The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
What are your favorite headphones in the mastering room. Studio Headphones
Old 27th August 2018
  #181
Lives for gear
 
Jantex's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb View Post
lots of experience = 10,000 hour rule

or more...

jt
Agree on this point, yes.
Old 27th August 2018
  #182
Great point Jerry! How many hours does it take any masterer to learn a room, or new monitors? A lot, for me at least.

I’m sort of learning to work that way myself, sort of accidentally— I often find open time to work when I’m at home, but the drive to my studio mostly chews them up. That dog won’t hunt! I started doing load ins/outs, gapping, and noise reduction at home, tasks suited to cans. But curiosity drives me to push the line. Increasingly I find my eq done at home checks out in the studio. I’m going to upgrade cans, and see how far I can go. Glenn’s work sounds great, so who knows?

dd
Old 27th August 2018
  #183
Lives for gear
 
Macaroni's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jantex View Post
I had both and HD800S remained in the end. Like thermos said:

Pros of LCD-X: low end
Pros of HD800S: better midrange, better sound stage and more comfortable.

While listening LCD-X gives you a warm hug for music enjoyment, I can easily mix and master with HD800S. Especially with more complex music like orchestral, where dynamic range is huge, HD800S really outshine LCD-X.
So are the Sennheiser HD800s the ones you are working with exclusively now?

Are you also using SonarWorks headphone correction?

How did the Audeze Reveal plugin work to adjust the LCD-Xs?

How about Can Opener for cross-feed, are you using that or something similar?


Thanks!
Old 28th August 2018
  #184
Lives for gear
 
Jantex's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macaroni View Post
So are the Sennheiser HD800s the ones you are working with exclusively now?

Are you also using SonarWorks headphone correction?

How did the Audeze Reveal plugin work to adjust the LCD-Xs?

How about Can Opener for cross-feed, are you using that or something similar?


Thanks!
I am working with my speakers, because I am not used to working on headphones, but have HD800s for reference check and maybe minor corrections of something I realize while listening to alternative presentation. I actually don't use Sonarworks, because to me it sounds weird with HD800s. They have quite a great balance, I only have 2,5dB shelf from 40Hz down.

What bothers me the most regarding headphones is their fairly distorted low end. While it is spectrally very even, it is not clean at all. I much prefer Audeze LCD-X in this sense, but still, far far away from great speakers in a room. That is also the thing that sways me from enjoying listening to headphones in general. Not the impact or imaging, but THD. But I could get used to working with them exclusivelly if I devoted enought of my time to learn that skill.

To be honest, I also didn't like Audeze Reveal, when I tried it. I don't know, I am an advocate of DSP corrections, but these two solutions for me somehow don't work. Or I will say it like this, Sonarworks actually pefrorms better with lesser phones, like Shure SRH-840 and ATH-50X that I use for tracking. But with HD-800s it simply ruins the sound IMHO.
Old 28th August 2018
  #185
Gear Maniac
 
syncussion's Avatar
 

I did an extensive A/B between the HD800 and DT1990 and to me for studio use the DT1990 was better.
The only thing is that with the DT1990 you must do the little dip at ~9kHz otherwise the ringing at that frequency is bothersome.
As for the HD800, you can turn it into an HD800S soundwise by giving it a little dip from 4 to 5kHz (I used Pro-Q2 with 48dB slope bell, gives the exact same curve as the HD800S in this area). The only difference then is that the HD800S also increases the harmonic distortion in the bass to give more perceived bass but this is a bad thing imho.
The HD800 and HD800S and not voiced "neutral" / flat. Sennheiser uses a diffuse field EQ curve as reference but produces the HD800 and HD800S to be warmer relative to this for the home hifi market. Every HD800 and HD800S is supplied with an individual measurement for your headphone (smoothed to 1/3 octave and missing the top and bottom), you can see on this measurement how warm the HD800 and HD800S is voiced relative to Senneisers own concept of diffuse field curve (which is already a rolled of treble curve relative to flat). If you EQ it to at least Sennheisers diffuse field curve based on your headphones measurements it will already greatly improve. But not to the point of the DT1990 which is still better with the analytical pads with only a minor narrow bell dip around 9kHz.
The HD800 driver is not only less flat in the bass but also has more distortion (the HD800S even more so), it also has more trouble in the treble, and in addition to all this the HD800 / HD800S have large earcups which reflect the sound. You can hear this when you listen to a dry sound fully panned left or right. The earcups themselves impart a bit of a "spacious" sound to everything but this comes with some colouration. Especially if you do for instance classical music or other music which has a good convincing soundstage of itself then the colour of the HD800 / HD800S earcups gets in the way and it will never get as real as with for instance the DT1990.
Sennheiser headphones are home hifi headphones, never studio headphones as far as I'm concerned even though the HD800 / HD800S do better than the extremely coloured HD600 and HD650 etc it's still not a neutral critical headphone.

