Post your Equalization (Equalizer, EQ, PEQ) Presets

So I though someone had already made a thread for this, but I couldn’t find it. Anyone else notice you can’t search two letter words like “EQ” unless you know to add the quotation marks? I suspect that’s part of the reason we have a bunch of dead EQ related threads.

Anyway this morning I’ve experimenting with my (original) Sundara to see if I can make it more “fun” sounding like the HE-4XX. This is what I came up with. Personally I find listening to stuff like pop music much more enjoyable with this tuning.

If you copy the text below to a .txt file, you easily import them to Peace or EQ APO.
Note that “LS” indicates a low shelf filter and “PK” indicates a peak filter.

Equalizer: Generic
No measurement
Filter 1: ON LS          FC 300  Gain  2 Q 1
Filter 2: ON PK          FC 2000  Gain  3 Q 1.6
Filter 3: ON PK          FC 5500  Gain  -3 Q 4
Filter 4: ON PK          FC 8000  Gain  5 Q 1.8
Filter 5: ON PK          FC 12200  Gain  -5 Q 3

This chart shows the new theoretical response curve along with the original.

(The chart was generated using an Excel tool I’m currently developing.)

EQ Chart

1 Like

So I wanted to run an experiment to see how reliable headphone measurements are for working with EQ. I sourced Elex and Clear measurements from Oratory1990 on the AutoEQ Github. Since the measurement rig and headphones structures are the same, the measured relative differences should be pretty accurate. So theoretically I can tune the Elex to sound like the Clear using these measurements. Below is what I came up with.

Equalizer: Generic
No measurement
Filter 1: ON LS          FC 400  Gain  -0.5 Q 0.5
Filter 2: ON PK          FC 2800  Gain  2.5 Q 1
Filter 3: ON PK          FC 5000  Gain  -3.5 Q 0.9
Filter 4: ON PK          FC 8100  Gain  1 Q 5
Filter 5: ON PK          FC 10000  Gain  -1.5 Q 5

For testing, I had my 789 and Atom running simultaneously. The two should be close enough for this test. After going back and forth between the two for more than an hour, I found the Elex+EQ to be close but definitely not perfect. The Elex was still peaking noticeably more in the mids.

Anyway, if any Elex owners want to test out the Clear’s tuning, feel free to try this out. I would just ignore the bass reduction since it will give a little better results. Also keep in mind an actual Clear will sound more balanced/neutral.

1 Like

Great to hear your results!

I’ve done the same thing but with M50x, DT1990 and HD600. Found the Oratory1990 measurements to be most accurate. Not unexpected, given he’s using a more recent and more realistic measurement ear. Only exception is the HD600 for which the innerfidelity graph is slightly more accurate. But in this case I suspect that’s due to the well-worn pads on my unit. Since Oratory also does both the Clear and Elex, I’d be very interested in your results doing the same experiment but with his data.

1 Like

I’m glad you’re here Maynard. You might be the only person on this forum who cares lol.

I didn’t realize the Oratory1990 measurements are supposed to be more accurate. I opted to go with innerfidelity after looking the at HD600 graphs specifically. Those spikes after 10k don’t seem right at all to me.

I will do the test again a little later.

1 Like

Oratory is using the latest, greatest, most expensive, and most standards-compliant equipment. InnerFi and Rtings are using much older gear with a straight pipe for an ear canal. In theory their measurements are meaningless above 10 kHz and problematic above 2 or 3 kHz. But OTOH I’ve seen Oratory graphs that make me scratch my head, so would really like to see each one validated by tests like you’re doing.

Here is the raw graph for the HD 600:

The red and blue lines are compensated and averaged. What’s important are the raw data for each of 5 trials. Notice how wildly the 10 to 20 kHz region differs from trial to trial. Peaks as pronounced as Oratory shows may be buried in there for all I can tell. (And Axel Grel at Sennheiser was using equipment that was no more accurate than this when developing the 600.)

But again, what do your ears hear? Mine don’t hear anything above 10 kHz, so if the Oratory graph doesn’t match what you hear with younger ears, a continuous test tone plus a flat amp & dac that settles the matter for me.

