Graphic Equalizers

[Frank Sol]

A long time ago I got a nice one. It came with a record with instructions and test tones.

The idea was to make all the tones the same loudness. Equalizing - flat across the board.


Hope this makes sense.

Yes it does... Flat for the room was the goal

My 'best' EQ (Yamaha EQ-1100) does that with built in white noise sweeping the band , Right & Left sides independently , with Mic adjusting as it goes

Oddly enough... Most people dont like flat -- IMHO

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Quality equalizers cost quality money (good ones cost serious money in 1960-1970 something) and require skill and taste to operate properly. They are no cure all. They're helpful in some situations (I rarely use them except to cut something). And need skilled operators.

 

[Guest159]

EQs aren't used much by anyone chasing high quality mainly because they don't fix the most basic problems and make their own problems. People will claim they use them to fix room problems. They only fix specific room problems in a room that's already been properly treated. If you're intending to use one to solve speaker response problems, you can pretty much forget about proper phase response if you need more that 2dB of correction. The speakers are the problem and thats where the solution should be applied.

I don't understand why people think tone controls and EQs are common or normal anymore. You don't see them on the cheapest portable speaker or the best gear money buys. A few brands throw them in, but they're not at all common on 2 channel audio gear anymore regardless of price, from the cheapest Schiit to the most expensive Pass and Boulder. The reason for that is $1500 will buy speakers like LS50's which do just fine with no tone controls.

 

[DMLBES]

EQs aren't used much by anyone chasing high quality mainly because they don't fix the most basic problems and make their own problems. People will claim they use them to fix room problems. They only fix specific room problems in a room that's already been properly treated. If you're intending to use one to solve speaker response problems, you can pretty much forget about proper phase response if you need more that 2dB of correction. The speakers are the problem and thats where the solution should be applied.

I don't understand why people think tone controls and EQs are common or normal anymore. You don't see them on the cheapest portable speaker or the best gear money buys. A few brands throw them in, but they're not at all common on 2 channel audio gear anymore regardless of price, from the cheapest Schiit to the most expensive Pass and Boulder. The reason for that is $1500 will buy speakers like LS50's which do just fine with no tone controls.

$2,499.99 will buy speakers like the Kef LS50 wireless in which some claim that it sounds better then the KefLS50 due to DSP aka EQ.

 

[jimmeq]

My name is Jimme, and I love graphic EQ's.

Sort of. I really like the way they look mostly. It's fun to tweak the different frequencies; makes one feel like a sound engineer. I have four. Sherwood, ADC & two Soundcraftsman. Make that five. I currently use a Schiit Loki 4 band EQ in my system. The other four introduced some noise so I got the Loki. Also, since they are only just-so capable of room correction and you really need a meter to use it effectively my vintage EQ's are on the shelf.

Man, the ADC and Sherwood do look cool with their individual sliders lit. This is one piece of gear I like with all the lights. Now that I'm thinking about it, I might put one back just for the lights. I won't put it in the audio loop, just for the coolness factor. (I'm laughing too.)

 

[Guest159]

$2,499.99 will buy speakers like the Kef LS50 wireless in which some claim that it sounds better then the KefLS50 due to DSP aka EQ.

Yeah...digital signal processing is a LOT different than using an EQ or tone controls. It's vastly superior to any typical EQ in that it can manipulate very narrow bands of frequency which is what's required for dealing with room resonances. It does nothing at all for the primary problem of first reflections that people think they can use EQ'ing to fix. DSP also doesn't create the kind of phase shifts significant tone control use does.

I think DSP gets a lot of credit for things it can't do and many debates have been had on just how much DSP can do. It makes miraculous claims. In actual practice, it's hit or miss. It's NOT a fix or replacement for a properly treated room and good placement.

 

[Beatnik]

It does nothing at all for the primary problem of first reflections that people think they can use EQ'ing to fix.

Who are these first reflection eq people you keep referring to ?

 

[Route 66]

There's a reason why many high end manufacturers chose not to install tone controls on their gear, and it's not to save a few dollars.

 

[Beatnik]

 

[z-adamson]

There's a reason why many high end manufacturers chose not to install tone controls on their gear, and it's not to save a few dollars.