edit: Btw, an example for the HD800 / HD800S earcup problem. Listen to this: YouTube
It's a simple recording with two omni's at a reasonable distance with no further processing. Most of the sound is therefore a true diffuse field as the sound reverberates throughout the cathedrale. With a diffuse field curve headphone the sound should be natural as if you're there. It is with the DT1990 but with the HD800 it's a mess, it does get a bit better post EQ but the main problem remains which is that the space is never convincing due to the earcup colourations and sounds messy and too reverberant etc. So especially for classical music and more natural far field recordings this headphone is a very big no as far as I'm concerned.

Last edited by syncussion; 28th August 2018 at 10:27 AM..
Old 28th August 2018
  #186
Mastering Moderator
 
Riccardo's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Anybody using or tried SR007 or SR-L700 ? (Stax)
Old 29th August 2018
  #187
Lives for gear
 
Macaroni's Avatar
 

@Jantex: Thanks!
Old 29th August 2018
  #188
Gear Maniac
 
ilalin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by syncussion View Post
I did an extensive A/B between the HD800 and DT1990 and to me for studio use the DT1990 was better.
The only thing is that with the DT1990 you must do the little dip at ~9kHz otherwise the ringing at that frequency is bothersome.
As for the HD800, you can turn it into an HD800S soundwise by giving it a little dip from 4 to 5kHz (I used Pro-Q2 with 48dB slope bell, gives the exact same curve as the HD800S in this area). The only difference then is that the HD800S also increases the harmonic distortion in the bass to give more perceived bass but this is a bad thing imho.
The HD800 and HD800S and not voiced "neutral" / flat. Sennheiser uses a diffuse field EQ curve as reference but produces the HD800 and HD800S to be warmer relative to this for the home hifi market. Every HD800 and HD800S is supplied with an individual measurement for your headphone (smoothed to 1/3 octave and missing the top and bottom), you can see on this measurement how warm the HD800 and HD800S is voiced relative to Senneisers own concept of diffuse field curve (which is already a rolled of treble curve relative to flat). If you EQ it to at least Sennheisers diffuse field curve based on your headphones measurements it will already greatly improve. But not to the point of the DT1990 which is still better with the analytical pads with only a minor narrow bell dip around 9kHz.
The HD800 driver is not only less flat in the bass but also has more distortion (the HD800S even more so), it also has more trouble in the treble, and in addition to all this the HD800 / HD800S have large earcups which reflect the sound. You can hear this when you listen to a dry sound fully panned left or right. The earcups themselves impart a bit of a "spacious" sound to everything but this comes with some colouration. Especially if you do for instance classical music or other music which has a good convincing soundstage of itself then the colour of the HD800 / HD800S earcups gets in the way and it will never get as real as with for instance the DT1990.
Sennheiser headphones are home hifi headphones, never studio headphones as far as I'm concerned even though the HD800 / HD800S do better than the extremely coloured HD600 and HD650 etc it's still not a neutral critical headphone.

edit: Btw, an example for the HD800 / HD800S earcup problem. Listen to this: YouTube
It's a simple recording with two omni's at a reasonable distance with no further processing. Most of the sound is therefore a true diffuse field as the sound reverberates throughout the cathedrale. With a diffuse field curve headphone the sound should be natural as if you're there. It is with the DT1990 but with the HD800 it's a mess, it does get a bit better post EQ but the main problem remains which is that the space is never convincing due to the earcup colourations and sounds messy and too reverberant etc. So especially for classical music and more natural far field recordings this headphone is a very big no as far as I'm concerned.
Do you have any idea how you'd correct an HD650?

