[sennsay]

No worries, at least you know where you can get pad rings if you need them. Personally, the HD540s were designed with them as part of the overall balance and so they are staying in my set-ups. On eBay.oz there are still wang pleathers available. The order I placed for some nice looking and right-sized velour pads fell through unfortunately, the original sets I bought may be still in the mail somewhere on the planet, but I've mostly given up on the idea of them arriving, if they do they do. Wang pleathers it is then ... for the time being.

Reading through this thread a bit more, it seems like they wouldn't be the best choice. I'll be looking for the wang_yifei pads instead (though they themselves do not seem to be selling those pleather ones via eBay any more? I can just see thick sheepskin/memory foam ear pads and those do not seem to be the right ones).


"Outer foams" meaning those at the back of the ear cups? They seem to be fine for me, but I might stock up on foams in case they will be needed later.

Thanks for the offer! I'm located in Europe though and the shipping costs would get to the point where I could just buy another pair of 540s (which I'm actually considering-- never a bad idea to have some spare parts anyways). I suppose I'll try to get proper pads first and then figure out some mounting solution.

 

[sennsay]

I recently acquired an HD540 REFII. Since I have a MiniDSP HEARS I figured I’ll try to measure the differences between pads and the effect of different tweaks. (I’m pretty new to all of this and more of speaker listener so any comments are welcome).

The HEARS is not very accurate above 3kHz but can be “corrected” for measuring a specific type of headphone. The HD600 is built similar to the 540. I was able find measurements of the 600 on a HEARS so yesterday evening I made a correction for the HEARS using Crinacle’s measurements of the HD 600 on a GRAS 43AG as reference. The resulting correction was very similar to the general correction for over-ear type headphones proposed by Oratory (except for the bass range where Oratory uses the Harman Boost and I don’t):


Oratory over ear correction (black) and my L and R corrections


Seems to be pretty well within the error margin:




So today I made some measurements. The 540 like the 600 is not very critical of position. The measurements are very repeatable. Only the seal and clamp pressure change the bass extension somewhat. So the below measurements are single measurements not averages of many measurements as the change in doing multiple measurements is minimal.


Stock with new foam disks from “Wang” in front of the drivers and new 0,5cm foam behind the driver against measurement of “Oratory”. These are raw measurement so the ear gain peak is not removed:

Green: Oratory GRAS 45CA. Blue: Stock with “Wang” front foam and new back foam. Not a bad match. I'm looking trends and relative changes between tweaks. Not super accuracy.

As a “sanity check” Here’s Crinacle’s measurement of the HD 600 L and R channel. Differences of up to 5dB seem normal.



So now onto some comparisons of tweaks and pads. Target is Harman 2018 above 1kHz and flat below like the Crinacle target for all the following charts.

Here’s the stock version with ‘Wang" foam disks compared to adding some acoustic fabric disk in front of the wang foam. The extra fabric attenuates the highest frequencies a tiny bit:

Only wang foam in blue. Added fabric disk in green.
Notice how stable the measurements are. I removed the pads inserted the fabric and replaced the phones on the fixture between measurements


Here’s the stock pads with wang foam compared to Wang Pleather pads and foam disk (fabric still covering the foam disk):

Stock blue. Wang Pleather and foam plus acoustic fabric green.
The response is much flatter up to 5kHz. The peaks at 5 and 8 kHz are reduced a bit. Not bad.


So I was thinking how to reduce the highest frequencies. Looking at the response of the HD600 it is very smooth on top. The shape of the ear cups is different but I figured the diver would be similar. Googling for some pictures I noticed the driver is indeed similar but the baffle has smaller centre opening partially covering the driver. So I cut some Scottex disks to make the centre opening smaller.

HD600 driver:

HD600 Baffle:



Scottex baffle kept in place with tiny bits of scotch for the moment:



And the result:

Wang Pleather and foam plus acoustic fabric: green. Added paper baffle and removed acoustic fabric: red.

Bingo!
The dip at 10kHz is not there in reality. I checked with a sine sweep and I hear no dip at all. It’s just a resonance in the HEARS “ear canal”. The peak at 13 and dip 14K dip also don’t seem to be there but it’s at the limit of my middle aged hearing so I’m not sure.


Here’s both the L and R channel:



Disregarding the dip at 10k I’m roughly within ±2.5 dB up to 13k.
I’m done… It sounds fabulous!
The disks seem to enhance the staging also.

The Wang pads were installed without the clip ring since they are in my original pads. They stay in place without the rings but not really well. The rings are almost impossible to remove without damaging the pads but I figured I wouldn’t use the pads anyway so pulled the rings out and put them in the Wang Pads.
With the pads secure in place I thought I'd be a happy camper but…

Big mistake:


The rings completely change the tuning!
Come to think of it they seal the gap between the baffle and the cup. So effectively they seal the baffle edge.
So out go the rings and I need to think of a way to make the pads stick better. Maybe some double sided tape on the side of the cup or some spring metal rings in the pads. Any ideas are welcome.

Happy tuning!

Well, good research and playing around there. I will say that if you are using the original steel cable with the HD540 IIs then you will likely get that peakiness in the top end. I have no such response in my HD540's using the Mogami cable and the usual set-up of gear. Smooth as. The HD540 IIs have an upper mid/lower treble peak as standard too, and again, when I used the Mogami cable on a pal's HD540 IIs for a while that peak smoothed out, although it showed that the peak was inherent in the design, still there, but now just a slight brightening of tone in that part of the frequency band. You're certainly having fun there.

 

[arnobartels]

Well, good research and playing around there. I will say that if you are using the original steel cable with the HD540 IIs then you will likely get that peakiness in the top end. I have no such response in my HD540's using the Mogami cable and the usual set-up of gear. Smooth as. The HD540 IIs have an upper mid/lower treble peak as standard too, and again, when I used the Mogami cable on a pal's HD540 IIs for a while that peak smoothed out, although it showed that the peak was inherent in the design, still there, but now just a slight brightening of tone in that part of the frequency band. You're certainly having fun there.

Interesting.

I do use the steel cable. The left and right channel measure pretty much the same but during my measurements at some point the left channel had the peak at 6k increased.

I figured it could be a difference between the L and R pad or the way it was installed but swapping the pads didn't change anything. I tried changing the paper disks but peak stayed. I changed the white baffles between L and R and then even the cups figuring it maybe that the new foam in the cups was not installed in the same way between in L and R cups. The peak always stayed in the L channel. Finally I swapped the cables between L and right and the channels were identical again.

After installing the 0.5mm foam in the cup behind the driver the cable connectors were initially a bit hard to insert because I did not cut it around the point where the cable inserts so there is some foam between the cup and baffle frame there. One connector was more difficult to insert than the other. After swapping L and right they both inserted with same pressure.

I guess the 6k peak is a resonance in the cup or baffle frame that may be exaggerated if the contact between the cup and baffle fame getting disturbed by the connectors changing the damping of the cup and baffle.

I have another (new) cable. Quite possibly copper cable. I can see if it measures different. But cable material will not change the response by 3dB. Be it steel, copper, silver or gold. Geometry, inductance capacitance and inductance will to some small degree but again not by this amount at 6k. So my bet is on some resonance due to the connectors.

My next plan is to see if I can raise the low bass a bit by installing some foam in the gap left by not installing the ear pad rings or changing the foam in the vent of the driver pole piece.

Cheers!

 

[sennsay]

Interesting.

I do use the steel cable. The left and right channel measure pretty much the same but during my measurements at some point the left channel had the peak at 6k increased.



I figured it could be a difference between the L and R pad or the way it was installed but swapping the pads didn't change anything. I tried changing the paper disks but peak stayed. I changed the white baffles between L and R and then even the cups figuring it maybe that the new foam in the cups was not installed in the same way between in L and R cups. The peak always stayed in the L channel. Finally I swapped the cables between L and right and the channels were identical again.



After installing the 0.5mm foam in the cup behind the driver the cable connectors were initially a bit hard to insert because I did not cut it around the point where the cable inserts so there is some foam between the cup and baffle frame there. One connector was more difficult to insert than the other. After swapping L and right they both inserted with same pressure.

I guess the 6k peak is a resonance in the cup or baffle frame that may be exaggerated if the contact between the cup and baffle fame getting disturbed by the connectors changing the damping of the cup and baffle.

I have another (new) cable. Quite possibly copper cable. I can see if it measures different. But cable material will not change the response by 3dB. Be it steel, copper, silver or gold. Geometry, inductance capacitance and inductance will to some small degree but again not by this amount at 6k. So my bet is on some resonance due to the connectors.

My next plan is to see if I can raise the low bass a bit by installing some foam in the gap left by not installing the ear pad rings or changing the foam in the vent of the driver pole piece.

Cheers!

Good luck with it. For my ears, the peaky forwardness of the original steel cable is quite sonically noticeable, even though I enjoyed many hundreds of hours with my first and still No 1 HD540 Ref1s to this day, bought new back in 1989. That lower treble exposure is inherent in the cable, both on it's own and in combination with the original cloth pads. I can plug that same cable into my Ref1s (even with the wang pleather pads) and still hear that peaky exposure today. And the more airy bass, it can go deep but lacks physicality. Still, I had so many fine hours regardless! Fabulous cans!

 

[arnobartels]

Interesting.

I do use the steel cable. The left and right channel measure pretty much the same but during my measurements at some point the left channel had the peak at 6k increased.



I figured it could be a difference between the L and R pad or the way it was installed but swapping the pads didn't change anything. I tried changing the paper disks but peak stayed. I changed the white baffles between L and R and then even the cups figuring it maybe that the new foam in the cups was not installed in the same way between in L and R cups. The peak always stayed in the L channel. Finally I swapped the cables between L and right and the channels were identical again.



After installing the 0.5mm foam in the cup behind the driver the cable connectors were initially a bit hard to insert because I did not cut it around the point where the cable inserts so there is some foam between the cup and baffle frame there. One connector was more difficult to insert than the other. After swapping L and right they both inserted with same pressure.

I guess the 6k peak is a resonance in the cup or baffle frame that may be exaggerated if the contact between the cup and baffle fame getting disturbed by the connectors changing the damping of the cup and baffle.

I have another (new) cable. Quite possibly copper cable. I can see if it measures different. But cable material will not change the response by 3dB. Be it steel, copper, silver or gold. Geometry, inductance capacitance and inductance will to some small degree but again not by this amount at 6k. So my bet is on some resonance due to the connectors.

My next plan is to see if I can raise the low bass a bit by installing some foam in the gap left by not installing the ear pad rings or changing the foam in the vent of the driver pole piece.

Cheers!

Turns out it's not a resonance. While doing the measurements I had the test fixture facing me with the right ear instead of with the front or back due to space constraints. So I was placing the left cup "in the blind". It turns out I placed it too low all the time. The placement gives rise to some small response changes above about 3k.

I also have the Wang velour pads so I will measure with these also to see how they fare. I have the idea that thick pads reduce the bass output due to the driver being further away from the ear.

The bass response in the measurements is highly dependent on the how the pad seals on the test fixture. The original velour pads show a bit more low bass because these are vey soft and cover the screws around the ears on the MiniDSP more easily.
The Wang pleather is stiffer so the screws give rise to air leakage. The bass definitely doesn't as rolled off as the measurements seem to show. I'm thinking about gluing the dummy ears in place, removing the screws and filling the gaps with something. Why they placed screws in these positions is beyond me...

In the mean time I tried some alternatives for the scottex disks. I tried different size disks with different hole sizes, disks in plain paper and using cotton makeup removal disks but for now the scottex disks in the picture give the best result. The material of the disks seems to matter. A more absorbent material gives more attenuation but not equally at all frequencies.

