NAD Tone Controls: effective and fun

I was not an english or language major. I often wonder about how words originated. There are spelling rules, except when they are ignored. Then there are French or Spanish or Latin etc words that sneak in. BTW, the "wright" was intentional.
 
the skipper said:
While we're kvetching about misuse of certain words, I wanna strangle the person who calls records "vinyls". They have been called records for 80+ years.
Click to expand...
Like fish, the plural of vinyl is "vinyl".

I've got a goodly collection of vinyl. :)
 
Last edited:
So I was a tool designer before retirement. So we had gages to dimensionally check threads etc. And hydraulc gauges to check pressures. Why two words? Where did that come from?
 
E-Stat said:
Which is why I always ran a C-162 I had for a while in bypass. I guess I prefer real bass to "fat" bass.

Tone controls can only boost what's there. They cannot restore what was never captured. On the other hand, I have used parametric EQ with the HT processor to attenuate a couple of room modes situated on both sides of 100 hz.

To each his own I guess.:)
Click to expand...

Perhaps you've never heard of the Fletcher-Munson or "equal loudness" curves?
 
jdmccall said:
Perhaps you've never heard of the Fletcher-Munson or "equal loudness" curves?
Click to expand...
Look at it this way. Fletcher-Munson curve or not, if the source has no content below 40 hz,, boosting 20 hz won't add a thing. There's nothing in the 20 hz region to boost.
 
the skipper said:
Look at it this way. Fletcher-Munson curve or not, if the source has no content below 40 hz,, boosting 20 hz won't add a thing. There's nothing in the 20 hz region to boost.
Click to expand...

That's certainly true. My point though, is that thoughtful use of good tone controls, particularly for bass, can improve accuracy at low listening levels. That's all.

But then there is the value thing. It seemed to me that as "features" were removed from preamps, the prices almost always went up. Paying for purity, I suppose, was the idea being sold.
 
jdmccall said:
Perhaps you've never heard of the Fletcher-Munson or "equal loudness" curves?
Click to expand...
I'm quite familiar with the results. It's merely a measure of the sensitivity of our hearing.

Forget about audio and hi-fi for a moment. Think about hearing sounds around you. Birds. Traffic. Thunder. A gun shot. Live music in a park. If you compare two samples of any one of those and one is softer, what does that tell you?

Don't know about you, but my senses tell me there's a difference in distance. As I get closer to the source of the sound, it gets louder. That's another hearing phenonema.

Now, let's do what Fletcher and Munson never suggested: apply inverse equalization to *fix* it. How does that sound? Quite unnatural to these ears. Returning to a musical example, it would be as if the players of instruments that were predominantly in the mid range were still at the same distance while the bass drum guy suddenly moved fifty feet in front of the rest of the performers. Huh?

Even back in the 70s when the feature was de rigueur, I always found the results overly heavy and dull sounding. If I want the bass to have realistic impact, I would get nearer to the sound source - or, in the case of recorded sounds turn it up!

jdmccall said:
It seemed to me that as "features" were removed from preamps, the prices almost always went up.
Click to expand...
Because they focused on improving the basic circuit and power supply capabilities!
 
Last edited:
the skipper said:
Look at it this way. Fletcher-Munson curve or not, if the source has no content below 40 hz,, boosting 20 hz won't add a thing.
Click to expand...
If the boost were only below 40 hz, I might actually use one. While implementations vary, emphasis begins as high as 500 hz. Just thickens stuff up too much for me.
 
E-Stat said:
If the boost were only below 40 hz, I might actually use one. While implementations vary, emphasis begins as high as 500 hz. Just thickens stuff up too much for me.
Click to expand...
True, but I was simply trying to make a point, not get into the theory of tone controls and slopes.
 
The bass turnover switches for the 1300 preamp section use 50Hz/120Hz/250Hz centers that allow +/- 12db via the knob.

So for the record here that's a good bit away from 500Hz,and not all too far from 40Hz.

Honestly any necessary boosts/cuts below 40Hz are likely best dealt with other ways,rather than expecting a basic tone control on a preamp to manage that sorta thing.
Heck,even most 10/12/15 band graphic EQ's only have 1 ~ maybe ~ 2 sliders to cover frequencies at -or- below 40Hz.

In a good many systems anything below 40Hz is gonna be something that's left for the subwoofer to deal with,and not the preamp itself.
And many subwoofer crossovers start around 40-50Hz or so,and they are'nt typically crossed over that low.
IME it's much more common to cross over the sub up around 75-100Hz or so.
So for the most part the subs level control (volume knob) is the main player there...

So by some accounts that NAD 1300 "semi parametric" bass control covers a decent amount of ground.
And just as an FYI sorta factoid here the 1000 preamp is +/- 10db centered @ 50Hz.

Consider that if one is using a subwoofer,that higher turnover frequency switch becomes a nice option to have.
That switch lets you get the preamp's bass control center outta the Hz that the sub is dealing with,and as such prevents any sorta unnecessary redundancy.

Just some food for thought,,,or fodder for debate,,,ya'lls choice...

Bret P.
 
xero-D-hero said:
So for the record here that's a good bit away from 500Hz,and not all too far from 40Hz.
Click to expand...
So for the record here comments about 500 hz referred to the use of Fletcher-Munson curves included in the quoted text.

Perhaps you missed that.
 
Last edited:
E-Stat said:
So for the record here comments about 500 hz referred to the use of Fletcher-Munson curves included in the quoted text.

Perhaps you missed that.
Click to expand...
Yes,I did.
That's because I put The Skipper on ignore after our last exchange,so I had to take him off ignore to figure out why I missed that bit.
So you quoting him & him quoting you were'nt visible on my end.

Oh well...

Anyway you two can have at it here,enjoy.

Bret P.
 
xero-D-hero said:
Yes,I did.
That's because I put The Skipper on ignore after our last exchange,so I had to take him off ignore to figure out why I missed that bit.
.
Click to expand...
Well, that's certainly a mature way of handling a difference of opinion. If you haven't done it already, please put me back on your s**t list.
 
E-Stat said:
So you don't read the quoted text to which folks reply? Gee I find those helpful in order to put the comments into perspective.

Ok!
Click to expand...
Just so you know,If a person is being ignored,not just their posts disappear,but their quotes in other folks posts disappear as well.

So any perspective goes out the window.

HTH

Bret P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom