Who can't listen without EQ anymore?

[Westsounds]

Particularly headphones and speakers as well. I don’t think I even like the sound of flat tuning anymore. It’s me that has to listen to it so I’m enjoying it.

If I want a bit of warmth, bass emphasis, or reduced treble, I’m welcomed to it. If it makes the sound more enjoyable, why not.

Everything is pretty much tuned differently anyway. So as long as you get something that measures well, why not tune it to your liking.

Anyone else feel the same?

Current most used software EQ, Boom 3D on Windows

 

[JohnnyNG]

I wouldn't want to go without Dirac Live in the bass now that I know what it can do.

 

[Westsounds]

I wouldn't want to go without Dirac Live in the bass now that I know what it can do.

Yes quite, I can imagine that clever bit of software really has an impact in more ways than one over the control of bass.

 

[LTig]

No way for me to get rid of room EQ or headphone EQ. We are spoiled ...

 

[Ropeburn]

I can't listen to really accurate headphones or earplugs without EQ, because the inevitable super high boost between 2-4kHz (Harman curve) quickly hurts my ears. I got a sensitivity there that makes it physically painful. Must EQ it down.

 

[Westsounds]

I can't listen to really accurate headphones or earplugs without EQ, because the inevitable super high boost between 2-4kHz (Harman curve) quickly hurts my ears. I got a sensitivity there that makes it physically painful. Must EQ it down.

I’m similar, for me, it’s around 4-8 khz area, with music anyway, it really annoys me. It depends on the music of course and how it's been recorded or EQ’d but it is more or less a constant. I'm usually fine listening to vocals flat or recorded stuff on YT, it’s just when everything is thrown in like music, it sounds so unatural flat. And if I listen to music loud, then I really struggle with that sensitive area, for me anyway.

I also like boosted bass, like to hear the rumble, and it fills in the sound, gives added 'body and warmth', subjective terms I know but there we are .

 

[Ropeburn]

I’m similar, for me, it’s around 4-8 khz area, with music anyway, it really annoys me. It depends on the music of course and how it's been recorded or EQ’d but it is more or less a constant. I'm usually fine listening to vocals flat or recorded stuff on YT, it’s just when everything is thrown in like music, it sounds so unatural flat. And if I listen to music loud, then I really struggle with that sensitive area, for me anyway.

I also like boosted bass, like to hear the rumble, and it fills in the sound, gives added 'body and warmth', subjective terms I know but there we are .

There is nothing wrong with enjoying the good old smiley curve.

Or with subjectivity in general. It's music, it's supposed to trigger an emotional response. Without that, it's pretty much worthless.

The most important things I learned on here the last two years is how hard data and facts translate to subjective perception, and what my taste factually means. Can't overstate the usefulness of that for choosing gear.

 

[levimax]

I have 2 systems I regularly listen to, one EQ'd and one not. If I listen back to back I definitely prefer the EQ'd system but I find after listening for a few minutes I get used to either system and it doesn't really affect my listening enjoyment. There is a lot of research on humans ability to "hear through the room" (assuming the speakers are good) which I think gets discounted by many. For low bass yes EQ can make a big difference but above Schroeder not so much. Many speakers don't really have much low bass anyway. To answer OP's question, EQ can be helpful for low bass but I can certainly enjoy listening without it especially with typical bookshelf speakers.

 

[voodooless]

Current most used software EQ, Boom 3D on Windows

Yet you can’t listen to EQ anymore?

EQ is not about just getting a flat response. That’s usually just a starting point to the add some customization to suit your preferences on top. I don’t see any issues with that.

 

[Westsounds]

I have 2 systems I regularly listen to, one EQ'd and one not. If I listen back to back I definitely prefer the EQ'd system but I find after listening for a few minutes I get used to either system and it doesn't really affect my listening enjoyment. There is a lot of research on humans ability to "hear through the room" (assuming the speakers are good) which I think gets discounted by many. For low bass yes EQ can make a big difference but above Schroeder not so much. Many speakers don't really have much low bass anyway. To answer OP's question, EQ can be helpful for low bass but I can certainly enjoy listening without it especially with typical bookshelf speakers.

Great point actually. Your ears (or brain rather) can adjust to sound I believe. I’ve done it many times where I’ve changed speakers which have been quite dramatic, yet provided I like the speakers presentation you just get used to what you are hearing. It’s the contrast that does it more I think especially when you compare.

 

[Arindal]

Should start by saying that I use PEQ for professional reasons and have been trained to apply it both for recording and for room correction purpose. Can say that doing it right is tremendously difficult, if you are not used to ´hear precise frequencies´, and particularly applying graphic EQ filters to achieve a certain subjective target curve can oftentimes go wrong. Whatever I do, I usually rely solely on shelf filters plus high-Q PEQ.

Anyone else feel the same?

