Does anybody EQ their monitors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CrowsofFritz
  • Start date Start date
CrowsofFritz

CrowsofFritz

Flamingo!
This doesn't have to be strictly mastering related. Some guy made a comment over the internet and said "show me an engineer who doesn't EQ his monitors and I'll show you a terrible engineer."

I don't know anything about that, so I didn't address it. Is this guy talking out of his bum, or do people really EQ their monitors? I can't believe that is so. Isn't the frequency response what makes monitors special?
 
If it's a live situation then no he isn't talking out his bum.
In the studio yes he would be talking out his bum. For the monitors are tuned flat as possible, and any EQing would be done within any single track.
 
I thought so. He said something along the lines of, "if you EQ Beats headphones, they're really good! But what do I know, I'm only an engineer with 4 credited albums, blah, blah, blah."


I actually asked him how he EQ'd his Beats and he never responded.
 
It was on Reddit.com

I can probably link that specific conversation to you if you would like.


I really need to get off that site. It's full of snobs!
 
I don't eq my monitors, I eq my room. At least I try to. Someday I'm going to measure it for real.
 
moresound said:
Forum raid time?
Click to expand...

Nah, it's not a forum. You can't raid Reddit, unfortunately. They have over 2,000,000 users and a voting system. Anything dumb we try to do actually gets shot down.




WAIT! There can be a sort of raid, and I will enjoy the hell out of it. So here is reddit. reddit: the front page of the internet


As you can see, there are posts and comments. There is a voting system called karma. Upvotes are good. Downvotes are bad. The redditors care so much for these fucking internet points! :eek: The posts I don't mind, but the comments are stupid, almost always. Now, most Redditors (as they aptly name themselves) have normal accounts. e.g. - I'm_a_Redditor

There are some Redditors that have what they call, "novelty accounts." e.g. - I_paint_your_comment. And that account usually paints a picture of the comment it replied to. Everybody loves accounts like that. They're like fucking kids laughing at peek-a-boo to accounts like those.


Now, there are other novelty accounts such as "Just_Repeats_You." I don't think I need to explain what that novelty account does. Everyone absolutely hates that account, and I love it because it makes everyone angry. People literally comment, "dude, I see you everywhere. Fucking stop!"


I love it! :p


Here's where the possibility of a raid kicks in. I told you about a voting system. We can never get by with posts, as they will just vote us down and it will never make the front page. But we can get by with comments! We could create an account called, say, Internet_Tough_Guy1 and 2 and we could comment on the top comment and call them names. We would get downvoted to hell but because we commented on the top comment, they can't hide us! Can ya think of other novelties? :D





Additional information - There have recently been a whole army of accounts that post pictures of buttholes saying "Don't click the picture below. It's a picture of my Butthole! Tee hee!" Redditors hate that the most, but unfortunately, that will get us a quick ban ticket.
 
Chili said:
I don't eq my monitors, I eq my room. At least I try to. Someday I'm going to measure it for real.
Click to expand...

Oh dang, I didn't see your comment. Thanks for the input! I still have to EQ my room.
 
Eqing the monitors actually works better than eqing the room. Room related frequency response problems are usually both location specific and time based. You might be able to sq so that it sounds better in one spot, but it will probably sound much worse somewhere else. If you're sitting in a particularly deep null for a given frequency you may not ever be able to hear that note no matter how much you boost, though it could be overwhelming somewhere else in the same room. You might be able to cut a band that is particularly loud at your listening position, but it will still tend to ring like a frequency specific Reverb.

OTOH, if the speakers just put out too much treble, or are overly aggressive in the mids, or you prefer a little more bassr, eqing can help to an extent.
 
CrowsofFritz said:
This doesn't have to be strictly mastering related. Some guy made a comment over the internet and said "show me an engineer who doesn't EQ his monitors and I'll show you a terrible engineer."
Click to expand...
I only know a few "serious" engineers that EQ their monitoring chain -- And undoubtedly, it's a "preference" thing. EQ'ing monitors doesn't do ANYTHING to make up for problems in a room (at the "listening" level, it will almost guarantee a *MORE* problematic mix, as the only thing "EQ'ing the room" can do (same for "self-room-correcting" monitors) is take the problematic frequencies and make it so they cannot be heard in the first place (of course, that doesn't remove those problematic frequencies from the program material).

