Nearfield EQ

[obsessive9119]

Based on Erin's review, I've just picked up some Edifier MR3s for my WFH setup. I've been using HouseCurve to EQ them, and they sound a lot better than out of the box (unsurprisingly).

Initially I used the Harman "target" (I know, not a target etc etc) which sounded pretty good, then I thought - hey, these are nearfield so the reasons for the downward-sloping Harman curve don't really apply. I EQ'd them to a flat "target" and I prefer it to the Harman, though I still tweaked it a bit for personal preference.

This got me thinking - the Harman target curve for headphones is anything but flat. Would it make sense to EQ nearfield speakers more like headphones than speakers?

 

[DVDdoug]

This got me thinking - the Harman target curve for headphones is anything but flat. Would it make sense to EQ nearfield speakers more like headphones than speakers?

I don't think so... From what I understand, the downward slope is what you get in a typical room with a speaker that has "good" off-axis characteristics and measures flat on-axis in an anechoic chamber. It's what's heard in the studio so it's what you want at home.

I think the bass boost in the headphone preference is a perception thing, maybe because with real bass in a room we can feel bass in our bodies. (You're not going to get "realistic bass" that you can feel in your body from a tiny woofer though, even with EQ.)

 

[thewas]

This got me thinking - the Harman target curve for headphones is anything but flat. Would it make sense to EQ nearfield speakers more like headphones than speakers?

Like Toole says (see more about it in the first link of my signature) the "Harman curve of loudspeakers" is rather a result of good loudspeakers, not a target to EQ them too as the slope will depend on the directvity, room reverberation and listening distance so you did the right thing there.

The headphone Harman curves where the result of preference test and have also partially lifted bass to compensate the missing tactile impact.