Do you mean the 2x4 that people use for loudspeaker stuff? Looks awfully technical. Glad you’re volunteering to provide the hand-holding I would need if that’s the case. (What a long thread that would be.)
Yep. That’s what made me aware (and envious) of EQ APO in de first place! Them thar techniques am what I ‘parently isn’t a-doin’ correct like.
IAC, while I look forward to exploring EQ APO, fact is it doesn’t run on my MacBook. And another fact is that there are many reasons why I want to continue to do my listening from the laptop.
No underestimation here either of EQ APO or the depths of my ignorance on what to do with it.
But really the upshot is that despite a mere 31 fixed frequencies to work with (1/3 octave points) I haven’t run into any examples yet of where I would benefit from more. For example, even the dreaded 10 dB 7-9 kHz peak of the DT 1990 seems to be purring like a kitten. Smooth transition from 6.3 to 8 to 10 kHz. So presumably under the hood, the GEQ is calculating the optimal Q to connect any two points smoothly.
Thanks! had previously seen both those vids. It’s very comforting to know there actually is an n-channel PEQ option available for Macs. One project I already have slated for the end of shirt-sleeve-outdoors weather is to get the hang of PEQ a la EQ APO. After that, Mini-DSP may well look like a necessity.
But right now I’m still in shock thanks to that online tone generator you posted. I have some hearing damage in one ear. After playing with various EQ work-arounds I decided that ignoring my own variance in that area of the spectrum and EQ’ing to flat based on measurement data was the best approach. But playing with that app, I decided to try EQ’ing that region to subjective smoothness like every other part of the sound spectrum already was. Mind-blowing improvement.
Of course I could have done the same thing with a sine sweep, but the sheer ease of use of that app encourages experimentation Thanks so much for bringing to our attention!
… Although – on the downside – that totally eliminates any chance I’ll ever be able to stand using a headphone for music listening without EQ. Had in back of mind picking up a used HD 600, which of course comes admirably close to being flat, but now I’d have to EQ it to add my broken ear correction.
You can also use brown noise and pink noise to help judge if a frequency is missing or misadjusted. You just have to learn what the noise should sound like, and then you can go off of that point of reference if you want to make it as neutral as possible to you.
Looking at the 770 it seems to do a pretty bad job at picking up higher frequencies since beyerdynamic has a telltale peak in the higher frequencies. Picked up the random droops on the 770, so at least it has that going for it. Otherwise it seems like better-than-nothing way of measuring it, which is still respectable.
No problem! I was debating whether I should make me own sweep with a slider or not, then realized I should just google for it, so I found this after some poking around, lol.
Yeah I immediately was looking for the 8-9 kHz peak after I took that data… I’m planning on fooling around with the setup a bit more so I can get more consistent/accurate high frequency results. For now it seems to do well enough through the mid range.
The volume was a bit high, probably ~95 dB, but I didn’t check.
Unfortunately my phantoms didn’t come this weekend, so I won’t be able to play around with measuring those, but I’ll likely play with the 6XX’s and the 770’s a bit more…
(What a long thread that would be.)