[deama]

Alright so I managed to take the graph they gave for that free trial software, used a script to make the window transparent and through-clickable, then I just traced the EQ points on EQ APO and ended up with a very accurate EQ graph. So one problem solved.

Now I need to do an EQ tweak thing for my earphones... at least I have a reference point now.

 

[deama]

Also, I managed to find my earphones on the github repo, however that github repo I don't think has 100% got the right neutral balance going for it, at least when I tried the config for the audio techinca m20x. I'll try going through the Hz stuff again tomorrow or so, see if I can get it better.

The profiles from sonarworks seem to be the best, but their software isn't great.

 

[gargani]

Other way round. With a high Q you can create a narrow peak or dip.

Got it. Thank you.

 

[deama]

I was also wondering, is it worth it to EQ balance a microphone too? Any links to a repository that has a list like with the headphones one?

 

[bigshot]

Most microphones are pretty flat. A lot of EQing goes on in the mix, but that is mostly to weave sounds in and around each other so they don't fight.

 

[Lunatique]

Most microphones are pretty flat. A lot of EQing goes on in the mix, but that is mostly to weave sounds in and around each other so they don't fight.

There are some mics out there that are voices in a specific way to sound pleasing for certain applications, such as recording vocals, guitars, drums, etc., so it's a good idea to look up the measurement data for the specific mic you want to get. I have an Audio-Technica condenser mic that's significantly brighter than neutral, while my Shure SM7 is much more neutral. Ideally, you want to get what's called a "measurement" mic, as they are especially designed to be very flat and neutral, as they are used for measuring sound. For example, I use IK Multimedia's ARC System 2, and it comes with a measurement mic that's very accurate, but it is a model that's rebranded and could also be bought from the original brand. I don't recall which, but a little investigative work will turn the name up.

 

[bigshot]

I should have said pro mikes are mostly pretty flat. Consumer mikes can vary.

 

[Lunatique]

I should have said pro mikes are mostly pretty flat. Consumer mikes can vary.

I think it depends on application. The mics I mentioned are all pro audio mics meant for professional studio recordings. Often mics that are "good for vocals" or any other specific applications will be tuned to not be neutral. For example, having "tube-like warmth" is often a desirable trait in popular professional mics, so you need to know about the specifics of the mic you want to use if you want to EQ it.

I was also wondering, is it worth it to EQ balance a microphone too? Any links to a repository that has a list like with the headphones one?

There are plugins that can emulate various famous microphones, so those have build in EQ curves for each preset. You just specify which model/brand of mic you're using, and then pick the mic you want to emulate. It works similarly as the Sonarworks and Morphit plugins.

It's going to be hard to try to measure and EQ a mic on your own, because first of all, whatever you're using to play test tones for the mic to record will have to be able to play back test tones with perfect neutral accuracy at the mic's position, and that in and of itself is already a great challenge. If you just want a very neutral/accurate mic, just buy a measuring mic and be done with it.

 

[bigshot]

I've never worked with colored mikes and if an engineer suggested it to me, I would probably ask them why they couldn't add coloration in the mix. My goto mike for voice is a Neumann U-87, and it is pretty flat. The trick to miking is mike placement, not the coloration. Likewise the tube mic pres I've worked with are stone flat. They cost as much as a nice car, they had better be! Gregorio knows more about this stuff than I do. I just supervise the recording and mix, I don't engineer it. But I expect recording to be flat and clean. If I want to adjust, I do that in the mix.

 

[Lunatique]

I've never worked with colored mikes and if an engineer suggested it to me, I would probably ask them why they couldn't add coloration in the mix. My goto mike for voice is a Neumann U-87, and it is pretty flat. The trick to miking is mike placement, not the coloration. Likewise the tube mic pres I've worked with are stone flat. They cost as much as a nice car, they had better be! Gregorio knows more about this stuff than I do. I just supervise the recording and mix, I don't engineer it. But I expect recording to be flat and clean. If I want to adjust, I do that in the mix.

That's my general stance about audio gear as well--if I wanted coloration, I prefer to add it myself, and my gear shouldn't have some kind of permanent coloration built into it. I recently spent a lot of time researching and trying a bunch of bass combo amps, and it was very disappointing because all the big name brands you'd find at Guitar Center had significant coloration in their products. Eventually, I found the most neutral/accurate one in Phil Jones products (I ended up with a Flightcase BG-150).

But it's surprising how many people in the pro audio world favor build-in coloration, selecting gear based on the unique voicing of specific amps, mics, mixing consoles, studio monitors, or whatever, because their unique colorations are deemed pleasing and/or useful.

 

[deama]

Oh, I might have to drop the mic stuff then, as I wouldn't like to spend much money onto it, and I doubt there's any EQ specification for my £40 microphone.

 

[bigshot]

That's why most pro microphones capture full range sound clean. You can always take away in the mix, but you can't put back what isn't there.

 

[Lunatique]

Oh, I might have to drop the mic stuff then, as I wouldn't like to spend much money onto it, and I doubt there's any EQ specification for my £40 microphone.

That's why most pro microphones capture full range sound clean. You can always take away in the mix, but you can't put back what isn't there.

Your safest bet for any kind of critical measuring using a mic, is to get a measuring microphone, designed specifically to be extremely flat in frequency response. It is not recommended to just use any professional mic because they are not designed to be ruler flat. Here are some examples of measuring mics:
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/search.php?s=measuring+microphone

The one that came with my ARC System 2 is one of those but IK Multimedia took the branding off when they included it in the ARC System package.

 

[deama]

Your safest bet for any kind of critical measuring using a mic, is to get a measuring microphone, designed specifically to be extremely flat in frequency response. It is not recommended to just use any professional mic because they are not designed to be ruler flat. Here are some examples of measuring mics:
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/search.php?s=measuring+microphone

The one that came with my ARC System 2 is one of those but IK Multimedia took the branding off when they included it in the ARC System package.

Oh, the price is not as high as I thought.
Would this one work?
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ECM8000--behringer-ecm8000-measurement-condenser-microphone

So basically I use the above measuring microphone instead of my normal one, and then just apply some light EQ for whatever purposes I need, correct?

 

[castleofargh]

Sometimes you can find the version from Sonarwork that comes with individual calibration file. If you can find those at the same price, that's not a bad idea.
I haven't followed the conversation but I assume you're aware that this ECM8000 needs an ADC with XLR input and phantom power?
Some microphones comes conveniently as an all in one USB device(so the ADC is in the mic), which is very cool, but some room calibration software might not work with those for some reason(if you're only going to bother with basic frequency response, you don't have to care about that).