# POLL: Do you think Sonarworks is effective with headphones?



## sIR dORT (Apr 27, 2020)

There's a similar thread about this going on, and I was curious what the actual ratio was of people who do and don't find it effective with headphones.


----------



## rrichard63 (Apr 27, 2020)

Part of the controversy might be about defining "effective". Depending on what you are used to, as-flat-as-possible frequency response might not be what you would prefer to listen to for enjoyment of the music. But it's probably better (other things being equal) for mixing and mastering.

Other things being equal: if the price of as-flat-as-possible frequency response is phase issues or resonances or other anomalies associated with EQ, then it might not be worth it even for mixing. As a result, my guess is that headphone correction works better with expensive phones that are fairly flat to begin with, don't need a lot of correction and don't stress the EQ algorithms, and not so well with inaccurate phones.

Finally, as-flat-as-possible frequency response doesn't address the other main problem with headphones, which is spatialization. Hence Waves NX, Flux HEar and similar tools. Whether you find Sonarworks "effective" might depend on how your ears and brain perceive the relationship between frequency response issues and spatialization issues.

I'm still waiting for a product that addresses both problems together.


----------



## Akarin (Apr 27, 2020)

Not really. I've spent a ton of time just listening to music on my headphones and I somewhat know how my mix should sound in them. What I find useful is a crossfeed emulation plugin like CanOpener.


----------



## Tim_Wells (Apr 27, 2020)

I would like a "I'm not sure" option...


----------



## EwigWanderer (Apr 29, 2020)

Helped me a lot. Most useful plugin that I've ever bought.


----------



## sIR dORT (Apr 29, 2020)

Does anyone here have experience with Toneboosters' Morphit software? How does it compare to sonarworks for headphones? Saw Blakus mentioned it in a vid and saw it was cheaper, wondered if the quality was still there despite the price.


----------



## rrichard63 (Apr 29, 2020)

sIR dORT said:


> Does anyone here have experience with Toneboosters' Morphit software? How does it compare to sonarworks for headphones?


Thank you for mentioning this. When I looked at it several years ago, it didn't have profiles for nearly as many headphone models as it does now. In order make a real comparison, I'll have to shake the dust off my Morphit license and A/B them.

Keep in mind that Sonarworks includes (1) speaker/room correction, (2) a "systemwide" component, and (3) custom profiles for individual headphones if you pay extra for them. Morphit has none of these.


----------



## darcvision (Apr 29, 2020)

sonarworks is really helping me for mixing music. my gear are only audio technica ath m50x + focusrite scarlet 2i2 and i think without sonarworks, it sounds very bright and too much low end. after i used sonarworks, it sounds more warm and flat, especially when you're listen to orchestra piece, sounds like cello, or mid range stuff are more audible


----------



## sIR dORT (Apr 29, 2020)

stefandy31 said:


> sonarworks is really helping me for mixing music. my gear are only audio technica ath m50x + focusrite scarlet 2i2 and i think without sonarworks, it sounds very bright and too much low end. after i used sonarworks, it sounds more warm and flat, especially when you're listen to orchestra piece, sounds like cello, or mid range stuff are more audible


I just got the m50x today, and noticed the same thing - punchy bass and boosted highs. Great for listening if you have the bluetooth extension, but definitely need some correction software for mixing/mastering.


----------



## darcvision (Apr 29, 2020)

sIR dORT said:


> I just got the m50x today, and noticed the same thing - punchy bass and boosted highs. Great for listening if you have the bluetooth extension, but definitely need some correction software for mixing/mastering.


when i'm using m50x without amp, it sounds like high kind of dull, and bassy, but it sounds really good for 150$ and it changes my view how are actually good music sounds like, and i still using it until now.


----------



## MjS (May 1, 2020)

My DT770's are a bit shrill in the high end without them, but I mix it in for about 80% because otherwise it's too dull. I find it useful for that.


----------



## peladio (May 1, 2020)

I think it's very helpful, I mix on HD800 and mixes translate much better now..


----------



## vitocorleone123 (May 1, 2020)

Akarin said:


> Not really. I've spent a ton of time just listening to music on my headphones and I somewhat know how my mix should sound in them. What I find useful is a crossfeed emulation plugin like CanOpener.



I use both. I usually have the generic profile dialed in around 70% in Sonarworks for my DT880 Pro 250ohm cans, then will turn CanOpener on for awhile, and off for awhile, more as a longer check than a constant effect.

I found that going 100% in Sonarworks didn't lead me to be more accurate.

Part of it is making sure you listen to EVERYTHING from your computer, including A/B or just music for fun, the same way, so you get familiar with it.

I then still use TonalBalance Control and REFERENCE. I also check my mix in Neutron/Ozone to see if it's really different (and, more importantly, better than what I did!).

Having a proper room and monitors would sure be easier. But just not possible. So... more steps to deal with.


----------



## robgb (May 1, 2020)

I simply used this website to calibrate my headphones for the flattest possible response. Works great for me: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Au...204076e9e064426a8762b992718/results/README.md


----------



## robgb (May 2, 2020)

robgb said:


> I simply used this website to calibrate my headphones for the flattest possible response. Works great for me: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Au...204076e9e064426a8762b992718/results/README.md


Oh, by the way, the website also includes IR files for each headphone that you can download and use in a convolution reverb instead, if that works for you. I've added one to my monitoring tab in Reaper.


----------



## MartinH. (May 2, 2020)

robgb said:


> Oh, by the way, the website also includes IR files for each headphone that you can download and use in a convolution reverb instead, if that works for you. I've added one to my monitoring tab in Reaper.



Thank you very much for pointing that out. I had missed that important info when I looked at the site. This is brilliant! They have a profile for my cheap Creative Fatal1ty gaming headset! When I use those with the IR loaded in NI Reflektor and dialing stereo width back to ~70%, it sounds a lot closer to what I hear from my 2.1 Speakers. 

