Can we discuss - This FR Correction Tool - http://owliophile.com/

DIY Audio & Modifications
1

http://owliophile.com/

PS : 1st - to the moderators, I would consider that using EQ is a “mod”. Just not one done in the physical domain, but done digitally. If you move this to any other category in the forum, could you kindly have the courtesy to inform me. Thanks

Hereafter, I’ll refer to this website as owl. This web based tool, works by generating tones, and you define your own EQ based on your perception of these tones, to correct the Frequency Response(FR) of your listening device.

I will not go into the details, cos all that information is available on the web site, in the Q & A Section. Please note I am not in anyway affiliated to this web site. Discovered it via another member of the headphones community here - Luke.

It can take a while to learn how to use, and its usefulness is clearly a function of the skill of the operator.

I had made an effort to use it on an IEM with non stock eartips, the ARRTI T10 + Moondrop SPRING tips, which was my 1st attempt. I was not able to define many EQ filters, probably cos it was my 1st attempt. Implementing the filters was difficult because I had no way to translate the Q parameter of each filter into the Bandwidth parameter which my parametric EQ uses.

But Luke pointed me to this page, which assists with that, unfortunately that was after my 1st attempt with the T10

I’m bothering to share my experience here, cos I made a 2nd attempt, with another IEM, the KZ Libra X, which has a broadly trebly tone. In my opinion, does not have the best resolution, or technicality whatever that means, hope you get the idea.

Anyway, what you may want to know. The result has been very good, making the Libra X balanced, and quite pleasant to listen to, vocals, instruments, all quite significantly improved. I was pleasantly surprised. Shocked actually. The only thing missing is detail, and resolution, and a sense of front to back and 3 dimensionality, which I think is a function of the driver. I consider that each driver has its own limitations, and there is really nothing one can do to improve that.

But compensating for whatever changes the following chain introduces to the sound, I have found to be possible, using this tool.

  1. Ear canal resonances.
  2. IEM resonances /cancellations including the influence of whatever tips you use
  3. Our own HRTF

The end result introduces improved naturalness in the vocals, balance in the stereo field, but as I said, the key limitation is the quality of the drivers of one’s device, no way to overcome that. But FR, definitely that has improved in leaps and bounds on the Libra X.

Not saying that I’ll be listening to the Libra X any time soon, cos the resolution is nowhere near that of the T10, but it makes for an interesting academic exercise. Maybe I’ll give the ARTTI T10 another go.

Don’t think there’s any point in sharing the settings I used.

Yes you can save the settings locally on the device where you run your browser.

Now I would like a native version that runs in Windows.

I’ll end with this, resolution aside, which it cannot improve, but the FR changes on my Libra X are stunning.

I had thought of getting into physical mods, but sincerely, I won’t bother anymore, cos a physical mod, typically does just the same thing, and rather than broad changes made by physical nozzles, and physical filters, this owl tool, can allow you to be even more precise, and flexible, and the results can be checked in your parametric EQ, in just a few minutes. I’m impressed.

For casual listening, with the resolution quality challenge caveat, the FR is now stunning. Truly stunning. really balanced, from top to bottom.

There are of course tons of issues to consider, in using this tool. But this approach has promise.

The 1st thing I would recommend, is that the developers implement secure http, cos using a web site which does not secure communication with my web browser, in 2025, is simply not acceptable.

2 Likes
2

Wow it just hit me. With these DACs which nowadays also feature parametric EQ’s. This would be so awesome, so I can take the settings with me to whatever device I’m listening to via USB-C. That would be great.

Not familiar with EQ on the android. Will investigate, maybe I could apply this directly on the smartphone. So as I move from a laptop to a smartphone, the IEM sounds exactly the same, with the FR correction applied!. Awesome,

2 Likes
3

One optimisation I think in the process, for anyone attempting this, I suggest for your 1st attempt, do not try to do individual EQ’s for each ear, which makes the process tedious. That’s what I did on my 1st attempt, try to generate correction filters for each ear independently. And in real life, how many parametric EQ’s that most people use on devices, allow you to set a different EQ for each ear.

To avoid fatigue, during the test process, which would affect the end result. This is highly recommended.

I think sure individual EQ would be great, and improve the result even more, but at the risk of getting fatigued and not making the right decisions, cos the ear is tired.

Definitely try this test out, only when your ears are fresh. And you have not been listening to any other music/audio - ideally.

2 Likes
4

Hi, I’m the one making that site, Luke is the one who keeps bugging me to add more features. The save/load EQ function may not fully work right now but I’ll try to get it fixed on the weekend. We also haven’t “officially” launched the site, i.e., we’re just starting to ask for feedback behind the scenes as it’s still under development and I may break things in the process to rebuild them later.

