-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Is EQ'ing headphones worth it?
- Thread starter Robbo99999
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,117
- Likes
- 14,783
And for the ever so odd Audio Technica W5000 (with some bending of the band to get them to cover ears) ...
Incredibly it sounds normal. And if there is a bass playing, you can hear it! Seem to take EQ quite well.
Incredibly it sounds normal. And if there is a bass playing, you can hear it! Seem to take EQ quite well.
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #163
I don't think there's much merit in EQ'ing headphones or speaker systems unless the EQ profiles have been created with some kind of measurement system to a known curve. EQ'ing to taste 'randomly' is a voyage into subjectivity....I believe in EQ'ing to a known measured curve using for example Oratory's measured EQ's for each brand of headphone and then (perhaps) EQ'ing a little to taste from there....but I think EQ'ing without any kind of measurement involved is a bit of a folly and exercise into subjectivity. Same goes for EQ'ing speaker systems to rooms if there is no measurement involved. So if people are just posting 'random' EQ's they've created for headphones in this thread that are just based purely on their own subjectivity (which seems to be happening recently), I don't think there's a lot of merit in that.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,117
- Likes
- 14,783
Think I agree. I wouldn't know where to start, so I tweak existing or at the very least look to the measurements for excessive dips and peaks to counter with EQ. Never blind.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #165
Ah, I thought you were doing it blind. Ok then. Maybe make it clear where you got it from & how you changed it & why.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,117
- Likes
- 14,783
I did for the hd800 above, if I remembered correctly. No idea for the w5000. But point taken.
And as for why I made any changes- no chance. I just do until they sound right to my ears- usually reducing any large dips and peaks in the EQ . In my mind this is to retain some of the quirk of the phone. In reality its probably because I dont like to see big bumps in the curves.
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results one of the result sets on here will usually be a starting point.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,117
- Likes
- 14,783
But as to your last point, I dont agree. If an EQ set sounds good to person A, regardless of source and science behind it, they are entitled to share and we are entitled to try. Just because its not based on measurements, doesnt mean it doesnt improve things. Subjectivity isnt a crime. Or invalid per se.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #168
I think what you're describing there is in contrast to what this whole site is about - measurement and objectivity, backed up with a little bit of subjectivity, but 100% pure subjectivity with nothing to base it on is generally a bad move and at odds with the purpose of this site, so I wouldn't want to see this thread clogged up with lots of the latter.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,117
- Likes
- 14,783
That's unfortunate for you then.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #170
It is or it isn't, I'm just having my say, and I am the thread starter.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,117
- Likes
- 14,783
No ill will here, and I've libated so apologies if this sounds antagonistic, but for the record, that's not how it works. Anyway, happy listening, EQ or otherwise.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #172
Well, we've both had our say, doesn't matter. Happy listening.
Last edited:
https://www.0db.co.kr/index.php?mid=REVIEW_0DB&category=182&page=4&document_srl=211526
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/sennheiser/hd-660-s
https://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD660S.pdf
Look for agreements between measurements and make corrections accordingly.
For example, the 5.2 kHz spike doesn't show up in the Rtings and IF measurements, so it's questionable if it should be corrected. Ideally, you should run a sine sweep without EQ enabled and listen for yourself.
Disagree. Any EQ profile "standard" assumes perfect hearing, and the curve is ideal for such individuals (16 year olds without high frequency hearing loss). But those of us over 50 may require EQ simply because of hearing loss from age or damage. For me, there is no possible curve or standard that can possibly be used for my needs unless I apply some correction curve based on my hearing limitations (I assume such curves can be extrapolated from hearing tests?). We have no choice but to voyage into subjectivity...
OP
- Thread Starter
- #176
Yeah, that's fine, but you're EQ'ing to some kind of understandable curve, your own curve that is related around your hearing loss, that's not random as I guess you know which frequencies you can hear and which you can't hear as good....describing how you achieved that in this thread would have merit in my eyes. It might not be useful for exact replication by someone else because they might not have the same kind of hearing damage, but it could be useful for them to understand your approach. Yes, so your EQ'ing would not be based entirely on subjectivity, it would be based on knowing what frequency areas you are deficient on, and then I guess you boost those areas. I suppose you could keep other areas of the curve as 'Harman Curve' or something and boost your problem frequencies around that. That's not the same as me having a go at someone for posting "random EQ's" that have been done purely on subjectivity with nothing else behind them.
Going to bed now. Will do it first thing in the morning tomorrow.Could you?
@renoxd
Peace preset: https://mega.nz/file/twpTiaJD#c7v5GdBSWaqUBIPCLXS7yVYcK70gloEzko5NMbpwDXU
In case you're not using Peace, here are the filters:
Filter 1: Peak, 17 Hz, Gain 8.2 dB, Q 0.38
Filter 2: Peak, 230 Hz, Gain -1.4 dB, Q 1.4
Filter 3: Peak, 1200 Hz, Gain -1.2 dB, Q 5
Filter 4: Peak, 2500 Hz, Gain 2.4 dB, Q 2.5
Filter 5: Peak, 3000 Hz, Gain -1.1 dB, Q 3
Filter 6: Peak, 4600 Hz, Gain 3 dB, Q 7
Filter 7: Peak, 5200 Hz, Gain -0.8 dB, Q 5
Filter 8: Peak, 7000 Hz, Gain 1.9 dB, Q 6
Preamp: -8.5 dB
Peace preset: https://mega.nz/file/twpTiaJD#c7v5GdBSWaqUBIPCLXS7yVYcK70gloEzko5NMbpwDXU
In case you're not using Peace, here are the filters:
Filter 1: Peak, 17 Hz, Gain 8.2 dB, Q 0.38
Filter 2: Peak, 230 Hz, Gain -1.4 dB, Q 1.4
Filter 3: Peak, 1200 Hz, Gain -1.2 dB, Q 5
Filter 4: Peak, 2500 Hz, Gain 2.4 dB, Q 2.5
Filter 5: Peak, 3000 Hz, Gain -1.1 dB, Q 3
Filter 6: Peak, 4600 Hz, Gain 3 dB, Q 7
Filter 7: Peak, 5200 Hz, Gain -0.8 dB, Q 5
Filter 8: Peak, 7000 Hz, Gain 1.9 dB, Q 6
Preamp: -8.5 dB
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2019
- Messages
- 51
- Likes
- 13
Depends on which headphone amp.
If SET then second harmonic is perceived as a slight treble gain. So a minimal ambler tilt to low end automatically giving slight reduction of high end.
It's one knob so can be hidden from view. Don't tell your friends.
If amp is zero distortion then no eq.
If SET then second harmonic is perceived as a slight treble gain. So a minimal ambler tilt to low end automatically giving slight reduction of high end.
It's one knob so can be hidden from view. Don't tell your friends.
If amp is zero distortion then no eq.
MRC01
Major Contributor
If you're listening to a recording of unamplified acoustic music - do you want it to sound like it would if the musicians were playing live in front of you?
If you EQ to correct your hearing loss, it won't. Instead, it will sound like it might have sounded years ago before your hearing loss developed.
Personally, I would find that confusing. Long-term auditory memory isn't that great. I know what it sounds like now, but I can't be sure what it sounded like 20 years ago. As my hearing gradually deteriorates with age, I'm not applying any corrections. Of course each person makes his own personal decision here.
Similar threads
