• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
Also big thanks for your work!
I have a question regarding the Crinacle measurements. I downloaded the latest raw data in the proposed directory structure.
For some reason, the latest Focal Utopia (Sample 3) is not generated.
Do you need to update the script if something in the measurement change or should your script do that automatically?
Thanks, Mike
Should happen more or less automatically. Did you run python measurements/update_measurements.py --prompt --crinacle this will read the measurement data from raw_data folder and create an AutoEq friendly data file in the data folder. After that you should be able to use it to generate eq settings.
 

mike_ranger

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Messages
6
Likes
0
That did the magic... now I can try the new measurements.
I will also compare your latest implementation regarding the dips and compare.
From what I can say so far... the original implementation created some additional depth in the soundstage it seems.
Will report back.
 

rxp

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2020
Messages
77
Likes
79
New algorithm sounds amazing! Out of interest will this have any benefits to the transform function of AutoEQ for impulcifer IEM use?

I still struggle to get a good transform got my Air Pods Pro, but that could be poor dummy head measurements. A manual EQ process would still be optimal I feel.
 

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
New algorithm sounds amazing! Out of interest will this have any benefits to the transform function of AutoEQ for impulcifer IEM use?

I still struggle to get a good transform got my Air Pods Pro, but that could be poor dummy head measurements. A manual EQ process would still be optimal I feel.
Might have even bigger impact on Impulcifer, eventually. The limited slope algorithm is designed to work with only headphones for now. I have a branch with the new AutoEq version so you can test it out if you wish but I didn't have success yet. Reguires some work to make it compatible with speakers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ata

Hephaestus

Active Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2019
Messages
220
Likes
439
Location
Rapture
I applied the eq provided by AutoEq project into my Logitech X PRO Lightspeed gaming headset and the results are JAW DROPPING.

This project is a real service to the public!
 

YoniV

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2019
Messages
25
Likes
11
AutoEq also uses a bit less bass boost than what the Harman target asks for. I made this decision since not all headphones can do a large bass shelf like that without distorting and I have no way of checking if the headphone would distort.

What should I do if I want to generate EQ filters for the actual Harman target using your tool?
In principle, that should more or less reproduce Oratory's results, right?
 

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
What should I do if I want to generate EQ filters for the actual Harman target using your tool?
In principle, that should more or less reproduce Oratory's results, right?
Use Harman target without bass boost. --compensation="compensation/harman_over-ear_2018.csv" --bass_boost=0 with full sized headphones and --compensation="compensation/harman_in-ear_2019v2.csv" --bass_boost=0 with IEMs. You could also use the Harman target without built-in bass shelf and adjust it to your liking: --compensation="compensation/harman_over-ear_2018_wo_bass.csv" --bass_boost=6. Bass preferences vary greatly between listeners so it's always recommended to adjust it to your own tastes.
 

Jimbob54

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
9,622
Likes
12,495
Nice! Thanks for bringing Oratory1990 to my attention. I made a quick helper sheet to create Equalizer APO EQ settings based on those settings in Google Sheets.

How do you get the settings from the google sheet into Peace/ EAPO?
 

Ata

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 6, 2021
Messages
385
Likes
328
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Might have even bigger impact on Impulcifer, eventually. The limited slope algorithm is designed to work with only headphones for now. I have a branch with the new AutoEq version so you can test it out if you wish but I didn't have success yet. Reguires some work to make it compatible with speakers.
@jaakkopasanen I am a big fan of AutoEq and use it on all of my headphones using the convolution filters! Am I right to assume that the convolution filters are more precise than the PEQ settings?

How long do you think until AutoEq algorithm can be applied to speakers? Why would it not be compatible with speakers?
 

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
@jaakkopasanen I am a big fan of AutoEq and use it on all of my headphones using the convolution filters! Am I right to assume that the convolution filters are more precise than the PEQ settings?

