You are not logged in. Please login or register.
RME User Forum → ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series → Parametric eq
How can I apply a 15 band parametric eq to the 5 band eq offered by RME? RME seems to think this is a good compromise for DSP efficiency, but typically EQ bands contain more bands, see for example most EQ available at https://autoeq.app/
You can't, obviously.
I guessed so, so is it a good enough compromise as RME states in the device manual? I would think it not detailed enough. Many people have been asking for more bands, but they don’t deliver it.
Usually you use EQ in the DAW where you have the needed processing power or use external hardware devices.
Look e.g. at analog mixers, they typically had only 3-4 bands (some also parametrizable mids) for basic sound control options.
An alternative might be Room EQ for you, available for some recording interfaces where it fits.
As @ramses pointed out you might use peq of your DAW or your audio player.
I don't want to be rude, but maybe you should look somewhere else until RME satisfies your requirements.
Unfortunately there's not a single product on the market that does, currently. Probably for a reason.
I guessed so, so is it a good enough compromise as RME states in the device manual? I would think it not detailed enough. Many people have been asking for more bands, but they don’t deliver it.
5 bands, or 7 bands if you count in ADI-2‘s Bass / Treble EQ (which can seamlessly be integrated into the PEQ), is more than a “compromise”.
I found a fitting EQ setting with every headphone in my huge collection.
The full correction of every little wiggle in the measured frequency response, like AutoEQ in default settings does, is a mistake.
It introduces errors instead of correcting them.
For a solution, see my next posting:
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.ph … 09#p222609
Generally skip narrow band filters, specifically boosts of this kind only worsen the sound.
Why it’s better to ignore the high Q, low gain filters above 2 kHz, see this video, specially from positions 7’30”, 9’25” and 12’35”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nq9ZGAYTwU&t=541sOne has to be aware, that AutoEq presets are more detailed than the measurement they are based on.
Harman Target is largely smoothed and doesn’t justify such fine corrections.It’s not possible to correct better than you measure, so these corrections simply are wrong.
The (Harman-)Target’s smoothing makes sense, as person’s ear’s anatomics vary a lot, and are different from the measurement coupler used.
Even different positioning of the ‘phones on the head introduces great variations.
Therefore every EQ correction above ca. 2 kHz has to be taken with a large grain of salt, and might not be an improvement.
The video shows how to check for this.
In detail, let’s put it this way -
Why are narrowband EQ corrections with foreign origin questionable and should be just left away?
ALL the measurement-based EQ curves from the internet are wrong above ca. 2-3 kHz, with very few single exceptions.
The measurement systems used do not supply data with a high enough VALID frequency resolution to justify narrow EQ bands.
You cannot EQ better than your measurement is.
One has to be aware of the limits of a measurement system to judge it’s results.
If you compensate above these limits you introduce errors, and leave the errors you want to compensate untouched.
• Even slight changes in headphone’s placement, on your head or the measurement coupler, yield totally different results for frequencies above ca. 2 kHz.
Which one to use then, and why?
Averaging various positions doesn’t help much, practically you don’t listen to an average, but a discrete positioning.
• The famous “Harman”- and other compensations are strongly smoothed, coarse approximations for a very certain setup, intentionally leaving out the fine details of the curve, therefore limit frequency dependent precision.
• People use Harman- or other compensations as if they were valid for other measurement rigs too, which they aren’t.
• Most compensations, except “Freefield” do use the room sound signals without any angular weighting.
Opposed to that the human brain does give a lot more weight to the direct sound from the source, above the room-reflected sounds.
• Your personal pinnae have different shapes, and therefore different HRTF (Head Related Transfer Function, angle dependent frequency response) than the measurement “ear”, coupler.
• Each human’s auditorial system permanently adapts to the sound colors it’s presented, like the eye adapts to light colors.
You have to “readjust” that from time to time with natural sounds to judge an artificial reproduction system.
The amount of ability for those adaptions is different for each individual, and there are limits.
• There are certain characteristics of a headphone or loudspeaker that are prominent and specific enough worth for correction, the famous 6 kHz peak of Sennheiser’s HD-800 comes into mind.
Even this one doesn’t annoy everybody.
Remark:
Didn ‘t you notice, all these Oratory, Auto EQ Project and most other Internet fine-tweak-EQ Setups simply sound like shit (sorry for the strong word) in the upper range?
Doesn't a simple Treble Shelf EQ or broadband Peak EQ, or a combination of both, adjusted to taste, give better results?
The measurements, BTW, can give a starting point for COARSE correction above 2 kHz, and below 2kHz measurements actually are quite valid, if your can achieve a good seal on your head.
Finally:
I do my EQs based on measurements on my own head, using my own compensation curve.
Even this is limited and has to be adjusted by taste over a period of several weeks or months at least.
How can I apply a 15 band parametric eq to the 5 band eq offered by RME? …EQ available at https://autoeq.app/
That’s easy.
In the Auto-EQ page:
• Select you headphones model.
• Cick on “Show Advanced”..
• Select equalizer app “Custom Parametric EQ”
• Click twice on “Add Filter”, to get a 7-band EQ.
• Change band #5 to “PEAK”.
• Change band #7 to “HIGH SHELF”.
• Suggested extra setting: “Transition region (Hz)” dial 2000, 4000.
This avoids the problem of corrections that introduce errors, like explained in my posting above.
• For some ‘phones models AutoEQ suggests settings that are outside of ADI-2’s parameter range.
Only in this case adjust the “MIN … / MAX….” limits in AutoEQ’s bands accordingly.
Now you have a 7-band Parametrc EQ with the outer bands set to “SHELF”, that fits to ADI-2 with the option “Bass / Treble - Load with EQ” enabled.
@MC:
AutoEQ offers parameter sets for various EQ apps and devices.
RME should contact them for an ADI-2 preset to be integrated into their list.
Seems you did not notice that autoEq crawls public available measurements from different sources? And they all have their own different license policies…
Seems you did not notice that autoEq crawls public available measurements from different sources? And they all have their own different license policies…
So my posting had a double meaning, you picked the other one.
I didn’t mean the actual EQ settings generated by AutoEQ.
If you look at their page, in the “Select equalizer app” dropdown menu, you can choose which app to use for the setting, like e.g., 10 band graphic EQ, Spotify EQ, iTunes built in EQ, etc.
This is for defining the available number of bands and their parameters.
In this menu ADI-2 should be listed for convenience.
Currently only their custom EQ offers the option to set all the parameters manually, one by one.
Double meaning? Sorry, i still don't understand.
I fully understand how autoEQ works and what you want. What I was implying is that since autoEQ is open source, any private individual is free to extend the code, like adding their own EQ profile, which is great.
Sorry, maybe i was not 100% clear. What i meant - If you just look here (3.rd bullet point):
https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/wi … f_presets/
and if you say:
RME should contact them for an ADI-2 preset to be integrated into their list.
How would you treat it? Commercial or private?
But i am not a native englisch speaker - maybe i misunderstood some kind of irony, or sth?
Double meaning? Sorry, i still don't understand.
I fully understand how autoEQ works and what you want. What I was implying is that since autoEQ is open source, any private individual is free to extend the code, like adding their own EQ profile, which is great.
Sorry, maybe i was not 100% clear. What i meant - If you just look here (3.rd bullet point):
https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/wi … f_presets/
and if you say:RME should contact them for an ADI-2 preset to be integrated into their list.
How would you treat it? Commercial or private?
But i am not a native englisch speaker - maybe i misunderstood some kind of irony, or sth?
You‘re on the wrong link.
Look here, this is the AutoEQ app, which extends on the pre-compiled results in the list:
https://autoeq.app/
After selecting your headphone there is the choice: “Select equalizer app”.
This loads the number of available EQ bands and their parameter limits.
This can be done in AutoEQ app’s “Custom parametric EQ” preset, but takes some effort.
RME ADI-2 should be listed in the dropdown for convenience, similar to other commercial products, e.g. like Qudelix-5K, which is a portable amp.
For that to happen, RME needs to contact them, I think.
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/issues
AutoEq
Terms of Service
AutoEq is a tool intended for creating equalizer settings automatically based on headphone frequency response measurements.
The AutoEq service is offered free of charge and "as is" and no guarantees are made about the correctness, quality or service level. The service is intended for personal use but also commercial use is permitted. The user is asked not to put unnecessary load on the service as the processing takes significant computational capacity and can be over-loaded.
The service is based on software code made available at Github.com. https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq . Bugs and feature requests may be submitted via the Github repository's Issues page. https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/issues
…
You‘re on the wrong link.
No, i think, i am not.
Look here, this is the AutoEQ app...
https://autoeq.app/
I know this. And i know exactly what you mean.
which extends on the pre-compiled results
Sure. But where do the "pre-compiled results" autoeq.app come from?
-F.ex to get them from oratory, the autoeq Web App uses this code: have a look into lines 113 and 133-135:
https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq … C1-L135C13
- So, the crawler downloads the pdf files, extracts the values from the graphs, compiles the csv files and the result is offered in the web app.
If you look int the faq on oratorys reddit page:
The "Github-page" (https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results/oratory1990 ?) is created and maintained by u/jaakkopasanen. It's his thing, has very little to do with me, actually.
What Jaakko does is he takes measurements from various sources and applies his algorithm that automatically creates an EQ for that headphone (hence the name "AutoEQ").
The measurements that I make are among those sources.
And you will find there this too, as i said:
Unlicensed commercial use is prohibited.
To sum up:
- autoEQ itself is free for private and commercial use.
- But at least one source for the measurements (in the "select headphones" field), is not free for commercial use (but yes, for private use - ok).
- And as "Select equalizer app" field belongs to the "whole" web-app, too.
Hope you can understand better now, what i mean.
RME User Forum → ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series → Parametric eq
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.