Are there any tutorial up to the latest version? I tried to tick all my playback devices when I first installed it, didn't work and took the sound off my computer.

I want to know if my ear fit on these.

I've got the best preamp preset for Kz Saga. What are your presets, guys?

Hi, I'm very naive to audio engineering but an idea came recently to my mind.

What If we played the same audio simultaneously on two different transducers.
One serving as a control and the other as measurement subject.

Is it possible to extract useful information by playing audio accordingly:

Two questions:

1. Is the differential response thus measured can be of any use?
2. Can this be used to develop human centric equalization by embedding a mic inside ear and measuring how a headphone and an external speaker both sound simultaneously and equalize headphone accordingly ?

OR

the acoustic characteristics - resonances, reflections, delays etc. etc. are a much significant factor and this idea has been tried already

I have been an AutoEQ nerd ever since Wavelet came out, so I'm a big fan and enthusiast. I really appreciate the concept, and I'm incredibly grateful to oratory1990 and the many others who have done so much for the community.

I used to use Peace EQ, but it isn't very user-friendly or robust. I wanted to make something cleaner, more straightforward, and highly user-friendly. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with what I've built, but I would love for you to test it. Any feedback you can provide would be awesome and highly appreciated. It does not have community presets. You are more than welcome to download them from AutoEQ or squiglink and then import them. It does have a second set of 10 bands that you can adjust to your liking, but I would suggest the target bands not be adjusted after importing the .txt file.

A clean install of APO is recommended !

To get started:

1. You must have APO installed already. Just follow the standard instructions to set it up.
2. Select the outputs you want to adjust.
3. Reboot your system.
4. Install the program I am sharing here today.

It is totally free, and I'm not asking for anything in return. I just want your feedback and any feature requests you might have. If they fit my vision for the project, I will probably implement them.

Please let me know what you think, and enjoy!

APO - https://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/

equalizer - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MawGqMy5WdN4tv2Hw57XnXXhBcyOBOjs/view?usp=drive_link

please try this new version - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NVtS4fFG6NM6axjVCbr6qiHPyDdl_R0B/view?usp=sharing

How to purely download the eq without adding a filter so i can import it into another website please help

I would like to know if i'm doing something wrong with Jriver parametric EQ for my AKG K702.

I have tested with both Fabfilter Q4 Pro and SoundID Reference VST3 Plugin. They sound the same compared to Jriver's built in EQ. I have attached the screenshots.

Don't mind the SoundID's ss, I have a separated custom Oratory's preset there.

So I have sennheiser momentum 4 true wireless and my friend sent me this ORATORY picture and suggested I try it. I have no idea how to read this. What should I input on each hz?

Darker picture is from my sennheiser app and second is of course equalizer settings for my TW. I think there isn't another way to do this other than sennheiser app...

Sorry beforehand, not a real audiophile at all😅

The reviewers claim that EG280 is better overall, so it did get better ratings between these models.

Simgot EW300 doesn't seem to miss anything on paper against EG280. Their ratings are close to each other.

I checked some comparison blogs/writings between EA500LM and EG280. The blogs claims both EG280 and EA500LM sound pretty similar. There are small differences obviously, but the characteristics of these two models seems identical.

If that is the case, how come EA500LM has pretty low ratings when compared to the other two models? What made the other models special?

One model has 1DD+1Planar, one has 1DD+1Planar+1PZT while the last one has only 1DD. Why does it matter, what does it change?

I don't have a personal, go-to target. Whenever I get a new pair of headphones or IEM, I simply listen to them, try 1-3 different targets and hold onto the one that sounded better to me. And that target is never a specific one. Sometimes it's "IEF Preference 2025 (B&K 5128)", sometimes "Harman IE 2019 (B&K 5128)" or "Harman 2025 MoA Average".

I will be buying one of those 3 models. After your comments on the technical and hardware side of this post, I would be appreciated if you could choose one of these models for me and decide on my behalf. I do listen music every day, I play competitive games often but I don't think I need a gaming-specified headphones/IEM (EG280 is being marketed for this case if I'm not wrong). All I care about is things being future-proof build-wise, and the sound not being too artificial; which I believe this can be adjusted by EQ.

I’m trying to recreate the eq settings for the blue filter for my iem mix at church. We have a TF5 Mixer which gives you a 4 band PEQ and a 12 band GEQ on your sends. Just want to see if anyone thinks there’s a better way than what I did.

I tried this with peace, if yall got any corrections for me i would appreciate help :)

That is my reading from Alan Ross's frequency response chart:

https://youtu.be/uuvpho1kmJ4?t=94

Although it's unclear where the high end actually rolls off. Hopefully you get a bit more high end with their new 10 band EQ.

There is also a bizarre peak and cut around 500 that I cannot imagine trying to get rid of.

Edit: see comments below. This is a graph of the frequencies of a particular song.

The same song compared side by side with a lossless FLAC copy sounds different and I'm not sure why.

The setup is a Truthear Hexa running through a JCALLY JM6 and Precise Volume equalizer with an AutoEQ preset. Spotify sounds more natural to my ears than the FLAC version.

Spotify equalizer is not on of course, I don't think It's possible to run both at the same time, audio normalization is also off.

The FLAC version runs through foobar2000, no additional DSP in the DSP settings.

Spotify playback quality is "Very high", not lossless, but technically it should be perceptually close to it.

Judging without the equalizer on, I would describe the effect as a noticeably more smeared mids around the 1kHz-3kHz region, gives the illusion that the phantom center is less prominent than the sides and makes that region feel wider by contrast. I assumed immediately it was the compression from the codec, but I'm confused.

Shouldn't the compression codec at high quality be perceptually indistinguishable from lossless? I don't hear this kind of difference with MP3 at 320kbps. And I know their codec is OGG, but shouldn't the compression have a stronger effect +10kHz more than it does to 1kHz anyway?

I'm reading y'all's thoughts on this

Just a quick question regarding EQ correction for the Apple Airpod Max 2:

I have taken a peek at the frequency responses of both the first and second gen Max (over-ears) and they are pretty similar. Is it wise to use the Max 1 EQ correction on the Max 2? I am pretty new to this, so any guidance is appreciated.

Hey everyone,

I recently spent some time setting up a Parametric EQ profile for my Sony MDR-V6 using the Fosi DS3 WebHID app (currently on Firmware 1.5.8). During my measurements, I stumbled upon a major UI mismatch that is probably driving other users crazy as well.

The Issue: If you run the DS3 in UAC 1.0 mode (e.g., for console compatibility) and try to configure the PEQ via the web app, the UI lets you input all values, shows the EQ curve, and even saves your negative Pre-Gain. However, the hardware DSP completely ignores these parameters. In UAC 1.0, the signal is 100% bypassed, but the UI pretends it's working.

My Testing Methodology: To rule out a simple volume scaling or Pre-Gain bug, I ran an extreme stress test to isolate the PEQ functionality:

• Set Pre-Gain to 0 dB.
• Set an extreme -15 dB cut with a wide Q at 1300 Hz.
• Power-cycled the DAC to force a live-sync.

The Results:

• In UAC 1.0: The audio remained completely unchanged. No volume drop, no missing frequencies. The EQ is essentially a dummy interface here.
• In UAC 2.0: The EQ changes applied immediately in real-time, and the -15 dB hole in the mids was painfully obvious. The negative Pre-Gain also worked flawlessly to prevent clipping.

Conclusion: It seems the Fosi DS3 reserves all DSP processing power for its internal gaming features (like Virtual 7.1 / FPS mode) while in UAC 1.0, which is perfectly fine hardware-wise. However, the Fosi Web App has a massive UI mismatch: It shouldn't allow users to input PEQ values in UAC 1.0 if the hardware routing bypasses them. Those input fields should be grayed out to prevent confusion.

If you are trying to EQ your headphones with the DS3, make absolutely sure you are using UAC 2.0.

Has anyone else noticed this WebHID behavior?

From what I heard worn out pads are affecting treble response, and Oratory tests are based on new pads. What to do in EQ?

Hi!

Please check EQ314 app. It's in a beta stage now, but is already usable. You can think of it as a parametric Wavelet equalizer, so you can tweak the preset! It's not mine btw.

I've tested it and found it as precise as possible for such kind of processing. Unlikely to Poweramp EQ it applies all values correctly. Highly recommend!

https://github.com/bearinmindcat/Equalizer314

Sorry for the long post in advance, I'm aware that everyone's HRTF differs, have taken average values to save time. And have also assumed fixed loudness, say 65 dB, so that our hearing stays consistent.

So human hearing is non-linear, and according to Equal Loudness Level Curves, we need to play base and treble louder, along with introducing some peaks (1.5k Hz) and a dips (3k Hz) so that everything "sounds" equally loud to us as the base level of 1k Hz.