I am currently using Sonarworks Ref 4 and a Can Opener3.
Old 29th August 2018
  #189
Gear Maniac
 
syncussion's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilalin View Post
Do you have any idea how you'd correct an HD650?
Yes, by getting a DT1990

But no, I don't have much of an idea. It's not as simple as one may think at first.
You could go have a look at the HD650 measurements over at rtings.com I like their measurements the most though I don't agree with their target curve when it comes to using it for studio work. But even then, measuring headphones is basically a mess.. Can't trust any measurements in a detailed manner.
But anyhow measurements can give a general idea. It is possible to trace the exact curves in a program and then use the extracted curve with REW to generate an exact EQ curve which will work with something like EqualizerAPO. But this method does not give perfect results at all due to errors in measurements of the exact headphone - ear interaction, errors in general target curves and the specifics of the many troubles of all headphone drivers (ringing distortion phase shifts etc etc).
For me best is to use the measurements as a general idea and then find the resonances seen in the measurements by ear with the help of EQ and playing a noise track and remove them out with sharp bell cuts and then try to make the bass flat with low-q EQ and then take on the rest. It's a long process which doesn't get perfect but I don't know any better way (certainly not sonarworks).

Btw there are two versions of the HD650, black driver and silver driver and they sound a little bit different. But both have drivers which in my personal opinion do not cut it at all for studio work especially the treble is very bad (famous for its veiled sound) and I strongly suspect can't be fixed with EQ. I'd really recomend getting a DT1990 and do the minimal EQ I described before to remove the ringing at 9kHz.
Btw, for these headphones a decent headphone amp is a must. Solid state, impedance 10 Ohm or lower and at least 50 mW output before clipping. And of course low distortion IMD etc. Does not have to be expensive, watch out for head-fi.org recomendations its a hifi forum where the leading direction is towards warm coloured non critical sound.
Old 29th August 2018
  #190
Gear Head
 
moostapha's Avatar
 

I might be totally off base for this, but...

I've had some luck getting IEMs and headphones to sound better by using (mastered) music I know well and applying the same thought process I'd use with mastering EQ to develop an EQ feeding those headphones. Doing that a few times, I've found that the curves are pretty similar for a given set of headphones. Then, applying that reduces the differences between the headphones and my speakers.

It works better, IME, than sonarworks's average curves for models, at least. And while I do have a headphone/IEM measurement jig, it seems to work better than using REW to generate a curve with it. FWIW, I bought sonarworks to try it out after kind of liking what the demo did to my MDR-7506s. And....I don't like it in my room. At all. And that procedure works better for the 7506s anyway. It was basically a really expensive measurement mic that I don't seem to get the actual calibration files for...so, a huge waste. Maybe I can sell it.

Anyway...

That procedure, plus a couple small tweaks based on testing my hearing with them (ear imbalances and/or channel imbalances in the headphones) gives a pretty simple monitor path with Pro-Q2 and CanOpener that sounds just great...

I've done some test masters with that setup, and so far it's rare that I really want to change something when I listen to it on my speakers (or in my car, living room, etc.)...more in the realm of taste or different days than wildly different approaches. And one master done that way out of necessity has apparently played really well in local clubs on huge (but certainly not top end) PA systems. But, take all that with a grain of salt. I'm a beginner in this world, and I'm not exactly comparing the headphones/IEMs to a Northward room.
Old 29th August 2018
  #191
Gear Maniac
 
ilalin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by syncussion View Post
Yes, by getting a DT1990

But no, I don't have much of an idea. It's not as simple as one may think at first.
You could go have a look at the HD650 measurements over at rtings.com I like their measurements the most though I don't agree with their target curve when it comes to using it for studio work. But even then, measuring headphones is basically a mess.. Can't trust any measurements in a detailed manner.
But anyhow measurements can give a general idea. It is possible to trace the exact curves in a program and then use the extracted curve with REW to generate an exact EQ curve which will work with something like EqualizerAPO. But this method does not give perfect results at all due to errors in measurements of the exact headphone - ear interaction, errors in general target curves and the specifics of the many troubles of all headphone drivers (ringing distortion phase shifts etc etc).
For me best is to use the measurements as a general idea and then find the resonances seen in the measurements by ear with the help of EQ and playing a noise track and remove them out with sharp bell cuts and then try to make the bass flat with low-q EQ and then take on the rest. It's a long process which doesn't get perfect but I don't know any better way (certainly not sonarworks).