How are you loading these IRs in Reaper?


----------



## BillH (May 2, 2020)

robgb said:


> Oh, by the way, the website also includes IR files for each headphone that you can download and use in a convolution reverb instead, if that works for you. I've added one to my monitoring tab in Reaper.




I can't seem to the IRs on the site. could someone direct me. Thank you.


----------



## robgb (May 2, 2020)

MartinH. said:


> How are you loading these IRs in Reaper?


I use Melda's MConvolutionMB (they also have a free version) on the Monitoring FX bus (View>Monitoring FX). That way I don't have to remember to turn off headphone correction when I render. It always renders without the FX on that bus.



BillH said:


> I can't seem to the IRs on the site. could someone direct me. Thank you.


Click on the link for your headphones and you'll see a list of files. One or more of those will be wav files. Click the link, go to where it says Raw File (or something like that), then right click and download that file to load into your convolution reverb.


----------



## gideonleong (May 3, 2020)

I just got it last week, and worked perfectly with my Beyerdynamics DT 880 Pro headphones, which really didn't have the low sub-bassy sounds, as well as the high mids. Mixing sounds very different without Sonarworks.


----------



## BillH (May 3, 2020)

robgb said:


> I use Melda's MConvolutionMB (they also have a free version) on the Monitoring FX bus (View>Monitoring FX). That way I don't have to remember to turn off headphone correction when I render. It always renders without the FX on that bus.
> 
> 
> Click on the link for your headphones and you'll see a list of files. One or more of those will be wav files. Click the link, go to where it says Raw File (or something like that), then right click and download that file to load into your convolution reverb.




Yeah seems to work great. I also put it on the FX Monitor in Reaper. I'm using _Convology_ Reverb with it set at 100%. Are you using yours at 100%? Thanks for all your help!


----------



## robgb (May 3, 2020)

BillH said:


> Yeah seems to work great. I also put it on the FX Monitor in Reaper. I'm using _Convology_ Reverb with it set at 100%. Are you using yours at 100%? Thanks for all your help!


Yep. You're welcome. You might want to consider the Melda MConvolutionEZ, which is free. I think it takes less resources than Convology.


----------



## Karma (May 3, 2020)

I think it depends on the cans! I'd never use it with my HD800S, it does way more harm than good. 

Love it on monitors though, especially if you tend to work around the same level.


----------



## prodigalson (May 3, 2020)

Karma said:


> I think it depends on the cans! I'd never use it with my HD800S, it does way more harm than good.
> 
> Love it on monitors though, especially if you tend to work around the same level.



Well sure, if you have $2,000 headphones with a Freq Response of 4Hz-51KHz then it would seem bonkers to apply software EQ correction to them.


----------



## Karma (May 3, 2020)

prodigalson said:


> Well sure, if you have $2,000 headphones with a Freq Response of 4Hz-51KHz then it would seem bonkers to apply software EQ correction to them.


You'd be surprised! Especially when people are seeking a perfectly 'flat' response.

Saying all this, I wasn't a massive fan of it on my previous AKG k712's either. I remember trying Morphit on those which turned out far worse too.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 12, 2020)

robgb said:


> I simply used this website to calibrate my headphones for the flattest possible response. Works great for me: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/Au...204076e9e064426a8762b992718/results/README.md


This looks like a valuable resource. Do you know how to contact a GitHub developer to report invalid links? The results link for the AKG 240 Studio model, for example, leads to a 404 page not found error. I have two pairs of this model.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 12, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> Finally, as-flat-as-possible frequency response doesn't address the other main problem with headphones, which is spatialization. Hence Waves NX, Flux HEar and similar tools. Whether you find Sonarworks "effective" might depend on how your ears and brain perceive the relationship between frequency response issues and spatialization issues.
> 
> I'm still waiting for a product that addresses both problems together.


Today Blue Cat Audio released ReHead, a $49 plugin that addresses both issues. The EQ is not as sophisticated as Sonarworks Reference, but it does offer the option to use impulse response (IR) files instead of EQ curves for freqency response.

ReHead is for headphones only. It doesn't support room and speaker correction they way Reference does.


----------



## robgb (May 12, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> Finally, as-flat-as-possible frequency response doesn't address the other main problem with headphones, which is spatialization. Hence Waves NX, Flux HEar and similar tools. Whether you find Sonarworks "effective" might depend on how your ears and brain perceive the relationship between frequency response issues and spatialization issues.


Actually Waves NX also has headphone correction, but it's limited to only certain headphones.


----------



## robgb (May 12, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> This looks like a valuable resource. Do you know how to contact a GitHub developer to report invalid links? The results link for the AKG 240 Studio model, for example, leads to a 404 page not found error. I have two pairs of this model.


I came across that error, too, but found another link that worked. Unfortunately, I don't remember how I found the working link.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 12, 2020)

robgb said:


> Actually Waves NX also has headphone correction, but it's limited to only certain headphones.


Thank you for the reminder. I forgot that fact about NX precisely because the list of supported models is so limited.

Blue Cat ReHead's list is even more limited, but it's a brand new product and that might improve. Compared to Sonarworks EQ algorithm, ReHead's EQ is also limited to five parametric bands plus low and hi cut filters. But if using IR impulses works as intended, that would compensate for the somewhat rudimentary EQ.


----------



## robgb (May 12, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> Today Blue Cat Audio released ReHead, a $49 plugin that addresses both issues.


Just downloaded and tried this. I like that you can load up your own IRs, but I'm getting pretty much nothing from the "spatial" aspects of this plugin and can't seem to find how to address this in the manual. It's on sale now for $34, but without the spatial capabilities (like NX), you can do just as well with Melda's free MConvolutionEZ.