Cheers

 

[trollchu]

I went by a meet this weekend and met a guy who brought his Ref II's and I got to try them out alongside my Ref Gold. Timbre wise, they were almost identical, but the mids on my pair was just the slightest bit thicker. The biggest difference between them was that while my pair was stock, he was using medical gauze in place of the felt or wool disks. His cuts were very rough, but from what I heard, the resulting sound was also very near what it should be. For anyone who may need to replace their wool disks, neatly cut medical gauze in the double ring, like I believe @lantian previously pointed out, might be enough to get the sound just right where it should be.

(Borrowing this)

 

[2ter]

Hey everyone, got a like New 300 ohm HD 540 Reference today. Earpads seem a little stiff. Maybe they need to break in.
It is my second working HD 540.

 

[sennsay]

Hey everyone, got a like New 300 ohm HD 540 Reference today. Earpads seem a little stiff. Maybe they need to break in.
It is my second working HD 540.

Ah, the good old steel cables Cans do look terrific, pads too, how wonderful to find a set of Ref1s in such 'as new' condition. Those particular pads seem to have stiffish foam in them, the set that came with my second Ref1s (600 ohms) had white/cream pleather on the faces but the foam is useless for anything, they haven't aged well ... or just haven't been looked after by previous owners. As you say, you may need to run these ones in for a while and hopefully they will loosen up a bit, in fact the headphones themselves may have had little use and will need some more running in time. Is your first pair 600 ohms, or another 300 ohm set? What sort of gear are you going to run with them and if I may ask, how much did you pay for them? You will find loads of great info in these pages! As an avid owner of HD540 Ref1s for 34 years, I'm keen to hear what someone relatively new to them thinks and feels about these truly fine headphones. BTW, they often sound terrific through integrated amplifier headphone jacks, the higher output impedance, often 330 ohms, really suits them.

 

[arnobartels]

I went by a meet this weekend and met a guy who brought his Ref II's and I got to try them out alongside my Ref Gold. Timbre wise, they were almost identical, but the mids on my pair was just the slightest bit thicker. The biggest difference between them was that while my pair was stock, he was using medical gauze in place of the felt or wool disks. His cuts were very rough, but from what I heard, the resulting sound was also very near what it should be. For anyone who may need to replace their wool disks, neatly cut medical gauze in the double ring, like I believe @lantian previously pointed out, might be enough to get the sound just right where it should be.

(Borrowing this)

The Ref II's came without the felt rings bit do sound (and measure) a bit hot on top. Covering the driver like in the picture does measurably reduce the top end. The rings seem to need to be of some abortive material as plain paper did more harm than good. Stottex kinda worked but cotton makeup removal disks were too absorptive. No idea where to source felt like that. Il try medical gauze also then.
Thanks!

 

[arnobartels]

I did some more measuring.

There is a measurement of the HD540 RefII on Oratory’s website. I figured I could use that to check my correction of the MiniDSP but Oratory’s measurement shows an elevated bass response whereas I measure a flat bass response. The high frequencies match reasonably well though:

Red: Oratory (Harman target without bass boost)
Green: My HD540II stock

Since the MiniDSP EARS is pretty accurate below 1kHz something is wrong here. I’ve seen that using pleather pads with the retaining rings elevates the bass in the same way so I re-measured my unit with the “Wang” pleather pads:

Red: Oratory
Green: My HD540II with Wang pleather pads

Looks like Oratory measured a unit with pleather pads. Actually a surprisingly good match. Even the high's match better now. The differences are not more than unit to unit variation or differences in placement on the test fixture. Here is a comparison of two HD540 RefII’s measured on my MiniDSP EARS:

Comparison of two HD540’s in stock form.
Blue: Unit 1 with worn original pads
Green: Unit 2 with firm original pads
These two units differ in that unit 1 has a white dot on the centre of the driver and unit 2 a black dot. The unit with the black dot seems more like the unit from Oratory in the high frequencies.

I can see why some prefer the Wang pleather. The bass is much more balanced with the high frequencies.

 

[arnobartels]

Pads and tuning comparisons.

The Wang pleater pads give a smily face tuning when used with the retaining rings. Without rings it’s much like the stock version. Too much highs. So some damping disk is required. Scottex or cotton will work.

Here is the wang pleather (without retaining rings) with scottex damping disk as previously posted (green) vs stock (red):

The scottex dampens the highs nicely but the Wang pads without retaining rings loose some bass. A bass boost is needed with organ music.

Next I tried the Wang velour pads.

Red: Stock.
Blue: Wang velour

These are pretty much like the stock pads. Actually flatter up to 6kHz but with more energy above 6k. If I could dampen only the range above 6k these are a winner. Also because these are the most comfy and no bass boost is needed.

Best I could do is a cotton disk with small hole in front of the driver:

Red: Wang Velour
Green: Wang Velour + cotton disk like picture below.

Then I tried velour pads from this seller: https://www.ebay.com/itm/254669296151
They look very much like the Wang velours but the velour has longer fibres. Here measured with the same cotton disk.

Gives more damping above 5kHz. This is the best tuning I found. Disregarding the usual dip at 9k it's basically plus and minus 2 dB till 13k and minus 3dB at 30Hz. This is superbly flat and it does sound terrific. I don't see how I could improve on this. I ordered 2mm wool felt to make a nicer damping disk like in the 540 Gold. Hopefully it measures the same.

Cheers!

 

[sennsay]

