[Geruvah]

Seems to have a link for OSX downloads. Now I have to find a player that can support VST plugins on the mac.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

3) Engage Isone and look at the pink wave on the analyzer. Now you see EXACTLY how Isone is changing the frequency response.

Care to post a screenshot for the lazy among us?

 

[Br777]

Quote:

This is what I do:
 
1) Insert a spectrum analyzer into the signal path after Isone. Make sure the slop is 3dB for a flat response. I use Voxengo SPAN (it's free and very, professional). You can use the mastering preset, but change the slope to 3dB.
 
2) Run a pink wave. Make sure Isone is bypassed. Look at the analyzer and make sure the pink wave is read flat. If you haven't changed the slop to 3dB, now's the time to do it, as you'll visually see the response of the pink wave tilt and flatten out as you change the slope, otherwise it'll be tilted.
 
3) Engage Isone and look at the pink wave on the analyzer. Now you see EXACTLY how Isone is changing the frequency response.
 
4) Insert a high quality parametric EQ into the signal chain before SPAN (you can put it before or after Isone--I don't think it matters that much). Now adjust the EQ to flatten out Isone's frequency response while looking at the analyzer. This is very easy because you're seeing changes in real-time.
 
Then that's it. You now can enjoy the realism of Isone without having to turn of the HRTF or Room simulation features, and still get a flat frequency response.

thats a good idea except the real issue isnt the eq changing within the signal path, its the way i hear it.  i eq sine waves flat whether using isone or not , but i base it on what i hear.  that way when i get the sine wave to sound as flat as possible to my own ear, i am assured to be hearing the music closer to the way it was intended.   this is challenging and not exact of course, but short of investing in some sort of tiny in ear microphone, and probably quite a bit of software, with what would most likely still be only semiaccurate results,  its the best i can do

 

[chinesekiwi]

People do realise that with headphones, a balanced sound signature sin't flatline like in speakers right?

 

[Br777]

Quote:

People do realise that with headphones, a balanced sound signature sin't flatline like in speakers right?

please explain...

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

People do realise that with headphones, a balanced sound signature sin't flatline like in speakers right?

Yeah, but we're not talking about the headphone's frequency response. We're talking about Isone's frequency response, which isn't flat, so if you want Isone to not further color your sound, you need to EQ it to be flat (or turn off the room simulation and the HRTF features and only keep the basic crossfeed). Also, the spectrum analyzer in this case is only measuring the audio data being played inside the computer, not the sound that's coming out of your headphones.

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

thats a good idea except the real issue isnt the eq changing within the signal path, its the way i hear it.  i eq sine waves flat whether using isone or not , but i base it on what i hear.  that way when i get the sine wave to sound as flat as possible to my own ear, i am assured to be hearing the music closer to the way it was intended.   this is challenging and not exact of course, but short of investing in some sort of tiny in ear microphone, and probably quite a bit of software, with what would most likely still be only semiaccurate results,  its the best i can do

When you say sine waves, what are you talking about exactly? Are you playing sine waves of equal amplitude at various frequency intervals and trying to make all frequencies sound the same in terms of loudness? Do you play log sweeps? Pink noise? If you are EQ'ing to get your headphones to sound more flat by ears only, how would you know what flat sounds like? If all frequency intervals sound the same loudness to you, that doesn't necessarily mean it's flat, because of the Fletcher-Munson curve. Using a visual spectrum analyzer is the only way to be accurate (or relatively more accurate than relying on your hearing alone). 

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

or turn off the room simulation and the HRTF features

What.....
To make as less coloured as possible and most realistic and as close to speakers as possible, you need these, particularly the HRTF 'Head size' function. As alluded to in this thread, the ear size function is kinda useless as your pinna is always the correct 'settings' for that funcation thus why you set the cue strength to zero, which only affects the 'ear size' function.
Headphones by nature distort the sound due to lateralisation (the 'two blob' effect of headphones). If you understand HRTF, you'll understand why there's the need for that function.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Quote:

People do realise that with headphones, a balanced sound signature sin't flatline like in speakers right?

please explain...

As headphones are directly placed next to the ears, the analog sound signal that it emits is affected by the resonances from the shape of your pinna, which is the fleshy outer part of your ear. This in turn affects the frequency response significantly, thus why headphone adjust for this by (in 'balanced sounding headphones) by having the bass +2-3dB and why there is a large spike at around 10k. Think of it like room acoustics problems in speakers.

