[Solrighal]

Great thread. I employed the EQ enhancement in the first post for my HD650's via JRiver and it's a keeper.

 

[Solrighal]

You probably don't want to do that. The mids of HD650 doesn't need any boosting at all, and you'll just destroy its renowned balanced sonic signature and make it too bright. If you must do it, then just create a single parametric band with a gentle slope and maybe +2~3 dB and sweep it throughout the mids and find the spot that sounds the most appealing to you. Make sure you listen to a wide range of different types of recordings/styles of music while you do this, so you're not just EQ'ing for only one particular song and then all other songs sound worse with the EQ.

I agree. I bought the 650's specifically for the mids. No enhancement required.

 

[B-Dawk20]

Well I will be purchasing a pair of HD650's hopefully by sometime today so maybe I will get to try these EQ settings soon

 

[Mario GS]

Hi,
I tried your settings with my ATH-M50, I really like them. I'm using, unfortunately, my onboard sound card, which is a Realtek, and I notice that the voice is a bit down. I'm wondering If you can recommend me a little tweaking to make the voice clearer, but without over increasing all the treble frequencies.   

 

[Lunatique]

  Hi,
I tried your settings with my ATH-M50, I really like them. I'm using, unfortunately, my onboard sound card, which is a Realtek, and I notice that the voice is a bit down. I'm wondering If you can recommend me a little tweaking to make the voice clearer, but without over increasing all the treble frequencies.   

Here's a quick cheatsheet for EQing a variety of different instruments and voice: http://www.cheatography.com/fredv/cheat-sheets/eq-tips/
 
There are tons of similar articles online you can search for to educate yourself on all things related to mixing/mastering subjects. 

 

[Lunatique]

For those of you who have been following this thread, I have something big I want to share with all of you.
 
I've finally written that comprehensive guide on how to easily/reliably EQ your headphone for the most accurate/neutral sound possible. I have included everything--from what tools to use, the exact steps and approach, what to listen for, and all the test tones you need as well as carefully chosen musical material that's from my own audio gear testing playlist, with descriptions for how to use each track to test for specific problems in your headphones (and of course can be used to test speakers too). Here's the link: http://www.head-fi.org/t/796791/the-most-reliable-easiest-way-to-eq-headphones-properly-to-achieve-the-most-ideal-sound-for-non-professionals

 

[Lunatique]

I just updated the HD650 EQ curve, bringing 8KHz down since it's too prominent compared to the relative amplitude of 6.3KHz and 10KHz. 
 

 
 
Here's the actual setting copied from the .xml file
 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Equalizer PatchFormat="2">
  <Band Mode="Low Shelving" Frequency="44.7744228" Gain="6" Bandwidth="2.44"/>
  <Band Mode="High Shelving" Frequency="14000" Gain="5" Bandwidth="1.92"/>
  <Band Mode="Low Shelving" Frequency="119.132429" Gain="5" Bandwidth="1.82"/>
  <Band Mode="Peak/Dip" Frequency="1200" Gain="3" Bandwidth="2.5"/>
  <Band Mode="Peak/Dip" Frequency="8000" Gain="-6" Bandwidth="0.25"/>
</Equalizer>

 

[headdict]

Hi Lunatique, I have only recently found your threads on EQ'ing and really appreciate your work! I thought why not revive my old ATH-M50s by applying the EQ profile you provided. Since I'm using a Sansa Clip Zip with Rockbox, I had to make the lowest and upper most filters shelving ones. I also had to approximate some values. Shouldn't do much harm, I guess. However after EQ'ing the bass still appears way too boomy.
 
Do you have any idea how I can get this overwhelming muddy mess under control without engaging any more EQ bands, since there are none left?
Otherwise the result is very promising, to say the least. Even voices are now being clearly portrayed! 

 

[Lunatique]

  Hi Lunatique, I have only recently found your threads on EQ'ing and really appreciate your work! I thought why not revive my old ATH-M50s by applying the EQ profile you provided. Since I'm using a Sansa Clip Zip with Rockbox, I had to make the lowest and upper most filters shelving ones. I also had to approximate some values. Shouldn't do much harm, I guess. However after EQ'ing the bass still appears way too boomy.
 
Do you have any idea how I can get this overwhelming muddy mess under control without engaging any more EQ bands, since there are none left?
Otherwise the result is very promising, to say the least. Even voices are now being clearly portrayed! 

I don't use Sansa Clip Zip or Rockbox, so I have no idea what the available EQ is like. Can you give me more information? Can you post a screenshot of your setting?
 
If it's mainly a problem with shortage of available EQ bands, then just simplify so you're correcting the most severe and broad nulls and peaks, and in the most critical frequency ranges. You might even have to combine bands into one very broad band and ignore the additional bands with smaller problems between them. 

 

[headdict]

  I don't use Sansa Clip Zip or Rockbox, so I have no idea what the available EQ is like. Can you give me more information? Can you post a screenshot of your setting?
 
If it's mainly a problem with shortage of available EQ bands, then just simplify so you're correcting the most severe and broad nulls and peaks, and in the most critical frequency ranges. You might even have to combine bands into one very broad band and ignore the additional bands with smaller problems between them. 

I just had[size=x-small] to make shelving filters out of the bands centered at 40 Hz and 20 kHz, respectively. Besides that I had to round the frequencies to the nearest multiple of 10, the gain to a multiple of 0.5 and the Q-value to a multiple of 0.1. Nothing really bad should result from that, other than below 40 Hz and above 20 kHz[/size][size=x-small].[/size]
 
Combining the bands around 40 and 130 into one low shelf and keeping the boost at 95 might do the trick. Is there a systematic approach to that?

 

[Lunatique]

 
I just had[size=x-small] to make shelving filters out of the bands centered at 40 Hz and 20 kHz, respectively. Besides that I had to round the frequencies to the nearest multiple of 10, the gain to a multiple of 0.5 and the Q-value to a multiple of 0.1. Nothing really bad should result from that, other than below 40 Hz and above 20 kHz[/size][size=x-small].[/size]
 
Combining the bands around 40 and 130 into one low shelf and keeping the boost at 95 might do the trick. Is there a systematic approach to that?

The most important thing is to use your ears. The test tones and the music I posted in the EQ thread--use those to check your frequency balance. 
 
Are you using a graphic EQ or parametric EQ? Graphic EQs are not nearly as flexible due to fixed bands. If you can, use parametric EQ. In fact, I would choose my music listening platform solely based on if it has parametric EQ options available (if not in the default app, then third-party app). Replay Gain (or similar feature) is also critical, since nobody wants to ride the volume control between each song. 

 

[headdict]

  The most important thing is to use your ears. The test tones and the music I posted in the EQ thread--use those to check your frequency balance. 
 
Are you using a graphic EQ or parametric EQ? Graphic EQs are not nearly as flexible due to fixed bands. If you can, use parametric EQ. In fact, I would choose my music listening platform solely based on if it has parametric EQ options available (if not in the default app, then third-party app). Replay Gain (or similar feature) is also critical, since nobody wants to ride the volume control between each song. 

I use a 10-band parametric EQ on my listening platform, which is a tiny portable device. It does that job pretty well, but it's not great for checking things out, listening to test tones while adjusting parameters. I don't have the best tools on my computer either. I'm not ready to invest in professional software for my Mac or install Windows for just that purpose. So I'd rather use other (smarter and better equipped) people's results, at least as a starting point for further (minor) tweaking. I admit that laziness also plays a huge part in this.
 
I'm not even sure I would ever use the M50 again, I was just intrigued by your post and found the result of applying your EQ settings astounding. Now if I only could hear it minus the bass bloat, that would be very interesting. If I were to invest a lot of effort, though, I'd rather work on some IEMs that I actually use on a regular basis.

 

[Lunatique]

 
I use a 10-band parametric EQ on my listening platform, which is a tiny portable device. It does that job pretty well, but it's not great for checking things out, listening to test tones while adjusting parameters. I don't have the best tools on my computer either. I'm not ready to invest in professional software for my Mac or install Windows for just that purpose. So I'd rather use other (smarter and better equipped) people's results, at least as a starting point for further (minor) tweaking. I admit that laziness also plays a huge part in this.
 
I'm not even sure I would ever use the M50 again, I was just intrigued by your post and found the result of applying your EQ settings astounding. Now if I only could hear it minus the bass bloat, that would be very interesting. If I were to invest a lot of effort, though, I'd rather work on some IEMs that I actually use on a regular basis.

If you post your EQ setting screenshot, I will be able to tell you exactly what to correct to get rid of the bass bloat.
 