I've found that when I use NX, I can literally take off my headphones and the spatial positioning on my monitors sounds exactly the same as it does when using NX. Not getting that here. What I DON'T like about NX is that I feel it messes with the EQ a bit (even with the headphone correction turned off).


----------



## rrichard63 (May 12, 2020)

robgb said:


> Just downloaded and tried this. I like that you can load up your own IRs, but I'm getting pretty much nothing from the "spatial" aspects of this plugin and can't seem to find how to address this in the manual. It's on sale now for $34, but without the spatial capabilities (like NX), you can do just as well with Melda's free MConvolutionEZ.


The spatial aspect is controlled by setting the angle between the speakers on the left hand side of the UI. The effect is similar to a stereo width control. I'm not sure Blue Cat is actually using binaural crossfeed techniques as do NX and Flux HEar. I kind of like it, but I haven't yet compared this new plugin to either of those yet.


----------



## robgb (May 12, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> The spatial aspect is controlled by setting the angle between the speakers on the left hand side of the UI. The effect is similar to a stereo width control. I'm not sure Blue Cat is actually using binaural crossfeed techniques as do NX and Flux HEar. I kind of like it, but I haven't yet compared this new plugin to either of those yet.


Yeah, I've been messing with the controls and it doesn't do much for me. Per what I added to my post above, NX really makes it sound as if I'm listening to my monitors. I sometimes forget I'm not. But again, my problem with NX are the slight changes in EQ, even with the correction function turned off.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 13, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> I haven't yet compared this new plugin to either of those yet.


I have now done a brief shootout among NX (without the associated head tracking hardware), Re-Head, GoodHertz CanOpener and Flux Ircam HEar. I didn't include Toneboosters Isone (although I own it) because my current shootout template is limited to four plugins at a time. I used the headphone response correction for my AKG 701s in Sonarworks Reference and disabled all EQ and ambience features in the four spatialization plugins. I made all of the other settings as comparable as possible and attempted to compensate for output level differences.

(Incidentally, until today I thought that CanOpener was Mac only. In fact it's available for Windows too.)

I think the four plugins are very similar with respect to spatialization (the binaural crossfeed part), but they seem to introduce noticeably different tonal colorations. This is fairly subjective, but to my geriatric ears CanOpener and Re-Head add less coloration and NX relatively more.

I think this comes down to features as much as it does to sound quality. If you like the added three dimensionality of the head tracking hardware, that's a plus for NX. It also has an adjustment for the physical dimensions of your head. If want to try to mix 5.1 or 7.1 surround on headphones, HEar and Spatial Sound Card by New Audio Technology have that (and for Ambisonics there's Plugin Alliance's Dear Reality VR). If you want spatialization and headphone response curve correction combined in one plugin, Re-Head is probably as close as it gets to that right now.

But none of these combine headphone treatment with speaker and room compensation. For me, the real solution is for Sonarworks to add binaural crossfeed spatialization to Reference. As things are right now, switching between speakers and headphones requires (in addition to muting the speakers) enabling/disabling/changing presets on either two or three plugins. Or, alternatively, a DAW template with separate monitor busses for speakers and headphones. I wish it were all in just one plugin.


----------



## Bear Market (May 13, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> For me, the real solution is for Sonarworks to add binaural crossfeed spatialization to Reference. As things are right now, switching between speakers and headphones requires (in addition to muting the speakers) enabling/disabling/changing presets on either two or three plugins.



You could perhaps look into a headphone amp that has crossfeed functionality.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 14, 2020)

Bear Market said:


> You could perhaps look into a headphone amp that has crossfeed functionality.


I'll Google that. I'm not aware of any. Thanks. 

EDIT: But such an amp would also have to include EQ to compensate for different models of headphones, and ideally for sample variations within models. That's because the binaural crossfeed comes first in the chain, and EQ after it.


----------



## Bear Market (May 14, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> I'll Google that. I'm not aware of any. Thanks.



There are a few. I use SPL's Phonitor 2.


----------



## onebitboy (May 14, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> The results link for the AKG 240 Studio model, for example, leads to a 404 page not found error. I have two pairs of this model.


https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results/referenceaudioanalyzer/HDM-X/AKG%20K240%20Studio


----------



## rrichard63 (May 14, 2020)

onebitboy said:


> https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results/referenceaudioanalyzer/HDM-X/AKG%20K240%20Studio


Thank you. How did you retrieve this link?


----------



## Bear Market (May 14, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> That's because the binaural crossfeed comes first in the chain, and EQ after it.



Why is that, if I may ask?


----------



## rrichard63 (May 14, 2020)

Bear Market said:


> Why is that, if I may ask?


Short answer: frequency response correction would alter the binaural crossfeed processing in a way that has nothing to do with the source audio, and therefore muck it up to a greater or lesser degree:

Long answer (including a quote from Sonarworks):









Waves Audio Announces Waves Nx – a Virtual Mix Room Plugin - Page 4 - Gearspace.com


Quote: Originally Posted by JSt0rm ➡️ The smyth has custom tailored respones to you in a space. I highly doubt they can do that for you as a generic impulse. The thing that falls apart the most is the center channel. Your mind recognizes things directly in front of you in part to the shape of...



www.gearslutz.com





Blue Cat Audio agrees: "You may also want to add the headphones correction software AFTER Re-Head, because it may screw up the crossfeed mechanism". See









KVR Forum: Blue Cat's Re-Head Plug-In For Headphones Released! - Page 2 - Blue Cat Audio Forum


KVR Audio Forum - Blue Cat's Re-Head Plug-In For Headphones Released! - Page 2 - Blue Cat Audio Forum




www.kvraudio.com


----------



## onebitboy (May 14, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> Thank you. How did you retrieve this link?


Your list with the non-working links was an old version. The current version can be found here: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results


----------



## Tim_Wells (May 15, 2020)

It'd be cool if Sonarworks (and others) would let you calibrate your own headphones with something like this:





EARS


miniDSP EARS brings headphone measurement capability to "the masses" with an extremely affordable measurement rig for headphones and IEMs. Using the same technology as our popular UMIK-1 calibrated measurement microphone, one can easily measure/compare/EQ headphone response.




www.minidsp.com


----------



## aaronventure (May 17, 2020)

For me the headphone correction in and of itself isn't the main attraction. As others have said, you can get used to your cans and if you've listened to hundreds of hours of music on them, suddenly changing the response can be sub-optimal. 

The main reason I use it is to get an very close-matching response across the board. My main monitors are calibrated with Sonarworks. I still have an old pair of M50Xs but I very, very rarely use them in the studio (I happen to be in a situation where I can make noise 24/7 without disturbing anyone). But when I do, the transition is almost seamless. The response is very similar between my monitors and the cans. And so when I'm out and about with only these headphones to rely on, I know exactly what I'm working with.


----------



## cmillar (May 18, 2020)

Yes, I think the Sonarworks software is invaluable now that I've had it for about 5 years or so.

It just works...as long as you do the calibration for your monitors.

And, with my Beyerdynamic 770Pro's 250ohm, I can always depend on them for a pretty nice mix if I don't use my monitors. 

I don't have to worry about my mixes translating well to other speakers for playback in public when I use Sonarworks. The mix sounds great.


----------



## jononotbono (May 18, 2020)

Karma said:


> I think it depends on the cans! I'd never use it with my HD800S, it does way more harm than good.



Totally agree. I have Sonarworks and used to love it but since upgrading to decent headphones I hate the sound of it. Basically it's great if your headphones are shit.


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 18, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Totally agree. I have Sonarworks and used to love it but since upgrading to decent headphones I hate the sound of it. Basically it's great if your headphones are shit.


This is good information. It makes sense to me and encourages me to make a better headphone purchase.


----------



## rudi (May 19, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Totally agree. I have Sonarworks and used to love it but since upgrading to decent headphones I hate the sound of it. Basically it's great if your headphones are shit.


Whilst it is true that the flatter a pair of headphones is, the less correction it will need, a lot of affordable headphones are often "voiced" to make them sound "better", and there are subjective elements too.

There is a set of reviews from the Sonarworks website that illustrates how the response of various popular headphones models vary. Of course there is also an element of personal subjectivity at play when evaluating headphones, including frequency response preferences, monitoring levels, isolation, comfort, age, even the size and shape of our pinnae, etc. Our brains are also quite good a getting used to a certain tonal balance and compensating for it. It took me some time to get used to my modest calibrated setup - it sounded duller and less bass heavy at first, but I wouldn't be without it now. 

It makes for an interesting read:

https://www.sonarworks.com/blog/gear-reviews/


----------



## Tim_Wells (May 19, 2020)

rudi said:


> It makes for an interesting read:
> 
> https://www.sonarworks.com/blog/gear-reviews/


It's interesting that the reviews give higher scores to the HD 650s than the HD 800s, even _*without*_ the calibration.


----------



## jononotbono (May 19, 2020)

Who are these reviews by?


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 19, 2020)

rudi said:


> Whilst it is true that the flatter a pair of headphones is, the less correction it will need, a lot of affordable headphones are often "voiced" to make them sound "better", and there are subjective elements too.
> 
> There is a set of reviews from the Sonarworks website that illustrates how the response of various popular headphones models vary. Of course there is also an element of personal subjectivity at play when evaluating headphones, including frequency response preferences, monitoring levels, isolation, comfort, age, even the size and shape of our pinnae, etc. Our brains are also quite good a getting used to a certain tonal balance and compensating for it. It took me some time to get used to my modest calibrated setup - it sounded duller and less bass heavy at first, but I wouldn't be without it now.
> 
> ...


Thank you for sharing this link Tim.

Where do they describe what their ratings mean? Where do they determine what the criteria is for their ratings?

While it is nice to put numbers on things, without a well documented breakdown of how each of those numbers is allocated to each pair of headphones, I might assume that like many things, this is a paid advert.

It is curious that the Sennheiser HD650 without Sonarworks gets a rating that is almost as high as the Beyerdynamic DT880 gets with the Sonarworks software engaged.


----------



## el-bo (May 19, 2020)

The headphones i bought were reputedly pretty flat to begin with (KRK KNS8400). Whether 'Reference' is successful at making them totally flat, I cannot say. But it does remove all traces of harshness and listening fatigue. So it's got to be pretty near to flat, I would guess.

For nothing but that extra listening smoothness, it'd be worth it for me.


----------



## Tim_Wells (May 19, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> Thank you for sharing this link Tim.
> 
> Where do they describe what their ratings mean? Where do they determine what the criteria is for their ratings?
> 
> ...


All good questions that I wish I could answer. (B-t-w, Rudi originally posted the link). I've been looking at their website to see exactly how they test and calibrate the headphones, but haven't found anything yet. My guess is they want to keep their methodology proprietary. I also assume that they use a combination of hardware and software to measure the headphones. Hardware being something like this: GRAS 45CC 

The answer may be somewhere on the website or discussion forums. You can also shoot them a question at [email protected] FWIW, I personally trust them as a good source for headphone information. Others may be more skeptical.


----------



## rudi (May 19, 2020)

I have had a further look on their website to find out more about their methodology as well, but beyond the fact they have a headphone callibration service I haven't found any other details.

BTW I am not affiliated in any way with Sonarworks, I am just an end-user.
I have also noticed that their editor is called Rudi, but it is a different Rudi


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 19, 2020)

rudi said:


> I have had a further look on their website to find out more about their methodology as well, but beyond the fact they have a headphone callibration service I haven't found any other details.
> 
> BTW I am not affiliated in any way with Sonarworks, I am just an end-user.
> I have also noticed that their editor is called Rudi, but it is a different Rudi



Rudi & Tim,

Perhaps someone from Sonarworks could be summoned into the forum to answer these important questions?