There won’t be a Windows, or any other OS-specific, version as the tools to do it system-wide already exist. This website is meant to be OS-agnostic and you will soon be able to save the profiles for the specific EQ tool that you are using as your main EQ. The idea is that you set up your profile on the page, save it to file, and load it straight into your preferred EQ.

But I don’t wanna go into too much detail now as it’s still under development. Will make my own post about it when we’re ready to launch.

4 Likes
5

Hello Owliophile,

While I may have a plethora of ideas for improvement, please note, over time, I am getting more efficient at using the web site to generate corrections.

Initially it took me about 40 minutes for the 1st set of corrections, but over time, I think I can complete a decent set of corrections in about 15 minutes, using the stage 1 and stage 2 suggested levels. I generally do not bother with stage 3.

Of course what I say is subjective. But I encourage you, I think your tool has huge potential, and I have found it extremely useful, as I have become more efficient with my strategy for using it, to tease out just that little bit more performance from my IEMs.

I also do not think there will be a substitute for the benefit that the “self measurement” approach delivers. There really is no other way to do this, with automated tools, cos they do not hear what we hear. While it may be possible to get our hearing measured, get headphones measured and use both of these measurements to create a correction EQ set of filters, to conform to a target, having both of these done for our own ears, and for the specific copy of the headphone we have, is an expensive process, and an involved one, and I am not aware of any tool that will input all these measurements and generate a correction EQ. At least not one I am aware of in widespread use - I can imagine that in academia in some obscure corner of the world with lots of funding, these things may exist, and become widely available in the distant future. but until that happens, we have owliophile.com.

My suggested approach, from my own experience is :

  1. Start with a very good headphone/IEM/whatever. This tool will not turn junk into diamonds. It will not fix poor resolution and distortion in a transducer. It will NOT polish turds.

  2. Do not try to iron out every wrinkle, just focus on the most deviant frequencies that need correction. This certainly helped me identify about two or three areas in my hearing where at about the same frequency, on most listening devices, I need a tweak. The exact frequency is not identical, but at one frequency, which may be related to canal resonance (my hypothesis), its pretty much the same frequency in all IEMs. Huge boost, needing a corrective cut.

I tend to limit the number of filters I identify with owl to no more than 7 or 8, ideally maybe 5. This way I focus on the stuff that delivers the greatest improvement. Not trying to totally flatten the headphone response perceptively, but just to deal with its worst habits.

Habituation will naturally “flatten” any other minor anomalies, as one becomes attuned to a particular listening device.

So well done. Thank you for making this free.

My only request. I would happily pay something to have a version of this I can keep and use. Why? Everyone passes away, and some of the best tools we have become extinct when the developer - usually a one man band, passes away - which is unavoidable, our death.

But it would be nice if the tools you create live beyond you. I would hate to wake up one day and find that your site is no longer available, cos I now rely on your tool, for all my IEM correction, and not have it available.

What I’m saying is that what you have achieved is very valuable, and please think about how to preserve its usefulness, beyond your lifetime, to make it perpetually available, especially to those who are willing to make a contribution to have a copy which they keep, for their own private use, knowing that if the site ever goes down, they can still continue to use their own private copy. Please think about this.

Keep well. Like Crinacle would say - don’t die. And I mean that, I would hate to see owliophile.com die.

1 Like
6

First thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it! Good to hear you’re getting better at it. I’m so eager working on the site myself that unfortunately I barely get to use it.

(1) Good headphones are usually easier to tune and tend to have fewer peaks and dips that need to be fixed. However, the potential for fixing weak headphones is greater if you know what you’re doing. A headphone that has almost no peaks and dips doesn’t have that much room for improvement.

(2) it’s true that it’s not really required to fix every little wobble. You can if you want to, but small little wobbles here and there aren’t significant to the overall sound quality IMO.

(3) you can certainly focus on fixing the peaks and dips and trying to leave the tonal balance alone, that by itself already makes for a big improvement usually. However, if your headphone is notably off the mark in terms of tonal balance I do recommend fixing that as well.

(4) Rumors of my death have been vastly exaggerated. And to calm you down a bit: I’m 37. Luke does have a backup of the site’s code though as an insurance. So as long as we don’t both die at the same time you can put your mind at ease. I understand that this means Luke and I shouldn’t board any plane together, and if you’re worried about that, so far we never have.

We’re getting close to v1.0 now and I’m getting excited to share it with a bigger part of the audiophile world. Probably a few days out, 1-2 weeks max. :slight_smile:

3 Likes
7

Here is an interesting conclusion. Having used all the tools at my disposal, including EQ correction, to improve the sound of my headphones, I conclude, for me, wasting time with lower quality listening gear, is not worth the effort, time, or money. The difference in cost is negligible between the lower cost head worn gear, and the things that sound much better.

