• 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!

What Headphones do not need (or scream for) EQ?

OP
audioholic63

audioholic63

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
72
Likes
95
After reading your write-up I am almost inclined to try a set. EQ is no issue and I would swap out the pads with a set of of Shure 1540 Alcantara pads sitting around here doing nothing. I had bought them for my K240, and while a vast improvement in comfort over stock, I still don't really listen to the damn things.
 

ADU

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 29, 2021
Messages
1,584
Likes
1,086
My attempts to articulate myself are probably not sufficient to meet the rigor that we all seek to maintain on this site when it comes to limiting subjective descriptions of audio reproduction and perception. All I am trying to express is that we all hear differently. There are physical limitations based on age, prior exposure to damaging sound levels, the shape of your skull and ears insofar as if you are not physically comfortable it will impact your overall listening experience. There is also an emotional component to the music being played, both in terms of style and recording quality as well as sonic texture. Some people are obsessed with certain genres as well as how they perceive specific instruments and frequency ranges. This is my intent when I refer to wearing headphones as a listening space. It is very intimate and focused and there are a myriad of factors that influence a listener's perceptions. Two people can evaluate the same headphones on the same playback system with the same material and have two very different reactions to the experience.

This helps me to understand a little better what you meant by listening space. But it's not really helping me very much in terms of what you want in the way of sound quality or frequency response... So I guess I'm still a bit confused. (?)

As to the PX100/ii, I was not in any way putting forth the notion that they would measure specifically well against any established standard or be considered a reference point. I was only pointing out that quite surprisingly they are the only headphones I have that I do not need to eq to fully enjoy. They embody some good qualities, cheap, lightweight, they don't specifically annoy me. They are not my first reach for critical listening. Right now that is a rotation of Senn/Drop HD6XX, HifiMan HE400se, and Audio Technica AD-ATH500x. Each of them provides a certain type of pleasure as well as annoyance. I find that I need a little eq on each one. YMMV.

So you're looking for something which is enjoyable to listen to, but not accurate then?

Generally, the two go hand in hand for me. And the more accurate the headphones are, the more I'll tend to enjoy pretty much all of the music that I listen to (which includes quite a wide variety of genres, from pop, to jazz, to R&B, to classical, to disco, to latin/reggae, to rock & roll, and metal, and alternative, and beyond). IOW, I don't buy one pair of headphones for rock, and one for jazz and classical, and one for hip-hop, and so forth, the way some other hobbiests like to do. If that's how you want to roll though, it's certainly your choice to do that.

What I might try to do (if or when I ever have the $$) is buy, or EQ my headphones to sound like different speakers. That idea seems to have some merit to me.
 
Last edited:
OP
audioholic63

audioholic63

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
72
Likes
95
This helps me to understand a little better what you meant by listening space. But it's not really helping me very much in terms of what you want in the way of sound quality or frequency response... So I guess I'm still a bit confused. (?)



So you're looking for something which is enjoyable to listen to, but not accurate then?

Generally, the two go hand in hand for me. And the more accurate the headphones are, the more I'll tend to enjoy pretty much all of the music that I listen to (which includes quite a wide variety of genres, from pop, to jazz, to R&B, to classical, to disco, to latin/reggae, to rock & roll, and metal, and alternative, and beyond). IOW, I don't buy one pair of headphones for rock, and one for jazz and classical, and one for hip-hop, and so forth, the way some other hobbiests like to do. If that's how you want to roll though, it's certainly your choice to do that.

What I might try to do (if or when I ever have the $$) is buy, or EQ my headphones to sound like different speakers. That idea seems to have some merit to me.
I think you are overthinking the intent of my original post, for which I take the blame. I'm not seeking a perfect headphone for all genres, all amplification sources, all environments, and no eq needed. Every headphone has its own characteristics (iem, supra aural, circum aural) and set of conditions where it is the best solution. Most of my headphone listening is at my desk and I tend to cycle through different sets depending on mood. They all provide enjoyment and regardless how they measure they all need some eq. All the previous talk about the Superlux has me back on my 600 Ohm K240 Monitors (using Sextett peq) and rediscovering their charms all over again (with the Shure Alcantara pads, nothing else works for me on these).