Are you referring to current, in-production gear or vintage gear or both?

 

[Guest159]

Who are these first reflection eq people you keep referring to ?

Everyone who claims they're trying to fix room response issues.

 

[DMLBES]

Yeah...digital signal processing is a LOT different than using an EQ or tone controls. It's vastly superior to any typical EQ in that it can manipulate very narrow bands of frequency which is what's required for dealing with room resonances. It does nothing at all for the primary problem of first reflections that people think they can use EQ'ing to fix. DSP also doesn't create the kind of phase shifts significant tone control use does.

I think DSP gets a lot of credit for things it can't do and many debates have been had on just how much DSP can do. It makes miraculous claims. In actual practice, it's hit or miss. It's NOT a fix or replacement for a properly treated room and good placement.

If the LS50 does fine without tone controls then the LS50 wireless does better then the LS50 with DSP aka EQ regardless if you think its vastly superior to typical EQ as its still EQ none the less. A lot of credit and miraculous claims is all debatable. In actual practice though it does work and helps one's system sound better. If it didn't no one would be using DSP. Like I mentioned before a lot of powered subs are using DSP and powered speakers with DSP and becoming increasingly popular.

 

[BOUXY]

Just seems like too many here must have hearing problems from what I see/hear

 

[Beatnik]

Everyone who claims they're trying to fix room response issues.

But I thought this was all they were good for ?

 

[Guest159]

If the LS50 does fine without tone controls then the LS50 wireless does better then the LS50 with DSP aka EQ regardless if you think its vastly superior to typical EQ as its still EQ none the less. A lot of credit and miraculous claims is all debatable. In actual practice though it does work and helps one's system sound better. If it didn't no one would be using DSP. Like I mentioned before a lot of powered subs are using DSP and powered speakers with DSP and becoming increasingly popular.

I'm going to start with the non sequitur: "If it didn't no one would be using DSP." Just because people do things isn't proof they work. Ever heard of "cargo cult science"? There's certainly debate on the quality of the amps and processing in the LSX. If we're going to use your reasoning that people only do things that work, then the fact the unpowered LS50 is vastly mom popular than the LSX suggests it's the better product.

 

[DMLBES]

I'm going to start with the non sequitur: "If it didn't no one would be using DSP." Just because people do things isn't proof they work. Ever heard of "cargo cult science"? There's certainly debate on the quality of the amps and processing in the LSX. If we're going to use your reasoning that people only do things that work, then the fact the unpowered LS50 is vastly mom popular than the LSX suggests it's the better product.

There is proof that DSP in the LS50W works. Its not cargo cult science. What does the quality of the amps and processing have to do with the wireless sounding better? Kef LS50 is more popular because it came out first and second because its cheaper and third because some do not like powered speakers because they have there own gear. But yet the fact still remains that those who have tried the Kef wireless say its sound quality is better with the DSP.

 

[Guest159]

There is proof that DSP in the LS50W works. Its not cargo cult science. What does the quality of the amps and processing have to do with the wireless sounding better? Kef LS50 is more popular because it came out first and second because its cheaper and third because some do not like powered speakers because they have there own gear. But yet the fact still remains that those who have tried the Kef wireless say its sound quality is better with the DSP.

Some say that. Some don't. The amps in them are ok. Nothing special.

 

[Route 66]

Are you referring to current, in-production gear or vintage gear or both?

Actually, both. I used to have a Counterpoint SA 3.1 preamp from 1985 that didn't have any tone controls, for this very reason. I know that many current high end manufacturers don't have tone controls of any kind on their equipment. If you have speakers that couple well with your room, you don't need them.

 

[z-adamson]

Actually, both. I used to have a Counterpoint SA 3.1 preamp from 1985 that didn't have any tone controls, for this very reason. I know that many current high end manufacturers don't have tone controls of any kind on their equipment. If you have speakers that couple well with your room, you don't need them.

Don't see too many top of the receivers or preamps from the 70s that were without tone controls. I can't even think of any.

2000 and foreward, lots of nicer gear were without tone controls in my observation.

 

[OnTheBlitz]

New Yamaha C-5000 Preamp

Twin mono design. Like the two toroidal transformers, there's two of everything stacked, L/R channels.