How to equalize monitor headphones for a neutral sound?

[Jac459]

This is probably a silly question, but: why all these complications, rather than using eqmac?

This is probably a silly question, but: what is eqmac?

Ok I googled it. Actually, having a system wide EQ is also a very good idea...

The advantage of the solution of Uncle E in my view is that it is all contained in your DAW and you can also create specific profile in the EQ without ever impacting your mix down. For example, morphIT allows to simulate various headset from your headset and it works surprisingly well. I emulate the Sony 1000xm5 from my Focal because Sony is very very heavy in Bass and being able to emulate directly really helps...

It is only a bit of work the first time, after you just put that in your template.

[Jac459]

Talking about smart way to use FX tracks for mixing&mastering, excellent video from Polarity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QNdDPRjvjg

[Uncle E]

This is probably a silly question, but: why all these complications, rather than using eqmac?

I'm still a bit concerned about eqmac adding latency. More importantly for me, I'm using VSX for my eq correction so I have no choice but to use a send, although I think they're working on a system-wide solution.

[Monsieur_FyP]

This is probably a silly question, but: why all these complications, rather than using eqmac?

I'm still a bit concerned about eqmac adding latency.

I can understand the concern. In any case, they claimed in 2022 to have « improved the latency compensation calculations… »

[MetalSir]

It won’t work with the MacBook headphone output. Your interface needs to have a dedicated headphone output separate from the main outputs. Create a send that outputs directly to the headphones and place the EQ in that send’s insert. Very important that this send does not send signal back to the main buss, it needs to go out to the headphones and stop there.

many tks for your reply

Ok, I am no expert in routing but I will explain step by step what I did as it may be useful for others (and if you spot any mistake, please let me know).

1 - Create an FX track in your DAW ==> let's call it "listening track". In this track, make sure your signal is fully wet. I mean 0% original signal, 100% signal after the FX devices you will put (our corrective EQ). I am not sure on how to do that on every DAW but in Bitwig, you need to keep all the tracks volumes to 0 (in the FX track interface) and set the FX track volume to 100% (cf screenshot)(.....)

bro, I have seen this tutorial only now! I'm sorry for the DM but ain't no notification from this forum! Imma try this on LUNA and check if it works!
the ultimate solution is just to remember to bypass the headphones eq before bouncing any track!

This is probably a silly question, but: why all these complications, rather than using eqmac?

fair point, I have installed and configured it, I just want to compare eqmac with an IR-based response.

[Jac459]

the ultimate solution is just to remember to bypass the headphones eq before bouncing any track!

That's what I try to avoid with this tutorial because believe me, you will forget and get confused (did I by pass?)

[MetalSir]

This is probably a silly question, but: why all these complications, rather than using eqmac?

I'm still a bit concerned about eqmac adding latency. More importantly for me, I'm using VSX for my eq correction so I have no choice but to use a send, although I think they're working on a system-wide solution.

using it right now, I have zero (or not appreciable) latency. I'm testing YouTube, Netflix (for checking the sync with the video) and there is no latency IMHO.

EDIT: on LUNA actually I have latency. but not on YT, Netflix, nor on any other audio-video support on my SDD.

Then I checked LUNA for the IR eq solution: can't be done. LUNA simply doesn't allow it.

So, all considered the eqmac, taking into consideration that fully works for absolutely free, is a MAJESTIC solution.

[MetalSir]

Talking about smart way to use FX tracks for mixing&mastering, excellent video from Polarity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QNdDPRjvjg

I much appreciated this video, many tks! I casually discovered that fabfilter pro Q3 does ta similar thing: let's suppose that you loaded the Q3 on 7 tracks, you can see a graphic recap of all these tracks separately on every instance.

[Jac459]

Talking about smart way to use FX tracks for mixing&mastering, excellent video from Polarity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QNdDPRjvjg

I much appreciated this video, many tks! I casually discovered that fabfilter pro Q3 does ta similar thing: let's suppose that you loaded the Q3 on 7 tracks, you can see a graphic recap of all these tracks separately on every instance.

Yes, neutron does that too. Polarity is the minister of re-creating plug ins with DAW features only.

[_al_]

Seems like you got your answer, but I'll add my experience, just because I find the topic interesting haha

I did this manually by putting my headphones on and playing a sinewave slowly up the keyboard, note by note.
I was worried that there might be some little "in-between notes" peaks, but I felt that it would be easier to identify problem areas, if I just let my DAW play slow, constant tones, as a sudden jump in volume would be more noticeable than gradual up/down that a sweep would give.

Happily used this preset in all my tracks for a month or two, and then found out about Sonarworks and Realphones.

Upon installing and testing these apps, I was surprised to see that Realphones sounded almost IDENTICAL to my custom EQ curve. The on-screen EQ curve in Realphones looked a bit different to mine, but the sound was so close, it shocked me.

Sonarworks was not so close. Noticed differences immediately.
Not necessarily a bad thing, as all pairs of headphones have a unique curve to some degree, so maybe Realphones got lucky with my pair. Who knows.

I did end up still buying Realphones though! Just for peace of mind.
Was quite weird, buying a VST to replace my EQ settings, and hearing almost no noticeable change whatsoever

But hey... I really wanted to leave that sort of thing to professionals, so I was happy to do so.

Did get an added bonus when I realised I now had systemwide correction though!

So yeah... if you got a good ear for it (good at level balancing and stuff), then yeah, you'll get along just fine with some good EQ settings.

But be warned... the graphical EQ display you might find for your headphones, might not be enough to get a true flat sound.
As I said earlier, the graph I downloaded for my ATHMX 50, or whatever the fk they're called, actually looked quite different to the curve I had to draw on my EQ, and yet, the sound matched perfectly! And I created my EQ curve before I even looked at any online graph readouts.

If I had followed an online graph to clone in a vst EQ, it would've been nowhere near as close.

So yeah... just a little headsup about blindly copying a pic on the net.
I would at least get a second opinion, by playing a sine wave through your custom settings, to make sure there really is no peaks or dips

[Jac459]

Seems like you got your answer, but I'll add my experience, just because I find the topic interesting haha

I did this manually by putting my headphones on and playing a sinewave slowly up the keyboard, note by note.
I was worried that there might be some little "in-between notes" peaks, but I felt that it would be easier to identify problem areas, if I just let my DAW play slow, constant tones, as a sudden jump in volume would be more noticeable than gradual up/down that a sweep would give.

Happily used this preset in all my tracks for a month or two, and then found out about Sonarworks and Realphones.

Upon installing and testing these apps, I was surprised to see that Realphones sounded almost IDENTICAL to my custom EQ curve. The on-screen EQ curve in Realphones looked a bit different to mine, but the sound was so close, it shocked me.

Sonarworks was not so close. Noticed differences immediately.
Not necessarily a bad thing, as all pairs of headphones have a unique curve to some degree, so maybe Realphones got lucky with my pair. Who knows.

I did end up still buying Realphones though! Just for peace of mind.
Was quite weird, buying a VST to replace my EQ settings, and hearing almost no noticeable change whatsoever

But hey... I really wanted to leave that sort of thing to professionals, so I was happy to do so.

Did get an added bonus when I realised I now had systemwide correction though!

So yeah... if you got a good ear for it (good at level balancing and stuff), then yeah, you'll get along just fine with some good EQ settings.

But be warned... the graphical EQ display you might find for your headphones, might not be enough to get a true flat sound.
As I said earlier, the graph I downloaded for my ATHMX 50, or whatever the fk they're called, actually looked quite different to the curve I had to draw on my EQ, and yet, the sound matched perfectly! And I created my EQ curve before I even looked at any online graph readouts.

If I had followed an online graph to clone in a vst EQ, it would've been nowhere near as close.

So yeah... just a little headsup about blindly copying a pic on the net.
I would at least get a second opinion, by playing a sine wave through your custom settings, to make sure there really is no peaks or dips

That's indeed an interesting experience, but you raise here another question. Should we also correct our hear frequency response ?
Because by doing as you did with your DAW, you are in fact measuring in one go both your headphones and your ears (I assume you are passed your early 20s and thus your ears are not perfect).

I know there is some app doing also system wide EQ but use a frequency response test first in order to calibrate your ears....

To me, my reasoning is that most (or all) of the cases I don't use frequency corrections for my ears so I better NOT correct them during my mastering. I prefer to rely on a few good reference songs...
I still correct my headphones during the mastering (also because I much better prefer the sound of my headphones when flat) and after try to simulate many different listening environments either virtually by plugins, or by trying on different cans and speakers.

[MetalSir]

Seems like you got your answer, but I'll add my experience, just because I find the topic interesting haha

I did this manually by putting my headphones on and playing a sinewave slowly up the keyboard, note by note.
I was worried that there might be some little "in-between notes" peaks, but I felt that it would be easier to identify problem areas, if I just let my DAW play slow, constant tones, as a sudden jump in volume would be more noticeable than gradual up/down that a sweep would give.