Btw there are two versions of the HD650, black driver and silver driver and they sound a little bit different. But both have drivers which in my personal opinion do not cut it at all for studio work especially the treble is very bad (famous for its veiled sound) and I strongly suspect can't be fixed with EQ. I'd really recomend getting a DT1990 and do the minimal EQ I described before to remove the ringing at 9kHz.
Btw, for these headphones a decent headphone amp is a must. Solid state, impedance 10 Ohm or lower and at least 50 mW output before clipping. And of course low distortion IMD etc. Does not have to be expensive, watch out for head-fi.org recomendations its a hifi forum where the leading direction is towards warm coloured non critical sound.

Awesome,

thank you for the suggestions
Old 29th August 2018
  #192
Quote:
Originally Posted by syncussion View Post
Yes, by getting a DT1990

....Btw there are two versions of the HD650, black driver and silver driver and they sound a little bit different. But both have drivers which in my personal opinion do not cut it at all for studio work especially the treble is very bad (famous for its veiled sound) and I strongly suspect can't be fixed with EQ....

.....watch out for head-fi.org recomendations its a hifi forum where the leading direction is towards warm coloured non critical sound.
It's nice to see confirmation (at last) of my impressions of the 650. When recording live, often in the same acoustic space as the event and usually orchestras and choirs, I am used to using my Etymotic Research ER4S. When I remove them and listen to the actual sound, the similarity is striking. 14 years ago I tried the same with a loaned pair of Sennheiser 650s and thought they must be broken—or else I was completely out of touch with what passed for desirable amongst audiophiles. On lengthy reflection ever since that experience, it seems that you are right in your assessment of the trend being in the direction of warm, diffuse sound—except that the target appears to be much warmer and rolled off in the HF than I had suspected.

My guess is that may be the fallout from the early, screechy days of CD, before mastering had fully realized that is was no longer necessary to over-compensate by second-guessing HF losses through tape and vinyl generations to follow.
Old 30th August 2018
  #193
Gear Maniac
 
syncussion's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell Dawkins View Post
It's nice to see confirmation (at last) of my impressions of the 650. When recording live, often in the same acoustic space as the event and usually orchestras and choirs, I am used to using my Etymotic Research ER4S. When I remove them and listen to the actual sound, the similarity is striking. 14 years ago I tried the same with a loaned pair of Sennheiser 650s and thought they must be broken—or else I was completely out of touch with what passed for desirable amongst audiophiles. On lengthy reflection ever since that experience, it seems that you are right in your assessment of the trend being in the direction of warm, diffuse sound—except that the target appears to be much warmer and rolled off in the HF than I had suspected.

My guess is that may be the fallout from the early, screechy days of CD, before mastering had fully realized that is was no longer necessary to over-compensate by second-guessing HF losses through tape and vinyl generations to follow.
I'm not very familiar with in-ear heaphones and their design and theory (though I had an Etymotic ER4p a long time ago). But if I remember correctly in-ear headphones have several additional problems relative to over-ear headphones.
First of all there are no longer any reflections of the ear (which are fairly unique for each ear) giving a less natural sound (because its effect then has to be incorporated in an average way in the in-ear phone EQ curve). And also the ear canal has a natural resonant frequency, by sticking something in the ear canal this resonant frequency is changed. I belief because of these things its even harder to get a natural balanced sound with in-ear headphones.
I do think the ER4s is targeted towards a diffuse field EQ curve (which is different for in-ear heapphones than for over ear headphones). Which is not that warm, just slightly rolled of trebble relative to direct free field response curve (which is basically only a head and torso corrected version of a flat speaker in front of you in an anechoic room, which sounds not "flat" but rather sharp in reality, we're used to speakers with still some room sound also in studios with nearfields). So diffuse field EQ-ed headphones are not very warm sounding, I'd say its currently the most "neutral" curve described for studio use (though not perfect because of several reasons and I personally like a bit more high treble though dynamic headphones drivers have trouble deliviring high treble cleanly so for many headphones its a good thing to have it slightly rolled off).
But yes, even with the difference between over-ear and in-ear headphones the ER4s have a more neutral curve. Though perhaps the ER4s still don't give a balanced enough imperssion when listening to most music? (my ER4p didn't)

