[squadgazzz]

Hey there! As a bass music lover, I'm struggling with turning the flat bass response of my LCD-2 Classic into tight and punchy. But my question I guess would apply to any headphones.
I started with oratory1990's, then mixed in AutoEQ. As a result, I got something I like in the mids and highs regions but not the lows.
Yes, I have much stronger and bigger lows, but they're still a bit flat and bummy. I need more presence of the lows, not the overwhelming bummy sound. Sometimes IEMs produce such sound, but they don't have the benefits of full-size planar magnetic headphones. I believe this is possible to achieve with an EQ.
Almost every EQ preset has a very straightforward manipulation with the lows: low-shelf and add some peaks around 100hz.

Spoiler: current results

I wonder if one of the options is attainable after all:
1. Follow good EQ preset examples to adjust the lows. (Couldn't find any)
2. Send headphones to an engineer in order to create an EQ preset. (Is kind of people even exist?)

PS I've talked with some engineers already who told me that flat bass response is a much better option compared to colored headphones because with flat response any result is achievable.

 

[squadgazzz]

BTW, I've recently found a manual. Not sure if it's legit.
Need more guides like this

• 80 – 200 Hz: Fullness. Boosting here adds depth and body, solidifying a robust low end.
• 200 – 300 Hz: Muddiness loves to live in the 200 to 300 Hz range. If you find your bass guitar lacks clarity, try cutting frequencies in this range to clear things up. This is also true of an entire mix. If your overall product is muddy, try cutting a tad between 200 and 300 Hz on the mix buss.
• 500 – 1000 Hz: Punchiness. If you need more low-mid grind from your bass, try boosting in this range.
• 2.5 – 5 kHz: Attack. Boosting in this range will give your bass guitar more bite in the upper overtones.

 

[gregorio]

As a bass music lover, I'm struggling with turning the flat bass response of my LCD-2 Classic into tight and punchy.

And you will struggle because to a certain extent what you appear to be after is effectively a contradiction and therefore not really possible.

Boomy and muddy lives in the low and mid bass frequency region and is pretty much the opposite of “tight and punchy”. In other words, adding a lot of bass will tend to make music sound LESS “tight and punchy”. To make it sound MORE “tight and punchy”, you need to reduce the bass or at least leave it flat and boost the 800Hz - 1.8kHz range but you’re doing almost the opposite of this because you’re a “bass lover”.

I've talked with some engineers already who told me that flat bass response is a much better option compared to colored headphones because with flat response any result is achievable.

This is true to an extent. However, you have quite a serious amount of added bass in your example EQ setting, if you are also listening at fairly high playback levels, there’s a pretty good chance you’re introducing bass distortion, which again will make it sound more boomy/muddy (and grungy) and less “tight and punchy”.

BTW, I've recently found a manual. Not sure if it's legit.
Need more guides like this

It is legit, although bare in mind that all these types of lists or charts are a VERY rough approximation. In fact so rough an approximation that they can be misleading. The ranges have been restricted so that it doesn’t appear confusing but taking all music cases into account, “fullness”, depth and body can be anywhere from about 60Hz - 400Hz and muddyness can be anywhere from around 100Hz - 500Hz. So in reality, there can be a big overlap and whether you add muddyness or depth and body when you boost in this region depends entirely on the individual mix you’re EQ’ing, although there tends to be trends within different music genres.

I know none of the above is the definitive/precise answer you were looking for but unfortunately, our perception works in a relative rather than absolute way and virtually all of the descriptive terms we use have a vague rather than a precise meaning. Therefore, there is no definitive/precise answer, except possibly for a particular, individual track/mix.

G

 

[someguyontheinternet]

PS I've talked with some engineers already who told me that flat bass response is a much better option compared to colored headphones because with flat response any result is achievable.

Flat on a studio monitor is not the same as flat on a headphone, because the individual head shape causes frequencies to rise or dip until the sound waves reach the ear drum.
In "speaker world" the ideal target frequency response according to subjective preference research is completely flat from 20Hz-20kHz in an anechoic chamber. This is probably what engineers would refer to as "flat". For headphones this is not the case though because of the aforementioned head related transfer function.
To approximate "flat" for a headphone in the same way as is heard on studio monitors, the ideal bass is not necessarily flat on measurements. If an evaluation of subjective preference is done (approximately) the same way it was for speakers, the result is the Harman target.
Important to note is that there is deviation in bass preference and to a smaller degree in treble preference. Some conjectures suggest that the increased bass preference is a sort of compensation for the lack of physical feedback you would get from a subwoofer, but cannot get on a headphone.

TL;DR:
The ideal bass FR for you is likely not the same as for me or another person. Harman is the average bass preference, if you take a bunch of people and let them rate different FRs. The likelihood of liking Harman is higher than not liking it, but deviations from this target are completely normal.
To get the ideal FR for you there is no other way than creating your own ideal target FR.

