Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 11:00:00 GMT
Hi folks. I'm hoping there's someone here more knowledgeable about equalization than I am because I'm getting a bit lost. I have a program called Ozone6 and I'm trying to set it up to hopefully reduce the upper-bass bloom that's present on my HD 650's. The problem is there are so many options to tweak that it's difficult to know exactly what's happening. Here's a screenshot below that will at least let you see what I'm seeing on my screen.. As you can see the equalization can be either analogue or digital (I've no idea how that works) and then there are various options after that. Also in the screen above is the FR graph for the HD 650. I'd appreciate any & all input.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Aug 26, 2015 12:15:54 GMT
The EQ is always digital.
You need to create the 'opposite' of the headphone plot. I would only use a very low-Q parametric filter around 150Hz and boost the treble with a mild shelve above 3kHz of just 1 to 2 dB (NOT 10dB as the plots suggest).
As a proper EQ is difficult without either good tonal references (DT250-250 for instance) or without proper measurements and knowledge about how to set parametric EQ's is why I made the filters. So you just have to pop in the filter and convert that headphone closer to a flat reference like the DT250-250.
You can safely use the headroom plots up to 1kHz but above 1kHz there is less correction needed than the plots indicate. When you were to correct the treble also to a flat line you would need +10dB in the treble. This will sound sharp and harsh.
reason: the correction used (for the used dummy head) is NOT the correct one for headphones. Using the OW correction on the raw signals may give better results but then you end up with the OW target which is a LOT bassier.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 12:44:54 GMT
I was hoping you'd chip in Frans, thanks. I'm happy with the top end of the 650's so no need to alter that for me. It's the upper-bass that needs reduced & possibly the low bass boosted a bit. I've followed your advice for the upper-bass and it does sound better, I think. I'm only using one track as a reference because it's too easy to get confused with multiple tracks. So far, so good though. Here's what I have so far.. Any ideas for boosting the low bass a bit?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 13:06:09 GMT
OK, I gave it a go with both your suggestions Frans and my own guess at the bass end. So 3 bands in all. How does it look to you? There's no rush getting back to me by the way. I appreciate you have actual work to do whereas I'm just sitting here twiddling
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Aug 26, 2015 14:03:01 GMT
band 1: F = 10 Hz, low shelf +5dB Q = 2 band 2: F = 150 Hz, Bell, -5dB, Q = 0.7 band 3: F = 5kHz, high shelf, + 1.5dB, Q = 0.6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 15:17:56 GMT
band 1: F = 10 Hz, low shelf +5dB Q = 2 band 2: F = 150 Hz, Bell, -5dB, Q = 0.7 band 3: F = 5kHz, high shelf, + 1.5dB, Q = 0.6 Thanks Frans. Unfortuntely I can't seem to get those figures. I can only go as low as 20Hz and on the high pass it only allows a Q factor of 1 as the lowest.. I have no idea why this is the case. I think I like what I hear though. It's actually very noticeable in the midrange. Much more detail and less cuppy sounding, if you know what I mean.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 26, 2015 15:23:08 GMT
You know Gordon, I'd wait for a filter. It's way more accurate than eq since it can be so hit and miss if you want it as flat as possible. The advantage is that the filter hits just the spot that's needed and isn't quite as broad as eq.
EQ also introduces artifacts into the signal that would be less with a filter.
It's also easy (and tempting) to just use too much EQ.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 15:28:40 GMT
Yeah, I guess. I'm just mucking around to see if I'm going to like the filter.
There's even more options for each type of filter here too. For instance, the high and low pass filters can be either Analogue, Vintage, Baxandall & Resonant. The Bell filter can be Peak, Proportional Q & Band Shelf. So many options.
Any idea how far away the hardware filter is?
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Aug 26, 2015 15:52:05 GMT
As far as I know Jeremy has not started on it and is still busy with the linear first.
I may design the PCB myself (in the same cabinet as the Kameleon). Will be a green PCB and not in 'Garage 1217 looks' though.
First finish the desktop Kameleon. Just ordered the still missing parts.
band 1: F = 20 Hz, low shelf +2dB Q = 1 band 2: F = 150 Hz, Bell, -5dB, Q = 0.5 band 3: F = 5kHz, high shelf, + 1.5dB, Q = 1
try this, might be closer
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 26, 2015 18:00:31 GMT
Ozone6 is a nice programme, Gordon. It's more a mastering type of thing where you might eq individual sounds on multitrack rather than eq a whole mix. Ie; it's slightly more refined when you can get at each track but a bit crude for overall mixing since it's a bit like using a hammer.
Even narrowing the bandwidth is hit and miss since it's actually easier to MISS the target frequency and just mess the overall sound up altogether.
I only use EQ myself if something desperate seems wrong with a recording. I know that some permanently use EQ but I bet none of them EQ to flat and they 'learn' a sound that's far from it unfortunately, so most headphones sound 'wrong' to them!!
I equate it with getting the colour balance right on a TV or on a photo. It is actually very difficult to get right!!! It is easier if you have a reference close by to compare with.
The filter is 'sharper' and hits less, but hits at the right places so that the HD650 sound remains intact whereas a general eq will both alter the hd650 character and add artifacts. Because the filter only targets identified areas, less artifacts are introduced and the Senn sound is left basically as it was.
If you like the sound of the Senn, then the filter leaves the sound there but fills in its biggest weaknesses only. In effect, it becomes a fuller headphone without being 'fatter'. In fact, it's leaner, with a deeper bass.
My Sennator isn't working correctly, but after hearing it, I have found the hd650 lacking if I'm honest, which is why I've moved to other headphones until a filter is ready for the Polaris, when I may well return to the fold.
It's the deep bass that I miss, without the bloat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 18:55:01 GMT
Yeah guys, I hear ya. I've actually ditched Ozone6 & reverted back to JRMC's built-in parametric. It has none of the fancy graphics but does allow an infinite number of filters. Frans latest settings actually work very well. The only caveat being the cut to the midrange because JRMC only offers Low-shelf & High-shelf. I've chosen Low-shelf for the 150Hz cut.. I understand the TV analogy only too well. Being a keen amateur photographer has made me a tad pedantic about neutral reproduction. Actually the right settings are way less exciting to look at than many people expect. The only TV's I'll buy are Panasonics for this reason. They seem to work particularly well when adjusted correctly. Pioneer used to be brilliant but they stopped making them. Monitor-wise I won't use anything other than an IPS panel for the same reasons.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 26, 2015 19:54:24 GMT
I also use Panasonics ... In the front room, a 55 inch monster. It's great. Especially in 3d. Colour is excellent. Digital radio put into Ifi micro is fantastic for the low bitrate used.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2015 2:00:23 GMT
band 1: F = 20 Hz, low shelf +2dB Q = 1 band 2: F = 150 Hz, Bell, -5dB, Q = 0.5 band 3: F = 5kHz, high shelf, + 1.5dB, Q = 1 try this, might be closer Outstanding! Cheers
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2015 2:40:53 GMT
Only me Anyone got any thoughts on this VST plug-in? MathaudioI've installed it but I'm really struggling to get my head around how it should be used. Any help would be great. Frans?
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,882
|
Post by solderdude on Sept 14, 2015 6:20:46 GMT
From a quick glance it would appear that the plug-in can only attenuate. To boost a range you would have to lower the non-boosted parts instead it would seem.
I have no experience with foobar nor its plug-ins.
|
|