If you want to run software that’s a plug-in with Roon you have to:
Be using a computer as the end-point.
Direct Roon’s output it to the system output (or a virtual sound card).
Have some sort of audio routing/hi-jack software pickup that output (if it IS a virtual sound card, this is easy).
Have that software host and run the plug-in.
Direct that software to output to a physical connection on the computer directly connected to the DAC (USB, TOSLINK, COAX).
It can be done. It tends not to be as stable as native Roon. Depending on the precise software involved, it often requires manually remaking the software connections after a reboot. It can also result in you having to manually switch sample rates in various parts of your chain, again depending on the specific plug-in host, VSC and plug-ins.
In addition to sample-to-sample variation, I still don’t quite grasp the concept of some standardized EQ curve applied for a given headphone across many different listeners when the rest of the equipment, cables, power/EMI/RFI environment vary so widely, but most of all music genre and personal tastes!
This gets a bit off topic and maybe we can move this to a different discussion.
Some of what you’ve mentioned are very important variables to consider, even though I don’t think cables or RFI/EMI differences matter, certainly not for EQ situations, as whatever people believe about power and cables, at the very least this stuff doesn’t impact FR (unless you’re using an impedance adapter or something like that).
Perhaps the biggest variable though would be coupling and ear-related gain differences at the DRP (drum reference point). For this reason, it’s so important not to just slap a profile on and be done, you have to also listen and see if that works for you. I’ve mentioned this before but I think it bears repeating, what the phenomenon we describe as sound does in a given environment is all completely objective and can be reasonably understood in these terms, the big mystery is how that interacts with what’s going on between our ears - and this is the most important question.
People ask for profiles, and sure it can be helpful, but it’s mainly just to show the kinds of adjustments to make as a starting point. It’s like saying “these are the places I found important to adjust” to achieve a good balance between fundamental and harmonic. This is also why I recommend starting with profiles like the ones @Chrono has put together, since they’re often the less granular ones. Use as few filters as possible and don’t go crazy on narrow Q values. Most people don’t have the luxury of an industry standard measurement rig to test against. But the bottom line is that you gotta use your ears too.
Agree. After messing around with granular settings I can agree that it takes time for our ear/brain to get used to any sound, so that then can be a comparison to a different setup. I know my ears are most rested and I am more in tune to my music in the mornings - that’s now when I do most of my listening.
I think I would be a fan of DSP if and when it would have the ability to reduce the volume of the lead guitar by 6 db relative to the rest of the mix in order to correct for Neal Schon’s bloated ego.
Thanks to those who helped me figure out how to add a convolution filter to ROON. Easy-peasy lemon squeezy once I saw the steps. Only clunkiness is that unlike with the built-in Audeze filters, you need to select the proper convolution filter, 44.1 or 48 K based on the content you’re playing.
I see that the convolution filter on My Mac took the processing speed multiple from high 80s to about 50x. The ROON convolution filter was one of the most transparent bits of EQ I’ve experienced, which doesn’t mean I’m loving it so far. Just tried it with the Rosson RAD-0, and it makes them sound like they’re tuned to Harman target. Which is slightly weird, as I was used to the RAD-0 just as they are. And I’m thinking very much that they don’t need this EQ.
If you put the two filter files (44.1 and 48 kHz) for a given filter in a .ZIP file, and install that instead of the individual impulse response files (usually .WAV), Roon will automatically choose the correct filter for the sample rate being played.
Question on the Mac - I’ve been finding filters at phones.killdozer.uk and downloading what are shown to be zip archive files. When I bring them to the Mac, they show up as a folder with no extension and with 2 wav files in them about 19 or 20K each.
If I add the extension.zip to the folder using the INFO from the finder window, then ROON will see the archive as a folder with two wav files.
If I compress the folder, then it takes on the zip archive icon, and Roon sees the folder, and it is only about 5K
Is this correct?
Somehow two days ago I was doing this and I got what appears to be an uncompressed zip archive (I know that’s a possibility) for the RAD-0 filters which appears to work.
Is this preferable? and if so what the F did I do to get the uncompressed zip? (I used to use PKZip on DOS which I don’t have now, and Stuffit Deluxe on Mac, which I also don’t have now, just using the OS).
Thanks in advance for helping this nitwit Christmas elf.
LATER NOTE: I did just pick up a utility that will let me make a ZIP archive while applying no compression.
Sounds like your Mac or your web browser is uncompressing the .zip automajically somewhere along the line. When I click the download link on that site on my Mac with Safari, I get a .zip file.
So you are correct in that for best results, create a .zip file from the folder. Or figure out how to download the .zip without it getting decompressed. Or find the original .zip download as it is unlikely your Mac deleted it. Pro tip: I often sort my Downloads folder with most recent at the top. If so, the original .zip file may appear further down the list as it could be using the datetime the original .zip was created and not when the download occurred.