You're certainly having a good time with all the measuring! Just to be clear, are you saying that the large suck-out at 8-10k is a measuring device flaw? It's not something I would like to have in any of my cans, as that is approaching the limits of my hearing and would possibly seriously degrade top end detail, focus and imaging and currently I am not experiencing that, though the No 1 Ref1s are very smooth in that area with near new wang pleathers and Mogami cable.
In saying that, I have been looking at my almost stock 2nd HD540 Ref1s, they have a partly used set of wang pleathers but are otherwise as they came from the factory, complete with the stock cable, which as I have mentioned previously does have some upper mid/lower treble 'exposure' and I have enjoyed countless hours in sheer joy with them. I want to be able to see if I can again find that joy with them as they are and I certainly have, though it's needed a fair bit of playing around with the HDAM and Burson modules in the FrankenZero. The options were the long time favourite Audio-gd Earth HDAM, all full sized discrete components and a Russian ex-military Paper In Oil [PIO] 0.1uF non-polar cap across the power supply pins of the HDAM. Burson recommend the same thing with their modules once run in, 100 hours +, I have not done that with the Vivid V6 as yet, which currently has some 150 hours+ on it. The Vivid V6 is option 2 and the nowhere near-run in Burson Classic V6 is option 3, though it is certainly starting to open out after some 26 hours.
The A-gd HDAM I've had for some 14 years now (I have several of them, including at least two of the Moon versions and a Sun module, all are different sonically, though the Earth is the most neutral and my all time preference). and it was this module in Frankie that has brought me so much musical joy in all of that time, including playing BluRays through it into my TRI TRV-88SE valve amplifier into Triangle Antal EX speakers, stunning results.
No 2 Ref 1s: I actually started with the Burson Vivid V6 in Frankie, since it was already on board. Results were superbly clear, very focused though not as much sound stage height as I'm used to, a little removed from being intimately all-encompassing, a little lacking in sheer bass fullness (unlike with the No 1 Ref1s), yet extremely revealing of recording quality. Very tuneful! I went, "Hmm", and replaced it with the Classic V6. What a difference! Fuller, closer, a little less transparent, top end was good, but more on that in a minute. Good fun, more intimate, though I can hear the grain in the upper mids/lower treble, a coarseness I'm very familiar with, yet I still had fun with this combo. Bass is more mid-bass focused, fuller and less detailed and quite clearly more rolled off in the lower and sub-bass, the Vivid being far more neutral. Top end is good, but no Vivid V6. Playing Richard Thompson's Calgary Cross Live, with it's sparse vocals and cymbal work, balanced with a really live sounding drum kit, shows the grain in the vocals immediately, as with the cymbals, coarser and not as pure as I'm used to with this much played test piece. My favourite version of Pulp's Common People is by William Shatner and Joe Jackson, imbued with so much emotional intent, hints of derision and repressed expression of the middle class society, made even better by the children's chorus it becomes a powerful piece of musical story-telling. I've heard it sound quite ordinary before, with coarse and edgy chorus and compression. Not here and neither with the Classic V6, though the grain is smooth while noticeable. No nasty edges. The chorus has individual voices and space and it has mass, William and Joe's voices are wonderful, with depth and separation. The Classic is great with rock music, especially if you like a bit extra mid-bass punch and fuller vocals. Top end is good, yet without the instant transparency and harmonic details of the Vivid, the speed of transients and what this does to the expression and intent of those playing these instruments.
Out it went and the HDAM went in. Wow! Here we go. Now I have the utterly all-encompassing virtual surround sound that I enjoyed those few years ago, no ear cups or skull apparent, just music in space all through, above and below and in front of my head. It's not quite as focused and pinpoint as the Vivid V6, vocals are more forward than the No 1 Ref1s and while I can hear that grain it's not stopping me from having a great time, really just a coarsening of fine detail. Instantly fine rhythmic timing, my body wants to move immediately, music is alive! Best overall match yet? With the No2 Ref1s, for sheer intimately organic enjoyment, pretty much yes. It's an overall package with the original cable that is a very good match .... unless you like being a little more separated from your music. Bass is more open and extended than the Classic V6, it's free of the confines of ear capsules and this was shown instantly with the very quirky album from Life Without Buildings, especially the last track, Sorrow. A sparsely recorded piece, the bass plays quite gently, a rhythm guitar is RHS and kick drum and cymbals to the left, outside and lower than the LH capsule and has a really solid weighty crack from the skin. The singer, Sue Tompkins voice, partly sings and talks her story, this is no 'normal' piece of music, but man is it telling on how well this music is communicated, or not. In the case of the HDAM, it's brilliant. Bass is too thick for the details of the drum kit with the Classic, the Earth HDAM has me right in the mix, no way to avoid what is being communicated here, kick drum taut, textured and cymbals almost there with the Vivid.
So, all good here right? Well, after two or three days of this, I popped the Vivid V6 back in and was immediately struck by the greater transparency, detail retrieval from top to bottom (without brightness!), image focus and the sheer musical intent of every piece of music played through it. True, a bit less in the musical event, yet with this set of Ref1s the musical event is revealed in fine clarity, despite the slight peakiness (if a little smoother with the Vivid V6) and grain, less noticeable with some music. The obvious detail retrieval in the top and bottom ends are immediately heard, there is a purity of signal that the others don't quite have, Classic V6 the more so and the HDAM is pretty close to the Vivid, if with a bigger, bolder and more immediate soundfield, plus it is just so much fun to listen to!
I often finish my night's session with a singular piece of music by the West Australian Symphony Orchestra, Rodolpho's Dream, as excerpt from La Boheme. A glorious piece that is both relaxing and expressive of a dream state experience. The Classic blurred the basses and lost some of the resinous bite and ambient detail, top and bottom, smoothed over and a bit 'brown', weirdly. The HDAM was an involving and thoroughly intimate experience, yet with the Vivid V6, here we have the real intent of every played string, the actually 'feeling' of the dream state, instruments sound much more real and alive, ambient space surrounds the musicians and all of this becomes even more so when I plug in the No1 Ref1s! The whole track now becomes a musical masterpiece, that can only be described as 'OMG beautiful!' and 'exquisite'.
I can actually enjoy my No2 Ref1s again! The sheer lack of any compression with the HDAM allows for both relaxing and 'bundle of dancing joy' at the same time. As good as it ever was, no edge, harshness or thin vocals ... unless it's a truly awful recording and I will rarely ever play such a thing (even though, the stock cable will actually thin out vocal density, as such).
A question arose, are my No1 Ref1s too smooth on top? Certainly there is a much blacker background for even the tiniest of sounds to be seen and heard, the stock steel cable has a noticeably whiter background, more lit up in that upper mid/lower treble area. The Mogami cable is significantly 'quieter' than the original. Does it matter when one is rocking his socks off? Not really! For orchestral and quieter pieces, it can do. I have choices
The Burson Classic V6 will need further time on it, as I have a review to write on it for Burson Audio, I've been significantly delayed by a health crisis for over a month and this is my first more comprehensive writing piece in some time.
A few pics below, I had to cut an opening to fit the HDAM with it's big PIO cap with the lid on ... my kitty likes to jump up there sometimes, and for easy exchanging modules, Vivid V6 is red, Classic is orange. The full sized HDAM is noticeably larger. Most of the major modifications, especially all of the PIO bypass caps are under the main board. The headphone amp is disconnected from all power. It's vastly behind the Magni 3+ in any quality at all.

 

[arnobartels]

Yes it's a measurement flaw. And no, it's not a measurement flaw.
You sure are having fun tinkering with equipment. I've done a lot of that too with my stereo.

I'm pretty new to headphones but this is what I understand so far:

Putting a driver in a small enclosed space over your ear will create an acoustic coupling to your ear canal.
Everybody has different ear canal and outer ear so no measurement rig will measure exactly what you hear. The MiniDSP EARS are made of silicone with a straight tube ear canal. Your ears are not. A professional rig will resemble a human are much better. You will hear small suckout around 10k or so with most headphones and a peak somewhere else in the treble (for me around 6k). Then there is the Fletcher-Munson curve... An equal loudness sine sweep (through loudspeakers) will sound like this to us (yes I inverted the graph on purpose otherwise will represent our ear's sensitivity)

See a dip around 10k?
(Don't EQ your cans to sound flat with a sine sweep. A sine sweep should not sound equally loud at all frequencies but like curves above. You will lift the bass and 8k regions too much EQ-ing for flat response that way.)

Anyway watch this video:
Notice the measurements he shows in the first 30 second all have a dip around 10k.
You need to "see through" the peaks and dips in the HF and know which target response you like.
I like flat below 1k and Harman above that. So that is what my graphs use.
It may in effect be better to show raw measurements so you can see if the response is close to YOUR preferred target.
Here's a raw measurement of my 540RefII's final tuning with my target response curve:

 

[arnobartels]

Here's the above measurement again and also the same measurement but using the general correction for over-ear headphones for the MiniDSP proposed by Oratory.
His correction adds more bass than mine. This would mean my headphone would sound more like the Harman curve with bass boost:

I have the feeling the bass might be somewhere in the middle. It sounds a bit more bass heavy than the first graph shows but not as thunderous in the low bass as the second graph. The low bass depend on the how the pads seal around the ear and the MiniDSP has some problems there although with the Wang pleather my measurements are the same as Oratory's. Maybe with velour pads the low bass might be a bit more than the Mini DSP measures. I will try to compare with my stereo to see if the bass is elevated or not.
At any rate, the high end is well tuned, be it with my correction or Oratory's.

(Forgot to add the correction for the microphones in my MiniDSP to the lower curve. The bass should be about 2dB lower for the orange trace)

 

[arnobartels]

Since I have a Fostex TH610 I figured I could use that to check the bass against a measurement by Crinacle.
L&R average of my EARS (brown) and of Crinacle (blue):

Disregard the high frequencies where the Fostex would require a different correction. Below 1kHz I'm within about 1 dB so it looks like my correction is accurate in the bass and my tuning of the HD540RII follows my preferred target of flat below 1k and Harman above very well with maybe still a smidgen to much HF.