Using EQ with Phones!

[or099]

hi all,

i own the NWA - 1000 mp3 player. having recently upgraded my phones from the stock buds to the SHURE e2c phones, i noticed that the e2c phones need to be equalized....

also having read the review put together by one of ATRAC's members, on different sets of phones, it talks about needing to EQualize the sound for the SHURE's...

now for my question.. does it overload the output signal , if the bass and treble is set to the highest setting on EQ? or is the EQ settings designed to be pushed this high if needs be, to get the best sound from the headphones. second question, does anyone here, use the NWA - 1000 with SHURE e2c phones and can tell me a good EQ setting to use?

any help is much appreciated

cheers

oli

[Guest Stuge]

I will say fiddle with the Equalisers ,till you like the sound or sound which suits your ears .

[JustAnUnCoolCat]

Personally, i dont touch the EQ or even use it.

Ok, using canal phones or inner-ear types, you may find the need to EQ to compensate, but for any half-way decent kinda headphones (walkman type lightweights or full-on hifi/dj stuff) if the response is there on the cans and they are pretty neutral (aka they reproduce what's put in fairly transparently) then there is rarely a need really to EQ except for personal pref tastes.

Ok, it's a one-cats-viewpoint (and often very unpopular POV), but it's precisely how i always worked with phones and amps and speakers and to this day, the only time i EQ anything is at the mastering/restoration stage of audio production.. at playback (end-user and auditioning mixdowns), playback-invoked EQing is never used in my arena..

Why..??

No point, i happen to like to hear the audio as the producers intended it to be heard, and since there's no need with my setup to compensate for unusal extreme or major deficiencies or colour on the speakers and phones used, i see no point in masking what usually sounds great in neutral/bypass.

That said, clearly if the audio was mastered (as some 'dance' tracks i have heard recently... *shames himself to admit listening to them*) with kinda ultra extremes of EQing at the mastering stage (the kinda time when you make the audio go thud thud thud.. pandering to subwoofer-freaks taste) and you phones/speakers have the response that makes this kinda trickery sound totally overkill, sure.. EQ to cut it back for sure..., then you may start actually hearing the audio as it was supposed be heard.

As already suggested, previously in a reply, if you wanna toy with EQing, just play away - getting EQ related advice and suggestions is kinda a minefield, as there are as many personal opinions as there are people out there who EQ stuff to death making it kinda hard to get sane advice.

All due respect given, mind, to those who do try to offer advice on such things intelligently

'Tom Kat'

[or099]

thanks for your response "tomkat".

having read other threads, i've noticed you seem to talk intelligently about the subject matter, that i thank you for i've never been into EQ'ing, and i personally like yourself, prefer to hear the audio as it was intended, no messing around with it... but since buying the e2c's, i have certainly noticed the need to EQ them , as much as i hate to have to go there... its a shame shure cant make the phones, so that they sound neutral through sony players. however, for those who haven't heard, e2c's, dont be put off, they are superb!!!

thanks again for your input.

oli

[JustAnUnCoolCat]

Well, thanks - i do try to keep an intelligent tone and intent to my posts most of the time (except maybe on the odd irrational day when my posts go a touch... insane).

We are, it seems, a minority - those of us who go with the preferred no-EQ setting on playback - but then again, so few mention their no-EQ pref that it's hard to know how much of a minority we actually are

I know, sadly, that it's almost inevitable to end up EQing canal phones - despite the fact i used and subsequently had to scrap a set of MDR-EX71's (scrapped to a majoring tolerence issue - aka they tended to give me migranes.. and since i already suffer them badly, the 71's had to be dumped) i noticed the inevitable EQing to be necessary when using them.

I'm not sure whether it's a case of being too-hard to make a set of canal phones that are neutral or near-neutral (hell, a pair of canals that were 'monitors' of the earphone would would be a good place to get to) or that to sell them easily, they end up pandering to the tastes of those who listen to 'boombox' orientated music.

Then again, it could simply be that when it comes to what is almost DI (direct injection) equiv (to nick a fuelling term from motor circles) then maybe it's harder to get a generic even perception of being neutral when pump audio out so near directly.

Never really took enough interest at that level, to be honest - pretty much quit the 'how it works at the hearing stage' theory much after the basic audio theory and anatomy crossover that goes with audio tech/production training. Maybe i should take more interest in the hows and whys in a more refined way regarding the discrete bits that make canal transmission work effectively...

I'm sure the E2C's are indeed quality items, it seems they are getting popular despite cost - usually when something on the high price side starts to gain popularity despite there being cheaper alternatives, it says something about the product that seems to be chosen.

I never confirmed it either way, but i seem to recall someone built a hybrid canal phone/mic set and was selling them a while ago. I think it was a set of Shure canals for phones, and a matching set (built into Shure casings) of discrete mics that you used whichever set was needed - designed for stereo discrete recording if i recall.

'Tom Kat'

[or099]

sum good points there tomkat.

judging by sum things you have said, i gather the impression you are a sound technician? what sort of work do you do?

if money was no object i would buy the sennheiser equivalent, and the etymotics equivalent to the shure, and give them a test run, to see if it is just the shure's that need EQ'ing.

however, i have got the sound balance spot on now, using EQ (sadly lol), and i'm starting to enjoy the sonic bliss of the e2c's!

thanks again

oli

[JustAnUnCoolCat]

Well, as it goes..

I started out in the IT business, audio technology being a kinda hobby (aka i was doing audio restoration and A/D transfer back when there were no decent tools.. just a damn good attention to detail and being able to use basic filters and noise profiling with scapel precision being about the best method around then).

After a big meltdown at work, i took time out and kinda got involved in broadcasting at a community radio level (someone 'volunteered' me for being available to help sort out their audio library and transfers - this was still in the early Digital Audio days) - so between what i had read and learnt over time and put into serious time-served practise at the station (and other stations over time) and in my hobby, the basics really fell into place.

And generally over time, i got involved with various stations doing much the same (being the insane nutter who'd do 20 hour shifts doing transfers and library maintenance.. and the occassion 'get us out of trouble' incident when another more front line role was needing filled) - and over time, of course, techniques got better and so did the software and tools )

Also did a bit of music production work too, but strictly at the 'doing a favour for mates and local musicians' level, so there sealed picking up the fine art of tailoring audio to suit listening environments and most importantly, making audio mixdowns that were universally good sounding across anything from a cheapo transistor radio to mega-bucks AP kit

Apart from some occassional serious work in the audio field (usually related to netcasting), i'm pretty much out of the game now (you gotta know when you are getting past it) - as for the DAP related side, *hangs head in shame*, that's a legacy of being involved under contract with iRiver and also for a now very defunct UK retailer of DAP's (and they deserve to be defunct) on a technical and user support level.

Whether that qualifies as being fairly involved in audio and DA and related stuff, i guess that's for each to judge.

I know what you mean about 'money no object' testing, likewise if i had those means, i'd be messing with testing lots of amps and speaker combos to draw up a shortlist of recommended 'affordable' indoor setups to suit DAP's as well as the usual analog/digital sources.

Well, as for the 'ending up EQiing', i guess that kinda was not unexpected - still, i bet the amount of EQing you ended up doing was more subtle adj than say.. for EX71's )

As i said somewhere else, you got a solution you are happy with - that's THE most important thing at the end of the day ... as long as the inner cat spirit is purring, it's money well spent..

Was listening to some good old acoustic blues whilst writing this, using my fav 'toy' cans.. the Medusa items in 2-channel mode (aka so they act as four-driver per channel cans).

Be Cool Always

'Tom Kat'

BTW - if you ever want a good crash course in the fine art of 'tuning' audio to sound good over narrow band routes, such as squeezing HQ audio over limited bandwidth and also through fixed filtering (elements which are worth understanding when it comes to practical netcasting), get into radio communications as a hobby

That's also my other time-consuming passion

Edited September 2, 2006 by JustAnUnCoolCat

[or099]

wow, thats sum time in the business i must say! i dont have that much experience, but i've played with mixing desks in a live setup, and i am a guitarist so i have a relatively good ear for balance. music listening and playing is my main hobbies, as well as running and weight training. i've turned into a bit ofa fitness fanatic as of late, cuz running with e2c's is effortless! lol. take care tom, cheers for your input on this thread. much appreciated

cheers

oli

[JustAnUnCoolCat]

It's all worthy experience :oD

And i'm sure you do indeed have an pretty good idea of what works.

So keep the faith, and just do what works..., and if you find ways to improve on things and methods you hear about - damn well have the dangly bits to go out there and show what you discover. Never feel that standing out.. or seeming to rebel against the perceptions of the audiophiles and self-elected 'audio experts' is a bad thing.

That's my advice, regarding your insight and experience.

Noone's got a purrfect handle on it all, and subsequently, noone is qualified to condem you for a lack of insight or experience. If you get by with what you know and feel.., but are open to ideas, that's all you need to exist in the audio world.

Be Cool Always..

'Tom Kat'

*turns himself in, to face the jury re the crime of gross sidetracking and off-topicness of recent replys* :op

[or099]

cheers tom, if i do make any groundbreaking discoveries i'll be sure to let you know lol, although sum how i think i'm dreaming... add me on msn mate, if you like : livesoul2olly35@hotmail.com. always good to have a knowledgable opinion to compare too.

oli