• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Pros and Cons of Equalizers

Walter R

Walter R

Active Member
My setup includes an ARX SP-60 30 channel equalizer. I’ve used the Dayton Audio audio analyzer program with calibrated mike to adjust for room acoustics, which mostly consists of suppressing bass tones that resonate in the room. I’d be interested in hearing from anyone who’s familiar with the SP-60 as to whether it’s a good unit, or regarding the pros and cons of equalizers in general. Is the increase in distortion worth it? Supposedly the equalizer circuit is removed from the audio circuit if the adjustment is left at zero.
 
Register to hide this ad
Dunno about your equalizer in particular but here's my thoughts on equalizers in general.

You're using it correctly by using it mainly to cut rather than boost. People get in trouble when they go for the infamous "smiley face" configuration in order to boost the frequency extremes, which can suck an amplifier dry,

As for any increase in distortion, can you hear it? If not, then you're worrying needlessly.

Ultimately, here's the question you should be asking yourself: Does my system sound better with it or without it?
 
Last edited:
I stopped using EQ's, sound expanders, etc when I realized they were negatively affecting the soundstage. Try setting all of the controls to flat, then switch the EQ in and out of the signal path while listening for changes, and if there is is it a positive or negative change?
 
Last edited:
If there is something to correct in a room or speaker, I will use EQ. I do it in the software side.
Its why EQ was "invented".

If the average listener, in the average room, with average gear doesn't use EQ, it will not be flat.

EQ is good. (Cheap units are noisy)

EQ is the right tool to use. Not swapping out cables, DAC or speakers that are "too bright or too warm" and all that stupid crap: Just EQ.
 
Grenadeslio said:
I stopped using EQ's, sound expanders, etc when I realized they were negatively affecting the soundstage. Try setting all of the controls to flat, then switch the EQ in and out of the signal path while listening for changes, and if there is is it a positive or negative change?
Click to expand...

Yea, mine is quieter when the (edit: analog) EQ is in the loop. Subjectively, the "straight through" sounds much better in a direct A/B... :)
 
Beat it! Just beat it! (familiar song) :D

My take in my puny home environment is I just use it as extended bass & treble controls and everything in between and since I am using it with an integrated amp with tone defeat options, I just keep the tone defeat button turned off unless I am in a mood to rock then I turn it on. Its not that bad, maybe a little muddy at times or depending on what I am listening to but in general, I usually leave the tone defeat switch off and the EQ set it and forget it! :p

To me, midrange just seems to sound good flat. Heck I always leave the mid control straight up on my Marantz 1060 with or without an EQ.

Now if an EQ is being used for correction in a place like a public environment, then yes, set it up, measure whatever acoustics you are looking for and never touch it again. :music:
 
I have a Behringer 15 band stereo EQ which sits in a tape loop from my preamp, so it's not in circuit most of the time. It only really gets used for testing purposes or for putting a bit of EQ in for music that appears to need it. I might add that it has been heavily modified by me with a super quiet linear PSU and various other changes. My system (as some here will know) is fully active, so I have various active crossover setups that I use for different purposes.

Talking about auto setup systems (quite a few AV systems have them), one thing I have found is that microphones don't 'hear' the same way that we do. They can be used to analyse audio sweeps and tones etc, but the problem is that we have very selective hearing. For example, the human brain is very good at processing, and ignoring, reflected sound where microphones and processors are not. I have not found a 'self aligning' system yet that produces a balance sound setup on it's own. It can give you a fair base line, but the final setup should always done by ear.

At the end of the day the machine is just processing sound, it's not listening to music.
 
century tek said:
Beat it! Just beat it! (familiar song) :D

My take in my puny home environment is I just use it as extended bass & treble controls and everything in between and since I am using it with an integrated amp with tone defeat options, I just keep the tone defeat button turned off unless I am in a mood to rock then I turn it on. Its not that bad, maybe a little muddy at times or depending on what I am listening to but in general, I usually leave the tone defeat switch off and the EQ set it and forget it! :p

To me, midrange just seems to sound good flat. Heck I always leave the mid control straight up on my Marantz 1060 with or without an EQ.

Now if an EQ is being used for correction in a place like a public environment, then yes, set it up, measure whatever acoustics you are looking for and never touch it again. :music:
Click to expand...
That's because our ears are most sensitive to midrange (speech frequencies). Bass and Treble is really used as a variable loudness curve depending on how loud the music can be listened to.
 
I used to not like EQ's but then I realized that not everyone can switch gear like I can. If something doesn't sound right, I swap until I find the right combo. For those who have one setup, EQ is good for fine tuning. Keep in mind that adding EQ lengthens the signal path and that EQ can only cover up but not correct the underlying imbalance.
 
century tek said:
To me, midrange just seems to sound good flat. Heck I always leave the mid control straight up on my Marantz 1060 with or without an EQ.

Now if an EQ is being used for correction in a place like a public environment, then yes, set it up, measure whatever acoustics you are looking for and never touch it again. :music:
Click to expand...
Midrange is nasal.sounding. I cut my 500/600. It's about the only area of the sound spectrum I touch. Except for a little boost on the high end due to bad hearing.
There are no cons to an eq. Parametrics are even better.
 
EQ can be a great thing, if the EQ itself is a good sounding unit that doesn't shift phase too much and is quiet. There are not very many that fit those criteria, but there are some. One of the toughest things to do is to set the thing correctly. I've never had great luck using Pink Noise as it isn't music and it tends to compensate too much for the room. Why is that a problem, well most of what we "hear" and interpret as "the sound" is the transient impulse in the first few milliseconds. So, I've had little bit better luck using a relatively quick sweep from 20 to 20K (about a 10 second sweep). Even better is if you can use an MLS (minimum length sequence) or impulse generated frequency response (via FFT - Fast Fourier Transform). Adjust your EQ to give close to flat response (down to about 200 Hz) using an MLS impulse analysis and it can sound very good. Use only enough EQ to adjust out about 1/2 of the variance from "flat" on any given band filter. After that you will still need to run sustained tones in the sub 200Hz range to find the "big" problems associated with standing waves. Again only adjust about half of it out and listen. Overuse of EQ is generally not going to get you the "best" sound, but used correctly (and in moderation) it can really clean up the sound. Also, I don't recommend using anything less than a 31 band (per channel) EQ - unless you have full parametric EQ available. The ones that adjust less than that have too much overlap and are not useful for much more than expanded tone controls (not that that is a bad thing).

As was suggested above, once you have it all adjusted - listen carefully both with and without the EQ. If it sounds better without EQ overall - then ditch the EQ :) . Since you are introducing another set of connections even that alone can negatively impact the sound. So ... listen carefully. A lot of EQ's will cause the soundstage to change (maybe even collapse) or cause other anomalies that you may not find "beneficial".
 
Last edited:
Any and all eq done in the analog realm do two things. Selectively alter levels and change timing (phase shift). Any time you use even a bass and treble control, you've effected these two domains.

Now if you listen to typical modern assembled music that has no phase coherance, or use the typical phase scrambled multi-element speaker, then the phase aspect will mean little to nothing.

But if you like to listen to the kind of music simplistically recorded with a carefully placed mic pair, through a speaker design with timing in mind, then you may clearly hear the resulting mangling of stage width and depth.

So ask what does time coherance effect? Any note, piano, trumpet or guitar string plucked, all are made up of transient multiple notes. The timing and energy in those seperate elements that makes up those 'notes', is what enables you to tell which instrument is playing that note. Do you care if that's a trumpet or a french horn playing that line? And where it's portrayed on the stage in front of you? Or how far away it is versus others?

Equalization, or flatness of the playback spectrum isn't the only challenge to good playback. Time coherance may actually matter more!

Food for thought.

EV3
 
Walter R said:
My setup includes an ARX SP-60 30 channel equalizer. I’ve used the Dayton Audio audio analyzer program with calibrated mike to adjust for room acoustics, which mostly consists of suppressing bass tones that resonate in the room. I’d be interested in hearing from anyone who’s familiar with the SP-60 as to whether it’s a good unit, or regarding the pros and cons of equalizers in general. Is the increase in distortion worth it? Supposedly the equalizer circuit is removed from the audio circuit if the adjustment is left at zero.
Click to expand...
I’ve done some testing and I think I prefer the soundstage with the equalizer bypassed, though it’s kind of subtle. I haven’t decided to remove the equalizer but I’ll keep it bypassed for now.
 
The only time I use my EQ is when I burn one of my old bootleg tapes to cd. Helpful in reducing tape hiss, etc. My problem is I do not have the ambition to burn a good size collection of boots to cd. I guess I should cherry pick the collection & limit the project to the best radio broadcasts. Not even an EQ can save audience tapes at this point in my listening career.
 
Walter R said:
Sorry, I’m a new member.
Click to expand...

I know, I wasn't getting on ya, I always post something sarcastic when there's a pro/con EQ post. Walter at the top of the page is a search button that'll provide a ton for ya on EQ's, but not specifically concerning your SP-60 concern (but who knows).
 
Asking for an opinion on certain subjects is a sure way of getting various, differing, opinions. Some of which you may like and agree with and. some you may not. You're free to pick and choose but, be aware, some may have the effect of making you doubt your own ears and put you on a never ending quest for more expensive equipment.

Remember, change is easy. Better, not so easy, and they are not the same.

Basically, if you like the sound, leave it at that. Don't worry about what others feel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom