i did send off his comments to kef, audeze and schiit for their ops/feedback.
i’d like to think these companies don’t put out crap products or solutions
that are gimmicky (not like they’re selling to the masses)
his final reply: _’'Equalization is NOT a new concept _
_It is the law of physics. Wake up buddy there is is no free room equalization. _
_This is just a gimmick _
Anytime you mess with one frequency it screws up another … it is for suckers’’
He’s wrong, though, anyway. In the digital domain you absolutely CAN affect a single frequency, without adjusting any others, if you wanted to. We don’t, in general, because it’s not very useful and what you almost always want is a graduated ranged of effect around a center frequency.
Regardless, essentially every studio album ever has massive amounts of EQ, and other processing, applied all over the place …
It’s the same with room treatments (bass-traps and so on) though. In most cases they’re actually quite a bit LESS precise than DSP (sometimes grossly so). They’re preferred by a lot of “purist” types simply a) because they’re not in the signal chain and b) sometimes they can address issues that are harder to do in DSP (i.e. would drive up the cost too much).
DSP can address a lot more than just equalization.
At the end of the day, the only way to avoid these issues entirely is to build an acoustically inert room and couple it with a (non-existent) perfect speaker.
Your friend reminds me of Don Quixote.
And this is a very common position/attitude among people that have “very expensive” audio systems. Which is a shame, because expensive is highly relative (his $70K speaker system is less expensive than my primary headphone rig).
At the end of the day, there isn’t much that’s more annoying than someone telling you how to spend your money or what you should, or shouldn’t like. The best way to piss away very large sums of money in audio is to spend any time at all worrying about what anyone else likes.
If you like your music run through a cheap 1980s graphic equalizer, with a massive U-shaped profile, more power to you! That’s no more wrong than it is correct as long as the person writing the check and listening to the music is happy.
I wish I could find the reference, and sadly I don’t have any to measure myself, but my recollection is that the Cipher DSP applies fairly radical adjustments to the iSine, much more extreme than what Reveal does for the LCD series.
I also think that combining DSP with headphones is the future and I’m happy to see Audeze take a leading role here.
The more that I mess with EQ, the more I realize that subtle can go a long way. The LCD2C is a pretty fine sounding headphone in stock form, so it’s not surprising that Audeze doesn’t feel the need to go crazy with Reveal. Push it too far and you end up creating a totally different sounding headphone, which becomes a tricky marketing proposition–hey, spend $800 bucks on these headphones that we don’t actually think sound great, but here’s some free DSP to fix them 
totally agree Torq…he believes stereophile is the holy grail of audio
(to him both resale value and stereophile grade A+ hugely influence his buying decisions)
so i just sent to him an article from one of their reviewers who liked one of the older DSP systems
(from 2014).
my retort to him:
‘’ It’s not just about dsp for EQ…it’s also about room correction.
_Yeah I know this might be hard for you to realize…. from your beloved Stereophile that is the be all and end all for you…feel free to have a read (bottom link)._even of their reviewers liked a DSP room correction system (god forbid!)
sure the article is a few yrs old…but probably even more refined systems are out there now, too, no doubt.
_Also Just because your buddy had a bad experience with and $$$ dsp 10k system doesn’t mean you should then use that as a reference for all DSP implementations
_imo The middle ground is in using both dsp and room treatments (bass traps, diffusers etc)
_ _
excerpt:
‘’ Dirac’s Live Room Correction Suite has hooked me. Yes, it’s limited to 24-bit/96kHz PCM resolution (24/192 is promised), but no matter. More experiments, comparisons, and independent measurements will follow—but for now, Dirac LRCS has made me confident that file-based multichannel playback can sound as good as any from physical discs—and maybe even better.
Do not engage with someone who is so firmly ideological. This person has turned a process into a goal. Continuing will only lead to stress and discord.
Audio is well understood by this point, with decades of research and development into what works and what doesn’t work. It’s easy to perform A/B tests and blind tests to evaluate whether a difference really matters. Similarly, research on biology and perception has considered what’s even possible for humans to detect. Finally, anyone with basic experience in music performance and production (Pro Audio) knows that small changes upstream can greatly affect the end product. So, seeking perfect reproduction [or improvement] with esoteric $$$$$$$ audiophile gear is as meaningful as collecting fairy dust and unicorn tears.
For a critical, honest evaluator there’s nothing more to do.
Do not engage with someone who is so firmly ideological. This person has turned a process into a goal. Continuing will only lead to stress and discord.
thanks, bud…i wholly agree…this is one of the reasons i don’t hang out much with this dude and often rebuff his requests to do so.
another article i’ll send to him if he bugs me again:
from his beloved stereophile, too:
‘’ I have heard the future, and the sound is wonderful.
— Peter W. Mitchell
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/i-have-heard-futuredsp-room-acoustics-correction-page-2#VgARCKJVXEFAIs4h.99
hey gang:
quello is having discounts for their concerts.
25% or 50% off.
i enjoy watching/listening with my big ass 65’’ oled tv:
use optical out to chord mojo then to my iems/or cans.
I have removed all the walls from my room. I raised the ceiling to infinity, and then took out the floor. It’s much better now.
Help! I'm f
a
l
l
i
n
g
.
.Lately, I’ve tried to make EQ work with headphones’ natural frequency response rather than against it. The LCD2C is characterized by articulate but not particularly loud bass, full sweet mids that render fairly forward and euphonic vocals, recessed upper mids and low treble that make for an easy listening experience, and an overall dark upper treble response. Although they get a lot of flack for their ratings, I think Rtings frequency response graph of the LCD2C fairly accurately represents how I hear it.
Although I like the general idea, I think the stock tuning takes a good thing too far, so here’s an EQ profile that dials things back a bit while preserving the general shape. It also takes into account the fact that the LCD2C suffers from some driver variation from model to model that manifests itself in the treble, so it mostly avoids narrow adjustments. Because of this, it should theoretically yield similar results on other people’s LCD2C’s (and I’d love some feedback on how it sounds to them).
Note - graph uses MiniDSP E.A.R.S.’ Harman-like HEQ compensation
Well, it’s time for a new round of LCD2C eq! This EQ aims to keep some of the LCD2C’s stock sound (slightly forward midrange, overall dark treble, great extension on both ends) while fixing some of its problems (too forward around 1KHz, not quite enough sub-bass, uneven and at times bright treble). Unlike my past settings that were heavily influenced by my MiniDSP E.A.R.S., these are based on professional measurements (and of course listening). I’m running these settings on PulseEffects on Linux using linear phase filters, listening at around 65-70 dB SPL(A), and I’m loving them. They really allow the LCD2C’s best qualities to shine through without being hampered by the odd stock tuning. These settings work particularly well with crossfeed with a 650 Hz cutoff and 6.5dB feed level.
If I’m still running these settings after a month I might do a review of this EQ’d LCD2C.
Well, I sold my LCD2C, so I guess I didn’t make it through a whole month with these settings 
I sold mine a few months back…instant jaw pain was the main reason…
What’s your main now?
HD58X with felt mod and heavily eq’d and crossfed KZ ZS10 Pro. Honestly except for the downside of not loving having stuff in my ears, the EQd ZS10 Pro sounds as good as anything I’ve ever tried. I use it with an LG V20 and I’ve ordered a second one to use as a dedicated DAP. I’ll root it and apply system wide EQ and crossfeed.
NB the ZS10 pro without EQ sounds fine but it wouldn’t be my top pick.
Edit - Forgot to mention the AKG K371. I use that at my desk with a moderate amount of EQ. Sounds quite good without EQ too. Great sub bass extension, good detail and passable tonality/timbre. A bit thin and metallic, but that’s Harman tuning for ya.
Never understood why EQ is taboo subject. I’ve noticed balanced/netural headphones are easier to tweak, The ER4SR only needs a bass boost. A 6db low shelf at 200Hz is enough to give it a fullness while keeping the same quality as the stock sound. Which makes me highly doubt multi driver configs that need 1 or 2 bass drivers for a +6db boost and the THD for the SR in bass area is 0.35%?.
I’ve become a big fan of EQ. They really add life in the right spots to my LCD3 and Focal Stellia. Torq showed me to the Schiit Loki and it’s been great for EQ.
Reviving this old thread - part of the changed landscape since 2019 is the ability to run Apple Music lossless at full quality (up to 192khz) from my Mac Mini M1 to my Sonnet Hermes streamer (via ropieeeXL - Shairport-Sync for Airplay). I started playing with the inherent opportunities to use audio effects (via SoundSource - now also runs on Mac OS 12 Beta).
This led to a rediscovery of the pleasure and superiority (vs. Roon) of running the DMG EQuilibrium equalizer. The smoothness achievable with a 10 point parametric EQ, vintage EQ simulation (e.g. try 110, 550) and FIR/Analogue phase/262k impulse/x8 padding/Kaiser/window=50 is amazing.
As I am waiting like the rest of the planet for the Stax SRX9k), I had been pondering selling my Raal rig. No more - this tweak makes enough of a difference to address my complaints about the SR1a, esp. listening fatigue after some hours. The Raal SR1a gains some of the “liquid coherence” esp. in the mids that I like best about the Susvara. At the same time, highs are very well balanced - they sparkle without being harsh.
Both Equilibrium (DMG) and SoundSource (Rogue Amoeba) have trial versions - I would encourage you to give this a try if you are on a Mac. Use e.g. AutoEQ curves for your headphones as a starting point.
Observations mostly based on Apple Music → Sound Source (Equilibrium) → (AirPlay, ropieeeXL) Sonnet Hermes → (I2s) Metrum Adagio (DAC3) → Ayon Spheris III → Raal HSA-1a → SR1a.
