Disclaimer: this review was originally posted in French on Audiofanzine.fr. With their kind permission we translated the text to English and published here for you to enjoy.

The Austrian manufacturer AKG, not content to simply have microphones in its catalog, notably the C414 and the C12, also manufactures headphones whose reputation have reached far beyond the borders of its small country.

One of the most notable of these is the K702 which has pleased hobbyists and professionals for years.  We are excited and curious to test the K812.  The K812 is the crown jewel of its line at a price of nearly 1200 €.  So, is it worth it?

We think that 150 € is a good starting price for “professional” headphones that are reliable enough for serious work. We have noticed in the past that models priced around 300 € are significantly better than those at 150 €.  At 300 € you get a bit more balance and precision.  For double the price, you certainly do not get double the quality; however, there is a significant improvement that is well worth your money.

IT’S OVER 900 (€)

Most manufacturers make one or more high-end models.  These are usually priced over 1000 €.  This price, three to four times higher than that of many well-performing models, raises a few questions.  What would be the advantage, if there is any, over “my good ‘ole headphones”?  We will address these questions in this test, which will compare the K702 (which sells for less than 200 €), a pair of headphones which we have had and enjoyed for a long time, to the most recent and expensive K812 (around 1200 €).

There are two things that we must note before jumping into the test.  The K812, even if it has a price often attributed to “Hi-Fi” or “audiophile” material, is described by the manufacturer – just as the K702 – as a pair of headphones made for mixing and monitoring.  So, the goal of these two models of headphones is the same. Know as well that there is an in-between model in the Austrian manufacturer’s catalog – the K712 costs around 350 € and takes its place between the K702 and the K812; however, we don’t have it on hand for this test.

CLASSY, COMFORTABLE, AND DELIGHTFUL

When opened, even with the price in mind, we had to confess that the K812 doesn’t disappoint.  It has a simple yet classy look with its charcoal grey exterior and its subtle silver borders.  It has a convenient 3 meter detachable cable and weighs only 390 grams.  That, along with its classy wooden stand, convinced us that we were dealing with some very high-end headphones!

The manufacturer tells us that inside the headphones there is a 53mm transducer (its largest) as well as a 1.5 Tesla magnet with lightweight aluminum-copper coils.  From a technical standpoint, know that the K812 is a pair of open headphones, with a 36 ohm impedance and replaceable cushions.  Note also some characteristics affecting its mobility: the headphones do not fold and have no remote.  However, this is totally reasonable in view of the high-end, sedentary nature of the K812.

We liked the light, comfortable fit of the K702, but the K812 raises the bar even higher.  The cushions are shaped to perfectly fit the ears and head.  Once put on, they stay perfectly in place and are so comfortable that you could forget you’re wearing them.  It is a real pleasure to wear these headphones. Now all we have to do is plug them in…

BENCHMARK

For this test, we organized a new testing protocol in addition to the classic, comparative listening test. With the precious aid of our partner, Sonarworks, we were able to make precise graphs of frequency response and magnitude.  These graphs were elaborated by professionals who do this kind of work in a lab on a daily basis.  They have extensive experience, and you’ll get to read their professional opinion.  Isn’t life great?

We’ll start with the frequency response of the K812, followed by that of the K702:

We can clearly see that these two headphones have the same origin, and a certain signature AKG sound.  The bottom of the spectrum is fairly linear and the top of the spectrum is well developed.  Our first observation on the K812 is that there is a difference in bass between the right and left channels.  In fact, the right channel has around 2dB more on the entire low register (between 50 and 400 Hz), something that we don’t see on the K702.  So there’s the first disappointment.  We also found a significant – up to 6 dB – drop between 2 and 3 kHz, which are important frequencies for mixing.  The K702 also has variation in these medium-high frequencies, but never more than +3 or -2 dB.  In the higher frequencies, the K702 peaks to just over 6 dB between 6 and 10 kHz; however, the K812 peaks to nearly 10 dB at 10 kHz.  The overall graph for the K812 is clearly rougher than that of its little brother, the K702.  That’s good for recreational listening, but not so good for mixing.