How long do you think until AutoEq algorithm can be applied to speakers? Why would it not be compatible with speakers?
Convolution filters are more precise but in practice that probably isn't very audible. They however don't leaves anything up for interpretation and therefore are going to be the same in all equalizers.

I've no plans of making AutoEq for speakers. REW and other solutions already exist. You probably could use AutoEq for room correction if you're clever enough with the parameters to work around the potential obstacles.
 

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
Every reviewer seems to have their own target curve for IEMs so I thought I'd join the fun and publish my own preferred IEM target. I call it AutoEq in-ear target and it looks like this. It's just Harman 2019 (Listen Inc feat Sean Olive) target with 1.5 dB less ear gain (3766 Hz, 0.63 Q) and a 6 dB bass shelf instead of 10 dB.
autoeq_in-ear.png

The raw data can of course be found in AutoEq: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/blob/master/compensation/autoeq_in-ear.csv

I also wanted to have an option to do loudness based equalization on Android with Wavelet. The app doesn't have loudness built-in so I took the equal loudness contours and calculated the differences for 70, 75, 80 and 85 phon curves relative to 90 phon curve. These are also now available in AutoEq's research lab , which means you can use the CSV files as sound signature with --sound_signature="research/equal_loudness/80vs90_loudness.csv" and so forth. I create a few results for myself with different loudness compensations and imported the GraphicEQ txt files to Wavelet. Now whenever I'm listening with low volume, I can bring back the "fullness" lost due to low volume.
relative_equal_loudness.png

There are also versions of these curves with only the bass present. Everything above 1 kHz has 0 dB gain in these files.
 

buz

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 17, 2020
Messages
272
Likes
232
I create a few results for myself with different loudness compensations and imported the GraphicEQ txt files to Wavelet. Now whenever I'm listening with low volume, I can bring back the "fullness" lost due to low volume.


I would love to see that integrated wavelet, did you reach out to the dev (similarly, qudelix after they just added the DB to the app, FWIW)?
 

wiz2596

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2020
Messages
61
Likes
43
I just installed the app on my cellphone and I'm really impressed with the autoeq feature, my fiio fd1 sounds like a totally different iem now, better neutral sound overall, thanks you so much @jaakkopasanen for your effort on this app, it's amazing
 

luxonator

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2022
Messages
15
Likes
3
Still pretty new to EQ so please bear with me. I have couple of questions I haven't been able to find solid answers and have created quite a bit of confusion for me.

When I read guides on how to use the Equalizer APO + Peace, they mostly say to go to AutoEQ to get the values OR use the ones from oratory.

1. What should I do when there are multiple different results from multiple different sources in the AutoEQ list. Am I supposed to try all of them and choose one that works best for me and then tweak it to my liking? I thought the point of AutoEQ was to combine all the measurements into one working setup(?)

2. When I compare the results from the AutoEQ github page for measurements made by oratory, the EQ values are different than from what oratory has released on his pdf. Which one should I use? Why are they different?

3. I've seen some android apps (like Wavelet) can download the values automatically when you just search for the headphone model. Which files does the software choose from all of the available ones?
 

Jimbob54

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
9,622
Likes
12,495
1. What should I do when there are multiple different results from multiple different sources in the AutoEQ list. Am I supposed to try all of them and choose one that works best for me and then tweak it to my liking? I thought the point of AutoEQ was to combine all the measurements into one working setup(?)

2. When I compare the results from the AutoEQ github page for measurements made by oratory, the EQ values are different than from what oratory has released on his pdf. Which one should I use? Why are they different?

3. I've seen some android apps (like Wavelet) can download the values automatically when you just search for the headphone model. Which files does the software choose from all of the available ones?
1. Yes- but the AutoEQ has a ranking of measurement sources- with Oratory and Crinacle being at the top (I think) - they use rigs that are comparable to those used to actually create the target curve. This does not mean you will prefer those- just that "most" people should prefer these- so yes, experiment. And no, I dont think any one profile on AutoEQ is an amalgam of different measurements. I think the whole database pulls in measurements from different sources and so you see different eq profiles for the same headphone based on the measurement source.