I do use EQ in home situations to adjust room-induced bass- and upper-treble phenomena such as booming, bloated bass or ´lack of air´ - solely after main problems with room modes and imaging have been solved, as any EQ-based room correction cannot compensate for long decay booming and cancellation.

Between 500 and 7,000Hz I try to leave things unchanged. Whenever I feel the necessity to EQ anything in these bands, it usually turns out to be problems which are actually not solvable by EQ at all, mostly having to do with reflections, dominant indirect sound and tonally imbalanced reverb. So only different loudspeakers, room treatment or different positioning can bring cure.

With headphones, things are a bit different (as there are no reflections). Nevertheless, what feels right from the start, usually does not need any EQ in roughly the same bands ever.

That said, I try to double check EQ curves for reproduction with a vast number of existing recordings, as tonality and taste of the mastering engineers vastly vary, and it should fit all, should it not?

the inevitable super high boost between 2-4kHz (Harman curve) quickly hurts my ears.

Is this the case with loudspeakers as well? I would advice against following any target FR curve (particularly the Harman one as the brilliance boost you were mentioning, is fairly broad with this one) for headphones, but in theory it represents just an averaged HRTF, so eardrum curve with perfectly linear loudspeakers should look similar.

I wouldn't want to go without Dirac Live in the bass now that I know what it can do.

Are you using any Dirac ART or multi-sub cancellation routines? Asking because I have never been experiencing satisfying bass from any Dirac Live corrected system.

 

[JohnnyNG]

Are you using any Dirac ART or multi-sub cancellation routines?

No, just plain Dirac Live in a miniDSP Flex below 500Hz to EQ/house curve/correct and crossover/"tie together" my single sealed nearfield sub and stereo midbass bins. I really like it.

 

[Sokel]

I can. But I wouldn't like to listen at an untreated room anymore.
For example when DSD rushes in all RC (that's my EQ, 3 filters up to 100Hz) is off but does not particularity bother me.

I would EQ the hell out of any bright sound though, I would prefer to listen to a nice chainsaw.

And then it's the un-EQable stuff, like adding meat to a speaker that does not have it on its own.
I wouldn't even try it, its plain abuse. If it could have meat the designer would add it just fine, there's always a reason of its absence.

 

[SSS]

I don't use EQ. Instead I need the old bass and treble knobs. Reason is different mixed sound structure of music files and bass settings needed according to the listening sound level. And of course I like a fat bass listening blues, rocknroll and big band with brass instruments.

 

[Ropeburn]

Is this the case with loudspeakers as well? I would advice against following any target FR curve (particularly the Harman one as the brilliance boost you were mentioning, is fairly broad with this one) for headphones, but in theory it represents just an averaged HRTF, so eardrum curve with perfectly linear loudspeakers should look similar.

Definitely not the case with speakers. Neither with "bad" headphones that don't show this adherence to Harman but employ a simple smiley curve instead.

I guess it has to do with relative levels and subjective perception of them. I don't listen as loud on speakers because it gets physically exciting and "party moody" way quicker, due to simple physics - room filling bass is nice and fun way better than listening with headphones - which in turn is physically louder to the ears to get the same "hell yeah" effect. That means for the same subjective enjoyment, mids and highs don't need to be as loud on speakers in the first place. Difficult to describe, I hope you get it. My speakers themselves are very linear in that range and generally too.

The 2-4kHz region also is a range I've always been sensitive at, an old hearing trauma from the army didn't help either, four weeks of hell, I tell you. Never fully healed.

I know... I should take more care of my ears in general. It's walking the edge: ear health is a real concern, especially long term, but I just happen to love powerful music very much... I need it in my life.

 

[Ropeburn]

I don't use EQ. Instead I need the old bass and treble knobs. Reason is different mixed sound structure of music files and bass settings needed according to the listening sound level. And of course I like a fat bass listening blues, rocknroll and big band with brass instruments.

What if I told you... those bass and treble knobs literally are EQ?

 

[Westsounds]

I don't use EQ. Instead I need the old bass and treble knobs. Reason is different mixed sound structure of music files and bass settings needed according to the listening sound level. And of course I like a fat bass listening blues, rocknroll and big band with brass instruments.

It's eq, but in two knobs that's all.

 

[SSS]

What if I told you... those bass and treble knobs literally are EQ?

Basically right, a two-band EQ. But the term EQ was set for more than two bands as far as I know.

 

[Ropeburn]

Basically right, a two-band EQ. But the term EQ was set for more than two bands as far as I know.

Definitely not. You can use (or build) a single band and it's still EQ.

 

[SSS]

Definitely not. You can use (or build) a single band and it's still EQ.

If this is common ground, it's OK for me. For the two-band EQ in Germany it was said "Klangregler" which means "sound control" and/or "sound adjuster". I should mention that I am not a native English speaker.