Don’t worry about using Zip compression, it is not lossy like MP3.
EDIT: Also I’m noticing that these convolution filters are created from AutoEQ. That means an algorithm decided what filters to apply. I have not really liked any of the AutoEQ generated presets. YMMV
Thanks - which ones do you suggest? This is the site that ROON suggested. I can go to the jack ones also.
I do not know what Safari is doing - whatever it is it’s automatic. I’m on Ventura 13.1, and I can’t find any way to manipulate the settings. It appears that ROON is looking for the physical .ZIP extension. I would anticipate that it is probably able to automatically select and work with the compressed files.
I think you are correct that when I"m downloading it’s going to an unzipped folder. I couldn’t find any original zip from the download, nor am I able to find any hidden file settings. Sometimes the Mac is just too damn smart.
I’ve added BetterZip 5 so that I now have more control over the archive process. I have been around the archive block generally. Did you notice the size of the original ZIP files? Maybe 5-6K? Thanks again for the suggestions. I do keep Downloads in chronological order, usually.
Safari → Preferences. In the “General” tab, uncheck “Open ‘safe’ files after downloading”. This will stop Safari from automatically unzipping the files.
Alternatively, hold the Alt key when you click the download.
Thank you. I have been using Opera for most of my browsing on Windows and a fair amount on Mac. Recently it’s not been keeping up so I’m using Safari on Mac much more (and Edge on Win). Apple’s help index could be a bit more comprehensive…
Merry Christmas. Happy Festivus. Best wishes for the season.
So to be CLEAR, the ONLY known repository of convolution filters is the one found at https://phones.killdozer.uk which are generated from AutoEQ.
You and @Torq appear to differ on the benefits of convolution vs PEQ. While some say that PEQ will introduce a phase difference it is uncertain that this will be heard. The advantage of PEQ is a.) low overhead and b.) the ability to tweak and actually use the exact Oratory1990 data as a base. The advantage of the Convolution set is that they will NOT introduce a phase difference (the tradeoff is a bit more compute time and latency).
Further, some are not happy with the automated choices generated in the AutoEQ project.
QUESTION: I may have missed this, but is there software readily available at the undergrad level for generating 44.1 and 48K convolution profiles suitable for ROON from the PEQ data and from any custom or individual tweaks that the user may desire?
PEQ can be done minimum or linear phase. Depends on the software doing the PEQ.
Roon’s PEQ is minimum phase.
Convolution filters make it easier to do a larger number of corrections. Usually those are computer by something like REW. You could do them with PEQ, you’d just have a lot of setup to do.
I didn’t go into what Oratory1990 says about that claim because I tend to avoid Reddit. That’s why I said “Some” because I’ve seen that information in many places, including @Torq who said that he could do an entire thread on people who misuse EQ, and I infer by people who voice loud opinions based either on other people’s opinions or their own misuse (and presumably tin ears). This most certainly does not include you or @AudioTool (even though he is a bass-head that worships at the Church of the Harman Target, he’s aware of his biases).
Me, I’ve downloaded the convolution EQ files and have put in the Oratory1990 PEQ filter recommendation for my RAD-0 and will listen for myself. And I expect that I will not hear much of a difference, and that I will prefer the RAD-0 without EQ, but who knows, I haven’t done it yet.
I see in ROON a drop down to chose precise or relaxed, minimum or linear phase. I’ve chosen precise, linear as a start. This is under Sample Rate Conversion, I don’t know if it apples to PEQ.
Right on - I was just making conversation more than anything. I do believe oratory recommends minimum phase for PEQ for headphones, and only using linear phase when mixing and mastering. But like you said, compare them and see which you like. I fully admit Audeze’s linear phase Reveal+ setting for my LCD-X 2021 is pretty cool sounding; I prefer the minimum phase one, but it’s great to have both options.
As for PEQ vs Convolution Filters, again, probably just go with what you think sounds best. Just know, the target for the CF might not work for your preferences or your HRTF.
The nice things about Roon or Equalizer APO/Peace’s PEQ is that they’re already minimum phase and, if you know what you’re doing, you can EQ to your own target or HRTF by ear. My HRTF seems to move peaks that show up in measurements slightly up the FR depending on the seal/headphone itself; so, while using measurements can be helpful, anything after the ear gain region isn’t fully reliable.
I personally think the Harman OE target is slightly shouty and also thin sounding in the mids. My personal target would be flat from 1KHz down to roughly 250-200 Hz, at which point the low shelf would kick in; I’d also drop 3-3.5KHz by 2-3 dB. So, figuring out your personal preference/target is key prior to trying to EQ manually in my opinion. Even then, manually EQing can be difficult.