So might as well spend just a little bit more and get as good as I can afford. And enjoy my listening. The entire purpose for me, of gear is to experience the music as accurately and neutrally as possible, whatever neutral may be. Hard to define. Cos this ideal will vary with personal preference.

Just thought I should drop this for those who come after. Please just get the best sounding device you can afford, so you actually spend less. With lower quality gear, you start an endless pursuit of sidegrades, trying to cheat the system and pay less to get more. But as you will discover, it’s hard if not impossible to cheat the system, the good stuff costs more, in my humble opinion/experience. Wish I could save others the bother. its hard to get truly great sound with the bottom budget gear. Trust me, I’ve tried and did not find any cheapie that sounded anywhere near as the stuff above the budget bracket.

The temptation to think that EQ can make a budget item sound as good as the more expensive stuff is there. I’ve tried this on speakers and headphones and IEM’s. Best to start with better sounding gear and tweak that. Start please with the best you can afford, then EQ is the icing on the cake.

There are also lots of situations where EQ is not an option, and there I have to rely on the raw quality of the device. Nothing like a decent listening device that is 95% of the way there, without EQ, with EQ being the icing on the cake.

1 Like
8

Oh I was gonna invite you to renting a Porsche 911 GT3 and driving at the Nurburgring together. Well crap, I guess we won’t be doing that then.

9

My conclusion from testing and EQing 10+ over ear headphones of various prices is that, indeed you can (sometimes). Caveats being that the cheaper headphones are comfortable, has low distortion, is well extended in FR on both ends, have good sound stage and imaging to begin with.

$50 cat ears headphones probably doesn’t fit all of those criteria.

True enough, if nothing else it is simply easier.

Given the caveats listed above are satisfied, then the barriers from success are knowledge and time.

Like I’ve mentioned before, if someone scores at least level 9 in Harman’s How to Listen program, then it shouldn’t be difficult to EQ headphones to exact satisfaction (given the caveats are met)

10

Luke
Oh I was gonna invite you to renting a Porsche 911 GT3 and driving at the Nurburgring together. Well crap, I guess we won’t be doing that then.

I didn’t say we never will! I’ll take you up on that offer for sure :wink:

11

The tool is now feature complete for v1.0 and essentially in open beta. some visual stuff needs polishing but by and large its complete :partying_face:

2 Likes
12

Congratulations. I find the redesign a very good step forward. logical, and flexible, one can have as many or as few filters as one needs, adding or deleting to taste. That was brilliant design. Well done. A very flexible approach.

The decision to turn on filters by design is also good for the workflow. Saves having to turn on filters, to see or hear what’s going on. I like that.

Hoping others will learn to use it, as I have.

13

The newest features are actually the saving to APO / Peace file format and the submit button. I agree that the redesign has helped usability and visual appeal. :slight_smile:

1 Like
14

Thanks for the info.

I already had my EQ done, for the only device that is critical, to my listening, so I had no need to run through the app again.

That’s why I did not notice these other features you have highlighted, cos I had no need to get into the save menu, to discover the new features.

Maybe you need to add or edit one of the Q& A’s to include a summary of the features of the tool,.so that one does not need to run through all of the Q & A, to get a good grasp of what to expect, like a brief features list.

Probably more important than mentioning the two “founders” in the 1st Q & A. I know you are proud of your work, but the end user is far more interested in what the tool can do for them, and could not care if it was built by AI or Elon Musk. or the man in the moon. Besides you do not really mention who you guys are. Kinda sneaky. You could be Bigfoot, and we would not know it, or care.

You may want to highlight - What can this do for you, as the most important thing in the Q&A, i.e. why should I use this, and what can I expect to achieve… Key features at a glance.

All the other stuff about you, is nice to have and know, interesting, but can’t be the USP, Unique selling point at the top of the 1st marketing blurb, about the product/service.

1 Like
15

Yeah that’s a good idea. The Q&A should probably start with the two blue highlighted sections.

16

Dropped a new update. Mostly visual stuff. Unless I hear of any bugs, this will be the official release version of the tool :slight_smile:

1 Like
17

Congratulations. You’ve done well. Taking in a fair number of my suggestions. Thank you for “listening”. Best wishes. Hope the app fulfils all that you intended.

You’ve achieved a lot. A whole lot. Now it’s up to the world to :

  1. Become aware of the tool - i.e. marketing
  2. Appreciate the need of it and value of it - this is the knowledge bit.
  3. Learn how to use it

Seriously, a very good start, and I wish both of you well.