AutoEqualized Fun

[TheSloth]

Don't you have to consider what response curve you are actually looking for? There are good reasons why headphone response curves aren't 'flat' (and some pretty bad ones as well). It seems you are basically looking for a 'flat' response on the potentially incorrect assumption that this is more 'accurate' and true to the source.

[Dreadhead]

Don't you have to consider what response curve you are actually looking for? There are good reasons why headphone response curves aren't 'flat' (and some pretty bad ones as well). It seems you are basically looking for a 'flat' response on the potentially incorrect assumption that this is more 'accurate' and true to the source.

In my opinion there is no way to achieve "true to the source" (or musician) there is only true to what is on the media. In most recording studios, it's my understanding that they use room correction etc to get as flat a response as possible in their system and do their mix the way they want. If I match that I'm getting what they recorded to the highest fidelity that I can.

I could also go after the "room correction" standard which is sloped 1dB/octave (or about that, my DEQ has it as an option). I read a review of some incredibly expensive eyeball looking speakers in Stereophile recently and the room correction curve was what the manufacturer used (out of his preference). The reviewer said he found it a bit too colored, but that's his opinion too.

Some argue about the equal loudness curves but in my opinion that not a good reason for going away from the flat response curve (or room correction curve). If you start trying to guess what the response of the mastering studio was you're just justifying your own flavor to the sound. I'm not arguing that this is inherently wrong I just don't want to do it.

[TheSloth]

In my opinion there is no way to achieve "true to the source" (or musician) there is only true to what is on the media. In most recording studios, it's my understanding that they use room correction etc to get as flat a response as possible in their system and do their mix the way they want. If I match that I'm getting what they recorded to the highest fidelity that I can.

I could also go after the "room correction" standard which is sloped 1dB/octave (or about that, my DEQ has it as an option). I read a review of some incredibly expensive eyeball looking speakers in Stereophile recently and the room correction curve was what the manufacturer used (out of his preference). The reviewer said he found it a bit too colored, but that's his opinion too.

Some argue about the equal loudness curves but in my opinion that not a good reason for going away from the flat response curve (or room correction curve). If you start trying to guess what the response of the mastering studio was you're just justifying your own flavor to the sound. I'm not arguing that this is inherently wrong I just don't want to do it.

I hear ya, but that wasn't quite what I was going after. I'm wondering what kind of response curve you are looking for with your EQ.

Speaker 'flat response' ≠ headphone 'flat response'!

In classical recordings we don't go in for fiddling with response curves or 'room corrections' usually. The room is part of the recording decision in the first place. Things are done as 'naturally' as possible, at least if I have any say in it. Often you need to fiddle around with EQ but that's only through comparing the master to the in hall sound and trying to get the best match to ear.

[Dreadhead]

In a short answer to your question though I'm going for flat frequency response at the measurement probe. No response curve. I can't acheive it exactly but I'm within a couple dB in most places as it stands

snip

Speaker 'flat response' ≠ headphone 'flat response'!

snip

I looked into this a while ago and I can't understand why people would say this. Flat is flat in my opinion. The different frequencies do attenuate slightly differently when traveling through air but to be honest if you do your room correction at the listening location then even this doesn't play in. Sound energy is sound energy. My theory is that the reason headphones are better at the details is that they are closer to your head so they only need to put out a lot less energy and hence the drivers are able to smaller and more finely controlled (especially at higher frequencies). Of course I am a lay person so if there is proof of the statement I'd be more than happy to eat crow and use whatever the scientific optimal is for headphones.

On the other hand the natural approach to recording that you describe ends up trying to do what I do with a probe. Music on site -> unflat recording tools -> "flat" mastering speakers -> adjustment to "sound like music site" -> send to media -> flat speaker/headphone response -> smile on my face.

I am a guy who takes a scientific approach to most things but I am in this hobby because I love music Right now my system succeeds in calming bringing out the bass in music without it being overpowering and still harsh ro shrill, everything sounds extremely natural but all the details are there (even the annoying ones like the violin players breathing too loudly just before they are about to play which I hear in the hall as well). I think people may be pleasantly surprised if they tried this for themselves and that's why I'm sharing it.

[Dreadhead]

A buddy of mine came over for a couple hours this morning and we auto-equalized his Edition 9 (to the calibrated curve I got from Room Eq Wizard). He was impressed enough to ask me to store the curve so when he figures out how to get an eq into his computer based system he can match it.

I'm looking forward to showing a couple more people later in the month at a micro meet.

[vvs_75]

A buddy of mine came over for a couple hours this morning and we auto-equalized his Edition 9 (to the calibrated curve I got from Room Eq Wizard). He was impressed enough to ask me to store the curve so when he figures out how to get an eq into his computer based system he can match it.

