Submitted by ICoeuss t3_120mjtr in headphones
Odd-Spend-8757 t1_jdi98xj wrote
The post I was waiting for. Thanks for sharing your experience man. Mine is similar, because it's about a year and a half that I own a pair of X2HR and some other headphones below 200 bucks, but it's only a week since I've finally found an EQ profile capable of making them sound warm and non fatiguing, without killing treble and details. I can share with you my EQ profile, it would be interesting to hear your take on it since I'm very proud of it hahaah.
ICoeuss OP t1_jdiik2t wrote
Sure I'd be happy to take a listen. I can share mine as well but I'm not sure if it would sound right to your ears or anyone's really.
I don't know how to share a txt file so I'll just paste it I guess. Here it is:
Preamp: -8 dB
Channel: R
GraphicEQ: 20 2; 50 -2; 80 -2.2; 170 0; 220 0.8; 254 0; 267 0; 300 1.7; 360 1.9; 410 0.2; 765 2; 808 0; 833 -1; 901 0; 1159 0; 1300 -1.5; 1655 -3; 1764 -5; 2035 0; 2096 0; 2137 1; 2224 0; 2283 0; 2450 1; 2800 2.5; 3202 3; 3469 1.3; 3567 2; 3683 0; 3948 1.5; 4000 -0.8; 4100 -1.5; 4187 0; 4510 0; 4649 2.5; 4710 0; 4850 -5; 4955 -4; 5000 -5; 5158 -4.5; 5268 -7; 5352 -8; 5434 -9; 5538 -8; 5671 -8; 5906 0; 6019 3; 6189 0; 6490 -3; 7439 0; 8003 2; 8739 2; 9140 6; 9312 4; 9465 6.5; 9789 4; 10000 3; 10129 0; 10185 -1.5; 10244 0; 10423 2.5; 10581 0; 10630 0; 10696 2.4; 10763 0; 10828 -1.5; 10868 0; 10951 2; 11026 0; 11124 -10; 11266 -1.5; 11508 -6; 11585 -3; 11930 0; 12437 0.5; 13012 6; 13516 4.5; 13787 5; 14206 5; 14923 5; 15107 7; 16313 7; 17505 0
Channel: L
GraphicEQ: 20 1; 40 0; 50 -2; 81 -2; 170 0; 180 0; 250 0.5; 262 0; 275 -0.6; 292 0; 400 0.9; 433 0; 465 -0.9; 530 0; 760 1; 800 0.6; 842 0.6; 900 2; 951 0; 1019 0; 1197 1.4; 1413 0; 1650 -2.5; 1985 0; 2300 2; 2541 2; 3200 3; 4110 3; 4356 0; 4378 0; 4421 1.8; 4614 2.5; 4666 0.5; 4718 0.5; 4807 2; 4900 0; 5000 -2.5; 5096 -3; 5350 -7; 5426 -5; 5505 -4; 5590 0; 5672 -2; 5731 0; 6002 3.7; 7442 0; 7465 -0.5; 7735 0; 8288 4; 8631 2; 9005 1.5; 9424 5; 9799 0; 9890 2; 9966 0; 10060 1.3; 10097 0; 10125 -1.6; 10176 -1; 10219 -2; 10248 0; 10318 4; 10406 0; 10443 -2.5; 10506 0; 10659 -6.5; 10683 -5.5; 10732 -12; 10767 -10; 10825 -20; 10951 -5; 11092 -7; 11330 -2; 11527 0; 11645 3; 11708 0; 11776 -9; 11859 0; 11894 2; 11980 3; 12176 8; 12430 3; 12788 7; 14914 2; 15158 4.5; 15376 4.5; 15673 7; 15959 2; 16122 6; 16246 6; 16372 0; 16496 0; 16591 -4; 16739 -2; 17122 -3; 17223 -1; 17407 0; 17826 2; 17949 4; 20000 0
Odd-Spend-8757 t1_jdived3 wrote
Damn that's a lot of stuff hahaha, what software do you use? My EQ profile is very simple in comparison.
