Oratory1990 has REMEASURED a load of headphones and updated his pdf's

[Robbo99999]

I'm new to peq and was just hoping you guys could answer a couple of questions. I entered oratorys settings manually in the 10 band peq in my usb audio player pro app for my hd6xx using his hd650 settings including the gain reduction. The volume is noticeably lower with the eq than without it. Is this normal? Should I just adjust the gain to where it's the same level as without eq?

Also, my eq doesn't have any setting that says peak so I'm using digital bell which I believe should give the same results. It also has analog bell though so I'm not sure.

Thanks

Chris

You could ask/research technical support of your phone or whatever EQ program you're using to find out if digital bell or analog bell is the normal widely accepted Peak Filter which has Gain & Q variables.

 

[01890jp]

I was noticing what seems like some big differences between oratorys 10 band graphic and para eq settings for the HD650. It looks like everything over 2700 hz is cut for the peq setting and everything over 2000 except for 16000 is boosted on the graphic. Again, I'm new to this so I could be reading it wrong.

 

[Robbo99999]

I was noticing what seems like some big differences between oratorys 10 band graphic and para eq settings for the HD650. It looks like everything over 2700 hz is cut for the peq setting and everything over 2000 except for 16000 is boosted on the graphic. Again, I'm new to this so I could be reading it wrong.

You've noticed a little wrongly in the specifics you mention, but it's true there are differences between the two. The reason being is two-fold.

Firstly the 10 band Graphic Equaliser EQ is 1.5yrs older than the other one, and the measurement is a bit different.....Oratory often measures more units of the same headphone and then updates the average measurement curve upon which the EQ is based, and if you look in the following two pdf files you'll find that this average measurement curve is different for both, he's not updated the measurement for the Graphic Equaliser EQ:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gwxt4qup0o6udvz/Sennheiser HD650 (10 Band Graphic EQ).pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zr5tqw0qojom9uh/Sennheiser HD650.pdf?dl=0

Secondly you'll notice that Oratory has chosen to align the measurements slightly differently on the Target Curve, with the Graphic Equaliser EQ measurement being aligned with the Target at 1kHz and in the other one you'll notice that the measurement at 1kHz is about 1dB above the Target Curve in terms of how he placed the measurement on the Target before applying EQ, which will effect how much & which parts of the curve are boosted or cut. It doesn't really matter much regarding where you the align the measurement on the Target Curve (as it's all relative) as the same result can be obtained in the tonality and general accuracy to the curve, but aligning the measurement optimally on the Target Curve can mean it can be slightly easier to EQ to the Target, perhaps using less filters, and I find it can make EQ'ing +10kHz more reliable if you choose wisely because if you place it optimally on the Target Curve from that perspective so that it aligns up nicely with the treble then often times +10kHz will be in the right ballpark area of energy without the need for any use of High Shelf Filters on the 10kHz+ area. For my EQ's that I create (based on Oratory/Crinacle's measurements) I try to align in the most efficient way, and that's often aligning at 1kHz, but sometimes small variations up or down based on what looks right & easy when I line it all up.

 

[01890jp]

You've noticed a little wrongly in the specifics you mention, but it's true there are differences between the two. The reason being is two-fold.

Firstly the 10 band Graphic Equaliser EQ is 1.5yrs older than the other one, and the measurement is a bit different.....Oratory often measures more units of the same headphone and then updates the average measurement curve upon which the EQ is based, and if you look in the following two pdf files you'll find that this average measurement curve is different for both, he's not updated the measurement for the Graphic Equaliser EQ:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gwxt4qup0o6udvz/Sennheiser HD650 (10 Band Graphic EQ).pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zr5tqw0qojom9uh/Sennheiser HD650.pdf?dl=0

Secondly you'll notice that Oratory has chosen to align the measurements slightly differently on the Target Curve, with the Graphic Equaliser EQ measurement being aligned with the Target at 1kHz and in the other one you'll notice that the measurement at 1kHz is about 1dB above the Target Curve in terms of how he placed the measurement on the Target before applying EQ, which will effect how much & which parts of the curve are boosted or cut. It doesn't really matter much regarding where you the align the measurement on the Target Curve (as it's all relative) as the same result can be obtained in the tonality and general accuracy to the curve, but aligning the measurement optimally on the Target Curve can mean it can be slightly easier to EQ to the Target, perhaps using less filters, and I find it can make EQ'ing +10kHz more reliable if you choose wisely because if you place it optimally on the Target Curve from that perspective so that it aligns up nicely with the treble then often times +10kHz will be in the right ballpark area of energy without the need for any use of High Shelf Filters on the 10kHz+ area. For my EQ's that I create (based on Oratory/Crinacle's measurements) I try to align in the most efficient way, and that's often aligning at 1kHz, but sometimes small variations up or down based on what looks right & easy when I line it all up.

Thanks for that. Most of it is above my pay grade but I think I understand what you're saying. Just curious if I were to tweak oratorys settings, how should I adjust the output level?

 

[Jimbob54]

Thanks for that. Most of it is above my pay grade but I think I understand what you're saying. Just curious if I were to tweak oratorys settings, how should I adjust the output level?

Keep the pre amp adjustment 1/2 or 1 dB (maybe more if lots of EQ peaks) greater than the highest EQ peak. So if you add a +5dB bass lift in, make sure your preamp is at least -5dB. You might get away with less if your music isnt recorded too "loud" in the frequencies with the most EQ. If your EQ software has a clipping indicator or similar, just keep your eye on that for a bit and get a feel for what "pings" it.

 

[Robbo99999]

Thanks for that. Most of it is above my pay grade but I think I understand what you're saying. Just curious if I were to tweak oratorys settings, how should I adjust the output level?

(About the points you got slightly wrong in your previous post to this one, you'll want to look at the "EQ Curve Total" graph (labelled as such) in Oratory's pdf files to see the combined effect of all the filters he uses at any given frequency.)

What do you mean by output level? That would normally be your listening volume, but I don't think you mean that, because you'd just turn up your amp for instance. The "Preamp Gain" listed in Oratory's pdf's is the amount of negative preamp that is required in order to prevent any digital clipping from the boost filters he's used, so you can't really compromise on that....you have to run the negative preamp he lists and then you have to turn up the volume on your amp if it's not loud enough.

EDIT: or do you mean if you change Oratory's filters then how do you know how much Negative Preamp to use? In that case just click the green squiggly line in PEACE to display the Total EQ Curve and then you lower the negative preamp until all points are below zero. If you're using EqualiserAPO without PEACE installed then you'd look at the Analysis Panel at the bottom of the EqualiserAPO window and you'd want to lower the negative preamp until there was no red showing in the Analysis Panel.

 

[01890jp]

Sorry about that. Yes, by output level I meant preamp gain. I'm using the 10 band peq in USB Audio Player Pro on my S7 into a Fiio K5 pro so I have plenty of power. The peq in USBAPP has a pre gain plus or minus adjustment so I was able to enter everything exactly the same as oratorys setting. It sounds great but I'm finding however that I like just adding a low shelf of 5 db at 75 Hz with my HD600. I guess therefore that I should set the pre gain to minus 5db.

 

[Jimbob54]

Sorry about that. Yes, by output level I meant preamp gain. I'm using the 10 band peq in USB Audio Player Pro on my S7 into a Fiio K5 pro so I have plenty of power. The peq in USBAPP has a pre gain plus or minus adjustment so I was able to enter everything exactly the same as oratorys setting. It sounds great but I'm finding however that I like just adding a low shelf of 5 db at 75 Hz with my HD600. I guess therefore that I should set the pre gain to minus 5db.

Uapp has an auto gain toggle that actively monitors and adjusts if easier.

 

[01890jp]

Do you think I should just use that? When I do, the signal is louder so it's subtracting less pre gain. Maybe it's my imagination but it doesn't sound quite as clean with the louder auto gain setting. I'll mess around with it though. Thanks

 

[Robbo99999]

Sorry about that. Yes, by output level I meant preamp gain. I'm using the 10 band peq in USB Audio Player Pro on my S7 into a Fiio K5 pro so I have plenty of power. The peq in USBAPP has a pre gain plus or minus adjustment so I was able to enter everything exactly the same as oratorys setting. It sounds great but I'm finding however that I like just adding a low shelf of 5 db at 75 Hz with my HD600. I guess therefore that I should set the pre gain to minus 5db.

If you're using this EQ:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zr5tqw0qojom9uh/Sennheiser HD650.pdf?dl=0
And then if you're adding in addition to all those filters a Low Shelf at 75Hz for +5dB then you'll need to add an additional minus 5dB to your negative preamp, so you'd need -14.3dB Negative Preamp - that's a lotta bass! If you're not doing what I think you're doing re the different filters you're using, then instead try to find an option in your EQ software where you can see the Total EQ Curve and then simply apply whatever negative preamp to make sure the Total EQ Curve is below 0dBFS for the entire curve.

 

[01890jp]

I like adding JUST a low shelf to my 600s not 650s and leaving everything else alone. I'm going back and forth between doing that and using oratorys full eq setting. As far as my 650/6xx, oratorys settings do improve them but I still think they sound much darker than the 600s. I'm always wanting a little more air or energy, especially with things like a snare drum. The 6xx seems to dull the crack of a snare while with the 600s everything seems to sound just right without being harsh or dull, especially with that low shelf added. Dare I say it even sounds fun!

 

[Robbo99999]

I like adding JUST a low shelf to my 600s not 650s and leaving everything else alone. I'm going back and forth between doing that and using oratorys full eq setting. As far as my 650/6xx, oratorys settings do improve them but I still think they sound much darker than the 600s. I'm always wanting a little more air or energy, especially with things like a snare drum. The 6xx seems to dull the crack of a snare while with the 600s everything seems to sound just right without being harsh or dull, especially with that low shelf added. Dare I say it even sounds fun!

Well if you've not got any other filters active other than a +5dB Low Shelf then (of course) you only need a -5dB Negative Preamp. Yeah, the HD600 doesn't need much done to it at all, best headphone without EQ in my experience. If you're adding a +5dB Low Shelf you might want to ideally take a little energy out of the 100-300Hz zone, might help overall clarity (which would be the way the Harman Curve is shaped), but to be honest now I think about it you said 75Hz, so the Low Shelf boost won't be affecting 100Hz+ in any way and I was initially thinking re a 100Hz Low Shelf. Yeah, +5dB Low Shelf at 75Hz I think would look pretty good to me, I might even try that myself for the HD600 (and everything else stock, no other filters).

EDIT: tried the HD600 with no EQ apart from your 75Hz +5dB Low Shelf - yeah it's pretty good. I played about adjusting the Gain on that Low Shelf and settled at +3dB 75Hz Low Shelf - I feel that complements the rest of frequency response in the most "undetached" and blended way that still retains in my eyes the unEQ'd ethos of the HD600. Still quite enjoyable on bass heavy electronic music with +3dB 75Hz Low Shelf. Haven't seen what it actually does to the frequency response graph, just going off listening impressions. I also feel that the relatively poor spatial properties of the HD600 are enhanced when listened to at stock in comparison to a full-on Harman EQ, and the +3dB Low Shelf is probably a sweet spot for not reducing those properties.

 

[01890jp]

Nice to know I'm on the right track from someone who actually knows what they're doing LOL. Yeah, 75Hz just seems a little tighter and punchier where 100Hz sounds just a little looser. Oratorys target eq sounds good but I think it maybe takes away a little too much of what makes the 600 so special so that's why I'm experimenting with just using the low shelf. I love everything else about the 600.

 

[Robbo99999]

Nice to know I'm on the right track from someone who actually knows what they're doing LOL. Yeah, 75Hz just seems a little tighter and punchier where 100Hz sounds just a little looser. Oratorys target eq sounds good but I think it maybe takes away a little too much of what makes the 600 so special so that's why I'm experimenting with just using the low shelf. I love everything else about the 600.

Yes, if you just put in a Low Shelf at 100Hz without taking out anything between 100-300Hz then it could sound muddy, because that filter will also boost between 100-200Hz, and then the added effect of the extra bass would also make it sound less tight I guess. I think you're right, use the HD600 at stock or with the 75Hz Low Shelf you thought of. I edited my last post while you were typing - try a +3dB rather than +5dB Low Shelf, I like +3dB better - see my previous post edits for a bit more detail on that.

EDIT: yeah, that's a lot of fun that frequency response. I might put that into REW and set that as a Target Curve, and try it with some of my other headphones that have better spatial properties. I might also play with extending the bass flat at the same level too, although I expect that might mess with the spatial qualities to some extent.

