>because it over-drives the headphone drivers and could damage them. Is this true?

Maybe. If you push all the sliders all the way and you run them on max volume for an extended period.

>I saw a YT video

I sometimes with people would treat YT videos more like entertaiment and less like a source of facts. Because f- me what a load of bollocks some people put in their videos!!

Not really. If you apply enough EQ to a frequency to cause driver damage, you’ll cause ear damage far before that, just like if you were to turn the overall volume up.

I mean you might damage some headphones if you EQ in like 20db of bass at a really high volume, but other than something like that you can't damage headphones with an EQ, and it's actually pretty hard to damage headphones in general

Maybe with extreme levels of EQ, like trying to add in 20dB of subbass. You’ll probably hear the driver screaming in pain before you actually damage it though.

No.

You can damage drivers with an excessive and unhealthy volume (amplification), but the unbalance in certain frequencies is irrelevant, and your ears would break first in this case scenario.

Take a look at a massively expensive Stereophile-recommend amplifier, or pre-amp/power amp combo. It will have a headphone jack & zero EQ knobs, with an option for Dirac room correction, because sound does bounce off walls. So, you can spend a car’s worth amount of money on a dream audio system and have nothing in that system for EQing your headphones. EQ is viable when the source is a PC, Mac or Android phone, or an iOS device playing downloaded files … and that’s it. That should tell u everything u need to know about EQ: don’t bother.

So if i set bass boost to sound like I have a massive subwoofer when playing EDM or something like that, it won't damage anything at normal to loud listening levels?

Nothing in the headphones

But try to keep your sessions at normal levels or your ears may develop Tinnitus. Quiet environments, good isolation, or noise cancelling are better ways to improve your listening experience than turning the volume up.

Also remember, good equalization is about turning the annoying frequencies down, not pumping the good ones up.

How is this even relevant bruh

😥me when I am asked to write a paragraph of text while pretending to have room temperature iq 😥😥

wtf do you think Dirac room correction is

This is a whole lot of words to say you know nothing about audio or the technology behind it, lmao.

.... huh?

Exactly what I said it is: EQ for the interaction between speakers and walls, which is real.

The original poster was worrying that EQ’ing his headphones might damage them. The answer is, “don’t bother: you’re not supposed to EQ headphones”

Came here to say this but I would leave noise canceling off the list because that is completely subjective and in its current state goes the opposite direction. Sure if I’m on a plane it would make things better but in my quite listening room forget about it. That is probably what you meant but I just wanted to clarify.

When your response is an insult but not a substantive correction, you might be the one who isn’t thinking clearly.

Then explain why I’m mistaken instead of just asserting that I am.

Sorry I wasn’t clear. This should help clear up your confusion: if you imagine that you need to EQ your headphones, something between the source and your ears is junk, and it’s probably the headphones.

There's no reason not to EQ headphones though? Phase shift is less of an issue because headphones aren't "real" stereo (ie no crossfeed). On top of that most of us are using the aforementioned PC, Mac, or Android phone to drive our devices, so EQ is usually viable.

Because nothing you said has anything to do with whether or not EQ can damage a headphone, for one. But even if we answered the question that no one was asking "Should you EQ," nothing you said, once again, is a reason to not use EQ. You even mentioned Dirac room correction, which is a form of EQ, so... You pretty much just shot yourself in the foot there.

> EQ is viable when the source is a PC, Mac or Android phone, or an iOS device

This is also ridiculous. You just described 99% of what audiophiles listen on, which means yes, it's definitely viable. The extreme majority of people are not sitting around near a turn-table or old CD/Cassette player.

Also, something being massively expensive has nothing to do with whether or not something is viable. I've seen million dollar cars lack pretty basic features, doesn't mean those features aren't worthwhile. It's a nonsense argument.

I hope that explanation makes sense.

Room correction is equalization for a case where it’s actually required, because sound does bounce off walls and the designer of the amp and speakers can’t be expected to know where your walls are in relation to the speakers.

Same could be said for headphones then. The way treble interacts with our inner ear varies from person to person.

There's nothing wrong with a little EQ to make the tonality of your headphones better match your preferences.

And my initial point was that it's not helpful to just say "don't use EQ" to someone that's asking if EQ can be damaging to headphones, hence why I asked "how is it relevant?".

adjective: substantive /ˈsʌbst(ə)ntɪv,səbˈstantɪv/ 1. having a firm basis in reality and so important, meaningful, or considerable.

Why should i lend you such consideration, when your own original post was uncritical nonsense with no relevancy, ridiculous reasoning and an incredibly vapid conclusion.

I mentioned Dirac precisely to make it clear that there is a situation in which equalization is necessary … because the designers of your amp and speakers cannot anticipate where your walls are in relation to the speakers. Equalizing for headphones is corrupting the source to compensate for junk equipment, which is usually the headphones. And listening from a PC is evidence that one is decidedly not an audiophile … notice the absence of any mention of PC peripherals in material targeted at actual audiophiles like Stereophile and Absolute Sound. The only place a PC fits in an audiophile’s world is as a Roon endpoint from which to feed actually good audio equipment … none of which has any facility for EQing headphones because there is no market for that among people spending real money on audio equipment … including fine headphones.

Yes, I included noise cancelling because it can be necessary for some people when traveling or at work. But I don't even own NC headphones, fortunately I'm the noisiest guy in the building and my home office is pretty well insulated.

> Equalizing for headphones is corrupting the source to compensate for junk equipment

It's not corrupting anything, modern digital linear equalization is transparent to the source aside from the adjustment to the frequencies, which you are intentionally changing. This is not corruption.

> And listening from a PC is evidence that one is decidedly not an audiophile

Oh okay, so you get to gatekeep what an audiophile is now, as opposed to someone who just enjoys good sound? Grow up.

> notice the absence of any mention of PC peripherals in material targeted at actual audiophiles like Stereophile and Absolute Sound

More gatekeeping garbage, irrelevant.

> The only place a PC fits in an audiophile’s world is as a Roon endpoint from which to feed actually good audio equipment

Yeah, most of the time PC parts feed into a DAC of some kind that is external to the device. This is braindead obvious, and no one disputed that. Maybe reading comprehension is your issue, considering your initial response was a reply to a question nobody even asked.

> none of which has any facility for EQing headphones because there is no market for that among people spending real money on audio equipment … including fine headphones.

Several devices come with in-built parametric EQ, if you spend enough for it. And guess what, there is NO SUCH THING as a perfect transducer, it doesn't exist anywhere. That's why EQ is a thing, to adjust the parts that we either do not like, or have issues. There's a reason why recording engineers like myself USE EQ in our mastering process, because perfection literally doesn't exist. And no, there really is no difference between doing it in the master and doing it for your audio system, the result is EXACTLY the same when it reaches the analog portions of what you're using.

Thank you for confirming you're clueless, though.