 

[Br777]

my understanding of what a sine wave is: a file that sweeps from 20hz to 20k slowly playing all frequencies at equal volume.. the closest i can come to describing it is when you hear the sound effect for a bomb dropping in a cartoon.. beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo... anyway im sure you know what im talking about..
 
so then, i play that on repeat with a spectrum analyzer visible so that i can have a visual reference for where in the frequency field the sine wave is playing
 
then, i use a parametric eq.. with the headphones on, to adjust for any peaks or valleys i am hearing to the best of my ability..
 
the end result is that.. again to the best of my ability, i hear the sine wave playing all the frequencies at equal volume.. though technically eq'ing the bass portion is more of a preference.. i mean if i truly got 30hz for example to literally sound as loud as 1k, the bass wold probably be overwhelming.. but you get my point
 
my understanding of the fletcher munson curve is this:  lets pretend you had headphones that could truly play all frequencies at the exact same volume.. well once you put them on your head your inner ear distorts this (very simplified i know) so that you no longer hear equal volumes of all frequencies.. therefore rebalancing them using the procedure described above brings you back to hearing all frequencies at the same volume.
 
whether this works in "theory" or not, it is clearly working in real life.. its very obvious when you have "flattened" the sound vs a stock sound.. sibilance dissapears, bass fills out, all the frequencies of a given album just sound "right" especially when you then compare to how it sounded without EQ.. there is clearly a big improvement.   When I had really nice cans, like thunderpants, this was particularly evident, as everything just sounded perfectly real.. anyway you get my point..
 
so this is what i do, whether im using isone or not.. if i am doing anything wrong please feel free to give me criticism.. all i know is that to me.. its the best i have ever heard things sound..
 
Quote:

When you say sine waves, what are you talking about exactly? Are you playing sine waves of equal amplitude at various frequency intervals and trying to make all frequencies sound the same in terms of loudness? Do you play log sweeps? Pink noise? If you are EQ'ing to get your headphones to sound more flat by ears only, how would you know what flat sounds like? If all frequency intervals sound the same loudness to you, that doesn't necessarily mean it's flat, because of the Fletcher-Munson curve. Using a visual spectrum analyzer is the only way to be accurate (or relatively more accurate than relying on your hearing alone). 

 

[attenuated 3db]

 
Quote:

I don't think you understand Isone Pro's features. Did you even read the manual? 
 

 
This is an old snippet of a reply to someone else, but it certainly applies to me as well.  I played with the demo version for a few hours, and thought to myself, "I'd really like this, if I understood how to set it up properly."  So I bought it, but the new Toneboosters version doesn't seem to come with the PDF manual others have mentioned in this thread.  So I have been tweaking it, but feel like a chimp at the helm of a commercial jet; lots of things to adjust, and they all do something, but how do I get them to do the right things for me?   Just to make sure to avoid confusion, here is my control panel:  
 

​

 
I honestly don't know what "HRTF" means, other than the "TF" likely stands for transfer function.  And I have no idea how to tell it my ear or head size.  I had the darndest time just figuring out how to use my laptop's touchpad to adjust the rotary knobs; my initial experiences looked like someone struggling with an unfamiliar video game. 
 
Anyway, I am using it under Foobar 1.1.2 beta 3, using the VST wrapper I found here:
 
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=84947
 
Windows 7 64-bit on a Core i7 machine with plenty of CPU cycles to spare, but I had to use the 32-bit version of Isone Pro because Foobar is a 32-bit app.  And I tried that Voxengo SPAN spectrum analyzer, but it did not work with either Foobar or the VST wrapper, claiming it was either 6 or 8 channels, and stopping playback immediately. So, I acquired these two free tools, thinking I could correct some frequency response problems, but realized I am over my head:
 
http://www.bluecataudio.com/Products/Product_FreqAnalyst/
http://www.aixcoustic.com/index.php/Electri-Q-posihfopit/30/0/
 
I have enormous respect for your opinions, Lunatique, going back to long before I joined Head-Fi.  Reading your review of the ATH-M50S and then seeing the photographs of your studio, I knew I was getting true expert knowledge for free, and I'm sure you haven't steered me wrong with Isone Pro, if I could figure out how to configure this new version.  Any chance of luring Jeroen back to the forum to explain, or better yet, publish a new PDF manual or noob-oriented tutorial?

