Looking for BT/ANC over ear with 'hardware EQ'

[Maciek]

Hello there!

This is my first post in this forum. I am growing out of my Fostex T50RP mk ii and out of wired headphones altotogether. I am looking for versatile (codec and connectivty wise) BT over ear headphones with solid build quality that will last me some years, which sadly disqualifies AKG K371BT.

Over the years I learned that I like a toned down Harman tuning, that is a tad less bass and treble than the official target. For some reason I'm also pretty sensitive to treble peaks (funny coz Grados were my first proper headphones). At the last audio show I atrended I really liked Meze Empyrean (https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/meze-empyrean/) and Fibae Black, although I felt that it has just a smidge too much bass (https://crinacle.com/graphs/iems/custom-art-fibae-black/).

As I plan to use them with multiple sources I am looking primarily at headphones without major FR faults out of the box or with internal PEQ that can correct it for every incoming signal. I really want to avoid source-side EQ. Resarching the topic over past weeks made me overwhelned as number of choices is really vast but 90% of headphones either change their tuning depending on input or ANC or EQ boils down only to ready made presets. I have narrowed it down to:

Sennheiser Momentum 3 - has solid build quality, FR graph doesnt look quite bad and has very good reputation. The drawback is that it has a dip at 4kHz and a peak at ~7kHz which I believe will be noticeable, and its internal EQ only allows for shelving specific ranges, like entire treble if I find that peak annoying. It also doesn't have LDAC but I think I could live with that in the end. https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/sennheiser-momentum-3-wireless/

Shure Aonic 50 - These are supposed to have very high user experience (sound quality aside), support all the codecs and connectivity options. FR is totally out of my target BUT its internal EQ can adjust specific frequency, filter type and Q. The drawback is that it only has 4 filters. I would use 2 to make bass range behave, one to bring down everything past 1kHz by 6db or so, and I would be left with one filter for what I would decide as the most offending issue in the treble. On the other side I think that treble overall is better behaved, less jagged (more peaks but of smaller amplitude) than Senns.

Sony doesn't have aptx so its out. I know Bose QC35 ii is good but has no EQ as far as I know, and QC45 only has ready made presets. Senn Momentum 4 is said to launch this month but its FR and DSP are a mystery.

I would really appreciate You input as both these headphones are quite popular. FR aside, distortion profile on both is acceptable ( https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...0-wireless/1585/12049?usage=19&threshold=0.10 ) but for some reason Shures have an opinion of being less resolving, which is one thing EQ won't solve. Perhaps my thinking on Shures is flawed and there are sone other notable choices?

 

[MayaTlab]

Hello there!

out of wired headphones altotogether.

Would a solution consisting of the Qudelix 5K + wired but portable closed back headphones be acceptable nonetheless ?

What are the sources you're considering using them with ? A mix of Windows, Android, Apple devices ?

The question of finding a pair of BT over-ears that I truly like has been quite... tormenting for me for a couple of years. If possible it's one of these situations where I's recommend strongly a "try before your commit to buy them" approach.

 

[jhaider]

AKG has an iOS app for N700NC M2. Honestly I haven’t played with it much. They just work out of the box for me so no need. It looks like it doesn’t have user-defined filters - you draw the curve.

 

[Maciek]

@MayaTlab yes I had my eyes on the Qudelix unit for a longer time but ultimately I decided to focus on all-in-one approach.
@jhaider thanks for the suggestion, indeed FR looks quite likeable oit of the box. Sadly it only has SBC, I was thinking aptx to be my minimum requirement and LDAC as a nice bonus. It just diesn't seem right to source lossless, redbook quality files and then degrade them through a basic BT codec. Its so much easier with wired headphones

 

[Maciek]

Just for the sake of other people researching this topic, I'll post an update.

If You don't mind using SBC codec for BT listening, apart from AKG 371BT, N700 M2, there's also Jabra Elite 85h which has really good tracking of the Harman curve. There are also some JBL 600 and 700 series headhpones with some added bass. This can same save You some money.