 

[01890jp]

That's funny, after I typed the message I made 2 presets....One at 3db and one at 5db. I think you're right, 3db is perfect for most music without having it get in the way of anything else. I think I've reached headphone nirvana, at least to where the law of diminishing returns comes into effect. I've owned my 6xx since last summer and honestly never really loved them due to the reasons I explained previously. I've had my 600s now for 3 weeks and feel like I've finally found the sound I'm looking for. I almost didn't buy them after reading so many reviews stating that they were so close to the 650/6xx and how they also had that veiled sound. Funny how we all hear things differently because I don't hear the veil at all in the 600s but I certainly do with the 6xx. I've tried several HPs lately including the 660s and a couple of entry level planars and none of them did much for me. The ONLY thing that was lacking somewhat with the 600s when I first heard them was the low end and now that that's been rectified....I'm very happy

 

[Robbo99999]

That's funny, after I typed the message I made 2 presets....One at 3db and one at 5db. I think you're right, 3db is perfect for most music without having it get in the way of anything else. I think I've reached headphone nirvana, at least to where the law of diminishing returns comes into effect. I've owned my 6xx since last summer and honestly never really loved them due to the reasons I explained previously. I've had my 600s now for 3 weeks and feel like I've finally found the sound I'm looking for. I almost didn't buy them after reading so many reviews stating that they were so close to the 650/6xx and how they also had that veiled sound. Funny how we all hear things differently because I don't hear the veil at all in the 600s but I certainly do with the 6xx. I've tried several HPs lately including the 660s and a couple of entry level planars and none of them did much for me. The ONLY thing that was lacking somewhat with the 600s when I first heard them was the low end and now that that's been rectified....I'm very happy

You can probably reach the same effect by EQ'ing your other headphones to the same frequency response as the HD600, but the HD600 does have an exceedingly smooth frequency response, free from jitter so-to-speak which is somewhat unique in the headphone world. Yes, I find that the HD600 is not veiled at all. Well thanks for your ideas on how to improve the HD600, that is a good sounding frequency response, I'll be doing some experiments in REW with my other headphones to match the frequency response of the HD600 with +3dB 75Hz Low Shelf - I feel that the better spatial properties of my K702 and HE4XX (I'll try with the NAD HP50 too) would make for a great combination with that slightly modified HD600 frequency response.

 

[Robbo99999]

You can probably reach the same effect by EQ'ing your other headphones to the same frequency response as the HD600, but the HD600 does have an exceedingly smooth frequency response, free from jitter so-to-speak which is somewhat unique in the headphone world. Yes, I find that the HD600 is not veiled at all. Well thanks for your ideas on how to improve the HD600, that is a good sounding frequency response, I'll be doing some experiments in REW with my other headphones to match the frequency response of the HD600 with +3dB 75Hz Low Shelf - I feel that the better spatial properties of my K702 and HE4XX (I'll try with the NAD HP50 too) would make for a great combination with that slightly modified HD600 frequency response.

Replying to my own post here as I have an update on my experiments to mimic the frequency response of the HD600 with 75Hz +3dB Low Shelf in some of my other headphones. I've tried it in my K702 and the HE4XX, following are the pics showing the EQ's (decided to extend the bass out on the HE4XX due to that headphone being superior in the bass):
K702:

HE4XX:

I flipped between Harman Curve EQ's and the EQ's you see pictured above and I prefer the Harman EQ's, so mimicking the HD600 (with +3dB bass boost) in my other headphones was not a success, it didn't sound horrible, but it didn't suit those headphones as well as it does the HD600 for some reason, and it didn't enhance the spatial properties like I thought it might. Regarding HE4XX my favourite EQ is straight up the Oratory EQ that he publishes, amongst my headphones I think that's the best of his EQ's, and for my K702 I prefer to use my own Harman EQ based on Oratory's measurement, with my EQ having the bass rolling off at 35Hz (for some reason it helps to enhance the spatial qualities of the K702 in particular).

 

[markanini]

If anyone is interested in Beyerdynamic DT880 the preference score went from 67 to 88: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0mxc2c4cy7tkxc0/Beyerdynamic DT880.pdf?dl=0

 

[Robbo99999]

If anyone is interested in Beyerdynamic DT880 the preference score went from 67 to 88: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0mxc2c4cy7tkxc0/Beyerdynamic DT880.pdf?dl=0

Which part of the frequency response changed the most? He measures more units of that headphone of course, and then averages them in, so that's normally the mechanism for the change in the measurement & the change in score. (you know that I think, but I'm saying for anyone reading).

 

[markanini]

Which part of the frequency response changed the most? He measures more units of that headphone of course, and then averages them in, so that's normally the mechanism for the change in the measurement & the change in score. (you know that I think, but I'm saying for anyone reading).

I don't have the original PDF. All I can say is that the new score matches my subjective impression of listening to one unit.

The new score suggests a large unit variation. Apparently the score gets very high when all his measured units are averaged.