Getting used to it - the benefits of owning multiple headphones

Headphones General Headphone Discussion
142

I’m not sure about the Verum 2, but the E3 has a notable bass boost. At that level it may product harmonic distortion issues on an HD 650 (HD 600 seemed to perform better). So can I get it to have full bass extension like a typical planar without introducing meaningful distortion issues? Yes. But can I boost the bass to the high heavens and give it a substantial bass BOOST without distortion issues, that’s where things get a bit more dicey.

As said before, the drivers do matter for their characteristics, and this is one instance where you are going to be limited by harmonic distortion.

143

Well, give it some time. Maybe we do maybe we don’t. I don’t think you’ll change your mind regardless.

144

Getting back to the LCD-2 closed back that I’ve tossed into the mix, the review was here:

I will note that I didn’t list the specific file, and that it was on TIDAL MQA at the time, decoded through the iFi xDSD. Which had Burr-Browns and no artifacts. And the LCD-2 was a true merde. @Resolve you posted a review just before and Mr.Photography/headphonesrevew did after.

145

I hated the LCD-2 Closed personally. I remember testing it ages ago and found it to be only good at double kick bass but nothing else.

146

image

1 Like
147

Look, it’s not ton-gen EQ that is the problem. It’s the exclusivity claim. And it’s the techno-reliance on graphs, charts and profiles which is a real sop to newbie users who just want you to give them a profile for their Chi-fi - Planinum-framistan Headphone du jour.

That kind of interaction isn’t what builds community.

And I really think you skip over with glazed eyes the references that @generic makes to perception science. This is a real and highly relevant field.

The question that should be posed - if you want the forum to be relevant is how do you make it better?
Part is attitude. Part is training new users. Part is software.

When people come here from the Discord, they seem unable to use the scroll bars. Or the search function. Maybe you should curate some good posts. I think it would be a more productive use of time.

1 Like
148

image

image0
image01920×1175 242 KB

1 Like
149

Yeah descriptions of these ‘technicalities’ categories is a thing I did when I started reviewing, which was back before I knew how to properly correlated and interpret those qualities. In fact this whole thread has been a nice trip down memory lane of perspectives I haven’t held for years.

But with that said, looking at my descriptions, the issue was how the tone came across. The mistake was in the parsing of it in terms of two distinct categories of evaluation.

Just to show the rest of the context:

image
image1220×523 89.2 KB

1 Like
150

Do you not know the technical term merde? The LCD-2 Closed back is a merde.

1 Like
151

What’s the exclusivity claim? Also, we do not generally recommend using EQ profiles. We’re suggesting doing it yourself.

It is. The things he’s saying in reference to it though don’t seem to address this particular discussion. It’s like if I were to say “here’s how cars work”, and someone were to come in and say “No! People drive them!” - it’s like yeah… okay.

It’s a good question. I think there’s lots we can do to improve the forum, both visually and in terms of signal to noise ratio. We’ll probably do some things in the coming year to help with that.

3 Likes
152

French for doo doo! Or did you mean something else?

153

You got it. 20 characters.

1 Like
154

Does the fact that you have evolved in your understanding and now point out your earlier “mistake” not give you pause as to what you may understand five years from now?

The general tone of your earlier review is quite authoritative as you explain details of the sound to your audience.

I’d suggest you compare it to my review but that would be hilarious. Hopefully my review got someone to study the the Canterbury Tales rather than to waste time with the Audeze LCD-2 closed.

…. Or at least to study a ginne and tonick.

155

Yes, absolutely! I can only hope to look back on my current self with a similar “wow, was I sure wrong about that” perspective, because that’ll indicate I’ve learned things. I tend to think it’s good if we look back at our former selves and consider the ways in which our viewpoints have changed - I think that’s what learning and growth is all about.

You know… I’ve had occasion to look back at my previous reviews with a mind to consider that I wouldn’t feel the same if I evaluated those products today. And, while I’m sure some of them would be different, maybe I’d be harsher, for most of the ones I’ve had reason to look back at I’ve been able to reconcile the perspective. Obviously I don’t feel technicalities are separate categories of performance evaluation anymore, but even back then I left the door open to the possibility that what I was hearing as ‘detail’ or ‘speed’ etc., was down to FR at the eardrum.

These ‘technicalities’ effects we experience are still real, and we can communicate them. In the same way, a wine enthusiast communicates various characteristics about wine - stone fruits, freshly cut grass, apricot, honey, vanilla and so on. The difference is that very few wine enthusiasts are confused about the ingredients involved. Nobody thinks those things are actually in the wine (fruit wine notwithstanding). This is the confusion we’re dealing with in audio communities.