----------



## rudi (May 19, 2020)

Actually Sonarworks have a white paper explaining their goal and some of their methodology at:

https://www.sonarworks.com/whitepaper

Page 14 onwards talks about how they have "developed proprietary hardware and software analysis tools capable of consistently mapping headphone features."


----------



## Ásta Jónsdóttir (May 19, 2020)

rudi said:


> Actually Sonarworks have a white paper explaining their goal and some of their methodology at:
> 
> https://www.sonarworks.com/whitepaper
> 
> Page 14 onwards talks about how they have "developed proprietary hardware and software analysis tools capable of consistently mapping headphone features."



"Sonarworks has developed proprietary hardware and software analysis tools capable of consistently mapping headphone features. The target of headphone calibration is an internally developed speaker-to-headphone transfer curve, which has been rigorously tested with audio professionals, i.e. the people actually capable of evaluating the sound of playback systems.

The Sonarworks SR headphone measurement system:

• Yields accuracy of +/- 0.9 dB for each individually calibrated headphone pair.

• Yields +/- 3 dB accuracy for averaged profiles of a headphone model. The lower accuracy of averaged headphone measurements is caused by differences between different headphone pairs of the same model. See Figure 8 for maximum error of averaged headphone profiles by frequency band.

• Compensates for Left / Right channel loudness differences.

• Accounts for real-world headphone usage by compensating for various ways over-ear headphones can be positioned relative to the ear. Also, bass leakage effects due to improper seal around the ear are accounted for.

• Is compatible with all headphone types, both in-ear and over-ear"



Thank you for sharing Rudi.

A white paper with vague descriptions of a "test rig" and general measurement criteria is not the same as telling you what the test rig actually is, what equipment it encompasses and how it works. I suppose like many things, this will remain a mystery until another company comes along and delivers the same product at a more affordable price and then the technology behind it may become public.


----------



## rudi (May 20, 2020)

I'd be very surprised if they reveal too much about their proprietary system.

Here's another interesting article from Sound On Sound magazine about that very subject. The article refers to both Sonarworks and Audeze head guys - the section called "In Situ" is particularly relevant:

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/designing-measuring-reference-headphones


----------



## jononotbono (May 23, 2020)

Ásta Jónsdóttir said:


> This is good information. It makes sense to me and encourages me to make a better headphone purchase.



Sonarworks is a “work around” to a problem. It obviously works best on bad sounding stuff. And this, in my opinion, works best with bad sounding rooms... Which nearly everyone has Because it’s not aimed for the pro end custom built room market.

Headphones, similar but different story. Headphones are a controlled environment. No matter how bad or good it is the entire environment you are in. As soon as you put your headphones on, there is no outside world, the world is what your headphones are. The real fix is to buy better headphones.

The real fix for a bad room is to fix the room and tune it (absorption, delusion,whatever it takes to get rid of or at least move bad frequencies elsewhere out of the listening position). This is completely unrealistic for most people asmost people don’t have multi million dollar/pound custom rooms. They have their shitty box room, or a living room with sash windows and a load of neighbours with barking dogs through the night.

Sonarworks is an excellent product but yes, buying better headphones removes this workaround layer of Dogs Brown.

I won’t mention the Audeze ever again after this as it’s probably gonna get annoying for people and I’ve said what I think. And more importantly, who cares what I think 😂


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 23, 2020)

So I've been trying our Sonarworks Headphone Edition with my Sen HD600's for a couple of weeks now. At first, I absolutely hated the correction, but decided to give it an honest go since I'm in the middle of mixing a large variety of library tracks. Today I went back to not using it (to hear the difference), and was shocked at how much my brain has become used to the "new" sound. Has anyone else experienced this? Now I'm on the fence with purchasing....the only reason I'm on the fence is because I'm not 100% sure if has actually made a substantial difference with my mixes (I use my monitors as the last "official" mix check). But if it is actually a true representation of what I'm hearing, then that's a good thing. The other thing is, I was disappointed to discover there is no longer a Simulation section in the interface, apparently they had to remove it. 

It's funny how companies go through a ton of research and development to tune their headphones, and then we come along and squash it with Sonarworks LOL!


----------



## Dex (May 24, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> So I've been trying our Sonarworks Headphone Edition with my Sen HD600's for a couple of weeks now. At first, I absolutely hated the correction, but decided to give it an honest go since I'm in the middle of mixing a large variety of library tracks. Today I went back to not using it (to hear the difference), and was shocked at how much my brain has become used to the "new" sound. Has anyone else experienced this? Now I'm on the fence with purchasing....the only reason I'm on the fence is because I'm not 100% sure if has actually made a substantial difference with my mixes (I use my monitors as the last "official" mix check). But if it is actually a true representation of what I'm hearing, then that's a good thing. The other thing is, I was disappointed to discover there is no longer a Simulation section in the interface, apparently they had to remove it.
> 
> It's funny how companies go through a ton of research and development to tune their headphones, and then we come along and squash it with Sonarworks LOL!


I mean, if you trust your monitors, does having it on or off sound more like your monitors?

Personally - and this is just my experience - I have two pairs of headphones I like.

With my HD 600’s, I prefer having sonarworks off and can opener on.

With my AKG 240 df’s, I prefer a custom correction curve based on the link above (free!) and can opener on.

Either way, I am no longer using sonarworks. I wonder if I can sell my license.


----------



## rudi (May 24, 2020)

One of the problems with calibrating headphones is that everyone's head and auditory paths are different. There is no standard universal hearing callibration profile, only custom ones based on measuring equipment, subjective listening and experimentation.