For Mac, you can try searching the KVR Audio database for free parametric EQ:http://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/newest There are also commercial ones that don't cost too much money too. You can also just search google for "free parametric eq mac."
 
How much time you're willing to spend on achieving sonic bliss depends on how important it is to you. For me, music is a huge part of my life and nourishment for my soul, so I cannot imagine life without it, which means I'm willing to put in the money and time to achieve sonic bliss. 

 

[headdict]

  If you post your EQ setting screenshot, I will be able to tell you exactly what to correct to get rid of the bass bloat.
 
For Mac, you can try searching the KVR Audio database for free parametric EQ:http://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/newest There are also commercial ones that don't cost too much money too. You can also just search google for "free parametric eq mac."
 
How much time you're willing to spend on achieving sonic bliss depends on how important it is to you. For me, music is a huge part of my life and nourishment for my soul, so I cannot imagine life without it, which means I'm willing to put in the money and time to achieve sonic bliss. 

This is how I converted your settings to Rockbox compatible ones:
 
20 KHz, 10 dB, 0.35 oct     --> High Shelf Filter 20 kHz, 10 dB, Q=4.1
8700 Hz, -12 dB, 0.30 oct  --> 8700 Hz, -12 dB, Q=4.8
5700 Hz, 12 dB, 0.42 oct   --> 5700 Hz, 12 dB, Q=3.4
4036 Hz, -3 dB, 0.25 oct    --> 4040 Hz, -3 dB, Q=5.8
3400 Hz, 4 dB, 0.33 oct      --> 3400 Hz, 4 dB, Q=4.4
2000 Hz, -2.4 dB, 0.42 oct  --> 2000 Hz, -2.5 db, Q=3.4
300 Hz, 4 dB, 0.47 oct        --> 300 Hz, 4 dB, Q=3.1
130 Hz, -3.2 dB, 0.35 oct    --> 130 Hz, -3 dB, Q=4.1
95 Hz, 4.8 dB, 0.25 oct       --> 90 Hz, 5 dB, Q=4.8
40 Hz, -5.0 dB, 1.82 oct      --> Low Shelf Filter 40 Hz, -5 dB, Q=0.7
 
Rockbox is limited to eight Peak Filters, a Low Shelf Filter and a High Shelf Filter.
 
Just downloaded the TDR Nova plugin for Mac from the KVR Audio database. Now I need a host for that plugin. Sonic bliss, here I come! 

 

[Lunatique]

  This is how I converted your settings to Rockbox compatible ones:
 
20 KHz, 10 dB, 0.35 oct     --> High Shelf Filter 20 kHz, 10 dB, Q=4.1
8700 Hz, -12 dB, 0.30 oct  --> 8700 Hz, -12 dB, Q=4.8
5700 Hz, 12 dB, 0.42 oct   --> 5700 Hz, 12 dB, Q=3.4
4036 Hz, -3 dB, 0.25 oct    --> 4040 Hz, -3 dB, Q=5.8
3400 Hz, 4 dB, 0.33 oct      --> 3400 Hz, 4 dB, Q=4.4
2000 Hz, -2.4 dB, 0.42 oct  --> 2000 Hz, -2.5 db, Q=3.4
300 Hz, 4 dB, 0.47 oct        --> 300 Hz, 4 dB, Q=3.1
130 Hz, -3.2 dB, 0.35 oct    --> 130 Hz, -3 dB, Q=4.1
95 Hz, 4.8 dB, 0.25 oct       --> 90 Hz, 5 dB, Q=4.8
40 Hz, -5.0 dB, 1.82 oct      --> Low Shelf Filter 40 Hz, -5 dB, Q=0.7
 
Rockbox is limited to eight Peak Filters, a Low Shelf Filter and a High Shelf Filter.
 
Just downloaded the TDR Nova plugin for Mac from the KVR Audio database. Now I need a host for that plugin. Sonic bliss, here I come! 

Here's the problem: When you change from peak/dip to shelving, the algorithm changes. I plugged in your high and low shelf numbers and look what happens to the EQ curve. 
 
Here's as it should be, without the high and low shelves:

 
And here's when the lowest and highest bands were changed to low and high shelves:

 
That's a pretty big difference. What you need to do, is to use a parametric EQ that shows you the EQ curve visually, so you can make sure you're not creating weird anomalies. You can try tweaking the low and high shelf more so they actually match the curve of the original visually, instead of just plugging in numbers (since different algorithms change how the numbers actually affect the curve).