1 Like

The red and blue lines are the two channels right? That’s a pretty big channel imbalance from 5-10k. I wish he used a better pair lol.
And yeah it’s hard to make sense of the trials with them bunched together. I wish he made his raw data available somewhere. From now on, I will focus on oratory’s measurements. Another good test case will be comparing the 58X, 6XX, and 600.

Okay it turns I did use the oratory1990 data for the Elex vs Clear test. The innerfidelity database doesn’t have Elex measurements. Knowing that I was already using the best data available, it’s a bit disappointing I didn’t get a closer match. But I guess one possible reason could just be manufacture variability. I have seen it suggested the Elex has it worse than normal.

1 Like

Of course and to state the obvious, until you know you have an accurate graph for at least one headphone you own, there’s no way to pin down which headphone’s measurements in a simulation test is at fault. In my case, Oratory’s graph for the DT 1990 just nails it for my own DT 1990. So when I simulate another headphone on the 1990 I know any discrepancy has to come from the other headphone’s measurements.

Perhaps try this? EQ one of your headphones to the no-bass Harman curve using the Oratory graph. Now listen to it using On-line Tone Generator or whatever sine sweep approach you’re comfortable with. As you go up in FR do you hear flat or a very steady rise or fall throughout? If so, that suggests a good match. If not, try another guy’s graph. If still no joy, do the same thing with each of your headphones that have usable measurements in turn.

(Of course, if you hear the same upper mids or treble spike in multiple cases that suggests it’s one of your ear canal resonances at work, not the measurements.)

1 Like

Parametric for the Sivga P-II / Blon B20 (do not know if it applies to the Sendy Aiva):

  • Filter 1: PK Fc 31 Hz Gain 1.3 dB Q 0.75
  • Filter 2: PK Fc 217 Hz Gain -1.2 dB Q 0.89
  • Filter 3: PK Fc 638 Hz Gain -2.8 dB Q 6.05
  • Filter 4: PK Fc 717 Hz Gain 4.0 dB Q 7.25
  • Filter 5: PK Fc 1182 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 3.04
  • Filter 6: PK Fc 1945 Hz Gain 1.1 dB Q 5.02
  • Filter 7: PK Fc 3771 Hz Gain -4.1 dB Q 2.47
  • Filter 8: PK Fc 5998 Hz Gain 4.7 dB Q 2.41
  • Filter 9: PK Fc 12592 Hz Gain -5.0 dB Q 2.22
  • Filter 10: PK Fc 17476 Hz Gain 0.3 dB Q 2.62

It looks like those presets are from Crinacle database on the AutoEQ github. There’s also one for the Sendy Aiva. I tried out the Aiva one and I wasn’t a fan. How are you liking that EQ on the B20?

Can you elaborate on this? I currently have the 4xx and really enjoy it and most say the Sundara is an upgrade.

Also, do you have an EQ for the 4xx?

marcgii: I tweaked them somewhat based on the graphs Sivga published. I have the P-II, not the B20, but like the settings. Tried changing the pads to the perforated Aivas, and prefer the Sivga stock ones.

[EDIT: I see the github B20 EQ post was changed 12 days ago and now the numbers are different. Guess I will see what those do…

Yes the Sundara is an upgrade. If you look at the measurement graph up top, you’ll see that the 4XX has got bit more low end and more treble around 6-10k. Those two things make the 4XX more enjoyable for me on pop music (the only thing I use the 4XX for). I also find the 4XX to have greater presence for female vocals—which is half due to the treble. The Sundara is more neutral which I guessing most people prefer.

As for EQ, I haven’t used any with the 4XX. Was there something about the 4XX you want to improve?

Ah, gotcha.

I’ve been playing around w/ EQ on the 4xx and have something that I really enjoy.

EQ settings are a mix of metal and oluv’s…

EQ for the HE4XX (1.4142 narrow Q-factor):
31.5Hz +3.5dB
63Hz +1.5dB
1kHz -1dB
2kHz +4.5dB
4kHz +1.5dB
8kHz -4.5dB
16kHz +6dB

EqualizerAPO EQ Preset:
Channel: all
Preamp: -5 dB
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 30 Hz Gain 3 dB Q 1.41
Filter 5: ON LS Fc 100 Hz Gain 2 dB
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 3500 Hz Gain 2 dB Q 2
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 7000 Hz Gain -5.5 dB Q 2
Filter 11: ON PK Fc 10500 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 2
Filter 12: ON HS Fc 10000 Hz Gain -2 dB

I do want to try the Sundara’s next.

