Quote:
It's actually a rather targeted approach to deal the 6khz peak by just a few dB and done little if anything to he rest of the treble. After doing a lot of testing and a lot of listening to many HD800s from early to newer and comparing to Sennheisers' own charts, the key IMHO is not to focus on the treble specifically in absolute terms. The key is finding a way to bring up the trough from 1khz to 5khz 1-2 db through that range. The relative difference is greater than the absolute values though there is not mutual exclusivity. So, essentially it should be more about helping the midrange balance rather than taming the highs if you get my meaning.
Thanks for the information - I'll try some adjustments in the 6 kHz region and see how that works out (or, If I wasn't too lazy, actually install the mod).
However, to get back to the previous discussion: It doesn't really matter wheter your mod is designed to achieve a change in the bass, mids or treble. No matter what you are doing, you're altering the tonal balance of the HD800,
improving it - you previously critizised that any sort of "improvement" is not neccesary and/or not desirable. But I gather that, since you've modded your HD800 to achieve the result you described, an alteration of the tonal balance was desirable for you too.
Please don't get me wrong, I'm neither trying to critizise your mod nor yourself. My meaning is merely that changing the tonal characteristics of a headphone, or any device intended for sound reproduction, is not per se wrong. It may be desirable to correct certain flaws, or perhaps to adjust something to one's personal preference - if the listener perceives an improvement compared to the stock sound, then it
is an improvement.
Quote:
Nobody is saying you didn't spend enough or that your system isn't 'neutral' or shouldn't be. What I am saying is you or others should look at what possible electrical properties might cause a HD800 to sound bass light in one neutral system versus another neutral system that rocks significant bass presence and impact. Also how tonal characteristics might differ between the two. Don't make the mistake of thinking that all neutral measured systems sound the same and that what you have is a direct representative of some reference in audio reproduction free of coloration.
I'm quite convinced that my system does
not sound neutral. The point is that it doesn't have to; the EQ allows me to adjust the sound to whatever I wish (within reason). I've been through some gear since I've started with this hobby, some of it quite more expensive than what I have now, and all of it different. But looking back, I'll say that, for me personally, the current system is simply plain better than anything before.
In my experience, there are factors (such as mood, time of the day, quality of a recording, quality of the music itself) that have an influence on the perceived sound that is infinetly greater than the quality of the entire sound reproduction system, headphones included. That is not to say that these components are irrelevant of course, especially since a very large part of this hobby is the enjoyment gathered from trying, comparing and collecting stuff. But it seems to me that too much attention is being paid to finding the "right" amp, DAC, cable & whatever for a certain headphone, that while different gear may bring a change that is desirable at one point, at another time the listener will probably want yet another change. This then requires to go through the process of selecting the "right" gear again and again, because we humans are inconsistent and always want what we don't have. The strong (mis)conception of price = performance that is very prominent in this hobby doesn't help either.
I'd love to try more expensive, "better" gear than what I have. Cash is not the issue, but I know perfectly well that if I would buy a high-end, state-of-the-art system now I'd still be looking for something different in a year, maybe in six months. My current system is an experiment to see if the ability to change the sound whenever a change is desired helps with this constant desire to get something different.
Quote:
Ahhh...I can't figure out whether to do a hardware EQ or not. Can anyone share opinions/advice on this?
Reasons for: it would be a "system" EQ and all sources hooked up to my Zodiac would benefit from it. The Behringer DEQ24/96 is the one I've been looking at, and it has a lot of features & precision. Nikongod uses it well in his rig.
Reasons against: why go through all this trouble to select components over the last year and a half only to throw some low level pro-audio, aspiring DJ equipment in the mix? It'll add another stage in the signal path and clarity may be lost. Yikes, another head-fi vet, used it in his fancy speaker rig and said it significantly decreased resolution.
I guess I could go for a "better" EQ, but that would up costs heavily. The low cost alternative is the Anaxilus mod but I was really hoping to do frequency sweeps with the EQ to get everything relatively flat.
If you're open minded (which seems to be the case), I'd say that you won't regret adding an EQ to your system. It will not necessarily be a huge improvement over what you have, at least not in the unlikely case that you're perfectly happy with what you have now. But at least for me, the addition of an EQ has opened up a new perspective on audio in general. The great advantage of an EQ over "regular" gear is that whener you don't like how it sounds, you can simply bypass it at any time.
I can't comment on the Behringer EQ specifically, just keep in mind that the adjustment of settings is possibly rather finicky over that tiny display. At least that's the reason why I went with a conventional graphic EQ with sliders, which allows to adjust settings very quickly. On the other hand, the Behringer would allow to store several profiles to use with different headphones.
That said, I'd still try the Anaxilus mod first - If you're happy with the result, so much the better. I'd primarily consider an EQ over upgrading any of the upstream components.
