Yaaas. My style is either understatement or overstatement (unless in a “review”). With analog like Loki, I can choose to apply EQ AFTER the MQA rendering from the Dragonfly or xDSD. I have toyed with the Roon EQ, but it doesn’t have selections that fit my particular headphones. Or even my headphones that aren’t very particular.
A most interesting lecture. Learn something every day. I had never considered pad flap or whatever he calls it. I figured that pads are more of function of how much head sweat I wanted to induce rather than anything sonic (other than the dripping of sweat into my ear, usually stemmed by a barrier of ear hair in the past decade). Now there may be a reason to try pads or rich, crushed velour instead of Corinthian Leather. Or dime-store pleather.
1 Like
I really appreciate your comments. Until recently I was closed minded about EQ, but this makes sense. I’m still trying to absorb it all, so correct me if this is wrong. My understanding is that the Harmon Response Curve is an un-occluded measurement of the sound at the eardrum level. This method would be what some audiologists use to measure the output of hearing aids. The measurement is usually done with and without the HAs. So, if one could get an un-occluded measurement of their own ear (maybe because they are friends with an audiologist), and use Metal571’s method you would be closer to a neutral sound for me than using the Harmon Response Curve. My understanding is that each person’s response curve can vary quite a bit.
2 Likes
An astute first post. The real question here is - are you friends with an audiologist?
Welcome.
1 Like
I am indeed! I feel some experimenting in the near future. I just ordered my first real pair of headphones (Focal Elear with free Utopia Pads). My head is spinning trying to figure what I should pair it with. I’m very excited though!
1 Like
Welcome! And I’m glad you found my comments helpful. And yeah, I do believe if you can get a personalized measurement of your own ears, particularly the ear canal resonances as similar to that in David Griesinger lecture video, you could tune your own personalized EQ.
But here’s what this all boils down to–just because you can technically figure out how to use EQ to tune to “neutral”, that doesn’t necessarily mean the result will be YOUR preferred listening curve. I think the fun of adding EQ and other “coloration” devices like tube amps is that you are tweaking sound output to be whatever is pleasing and enjoyable to you. I liken it to shooting in RAW with DSLR cameras. It is great to have the most natural, unadulterated version of the image. But if I am going to print this image for framing in my house then I am absolutely going to edit the hell out of it to make it look however I want in order for it to be aesthetically pleasing to my own eyes.
2 Likes
Maybe I’m too simple, or maybe I’m from the generation that likes to twirl knobs and push levers. I’ve tried some of the software EQ, but generally find it fiddly. I’m not using measurements to tell my ears what the Harmon-Schmarmon curve thinks they want to hear. (I enjoy being obtuse). When I want to meddle with the sound, I like to add the Schiit Loki into the chain and twist a control knob.
I know it’s not a graphic or parry-metric EQ. But I can usually get the sound I want in a few seconds. And since I often switch from one recording to another, all the engineering choices somebody else made change too. The Loki’s leftmost bass knob usually does all the tweaking I need for bass, and the rightmost treble is usually enough for the small adjustments to treble that I want. Usually not due to the headphone, but to the recording engineer who miked the cymbals poorly.
3 Likes
I don’t see the two as mutually exclusive. You use the Loki for tone control to flavor the music to taste. I see digital parametric EQ as a mechanism for headphone correction, which is to say fixing what I find to be flaws in the frequency response of specific headphones, speakers, rooms, etc.
2 Likes
Okay let’s back up the taco truck for a minute 
. I hear what you’re saying , but I’m not sold on the preference part. I’m going to do an Equal Loudness test and see how it sounds post EQ. I may have a different opinion afterwards. I’m sure there is a margin of error (both in the accuracy of the curve and EQ) and some fine tuning may be necessary, but having a trained ear would also be important. I don’t subscribe to the idea that I should color the sound to my preference. I want to listen to the music as the artist intended. If they truly are an artist then it was recorded that way on purpose and there is intent behind it. The artist is trying to capture something besides just making aesthetically pleasing music. In fact there may be times the intent is not to be aesthetically pleasing. (Radiohead comes to mind) I want to experience that. It should better inform me of the conceptual idea the artist is wanting to get across. I do now acknowledge that EQ is necessary for headphone use. So far you have a partial convert out of me 
1 Like
Agreed. But EQ corrects 1Khz sine waves, pink or white noise, all of which I have on vinyl and CD by the usual performing artists (O’ Sillator, Square Waveman van Gogh, and the ancient Blonder Tongue, with a guest appearance by 2 Ning Forrik).
Yes, you can dial in a correction for a specific headphone, and make it sound like another (ideal) headphone. But such things rarely survive contact with the enemy, small children, or Phil Spector.
2 Likes
I can’t say I think EQ is necessary for headphone listening, any more than one HAS to get into extensive room treatments and software-correction for speakers-based listening.
This notion of “getting closer to the artist’s intent” is mostly nonsense unless you were there during the recording, mixing and mastering anyway. Especially with electronic music. You simply do not know what the original sound was, nor where the artist or engineer was going.
EQ is a much better way to make specific adjustments, be that to-taste or towards measurably-neutral response, than fapping-about trying achieve “EQ with component matching” … but to get to “what the artist intended” has so much presumption and non-data behind it as to be meaningless.
If you’re pursuing anything other than “the sound YOU like best”, regardless of WHY you like it, then you’re wasting your time and money in purist pursuits in what should be about enjoyment.
10 Likes
This! EQ should just be about yourself…as “your” EQ is subjective…I like messing with EQ on occasion, hence my desire for the ADI-2DAC (and the pretty display…ok mostly the display)…but I think I would be more inclined to use the Schiit Loki, but it would be less useful for creating EQ sets to easily go back to…everything has a give and take/pros and cons…
But ultimately I like listening to stock headphones…because that is how the engineers designed them 
too soon? Too much? Too real? Lol sorry, not sorry…I have multiple headphones due to what they are capable of or their unique signature etc.
But EQ is a very powerful tool to dial your preferred headphones even closer to “your” preference =) have fun with it!
4 Likes
This is always the classic argument for “neutrality”. I get that. And that is a perfectly fine reason for trying out EQ. But as @Torq said, “You simply do not know what the original sound was, nor where the artist or engineer was going.” Let me give you an example from a visual example. Imagine there is a painting you love. But later you find out that the artist is red/green colorblind. If you are not also red/green colorblind, you are absolutely NOT seeing the work of art the same way the artist does or “intended”. Just as in this example, it could be that the sound engineer of the track you like has no hearing above 14 kHz, but you can hear up to 17 kHz. How do you reconcile that?
That is the basis for why I just don’t go crazy seeking “neutrality” and trying to believe I am doing everything possible to match what the artist intended. In the end, I just don’t think it is possible. I use EQ because I tend to enjoy a little extra bass sometimes, or other times my hearing gets sensitive to treble so it helps to EQ that down to minimize fatigue. That may not be for everyone, and that’s ok too.
8 Likes
I have a similar perspective – there are genuine human perceptual plateaus, but audiophiles sometimes get lost in fantasy worlds about intent and authenticity. Neutrality doesn’t really mean much.
I developed this view after starting to play guitar several years back, as I CANNOT FULLY CONTROL MY OWN TONE, AND I TRANSFORM TONE WITH MINUTE ADJUSTMENTS.
I have electric guitars with about 6 knobs and switches on the face, plus a pretty simple amplifier with 5 more. Turning these in combination changes ‘my intent’ subtly and sometimes in ways I myself cannot replicate. Furthermore, the tone changes (degrades) as the strings age, and I have many dozen varieties of strings to choose from – each producing a different tone. Then after that one must consider pick versus fingers, hand placement up or down strings, the type of pick, and the mood/sensitivity of the player. Etc.
Now, consider how many more hundreds of variables come into play with a large band, vocalist, recording facility, guitar effects, digital post-processing, and the choice of microphone type and placement. This is why music is an art rather than a science. This is why – in the commercial world – music productions are made on budget and with basic studio monitors. You can dwell on it or get it done, but there is no absolute end.
Feel free to use EQ if you enjoy it, but I personally only consider it for deeply deficient headphones and speakers. One’s ears will generally habituate to a good system after 15 minutes to an hour (it it doesn’t sound good after that, there may indeed be technical flaws).
4 Likes
I recently heard an interview with a recording engineer discussing his process. Basically, he creates a mix based on what he think will sound good, then gives it to the artist so they can listen to it on their own equipment and give feedback, then they work through the feedback and tweak the mix as needed. Frequently, artists listen to the draft mix on Apple Earpods because they know that’s what many of their customers will be using and they want to make sure it sounds good. So in a sense, a good way to hear “what the artist intended” is to listen with Earpods.
Yes! The irony of this is that conveying the emotion doesn’t require high fidelity. I remember being deeply moved by music even on cassette tape played by a cheap boombox.
I think that strictly EQing to a standardized target is a fool’s errand, both because people’s preferences differ and because equipment doesn’t account for individual variations in anatomy and hearing. As an example, oratory1990 has a set of EQ profiles based on industry standard measurements and the Harman target. Every time that I follow his profile exactly I’m disappointed by the result and sometimes find it worse than the stock tuning. However if I use his measurements as a data point for understanding what’s going on with the frequency response, it can provide useful input for my own custom EQ.
One of Apple’s early engineers, Jef Raskin, would have agreed with you. He disliked customizable UIs on the premise that users are not UX experts, so why should they build UIs when the experts can do it better? I think the same line of thinking can apply here, but with one key caveat - until recently, headphone designers did not have DSP available as a tool for tuning, so physical headphones might not always fully reflect the designer’s vision.
4 Likes
I use EQ for my personal taste only. However if people want to tinker then each to their own. As always much in music is subjective. I can see that using something like the Schiit Loki would be appealing to some (like me) as an easier solution to change the sound. Something about turning a knob or dial. 
. Equally I like to tinker with EQ just a little to get my gear to sound more pleasing to me and my tin ear.
4 Likes
I use an eq on my computer if I need to correct quirks with my earphones. It can also help if you’re into trying new things. I had increased the 3k energy on my E2000, since the 6k peak was way too high and needed to be balanced out. Once I’m on my computer, if you guys have Peace, I can share the eq files.
2 Likes
One thing I’ve noticed after embracing EQ is how much frequency response affects my perception of qualities like resolution and timbre. For example, when I think one headphone is less resolving than another, often bringing up the mid-range (vocals) will nullify that impression. It’s made me doubt a lot of my past impressions.
2 Likes