Next, here are the magnitudes of the two pairs of headphones:

Here we are surprised to see less magnitude on the K702, whatever the volume.  Both headphones manage to stay under 2% for the entire spectrum at 83 dB; however, the K812 starts jumping at 93 dB between 2 and 4 kHz and in the extreme low register.  The K702 has no need to cower before its big brother; in fact, the exact opposite is the case.

MUSIC

Now we will talk about the headphones’ performance while listening to music.

Johnny Cash – Hurt

When listening to this Jonny Cash song, there is a clear similarity between these two AKG headphones; the audio and dynamic sound the same to us.  However, whether we’re listening to Cash’s acoustic guitar or his voice, the biggest difference between the two models is felt in the 1/1.5 kHz range.  In fact, the K702 peaks 3 dB while the K812 dips 6 dB, which makes around a 9 dB difference for certain frequencies.  This results in an emptier, less “in your face” sound on the K812.  Cash’s throat and nasal sounds are more prominent on the K702 whereas the K812 puts more emphasis on silence and air. Both headphones are very nice to listen to; however, it seems that the K702 tends to be less flattering to the ear as it lets through frequencies that are often a bit “hard,” yet that are necessary for mixing.

Gorillaz – Feel Good Inc.

On this song, we hear the K812’s more developed lower registers, and it’s very nice.  However, the difference between the two pairs of headphones is still relatively subtle, and even if the K702 has less prominent lower frequencies, they are both still very precise.  On the mediums and the highs, the drop at 1 kHz is clearly heard on the K812, which is manifested through voices and certain instruments having a hollow, distant sound. The general sound of the K812 is very nice; it is never aggressive while at the same time it is fairly detailed. However, the audio sounds more realistic on the K702, even if sometimes realistic doesn’t sound pretty!

Michael Jackson – Liberian Girl

We’ll finish with this piece by Bambi. The pad in the introduction doesn’t really let us hear a clear difference between the two pairs of headphones because both of them have a well-developed high register, so that we can hear this part of the song very clearly.  When Michael Jackson starts singing, the K702 clearly brings out his voice in a very natural manner, while the K812 makes him sound a bit less human and a bit more ghost-like.  This is mostly due to its balance of medium frequencies in contrast with the high and low extremes.  On this piece, the K702 acts a bit like a magnifying glass that lets us hear certain elements with precision, while the K812 gives us a sound more suited to recreational listening.

To summarize, the K812 seems to be less fit for mixing than its little brother the K702.  It has more balanced mediums than the rest of the spectrum.  However, the K812 has shown itself to also be very agreeable, both in terms of audio as well as comfort.  It has a nice feel and decent clarity in the higher registers, but as we have already said, it seems that the K702 is a much better option when it comes to mixing and audio production.

The opinion of Sonarworks

AKG did a fantastic job with the comfort and quality of these headphones’ construction.  The K812’s sound is reminiscent of traditional “studio” headphones that sound far too bright for mixing or mastering.  For its price, we would have liked the tonal signature to be more balanced.  After all, there are much less expensive pairs of headphones that provide a similar spectral balance.

CONCLUSION

We were expecting a “super” K702; however, in the end we found ourselves with a pair of headphones that comes from a prominent line of descent, yet in the end also proposes a very different philosophy.  It is somewhat unbalanced in the middle and high frequencies, and its audio performance doesn’t necessarily outdo that of its much less expensive younger brother.  Its audio is still nice and detailed and it is perfectly comfortable to wear.  Its appearance and physical quality live up its high-class origins.  We would recommend these headphones to a rich, musical amateur rather than to somebody in a home studio who wants a useful tool and doesn’t care about its appearance.  The first is looking for a toy, the other for a tool.

The post Test of the AKG K812 Studio Headphones appeared first on Sonarworks.

Disclaimer: this review was originally posted in French on Audiofanzine.fr. With their kind permission we translated the text to English and published here for you to enjoy.

Audiofanzine recently tested the DT1770 Pro, and in the box it was shipped in, Beyerdynamic slipped us another set of headphones, the T1 2nd generation. These are a semi-open model, and at a price of around €1000, fall more into the Hi-Fi headphone range provided in the German manufacturer’s catalogue. But because we at Audiofanzine are open-minded, we took a listen and tasted the forbidden fruit…and here’s the verdict.

When we look more closely, this T1 2nd generation greatly resembles our good old DT 880 Pro to which we will compare. It has a fairly similar appearance, is circumaural and semi-open…The only real revelation that we are dealing with Hi-Fi headphones is the detachable cable connected to each earpiece (with mini-jacks), and not just on the left as with the DT 880 Pro. In Hi-Fi, we like things to be very symmetrical, is there a problem with that?

GERMAN QUALITY

As for its technical specifications, the T1 boasts a 600-ohm impedance compared to 250 for the DT 880 Pro, and they are noticeably heavier (440 g compared to 295). Testa technology is inside (It’s the “T” in “T1”), promising to deliver all the bells and whistles to the listener. Note the presence of a hard storage case for your precious, which lends itself to the equipment’s upscale character. At this price, you’d better take care of it!

A 3-meter long cable is provided, and is wrapped with textile, making it fairly rigid. We bet that this will help it endure the test of time a little better. An optional cable is also available with an XLR 4-point connector instead of a 6.35mm jack, which can be used to connect symmetrically to the headphone amp. Don’t get too excited, as you will still have to pay the modest sum of €149 to obtain this special cable, which is about the price of a DT 770!
Like the DT 1770 Pro recently tested on your favourite site, the T1 2nd Gen’s construction quality is irreproachable. It feels very sturdy due to the materials used and its assembly. It has an amazing appearance and beside it, the DT 880 Pro seems a bit “rough”, maybe even a little “cheap”. The T1’s finish is truly excellent, and there is no doubt that we are dealing with top of the line headphones. As for comfort, they’re in the same vein as other Beyerdynamic models, which means they are very comfortable, and we can say that they’ll never hurt your head even after being worn for many hours. The materials feel great, but we will have to wait to see if they become too hot in the summer. Considering the current winter temperatures, it’s difficult to comment on it now!

THE T1 HAS SOME GUTS!

Since testing AKG’s K812, we have created a new protocol in order to perform classical comparative listening. With valuable assistance from our partner, Sonarworks, we are pleased to provide you with precise frequency response curves and harmonic distortion rates provided by professionals, who perform this function every day in their laboratory. And because they have a wealth of experience, their valuable opinion about the headphones will also be provided to you. Isn’t life grand?
We begin with the T1 2nd Generation’s frequency response, followed by the DT 880 Pro’s:

Let’s divide the curve into two parts: what’s below 1 kHz, and what’s above. In the lower portion, covering the low mid-range and the bass line, we found that the T1 holds its own with only a 2dB deviation between 100 Hz and 1 kHz, which is still pretty good. Also, at -6 dB, these headphones can drop much lower than their little brother the DT 880 Pro (-2 dB at 55 Hz), which is relatively poor in low frequencies. The T1 therefore quietly wins the battle of the lower spectrum, against the DT 880 Pro, which is relatively linear.

For frequencies above 1 kHz, it’s another story however. The T1 keeps the Beyerdynamic footprint, but exaggerates all the traits. There’s a big spike at 10 kHz, ranging up to +12 dB (!) while it doesn’t exceed +7 dB on the DT 880 Pro, which is well endowed in this area. At the same time, the fairly typical 4 kHz dip (it can be found in the DT 770 and the DT 1770, remember), is slightly displaced near 3 kHz on the T1 with a drop ranging up to -5 dB, while the DT 880 Pro is more discreet (-2 dB at 4kHz).
It’s in this upper end of the spectrum where we find the sound may be more enjoyable to hear at first, thanks to the spike at 10 kHz, giving the impression of having a more detailed sound, and the dip at 3 kHz which helps make the sound seem sometimes less “hard”. But this strong deviation might be a handicap during the mixing stage, and may cause home-studio owners to under-dose the high frequencies or the high-mids if they let the T1 take them over. It may be preferable to work with more linear headphones, in order to best avoid surprises when dealing with monitors or any other sound reproduction system.
In terms of harmonic distortion, both headphones are very good, and even if the T1 has a higher distortion in the extreme low of the spectrum, it’s surely because they can go lower than the DT 880 Pro. Anyway, it’s difficult to separate these two sets of headphones here, as they are both excellent.

