Since we’ve been discussing what EQ can or cannot do for a while and we have two camps of EQ optimists and EQ skeptics here, I would like to suggest a fun game in this thread.
The rules are simple. A requestor posts a headphone and what characteristics they want to be dialed in with EQ. The EQers reply with the EQ settings that to their ears add those characteristics, and suggest further EQ adjustments. Then whoever tries these EQ settings share their impressions and further tweaks that worked for them.
This is different from the typical tuning to the Harman or any other coarse-grained target, as we want to explore subjective properties of sound profile here.
Sure this has reasonable limitations. E.g. a request like “HD6xx with Harman bass shelf” is prone to fail upfront due to the harmonic distortion. So let’s try to be reasonable with our requests. And since we know that HRTF varies from person to person, what works for one’s ears is not necessarily going to work for another person’s ears. Plus the pad wear difference. However, I believe that with some clues on frequency bands to adjust further more people will be able to reproduce the effect at least to some extent.
Here are a couple example requests to get us started:
HD6XX/HD650 sound stage enhancement. This is the headphone that many us of are likely to have around, and it is famous for its very intimate and 3-blob presentation. Try to increase the stage width, depth or continuous “circularity” if you can.
Focal Clear to Utopia tuning. As a Clear owner, I’m quite curious about this one. I don’t have an Utopia to compare, but still would be interesting to hear and describe the differences.
I’m pretty sure we can learn a lot from this exercise and have a lot of fun!
Interesting idea. I hope people who believe it is impossible could just leave this thread alone and let us do whatever
@MrSehrKalt if you could give some specific song sections that demonstrates the qualities you want to enhance, that would make the comparisons between EQ a bit more consistent perhaps.
On a related note, there are some extremely helpful EQ training programs out there such as Harman’s learn to listen, or this amazing site: Audiodrillz
I don’t have much in terms of specific requests or suggestions, as I have the HD600 and many other headphones, and I haven’t been able to EQ any stage width in. Perhaps for music with more stereo bass content… I think for those, simply having more bass helped.
This one I think would be more easy to do for other people, but the Clear/Utopia one would probably require the in-situ response to get them to sound identical. I’ve no idea how some of those fine-grained features would propagate for different people, like specifically above 3khz.
Given the variation in behavior across listeners, to say nothing of the issues of acoustic impedance and leakage effects from closed back headphones, I’m not sure how close you could get for someone else with most headphones. So for example, because I wear glasses, when I measure headphones on my head, I get meaningfully less bass for many headphones compared to what the rig shows, and consequently would need a different EQ from someone who doesn’t wear glasses - you get the idea.
But I actually think a better option here might be to say… create sound demos of different headphones, calibrated to the specific playback equipment a person has. So say you have an HD6XX, we could do a sound demo of an HD800S, calibrated specifically for that headphone, and see if that gives you the soundstage effect. Obviously the FR at the eardrum won’t be the same, but I think it’d be possible to get close.
I am currently using FR matching to EQ my DT-770, and think its workin pretty well so far.
If you’re going to try to match the FR of one headphone on another, ideally you’d probably want to use plots made on the same rig, by the same grapher for the best consistency. And also try to mitigate as much loss in sound quality as possible, using some of the tips here…
I still have some doubts about whether this would really work in the way some might hope or want though. And I’m not sure you can really turn a proverbial sows ear into a silk purse with this method, mainly due to the limitations of EQ and headphone design.
Fwiw, here’s what the difference between the HD800S and HD6XX looks like using measurements made on two different HBK 5128 rigs, by different graphers…
The 800S appears to be more forward in the midrange than the 6XX. More depressed in the upper mids/low treble. And more sibilant around 6k, based on these two graphs.
I’d also remove the narrow band peaks and valleys with smoothing before using something like the above as an EQ/correction curve.
I’ve done this before, it’s actually a very popular method in the IEM world to “swap EQ” and mimic another set of headphones. The problem is that resonance frequencies in the 7khz-10khz range are different on the rig than on your ears, so a lot of the sonic “character” doesn’t translate well even if it’s the same measurement rig. Plus minor errors in measurement and unit variations all add up.
Another way to put the headphones on an even playing field (but unfortunately not retaining all of its FR specifics) is to use a method like this one by JoeBloggs How to Equalize Your Headphones: 2016 update | Headphone Reviews and Discussion - Head-Fi.org Obviously all the links and software’s outdated, but this method definitely works. My friend and I have EQed headphones this way and got them to sound extremely similar, while removing a lot of the inherent character of those same headphones and swapping them for our own preference instead.
