This post is an automated archive from a submission made on /r/headphones, powered by Fediverser software running on alien.top. Responses to this submission will not be seen by the original author until they claim ownership of their alien.top account. Please consider reaching out to them let them know about this post and help them migrate to Lemmy.

Lemmy users: you are still very much encouraged to participate in the discussion. There are still many other subscribers on !headphones@hi-fi.community that can benefit from your contribution and join in the conversation.

Reddit users: you can also join the fediverse right away by getting by visiting https://portal.alien.top. If you are looking for a Reddit alternative made for and by an independent community, check out Fediverser.

There are those who are “purists” and deviating from how the headphone was tuned by the manufacturer is going against the point of listening to the headphone they created. That said, I’m not one that finds the harman tuning cater to my preference so I adjust my EQ differently than what Auto EQ has recommended. However, AutoEQ does have the baseline starting point that I work with when using EQ.

Generally parametric EQ will get more exact. You can configure AutoEQ, increasing the number of bands beyond 10 and tell it to attempt narrower corrections.

The measurements are not entirely accurate, particularly in the treble, and some aspects of the measurement will be different on your head, so extremely close adherence to a target from flawed measurements is not a great idea, small stuff it’s usually better to leave alone. Hence why by default it won’t make very narrow corrections.

The hills and valleys are not exactly at the same frequency across multiple instances of headphones, sometimes not even across multiple measurements of the same headphone instance perhaps. If you add a narrow hill to fill a narrow valley but not where the valley is then the result will be worse than no EQ.