I think a better title for my original post would have been "What headphones do you enjoy the most without any EQ?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: ADU

ADU

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 29, 2021
Messages
1,584
Likes
1,086
I think you are overthinking the intent of my original post, for which I take the blame. I'm not seeking a perfect headphone for all genres, all amplification sources, all environments, and no eq needed. Every headphone has its own characteristics (iem, supra aural, circum aural) and set of conditions where it is the best solution. Most of my headphone listening is at my desk and I tend to cycle through different sets depending on mood. They all provide enjoyment and regardless how they measure they all need some eq. All the previous talk about the Superlux has me back on my 600 Ohm K240 Monitors (using Sextett peq) and rediscovering their charms all over again (with the Shure Alcantara pads, nothing else works for me on these).

I think a better title for my original post would have been "What headphones do you enjoy the most without any EQ?"

I see now. And thank you for explaining this a bit better.

That makes the question a bit more interesting because you can take into consideration other factors than just the headphone's tonal balance or frequency response.

I have one other question though on this. And it's about the custom pads you're using. Are you swapping pads because you think it improves the headphones sound or FR? And would that also qualify as a form of equalization in your book? Or is it just more of a comfort thing?
 
OP
audioholic63

audioholic63

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
72
Likes
95
I see now. And thank you for explaining this a bit better.

That makes the question a bit more interesting because you can take into consideration other factors than just the headphone's tonal balance or frequency response.

I have one other question though on this. And it's about the custom pads you're using. Are you swapping pads because you think it improves the headphones sound or FR? And would that also qualify as a form of equalization in your book? Or is it just more of a comfort thing?
In the case of the AKG K240 is it primarily comfort. The stock pads are too thin and the lack of padding causes discomfort. The covering material is a very cheap feeling pleather and becomes very slick and sweaty. I initially tried Shure 1840 pads, which have more foam and a much higher quality synthetic leather covering. Comfort was much improved but they still get hot. The Shure 1540 Alcantara pads feel like the foam is a little less dense but the comfort of the material is off the charts. I can wear them for hours with those pads. Any slight shifts in response due to pad changes was minimal, the same peq profile is used regardless the pads.

Generally I use pad changes seeking comfort, but in the case of Grado it is definitely an acoustic chase as well. The differences moving between S pads, L pads, G pads, the current F(lat) pads, is significant. And yet in all cases, eq is definitely needed.

I am curious of your efforts to eq a set of headphones to sound like a specific set of speakers. Given the room interactions of speakers I don't know how you really get there or what is achieved. Despite a common technology, my HE400se planar headphones don't sound much like my ET-LFT8b's operating in 4000cu feet of air. Not sure how they ever really could.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ADU

Count Arthur

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
2,192
Likes
4,880
My twopence worth.

I have several pairs of headphones and IEMs and I have on occassion tried various EQ settings for them that I've seen on the web, including some that Amir has shown on his reviews.

In most cases I've found that the change with EQ was pretty subtle. None I have tried, with the headphones and IEMs I have, have made a difference that has made me think "wow, I can't go back to listening without this".

I don't use EQ with any of my headphones or IEMs, but, I do use EQ with my speaker set-up for room correction.
 

ADU

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 29, 2021
Messages
1,584
Likes
1,086
In the case of the AKG K240 is it primarily comfort. The stock pads are too thin and the lack of padding causes discomfort. The covering material is a very cheap feeling pleather and becomes very slick and sweaty. I initially tried Shure 1840 pads, which have more foam and a much higher quality synthetic leather covering. Comfort was much improved but they still get hot. The Shure 1540 Alcantara pads feel like the foam is a little less dense but the comfort of the material is off the charts. I can wear them for hours with those pads. Any slight shifts in response due to pad changes was minimal, the same peq profile is used regardless the pads.

Generally I use pad changes seeking comfort, but in the case of Grado it is definitely an acoustic chase as well. The differences moving between S pads, L pads, G pads, the current F(lat) pads, is significant. And yet in all cases, eq is definitely needed.

Understood.

I also use EQ on all of my headphones, and have been doing this for about the last 10 years. And the ease with which a headphone can be EQ-ed to what I consider to be a more neutral or accurate response is an important criteria in all of my headphone buying decisions. I'll give both your revised, and original questions some thought though, and see what I can come up with. Most of the headphones that I've used, owned, or spent considerable time with are fairly low-end though, usually in the sub-$200 price range. And designed a bit more for studio use.

Most of my posts on this forum are related in some way to my beliefs about what constitutes a neutral or accurate response though, in both headphones and loudspeakers (though I'm somewhat less knowledgeable, and have a bit less practical experience on the latter). So there are plenty of other thoughts to be found on that subject here. Including in this topic...


