headphones for mic placement/eqing

[Nate Najar]

does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?

I have used sony 7506 for years. I hate them but they're good for editing.

last year I got audio technic a ath m50 on a recommendation. they're very clean but seem to have a smile curve midrange and the low end seems exaggerated. Which is not good for judging my arch nemesis the proximity effect.

what should I be looking at? or is it a classic case of "learn your tools and adjust accordingly?" because i'd rather trust what I'm hearing rather than guess the proper compensation.....

as usual, any input is greatly appreciated....

N

[geoff]

On 28/05/2014 3:57 p.m., Nate Najar wrote:
> does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
>
> I have used sony 7506 for years. I hate them but they're good for editing.
>
> last year I got audio technic a ath m50 on a recommendation. they're very clean but seem to have a smile curve midrange and the low end seems exaggerated. Which is not good for judging my arch nemesis the proximity effect.
>
> what should I be looking at? or is it a classic case of "learn your tools and adjust accordingly?" because i'd rather trust what I'm hearing rather than guess the proper compensation.....
>
> as usual, any input is greatly appreciated....
>
> N
>

ATH-M50X , where they claim to have tweaked the curve and bass slightly
? And have multiple (detachable) cables.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

Nate Najar > wrote:
>does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?

They do not exist.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Nate Najar]

On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:30:45 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Nate Najar > wrote:
>
> >does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
>
>
>
> They do not exist.
>

somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
Nate Najar > wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:30:45 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > Nate Najar > wrote:
> >
> > >does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can
> > >reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
> >
> >
> >
> > They do not exist.
> >

> somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!

I'd say the ones you are used to - if they are of adequate quality. That's
why I stick to my ancient Beyer DT48s if I must use cans for this purpose.
But none are much use for forming a stereo stage.

--
*Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter since nobody listens*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Nate Najar wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:30:45 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Nate Najar > wrote:
>>
>>> does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
>>
>>
>>
>> They do not exist.
>>
>
> somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!
>

EQ and placement will always be affected by playback gear, not just
headphones.

--
Les Cargill

[Scott Dorsey]

Nate Najar > wrote:
>On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:30:45 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Nate Najar > wrote:
>>
>> >does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
>>
>>
>> They do not exist.
>>
>
>somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!

The issues are spatial ones more than response ones.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:57:48 PM UTC-5, Nate Najar wrote:
> does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
>
>
>
> I have used sony 7506 for years. I hate them but they're good for editing.
>
>
>
> last year I got audio technic a ath m50 on a recommendation. they're very clean but seem to have a smile curve midrange and the low end seems exaggerated. Which is not good for judging my arch nemesis the proximity effect.
>
>
>
> what should I be looking at? or is it a classic case of "learn your tools and adjust accordingly?" because i'd rather trust what I'm hearing rather than guess the proper compensation.....
>
>
>
> as usual, any input is greatly appreciated....
>
>
>
> N



Wow--that's a tough question! As others may have suggested, using phones is not an ideal way to check EQ or mic placement, really. I may occasionally grab a pair of phones if I'm trying to hear something specific--like a squeaky kick drum pedal, etc. But, when I'm working on EQ or anything closely related to the sound of an instrument or it's place in the mix, I prefer speakers over headphones, any day.

As you may know, phones almost always color the sound in some way. Some emphasize lower frequencies more than others and such. On top of that, using phones to check mic placement can actually mask some problems you likely *would* catch if listening via speakers. (Phase issues between multiple mics, for example.)

Nothing wrong with using phones for comparison purposes & such, as one should listen to their work through a variety of speakers, in various locations/rooms. And sure, many people do listen to music with phones or earbuds these days, so you'll want to check that mix, too.

But, I don't think I'd rely on *any* phones for much more than that--with very few exceptions.

My 2 cents, anyway!

Mike

[William Sommerwerck]

To check mic placement, you'd need at least a crosstalk generator that created
an outside-the-head image.

When I did live recording, knowing that headphone listening produced an
exaggerated, overly wide image, I adjusted the mics to create such an image.
It generally worked.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 5/28/2014 11:22 AM, Nate Najar wrote:
> somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!

