How to create headphones EQ profile using REW

[Music1969]

Don't just Auto EQ it.

Thanks for all the advice Robbo.

The good news is I'm not a fan of the huge boost in Harman curve. It really doesn't sound like the Genelecs I have nearfield at my desk.

I seem to prefer flat - other than bass boost up to ~200Hz. Identical to my preferences for my nearfield speakers.

So the good news is no boosting of these large dips in the raw measurement. Actually the flat curve ends up bringing everything around those peaks down lower LOL. Convenient for my anxiety

So in this case I was happy with REW's AutoEQ.

My preferred impulse response, only boosting bass, which has much closer tonality now with my nearfield speakers:

 

[Music1969]

HQPlayer also adds post-processing, so after convolution I also have Bauer DSP crossfeed applied.

Chuy Moy is my favourite and again makes things sound a bit more speaker like to me.

 

[Robbo99999]

Thanks for all the advice Robbo.

The good news is I'm not a fan of the huge boost in Harman curve. It really doesn't sound like the Genelecs I have nearfield at my desk.

I seem to prefer flat - other than bass boost up to ~200Hz. Identical to my preferences for my nearfield speakers.

So the good news is no boosting of these large dips in the raw measurement. Actually the flat curve ends up bringing everything around those peaks down lower LOL. Convenient for my anxiety

So in this case I was happy with REW's AutoEQ.


View attachment 107915


My preferred impulse response, only boosting bass, which has much closer tonality now with my nearfield speakers:

View attachment 107923

Dang, so you're literally EQ'ing your headphones to flat straight line (for all intents & purposes) as a Target Curve. Man, I gotta say I find that hard to believe that would sound right.....there's a reason that pretty much all headphones at stock and also all Headphone Target Curves (eg Headphone Harman Curve, Diffuse Field)....there's pretty much a reason why all of those have a boost around 2-8kHz - because that's what sounds flat & neutral as our ears magnify certain frequencies in this area. Your literal flat line of how you've EQ'd your headphones, I think you're well off from anything resembling neutral sound.....I find it hard to imagine that you have such unique HRTF and physical ear properties that your eardrum perceives neutral sound as a flat line. I mean if it sounds alright to you, then why not, but I simply don't believe that would sound right, I think you're really far from the mark there.

 

[Music1969]

I think you're well off from anything resembling neutral sound...

But I have a pair of neutral flat Genelecs 1m from my head...

Flat EQ headphones sounds just like flat Gennies to me.

Harman Curve sounds nothing like flat nearfield speakers... to me anyway. It sounds very wrong, not even a little bit.

Again I'm talking relative to the nearfield monitors.

Anyhoo that's the subjective nature of this hobby I guess !

 

[Music1969]

This is an interesting topic, maybe I should start a new thread for discussion on this topic.

I can ask the question - who actually thinks Harman Curve sounds like neutral speakers.

 

[Music1969]

I've only played with the 2 extremes so far. Harman Curve and flat.

I don't like Harman Curve but it's possible my preference is somewhere in between the 2 extremes... I keep an open mind

I only just learnt how to do this for headphones so things might change now that I can tweak !

 

[pkane]

This is an interesting topic, maybe I should start a new thread for discussion on this topic.

I can ask the question - who actually thinks Harman Curve sounds like neutral speakers.

Actually, I’m with you on this. For me, Harman target sounds OK, but not great. I EQ my phones to a nearly a flat line with in-ear mics and then bump up 3-4dB below 200Hz to taste. Maybe it’s just what I’m used to, but this sounds just much more natural to me. I’ve not found too many here that agree with my method, though, I have to warn you

 

[Music1969]

flat line with in-ear mics and then bump up 3-4dB below 200Hz to taste

LOL very much the same!

I just breathed a sigh of relief. I thought I would be forced to close my ASR account LOL

 

[Robbo99999]

Man, you guys are scientific anomalies, I could have sworn you (@Music1969 ) were trolling when you said you were EQ'ing a literal flat line into your headphones as a Target Curve. I really don't recommend anyone does that who is reading this thread, I think it's really poor advice, there's no basis for doing so whatsoever, in fact the scientific basis is the opposite of what you guys are doing, you can't treat headphones as if they're speakers - ie having a flat Target Curve, it's just not the same thing, there's proven scientific reasons for this. I'm not gonna comment anymore in this thread, I can't quite believe what people are choosing to put themselves through with the ridiculous things they're doing to their headphones....really bad advice. I suggest anyone reading this disregard what some people are saying in this thread....it's like some kind of Donald Trump Fake News Saga....get your news (on headphones) from proper sources! (P.S. My post is worded quite strongly, I don't hate you (dramatic),.....just felt I had to post strongly on this.)