2 Likes
156

True.

This is why I favor EGD graphs with at least millisecond or better precision. I have to apologize to Resolve though on this, because I think the last time I mentioned it, I said 1 decibel precision by mistake.

EGD graphs are helpful for analyzing minimum phase behavior though imo. And I’d like to see more of em. Especially on the lower end headphones.

1 Like
157

Yeah and there’s the argument that at ultra high frequencies headphones aren’t strictly min phase, but at that high in frequency I’m not sure how perceptually relevant that’s going to be. Certainly something to look at but I always come back to there just being so much more delta between graph FR and in-situ FR, and it provides a far more obvious explanation for perceived differences.

158

Yes and no, I think.

I still hold the opinion this (personalization) is more important with IEMs than with lower acoustic impedance circumaural headphones that surround the ear and interact with most of the pinna.

I welcome further investigation of this topic though. And would like to see a new mannikin and pinna that measures closer to the human average.

1 Like
159

Decided to ask AI about applying EQ and its potential impact on distortion:
” Applying EQ to an audio signal can potentially cause unwanted distortion, but this is typically due to specific conditions rather than EQ itself being inherently damaging. In digital audio, properly implemented EQs operate with high precision using 32- or 64-bit floating-point processing, which maintains a high signal-to-noise ratio and minimizes distortion. However, excessive boosting of frequencies can increase the overall signal level, which may lead to clipping if the gain is pushed too high, resulting in digital distortion. This risk is particularly relevant when using EQ to boost levels significantly, as it can cause the signal to exceed the maximum allowable amplitude, especially in the final stages of mixing or mastering.

Additionally, while EQ does not add new frequencies (which is the core definition of nonlinear distortion), it can introduce phase shifts and group delay, especially in minimum-phase EQs commonly used in analog and digital systems. These phase-related effects can alter the harmonic balance and create audible artifacts, such as “phase smear,” which may be perceived as a loss of clarity or a change in timbre. Although these are not technically distortion in the traditional sense, they can degrade the perceived audio quality, particularly when multiple EQ stages are applied in sequence.

Some EQ plugins, particularly those with analog-mode emulation, can introduce intentional nonlinear distortion for creative purposes, but this is not typical in standard digital EQs when set to clean mode. Furthermore, poorly designed EQs—such as older or low-quality implementations—may produce jagged frequency responses or introduce artifacts, which can be considered unwanted linear distortion. For example, the iTunes EQ has been noted for not accurately translating smooth user interface curves into precise frequency responses.

In summary, EQ itself does not inherently distort audio, but improper use—such as excessive boosting, cascading multiple EQ stages, or using low-quality plugins—can lead to clipping, phase anomalies, or audible artifacts that degrade the sound. Therefore, it is recommended to use EQ judiciously, favor cutting unwanted frequencies before boosting, and keep adjustments within ±3 to 6 dB to maintain clarity and avoid distortion.”

160

Before commenting on the specifics here, it’s worth noting… AI will also recommend to you audiophile rocks if you ask it the right questions. Definitely not a good idea to use it to make a point or indicate a proof of anything.

But the specifics here to do with harmonic distortion are relevant for headphones, and improper use can lead to audible problems with certain headphones. With that said… this is not a reason to think that using EQ actually degrades the sound quality in any perceptible way most of the time. Since distortion is related to level, adding a massive bass boost to something with higher than average harmonic distortion may lead to problems. So you shouldn’t do that.

Regarding the group delay stuff, there may be certain scenarios where that occurs, but I can take any conventional headphone, EQ it, and the EGD won’t change. As in - you can plot this to see if there’s anything to worry about, and there isn’t.

1 Like
161

I posted the AI response mostly for fun, just to see how far off the mark it was. Most of what it responded as results are largely truthful. Reasonable people can disagree regarding the degree of impact the variations caused by EQ actually are.

My experience with EQ is mixed at bast. The Sonarworks app mostly helps out with sound, but I’ve run across some instances where the sound is not improved. I’ve also noticed that there indeed is latency when EQ is applied, and although the Sonarworks app does allow to change the impact on latency, the result sometimes is worse when EQ is applied. Now, add the fact that the EQ tools quality are all over the place, and it gets a bit murky to add EQ successfully.

What could be useful is a deeper dive into EQ. There are a lot of tools available, and the quality of the tools, and why the results vary widely. I maintain that applying EQ is not easy or straightforward to get it right.

The best tool I’ve found to apply EQ is add the EQ in PGGB, and use convolution settings. I’ve had some success with this method. There’s virtually no discussion about employing this method, My experience to date is that if one has the right values, it works quite well, even better than the Sonarworks app.