You won't be able to replace speakers with headphones for all your mix
decisions, but with headphones, you can hear the difference between
direct and reverberant sound fairly well. This is helpful if you're
using a single point pickup (XY, M-S, or some spaced mic arrangement).
Trust your mics and leave the final EQ to the mastering stage.

However, if you're going to use the directionality of a mic as sort of
EQ, or you're working with the mic close enough so that proximity effect
is present (or if you're depending on it) you can only get an idea of
what you're doing if you spend a good bit of time learning how certain
mics sound in your headphones of choice. Not even the flattest
headphones are likely to be accurate - you need to learn to recognize
what's right when it doesn't sound right. I've heard some perfectly good
"broadcast" mixes made on headphones - I've even made some myself, using
Sony 7506s, but I just live with what it sounds like, get the balance
right, and usually I'm pleasantly surprised.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Trevor]

"Dave Plowman (News)" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Nate Najar > wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:30:45 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> > Nate Najar > wrote:
>> > >does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can
>> > >reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
>> >
>> > They do not exist.
>
>> somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!

What works (or not) for Scott may not be the same for you however.

> I'd say the ones you are used to - if they are of adequate quality.

Agreed, as long as you have enough experience.

> But none are much use for forming a stereo stage.

Right, but fortunately he didn't ask for that.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

> wrote in message
...
>As you may know, phones almost always color the sound in some way.

And all speakers do not?

>Some emphasize lower frequencies more than others and such. On top of
>that, using phones to check mic placement can actually mask some problems
>you likely *would* catch if listening via speakers. (Phase issues between
>multiple mics, for example.)

Gee I find phase issues easier to pick up on headphones.

Trevor.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article >,
Trevor > wrote:

> "Dave Plowman (News)" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > Nate Najar > wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:30:45 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> >> > Nate Najar > wrote:
> >> > >does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can
> >> > >reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?
> >> >
> >> > They do not exist.
> >
> >> somehow I thought that might the answer and I was afraid of that!

> What works (or not) for Scott may not be the same for you however.

> > I'd say the ones you are used to - if they are of adequate quality.

> Agreed, as long as you have enough experience.

> > But none are much use for forming a stereo stage.

> Right, but fortunately he didn't ask for that.

Depends on how you read 'mic placement'.

--
*I never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:31:54 AM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:
> > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >As you may know, phones almost always color the sound in some way.
>
>
>
> And all speakers do not?
>
>
>
> >Some emphasize lower frequencies more than others and such. On top of
>
> >that, using phones to check mic placement can actually mask some problems
>
> >you likely *would* catch if listening via speakers. (Phase issues between
>
> >multiple mics, for example.)
>
>
>
> Gee I find phase issues easier to pick up on headphones.
>
>
>
> Trevor.



Of course speakers color the sound--though "studio monitors" typically try to claim they don't so much. With phones, the low end is almost always emphasized--unless you spend the money for really accurate phones.

Perhaps my statement is too general....but I think you get what I'm saying?

As for using phones to catch phase problems....just saying my preference. I'm sure we all have our preferred methods, etc. I will say--I've been fooled by phones a couple times & removing the headphones helped me catch the problem.

Your mileage may vary, of course....

Mike

[geoff]

On 30/05/2014 5:09 a.m., wrote:
> On Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:31:54 AM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:

> Of course speakers color the sound--though "studio monitors" typically try to claim they don't so much. With phones, the low end is almost always emphasized--unless you spend the money for really accurate phones.
>
> Perhaps my statement is too general....but I think you get what I'm saying?
>
> As for using phones to catch phase problems....just saying my preference. I'm sure we all have our preferred methods, etc. I will say--I've been fooled by phones a couple times & removing the headphones helped me catch the problem.
>
> Your mileage may vary, of course....
>
> Mike


A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?


geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff > wrote:
>
>A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
>for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
>frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?

I think that yes, some of the headphones out there with exaggerated
bass or which have deliberate distortion mechanisms in them to make
bass more audible do in fact do this to try and compensate for the lack
of bass perception that you get through tactile means with speaker playback.

Whether this is a bad thing depends on what you're using the headphones
for. If you're using them for tracking it might not be bad. If you are
trying to make eq decisions because you don't trust the low end on your
monitoring system, it could be very bad.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Trevor]

> wrote in message
...
>> >As you may know, phones almost always color the sound in some way.
>>
>> And all speakers do not?
>
> Of course speakers color the sound--though "studio monitors" typically try
> to claim they don't so much.

And good headphones are usually less. Sure you can buy ones that aren't,
just as you can buy colored speakers for far more money.


>With phones, the low end is almost always emphasized--unless you spend the
>money for really accurate phones.

And "really accurate headphones" are still far cheaper than any speaker that
is remotely accurate. And don't suffer from room colorations as speakers do.
And the sound remains the same as you move your head unlike a speaker/room
combination.
The only thing hard to do on headphones IMO is stereo imaging.


> Perhaps my statement is too general....but I think you get what I'm
> saying?

Sure, I just don't agree with it.

Trevor.

[geoff]

On 30/05/2014 10:12 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
> geoff > wrote:
>>
>> A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
>> for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
>> frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?
>
> I think that yes, some of the headphones out there with exaggerated
> bass or which have deliberate distortion mechanisms in them to make
> bass more audible do in fact do this to try and compensate for the lack
> of bass perception that you get through tactile means with speaker playback.
>
> Whether this is a bad thing depends on what you're using the headphones
> for. If you're using them for tracking it might not be bad. If you are
> trying to make eq decisions because you don't trust the low end on your
> monitoring system, it could be very bad.
> --scott
>


I guess it comes down to *knowing* your he3adphones, if you are relying
on them for that.

geoff

[Trevor]

"geoff" > wrote in message
...
> On 30/05/2014 10:12 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> geoff > wrote:
>>>
>>> A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
>>> for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
>>> frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?
>>
>> I think that yes, some of the headphones out there with exaggerated
>> bass or which have deliberate distortion mechanisms in them to make
>> bass more audible do in fact do this to try and compensate for the lack
>> of bass perception that you get through tactile means with speaker
>> playback.
>>
>> Whether this is a bad thing depends on what you're using the headphones
>> for. If you're using them for tracking it might not be bad. If you are
>> trying to make eq decisions because you don't trust the low end on your
>> monitoring system, it could be very bad.
>
>
> I guess it comes down to *knowing* your he3adphones, if you are relying on
> them for that.

Right, as you must with speakers as well.

Trevor.

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff > wrote:
>On 30/05/2014 10:12 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> geoff > wrote:
>>>
>>> A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
>>> for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
>>> frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?
>>
>> I think that yes, some of the headphones out there with exaggerated
>> bass or which have deliberate distortion mechanisms in them to make
>> bass more audible do in fact do this to try and compensate for the lack
>> of bass perception that you get through tactile means with speaker playback.
>>
>> Whether this is a bad thing depends on what you're using the headphones
>> for. If you're using them for tracking it might not be bad. If you are
>> trying to make eq decisions because you don't trust the low end on your
>> monitoring system, it could be very bad.
>
>I guess it comes down to *knowing* your he3adphones, if you are relying
>on them for that.

Most of the things I want headphones for doesn't involve knowing them so
much.... for tracking, you want the performer to be able to hear the backing
tracks (and especially the beat) in a clear fashion without them leaking into
the tracking mikes. For editing you want to be able to hear sounds near the
noise floor to figure out where reverb tails end and where chair squeaks are.
If the tonality is screwed up, it doesn't matter as long as you can hear what
you need to hear.

But the majority of people using those headphones with exaggerated low end are
using them for casual listening where no real decisions are being made at all.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

geoff wrote:
> On 30/05/2014 10:12 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> geoff > wrote:
>>>
>>> A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
>>> for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
>>> frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?
>>
>> I think that yes, some of the headphones out there with exaggerated
>> bass or which have deliberate distortion mechanisms in them to make
>> bass more audible do in fact do this to try and compensate for the lack
>> of bass perception that you get through tactile means with speaker
>> playback.
>>
>> Whether this is a bad thing depends on what you're using the headphones
>> for. If you're using them for tracking it might not be bad. If you are
>> trying to make eq decisions because you don't trust the low end on your
>> monitoring system, it could be very bad.
>> --scott
>>
>
>
> I guess it comes down to *knowing* your he3adphones, if you are relying
> on them for that.
>
> geoff


Well, yeah. But phones are always good for a mix check if nothing else.

