I knew people that made the smileys as soon as they set it up and turned it on. Never touched them after. “That’s how they are supposed to be”
Why are equalizers not more popular?
- Thread starter Laggard
- Start date
I knew people that made the smileys as soon as they set it up and turned it on. Never touched them after. “That’s how they are supposed to be”
grillebilly
Empty Head
Back when I thought having as much gear in the system as possible was the way to go I had a big ol' silver faced equalizer with a lot of cool lights. Now the system is stripped down and it's gone. The preamp has tone controls which I set to mimic a loudness button when turned on. I sometimes hit it for entertainment value but I can't honestly say it improves the sound, it just changes it.
Many of us hear differently and like different sounds, like a lot of people need thunderous bass. Jazz musicians tend to let bass be more upfront, while rock and blues seem to be more of a blend with the drums, I guess that's why they are called the rhythm section.
It's entirely a question of whatever floats your boat.
Many of us hear differently and like different sounds, like a lot of people need thunderous bass. Jazz musicians tend to let bass be more upfront, while rock and blues seem to be more of a blend with the drums, I guess that's why they are called the rhythm section.
It's entirely a question of whatever floats your boat.
fill35u
Super Member
The vast majority of speakers have an on-axis response that is different from their off-axis responses. The disparity in frequency responses is something our brains learn to recognize as "loudspeaker sound", which harms the illusion. If you EQ one direction flat (usually the on-axis aimed for the sweet spot), the off-axis responses can get even worse. You can't fix directivity problems with one dimension of EQ.
OTOH, is EQ popular for headphone listening?
The non-directional bass region is a good place for EQ, but most *graphic* equalizers don't have the needed range, precision, or gain for that job. *Parametric* EQ is best, and shelving filters are helpful. This is where DSP shines, with presets, time delays, automatic correction, and accurate displays of calculated total results.
OTOH, is EQ popular for headphone listening?
The non-directional bass region is a good place for EQ, but most *graphic* equalizers don't have the needed range, precision, or gain for that job. *Parametric* EQ is best, and shelving filters are helpful. This is where DSP shines, with presets, time delays, automatic correction, and accurate displays of calculated total results.
Last edited:
There are many types of Equalizers. I am old school so I prefer Graphic Equalizers that were used with receivers with the tape loop. Todays fancy equalizers are called DSP but its too complicated for my old self. Graphic EQ is just hooked up using RCA connects that's it. Pro EQ's need special adaptors to connect to receiver.
My take on EQ's is its not going to make a bad awful sounding speaker sound good, your speakers have to already sound good to begin with the eq is just to FINE TUNE the sound to your preference. Most speakers even good sounding expensive ones have slight dips and peaks. Rarely a speakers frequency response is ruler flat from 20-20khz. So if there is peaks and dips you can adjust them with EQ accordingly. If the treble is a little too bright EQ can help reduce that brightness. Besides adjusting the EQ to your speakers you can also adjust the EQ to certain recording tracks. Some vocal tracks emphasize a lot of sibilance/sizzle (like Mariah Carrys tracks) in the vocals by increasing the 1-3khz range, using EQ to reduce it will reduce listening fatigue. Personally for me the GEQ is a very valuable tool as I can tailor the sound to my taste.
Also I forgot to mention the two tone controls on ones preamp/receiver/integrated amp for bass and treble are basically EQ. Bass control is usually around 30-40hz while treble control is around 4-5khz. Some gear can bypass the tone controls for a direct signal path. Why only have 2 EQ settings when you can have 7 or more with a GEQ.
Certain Carver components had 3 tone controls. Bass-Mid-Treble.
Why EQ's are not more popular is because the less equipment between the signal path equals less distortion, coloration or whatever lol but IMO what the EQ does for me out weighs the cons. My receiver has a by pass button for the tone controls I cant barely tell the difference. lol
My take on EQ's is its not going to make a bad awful sounding speaker sound good, your speakers have to already sound good to begin with the eq is just to FINE TUNE the sound to your preference. Most speakers even good sounding expensive ones have slight dips and peaks. Rarely a speakers frequency response is ruler flat from 20-20khz. So if there is peaks and dips you can adjust them with EQ accordingly. If the treble is a little too bright EQ can help reduce that brightness. Besides adjusting the EQ to your speakers you can also adjust the EQ to certain recording tracks. Some vocal tracks emphasize a lot of sibilance/sizzle (like Mariah Carrys tracks) in the vocals by increasing the 1-3khz range, using EQ to reduce it will reduce listening fatigue. Personally for me the GEQ is a very valuable tool as I can tailor the sound to my taste.
Also I forgot to mention the two tone controls on ones preamp/receiver/integrated amp for bass and treble are basically EQ. Bass control is usually around 30-40hz while treble control is around 4-5khz. Some gear can bypass the tone controls for a direct signal path. Why only have 2 EQ settings when you can have 7 or more with a GEQ.
Certain Carver components had 3 tone controls. Bass-Mid-Treble.
Why EQ's are not more popular is because the less equipment between the signal path equals less distortion, coloration or whatever lol but IMO what the EQ does for me out weighs the cons. My receiver has a by pass button for the tone controls I cant barely tell the difference. lol
Last edited:
They are. For those who, like you, really improve the sound meaning them.
noisefreq
Super Member
I started using a 32 band Ashly EQ and was able to remove the sub woofer from my system.
I'm using passive woofer speakers and just wasn't happy with how the low end presented in the room. It wasn't well matched.
The EQ is pretty much ran flat but bumped up around 80Hz and 5kHz and also dropped at 160Hz and 1.6kHz.
This really made my speakers come to life.
They sound much more efficient and full range.
I'm primarily a vinyl guy and can listen at low volume and still hear everything.
The EQ made all the difference.
I'm using passive woofer speakers and just wasn't happy with how the low end presented in the room. It wasn't well matched.
The EQ is pretty much ran flat but bumped up around 80Hz and 5kHz and also dropped at 160Hz and 1.6kHz.
This really made my speakers come to life.
They sound much more efficient and full range.
I'm primarily a vinyl guy and can listen at low volume and still hear everything.
The EQ made all the difference.
sqlsavior
Lunatic Member
The same way there are shady car dealers there are shady audio dealers.
Nixxuz
Super Member
Nobody is saying an EQ is needed. I'm just saying there is absolutely nothing wrong with needing, or wanting, to use one. It annoys me that there are certain purists out there that have been known to denigrate anything that their personal experience considers "wrong"What about those of us who have done those things and still don’t need EQ? Is that ok/allowed, I’m not sure at this point
to the OP, I agree with many folks here that if it helps your situation, then use one. There are caveats to this.
If one is trying to flatten the speaker's irregular frequency response curve, how does one know what the curve is without a good measurement in an anechoic chamber? If one is equalizing that in the listening room, the original response will vary throughout the room, especially in the bass with effects up to maybe 500 Hz. If one "fixes" the listening position, then it could be way off elsewhere in the room.
Room resonances can't be equalized out at the speaker output - it takes some room treatment that could be made removable. It can be a lot of work, too.
If one is trying to flatten the speaker's irregular frequency response curve, how does one know what the curve is without a good measurement in an anechoic chamber? If one is equalizing that in the listening room, the original response will vary throughout the room, especially in the bass with effects up to maybe 500 Hz. If one "fixes" the listening position, then it could be way off elsewhere in the room.
Room resonances can't be equalized out at the speaker output - it takes some room treatment that could be made removable. It can be a lot of work, too.
And that there rubs both ways equally on here.
I'm sorry. I need to heap on this one...
NOBODY making high end gear integrates EQ's. Luxman is a freak in the crowd who puts tone controls in some of their gear, but the VAST majority of gear has no tone controls or EQ at all. Not the dirt cheap gear from Schiit. Not insanely priced gear from Pass Labs. Not middle of the road Prima Luna.
Modern properly placed speakers in a decently treated room don't really need an EQ. Modern speakers are good at being flat in an average room. But beyond that, I think the jury has come back with the verdict that other qualities like tone and imaging and proper timing are more important factors than flat response.
Hey Mark, I may soon eat my words. I have a pair of EV Sentry VI's which need that outboard eq to boost the low end. I have an EV eq that was from some Sentry 1's, but you have to take out a few things, and replace with other things. Technical stuff I will eventually get around to, but in the meantime, I thought I'd connect my rather pretty Onkyo eq
I had a feeling Mc did... Should have looked. McIntosh is an anachronism though. Who else uses output transformers on SS amps!?!?!?
Bill Ferris
Lunatic Member
White Instruments 31 band EQ`s fit in nicely, in the analog days(pre quality DSP).
Ezd
Super Member
I usually find the claim "the news is fake" is the actual fake news...
Similar threads
