Sure stating that I am using EQ and which Tips Iām using makes perfect sense. With that said, please donāt make blanket opinion statements as fact. This can put off someone who has no issue with EQ from enjoying the benefits of it.
As of right now, I donāt know of any other IEM that will meet my requirements more than the Tea with EQ applied.
If one comes out or I discover one, Iāll probably sell these and get that. Sounds like there may be something coming soon and Iām patiently waiting for a comparison of the Tea with the 7hz Timeless.
I shared my EQ settings initially as I was very pleased with the outcome and thought others would enjoy hearing the improvements. I never expected to be attacked over looking to share this experience.
As for stating the changes you make, the same applies for tips. If you are discussing the sound of an IEM itās important to mention the tips youāre using as this can change the sound as well. EQ would apply the same to this general curtesy.
I swear i tried to hear this negative effect with an open mind, i REALLY tried and i just cannot hear it. Maybe because i am doing EQ right, meaning i always lower the pre amplifying to match the maximum dB boost, maybe because i have crappy ears.
Sure if you boost the bass of a transducer which canāt handle it then the negative effect will be obvious.
Anyways, regardless of why i cannot hear that negative effect what matters to me is that i can hear the sound signature improvement i chase after with EQ, and i cannot hear all the possible negative effects (distortion, masking, etc).
What i dislike about the āEQ policeā stance many have (and i am NOT saying you are one of the EQ police, i know you EQ your HE6se), is that most likely 99% of them cannot hear the negative effects of EQ, they just donāt use EQ because they know that, THEORETICALLY, those effects are there.
That makes no sense to me, i put music enjoyment as my #1 priority and if it sounds right to my ears i literally could not care less if the methods i use are considered āwrongā.
An interesting example of this is the Abyss 1266, theoretically it measures extremely poorly when it comes to distortion (which is one of the negative side effects of EQ), and still they are one of the best if not THE best headphone out there.
You keep restating this after I already corrected it. There is no downside risk. Your ego is getting in the way of accepting that I already corrected this statement.
It was massively opinionated and you created that post to be āFactā. This is EXACTLY my point. Your statement that it should be used as a last resort and you should find another IEM if you feel you need EQ to improve the sound is a PURE opinion statement.
Your defense is to simply point the finger and say I donāt know what Iām talking about while you continue to spew opinion as fact.
Again. Please donāt state opinion as fact.
I misspoke when I said EQ has no downside, apologized, and corrected my statement to say no downside risk. I recognized that my statement was incorrect and did not portray the meaning of what I was attempting to state and corrected it.
Your statement about how EQ should be a last resort and itās better to just find another IEM is not a fact. This is Opinion.
Cool, thanks for sharing, Iāll give this a try as well! Over the years of using EQ Iāve personally tried to apply as few filters as possible to adjust major issues only, but love testing other profiles out as well.
Well, i was out for some hours, glad to see a shitstorm passing through. Keep it rollin.
Iām still waiting for @Jman841 answer on why Teas are not giant killers. I know they arent, just wanna see what IEMs are you using to make the comparition
The comparison is the Blessing 2 on the IEM side. I donāt think they sound ābetterā than the B2 did which is a similar price bracket. Specifically in terms of technicalities (Detail, resolution, Staging/layering). The Imaging on the Tea seems to be better to me but the tonality of the B2 was better in my opinion as I didnāt feel the need for EQ. With the Teaās, I believe they need it.
If I consider them comparable to another IEM in the same category, I would not call them a Giant Killer, and compared with my over ears in the similar price bracket, they are sub-par except for sub-bass. Sub bass on the Tea is excellent.
Iām afraid to start this up again, but I still donāt understand how EQ can push the BA drivers to poor timbre quality if you reduce the volume or gain, since itās still within the range of frequencies the driver can produce?
Also there seems to be a contradiction; Resolution said that timbre has nothing to do with FR, and EQ only changes the FR. So how can EQ effect the timbre?
It does not. Timbre is separate from the FR/tonality/tuning, although sometimes tonality CAN have some effect, but that is like when it is just flat out badly tuned.
Have you met @luizgarcia ? Ever hear of an IEM falling apart with EQ?
If the transducer is pushed beyond itās capabilities and falls apart. Itās not even good or bad timbre at that point. The transducer struggles to operate.
Iām honestly trying to understand you here. @luizgarcia says he reduces the preamp volume to match the highest increase in the EQ. And he seems pretty happy with his EQ settings. So I donāt see how heās pushing the transducers ābeyond their ability to operateā. It feels like unless you push things to extremes this is a non-issue, and Iām not sure why youāre making it out to be such a big issue that you should never EQ at all.