Maybe one day it'll be possible to produce truly individual callibration profiles by:

1) 3D scan customers' ears and auditory canals
2) produce ultra-fine moldings of the above
3) design and put some micro-transducers deep inside the ear canals
4) some form of brain scanning to measure how the brain responds to individual frequencies
5) AI

In the meanwhile, millions and millions of records and pieces of music have been recorded and double checked on headphones as well as monitors, and are not doing too badly


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 24, 2020)

Great points. I’m going to pass on buying this, I was doing fine prior. If anything, I discovered there’s not enough bottom end in my cans to make final mixing decisions.....but that’s what my monitors are for.


----------



## Mark Evans (May 29, 2020)

On my last day of the demo and as when I tried Reference 3 I'm still in the unsure box. Kind of handy to have but also quite easy to get by without.


----------



## Leandro Marcos (May 29, 2020)

I have Sonarworks Reference Studio and it includes the plugin for the headphones. I don’t really understand the purpose. My sennheiser open back headphones are supposed to have flat response already (or nearly flat). Is the plugin trying to make it flatter?


----------



## ryans (May 29, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Today I went back to not using it (to hear the difference), and was shocked at how much my brain has become used to the "new" sound. Has anyone else experienced this?



Yes.. it's remarkable how quickly our ears can adapt.. and in my opinion this psychoacoustic effect renders most headphone calibration unnecessary.. Unless, as others have mentioned.. you are using headphones that have major issues.

In my own experience... testing sonarworks and the HD-600 and HD-800s was not positive. I preferred the tone of the headphones without sonarworks... probably, mostly because I am more familiar with the factory sound...

Also.. I've reached a point with the HD-600.. where I know their sound so well that I can safely make tonal mix decisions and be confident they will translate... The only areas I can't trust them are: precise stereo imaging and sub bass adjustments (which I check on monitors/sub) 

Ryan


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 29, 2020)

Leandro Marcos said:


> I have Sonarworks Reference Studio and it includes the plugin for the headphones. I don’t really understand the purpose. My sennheiser open back headphones are supposed to have flat response already (or nearly flat). Is the plugin trying to make it flatter?



Yes, if you look at the graphs you can see how much was flattened. I’ve only had my HD600’s for a short while, and I thought they were quite flat based on reviews. Indeed they are, but SW corrects them even further. I was blown away with how much the monitor calibration portion of SW improved my studio, and I ended up purchasing. I wasn’t 100% sold on the headphone calibration, but since I bought it and can spend more time experimenting, I’ll see what happens. So far though, my mixes have translated well.


----------



## Leandro Marcos (May 30, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Yes, if you look at the graphs you can see how much was flattened. I’ve only had my HD600’s for a short while, and I thought they were quite flat based on reviews. Indeed they are, but SW corrects them even further. I was blown away with how much the monitor calibration portion of SW improved my studio, and I ended up purchasing. I wasn’t 100% sold on the headphone calibration, but since I bought it and can spend more time experimenting, I’ll see what happens. So far though, my mixes have translated well.


 
I have the HD600s as well. So do you recommend using Sonarworks with those headphones?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 30, 2020)

Leandro Marcos said:


> I have the HD600s as well. So do you recommend using Sonarworks with those headphones?



You need to discover that for yourself. I didn’t like it at first, but the sound has grown on me....and mixes are translating better as I continue using the correction.


----------



## Mark Evans (May 30, 2020)

One tip I found quite useful was to back the mix % off a bit (bottom right corner), which seemed to restore a bit of naturalness to the sound without impacting too much on the 'correction'.


----------



## Tim_Wells (May 30, 2020)

It'd be good to have someone from Sonarworks to weigh in and give their side of things.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 30, 2020)

Tim_Wells said:


> It'd be good to have someone from Sonarworks to weigh in and give their side of things.



in what regard?


----------



## Tim_Wells (May 31, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> in what regard?


A lot of people in this thread appear to be quite happy with Sonarworks headphone calibration. But there have also been a few assertions that it doesn't add much value or could even make things worse. If it were my company, I'd want to address those.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 31, 2020)

Tim_Wells said:


> A lot of people in this thread appear to be quite happy with Sonarworks headphone calibration. But there have also been a few assertions that it doesn't add much value or could even make things worse. If it were my company, I'd want to address those.



SW does exactly what’s it’s meant to. The software makes a correction to either your monitors or headphones, providing a flat EQ curve (close, anyways). Whether or not this is valuable is 100% up to the listener. There is simply no right or wrong approach.


----------



## Tim_Wells (May 31, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> SW does exactly what’s it’s meant to. The software makes a correction to either your monitors or headphones, providing a flat EQ curve (close, anyways). Whether or not this is valuable is 100% up to the listener. There is simply no right or wrong approach.


Okay... I wasn't trying to start a debate. Vendors often weigh in in these sorts of discussions. Just thought it might be helpful here.


----------



## SlHarder (Aug 17, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> This looks like a valuable resource. Do you know how to contact a GitHub developer to report invalid links? The results link for the AKG 240 Studio model, for example, leads to a 404 page not found error. I have two pairs of this model.












AutoEq/INDEX.md at master · jaakkopasanen/AutoEq


Automatic headphone equalization from frequency responses - AutoEq/INDEX.md at master · jaakkopasanen/AutoEq




github.com





Is the link that works for me.


----------



## Trace (Aug 19, 2020)

sIR dORT said:


> There's a similar thread about this going on, and I was curious what the actual ratio was of people who do and don't find it effective with headphones.


I use Reference with a pair of Seinnheiser 650s that have been measured by Sonarworks.

I have a pretty good sounding room with a pair of Event Opals, Munroe Eggs, Genlec 1032s and 1029s As, with 1091 sub, and a pair of Aventone mix cubes.

It took me about 2 weeks to get comfortable enough with the Reference/ headphone set up that I can now mix, not check that mix and send it directly to a client. I do often check the mix, OCD yea know, but I really don't have to at this point.

