Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 1, 2013 12:48:38 GMT
I borrowed an eq device (and some leads) called a DBX 2031 and have been experimenting with it and home headphones today!!
Talk about fiddler's delight. You could be there all day, faffing around with sliders and the headphones still sound good, so doing it by ear is just daft.
So off to the good old internet to find FR graphs for the headphones I was using and then I tried to 'mirror' what I saw on the graphs.
I found some interesting things about these graphs - the Headroom and Golden Ear graphs are roughly like each other but there are frequency discrepancies and boy, do they 'sound' different on the headphone.
TBH, I didn't like the mirrors I created from Headroom but preferred the Golden Ears 'mirrors' except that they tended to sound a little bit bright (to me). So I used the Golden Ears graphs to make up mixes and tried to be as exact as I could. Then I played around with the top and bottom end slightly and found that for me, I preferred to slightly raise the bottom end by a fraction to warm things up.
So it seems for me, the Golden Ears graphs are more successful with a bit of warmth added.
The result was quite interesting.
Every headphone retained it's basic sound signature. So in the case of the K550, it remained a bit brittle and the M50 remained warm. I could have tweaked the hell out of the K550 but that would probably suck all the life out of it so I didn't do anything massively. Just as the graphs were showing.
To an extent this really does work quite well. It doesn't transform your headphone into something else, but I would say that 'perceived' clarity most definitely increases. Once you clear out any sharp humps or dips, things start to sound 'cleaner' and more natural.
You don't notice too much until you switch it off and in every case, my preference was most definitely eq'd.
The headphone make/type becomes slightly less important tbh, but it's just more comfortable. The more expensive headphones like the D2000 eq really well and they are staggeringly clean once they are sharpened up. It also takes very little.
The headphones that are difficult are ones that show sharp rises and dips all over the place. You can't be sure you're hitting the right areas or bandwidth, but on the smoother headphones, it works a treat.
I'm really considering going down this route, since it does (subjectively) improve the headphone listening experience. It doesn't particularly improve a dog's ear of a headphone, but it helps. The better headphones become more polished.
Whatever the added distortions are, I can't detect them. Maybe extended use will expose them, but it does give a good 'fix' for headphones where you think they are good but have a 'skew' somewhere that you don't like. The eq'ing will help but get these settings right and headphones shine.
It is so easily overdone though, so great care is needed. The settings I ended up with were just slight and switching between on and off produced an extra 'clarity' rather than night/day differences. In some cases, my wife wasn't that aware until I told her where it was I'd eq'd and then she heard it. She then said that she thought it was a clearer version. On other headphones (M50) she noticed immediately.
It's worth trying imo, but use sparingly and with FR graphs!! (Although I have some misgivings about the accuracy of any out there - at least they are a guide)
|
|
dicky
quite active
Posts: 230
|
Post by dicky on Aug 1, 2013 14:30:56 GMT
Hi Ian,
I've been doing this for a while now with a Behringer DEQ2496 that I got on ebay just after Christmas. I've been using it to 'fill in the gaps' on a couple of headphones and I've also used it to lift the bass a tiny bit on my T50's - rather than mess about with the low shelf in Frans' filter.
The good thing about the Behringer is that it has Parametric EQ so it's a bit more flexible than a regular EQ and has a number of presets that you can store for each headphone. It also has a bunch of other functions that I'll probably never use - but one that interests me is the room EQ. Plug in a mic and it'll measure the room acoustics and apply a fix - I guess a mirror just like you're doing - but automatic.
It does add a bit of noise at high volume levels and I'm sure some will argue it degrades the sound - but I think it adds value to the audio chain.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 1, 2013 15:22:13 GMT
Hi Dicky. I think they do serve a purpose. TBH, I have too many knobs to play with and I can accept a multitude of settings as being fine. That's why I resorted to looking at the graphs and then found that they weren't the same at all on different sites, resulting in really big differences in eq.
There is a very cheap Behringer eq unit with FBQ which is just a cheap plastic box. I wonder how useful 9 frequencies would be? They each work over an octave. Nothing fancy and no presets but very cheap!! The one I have is a bit expensive but I have been quite surprised with minor changes, that you'd thing haven't really made any difference until you switch it out.
This thing is too big and fiddly to set up for a home headphone (unless you stick with just one headphone) but it is making quite a difference to the way I see my headphones. At work, everything is pre-eq'd so I don't even think about it which is why I love the Beyer DT150, but not at home.