 

[Music1969]

Man, you guys are scientific anomalies, I could have sworn you (@Music1969 ) were trolling when you said you were EQ'ing a literal flat line into your headphones as a Target Curve. I really don't recommend anyone does that who is reading this thread, I think it's really poor advice, there's no basis for doing so whatsoever, in fact the scientific basis is the opposite of what you guys are doing, you can't treat headphones as if they're speakers - ie having a flat Target Curve, it's just not the same thing, there's proven scientific reasons for this. I'm not gonna comment anymore in this thread, I can't quite believe what people are choosing to put themselves through with the ridiculous things they're doing to their headphones....really bad advice. I suggest anyone reading this disregard what some people are saying in this thread....it's like some kind of Donald Trump Fake News Saga....get your news (on headphones) from proper sources! (P.S. My post is worded quite strongly, I don't hate you (dramatic),.....just felt I had to post strongly on this.)

Yikes, i didn't expect sharing subjective experience could rile up such emotions !

Thanks for adding the 'i don't hate you' though - that lessens the blow quite a bit !

As for the science, as Dan Clarke (headphones guru) wrote in another thread:

"it’s probably worth noting Olive says 25% of people want more bass than the curve and 25% want more treble"

Maybe when you add more bass and more treble , you end up getting closer to flat, than further away?

I don't know !

As mentioned, I haven't settled on flat! I only prefer it to Harman but a week from now I may have strongest preference for something between these 2 extremes !

 

[pkane]

Man, you guys are scientific anomalies

You're right! From now on, I am going to force myself to listen to something that doesn't sound right to me because that's what some random study subjects liked.

 

[Robbo99999]

Yikes, i didn't expect sharing subjective experience could rile up such emotions !

Thanks for adding the 'i don't hate you' though - that lessens the blow quite a bit !

As for the science, as Dan Clarke (headphones guru) wrote in another thread:

"it’s probably worth noting Olive says 25% of people want more bass than the curve and 25% want more treble"

Maybe when you add more bass and more treble , you end up getting closer to flat, than further away?

I don't know !

As mentioned, I haven't settled on flat! I only prefer it to Harman but a week from now I may have strongest preference for something between these 2 extremes !

There's a big difference between the quote you have in bold in your post vs EQ'ing a flat line, that's not even in the same ballpark, not even the same context, and shows a lack of understanding on the science surrounding how these Target Curves have been created and "how it all fits together".

When I see people spreading FUD then I have to make it known that it's a poor approach....afterall we're supposed to help people find better sound, and EQ'ing a flat line into your headphones is like the worst thing I can imagine doing to my headphone. I mean I know some people have a problem with the Harman Headphone Curve on a subjective listening enjoyment (lack of it) level as well as on an emotional level for some of them.....with their thinking being well who's saying we should like the Harman Curve, etc etc.....and some of them gain satisfaction by poking jabs at Harman Curve "Fans". As soon as I saw you EQ'ing a flat line into your headphone, then I thought "Great, he's probably trolling, part of the vehement anti Harman brigade spreading general FUD"......in fact I wondered if you even owned headphones or speakers when I saw you were suggesting EQ'ing a flat line into your headphones. I even entertained the thought you were trolling waiting for Harman Curve "Fans" to bite, as a bit of light entertainment....I thought this when I saw you EQ'ing a flat curve into your headphone, as doing so is just the maddest irrational thing I've heard, lol!

But anyway, the motives & realities don't matter much. I just wanted to make it known that I think your approach was nonsense and really poor advice, but I've said that and described some of the technical reasons why in some of my previous posts, so I'm gonna leave it there & bow out before I become part of the problem.

 

[pkane]

There's a big difference between the quote you have in bold in your post vs EQ'ing a flat line, that's not even in the same ballpark, not even the same context, and shows a lack of understanding on the science surrounding how these Target Curves have been created and "how it all fits together".

