Goodhertz Can Opener Studio and Toneboosters Morphit/Isone

[perpetual3]

Can Opener and Morphit here.

[ilmai]

I use Reference and CanOpener in that order. It probably doesn't matter which order you have them when using Reference with a generic headphone profile as there is no difference between L and R correction curves, but if you have a custom profile from headphones you sent to Latvia, or purchased from them directly, then you definitely want Reference before CanOpener so that it flattens the L and R channels before CanOpener applies its crossover algorithm.

This is the official answer to plugin order from the FAQ:

What order should CanOpener be placed in the processing chain?

Ideally, CanOpener would be placed last in the processing chain on the master channel. If you’re not using CanOpener’s built-in dither, the processing order matters less, but CanOpener should still be near the end. If you are using a headphone EQ correction plugin that uses different profiles for the left & right channel, CanOpener should be placed in front of it.

[vitocorleone123]

CanOpener --> Reference --> out

[simmo75]

Canopener Studio is on sale until Monday.
I’m tempted but dubious...

Does it really enable you to mix on headphones?
I mean accurately, finish mixes.

[plexuss]

CanOpener is dsigned to simulaute, as best it can, listening to speakers while listening with headphones. basically it feeds a bit of each side into the other. this makes sounds that are panned to soumd more like they are in front of you rather at thesides of year head. it should never be used for mix/master monitoring in term of the final render. its just for making listening to headphones more pleasing for those that like the effect.

[simmo75]

CanOpener is dsigned to simulaute, as best it can, listening to speakers while listening with headphones. basically it feeds a bit of each side into the other. this makes sounds that are panned to soumd more like they are in front of you rather at thesides of year head. it should never be used for mix/master monitoring in term of the final render. its just for making listening to headphones more pleasing for those that like the effect.

Thanks Plexuss, appreciate your reply.
I’m doing a lot more work in headphones at the moment and have a pretty flat response pair of Audeze LCD-1’s with the free Reveal plugin set with the LCD-1 algo, I’m just hoping I can get mixes close enough but am a way off that yet...
I’ve read a bunch of posts on Gearslutz and people raving about Canopener Studio and how they’re mixing on them.
I was hoping this was my solution.

[Calenberger]

Thanks for reminding me that I already have 112dB Redline Monitor.
Will put it into my Final Buss Chain.

[plexuss]

CanOpener is dsigned to simulaute, as best it can, listening to speakers while listening with headphones. basically it feeds a bit of each side into the other. this makes sounds that are panned to soumd more like they are in front of you rather at thesides of year head. it should never be used for mix/master monitoring in term of the final render. its just for making listening to headphones more pleasing for those that like the effect.

Thanks Plexuss, appreciate your reply.
I’m doing a lot more work in headphones at the moment and have a pretty flat response pair of Audeze LCD-1’s with the free Reveal plugin set with the LCD-1 algo, I’m just hoping I can get mixes close enough but am a way off that yet...
I’ve read a bunch of posts on Gearslutz and people raving about Canopener Studio and how they’re mixing on them.
I was hoping this was my solution.

You definitely don't want ot mix with CanOpener engaged. But if you do, there it is. It's not like anyone really cares about quality audio these days, so much of what's out there sounds like shieet. But if you are going for accuracy and reference you want to be very careful about what you put on your monitor buss. I make sure my whole digital system signal chain is bit accurate with no SRC. I use Sonarworks with individually calibrated headphones, and the same on my speaker monitors. I will use CanOpener when I am in "Listener" mode just because I like what it does and it sounds closer to speaker listening. But for technical mixing and mastering, CanOpener is off and Sonarworks is set to linear phase (I'd rather accept some transient ringing then phase distortion - personal choice).

[kidslow]

Demoed CanOpener on a variety of material this weekend. Given the use case (as a listening tool) and that the audible difference is just so subtle to me, I can't justify the $45 they're asking right now. Honestly, I wouldn't use it if it was free. I can see a (very slight) visible difference in the spectrum curves overlaid before and after. Maybe my old ears. Maybe my gear (Sennheiser HD 599 and Sony MDR-7506 cans out of a Scarlett 2i2), but I'm a hard pass.

I previously demo'ed Abbey Roads Studio, which is now on sale effectively at the same price, and I did hear a distinct difference with that. However, the CPU tax is too great to want to run it for general listening purposes. Plus the Waves Shell makes it impossible to install just the Audio Unit of only that so I can use it via Audio Hijack or SoundSource, as I am want to do.

Will try AutoEq some point soon. Otherwise, looking at maybe a demo of Sonarworks HE in the future.

[mcnelson]

Isone and Morphit. Never used Can Opener so can't compare, but had Isone in my chain since 2010 (jeez, never realized it was that old!)

[plexuss]

Demoed CanOpener on a variety of material this weekend. Given the use case (as a listening tool) and that the audible difference is just so subtle to me, I can't justify the $45 they're asking right now. Honestly, I wouldn't use it if it was free. I can see a (very slight) visible difference in the spectrum curves overlaid before and after. Maybe my old ears. Maybe my gear (Sennheiser HD 599 and Sony MDR-7506 cans out of a Scarlett 2i2), but I'm a hard pass.

What CanOpener does is pull audio that is panned more into the centre and ideally sounding some-what in front of you. It's not totally 3D though. So listen to something with a wide stereo image and A/B. When bypassed focus on the sounds that are obviously panned and then engage CO and those sounds should move more to the "front". CO has more of an affect on sound-stage more than anything.

[kidslow]

What CanOpener does is pull audio that is panned more into the centre and ideally sounding some-what in front of you. It's not totally 3D though. So listen to something with a wide stereo image and A/B. When bypassed focus on the sounds that are obviously panned and then engage CO and those sounds should move more to the "front". CO has more of an affect on sound-stage more than anything.

I did a lot of A/B. I mean A LOT OF A/B! I could hear what you're describing but I simply couldn't hear enough of a real world distinction to justify spending any money on it. I spent hours at my demo. I even tested with and without Goodhertz Midside before it in the chain. I can certainly hear the difference that expanding the stereo width above 100% in Midside makes.

Perhaps I was trying on the wrong set of material, but I thought that I was selecting from a very diverse palette in my choices. Maybe I chose poor test material. Maybe I'd be better with material that I gin up on my own, but at that point it's like why bother?

You have any suggestion for music that is particularly suited to such a test?

[plexuss]

What CanOpener does is pull audio that is panned more into the centre and ideally sounding some-what in front of you. It's not totally 3D though. So listen to something with a wide stereo image and A/B. When bypassed focus on the sounds that are obviously panned and then engage CO and those sounds should move more to the "front". CO has more of an affect on sound-stage more than anything.

I did a lot of A/B. I mean A LOT OF A/B! I could hear what you're describing but I simply couldn't hear enough of a real world distinction to justify spending any money on it. I spent hours at my demo. I even tested with and without Goodhertz Midside before it in the chain. I can certainly hear the difference that expanding the stereo width above 100% in Midside makes.

Perhaps I was trying on the wrong set of material, but I thought that I was selecting from a very diverse palette in my choices. Maybe I chose poor test material. Maybe I'd be better with material that I gin up on my own, but at that point it's like why bother?

You have any suggestion for music that is particularly suited to such a test?

I think it's one of those things that some people are more sensitive to and others. there are so many aspects to audio and every person has their own unique take on things. For me without CO panned tracks are percieved at the sides of my head within in the headphone. with CO those tracks move from in the headphones to outside the headphones a bit further away from my ears (in front of me, but not IN FRONT of me - the sound moves forward of my ears. It has more a speaker experience. not totally. but that "headphone experince" becomes more like a "speaker experience" so some degree. That's what it is for me. I prefer it and so CO is worth it to me. But I never mix or master with CO on.

[kidslow]

I think it's one of those things that some people are more sensitive to and others. there are so many aspects to audio and every person has their own unique take on things.

That's probably right. Thank you for the more detailed explanation. Glad I took the time to demo.

[acousticglue]

Depends on if you have a thin head or big head wider between the ears.