125 Hz, -1 dB, 1.5 Q 275 Hz, -2 dB, 2 Q 800 Hz, -1 dB, 2.5 Q 1780 Hz, -3 dB, 3 Q 2250 Hz, -2 dB, 1 Q 4000 Hz, -4 dB, 6 Q 5100 Hz, -7 dB, 5 Q 7000 Hz, -5 dB, 2 Q 8250 Hz, - 0.5 dB, 6 Q (this last band is not so important)
I know it's a bit strange because there are no boosted frequencies, but here is my take: you won't need them. This headphone is already bassy, so you won't need to add any bass (maybe sub bass but idc). Mids and highs are the confused area, a lot of stupid spikes going on here. Tried oratory EQ preset but I've never found oratory presets to be the best option for my taste, and with this HP in particular, I was not very satisfied. Then tried to work by myself on A LOT of different presets, and found that adding something to this HP is not a good option at all. It only needs to be tamed.
Let me know what are your impressions. Just remember that I'm treble sensitive mostly up to 4-6 kHz and I usually like to listen with high volume (around 80 dB) .
ICoeuss OP t1_jdjcp39 wrote
I use Equalizer APO. I'm used to the default interface so I never really tried Peace honestly. I listened to some stuff with your EQ profile and I measured it. It's certainly much better than default tuning. The harshness in 5-6kHz is gone, it even sounds a bit too recessed in that area for me but since you're sensitive to that I guess it's fine. I think the upper-mids are too recessed so I would recommend adding a 3000 Hz, 4 dB, 1.5 Q filter. If you don't like that you could try 2-3dBs instead for your preference.
Odd-Spend-8757 t1_jdjj7he wrote
Happy to have your feedback. You're right, with that 3k boost it sounds less recessed, which is a thing I noticed but I thought that it was inevitable, having to contain the higher frequency mess. So thank you, my X2HR now sounds a little bit more correct :)
Then I want to precise that our units could be different due to unit variations, so it's all relative.
ICoeuss OP t1_jdjkbun wrote
No worries, glad it helped :)
Yes, unit variation is definitely something to consider. There's even a very noticable channel imbalance on my unit for example.
[deleted] t1_jdjfgp5 wrote
I highly recommend using the Oratory1990 Harmon eq alongside ApoEQ and Peace.
It makes the x2hrs absolutely incredible for what you pay.
Odd-Spend-8757 t1_jdjgtap wrote
If you read my other comment below, I said that I personally find my own preset more accurate than Oratory's one. Harman is only a target that consider what casual listeners like. It's not an absolute reference target, so Oratory presets are usually better than stock sound but it's not the Bible.
[deleted] t1_jdjic9q wrote
I never said it was the bible lol. Also thsts not really an accurate description of how the target was formed.
Perhaps you should read or listen to some of Sean Olives talks he describes the process quite well. Also the target is just a baseline for your finer Eq changes.
Odd-Spend-8757 t1_jdlkya7 wrote
I will check it out, thanks. I wasn't claiming that you consider it as the bible, mine was just a consideraton. I agree on your definition.
But recently I did a test with all my HPs. For each one, I compared (obv with matched pre-gain volumes) the Oratory preset with another Oratory preset but with some modificaton based on my tastes and with a third preset, built looking to compensated FR graphs and simply correcting manually all spikes and dips. The results shows that Oratory preset were never pleasing and accurate as mine. Did the test also with a friend that is a sound engineer and House music producer (more trained ears than mine) and while he retains that Oratory presets are more balanced than stock sound, he also finds that my personal presets sound more linear and accurate. With oratory presets I usually perceive too much bass, voices are laid back and highs are a little bit "muted".
Odd-Spend-8757 t1_jdjhcap wrote
Also, I think there is nothing phenomenal about Fidelio, technically speaking. Pretty horrible tuning above 1.7k, average detail, it does not do well in busy parts. For the same price there is the HD560s or the DT880 that are more accurate and technically competent, except for soundstage that is the only thing where X2HR really stands out.
[deleted] t1_jdjig2a wrote
Hard disagree on both of those but you do you mate.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments