Jump to content
IGNORED

Massdrop Focal "Elex"


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, dalethorn said:

I would like to add for those who have the interest -- I EQ partly to compensate for obvious large deviations from "flat" in the frequency response, but from there my objective is NOT to bias anything for my hearing or "tastes", rather it's to achieve a natural sound just like I hear in the real world.  So whatever the quirks are in my hearing, they don't bias the EQ because my EQ'd sound is the same as what I hear live.

 

The reason I think this is so important is 1) I can hear the difference, and natural sound sounds OK to me, and 2) I believe all those other "fixes" have audiophiles chasing their tails trying to achieve something that's rarely if ever satisfactory.

 

I don't pretend that the house curve I use is somehow ideal, but it is commonly used. I start out by EQ'ing for a completely flat response, and then slowly, over time, tune it to the way I feel sounds best (most natural) to me with the music I prefer. The tweaks are rarely major, and always involve a simple tilt of the FR curve.

 

The tilt I seem to gravitate to mimics the behavior of natural sound at a distance (higher frequencies get absorbed more by air than lower ones). For example, a 20Hz sound coming from an instrument 20m away will be about 10dB louder than a 20KHz sound from the same distance. That's how my house curve is constructed. To my ear, orchestra sounds unnatural when recorded and played back with all the frequencies having equal weight (flat). But that's just me and the music I listen to :) YMMV.

 

Link to comment

EQ works and is even necessary with lo- and mid-fi headphones. EQ doesn’t work and is moreover destructive with hi-fi headphones. Hi-fi headphones such as the HD800, TH900, LCD-4, Utopia, etc and so on, are already meticulously tuned to achieve a certain sound and messing with the frequency response just ruins them.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I don't pretend that the house curve I use is somehow ideal, but it is commonly used. I start out by EQ'ing for a completely flat response, and then slowly, over time, tune it to the way I feel sounds best (most natural) to me with the music I prefer. The tweaks are rarely major, and always involve a simple tilt of the FR curve.

 

The tilt I seem to gravitate to mimics the behavior of natural sound at a distance (higher frequencies get absorbed more by air than lower ones). For example, a 20Hz sound coming from an instrument 20m away will be about 10dB louder than a 20KHz sound from the same distance. That's how my house curve is constructed. To my ear, orchestra sounds unnatural when recorded and played back with all the frequencies having equal weight (flat). But that's just me and the music I listen to :) YMMV.

 

 

pkane2001, would you be willing to post a screen shot of your EQ on that HD650?  My efforts of getting my HD6xx to sound good so far have fallen flat ;)

 

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

pkane2001, would you be willing to post a screen shot of your EQ on that HD650?  My efforts of getting my HD6xx to sound good so far have fallen flat ;)

 

If you are using HQPlayer or something that can take an impulse response WAV file, I can actually post these. Don't know how much variation there is between individual headphones, especially if this is a slightly different model. Or here are the PEQ settings:

 

PEQ1.thumb.JPG.4f8b718646219acae513b7cbd21401be.JPG

PEQ2.thumb.JPG.cf3f20cc40d52dd4101dd6f4cee31e31.JPG

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

If you are using HQPlayer or something that can take an impulse response WAV file, I can actually post these. Don't know how much variation there is between individual headphones, especially if this is a slightly different model. Or I can post the PEQ settings.

 

The PEQ setup should work. I use HQPlayer (usually with Roon as a front end) but I also sometimes use Roon's built in DSP without HQPlayer (direct to DAC), or JRiver with a DMG EQ plugin, etc.

 

There are probably sample differences, just looking for something to start out with...

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
Just now, crenca said:

 

The PEQ setup should work. I use HQPlayer (usually with Roon as a front end) but I also sometimes use Roon's built in DSP without HQPlayer (direct to DAC), or JRiver with a DMG EQ plugin, etc.

 

There are probably sample differences, just looking for something to start out with...

Added PEQ screen shots to the previous message. Take a look.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Added PEQ screen shots to the previous message. Take a look.

 

The top one is how you got your curve for the HD650 correct?  No adjustment past 3400hz??

 

which HP is the bottom one for?

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
2 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

For example, a 20Hz sound coming from an instrument 20m away will be about 10dB louder than a 20KHz sound from the same distance. That's how my house curve is constructed. To my ear, orchestra sounds unnatural when recorded and played back with all the frequencies having equal weight (flat). But that's just me and the music I listen to :) YMMV.

 

 

That's where a lot of unnecessary controversy creeps into discussions of headphones and natural sound.  If a person is compensating for their hearing, or for reproduced sound that doesn't work because certain aspects of the recording don't sound right (an issue in the recording most likely), then they should offer those as a disclaimer up front when suggesting EQ curves and so on.  That way, interested users will have more reliable reference points from which to build their own correction curves.

Link to comment
Just now, crenca said:

 

The top one is how you got your curve for the HD650 correct?  No adjustment past 3400hz??

 

which HP is the bottom one for?

 

They are both for HD650. rePhase allows multiple banks of PEQ filters, and I usually run a few iterations where I measure the effect of filters, and add new ones to correct for any issues that were not resolved by the previous runs.

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, GUTB said:

EQ works and is even necessary with lo- and mid-fi headphones. EQ doesn’t work and is moreover destructive with hi-fi headphones. Hi-fi headphones such as the HD800, TH900, LCD-4, Utopia, etc and so on, are already meticulously tuned to achieve a certain sound and messing with the frequency response just ruins them.

 

Umm, no.  Until their curves are truly neutral, a tweak here and there helps make for a more natural sound.  Many audiophiles have complained about irregularities in the HD800's response, but very few have suggested that it's perfect as-is.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, dalethorn said:

 

That's where a lot of unnecessary controversy creeps into discussions of headphones and natural sound.  If a person is compensating for their hearing, or for reproduced sound that doesn't work because certain aspects of the recording don't sound right (an issue in the recording most likely), then they should offer those as a disclaimer up front when suggesting EQ curves and so on.  That way, interested users will have more reliable reference points from which to build their own correction curves.

 

True. And I think I did just that:

 

3 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

If you think the post-EQ chart is tilted, that's because it's a house curve that I prefer. It sounds better to me, no doubt due to my particular hearing and the type of music I listen to ;)

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

They are both for HD650. rePhase allows multiple banks of PEQ filters, and I usually run a few iterations where I measure the effect of filters, and add new ones to correct for any issues that were not resolved by the previous runs.

 

 

I thought of that after I posted - thanks!!

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, dalethorn said:

EQ works and is even necessary with lo- and mid-fi headphones. EQ doesn’t work and is moreover destructive with hi-fi headphones. Hi-fi headphones such as the HD800, TH900, LCD-4, Utopia, etc and so on, are already meticulously tuned to achieve a certain sound and messing with the frequency response just ruins them.

 

@GUTB This reminds me of why I have you on my ignore list (I think everyone else on it has been banned).  This might be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said, though I am sure you will top it soon...

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, dalethorn said:

 

Umm, no.  Until their curves are truly neutral, a tweak here and there helps make for a more natural sound.  Many audiophiles have complained about irregularities in the HD800's response, but very few have suggested that it's perfect as-is.

 

@GUTB believes that expensive equipment is equivalent to perfection. Anyone with even a slightly less expensive set up is simply lying when they say that they can get great performance from their system.

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

@GUTB believes that expensive equipment is equivalent to perfection. Anyone with even a slightly less expensive set up is simply lying when they say that they can get great performance from their system.

 

 

I am not sure he has any beliefs at all.  I think he may be some kind of audiophile-contrarian bot designed by the North Koreans :P

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

@GUTB believes that expensive equipment is equivalent to perfection. Anyone with even a slightly less expensive set up is simply lying when they say that they can get great performance from their system.

 

 

Belief is one thing, but the only real problem I have in this business is "sales" sites that ban people for trying to save users money.  Sales includes taking a *lot* of ads.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, crenca said:

 

@GUTB This reminds me of why I have you on my ignore list (I think everyone else on it has been banned).  This might be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said, though I am sure you will top it soon...

 

@crencaWell let’s see. My hi-fi headphone resume includes the HE-6, TH900 and Utopia. Yours are...?

 

I’ve tried to EQ all my headphones. I tried going flat. Going for the so-called Harman curve. Looking up community curves. In all my hi-fi headphones, the negatives of EQ correction always outweighed the positives. Now with my lo-fi headphones such as the K553 and Superlux, EQ is not only benificial but I would say required. If your entire experience is with lo-fi and mid-fi (ie, HD650) headphones than you may think that EQ is always good.

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, GUTB said:

In all my hi-fi headphones, the negatives of EQ correction always outweighed the positives.

 

I have to agree at least in part.  The hardest jobs I tried in EQ were with the T1, T90, K812 etc.  I was never really satisfied with those.  I never did try the HD800.  The answer?  I dunno.  I'd guess the more revealing the greater the requirement for exactness.  But the EQ's I did, though I was not entirely happy with them, did make the sound somewhat better.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, dalethorn said:

 

Umm, no.  Until their curves are truly neutral, a tweak here and there helps make for a more natural sound.  Many audiophiles have complained about irregularities in the HD800's response, but very few have suggested that it's perfect as-is.

yes on this.  The laws of physics don't allow for perfectly flat (or perfectly curved to some target) response when the drivers are sitting so close to your ears.  It's the bane of the poor headphone's existence.  There are always going to be standing waves at one or more particular frequency because their wavelength is very short - this creates amplification of some frequencies and attenuation of others as the wavelengths bounce back and interact with the original one.  It's a very common phenomenon in room correction on speakers/subs, but that is usually aimed more at the lower octaves for speakers - given the length of the room.  Bass is often nice on headphones because their wavelength is MUCH longer than the distance from driver to ear and the phase response is preserved better.  

10 hours ago, crenca said:

 

@GUTB This reminds me of why I have you on my ignore list (I think everyone else on it has been banned).  This might be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said, though I am sure you will top it soon...

there are always going to be folks who have incorrect assertions.  But this helps the community when they are corrected publicly and it's on record for future thread viewers.  So there's still some benefit.  Geesh, I almost sound like a communist.  

Link to comment
13 hours ago, GUTB said:

EQ works and is even necessary with lo- and mid-fi headphones. EQ doesn’t work and is moreover destructive with hi-fi headphones. Hi-fi headphones such as the HD800, TH900, LCD-4, Utopia, etc and so on, are already meticulously tuned to achieve a certain sound and messing with the frequency response just ruins them.

So I do have to agree with this partly.  There is always a tradeoff when using EQ, of which I am a huge fan BTW.  The purists claim that EQ destroys the subtleties of the headphone's response, and they are not entirely wrong either.  'Destroy' seems to be blowing it way out of proportion however.  Whenever you EQ, you will alter the phase relationship of frequencies.  What you correct in the frequency domain becomes somewhat skewed in the time domain.  This is what "smearing" of transients is all about.  BUT.... I believe that EQ, despite the minuscule effect it has on phase when done properly, corrects the bigger problem - the frequency response!  To me, and many others, this is a perfectly acceptable tradeoff.  Especially if you know what you're doing, how much to EQ and where, which frequencies to treat with a linear phase EQ, and which are better suited to minimum phase processing.  It should also be noted that opponents of EQ usually haven't had experience with a top-shelf software plugin.  I tried countless very good free EQ plugins.  But when I went with Fab Filter, there was a distinct sonic quality the others didn't present.  No I am not affiliated with them nor did I buy this when it was on sale.  You can google me (Vincent Buonassi) and find out that I work in transportation.  I forked out the $179 for it like a regular schmuck.  You really get what you pay for, especially if you take the time to learn about the effects of EQ on phase.  Here's a great video that explains the basics of EQ processing mode and how phase affects frequency:

 

 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, buonassi said:

So I do have to agree with this partly.  There is always a tradeoff when using EQ, of which I am a huge fan BTW.  The purists claim that EQ destroys the subtleties of the headphone's response, and they are not entirely wrong either.  'Destroy' seems to be blowing it way out of proportion however.  Whenever you EQ, you will alter the phase relationship of frequencies.  What you correct in the frequency domain becomes somewhat skewed in the time domain.  This is what "smearing" of transients is all about.  BUT.... I believe that EQ, despite the minuscule effect it has on phase when done properly, corrects the bigger problem - the frequency response!  To me, and many others, this is a perfectly acceptable tradeoff.  Especially if you know what you're doing, how much to EQ and where, which frequencies to treat with a linear phase EQ, and which are better suited to minimum phase processing.  It should also be noted that opponents of EQ usually haven't had experience with a top-shelf software plugin.  I tried countless very good free EQ plugins.  But when I went with Fab Filter, there was a distinct sonic quality the others didn't present.  No I am not affiliated with them nor did I buy this when it was on sale.  You can google me (Vincent Buonassi) and find out that I work in transportation.  I forked out the $179 for it like a regular schmuck.  You really get what you pay for, especially if you take the time to learn about the effects of EQ on phase.  Here's a great video that explains the basics of EQ processing mode and how phase affects frequency:

 

 

 

One thing to note is that DSP is able to not just correct for frequency response (EQ) but also for any phase changes. In my system, I first adjust for FR by creating the necessary EQ filters in the form of an impulse response file. I then use REW/rePhase to adjust this IR file to create a minimum phase filter. This corrects for any phase issues that may be introduced by the EQ process itself.

 

Aside from creating excessive or unnecessary corrections during the EQ process, I am not aware of any downsides to correcting FR of my headphones (or speakers, for that matter).

Link to comment

I can't believe I didn't join this drop.  By all accounts, reviews, graphs, etc, this is one hell of a headphone.  Then again, I can grab a used Elear for $550 and EQ the crap out of it.  I have to research the REW software some more.  I have been too intimidated to download it thus far.  Then again, I'm ready for my next adventure, so....

Link to comment
11 hours ago, buonassi said:

yes on this.  The laws of physics don't allow for perfectly flat (or perfectly curved to some target) response when the drivers are sitting so close to your ears.  It's the bane of the poor headphone's existence.  There are always going to be standing waves at one or more particular frequency because their wavelength is very short - this creates amplification of some frequencies and attenuation of others as the wavelengths bounce back and interact with the original one.  It's a very common phenomenon in room correction on speakers/subs, but that is usually aimed more at the lower octaves for speakers - given the length of the room.  Bass is often nice on headphones because their wavelength is MUCH longer than the distance from driver to ear and the phase response is preserved better.  

there are always going to be folks who have incorrect assertions.  But this helps the community when they are corrected publicly and it's on record for future thread viewers.  So there's still some benefit.  Geesh, I almost sound like a communist.  

 

In the end, none of that technical mumbo-jumbo matters.  And I am a VERY tech-savvy person.  What matters is 1) Making the most- needed corrections first, to reduce the worst anomalies. 2) Making the final corrections toward a natural sound.  The problem I see in your contentions, and those other very techie contentions here, is it steers users toward a reliance on elitists, and as a long-time software dev supervisor, we don't need those at the level that serves ordinary users.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...