What I still want to do personally is to get an in-ear microphone and go out to various noisy places with a portable recorder and both the in-ear microphone and a flat omni measurement microphone and record sounds from various directions with both mics at the same time. And then at home play the audio from the measurement microphone over my headphones while wearing the in-ear microphone to see the response curve of the headphone - in-ear microhpone combination and compare it with the in-ear microphone recording of those sounds in real life. Hoping with some trial and error this difference will give the most natural (semi-diffuse) curve to EQ my headphones to. If I end up doing this I'll post the results here, though the exact curve will be personal for my head-torso-ear and headphones it may still be good for others as well with the same headphone model.

edit: But to make it extra clear. Headphones are never totally natural in frequency response as natural frequency response is direction dependent. The ear "EQ-s" sound based on their location and this is what the brain is used to and judges frequency response relative to. One of the ways you can clearly hear headphones are not natural to this is simply because with headphones most sounds do not have a natural location but are heard "inside you head". For a sound to be natural it has to have a precise location outside the head and its natural frequency response is dependent on which exact location. Front-back, left-right, height and even distance, every location gives a different HRTF EQ-curve. So headphones and music recordings as they stand today can only give a general average curve which is never totally neutral. Even speakers don't do this perfect but a whole lot better than headphones.

Btw I don't know if recording quality is the main thing which has driven the majority of the audiophile headphone community to warm sound. There are so many other factors (including many listening tests on the general public by manufacturers to find listening preferences which are done in a faulty manner in my opinion as they are in my opinion designed to hide driver flaws and indeed recording flaws by turning down treble in addition to the general public being used to warm sound already from hifi speakers placed against walls in reverberant rooms without any correction)

Last edited by syncussion; 30th August 2018 at 06:21 AM..
Old 30th August 2018
  #194
Gear Maniac
 
syncussion's Avatar
 

And a last post (as I'm posting a bit too much in this thread perhaps). I thought it may be good for some if I share my current EQ curve for my DT1990 (with analytical pads!).
Attached is my Fabfilter Pro-Q2 preset.
For those with a different EQ here are a screenshot and my filter settings:
Filter 1: 12dB/oct low shelf, Q1, 79Hz, +2dB
Filter 2: 12dB/oct bell, Q1, 1kHz, +2dB
Filter 3: 12dB/oct high shelf, Q12, 7110Hz, -3.6dB
Filter 4: 12dB/oct high shelf, Q12, 11000Hz, +3.9dB
Overall gain -3dB to prevent clipping.

Not saying it's perfect but this is a big improvement over stock DT1990 for me and it's the closest I've ever heard a headphone sound to a neutral studio monitor (though it's not as good as a good studio monitor in a good room in several ways, it is perhaps better in some others and at least good to have in addition). I think it's quite a good buy at around 400 Euro.
Results are of course for my DT1990 in my system (Anedio D2 DAC and headphone amp Anedio Affordable High-End Audio : Measurements of Anedio D2 Low-jitter USB audio DAC ).
Results may vary based on your headphone amp and any manufacturer differences between DT1990 models (which can be quite large sometimes with headphones, no idea how large for the DT1990).
If anybody likes my EQ curve I'd love to know (btw, you can play with the gain scale of course, maybe it's better at 80 or 90% and the bass bump a little bit lower in freq I don't know apply according to taste)
Attached Thumbnails
What are your favorite headphones in the mastering room.-syncussion-dt1990pro-eq.png  
Attached Files
File Type: zip Syncussion DT1990pro EQ.zip (318 Bytes, 6 views)
Old 30th August 2018
  #195
As to the degree to which the pinnae affect tonality, there was an experiment done in the 70's or 80's involving Sennheiser MKE 2002 binaural mic systems which I had thought were very small and extended down the ear canal to record right next to the ear drum, but may only have been what I see illustrated: with the mic elements positioned at the entrance to the canal at the focus of the pinnae, but not extending down to the ear drum.