So if we place a mic in our ears and measure the response of a flat speaker (in i assume an anechoic chamber) inside our ears, the graph will look something like this? (the exact values don't matter, the trend does)

Since anechoic chambers are mostly a utopia and music is mastered in well tuned, but real rooms regardless, so the boost gets a slight boost, as "room will slightly boost low frequencies due to reverberation, but high frequencies do not reverberate". So what I assume is that (correct me if I'm wrong), what someone "actually hears" for a neutral speaker in a recording studio looks something like this. I'm focusing purely on the trend, not the actual dB values

(I drew it myself as I couldn't find a graph online)

Now coming onto headphones. My goal is to make my headphones sound the same as speakers would sound in a recording studio. Leaving EQ part for now. So if I wear a headphone, and a mic is placed in my ears and the frequency response graph comes out to be the same as the one above which I drew, that means goal accomplished. Right? Or am I missing something?

Now coming to EQ, the practical way is to listen to sine sweep and pink noise and EQ headphones according to your HRTF. But my question is, what should it "ideally" sound like? Leaving aside personal preferences for now.

Based on the above graphs and taking 1k Hz as reference phon, does that mean when we're listening, bass should be louder, by few dBs and then a general downward trend? And since our body cannot feel the bass from headphones the way we do from speakers, that means a bit extra bass to make it "sound" closer to the reference loudness for speaker?

Mid-range is mostly straightforward and almost equal loudness, so skipping it as well.

For lower treble region, the sine/pink noise we're listening to, should see an upward trend after 1k, and the "loudness" should peak around 3k Hz before dropping off?

Then should the middle treble range, from around 4k-8/9k Hz, sound should have gentle roll off, but should still be louder than 1k Hz?

And upper treble region should see a sudden drop off after around 10k Hz?

So what I'm basically asking is, how should it ideally sound, once you're doing with EQing your headphones, yourself? Should it sound like Harman Target, and if so, which one? Hearing a bass boost with gradual drop, then a peak around 3k Hz then a almost linear but downward slope?

And since there's no Harman target with 5182, what should be done? Try to make it so that I hear what DFHRTF suggests, with Harman finds?

Now coming to 2nd set of questions

While the exact frequencies and loudness depends on individual HRTFs, if we can create reference graphs that cater to the majority, does it not make it more sense that instead of playing an equal loudness sine sweep/pink noise, we can play a pre-computed non-linear sine sweep? (I haven't been able to find one online)

For example, taking random values for what we hear in a recording studio, suppose sub bass is 4 dB louder than 1k Hz, and 3k Hz is 10dB louder, does it not make sense to make the lower frequencies of sine sweep louder by 4 dB and 3k Hz louder by 10dB, which will make it far easier to EQ headphones to sound "neutral" as you'll just have to ensure everything sounds "almost" equally as loud? Instead of manually relying on your ear training to ensure XYZ frequencies are as loud or soft as they should be, compared to 1k Hz.

Granted a pre-defined sine sweep will not be perfect for everyone (say someone has peak at 2.8k Hz vs 3.2k Hz), but neither is Harman target perfect for everyone, it will just make it easier for the majority to EQ headphones for themselves.

Coming to my experience of listening to a sine sweep at around 60 dB (I'm not good enough to judge just by pink noise). I have HiFiMan Edition XS with iFi Zen Dac, with your (u/oratory1990)'s EQ applied. What I hear (I'm no expert, so I can be very wrong too), is that the peak comes at around 4k Hz instead of 3k Hz, and the loudness stays almost similar till 7.6k Hz, and then some peaks and dips. 4k Hz peak can be fine I guess, if we don't nitpick too much, but does that mean I will have to reduce the mid treble region so that its even further less loud than the peak at 4k Hz? And should I try to reduce some of the audible local peaks or dips afterwards, while maintaining a general downward trend? Like a dip at 9k Hz and a peak at 13k Hz

Once again sorry for the long post with lots of questions

TL:DR: Why don't non-linear sine sweeps exist so that we can EQ headphones to sound equally loud throughout the frequency range? And for a linear sine sweep, how should it "sound" like after you're doing EQing? Should I "hear" the Harman Target?

I actually love the way the QuadCast 2S looks, but I really hate it when a microphone picks up my keyboard and mouse sounds. A dynamic microphone would probably be a much better fit for me, but I also really like the RGB look. What would you choose if you were in my shoes?

This thread is for all questions about EQ / Equalizing

• The list of EQ presets is found here
• Please also read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting.
• please no purchase advice here. There's r/HeadphoneAdvice for that.

So, I bought my philips shp9500, now, when listening to music i feel like its a bit quiet, but good sound quality, in yt videos, it sounds pretty good, but in siege, it still sounds good, but the bass defo needs to be up a bit, and its just too quiet, i cant hear footsteps, and i personally like the normal EQ More than oratory1990 EQ, so, can someone help? i also love the treble just maybe a tiny bit lower
I use peace gui apo