Our experiments so far on about 10 pairs of different over head headphones is that EQing this way timbre is affected by about 80-95%, sound stage to 20-30%, “dynamics and punch” 60%, imaging 20-40%. Of course every headphone is physically limited by bass and treble extension and distortions at the low end, so there’s no way to match them exactly at the extreme ends of the FR.
Unfortunately I don’t have any good suggestions for transporting the sonic signature from one headphone to another other than what @ADU suggested, it’s about as good as it gets today and IMO it’s a bit of fun that doesn’t work well enough to make a Sennheiser sound like a Hifiman. What you can do is JoeBloggs it and make headphone 1 sound pretty much just like headphone 2, but neither will sound like stock.
Nice idea and I would love to participate. However, I’ll do that as a observer, since I’m pretty sure that I’m one of the very few having a (fantastic) RME ADI-2 Pro FS R with „only“ 7 bands…
With all due respect, I’m not sure what you expect or even mean with „sound stage“, since we’re talking headphones… here a coincidentally very recent publication by Listener:
In general I do have some tips, and I would very much appreciate you guys’ tips and tricks and whatever worked for you! If you don’t find the following suits your own preference, great! Post your own. I’m not you, you’re not me, we own different headphones.
It is said that a lot of spatial information is in the 1800hz - 2200hz range. A lot of “wide sound stage” headphones have a small 2db or so dip at Q3 or 4 in that region. On the other hand, some people believe that making that region louder helped them feel more of the of this sound stage effect. Best if you try both and see if you hear any difference either way. Personally speaking, I think a small 1-2db recessed energy (from Harman curve) from 1800hz to 4500hz worked best for me. Since that’s where most of the ear gain hump is, slightly recessed in that area means slightly elevated (by comparison) treble and lower mids. Your mileage will vary!
As for “punch” or some call it “tactility”, I found better results by first EQing the 20-200hz region to taste first. Use your favorite tracks that actually has bass and sub bass for this. After that, some headphones still don’t sound like there’s much oomph or punch, especially if you EQ to something like a Harman target. What I found helpful (and again, YMMV) is a 100hz Q 0.15 +1db filter. Tweak to your taste. But what I found is that a general sloped elevation from bass to about 2000hz doesn’t ruin your carefully EQed tonality, but it does provide a bit more warmth and impact for drums than simply a rise in bass below 150hz for example.
As for “detail”, a small increase in the 6000hz-75000hz can really help. Try a Q3 filter or so and see how that feels.
All headphones have acoustic impedance and wave cancellation effects around the 7000-12000hz region. I’ve found that it helps a ton to meticulously even out that region for your own ears (you cannot rely on measurement graphs for this, your head isn’t the same as any rig). A simple treble shelf isn’t enough to correct for a lot of the idiosyncrasies of each individual headphone and how it interacts with your own ears. In fact, research has shown that above 12000hz, each ear can have different resonance too, so if you’re sensitive to sibilance, it’s particularly important to even the peaks of that region out (maybe even by L/R channel) before giving it a general curve or shape that you like to hear. Upper treble can give a sense of openness, clarity and space, but it’s very much an individual preference thing based on your age, your headphone’s original tuning, and how much time you’d like to spend to tame all the peaks in that region by EQ.
If you think I’m wrong, then you’re right! Post what worked best for you and I’ll give it a go and learn something on the way
I don’t have a 6XX either. And also not sure I’d want to tamper with its FR in quite this way.
Computing the difference in FR between two headphones in EAPO’s Config Editor (the EQ software I use) isn’t that difficult after you’ve made decent GEQ plots of the headphones you want to use.
Just throw the GEQ filters of the two headphones into a new project. And flip your headphone’s GEQ curve upside down with the invert response button.
Leave your target headphone’s GEQ curve as is (with no inversion). Save the project, and the Analysis Panel at the bottom should show the difference between the two. (Couple tips: make sure the “Start from:” setting in the Analysis panel is set to “Current file”, for the current project. And you’ll probaby also want to include a Preamp filter in the project to adjust/reduce the overall levels to avoid any clipping, which shows as red in the Analysis panel.) I wouldn’t really use the resulting curve as my EQ curve though, without going through some other machinations to smooth out the response, which is more difficult in EAPO’s Config Ed.
I think there are other EQ apps though, with these kinds of FR matching features already built in, that can probably do the same job with the touch of a few buttons.
Since I only use over-ears, we are probably working a bit at cross purposes. I don’t really have any magic formulas for achieving any of the above though with over-ears, other than simply to aim for a neutral response, with maybe a little Fletcher-Munson added if you listen at lower volumes. Many audiophiles prefer to listen at higher volumes though where Fletcher-Munson is less useful.
For best results, start with a headphone that’s already close to your target FR, with less distortion, and less modal breakup potential, and good extension in the bass and treble. Because large changes with EQ (especially at the ends of the audible FR range) just don’t work as well.
There are also some good reasons why you might prefer more or less upper mids to get better imaging, detail, soundstage, or whatever for different recordings. But I think that’s mostly related to the way the content is mixed, mastered, and produced. And probably not much more.
Most good pro audio mixing boards have EQ’s to control the levels in the upper mids at around 2 or 2.5 kHz, because this is where the phantom center on stereo speakers can drop out. And it’s where the midrange and tweeter drivers on speakers tend to cross over.
Since headphones don’t suffer the same issues, a mix or recording that’s been crafted to compensate for these flaws in speakers might tend to sound more hot or strident on headphones that do not have a similar type of flaw or “BBC dip” in the same frequency range.
Beyond that, I dunno. I have my own model for neutral (DF+SP) that I prefer, that is rooted in the Harman research, but also takes it a few steps further imo. I believe the best model though is the in-ear response of good speakers in a semi-reflective room. And there are certainly some ways you can experiment with getting close to that using mics in your ears, or maybe doing other kinds of listening tests to tune your headphones.
There are also some good reasons why audiophiles or enthusiasts in different age brackets might prefer more or less ear gain at around 3 to 4 kHz. And this could also relate in some ways to how the content is produced, mixed and mastered.
Older men generally suffer from more hearing loss in this range than younger men. Which means the older men might tend to prefer a little more ear gain vs. their younger counterparts. I don’t generally recommend using headphones to compensate for this type of hearing loss though.
Older audio producers and engineers can also suffer from this same type of affliction though, which could also potentially translate to more emphasis in the ear gain region in their mixes/recordings (esp. if their gear is neutrally tuned).
I love this thread idea; I was thinking of something similar over the weekend.
Here’s my proposal: Make the Drop/Sennheiser 8xx into a Sennheiser HD 800S. I own both. The former I don’t like very much except plugged into my receiver using its phono stage and my old cartridge, the sum of which produced a pretty forward, bright sound that the 8xx tamped down a bit. But the 800S of course is a justifiably legendary headphone.
Anyhow, I’ve tried to EQ the 8xx into the 800S. I couldn’t get it to work. That’s not to say no one could. I suspect someone could. Give it a go!
Can you say more about this? Why would you not recommend it?
I have a bit of measurable hearing loss from 2-4 kHz. I don’t try to EQ for it, and I also don’t have any preference for headphones with more ear gain. (One of my faves is the Audeze LCD-3, which basically has zip.) But I’ve nothing against it either and I would imagine for some it’s a solution. So I’m interested in your thoughts.
Well you’re lucky, it sounds like this challenge is something you might just be able to complete because you have both and you could A/B it.
First I would like to ask you to describe the difference between the 2 headphones are FR wise. Then maybe describe certain passages of certain songs and what particular differences you hear. And finally if you want to have a better chance of succeeding, get really good at understanding which frequency feature does what and what it sounds like. There are some really good training tools like Harman Learn to Listen or this online version: Audiodrillz
Above 6000hz your own ears don’t hear quite the same as a rig, but fortunately it seem like both of the headphones are very similar in that area.
The following suggestions are purely based on the graphs of unknown test methods, with unit variations (they have 3 different measurements for the 800s which are all a few db off of each other) and not your own headphones/ears, but give it a go if you’d like!
Applying the above EQ to the 8XX gets us really close to the average of the 800S graphs they have. But you’re never gonna get it exactly right due to unit variations and what your own ears actually hear.
I haven’t read much about the 8xx, just looking at the graph, it seems like the stock tuning is a bit muddy, veiled for vocals, might sound really grand and spacious for classical, with a pronounced and airy treble? Interesting headphones.
Hi, and thanks so much for these thoughtful replies. I am currently separated from the 8xx, and I had prepared papers to file for a divorce . . . LOL, I tried to sell it but nobody was interested in what I thought was a reasonable price. Anyway the 8xx is at the moment at another location, but I’ll be able to retrieve it in a few days, and I will give this a go! Cheers
That’s basically right, minus the “grand and spacious for classical.” The best one-word descriptor for it is “mistake.” It’s got too much upper bass (and would benefit from more sub-bass), and that massive 2k suckout is just wrong – maybe even 10 dB wrong. So that’s what I looked at the last time I tried EQ.
OK, here’s another: Sennheiser HD660S2 vs. Focal Utopia. Shouldn’t be too hard to make them the same, no? Maybe some micro adjustments between 1.5-6kHz. But it looks as if there’s hardly any difference.
. It is supposed to be a subjective challenge just to try different EQ settings and share impressions.
Maybe some micro adjustments between 1.5-6kHz. But it looks as if there’s hardly any difference.