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

Quote:

or turn off the room simulation and the HRTF features

What.....
To make as less coloured as possible and most realistic and as close to speakers as possible, you need these, particularly the HRTF 'Head size' function. As alluded to in this thread, the ear size function is kinda useless as your pinna is always the correct 'settings' for that funcation thus why you set the cue strength to zero, which only affects the 'ear size' function.
Headphones by nature distort the sound due to lateralisation (the 'two blob' effect of headphones). If you understand HRTF, you'll understand why there's the need for that function.

Turning those features off to get a flat frequency response is what Jeroen himself recommended. Yes, you are sacrificing realism by doing it, and I personally love the realism those features bring, so I choose to keep them on and EQ the frequency response of Isone itself instead, if I feel I absolutely must have it. For leisuring listening, I don't, so I just use Isone Pro with all features activated and that's it. For critical audio work, I'll likely EQ the response simply because I can't afford a skewed response when I'm doing critical audio work, yet I like the extra realism provided by the HRTF and room sim over just a simple crossfeed . Besides, turning those off doesn't get you perfectly flat response, just relatively so. I just thought I'd pass along what Jeroen himself has recommended.
 
Quote:

my understanding of what a sine wave is: a file that sweeps from 20hz to 20k slowly playing all frequencies at equal volume.. the closest i can come to describing it is when you hear the sound effect for a bomb dropping in a cartoon.. beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo... anyway im sure you know what im talking about..
 
so then, i play that on repeat with a spectrum analyzer visible so that i can have a visual reference for where in the frequency field the sine wave is playing
 
then, i use a parametric eq.. with the headphones on, to adjust for any peaks or valleys i am hearing to the best of my ability..
 
the end result is that.. again to the best of my ability, i hear the sine wave playing all the frequencies at equal volume.. though technically eq'ing the bass portion is more of a preference.. i mean if i truly got 30hz for example to literally sound as loud as 1k, the bass wold probably be overwhelming.. but you get my point
 
my understanding of the fletcher munson curve is this:  lets pretend you had headphones that could truly play all frequencies at the exact same volume.. well once you put them on your head your inner ear distorts this (very simplified i know) so that you no longer hear equal volumes of all frequencies.. therefore rebalancing them using the procedure described above brings you back to hearing all frequencies at the same volume.
 
whether this works in "theory" or not, it is clearly working in real life.. its very obvious when you have "flattened" the sound vs a stock sound.. sibilance dissapears, bass fills out, all the frequencies of a given album just sound "right" especially when you then compare to how it sounded without EQ.. there is clearly a big improvement.   When I had really nice cans, like thunderpants, this was particularly evident, as everything just sounded perfectly real.. anyway you get my point..
 
so this is what i do, whether im using isone or not.. if i am doing anything wrong please feel free to give me criticism.. all i know is that to me.. its the best i have ever heard things sound..

What you described is a log sweep. A sine wave is merely a pure tone with no over-tones or complex harmonics, and it can be any frequency. It's the purest tone in existence, and has traditionally been the most basic building blocks of synthesizers. The 1KHz beeeeeeep tone used in broadcasting to test equipment--that is a 1KHz sine wave. If you go to this website, you'll hear sine waves of various frequencies. This is a really good site to use for testing audio equpiment:
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/hearing.html
 
And to add to that, you want to go over here for the Bink Audio Test CD (free download):
http://binkster.net/extras.shtml
 
Those two test tone resources are all you need to make critical judgment.
 
One issue to keep in mind is that your own hearing may likely have its own idiosyncratic response, and if you are EQ'ing purely for yourself, including addressing your own hearing deficiencies, then go ahead and use listening as the primary method, but if you simply want Isone to sound neutral to anyone that might be using them, it's much better to use the spectrum analyer and simply play a pink noise, then EQ the response back to flat to address Isone's coloring. The latter method bypasses having to use your hearing at all because it is simply dealing with the audio data before it's even gone through the D/A converter--you're basically taking care of the problem at the source. A pink wave looks perfectly flat on the analyzer before Isone is inserted into the chain, and once Isone is inserted, it's clear as day exactly how Isone is coloring the sound, so it's a very simple and straightforward process to simply EQ the analyzer's reading back to being flat again.
 
There's a huge BUT though.
 