In any event, a group of seasoned engineers sat in on a recording session of a small jazz ensemble, each with his own pair of these mics in their ears. Each pair of mics was recorded on separate pairs of tracks, of course.

When these people had the opportunity to listen to playback of each of the different pairs of tracks, it was immediately apparent to everyone when 'their' ears were selected and, significantly, how very different the others were.

This is as close as I am aware to enabling the experience of hearing with other people's ears.

This is a comprehensive binaural recording history:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile...velopments.pdf
Old 30th August 2018
  #196
P.S.

In my last post I meant to include this link to Siegfried Linkwitz's EQ for the Etymotic ER4S, which apparently responds brilliantly to this:
Reference earphones
Old 30th August 2018
  #197
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Verified Member
What is the best way to test your hearing to see what your personal frequency curve is while listening on headphones?
Old 30th August 2018
  #198
Gear Maniac
 
syncussion's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcgood View Post
What is the best way to test your hearing to see what your personal frequency curve is while listening on headphones?
For me sine sweeps, white and pink noise and reference tracks you know on a good monitor system (especially pumped commercial tracks / edm work well for me).

Btw, this has less to do with a truly personal curve / HRTF.
A truly personal HRTF very much has to do with sound localization as well. This is not applicable when doing a general EQ-ing of a headphone (and isn't something you can do by just listening, those are very strange curves with big sharp peaks and dips)
Old 1st September 2018
  #199
Here for the gear
Having been through HD600s, Beyerdynamic , I’m amazingly happy with my Beyerdynamic T90s. Very comfortable, I’ve had mine for three years. These are close to the Beyer T1s... And can be had for a bargain £300 approx. I’d like to have a pair of 1990s though.
Old 1st September 2018
  #200
I've got HD600s for critical listening, and they've been workhorses for me. Specs-wise. the 800s are probably better, and certainly the 600s have some sort of funkiness going on below 100Hz, but they were the most clinical at my price point, and I've been able to solve many problems with them. Master with them? I'd never trust any set of headphones to master on. They are not for enjoyment listening by far IMHO, but however colored they might be, it isn't much, and it's something I can resolve easily.

I would never in a million years master according to my personal hearing curve, headphones or no.
Old 9th September 2018
  #201
Lives for gear
 
Raddler's Avatar
I'm realizing the ATH-R70x are actually really good headphones, I'm finally hearing the sub bass. My 600's are not getting used now.
Old 9th September 2018
  #202
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Yea, I really like my ATH-R70xs plugged into my Hilo.

I will say they are no match for my Amphion One 15s into my class AB amp though.

Also, lately I've been simultaneously running my Auratones at the same time which brings out the mids nicely.

I'm really loving this set up

P.S. I should add that I'm also using a Dynaudio sub which really fills in the bass nicely. Let's the One 15s do what they do best and the low bass is handled with the sub.

Last edited by bcgood; 9th September 2018 at 08:15 PM..
Old 24th November 2018
  #203
Lives for gear
 
stealthbalance's Avatar
 

Any idea what headphones Glenn is using for his mastering ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
.. tell that to Glenn Schick.