I am curious of your efforts to eq a set of headphones to sound like a specific set of speakers. Given the room interactions of speakers I don't know how you really get there or what is achieved. Despite a common technology, my HE400se planar headphones don't sound much like my ET-LFT8b's operating in 4000cu feet of air. Not sure how they ever really could.

It's an interesting subject. And one that I hope to maybe do a couple articles on at some point. EQ-ing headphones to match the in-room responses of different speakers is a topic I've touched on tangentially in some other related discussions though here, and elsewhere.

Imo, you can't make a pair of headphones sound like a pair of speakers by simply modifying the headphone's FR or tonal balance with a basic equalizer. It's a bit more involved than that.

But you can measure the steady-state in situ response of a pair of good speakers using the same type of in-ear mic that you'd use to measure a pair of headphones. And try to make some comparisons that way... which is my principal interest.

There are probably also some other more sophisticated methods which could also potentially be used to try to better approximate more of the temporal characteristics of a speaker in a room, which might involve the use of DSP, binauraul recordings, and so forth. That is not an area that I've spent much time exploring. But there may be some others here with a few thoughts on this subject.

There are some other methods that I use to try to get a general approximation of the steady-state in-ear response of speakers though, for purposes of EQ, which are discussed a bit here...


The ideas discussed in the above link re sound power and diffuse field measurements need to be validated with more in-ear measurements done with actual speakers though.
 
Last edited:

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I expect this has been discussed or perhaps there is even a sticky but I cannot find it (or I'm not looking hard enough). It seems every headphone review comes with a certain amount of recommendations for EQ adjustments. Some are gentle corrections to yield closer conformity to the preference curve, some to attempt to correct gross deficiencies in frequency response.

My headphone listening is primarily at my desk so the discovery of EQ_APO/Peace has been a godsend. Strangely enough the only headphones I have that I generally find most listenable w/o EQ are a lowly set of Sennheiser PX100/ii. It's a shame they abandoned that product line.

Has there been a list compiled that ranks headphones in terms of EQ requirements? This would have to be based on measurements only I would think. EQ settings to account for personal preferences are of course completely subjective to the listener.

current stable, generally from Win10 pc==>AudioEngine D1 via USB==>Kenwood AVR (really old)==>Liquid Spark
  • AKG K240M (600 ohm)
  • AKG ATH-AD500x (current fav)
  • Koss PortaPro (varying levels of mods)
  • Koss KSC75x (varying levels of mods)
  • Grado SR80e (modded a bit)
  • Grado SR225x (stock but constant pad swaps)
  • Hifiman 400se
  • Sennheiser PX100/ii
  • Sennheiser/Drop HD6XX
Here's a really quick way of comparing Harman Preference Scores amoungst different headphone models:

Note that if you click on the individual headphone links on that site that you will be directed to EQ's that are not based on the Harman Curve (they've tweaked the bass a bit), but the Preference Ranking List they have at that link is actually based on compliance of the headphone to the Harman Curve, so that's authentically valid to the Harman Curve. The higher the rating then the closer they adhere to the Harman Curve and the less EQ they're likely to need. My own opinion on this, is that the Preference Score cannot totally capture the experience, so this ranking will give you an indication to whether a headphone requires EQ or not, but it's not definitive, there can be some outliers that don't fit - a single score cannot totally capture this aspect, but it's a good guide to start with. In my own personal experience of different headphones, I'd say the HD600 is the best headphone to use without EQ, I do own that one amoungst others, and whilst it's not my favourite headphone without EQ, I do recognise it as being the headphone that benefits the least from EQ - this headphone ranks at position #7 out of over 400 over ear headphones listed. For people that are not overly concerned with soundstage and for those not using EQ I think the HD600 is the best headphone out there for those folks.
 

Phoney

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2021
Messages
370
Likes
236
Here's a really quick way of comparing Harman Preference Scores amoungst different headphone models:

Note that if you click on the individual headphone links on that site that you will be directed to EQ's that are not based on the Harman Curve (they've tweaked the bass a bit), but the Preference Ranking List they have at that link is actually based on compliance of the headphone to the Harman Curve, so that's authentically valid to the Harman Curve. The higher the rating then the closer they adhere to the Harman Curve and the less EQ they're likely to need. My own opinion on this, is that the Preference Score cannot totally capture the experience, so this ranking will give you an indication to whether a headphone requires EQ or not, but it's not definitive, there can be some outliers that don't fit - a single score cannot totally capture this aspect, but it's a good guide to start with. In my own personal experience of different headphones, I'd say the HD600 is the best headphone to use without EQ, I do own that one amoungst others, and whilst it's not my favourite headphone without EQ, I do recognise it as being the headphone that benefits the least from EQ - this headphone ranks at position #7 out of over 400 over ear headphones listed. For people that are not overly concerned with soundstage and for those not using EQ I think the HD600 is the best headphone out there for those folks.
ada8677dfbfab1c3b63831cc0193d3bc.png
5ff00835838dc53744b45f1fa3ea6f40.png


Left is Dan Clark Stealth, right is Hifiman Sundara. The scores can be fairly misleading at times, I'd rather just look at the frequency response myself.
 

MayaTlab

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
924
Likes
1,512
The scores can be fairly misleading at times

Like any over-simplified metric :D. Kill them with fire please.

That said, at least Harman's preference score system has some degree of relevance given that it's backed up by listening tests (unlike most others), the most significant problem being whether or not a pair of headphones as measured on their modded GRAS setup and reproduced via their virtual headphones method (the way the predictive model was designed) provides listeners with a truly accurate representation of said headphones, something for which the validation articles for the virtual headphones methodology don't make a superb case for in my opinion, at least not for all headphones (HP5 or figure 7 for example). And let's not even get into the in-ears validation article where the actual headphones were never put into the listeners' ears.

The HE400SE scores well in that list, and yet the sample I got is one of the most unlistenable pair of headphones I own (collection of nasty treble spikes above 8kHz that makes them excruciatingly fatiguing to listen to). Even worse, it's unsalvageable with EQ.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
View attachment 204116View attachment 204117

Left is Dan Clark Stealth, right is Hifiman Sundara. The scores can be fairly misleading at times, I'd rather just look at the frequency response myself.
I agree 100%! The scores are useful for a quick quide for the uninitiated who haven't built up enough experience in "reading" frequency responses yet, but always best to see the frequency response graph vs the Harman Target to see how well it really fits & what kind of experience it would give. And your example is a fine one, as the Stealth tracks Harman in a lot more pleasing & significant manner than the Sundara, yet that is certainly not reflected in the scores in the same way:
 

Dealux

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
175
Likes
195
Location
Arad, Romania
I used to EQ a bunch of headphones like the LCD-2 Fazor and HD800 but I went back to cheaper headphones because there was always one thing missing which is timbral accuracy.

Funnily enough I went back to my first open back, the AKG K612, and I liked it more than all of my previous and more expensive headphones because the tuning was kinda spot on but still somewhat flawed. Fast forward a few months and I modded them with Dekoni Velour pads and @solderdude 's custom passive filter and the timbre plus bass impact and extension are even better. There's still a hint of sharpness but I like this headphone in its modded state more than I liked the HD800 with EQ (though technically the passive filter is a type of passive EQ).
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I used to EQ a bunch of headphones like the LCD-2 Fazor and HD800 but I went back to cheaper headphones because there was always one thing missing which is timbral accuracy.

Funnily enough I went back to my first open back, the AKG K612, and I liked it more than all of my previous and more expensive headphones because the tuning was kinda spot on but still somewhat flawed. Fast forward a few months and I modded them with Dekoni Velour pads and @solderdude 's custom passive filter and the timbre plus bass impact and extension are even better. There's still a hint of sharpness but I like this headphone in its modded state more than I liked the HD800 with EQ (though technically the passive filter is a type of passive EQ).
The problem with this is if you're not basing your EQ on measurements as a solid & influential starting point then you're a bit in the dark with what changes you're making, and also when introducing unknown variables like unmeasured different aftermarket pads. It's good that you ended up somewhere you like though.....but it can be quite easy to get used to something & "creep" into a sound that you think is good, but wasn't really when you end up going back to compare it against a known "reliable good sound".
 

Dealux

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
175
Likes
195
Location
Arad, Romania
The problem with this is if you're not basing your EQ on measurements as a solid & influential starting point then you're a bit in the dark with what changes you're making, and also when introducing unknown variables like unmeasured different aftermarket pads. It's good that you ended up somewhere you like though.....but it can be quite easy to get used to something & "creep" into a sound that you think is good, but wasn't really when you end up going back to compare it against a known "reliable good sound".
Dekoni provides measurements which show a relative difference between stock and their pads. In the K612's case, the change in sound is not drastic. What changes is the bass extension and some parts of the treble response. In some sense they sound harsher on stock pads because there is some added upper treble energy (which also enhances imaging somewhat) but with the passive filter most of the excess energy is EQ-ed out.