The opinion of Sonarworks

The Beyer sound is pushed to its limits. The famous spike in the treble ranging up to +12 dB at 10 kHz makes listening very realistic, but don’t wear yourself out. The distortion is very weak; these headphones extract the details of certain recordings very well, but present them in a distorted manner. If you want to seriously mix or master with these headphones, the engineer must first tame the T1’s tonal coloration.

LISTENING

Johnny Cash – Hurt

In this song, we can clearly hear the differences between the DT 880 Pro and the T1. And for good reason, whether on Cash’s voice or his Martin acoustic guitar, an important part of the information is found above 1 kHz. With a frequency of 3 kHz dropping back and a huge spike around 10 kHz, the T1 has a very detailed sound, with attacks of intense chords and a voice highlighting the resonances located around the nose as well as sibilance. It really feels like Cash is singing two centimetres from our ears. If the detail has a magnifying effect, which can be useful in some situations, (you can hear, for example, on this recording, the bleeding of tracks on the magnetic tape which were subsequently erased), the rendering is far from being natural with an overflow of presence, regardless of the instrument. The DT 880 Pro, which however is not particularly flat in this frequency range either, has a much more natural rendering, with high-mid frequencies that return a little more in the low and high frequencies. Going from the DT 880 Pro to the T1 is still a bit painful. The DT 880 Pro seems much more appropriate for mixing and mastering.

Gorillaz – Feel Good Inc.

This title did much better in the low frequencies, and the T1 quietly overshadows its little brother in this area. The lower spectrum is really quite clean and discernable, it drops relatively low and isn’t disproportionate compared to the low-midrange. It’s along the same lines for the upper spectrum. When you go from the T1 to the DT 880 Pro, the sound seems a little more “boxy” at first, but we did it quite quickly. When you return to the T1, the acclimatization is much harder. The sibilance hurts on this title, and the overall sound seems far too hollow, with too much treble and not enough mediums. You can feel the fatigue a little, so you should pay attention to your ears if you plan to work on pieces with similar productions for long hours…

Michael Jackson – Liberian Girl

We finish with this piece from Michael Jackson, and the introductory layers take full advantage of the T1’s ultra-developed upper spectrum, with very present details. As for fatigue, this track is comfortable, with only minor sibilance to titillate our hearing a little too violently for our tastes. The lower spectrum (bass and kick) transcribes very well here, it’s clean and discernable. With the DT 880 Pro, these instruments sound a little more “in the box”, as there’s already -2 dB at 100 Hz…In terms of dynamics, there’s nothing wrong, and they’re very good.
Even though we were fully convinced by the T1 under the 1 kHz range, with their great linearity and a lower spectrum that drops relatively low, we can’t say that the upper spectrum really wowed us in terms of using it for music production. The high frequencies above 10 kHz are far too present, and the drop around 3 kHz is a little too deep. The balance in this end of the spectrum is not as good as our trusty DT 880 Pro, which is much cheaper. That’s unfortunate. We understand what Beyerdynamic was trying to do within the realm of Hi-Fi listening where, above all, you want to seduce the listener. By reducing the sometimes “hard” 3 kHz frequencies and by increasing the high frequencies around 10 kHz to add detail, the T1 tends to make for more recreational listening, even though we think that +12 dB is too much of a spike which can result in listening fatigue, in some cases.

CONCLUSION

We wanted to try “Hi-Fi” headphones to see if they could meet our expectations, and they do so only partially. The quality of fit and finish is impeccable; the materials used provide a feeling of undeniable robustness and comfort. The little carrying case and the detachable fabric-wrapped cable really make you feel like you’re using high-end equipment, and the €1000 price tag clears up any confusion about that. The lower spectrum is really very good, because it is reliable and developed, and the distortion is completely acceptable. In the upper-mid spectrum, things get spoiled if you want to use the headphones for mixing or music production, because of an imbalance between the high frequencies, the high-mediums and the rest of the spectrum. If your goal is to mix or master your latest track (which is surely the case if you’re on our site), there are much less expensive models, including from Beyerdynamic, and with qualities more suited to your occupation.

The post Beyerdynamic T1 2nd Gen. Headphone Test appeared first on Sonarworks.

How to make proper decisions regarding type and amount of reverb when mix on headphones.

In the previous post, we discussed the concept of creating dimensionality in a mix and the tools we have to create a three-dimensional soundstage. In this post, we’re going to discuss practical applications of reverb what to listen for when using headphones.

THE LONG TAIL OF REVERB

Nothing makes judgments regarding the application of reverb in a mix easier than headphones. However, since you’ll be able to hear those long reverb tails clearly, you’ll either be tempted to go overboard, because the reverb sounds so good, or you might dial back the amount of reverb because it’s so clearly audible. What’s a mixer to do? While both warnings have an element of truth, they fail to mention that it’s not just a matter of quantity of reverb; it’s also a matter of quality. “Quality” in this case refers to the density or sonic texture of reverb decaying over time.

The parameter that controls density varies with different manufacturers. For example, on Lexicon reverbs, “Definition” controls density, whereas on the Sonnox reverb plug-ins, the control parameter is “Dispersion.” What you’re looking for are low-density reverb tails. Think of low-density reverb like Swiss cheese, with lots of holes in it, and high density like smooth peanut butter. In nearly every case, with the exception of a desired special effect, a low-density reverb is preferable.

Lexicon PCM96

Sonnox Oxford Reverb

REVERB IS NOT JUST FOR SPEAKERS

Reverbs in a mix don’t live in isolation during playback over speakers. They actually join with the natural reverb of the room. If you use a thick, creamy-smooth reverb, it will combine with the room’s reverb and pull its associated instrument backward in the mix. The larger the room, the more its natural reverb combines with the mix reverb. The holes in a low-density reverb will be filled with the room reverb, creating a seamless join, and will have the effect of bringing the parent sound closer. The isolation afforded by headphones takes this phenomenon out of the equation, but it should be taken into account in order for your mixes to translate properly to speakers. Therefore, as a basic rule, stick with the low-density reverbs.

Another thing to consider is that long, smooth reverb tails require more volume to hear, which in turn takes up more space in the mix, plus, they have a masking effect on all surrounding sounds. Since we have limited space in a mix, anything that isn’t heard is just wasting resources—and that provides a clue for determining the length of reverb tails. Once a reverb tail is no longer heard in the mix, there’s no reason for it to continue beyond that point.

When deciding the length of a reverb tail, make sure you end it in a musical fashion. For example, if a reverb tail continues for two measures, but is only heard for one, end the tail on or slightly after the downbeat of the second measure. Ending it before the downbeat will create an unmusical empty space with the uneasy feeling of stopping short, but extending it to the downbeat will have the effect of a wave pushing the rhythm to the next measure.

WIDENING EFFECTS OF REVERB

A trick for adding stereo width to a sound with reverb is to create two aux tracks in your DAW and use a different reverb plug-in on each aux track with different types of reverb. Pan one aux reverb left, the other right, and assign the dry sound source to each. You can further expand on this concept by using three mono reverbs, which is based on a technique created by 23-time Grammy-winning engineer Al Schmitt (Steely Dan, Toto, Henry Mancini), who would take the mono live chamber reverbs at Capitol Studios and spread as many as eight sends across the stereo field. (Hard left/right, center, a couple mid left-center, and couple mid right-center. More than likely, Al used as many as eight mono reverbs to mix large ensembles, assigning different instrument groups to each send based on their actual physical position.

Since we’re mixing on headphones, it will be easier to hear the effects of the multi-mono reverb trick, but before you go all Al Schmitt on your tracks, try using the dual mono reverb to widen synth pads. Save the three mono reverbs for vocals, with a spring reverb up the middle, large room on one side, and medium room on the other. For a good jumping off point, set a 50ms pre-delay on the center reverb, 8ms on the large room, and no pre-delay on the medium room. Of course, you should experiment.