Things get more pricey if You want to have an in-app EQ and aptx low latency for movies/games. According to rtings database only Senn Momentums 3 and Shure Aonic 50 have the closed back over ear for factor, custom EQ and aptx LL.

Things get even worse if You want LDAC. Apparently there is no EQ available for LDAC, regardless of hardware. I've read this limitation it in threads on Shure and Fiio products. This looks to be a major problem because some phonea automatically switch to LDAC if its available, so to use onboard DSP in active headphones one would have to manually switch it to aptx or SBC at every connection.

To sum up - get LDAC headphones only if You like stock SQ. Otherwise keep wired listening as an higher SQ option.

 

[MayaTlab]

has really good tracking of the Harman curve.

I'm just a boring parrot at this point, but this applies particularly to ANC headphones above the feedback range : I would be very careful about considering that ear simulator measurements always translate well to your own ears in terms of delivering the intent of a target, let alone the Harman target.

While I don't know exactly what the Harman target is supposed to sound like (https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ctivist-bang-for-your-buck.34596/post-1207611), what I can say is that, regardless of the methodology I use to guesstimate what it's supposed to measure like in situ, the second pair of N700NCM2 I owned never came closer to these estimates than the several pairs of Airpods Max I measured in situ, even though ear simulators would show the opposite.

For ANC over-ears, for which in addition to sound quality there are a lot of other factors involved such as connectivity issues, ANC behaviour, etc. - that is to say so many variables that it's difficult to make any recommandation without knowing you and your situation in detail, I'd keep it simple : if possible, try them for yourself and return them if needs be, and in all cases keep a "bird's eye" view on how they measure (i.e. don't over-interpret them without additional measurements to contextualise them).

 

[Maciek]

@MayaTlab thanks, Your posts on different headphones supposedly sounding the same after EQing for the same target are very interesting.

Being in this hobby for over a decade I have been through a few moments of disillusion already, and I know that Harman's target is not neccesarily the Holy Grail. Headphone's consistency sample to sample? Please, I have T50RP, is there a more incosistent headphone? What I mean is that I totally agree with You and I know I habe to trust my ears to a degree. I had a few occasions to judge headphones before seeing ther FR graph and then correlating what I hear with what I see. I also have speakers to compare to if tonality is way off. One thing for sure is that treble cannot cross the target line, which outs vast majority with peaks around 7-10kHz.

This is exactly what led me to acitve headphones, the ability to fine tune the sound independent of source, otherwise I would not consider Shure Aonic even for a brief moment. This is probably the reason why Senn (or any other manufacturer I guess) does not try to compensate for dips/peaks in treble when releasing pre-tuned presets, like the High End one for Momentum 3s. It is enough to check the difference between L and R channel on Rtings to see that they are not matching closely, although the curve itself is similar among websites.

You are completely right in that once we go active the number of variables on headphone choice may become mind boggling. It's sad that only a handful of headphones offer true parametric EQ rather than simple shelving filters and then most sub 200 USD choices have issues with build quality (prone to damage).

From what I researched, no headphone ships what that powerful Qualcomm chipset that offers 10 bands of PEQ on Qudelix 5k. I gave it a strong second thought after Your post. Translating choices into money, I could buy Shure Aonic, because my phone apparently doesn't have LDAC so I'm safe for now and could utilisr Shure's 4 band DSP, sturdy build and basic portability for around 270 USD. Or buy Qudelix 5k for around 120 USD and look for a wired closed headphone around 150 USD. Popular choices in this price bracket include DT770, AT M50, AKG 371, Shure SRH840. From UX perspective this is the worst choice because You have both a separe component as a BT receiver and wires to tangle and watch out for but its probably the best in SQ terms. Another alternative would be to buy Shure Aonic 50 now and Qudelix 5k later if I feel like I need more EQ bands and use Shures in passive mode. This gives me lots of flexibility and probably nice SQ but the cost is high.

Pity that Momentum 4's seemingly do not bring any breakthroughs in functionality and SQ aparat from much improved battery life.