 

[castleofargh]

Just to be clear, the fairly common desire for more bass on headphones(as demonstrated by Harman), does not come from how the bass is altered by our heads. Low freqs are just really big(long wavelength) compared to our heads. We don't have that much impact.

One hypothesis often brought up to explain why so many want more bass on headphones(me!!!) is that it could be an attempt to compensate for the lack of tactile feeling.

 

[bigshot]

Just to offer a little practical advice... Boosting low end with headphones isn't usually as effective as boosting the upper bass. Dragging up sub bass can drag up a lot of sloppiness with it, while increasing the upper bass will give your bass more impact. It's like with acoustic standup bass in a jazz combo... the sub bass rumble doesn't define it. The pluck does.

 

[71 dB]

In "speaker world" the ideal target frequency response according to subjective preference research is completely flat from 20Hz-20kHz in an anechoic chamber.

Yes, when listening in anechoic chambers, but generally people don't do that. They listen to their speakers typically in their living rooms which are acoustically VERY different from anechoic chambers. Speakers have to be designed to take this into account. Speakers have directivity that tends to rise with frequency: At the lowest frequencies most speakers are radiating sound to all directions at the same level (directivity factor Q=1), put at the highest frequencies almost all sound energy is radiated in the direction of the driver axis (directivity factor is for example 14.2). This means a speaker has power response AND unique frequency responses to all possible directions. In anechoic chamber only one of these unique responses are heard depending on the orientation of the speaker in relation to the listener while the power response "doesn't exist" for any listener in anechoic chamber. For common boxed speakers the frequency response at 30° horizontal angle gives a rough approximation of the power response. In a room the listener hears a combination of responses: Direct sound from the speaker which is more or less the "on axis" response, early reflections manifesting the frequency response to various directions and the power response in the reverberation. This "sum" should be psychoacoustically flat for flat sound. In practise the power response drops with frequency while the "on axis" response should rise a little bit with frequency. The response should be most flat at an angle of 10°-20° and this gives the listener a nice way to optimize the sonic balance in his/her room adjusting the angle the speakers are toed in.

 

[bigshot]

You want as close to flat as your speakers and living room allow. Anechoic chambers are irrelevant.

 

[71 dB]

ILD (Interaural Level Difference) at bass is important with headphones. Sound pressure level difference bigger than a few decibels at low frequences is unnatural and makes the bass sound "fake", "weak" and for some people like myself extremely annoying. Mono or almost mono bass on headphones sounds more physical (almost tactile) and "bigger". So a "better" bass on headphones can be achieved by simply making the bass more mono.

 

[71 dB]

You want as close to flat as your speakers and living room allow. Anechoic chambers are irrelevant.

Speakers are designed measuring them in anechoic chambers, because you want to get rid of the room. People who are qualified to design speakers know how to take this into account.

 

[The Jester]

ILD (Interaural Level Difference) at bass is important with headphones. Sound pressure level difference bigger than a few decibels at low frequences is unnatural and makes the bass sound "fake", "weak" and for some people like myself extremely annoying. Mono or almost mono bass on headphones sounds more physical (almost tactile) and "bigger". So a "better" bass on headphones can be achieved by simply making the bass more mono.

Maybe one reason some prefer Vinyl to Digital as low bass is usually mastered to “centre” or mono for Vinyl due to its physical limitations ?

 

[71 dB]

Maybe one reason some prefer Vinyl to Digital as low bass is usually mastered to “centre” or mono for Vinyl due to its physical limitations ?

Yes, that is one of the reasons why people prefer vinyl (but they don't know why). Digital audio tends to be transparent so every stupidity done in music production is there in full effect.

 

[The Jester]

Yes, that is one of the reasons why people prefer vinyl (but they don't know why). Digital audio tends to be transparent so every stupidity done in music production is there in full effect.

And maybe with the current resurgence in Vinyl those re releasing “remastered” favourites on heavyweight Vinyl may use a little more time and care in the process to try and justify the end retail price ?

 

[bigshot]

Speakers are designed measuring them in anechoic chambers, because you want to get rid of the room.

That isn't the way you want to listen to speakers. The sound of the room is as important as the sound of the speakers.

 

[71 dB]

That isn't the way you want to listen to speakers. The sound of the room is as important as the sound of the speakers.

Designed in anechoic chambers and listened to in rooms. Speaker designers know how to take that into account for example by not designing a flat on-axis response, but a tilted one.

You can't design speakers in rooms, because every room has unique acoustics. You HAVE TO remove all acoustics to know what the speaker is doing. What rooms do to the sound is taken into account. Do I really need to explain things this self-evident to you? Sometimes you sound like you have never done anything audio-related.