BONUS TIP: ABBEY ROAD REVERB       

High-frequency tails of long reverbs can annoy and detract (unless it’s the effect you’re going for). At Abbey Road studios, it’s been a long-time practice to filter high and low frequencies on the input side of reverb aux channels, which creates a subtle, natural-sounding reverb. Try this on vocals: Set a high-pass filter at a -12dB per octave slope to cut everything below 600Hz or so and a low-pass filter to cut everything above 4k-5kHz plus or minus depending on the sound. Et voila, instant Abbey Road reverb.  

The important thing to listen for is how the cuts to low and high frequencies make you feel. For example, as you cut lows, apart from increased clarity, pay attention to the emotional impact and feel. You may find the vocal sounding not only bigger, more intimate and nuanced as you increase the center frequency. With high-frequency cuts, remember that 4k-5kHz is just a ballpark number. You might want to leave frequencies up to 6kHz for the sake of bringing out air in an instrument or breathiness in a female vocal. Again, each sound is different and requires some experimentation.

HAVE AT IT

That wraps up our five-part tutorial on mixing with headphones. If you’ve been struggling to achieve mixes that compete with the pros, headphones and calibration software offer you an extremely cost-effective and accurate monitoring solution. Along with achieving a flat response for reliable mix decisions, Sonarworks software headphone and speaker response curves enable you to reference what your mix would sound like across several playback systems to ensure mix translation. In addition, if you mix entirely inside the box, you have the added convenience of being able to “take your control room with you” and mix anywhere at any time. Speaking of convenience, if you’re a travelling engineer, you won’t have to risk transporting your favorite monitors, or spend time getting used to the characteristics of an unfamiliar control room.

Mixing entirely in headphones can solve many environmental problems, but they do not entirely preclude the notion of mixing with monitors. We find that a combination of the two is the best solution. Sonarworks also offers speaker calibration software to improve the performance of budget speakers and provide response curves of several popular monitors to create an affordable means of checking mix translation.

Barry M Rivman • exclusively for Sonarworks

Barry is owner and chief engineer of Sound Suite Studios in Medford, Oregon, and former senior pro audio staff writer for Musician’s Friend.

The post Referencing Reverb On Headphones appeared first on Sonarworks.

Engineer or not just about everyone can recognize the ubiquitous white coned monitor that made musical history. Some have called the Yamaha HS series a successor to the legendary NS10, we are a bit skeptical about that. HS5 is a bass reflex studio monitor which means that it won’t be able to replicate the agile impulse response of an infinite baffle speaker which was the NS10. The HS5 might not be a legend yet, but let’s find out why it might become one due to the terrific value it offers.

The post Yamaha HS5 studio monitor review appeared first on Sonarworks.

Countless times have our clients asked us what headphones to buy, therefore we’ve compiled an infograph for your convenience. The headphones you’ll see there have been chosen mostly for their neutral sound. We also made sure to actually try them out to see if they make sense ergonomically and won’t fall apart right before a critical session.

Closed or not?

Much ink has been spilled regarding the best in studio headphones, however there’s hardly something like the best cans for everything. First thing you need to find out is whether you need isolation. Do you work in a noisy environment? Will sound leakage from your cans bother the folks around you? If so – you need sealed headphones.

If the room is all yours, then generally it’s a no brainer to go for open or semi open backed headphones. 9 times out of 10 they will sound better than closed back headphones. One exception would be monitoring bass heavy music – sealed cans keep the air from escaping, so more bass is possible.

Horses for courses

When choosing what to buy, try to imagine how you plan to use your future headphones. Sound quality is extremely important, but long hours in studio can be made easier if your headgear is comfy. Expect to be on the road much? It’s best if your cans can fold and have multiple cables.

Then there’s the topic of drivability. The rule of thumb is that lower impedance headphones are more fit for portable devices and higher impedance drivers will love the voltage your audio interface can supply. Nowadays there aren’t really that many hard-to-drive headphones.

The post How to choose the best studio headphones? appeared first on Sonarworks.

When shopping for studio monitor speakers, you probably spend countless hours researching the highest ratings and pouring through many comments on forums, but you’re probably also aware about what kind of impact the room itself has on your sound system.

We have a thesis that frequency response wise monitors of the present day actually vary in just the slightest ways and the studio or room is the greatest factor in determining what you hear. Of course the best option is to build the perfect studio room and treat it with the best room treatment materials with the help of the best acoustician around. But not everybody is lucky enough to have the time and resources for that. Or you are travelling and just have to do with whatever room is available. So for those cases where you have to do with less-than-prefect studio and still want to create some great music with confidence, we’ve got the next-best solution to this seemingly complex problem.

Because every theory must be proven, we decided to conduct a little experiment to see how various monitors performed in a standard, unchanging environment. Then we applied the Sonarworks software, a highly precise, groundbreaking calibration technology with multipoint measurement, to see if we could obtain the sort of balance and harmony we were striving for.

On to the experiment…

Our testing location, or our “constant” if we are being completely scientific, was a studio with minimal acoustic treatments – one wall with an angle and an uneven and treated ceiling. (It could be considered a basic bedroom studio much like the ones growing in popularity with the accessibility of digital mixing tools.)

At this location, we set about to measure five different sets of speakers without adjusting the state the room. We left all the instruments, monitor stands, and tabletop components as they were.

Our test monitors included:
• KRK VXT6
• ADAM A7X
• ADAM A77X
• Genelec 8040
• Equator D5

After setting up each monitoring system, we used a 3-step process:

1. Measure the frequency response
2. Apply the correction (flat response target)
3. Re-measure the monitors with correction

For each speaker setup we measured approximately 70 points around the sweetspot. We kept the default priorities for the correction of the room quadrants (sweetspot – high, ~40 cm around it – medium, rest of room – very low). It is important to note that the software automatically detects where you are holding the mic, thus making the measurement process simple for the user and free from accidental mic placement errors.

Pre-Sonarworks Results
After applying the same measurement techniques to each set of speakers, a pattern emerged to reveal reoccurring issues that the room produced for all sets. As you can see from the graph below, there was a strong overall boost in the low mids ~80 – 200 Hz and dips at 100 Hz, 300 Hz, and just below 1 kHz.

Post-Sonarworks Results

We then ran the measuring process again, applying the Sonarworks software to see if we could correct the room issues. The correction plugin was included in the audio chain (using Virtual Audio Cable and Reaper).

We were quite pleased with the outcome of this test. As you can see from the graphic below, we witnessed considerable improvement. After the calibration, the main difference between these sets of monitors was at the roll off point of the bass frequencies while the overall frequency response was quite uniform.

The evidence from our experiment confirmed our thesis that frequency response wise room characteristics determine the sound in the studio more than specific model of monitor speakers. While the characteristics of the room generally affected all of the speakers equally, we were glad to see that the issues were easily remedied with the Sonarworks technology.

Over the next few weeks, we will test the same speakers in an acoustic chamber to gauge measurements with and without Sonarworks in a new environment. If you have any other speakers you’d like us to measure, please let us know in the comments below.

The post Studio monitor test and calibration: 5 speakers in a “bedroom” studio appeared first on Sonarworks.

Despite being best known for their legendary M50 series closed back headphones, Audio-Technica is no stranger to open back headphones. Their AD series open back headphones are well regarded by gamers for their stellar imaging and good resolution. The R70x was released together with M70x sister headphone as two premium offerings for studio engineers. We... Read more »

The post Studio headphone review: Audio-Technica ATH-R70x appeared first on Sonarworks.

We just released an update for Sonarworks speaker calibration software which fixes a critical bug. On MacOS Sierra (10.12) some users experienced an issue during calibration which made some buttons disappear.

The newest build for Sonarworks Reference 3 software solves this problem. Please download it here.

If any problems persist, please tell us about them!

The post A critical update for MacOS Sierra users is out appeared first on Sonarworks.

We just released another update for Sonarworks speaker calibration software which fixes a nasty bug. On MacOS Sierra (10.12) due to a recent security update some users couldn’t activate their Reference 3 speaker calibration software.

The newest build for Sonarworks Reference 3 software solves this problem. Please download it here.

If any problems persist, please tell us about them!

The post Another MacOS Sierra hotfix for Sonarworks Reference 3 appeared first on Sonarworks.

The post Protected: Do the Same Model & Make Headphones Sound the Same? appeared first on Sonarworks.

If you’re reading this, then there’s a good chance your headphones sound better than 98% of the stuff out there. Expensive or affordable, all headphones are limited by the same physics, which we can only cheat a little. But most of all they’re limited by the fact that almost no one has figured out what to shoot for when designing them. Our plug-in changes all of that and now I’ll tell you how we make sure you get a sound beyond anything attainable by physical manufacturing alone.

Going beyond average

Sonarworks individual calibration is currently the best remedy for driver variation in headphones. This is how we do it:

1. A pair of headphones goes through the whole measurement routine so we can see exactly what’s wrong with them
2. Our team of engineers check that the measurements are free of errors and do a good job of describing how the headphone actually sounds
3. Our proprietary software generates a highly precise calibration profile
4. The now-calibrated pair of headphones are checked against the reference, so no audible differences persist
5. Listening tests are performed by no less than 3 different specialists and final tuning is done by our chief research guy

In the end this increases the calibration accuracy from +/-3dB to a much more impressive +/-0.9dB. The 2.1dB difference sounds much more impressive than numbers might suggest. The improved channel matching makes instruments more clearly audible, thus allowing you to move them more precisely if needed. You might be asking what can we do about the last +/-0.9dB, and the honest answer would be – we shouldn’t do anything. Remember, that there will be some variation, even we can’t correct – ear shape, earpad wear, sealing issues due to hair (really!), etc. 

Two paths to excellence

There are two ways how you can get your hands on one of these custom calibrated cans. The obvious would be – contact us for the calibration service and send your cans to our lab. Remember to have pretty minty earpads on them, so your individual calibration doesn’t expire once the old pads do. The only drawback to it is that you’ll have to make do without your favourite headphones for about a week. I know how hard it can be, so that’s why there’s the second option.

You can always buy a pair of pre-calibrated headphones from us. We always stock some amount of popular studio headphones pre-calibrated and ready to be shipped to your doorstep. See if the cans you like are in our store, or just drop us a message about what headphones you’d like us to custom calibrate for you. Then you’ll need to buy them, put our address on the shipping label and we’ll reship them back to you once they’re done. We can calibrate all types of headphones, except earbuds and IEM’s. Oh, and if you’re sending a pair of electrostatic headphones, be sure to ship over the amp as well!

Tell us in the comments what’s your main gripe about studio headphones. Maybe we can fix it!

The post How individual calibration works? appeared first on Sonarworks.

After long weeks of measuring, testing and tweaking we’re releasing our biggest supported headphone update yet! With cans ranging from the noble-but-bright AKG K812 to everyman’s Beats now even more people can join the headphone revolution!

Here are the newcomers:

• Audio-Technica ATH-R70x
• AKG K812
• Beyerdynamic DT1770
• Beats Mixr
• Beats Pro
• Beats Solo 2
• Beats Studio 2
• Blue Lola
• Blue Mo-Fi
• Sennheiser HD202
• Sennheiser HD25 Plus
• Sennheiser HD25 light
• Sennheiser HD380
• Sennheiser HD700
• Oppo PM-3
• Philips SPH9500
• Yamaha HPH-MT220

If you have these headphones, reactivate the plug-in and try out the new profiles! Maybe your friends use these? If so – they’ll want to hear about this!

P.S. You can get the new profiles by putting in the activation code in your plug-in one more time. Press the SW logo in the UI and select “Add new product” licence. Enter your activation key and plug-in will fetch the calibration profiles from our server!

The post Calibration now on 16 NEW headphones! appeared first on Sonarworks.