I'm looking forward to showing a couple more people later in the month at a micro meet.

That's me.

Well, first I just want to say that I don't care much if headphone produces "flat"/ true to recording sound or colored, warm, cold etc. sound. I like details, tight quality bass and more realistic/natural sound.

I knew that Edt. 9 have problems in midrange aria but I was really surprised to hear how big the difference did equalization. I played a bit with the ON/OFF button by switching back and forth every few seconds. With the EQ switching ON: it was like the heavy curtain dropped and midrange details and clarity simply jumped forward. The bass still was there nice and tight but less evident. The heights clarity and quantity increased too. It was just a bit too much for my likening but I not fan of high frequencies, I think my ears just too sensitive to that spectrum. With the EQ OFF: I can clearly hear how the bass was overpowering the rest of the frequency specially midrange. And I always thought that my Edt.9 sounded not true or flat but good. Now no questions that I am going to copy compensation curve and use it too, simply because this way my HP sounds more right and better to my ears.

Cheers,

Vlad

[NightWoundsTime]

.

[deepak]

Dreadhead have you ever tried a software EQ called Linear Phase PEQ Red?

[Dreadhead]

deepak, I have not tried that one. I pretty much only use the DEQ2496 for everything. It has 10 band parametric built in but I'm sure it doesn't have all the bells and whistles that one does.

[Dreadhead]

Well this weekend I got to show off my setup and measure a pair of R10s on the setup. Those phones are sooooo colored, that said they sound nice, especially for classical. The sound is not for me but nice. I also came down that I do not need Qualias (want for coolness but no need on an audio front).

Also measured a pair of CD3000 that had been modded and they were the flattest phones I have encountered.

Also tonight I had some time and I did some reading on the Etymotic research and it looks like I should drop my target curve by an additional 5 db by 10000hz because even though studio monitors have a flat power output the actual response is not flat and hence the mix has a bump in the highs:

Etymotic Research, Inc. - ER-4 - Technical Specifications

Etymotic Research, Inc. - How we measure response accuracy

Etymotic Research, Inc. - ER-4 - Which ER•4 is Right for You

This is likely why most people think my curves are too bright. Sounds plausible to me and Etymotic really seem to know what they are talking about.

Also I think a pair of ER4s might be my next purchase.

[Dusty Chalk]

I'm curious what this process will do to a DT770 -- can I bring one over some time?

Did you try this on the L3000? I forgot to ask, I'm curious if it can take care of the small midrange swale.

[Dreadhead]

I'm curious what this process will do to a DT770 -- can I bring one over some time?

Did you try this on the L3000? I forgot to ask, I'm curious if it can take care of the small midrange swale.

Dusty, not this weekend but some other time sure I did not do the L3000s since I generally like to ask owners before I defile their headphones by measuring them

I was thinking about it today and I'm worried about the unit I have failing and being without or the unit going out of production so I'm planning on getting a second one to sit in the attic as a backup.

Maybe that way I can get the power supply caps changed out too because apparently they fail sometimes.

[Dreadhead]

Oh and I should mention that I now have a calibrated mic from this place:

Cross·Spectrum - Calibrated Behringer ECM8000 Microphones for Sale

They will calibrate down to 10Hz if you ask. One hell of a deal at $100. Will likely send my other mic for calibration too.

[Dusty Chalk]

Okay, I'll bring both over then, when I do.

Yeah, this weekend is out for me, too.

If you find a good price online and email it to zZounds, then they'll email you a better price.

EDIT: Is that the mic you were using last weekend?

[Dreadhead]

EDIT: Is that the mic you were using last weekend?

Yes that is. That is why I had that exact target curve on the DEQ. I can also upload the calibration file to my measurement software on the computer too but I haven't done that one yet because I don't have an extra mic cable and the XLR cable I usually use is being used to hook up the Phonitor.

[AlanY]

I'm not sure I understand your reasoning for a flat target curve. Ideally your target curve should be the frequency response of a speaker with a flat on-axis response and a smooth power response, measured at the listener's position. Essentially IEC 60268-7.

[Dreadhead]

I'm not sure I understand your reasoning for a flat target curve. Ideally your target curve should be the frequency response of a speaker with a flat on-axis response and a smooth power response, measured at the listener's position. Essentially IEC 60268-7.

I'm not so sure about this. There are several schools of thought as to the response of mastering studios. I am currently following the Etymotic curves shown in the post above (Flat plus 5-7db roll off). To be honest if I want that curve all I have to do is aim for it so no worries.

If you can find me a plot that would be cool since I'd love to give it a try.

[Dusty Chalk]

Apparently you can buy it at target.

(I'm still looking.)