I suspect that by doing so, you're probably messing with what Jeroen carefully designed in the algorithm to sound as realistic as possible, since part of the reason HRTF and room simulation works is because in reality, your head and ears and the room will cause the frequency response to be altered. So it's really a decision you have to make for yourself--do you want the kind of realism that Jeroen programmed based on his expert knowledge of acoustics and audio, or do you want your own subjective idea of what neutral is, even if it's at the cost of messing with an expert's careful design?
 
Quote:

 Any chance of luring Jeroen back to the forum to explain, or better yet, publish a new PDF manual or noob-oriented tutorial?

I have brought this up with Jeroen, so he knows the new version is much more cryptic than the previous version (isone Pro), and also missing a user's manual. But like I mentioned, his plugins are more like a hobby to him, so he's not as aggressive as typical developers when it comes to implementing user's suggestions and ideas. He originally designed those plugins for himself, and making them commercially available to the public was an afterthought. He's got a day job as an audio professional already.
 
It's very easy to contact Jeroen--just use the contact form on his site. That's how I get a hold of him. Anybody in this thead can contact him anytime they want, and could ask him to come back into this thread to answer additional quesitions. He's usually very responsive.
 

 

[Lunatique]

Okay, everyone, I just did a testing session, and my suspicion was right. I went ahead and EQ'd the Isone Pro's frequency response with the HRTF and Room simulation has been engage. Although the EQ doesn't make the resulting pink noise sound exactly like the same pink noise with Isone Pro bypassed, it was close enough and certainly far more more neutral sounding than without the EQ. But here's where my suspicion was confirmed. When I A/B'd two Isone Pro chains, the one without the EQ is much more natural sounding, and the one with EQ is nasal and not as smooth.
 
So, if you want the extra realism of HRTF and Room simulation, whatever change in frequency response is SUPPOSED to happen because that IS what happens when the head and ears and room acoustic become part of the equation. It is not a "mistake" or "unwanted coloration." That is how your headphones would sound if it actually became a pair of speakers in a room.
 
My conclusion--don't EQ Isone. Leave it as is, and keep the HRTF and Room modes activated for the most natural and realistic sound.

 

[chinesekiwi]

I really should write a guide for this as I know a little bit of sound acoustics (with your guys' feedback of course) but really, I'm far too lazy

 

[attenuated 3db]

Well, I wrote Jeroen an e-mail like Lunatique suggested, and he was very prompt replying, just as Lunatique said he would be.  I don't know how many people have the old version of Isone Pro and how many have the new Toneboosters Isone like me, but here is what Jeroen wrote to me: 
 
----------------------------------------------------
 
 
Thanks for your email. The manual is in progress but may take a couple
of weeks to finalize.

The default settings should nevertheless work for most people, and you
may wish to reduce
the room effect by modifying the distance control.

Most people from headfi prefer a straight frequency response, so
select 'flat response'
from the loudspeaker cabinet. If you want flat HRTFs as well, set HRTF
strength to 0.
This should give very neutral settings.

I hope this helps for now...

Cheers,

Jeroen
 
-----------------------------------
 
So I am doing as he suggested, and retaining a  bit of the close-to-the-ear headphone effect I have become so used to by setting the distance at 0.5 meters, flat response and the HRTF at 0.
 
Isone Pro takes some getting used to if you've chased your tail with various hardware and software tweaks in search of the elusive "bit-perfect, flat response" ideal. It completely changes the experience of headphone listening, and initially, some of the changes seem to be negative in SQ.  But then, you get used to it, and realize that with the exception of the rare binaural recording, most records are mic-ed and mixed to be listened to on loudspeakers, which makes headphones kind of unnatural in terms of putting you in an approximation of the same "space" that the recording artist and engineer had in mind.  My only real beef is it seems to make give my Sennheiser 650s a mid-bass hump they don't have without Isone that kind of obscures the clarity of transient high-frequency reproduction of things like flutes and top-hat cymbals.   But I take Lunatique's word not to try to apply EQ after Isone; I wonder if he would recommend EQ before Isone in the DSP chain?  I don't know if Jeroen would weigh in on that question, since there are so many ways for noobs like me to mess up EQ and then wind up blaming the effect on Isone.  So right now, TB Isone is the only DSP I use in Foobar, and when I am on a Linux computer like I am now that doesn't host VST plugins easily, I really miss it.