 

[MayaTlab]

I could buy Shure Aonic

I'd like to refrain from posting categorical recommendations (or anti-recommendations) but for these I'll make an exception : in my opinion, these are among the worst built and most poorly conceived BT over-ears I've ever tried, and I don't think that its parametric EQ can save it. From cheap feeling buttons and grating hinges to poor electronics passing by annoying noise floor levels, poor ANC, and nonsensical and, to me, uncomfortable headband / earcup / pad design, I found them to be an exceedingly bad product.

Pity that Momentum 4's seemingly do not bring any breakthroughs in functionality and SQ aparat from much improved battery life.

How would you know though ? We don't have any measurements yet among other factors.

 

[Maciek]

I'd like to refrain from posting categorical recommendations (or anti-recommendations) but for these I'll make an exception : in my opinion, these are among the worst built and most poorly conceived BT over-ears I've ever tried, and I don't think that its parametric EQ can save it. From cheap feeling buttons and grating hinges to poor electronics passing by annoying noise floor levels, poor ANC, and nonsensical and, to me, uncomfortable headband / earcup / pad design, I found them to be an exceedingly bad product.



How would you know though ? We don't have any measurements yet among other factors.

Well measurements are our for several days now and it looks just a bit better that M3 but not overly so, surpisingly close to Sony M4 https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/wmtk9i
Lately I saw Shure SRH1540 second hand in good shape for similar price as I could buy new Senn M3. It doesn't have bluetooth, ANC but on the upside there is little to correct FR wise, so DSP would not neccessarily be mandatory. So now I am contemplating between the two, with Shure winning in SQ terms but Senn wins on features, not to mention that adding reasonable BT adapter to Shure would up the cost.

Choices, choices. BT over ear headphones are even more tangled that regular headphones, as there are way more features to hit the mark or miss it and nobody does it all perfect, at least not at reasonable price.

 

[Moderate Dionysianism]

I really want to avoid source-side EQ

Personally I'm 100% comfy EQing at source (Roon / APO for desktop, Wavelet for mobile, including LDAC), but this does make me wonder how many devices actually offer the solution you're after (configurable EQ at the receiver end).

For example, Shure's app advertises "hardware EQ", but then the first user review says it has no effect on playback outside of the app itself. Aren't you EQing at source then? Or is the DSP circuit only enabled when synced with the app? Either way, it doesn't seem to give you a PEQ across multiple sources.

 

[Maciek]

Personally I'm 100% comfy EQing at source (Roon / APO for desktop, Wavelet for mobile, including LDAC), but this does make me wonder how many devices actually offer the solution you're after (configurable EQ at the receiver end).

For example, Shure's app advertises "hardware EQ", but then the first user review says it has no effect on playback outside of the app itself. Aren't you EQing at source then? Or is the DSP circuit only enabled when synced with the app? Either way, it doesn't seem to give you a PEQ across multiple sources.

While EQing at source is easy as You write it becomes tiresome if You have many receivers for each source. I use my phone to play music on headphones, currently I'm using system wide EQ that was stock with firmware. But I also use it to stream Tidal via BT to a stereo in my sons room and Wiim Mini streamer in living room. When I forget to switch EQ profiles I apply the curve for headphones to my speakers and thats really annoying.

What You wrote about Shures shows a major pronlem with many products - thry are reviewed only shortly after the release. In case of Aonic there was a firmware update that fixed the DSP and its now stored in the headphone itself and applied to every source while its powered on. This is also true for AKG N700 and JBL Club and Live BT series. Same with Senns but they only offer shelving filters for 3 bands.

What is holding me back are build quality issues and price to performance ratio, meaning a level of performace of a wired equivalent. Luckily, I'm in no hurry. I recetly tried an Android app named Safe Headphones which gives wired headphones an ambient aware mode and sone very basic ANC based on phone's microphones. While its probably not an equivalent of Sony or Bose, it is an intereseting addition to traditional, wired headphones form factor.