When I see people spreading FUD then I have to make it known that it's a poor approach....afterall we're supposed to help people find better sound, and EQ'ing a flat line into your headphones is like the worst thing I can imagine doing to my headphone. I mean I know some people have a problem with the Harman Headphone Curve on a subjective listening enjoyment (lack of it) level as well as on an emotional level for some of them.....with their thinking being well who's saying we should like the Harman Curve, etc etc.....and some of them gain satisfaction by poking jabs at Harman Curve "Fans". As soon as I saw you EQ'ing a flat line into your headphone, then I thought "Great, he's probably trolling, part of the vehement anti Harman brigade spreading general FUD"......in fact I wondered if you even owned headphones or speakers when I saw you were suggesting EQ'ing a flat line into your headphones. I even entertained the thought you were trolling waiting for Harman Curve "Fans" to bite, as a bit of light entertainment....I thought this when I saw you EQ'ing a flat curve into your headphone, as doing so is just the maddest irrational thing I've heard, lol!

But anyway, the motives & realities don't matter much. I just wanted to make it known that I think your approach was nonsense and really poor advice, but I've said that and described some of the technical reasons why in some of my previous posts, so I'm gonna leave it there & bow out before I become part of the problem.

This is a knee-jerk reaction if I've seen one. It seems to be based on something other than the actual EQ corrections being discussed here (you've mentioned perceived motives, FUD, supposed purpose of this site, etc.) Think about what it is you're really objecting to.

There's enough variation in preferences and physiology that it is most certain that Harman's curve will not work for everyone. Harman's target is not a natural law that can't be violated. It's the result of a statistical, subjective study with sufficient variation even within the study parameters to allow for a different interpretation for some of the study subjects. Not to mention the rest of the 8 billion people. Why is it that you insist that it must be right for everyone and anyone who doesn't like it must be a troll or at least, a scientific anomaly? Is that really scientific?

 

[maverickronin]

Some people really like to take the Toole and Olive studies and run with them.

They are a great place to start (especially for someone new to the hobby) but they are not some kind of well established and independently verified scientific consensus.

 

[Jimbob54]

Thank f*ck we haven't all forgotten some important tenets

1. This should be fun.
2. This should be about learning and making informed choices. Even if we get it wrong.
3. Software EQ is infinitely flexible and non-destructive
4. Saying one does not like the sound of something derived from solid science is not a crime, nor an expression of ignorance but of preference.
5. Nobody ever came to harm applying less than perfect setups to their audio kit.
6. Detailing ones experience here is not to be taken as advice to the membership . Hectoring is not the same as advising either.

 

[Jimbob54]

Actually, I’m with you on this. For me, Harman target sounds OK, but not great. I EQ my phones to a nearly a flat line with in-ear mics and then bump up 3-4dB below 200Hz to taste. Maybe it’s just what I’m used to, but this sounds just much more natural to me. I’ve not found too many here that agree with my method, though, I have to warn you

Heretic!

 

[pkane]

Heretic!

I hereby denounce all my attempts to make headphones sound pleasing and recognize the supreme validity and the dominance of the Harman curve over all other curves, past present and future, and swear allegiance to the same until my dying breath.

 

[Jimbob54]

I hereby denounce all my attempts to make headphones sound pleasing and recognize the supreme validity and the dominance of the Harman curve over all other curves, past present and future, and swear allegiance to the same until my dying breath.

You are saved my son

 

[Music1969]

Back to trying to help people (others that may want do custom EQ too) !

@pkane @dasdoing

At the moment this filter response needs a headroom of 6 dB (the "EQ Filters" window tells me that headroom value is required).

If I tick to "normalise sample to peak value" (see screenshot) then does that mean I don't need to apply any headroom later in my convolver ?

If so that's helpful because I can see the case where I will forget to apply negative gain for headroom and will accidentally enjoy the sound of clipping LOL

 

[pkane]

Back to trying to help people (others that may want do custom EQ too) !

@pkane @dasdoing

At the moment this filter response needs a headroom of 6 dB (the "EQ Filters" window tells me that headroom value is required).

If I tick to "normalise sample to peak value" (see screenshot) then does that mean I don't need to apply any headroom later in my convolver ?

If so that's helpful because I can see the case where I will forget to apply negative gain for headroom and will accidentally enjoy the sound of clipping LOL

View attachment 108206

I don't think that will do what you think it will. It simply adjusts the sample values in the convolution file, scaling them to the peak value to help use more of the bits for better resolution.

But, you can see the approximate headroom you need when you select the impulse response file in the convolution screen in HQPlayer. This is a good thing to check when selecting files, just to be safe.