1 Like

That’s a pretty significant amount of EQ. I’m guessing it’s to bring it closer to the Harman curve. If you’re willing to use EQ, then the Sundara is an even safer bet

yooooo marcgii, since u seem to be an EQ whiz. what frequencies would u mess with to get a warm headphone? any good guides u know of?

I’m definitely no wiz yet lol. My strategy for getting the sound I want (aside from trial and error) is to compare the measurements between two headphones like I did with the very first post. When I think “warm” I think HD6XX, so I’d use that as my reference point. Otherwise I’d say warm sounding headphones will have greater bass emphasis centered around 100-200 hz. So you could start boosting there. But it might make more sense to lower the mids or highs instead depending on the headphone.

Also here’s a post with general resources related to EQ. Look at the video playlist and the DIY AUDIO link.


New Aiva EQ!!! With the help of the EARS, I EQ’d it to have a similar midrange to the HD600. So far the results are pretty good. But I will keep working on it and update this post later.

Equalizer: Generic
No measurement
Filter 1: ON PK          FC 20  Gain  4 Q 1
Filter 2: ON PK          FC 950  Gain  -2 Q 1.6
Filter 3: ON PK          FC 3000  Gain  4 Q 0.8
Filter 4: ON PK          FC 6000  Gain  6 Q 3
Filter 5: ON PK          FC 2300  Gain  6 Q 4

Version 2

Equalizer: Generic
No measurement
Filter 1: ON PK          FC 20  Gain  4 Q 1
Filter 2: ON PK          FC 950  Gain  -2 Q 1.6
Filter 3: ON PK          FC 2300  Gain  4 Q 4
Filter 4: ON PK          FC 3000  Gain  2 Q 0.8
Filter 5: ON PK          FC 6000  Gain  3 Q 2
1 Like

I don’t know if this is the right place to post this but I’ve been playing around with my DT 1990’s to make them more mid forward. I don’t know too much about eq other than the bare basics so normally I go by ear.

I based my eq off Oratory 1990’s preset :

Band 1 LOW_SHELF FC 90 Hz GAIN 4,0 dB Q 0,7
Band 2 PEAK FC 220 Hz GAIN -3,4 dB Q 0,7
Band 3 PEAK FC 1500 Hz GAIN -1,0 dB Q 3,0
Band 4 PEAK FC 2700 Hz GAIN -1,1 dB Q 6,0
Band 5 PEAK FC 3700 Hz GAIN 2,6 dB Q 4,0
Band 6 PEAK FC 5500 Hz GAIN -1,5 dB Q 4,0
Band 7 PEAK FC 6400 Hz GAIN 2,9 dB Q 7,0
Band 8 PEAK FC 7350 Hz GAIN -5,8 dB Q 5,0
Band 9 PEAK FC 8350 Hz GAIN -7,3 dB Q 3,5
Band 10 PEAK FC 15000 Hz GAIN -6,0 dB Q 1,0

And this is my current “mid forward” preset:

Band 1 LOW_SHELF FC 90 Hz GAIN 3,0 dB Q 0,7
Band 2 PEAK FC 220 Hz GAIN 0 dB Q 0,7
Band 3 PEAK FC 1500 Hz GAIN 0 dB Q 3,0
Band 4 PEAK FC 2700 Hz GAIN 0 dB Q 6,0
Band 5 PEAK FC 3700 Hz GAIN 2,6 dB Q 4,0
Band 6 PEAK FC 5500 Hz GAIN -2 dB Q 4,0
Band 7 PEAK FC 6400 Hz GAIN 0,9 dB Q 7,0
Band 8 PEAK FC 7350 Hz GAIN -5,8 dB Q 5,0
Band 9 PEAK FC 8350 Hz GAIN -7,3 dB Q 3,5
Band 10 PEAK FC 15000 Hz GAIN -6,0 dB Q 1,0

Basically my changes were lowering the bass by 1 dB to hear vocals easier, undoing oratory’s changes to most mids frequencies as he reduced most of them (He did boosted 3700 so I left that one unchanged) and I reduced the 5500 and 6400 frequencies hoping to reduce siblance a little. As you can see most of my changes are based on nothing really so any thoughts about them would be appreciated.

1 Like