I wanted to be able to do some work at home, and not have to go to my studio. reference allows for this.


----------



## Trace (Aug 19, 2020)

I also, sometimes, use Waves Abbey Road Studio 3.


----------



## Trace (Aug 19, 2020)

The things that others have said about spatialization are pertinent. When I was learning how to mix, it took a while, several months of critical listening, to be able to feel the way a headphone mix will translate to speakers. In work where spatialization is critical to the product, and that product will be played on stereo speaker systems, I find that it is the spatial effects that may need final tweaks when I check my headphone mixes on speakers.


----------



## SlHarder (Aug 19, 2020)

Akarin said:


> What I find useful is a crossfeed emulation plugin like CanOpener.



Nicolas

Can you offer any insights on how you use crossfeed and how it benefits your use of headphones? Like you I cannot use monitors in my current setup. So mixing with cans is the only plan.


----------



## storyteller (Aug 19, 2020)

I've been back and forth on SW for headphones. In theory, the software is a phenomenal concept. I prefer things as flat as possible, however I am really sensitive to the ringing SW's linear phase mode creates and am not a fan of the non-linear-phase curves. The ringing is inherent to all linear phase EQs which not all people can hear. I'm using HD650s btw. From just an enjoyment state, I think I really like the EQ adjustments it makes. However, when adjusting mixes with SW enabled on HD650s, I have less success stories than when I am just using the HD650s without SW. I've experimented with the mix percentage, but that seemed to just mess with my ears further. So, as a whole... I love the idea, I love the sound it creates, I am glad I own it. Yet, I have still not become comfortable using it as part of my workflow. This has been going on three years or so since I bought it. I did order some new cans this week to try, so I will see how that experiment pans out. Overall, I think I just prefer using headphones without software manipulation (when a situation calls for headphones).


----------



## rrichard63 (Aug 20, 2020)

SlHarder said:


> Can you offer any insights on how you use crossfeed and how it benefits your use of headphones? Like you I cannot use monitors in my current setup. So mixing with cans is the only plan.


Wikipedia has a concise explanation:



> Directional sound perception is based on the delay between the same sound reaching a person's left and right ears. In stereo speakers, the sound from one speaker reaches both ears, although at different levels, and with a delay between one ear and another, since the speaker is placed away from the center. In headphones, this _crossfeed_ does not occur, so the resulting stereo image is different from what is heard from speakers. A crossfeed signal processor attempts to recreate the stereo image heard from speakers by mixing some signal from the left channel into the right channel, and vice versa.
> 
> The intent to produce speaker-like sound in headphones distinguishes crossfeed from the more general concept of stereo width reduction, which involves similar techniques.


----------



## Tim_Wells (Aug 20, 2020)

I've got the Drop 6xx's and Sonarworks, as well as the speaker calibration. The way I look at it is it gives me an additional source to check my mixes. Just like having another set of speakers or headphones.

I tend to leave it off when composing, but turn it on when I start mixing. I do think it provides a flatter more balanced mix.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Aug 20, 2020)

storyteller said:


> I've been back and forth on SW for headphones. In theory, the software is a phenomenal concept. I prefer things as flat as possible, however I am really sensitive to the ringing SW's linear phase mode creates and am not a fan of the non-linear-phase curves. The ringing is inherent to all linear phase EQs which not all people can hear. I'm using HD650s btw. From just an enjoyment state, I think I really like the EQ adjustments it makes. However, when adjusting mixes with SW enabled on HD650s, I have less success stories than when I am just using the HD650s without SW. I've experimented with the mix percentage, but that seemed to just mess with my ears further. So, as a whole... I love the idea, I love the sound it creates, I am glad I own it. Yet, I have still not become comfortable using it as part of my workflow. This has been going on three years or so since I bought it. I did order some new cans this week to try, so I will see how that experiment pans out. Overall, I think I just prefer using headphones without software manipulation (when a situation calls for headphones).



For me, the key was to leave systemwide turned on all the time. If you are always bouncing back and forth, you brain will never really get accustomed IMO. On my system, if I turn off SW, it sounds "wrong". And as another poster mentioned, I can now confidently rely n my mixes translating without worrying.


----------



## georgewmusic (Sep 3, 2020)

Disclaimer: I'm only referring to headphone calibration, not the full systemwide

Having been a long time Sonarworks user I recently made the jump to Waves NX and have been impressed. As others have pointed out, Sonarworks does exactly what it says on the tin; it corrects the EQ and phase.

NX seems to do this and more. It not only corrects the EQ of specific headphone models (the list is a lot smaller though, I use AKG 702s) but also emulates the listening environment of an acoustically treated studio. The headtracking part is a bit gimmicky so I don't tend to use this.

This might be waves snake oil, but, I feel like the bass response I get is more realistic and mixes translate better on to other systems.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Coke (May 21, 2021)

georgewmusic said:


> NX seems to do this and more. It not only corrects the EQ of specific headphone models (the list is a lot smaller though, I use *AKG 702s*)...


Ok the 702 are similar to the 701 i own.

- less bass
- mids perfect (on some new models harsh @ 2 khz?)
- highs too much detailed

If i use SR with the calibration for the 701 it's goes much quieter and very dull.

So i tend to boost the highs ... and in the end (without SR) the result will be no fun to listen on the original 701/702.

I mean the 701/702 are good "linear": https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#326/3992/332


----------



## georgewmusic (Jun 2, 2021)

Coke said:


> So i tend to boost the highs ... and in the end (without SR) the result will be no fun to listen on the original 701/702.


But the point is you shouldn't be aiming for your mix to only sound good on your headphones, and certainly not without the calibration these plugins provide. It should translate well across lots of listening environments - which in my experience, it does.

I recently upgraded Sonarworks Reference to the new SoundID. I can't remember if Reference allowed you to adjust the curve or not, but SoundID allows this. I've created a "listening" EQ curve preset which includes their corrective curve but also with a high shelf and a small amount of cut around 250Hz. This means I can flick between the two different curves based on what I'm doing. If I'm in my DAW and working, I want that flat response, but on the system wide I can have a bit more high end to make things sound a little more interesting to listen to.


----------



## Nate Johnson (Jun 2, 2021)

I have a love/hate relationship with Sonarworks. I use it with my AKG 702s and it really does correct the hype in the high end these cans produce. Turns out I had been cutting the shit out of the highs in my mixes without using correction and didn’t even realize it. So that was cool to see that level out with proper correction in place.

I really wish Systemwide carried over to DAW use, but it doesn’t; you have to throw the plugin version on the master bus. I hate having to remember turning the damn plug in off before I bounce a track. At least half the time I forget.


----------



## georgewmusic (Jun 2, 2021)

Nate Johnson said:


> I really wish Systemwide carried over to DAW use, but it doesn’t; you have to throw the plugin version on the master bus. I hate having to remember turning the damn plug in off before I bounce a track. At least half the time I forget.


Do you use Cubase by any chance? I do and I put any calibration software like Sonarworks on the control room inserts so it doesn't affect the stereo out export.

I'm not sure if other DAWs have a similar alternative method but might be worth investigating.


----------



## sourcefor (Jun 2, 2021)

Sonar works vs slate vsx , anyone compared the two?


----------



## Nate Johnson (Jun 3, 2021)

georgewmusic said:


> Do you use Cubase by any chance? I do and I put any calibration software like Sonarworks on the control room inserts so it doesn't affect the stereo out export.
> 
> I'm not sure if other DAWs have a similar alternative method but might be worth investigating.


Ohhh interesting. I’m in Logic. There must be a similar feature! I’ll do some investigating...


----------



## Coke (Jun 3, 2021)

Nate Johnson said:


> I have a love/hate relationship with Sonarworks. I use it with my AKG 702s and it really does correct the hype in the high end these cans produce. Turns out I had been cutting the shit out of the highs in my mixes without using correction and didn’t even realize it. So that was cool to see that level out with proper correction in place.


What monitors do you use in combination with the 702?

My 701 / 702 experiences:

Bass: lack, but it's really only "a litttle bit"
Mids: perfect
Highs: too harsh (depending on old/new AKGs)

I own an old 701 ("burned-in") made in Austria and bought new 701s + 702s ... there is a big difference - both have really harsh mids/highs.

So when i use the standard 701 correction from SR it would lead to different results.

I tried SR with the 701 and it sounds much quieter and duller. *So if i boost the highs it would sound awful when SR switched off.*

How do these 4 tracks sound on your 702?






*Do you ever had the feeling that some of your favorite tracks sounds soooo great on your Headphones so that the producer certainly own the same Headphones like you? Or maybe mixed the whole track on them?*

These 4 tracks sound *phenomenal* on my AKG K701 (old Austria version), also good on my Yamaha HS7


----------



## Bear Market (Jun 3, 2021)

Nate Johnson said:


> Ohhh interesting. I’m in Logic. There must be a similar feature! I’ll do some investigating...


I can recommend SoundSource from Rogue Amoeba. Check it out: https://rogueamoeba.com/soundsource/

EDIT: I have no affiliation, just a happy customer.


----------



## Nate Johnson (Jun 20, 2021)

Coke said:


> What monitors do you use in combination with the 702?
> 
> My 701 / 702 experiences:
> 
> ...



I'm using 5" KRK's for monitors, but barely turn them on these days (my chance to work is while toddler and mama are sleeping) 

Mixing on the 702s without headphone correction - the highs were brittle enough that I found myself killing them off. When I'd play back tunes on other systems, my mixes sounded dull. Like you said the low end was only a little off, so that wasn't really a big deal. 

The second I switched on SW for the first time, it was like 'ohhhhhh' THAT'S why - it fixed the high problem and leveled out the low end, exactly as prescribed. Now my mixes tend to translate a little better on other systems overall. 

Yes, if I toggle SW on and off, the results are different and thats the point. So don't get caught up in that. I leave systemwide on 100% of the time while listening to youtube, streaming music, etc and will have the plugin engaged while in DAW mode. This way I'm hearing everything the same, reference or not. 

....those tracks sound fine in my 702s w/SW on.....


----------



## Nate Johnson (Jun 21, 2021)

So after an unexpected (and still unexplained) system restart on my iMac, upon reopening Logic, a window flashed by, asking if I wanted to use Sonarworks Systemwide as an output device....I clicked yes, assuming thats what I've always been doing, but now I'm realizing I've found the solution to my monitoring-through-plug-in problem. In Logic's audio preferences, now that the output is sent through systemwide (which in turn is sent through my audio interface and out to my headphones), I can mix accurately and not worry about printing the SW eq curves by accident! ha.


----------



## storyteller (Jun 21, 2021)

Nate Johnson said:


> So after an unexpected (and still unexplained) system restart on my iMac, upon reopening Logic, a window flashed by, asking if I wanted to use Sonarworks Systemwide as an output device....I clicked yes, assuming thats what I've always been doing, but now I'm realizing I've found the solution to my monitoring-through-plug-in problem. In Logic's audio preferences, now that the output is sent through systemwide (which in turn is sent through my audio interface and out to my headphones), I can mix accurately and not worry about printing the SW eq curves by accident! ha.


Systemwide (the headphone version at least) will introduce latency though... much more than the plug-in...


----------



## Nate Johnson (Jun 21, 2021)

storyteller said:


> Systemwide (the headphone version at least) will introduce latency though... much more than the plug-in...


Yeah, I realize that, but it doesn’t bother when I’m in mix-mode!


----------