2. AutoEQ uses software to map the measured response to the target response. So even if AutoEQ uses Oratory measurements, its not going to be the same filters. He does a degree of tweaking and customisable filters on top of simply mapping A to B (I say simply- its obviously not as simple as this )

3. I would imagine the other software using the AutoEQ DB uses the hierarchy of measurements and related EQs - that is https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results under "recommended results"

I reckon the above massively oversimplifies what is a very complex real answer, but its my basic understanding.
 

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
AutoEq just got a new and improved parametric eq optimizer

While all major types of equalizers have been supported a long time now, including parametric equalizers, the optimizer which finds the best parameters for the parametric eq was slow and produced problems in certain rare(ish) cases.

The new parametric eq optimizer runs a lot faster, supports low and high shelf filters and has limits for filter (band) center frequencies, gains and qualities (widths). Together with the recent addition of multiprocessing, the new version generates the results over 100x faster and the speedup for a single optimization run is around 10x. The low and high shelf filters make it easier to adjust the bass and upper treble levels in your eq app. This is especially useful as the preferred levels for both vary wildly from one listener to another. And finally the limits on the filter parameters ensure that there won't be values produced which you cannot add to your eq app.

I put quite a lot of effort into ensuring the new optimizer is robust but this is still the first time the new results have been released out there in the wild so please let me know if you find something wrong/odd/funny/weird.

Here's an illustration of how the parametric eq optimizer finds the best filter parameters
peq.gif


Hope you enjoy!
 

ezublab

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
35
Likes
28
Wow! Thanks for your great work!
Will you recalculate all previous Eq or only coming news?
 

Jimbob54

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
9,622
Likes
12,495
AutoEq just got a new and improved parametric eq optimizer

While all major types of equalizers have been supported a long time now, including parametric equalizers, the optimizer which finds the best parameters for the parametric eq was slow and produced problems in certain rare(ish) cases.

The new parametric eq optimizer runs a lot faster, supports low and high shelf filters and has limits for filter (band) center frequencies, gains and qualities (widths). Together with the recent addition of multiprocessing, the new version generates the results over 100x faster and the speedup for a single optimization run is around 10x. The low and high shelf filters make it easier to adjust the bass and upper treble levels in your eq app. This is especially useful as the preferred levels for both vary wildly from one listener to another. And finally the limits on the filter parameters ensure that there won't be values produced which you cannot add to your eq app.

I put quite a lot of effort into ensuring the new optimizer is robust but this is still the first time the new results have been released out there in the wild so please let me know if you find something wrong/odd/funny/weird.

Here's an illustration of how the parametric eq optimizer finds the best filter parameters
View attachment 231795

Hope you enjoy!
Excellent work. I'll try it out. Thanks.
 

jaakkopasanen

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
46
Likes
181
Wow! Thanks for your great work!
Will you recalculate all previous Eq or only coming news?
All of them have already been recalculated. What you currently see in AutoEq results is the work of the new optimizer. Previously it was such a drag to recalculate everything because it took more than ten hours. Now it's a few minutes.
 

Ata

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 6, 2021
Messages
385
Likes
328
Location
Adelaide, Australia
All of them have already been recalculated. What you currently see in AutoEq results is the work of the new optimizer. Previously it was such a drag to recalculate everything because it took more than ten hours. Now it's a few minutes.

Thank you for the great tool and database, I am a fan of it, have a checkout on my machine, and use it quite a bit.

Does this bring any improvements in terms of EQ quality -- achieving same corrections with fewer filters applied, or better fitting being achieved? I know a db here or there is not going to bring much difference, merely curious if this is just a performance improvement, or a potential quality bump as well.
 
Top Bottom