Subjectively they sound very cohesive and neutral but obviously not perfect. For one thing, any headphone that has significant front dampening will not have high quality upper treble so with the K612 there is some haziness happening in the top octave and the response up there isn't very smooth (some dips) either.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Dekoni provides measurements which show a relative difference between stock and their pads. In the K612's case, the change in sound is not drastic. What changes is the bass extension and some parts of the treble response. In some sense they sound harsher on stock pads because there is some added upper treble energy (which also enhances imaging somewhat) but with the passive filter most of the excess energy is EQ-ed out.

Subjectively they sound very cohesive and neutral but obviously not perfect. For one thing, any headphone that has significant front dampening will not have high quality upper treble so with the K612 there is some haziness happening in the top octave and the response up there isn't very smooth (some dips) either.
It's good that Dekoni provide measurements showing the difference of stock vs their own pads, if their measurements are precise & reliable then you could use EQ based on that to revert to the "stock sound", and then as a basis to apply something like an Oratory EQ.
 

Dealux

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
175
Likes
195
Location
Arad, Romania
It's good that Dekoni provide measurements showing the difference of stock vs their own pads, if their measurements are precise & reliable then you could use EQ based on that to revert to the "stock sound", and then as a basis to apply something like an Oratory EQ.
If you want Harman bass, yeah. I reckon the mids and highs are about on target subjectively. If you use EQ there is no real reason to switch pads because the K612 works really well with oratory's profile but the comfort is improved with Dekoni pads for sure.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
If you want Harman bass, yeah. I reckon the mids and highs are about on target subjectively. If you use EQ there is no real reason to switch pads because the K612 works really well with oratory's profile but the comfort is improved with Dekoni pads for sure.
Comfort is important, so it's worth the switch if you can be sure of the change to the frequency response - which you say you can be because Dekoni publish the difference - that way you can work out what the frequency response is of your headphones with the Dekoni pads, and then apply EQ to the Harman Curve or any Target Curve that you've worked out that you like.
 

SebaMK82

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2021
Messages
8
Likes
3
Espero que esto se haya discutido o tal vez incluso haya un pegajoso, pero no puedo encontrarlo (o no estoy buscando lo suficiente). Parece que cada revisión de auriculares viene con una cierta cantidad de recomendaciones para los ajustes de ecualización. Algunas son correcciones suaves para producir una conformidad más cercana a la curva de preferencias, otras para intentar corregir las deficiencias graves en la respuesta de frecuencia.

Mi escucha de auriculares está principalmente en mi escritorio, por lo que el descubrimiento de EQ_APO / Peace ha sido un regalo del cielo. Curiosamente, los únicos auriculares que tengo que generalmente encuentro más escuchables sin ecualización son un conjunto humilde de Sennheiser PX100 / ii. Es una pena que hayan abandonado esa línea de productos.

¿Se ha compilado una lista que clasifica los auriculares en términos de requisitos de ecualización? Esto tendría que basarse en mediciones solo yo pensaría. La configuración de ecualización para tener en cuenta las preferencias personales es, por supuesto, completamente subjetiva para el oyente.

actual estable, generalmente desde Win10 pc==>AudioEngine D1 vía USB==>Kenwood AVR (realmente antiguo)==>Liquid Spark
  • AKG KAudioEngine D1C40M (600 ohmios)
  • AKG ATH-AD500x (fav actual)
  • Koss PortaPro (diferentes niveles de mods)
  • Koss KSC75x (diferentes niveles de mods)
  • Grado SR80e (modificado un poco)
  • Grado SR225x (intercambios de almohadillas de stock pero constantes)
  • Hifiman 400se
  • Sennheiser PX100/ii
  • Sennheiser/Drop HD6XX
¡Hola! También tengo el AD500X y me gustan mucho (aunque son mis primeros y no tengo nada con qué compararlos). Los uso en un PC con la placa base z390 Aorus Master (Dac ES Saber 9118), evaluada en esta página. Según Amirm, tiene el rendimiento de un dac dedicado por alrededor de $ 100, así que es por eso que sigo usándolo. Como amplificador utilizo un Xduoo MT-602. Con respecto al eq, los he escuchado mucho con APO + PEACE y los ecualizadores Harman de Crinacle, etc. Me gusta el cambio pero siempre termino escuchándolos sin EQ. ¿Qué ecualizador utilizas?
 
Top Bottom