# EQ Settings Trick



## Stillhouse

Recently I took an online hearing test for kicks, found out I had some loss in the 8k+ frequencies:










I got to wondering if I'd notice a difference if I applied these results to my normal EQ settings, paying attention to the areas showing loss, so I gave it a go and did hear a difference! Voices are clearer, and things like cymbal crashes and guitars are brighter.

To try this out yourself, take this hearing test:

http://www.digital-recordings.com/he...ht_help_p.html

It's best to use headphones. You might have to run through the test more than once to get the best results(I missed marking the tone several times). Once you finish it'll give you a nice graph like the one above. Then just follow the basic curve of the graph to your EQ and listen for a difference.


----------



## PROBN4LYFE

Too much time for an audiophile homie...WE are heard...not just hearing


----------



## TwIsTeDbOi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PROBN4LYFE* 
Too much time for an audiophile homie...WE are heard...not just hearing

Hahah. That's a comment to live by, aint it?









Ok, well I did it, and if your symbol is below the grey dot, that's good? If so I'm pretty much good on all sound levels. I'm either at or below the dot.


----------



## Stillhouse

I guess I don't understand the comment. I figure any time taken to improve something is time well spent. If you're like me and have some loss of hearing this really seems to help.


----------



## FaLLeNAn9eL

Great find! Definitely a useful tool for fine tuning individual frequencies.

Here's what mine looks like:


----------



## TheSubtleKnife

hmmm, i'm lacking in the 11-16k range


----------



## Criswell

Tritton AX360:


----------



## tadams720

Here is mine.

Not sure what it means.


----------



## deaddebate

Hey, i just used Stumbleupon to see this post, great website stillhouse.
Anyway, the reason i'm posting is because i find this is both horribly inaccurate and extremely unique solution to EQ settings. I am medical enlisted and I perform hearing tests (audiograms) for Air Force personnel exposed to Hazardous Noise, (my AFSC is 4E051 for anybody who cares to know) and we only test 500, 1K, 2K, 3K, 4K, & 6K annually unless a patient has serious concerns (hearing loss, asymmetric loss, etc).
This test is obviously highly inaccurate, but it does provide a good insight. My recommendation is to adjust your volume on the 2K to about 5dB. Generally, most people test best on the 1 or 1.5K from my personnal experience. Getting all zeros across the middle section would mean your speakers are too loud, and you can actually hear beyond the "0 dB" mark.
Consider testing in the morning after a good night sleep. Unless your bed is near the subway line, chances are you have had a good 6 hours (give or take) of minimal noise exposure, lessening your possibilities of "temporary threshold shift" (you were recently exposed to a loud noise, and your hearing may improve after some time away from it).
When you do get your "best" frequency (whether it is 1K or 4K) to about 5 dB, then take the rest of the test and adjust to that. Also, we test in 5dB increments, which in my opinion is fairly accurate. 1 dB increments is ridiculous.

If anybody has any questions about their results, or audiograms in general, PM me.


----------



## deaddebate

EDIT: Also, it's 2313 right now (11:13 PM for everyone else) and I just re-read this post. Little past my bedtime, sry if it doesn't make too much sense.

I meant to say, do a manual test on the 1.5K and 5 dB, and adjust the calibration to where you can just BARELY hear it. If you find you can test better on another frequency, use that as your "base" instead. Then keep the calibration the same and do the rest of the test. BTW, most personnel i test often get 30+dB on the 6K. It's really approaching the end of human hearing, and I wouldn't get too concerned with anything past that. Unless your a MAJOR audiophile, you're almost never going to be exposed to noises above 6K; I.e. a Piccolo and and the last key of a piano is only about 4.5K. ( http://www.psbspeakers.com/audio-top...ncies-of-Music )
Note the writing, the piano scale does have a note saying where a regular piano ends.


----------



## S2000_Skyline12

I feel good. Mainly cause my volume was lower than anyone here's so far


----------



## Stillhouse

Quote:


Originally Posted by *deaddebate* 
Hey, i just used Stumbleupon to see this post, great website stillhouse.
Anyway, the reason i'm posting is because i find this is both horribly inaccurate and extremely unique solution to EQ settings. I am medical enlisted and I perform hearing tests (audiograms) for Air Force personnel exposed to Hazardous Noise, (my AFSC is 4E051 for anybody who cares to know) and we only test 500, 1K, 2K, 3K, 4K, & 6K annually unless a patient has serious concerns (hearing loss, asymmetric loss, etc).
This test is obviously highly inaccurate, but it does provide a good insight. My recommendation is to adjust your volume on the 2K to about 5dB. Generally, most people test best on the 1 or 1.5K from my personnal experience. Getting all zeros across the middle section would mean your speakers are too loud, and you can actually hear beyond the "0 dB" mark.
Consider testing in the morning after a good night sleep. Unless your bed is near the subway line, chances are you have had a good 6 hours (give or take) of minimal noise exposure, lessening your possibilities of "temporary threshold shift" (you were recently exposed to a loud noise, and your hearing may improve after some time away from it).
When you do get your "best" frequency (whether it is 1K or 4K) to about 5 dB, then take the rest of the test and adjust to that. Also, we test in 5dB increments, which in my opinion is fairly accurate. 1 dB increments is ridiculous.

If anybody has any questions about their results, or audiograms in general, PM me.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *deaddebate* 
EDIT: Also, it's 2313 right now (11:13 PM for everyone else) and I just re-read this post. Little past my bedtime, sry if it doesn't make too much sense.

I meant to say, do a manual test on the 1.5K and 5 dB, and adjust the calibration to where you can just BARELY hear it. If you find you can test better on another frequency, use that as your "base" instead. Then keep the calibration the same and do the rest of the test. BTW, most personnel i test often get 30+dB on the 6K. It's really approaching the end of human hearing, and I wouldn't get too concerned with anything past that. Unless your a MAJOR audiophile, you're almost never going to be exposed to noises above 6K; I.e. a Piccolo and and the last key of a piano is only about 4.5K. ( http://www.psbspeakers.com/audio-top...ncies-of-Music )
Note the writing, the piano scale does have a note saying where a regular piano ends.


Sounds like good advice, I'll retake the test as per your suggestion and see how it goes.


----------



## scuppers

This is a cool hearing test link, and an interesting approach to adjusting your EQ.

One thing you probably already know: Human hearing isn't flat in its frequency response. In other words, most people hear certain frequencies better than other frequencies. So if you're adjusting EQ based on your test results, it might make the most sense to use the "Loss dB" column in the printer output as your dBs. Worth a shot if you like the way it sounds.

When you take that hearing test, there are those little grey dots on the graph. Maybe your resident audio expert can weigh in, but I think those are supposed to be the curve of general human hearing (equal loudness curves) Equal Loudness Wiki. All that means is you'd want to adjust for the difference in dB between the grey dots and your results, not to match the curve itself. (The loss dB column = the difference between the gray baseline and your results for each ear.)

What's interesting about this approach to EQ is it might adjust for your hearing loss, but the way you hear stuff in the world from day to day is still probably better represented by a totally flat Equalizer setting. (Assuming that studio engineers recording the original CDs tried to make it sound like real life in the first place. Sometimes they try and improve on real life, kind of like cranking your TV color way up instead of making it look like real life.)

Equipment also comes into heavy play for audio flatness. I'm always floored by seeing audio gadgetry (Ipod, Aiwa stereos, BBE), with settings for "Rock" or "Pop," "Dance," etc. Are these supposed to emphasize something that's "missing?" My take: set flat and forget. Or adjust moderately to taste with your favorite music and leave. Different recordings will be different, so unless you like fiddling with EQ all the time, you might find a set and forget approach easiest.

If you're feeling ambitious and fancy, you can always try test tones (Stereophile makes a good test CD) and a dB meter. One time, I even used a laptop with a spectrum analyzer and test tones (for the subwoofer in the car). But the approach that makes me happiest is not to get too hung up, and enjoy the music. As Bill C. Says: "I experimented with EQ a time or two, and I didn't like it, and er, didn't inhale" Remember that the very best playback equipment includes no EQ settings. Currently all my equipment's set as flat as it goes.

Scott, Research Scientist, Psychology, Physiology
http://www.scottspare.com

He who knows best knows how little he knows --Thomas Jefferson


----------



## razr7

nice


----------



## Amraam

Wow you guys put dogs to shame!

here's my result:










How do I now go and create a good EQ based on these results? amplify the ones that I can't hear well?


----------



## Chranny

I'm deaf. :C Put the volume calibration to the max and I can't hear anything.


----------



## newbile

lol stumbleupon
using it right now


----------



## jpye11

Stumblers are coming...


----------



## chinesekiwi

Using this online hearing test as a EQ setter has a number of flaws with headphones and speakers:

1) Your hearing is not flat. i.e. your ears do not perceive all frequencies the same

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour

With this, you perceive the midrange frequencies, the ones associated with human speech, the greatest.
This is due to the shape of your ear (the pinna, outside flashy part of the ear) affecting how sounds enter your ear and also how humans have evolved to this for survival reasons.

2) The conditions of the environment is different with everyone i.e. you really must have a quiet as of an environment to test this in with ambient noise to be minimised / eliminated as much as possible.

3) Time of day tested and how your body clock is. Reason I say this is because of course there tends to be less ambient noise at night but also depending on how your body clock, you have greatest concentration and are active (for most people who do not have sleeping disorders which throw your body clock off) around 2pm-3pm. Greater concentration = greater activeness = more acute hearing.

It's best to use this test with in-ears with a flat frequency response (e.g. Shure SE530's) as it eliminates the influence of the pinna in you perceiving the sound. The con with in-ears however are of course is the great variance in terms of frequency response between models. This is why also of course why you cannot compare the frequency response of in-ears vs. speakers or headphones.


----------