Personally? I'll do anything I can to avoid it up to and including different monitors (if they can't sound right on their own - CONSISTENTLY - they're the wrong monitors). My (Tyler Acoustics) D1's are voiced to my preference -- In my case, it was as simple as disconnecting a resistor that attenuated the signal to the tweeter side of the crossover by about 1dB. They measure fairly "razor flat" (again, CONSISTENTLY) *with* that resistor - But it's such a smooth, "warm" (for lack of a better term) sounding tweeter, along with the fact that I'm in a very well-controlled space, that I wanted that extra dB of "openness" in the top.

Keeping in mind that I'm hyper-sensitive in the top and that was one of several reasons I got rid of my B&W N802's.

My (smaller, also Tyler) D4M's sounded very "warm" with their 5ohm (around -4.5dB with that particular crossover) resistor -- Changed it to a 1.5ohm (added around 2.5dB if I'm hearing it right) resistor on the tweeter to make them MUCH more open on the top than they were designed to be. But again, I wanted that access to the "crazy" high end that they seemed to lack with the stock voicing. And again, they're ridiculously consistent with that new voicing as well. Quiet, loud, extremely loud - they translate well and the voicing doesn't change.

That all said -- There are very few speakers I've ever used (including the 802's) that were this consistent in regards to levels-slash-program material... If these guys that feel the need to EQ their monitors are using [insert name of dozens and dozens of boxes that I've tried] that measure somewhat "flat" at 85dBSPL with pink noise at -20dB(FS)RMS, it doesn't mean they're going to be anywhere NEAR flat with dynamic (and timbrally dynamic) program material at 75 or 79dBSPL... So they might choose to EQ for those shortcomings. But if they go up to "normal" SPLs, or listen to recordings that have a strong variation from a typical 1/f curve, who knows how accurate and/or consistent those boxes are going to be...

THAT all said -- I wholeheartedly disagree with the r/statement about EQ'ing monitors... I know plenty of professional engineers -- The vast majority of which do not have an EQ in their monitoring chain.
 
Massive Master said:
I only know a few "serious" engineers that EQ their monitoring chain -- And undoubtedly, it's a "preference" thing. EQ'ing monitors doesn't do ANYTHING to make up for problems in a room (at the "listening" level, it will almost guarantee a *MORE* problematic mix, as the only thing "EQ'ing the room" can do (same for "self-room-correcting" monitors) is take the problematic frequencies and make it so they cannot be heard in the first place (of course, that doesn't remove those problematic frequencies from the program material).

Personally? I'll do anything I can to avoid it up to and including different monitors (if they can't sound right on their own - CONSISTENTLY - they're the wrong monitors). My (Tyler Acoustics) D1's are voiced to my preference -- In my case, it was as simple as disconnecting a resistor that attenuated the signal to the tweeter side of the crossover by about 1dB. They measure fairly "razor flat" (again, CONSISTENTLY) *with* that resistor - But it's such a smooth, "warm" (for lack of a better term) sounding tweeter, along with the fact that I'm in a very well-controlled space, that I wanted that extra dB of "openness" in the top.

Keeping in mind that I'm hyper-sensitive in the top and that was one of several reasons I got rid of my B&W N802's.

My (smaller, also Tyler) D4M's sounded very "warm" with their 5ohm (around -4.5dB with that particular crossover) resistor -- Changed it to a 1.5ohm (added around 2.5dB if I'm hearing it right) resistor on the tweeter to make them MUCH more open on the top than they were designed to be. But again, I wanted that access to the "crazy" high end that they seemed to lack with the stock voicing. And again, they're ridiculously consistent with that new voicing as well. Quiet, loud, extremely loud - they translate well and the voicing doesn't change.

That all said -- There are very few speakers I've ever used (including the 802's) that were this consistent in regards to levels-slash-program material... If these guys that feel the need to EQ their monitors are using [insert name of dozens and dozens of boxes that I've tried] that measure somewhat "flat" at 85dBSPL with pink noise at -20dB(FS)RMS, it doesn't mean they're going to be anywhere NEAR flat with dynamic (and timbrally dynamic) program material at 75 or 79dBSPL... So they might choose to EQ for those shortcomings. But if they go up to "normal" SPLs, or listen to recordings that have a strong variation from a typical 1/f curve, who knows how accurate and/or consistent those boxes are going to be...

THAT all said -- I wholeheartedly disagree with the r/statement about EQ'ing monitors... I know plenty of professional engineers -- The vast majority of which do not have an EQ in their monitoring chain.
Click to expand...

Great, informative post like always Massive.



r/statement
Click to expand...


.................Well.......... I think you know the time when the narwhal bacons.
 
monitors are suppose to be flat , but most of them aren't , specially cheaper ones , eqing monitor is either because of the un flat response of monitors or it s because of the room response , if your problem is your room , then eqing your monitors would be wrong , but if your monitors are not flat MAYBE some eqing would help , but that s not that easy , you can not eq them by ears , you have to use a measuring mic and a measuring software to do that ...
 
Okay, I have a follow-up question.


So the NS-10's are obviously a famous set of monitors (or speakers, ha...). Let's say you have software that can tell your monitors frequency response and how to EQ it so it will have the exact response as the NS-10's. What's preventing your monitors to sound like the NS-10's? I mean, I would imagine that monitors are similar to guitars in this aspect, right? The driver for sure affects sound. What about the material? And space? This seems like a more technical question.
 
Last edited:
I think the general idea is that you "EQ" the room with proper treatment as best you can and only EQ your monitors as a last resort if said acoustic treatment isn't good enough.
 
What's preventing your monitors to sound like the NS-10's? (snip)
Click to expand...
You could theoretically EQ a nice set of monitors to sound as terrible as NS10's to some extent -- But you're not going to change the physics of the monitors. This would be one of those "at this level with this source" things again... You could probably get a similar response with pink at a specific level - But throw some music in there and all bets are off.

There are people who are much more informed on the physics than I that will hopefully jump in... But let's just say that it doesn't really work in practice.
I think the general idea is that you "EQ" the room with proper treatment as best you can and only EQ your monitors as a last resort if said acoustic treatment isn't good enough.
Click to expand...
The two really aren't related -- You can treat a room to be more accurate and consistent, yes. But you can't "EQ" that accuracy and/or consistency into a space that can't handle it. If you have a 30dB dip at 100Hz at the mix position, you can't correct that with EQ - You have to change the physical characteristics of the space.

The main reason you'd EQ a playback system is to remove frequencies the room can't handle. You're actually making the speakers LESS accurate to make up for buildups in the space (it works reasonably well in live situations, but you aren't doing yourself any favors if "accuracy" is on the menu). Except for "preference" of course -- If everything is "fine" but you'd rather have a little more top or you notice that the 3.5kHz are from the crossover is a little much and you want to dull it down by a dB, that's another story.
 
CrowsofFritz said:
Okay, I have a follow-up question.


So the NS-10's are obviously a famous set of monitors (or speakers, ha...). Let's say you have software that can tell your monitors frequency response and how to EQ it so it will have the exact response as the NS-10's. What's preventing your monitors to sound like the NS-10's? I mean, I would imagine that monitors are similar to guitars in this aspect, right? The driver for sure affects sound. What about the material? And space? This seems like a more technical question.
Click to expand...
it s not like that , the character and sound of any driver and cabinet material (and crossover parts in ns10 case) is different , size , shape , drivers placement and material of cabinet affect the sound ,crossover design and it components will affect the sound as well (in a passive crossover loudspeaker), you may measure an ns10 and eq another monitor to make it sound like that , but it won't , you can eq your monitors to sound flat but even after lotsa eqs it may won't , unless there are some minor changes , i mean you may measure your monitors and find out they have a lose at 200hz to 500hz and you boost you eq around that area to make it up but instead you may end up with a peak around for example 250 ,it depends on filters design mostly and lotsa other factors ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top