--
Les Cargill

[[email protected]]

On Friday, May 30, 2014 12:44:37 PM UTC-5, Les Cargill wrote:
> geoff wrote:
>
> > On 30/05/2014 10:12 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
> >> geoff > wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>> A thought - does the bass 'enhancement' in some headphones compensate
>
> >>> for the lack of physical excitation of the rest of the body by bass
>
> >>> frequencies ? And if so , would that necessarily be a Bad Thing ?
>
> >>
>
> >> I think that yes, some of the headphones out there with exaggerated
>
> >> bass or which have deliberate distortion mechanisms in them to make
>
> >> bass more audible do in fact do this to try and compensate for the lack
>
> >> of bass perception that you get through tactile means with speaker
>
> >> playback.
>
> >>
>
> >> Whether this is a bad thing depends on what you're using the headphones
>
> >> for. If you're using them for tracking it might not be bad. If you are
>
> >> trying to make eq decisions because you don't trust the low end on your
>
> >> monitoring system, it could be very bad.
>
> >> --scott
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I guess it comes down to *knowing* your he3adphones, if you are relying
>
> > on them for that.
>
> >
>
> > geoff
>
>
>
>
>
> Well, yeah. But phones are always good for a mix check if nothing else.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Les Cargill



Absolutely! One should always check their mixes through a variety of speakers--including headphones. I'll burn test mixes to disc and listen in my car...and anyplace I think can be helpful.

Mike

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 5/30/2014 1:44 PM, Les Cargill wrote:

> Well, yeah. But phones are always good for a mix check if nothing else.

Check the mix for what? What, that you hear in the headphones, would
make you change the mix? And then after making changes, what would you
check the mix on?


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 5/30/2014 1:44 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>
>> Well, yeah. But phones are always good for a mix check if nothing else.
>
> Check the mix for what?

Mainly reverb and phase anomalies, which show up better on phones.

> What, that you hear in the headphones, would
> make you change the mix? And then after making changes, what would you
> check the mix on?
>

I cycle between monitors, NS-10s , phones and a stock car stereo.

>

--
Les Cargill

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 28-05-2014 04:57, Nate Najar wrote:

> does anyone have any recommendations for headphones on which you can reliably judge mic placement and/or adjust eq?

HD25 for mic placement and stereo quality. EQ on loudspeakers, @home,
the next day.

> I have used sony 7506 for years. I hate them but they're good for editing.

> last year I got audio technic a ath m50 on a recommendation. they're very clean but seem to have a smile curve midrange and the low end seems exaggerated. Which is not good for judging my arch nemesis the proximity effect.

Yes, built in loudness and ear fatigue, narrow treble peak assumed but
not verified, but good for mixing on. I use them with my Soundcraft EPM,
but not for few mic location work.

> N

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Hikaru Ichijyo]

Peter Larsen > wrote:
> On 28-05-2014 04:57, Nate Najar wrote:
>
>> I have used sony 7506 for years. I hate them but they're good for
>> editing.
>
>> last year I got audio technic a ath m50 on a recommendation. they're
>> very clean but seem to have a smile curve midrange and the low end
>> seems exaggerated. Which is not good for judging my arch nemesis the
>> proximity effect.
>
> Yes, built in loudness and ear fatigue, narrow treble peak assumed but
> not verified, but good for mixing on. I use them with my Soundcraft EPM,
> but not for few mic location work.

I've come to exactly the same conclusions, and was mentioning this about
the ATH-M50's in another thread. I haven't found anything better to mix
on though, although I just got a pair of Sennheiser HD650's that are
different but not better or worse (great stereo field though).

It'd be nice if there was something like the ATH-M50 that was less
scooped.

--
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from
oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent
that will reach to himself.
--Thomas Paine

[Trevor]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 5/30/2014 1:44 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Well, yeah. But phones are always good for a mix check if nothing else.
>
> Check the mix for what? What, that you hear in the headphones, would make
> you change the mix? And then after making changes, what would you check
> the mix on?

Well the music that has made it to record/CD that is out of phase and sounds
*terrible* on headphones (when many people do listen to music on headphones
these days) is a bloody good reason to *always* check a mix on headphones
IMO! Don't you?

Trevor.