Because of the variants of ears/heads etc in the sound of the headphone, eq'ing does make sense I think. I don't detect any extra noise or distortion (and I have razors for the detection of that)
Should have done it years ago I guess. My M50's have surprised me. From fat, typical closed headphone sound, I've managed to open the sound up by checking FR graphs on Golden Ears and trying to draw a mirror. The biggest problem is hitting the correct place where you see peaks and dips. I don't think the graphs show them in the right places, or the dummy heads aren't the same as my head. (and that's pretty dummy too) I'm finding that perhaps, I am hearing the peaks and dips but in a slightly different frequency band. Not sure, but with patience and graphs, I reckon it could be adjusted to make most headphones sound respectable at least and good ones sound fantastic. The M50 is surprisingly good with a small amount of eq. (Mostly in the top) Other areas are just tiny.
Rooms are a nightmare to try and fix. The problem is that it needs very little in certain frequencies (depending on the room shape/size and speaker positions) in order for those resonant frequencies to 'ring' all over the place and combine to form other problems too!! You end up cutting the ringing frequencies too much in order to alleviate them and end up with a very odd response from the speaker. (with some frequencies possibly missing) The room needs 'acoustic' treating first, really.
Sit in your listening position and get the wife to run a mirror along the side walls until you see a reflection of the speakers. You need damping there. Also look on the back wall and damp there. At least then, the first reflections are mostly dampened. (Ceiling?)
I once went to great lengths to do this with panels in primary reflection places. It worked to a point but the room was a mess!! (and the floor!!!) Then eq and perhaps less frequencies will be missing. Rooms are very hard to sort out. At least with headphones, you don't have to contend with room interactions which really mess everything up.
You can go on twiddling with the eq units for hours though. This is not for OCD people I can tell you. It's also very easily overdone too.
Are you using what is called an 'Ultracurve?'
|
|
gommer
quite active
Posts: 140
|
Post by gommer on Aug 1, 2013 17:57:07 GMT
Isn't all this exactly what Fans' filter was designed for? It's fixed, one per HP, but it seems a lot simpler to use. Admittedly, it has more limitations, but OTOH, it's also much more precise in the things it does.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 1, 2013 18:02:45 GMT
Dicky, I tried my T50 via the eq and used Frans graph as the basis and it cleans up a lot. I raised 4Khz back down again and then Formed an upward curve into the treble, right to the top. It takes a lot of boosting up top and doesn't turn tizzy. The drivers can actually take a lot of pushing in the treble and they don't turn nasty.
The K550 turns very nasty in the treble if you raise it.
It sounds fine. (This is the unmodified one except for pads) Then just for taste, I raised the low bass a tad.
|
|
dicky
quite active
Posts: 230
|
Post by dicky on Aug 1, 2013 18:18:52 GMT
Isn't all this exactly what Fans' filter was designed for? It's fixed, one per HP, but it seems a lot simpler to use. Admittedly, it has more limitations, but OTOH, it's also much more precise in the things it does. You're quite right. But, I have a few HPs that aren't in Frans' list and I wanted to see if it was possible/worth correcting them without iteratively changing/modding the filters. I figured I could assess the potential using the EQ and then build the filter.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 1, 2013 18:49:02 GMT
Isn't all this exactly what Fans' filter was designed for? It's fixed, one per HP, but it seems a lot simpler to use. Admittedly, it has more limitations, but OTOH, it's also much more precise in the things it does. I probably need about 25 filters!! Yes, the filters are easier I guess, but you can also tailor to your own tastes. I have noticed that some people don't like a flat frequency response and prefer a raised bass for instance. You can also cut the input and use more of the travel in the amps vol pot. I know it adds to the sig/noise but I don't need to listen that loud to hear it. You can also easily bypass the unit in any case. It's quite interesting, twiddling away with settings and finding out what each frequency 'sounds' like, knowing which knob I'm turning!! Mine has to go home tomorrow.
|
|
dicky
quite active
Posts: 230
|
Post by dicky on Aug 1, 2013 18:58:29 GMT
Hi Dicky. I think they do serve a purpose. TBH, I have too many knobs to play with and I can accept a multitude of settings as being fine. That's why I resorted to looking at the graphs and then found that they weren't the same at all on different sites, resulting in really big differences in eq. There is a very cheap Behringer eq unit with FBQ which is just a cheap plastic box. I wonder how useful 9 frequencies would be? They each work over an octave. Nothing fancy and no presets but very cheap!! The one I have is a bit expensive but I have been quite surprised with minor changes, that you'd thing haven't really made any difference until you switch it out. This thing is too big and fiddly to set up for a home headphone (unless you stick with just one headphone) but it is making quite a difference to the way I see my headphones. At work, everything is pre-eq'd so I don't even think about it which is why I love the Beyer DT150, but not at home. Because of the variants of ears/heads etc in the sound of the headphone, eq'ing does make sense I think. I don't detect any extra noise or distortion (and I have razors for the detection of that) Should have done it years ago I guess. My M50's have surprised me. From fat, typical closed headphone sound, I've managed to open the sound up by checking FR graphs on Golden Ears and trying to draw a mirror. The biggest problem is hitting the correct place where you see peaks and dips. I don't think the graphs show them in the right places, or the dummy heads aren't the same as my head. (and that's pretty dummy too) I'm finding that perhaps, I am hearing the peaks and dips but in a slightly different frequency band. Not sure, but with patience and graphs, I reckon it could be adjusted to make most headphones sound respectable at least and good ones sound fantastic. The M50 is surprisingly good with a small amount of eq. (Mostly in the top) Other areas are just tiny. Rooms are a nightmare to try and fix. The problem is that it needs very little in certain frequencies (depending on the room shape/size and speaker positions) in order for those resonant frequencies to 'ring' all over the place and combine to form other problems too!! You end up cutting the ringing frequencies too much in order to alleviate them and end up with a very odd response from the speaker. (with some frequencies possibly missing) The room needs 'acoustic' treating first, really. Sit in your listening position and get the wife to run a mirror along the side walls until you see a reflection of the speakers. You need damping there. Also look on the back wall and damp there. At least then, the first reflections are mostly dampened. (Ceiling?) I once went to great lengths to do this with panels in primary reflection places. It worked to a point but the room was a mess!! (and the floor!!!) Then eq and perhaps less frequencies will be missing. Rooms are very hard to sort out. At least with headphones, you don't have to contend with room interactions which really mess everything up. You can go on twiddling with the eq units for hours though. This is not for OCD people I can tell you. It's also very easily overdone too. Are you using what is called an 'Ultracurve?' I am using the Ultracurve, Ian. I bought a mint version 1 on ebay at less than half price. However, I recapped it, upgraded the opamps, added some heatsinks to the warmer ICs (particularly the DSP), built a new linear PSU and a friend of mine made a slotted lid (that looks better than OEM!) to aid cooling. It now runs around 30 degrees compared to the >55 degrees stock and it's a lot quieter (audible noise). I use the FR graphs from the web to build the 'mirror' and try to avoid 'boosting' as much as possible. Of course, the beauty of the para EQ is that you can vary the bandwidth of the boost/cut and get a better fit for the peak or dip you are trying to correct. I think it's a great unit and I'm pleased I bought it. I'm currently feeding it into my Ember that turned up today. (In fact I think it must be my birthday today as my FiiO X3 turned up too.) It's almost noise-free via the Ember - so I obviously have a problem with both my Pandas which start to get noisy around 2 o'clock (sounds like mains hum). I guess it's a design 'feature'. To be honest Ian, I wouldn't bother with a 9-band EQ. I doubt it would be accurate enough for your lug 'oles and what are the chances that any band would be on a peak/dip frequency? I'd recommend the Ultracurve.
|
|
dicky
quite active
Posts: 230
|
Post by dicky on Aug 1, 2013 19:02:59 GMT
Isn't all this exactly what Fans' filter was designed for? It's fixed, one per HP, but it seems a lot simpler to use. Admittedly, it has more limitations, but OTOH, it's also much more precise in the things it does. Yes, the filters are easier I guess, but you can also tailor to your own tastes. I have noticed that some people don't like a flat frequency response and prefer a raised bass for instance. I agree, Ian. I like flat above 200Hz. I have a 4dB lift at 20Hz tapering to 0dB at 200Hz with my T50s. I really should open them up and fiddle about with the wool - but the weather is too nice! I seem to be a toggy in the summer and listen to music in the winter.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 1, 2013 20:03:43 GMT
I won't worry about a cheapo Dicky. If I got one, it would have to be a decent parametric, I think. I suspect noise could be the biggest problem with them although if you listened at the levels you need to pick up noise, you'd be deafened!!
It has been nice. I'm hoping it'll last until Tuesday when I'm away working/holidaying for a few weeks. I'll be heading into similar weather every day. Canb't work out what audio stuff to take with me!!
|
|
dicky
quite active
Posts: 230
|
Post by dicky on Aug 1, 2013 20:32:18 GMT
Well, I thought noise would be a problem - but all I get via the Ember is a hiss and that's at ear-damaging volume levels. When switching the EQ out, the hiss reduces (it's difficult to judge, but possibly by up to half). I doubt any noise contribution is significant at realistic listening levels. I have the same problem deciding what camera kit to take away - and usually take the lot.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 2, 2013 9:45:11 GMT
Mine is going home now. One thing I have noticed is the massively wide variations from 'neutral' that we can accept. After a short while, a really skewed sound sounds normal!!
I also tended to go brighter and brighter by 'ear' thinking that clarity was improving and then coming back later made a Grado seem dull!!!
|
|