Happily used this preset in all my tracks for a month or two, and then found out about Sonarworks and Realphones.

Upon installing and testing these apps, I was surprised to see that Realphones sounded almost IDENTICAL to my custom EQ curve. The on-screen EQ curve in Realphones looked a bit different to mine, but the sound was so close, it shocked me.

Sonarworks was not so close. Noticed differences immediately.
Not necessarily a bad thing, as all pairs of headphones have a unique curve to some degree, so maybe Realphones got lucky with my pair. Who knows.

I did end up still buying Realphones though! Just for peace of mind.
Was quite weird, buying a VST to replace my EQ settings, and hearing almost no noticeable change whatsoever

But hey... I really wanted to leave that sort of thing to professionals, so I was happy to do so.

Did get an added bonus when I realised I now had systemwide correction though!

So yeah... if you got a good ear for it (good at level balancing and stuff), then yeah, you'll get along just fine with some good EQ settings.

But be warned... the graphical EQ display you might find for your headphones, might not be enough to get a true flat sound.
As I said earlier, the graph I downloaded for my ATHMX 50, or whatever the fk they're called, actually looked quite different to the curve I had to draw on my EQ, and yet, the sound matched perfectly! And I created my EQ curve before I even looked at any online graph readouts.

If I had followed an online graph to clone in a vst EQ, it would've been nowhere near as close.

So yeah... just a little headsup about blindly copying a pic on the net.
I would at least get a second opinion, by playing a sine wave through your custom settings, to make sure there really is no peaks or dips

tks for sharing, I found this very interesting.
I'm quite sure that you are right, in fact, eqMac wants you to buy the paid version to unlock the "expert eq" with more than 10 bands (the free one).
this is why I tried to use the IR because putting an eq somewhere can't be something to pay for, IMHO.

PS: majestic ear I'd not be able to do it myself

PPS: can't get why inside the sequencer eqMac has latency and not on any other media outside of the sequencer

[MetalSir]

Did an entire mix with the new headphones eq system.

Anyone willing to give a listen on some studio monitors? I don't have any.

https://soundcloud.com/marcopetrone/wil ... w-mix-test

I feel like vocals needs +0.1-0.3 db of love to be on point, maybe a slight touch of compression but.. this is the first time ever I mix such a musical genre. Never did anything but metal in 20y

[kmonkey]

While I was VERY skeptical about headphone mixing after trying out numerous tools such as VSX(worst headphones in the history of the universe FOR ME), Dear Reality, Siena, Waves, Toneboosters, and some I can not remember the names anymore I almost dismissed it entirely. Then I tried dSONIQ Realhpnes 2.0 (1.8 prior to that) and I am still trying to find my jaw in my room.

https://www.dsoniq.com/realphones

In fact and this goes to tell you how still shocked I am - On the tracks that I grew with, and which I was under the impression I knew entirely at the lowest level - with Realphones 2.0 I was able to hear details like never before.

That was all happening with my Beyerdynamic DT 1770 Pro. But the whole thing got me interested so I ordered plenty of headphones (including planar magnetic) and settled for Neumann NDH 30 - which is not a perfect headphone system but my cons are related to clamp force (lack of it) and some small nonsense stuff.

With NDH 30 and Realphones, not only I am looking for my jaw, but I lost my brain altogether and listened to all my albums and thought something along the lines of "Is this the experience my favorite artist felt when created these tracks".

So you see it is a bit extreme expression but so was my experience with it. Your mileage may vary. I suggest you invest in good headphones, open back, and see for yourself. In Realphones ensure you try Studio 21A, set the ambiance to 50%, tweak the correction percentage, and just ...WTF


edit: yes I have SonarworksSound ID but it is not close to realism like Realphones. Plus they offer you linear phase filters which is an illogical decision. Because with headphones you want minimum phase filters (EQ). I was very surprised about that. Turns out their developers are not that insightful after all and they debated about it.

https://reference-4.support.sonarworks. ... eadphones-

[Uncle E]

So you see it is a bit extreme expression but so was my experience with it. Your mileage may vary. I suggest you invest in good headphones, open back, and see for yourself. In Realphones ensure you try Studio 21A, set the ambiance to 50%, tweak the correction percentage, and just ...WTF

Thanks. This is good. I own 5 headphones and not one of them is supported. However, my Airpods are. Not ideal and obviously not remotely close to what you experienced but still a huge improvement, anyway. Also, their system-wide app allows the Airpods to work with Studio One, which isn't possible otherwise due to a sample rate issue.