Glenn Schick Mastering - Clients

YouTube
Old 25th November 2018
  #204
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by stealthbalance View Post
Any idea what headphones Glenn is using for his mastering ?
I think he’s using audeze now. Probably lcd-4. I couldn’t get a read on those at all and they hurt my neck tremendously they are so heavy, but they are amazing sounding.
Old 25th November 2018
  #205
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by syncussion View Post
And a last post (as I'm posting a bit too much in this thread perhaps). I thought it may be good for some if I share my current EQ curve for my DT1990 (with analytical pads!).
Attached is my Fabfilter Pro-Q2 preset.
For those with a different EQ here are a screenshot and my filter settings:
Filter 1: 12dB/oct low shelf, Q1, 79Hz, +2dB
Filter 2: 12dB/oct bell, Q1, 1kHz, +2dB
Filter 3: 12dB/oct high shelf, Q12, 7110Hz, -3.6dB
Filter 4: 12dB/oct high shelf, Q12, 11000Hz, +3.9dB
Overall gain -3dB to prevent clipping.

Not saying it's perfect but this is a big improvement over stock DT1990 for me and it's the closest I've ever heard a headphone sound to a neutral studio monitor (though it's not as good as a good studio monitor in a good room in several ways, it is perhaps better in some others and at least good to have in addition). I think it's quite a good buy at around 400 Euro.
Results are of course for my DT1990 in my system (Anedio D2 DAC and headphone amp Anedio Affordable High-End Audio : Measurements of Anedio D2 Low-jitter USB audio DAC ).
Results may vary based on your headphone amp and any manufacturer differences between DT1990 models (which can be quite large sometimes with headphones, no idea how large for the DT1990).
If anybody likes my EQ curve I'd love to know (btw, you can play with the gain scale of course, maybe it's better at 80 or 90% and the bass bump a little bit lower in freq I don't know apply according to taste)
I just upgraded from my similarly excellent T90s to the DT1990s. Your EQ curve looks like it fixes the design flaw issues that are hotly debated elsewhere! I will check it out on my next mixdowns, although my bedroom studio is by no means an accurate ballpark!

I currently EQ each individual mixer channel by ear, and with a prayer to each and every god of the universe, as I record live to stereo, in my very basic setup. Ironically your EQ curve looks similar to the hearing loss curve I was offered by my doctor recently, but in reverse so to speak. So I’m probably lapping that Beyerdynamic spike, and the DT1990 high freq peak, like mana from heaven!
Old 26th November 2018
  #206
Lives for gear
 
Mark D.'s Avatar
 

Really disappointed in the Audeze LCD-4 and the slightly lighter variation. I mean they sound amazing, but yes weight, and a bit too midrangey in general. The surprise for me was the Shure SRH-1540. Stock they have a bit of high peak & great subs - but may not reach the ears if your head is longer. I put NVX Standard (non angled) Comfort Pads on them (quality protein leather, not smelly stuff). Slightly less low subs - but no treble peak and better 3D spatial sound. More room for ears, pad openings are taller / wider) for comfort and better reach for long heads. Easy to clean, no build up.
Old 26th November 2018
  #207
Gear Nut
 
classic86's Avatar
 

I keep returning to Sennheiser HD 600 for mixing and mastering. Would use something different for listening / consuming music, but my work on the HD 600 translates very, very well to other systems. I use minimal corrective EQ (RME TotalMix): + 1.5 dB @ 40 Hz Q 2.0 and -0.5 dB @ 200 Hz Q 1.0
Old 17th December 2018
  #208
Lives for gear
 
Edward Shnapper's Avatar
 

Hey guys. I'm a little confused, if someone could help me out that would be much appreciated.

When mastering, should I be switching on the 'safe headroom' option on sonarworks reference software or leaving it off at 0db. Seems like I should be leaving it off becase I'm often reading the meters and checking the level. However, if I leave it off, the extra frequncies that have been added could cause the master to clip?
Old 17th December 2018
  #209
Mastering Moderator
 
Riccardo's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward Shnapper View Post
Hey guys. I'm a little confused, if someone could help me out that would be much appreciated.

When mastering, should I be switching on the 'safe headroom' option on sonarworks reference software or leaving it off at 0db. Seems like I should be leaving it off becase I'm often reading the meters and checking the level. However, if I leave it off, the extra frequncies that have been added could cause the master to clip?
That is likely implemented to avoid clipping if you have dips that need boosting in order to flatten your room (headphone?) response.
Old 21st December 2018
  #210
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Just did a shoot out with my ATH-R70xs vs a $1,600 pair of headphones and the ATHs won!
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump