...and changing the drivers in a speaker sysyem doesn't?
You might want to lighten up a bit. Personal preference rules.
Why the need for expensive speakers when we got Equalizers?
- Thread starter chingon
- Start date
You might want to lighten up a bit. Personal preference rules.
Adda
Super Member
...and changing the drivers in a speaker sysyem doesn't?
You might want to lighten up a bit. Personal preference rules.
The old driver blew, I had no choice.
To fix the issue, I have plans to build new speakers.
In the studio (which is the perspective I see this from) personal preference does not apply to the playback chain, only what you do to the sound it plays.
I do not use my speakers for music production my K240DF's handle that job.
Here is something I figured out with a particular FX unit that many will buy and try (me included).
I bought an FX unit called a BBE sonic maximizer to try to enhance the low end of my PA system for JD work.
I would only use the BBE for low level play back. It’s kinda like a base boost button on your pre amps that enhances the low end and brings out the highs with some on board processing.
If I didn’t want to use it I just left in the by pass position thinking the signal was unaffected in the bypass mode. (WRONG)
Those sneaky bustards pulled a fast one.
Even in bypass mode the unit will degrade the sound so that by activating the unit it sounded better then in the bypass mode. Making the unit appear to make a positive effect when activated.
So my question is, do all eq’s really give you an uncolored sound in the flat setting or in bypass mode verses not having it in the signal chain in the first place?
Dennis
I bought an FX unit called a BBE sonic maximizer to try to enhance the low end of my PA system for JD work.
I would only use the BBE for low level play back. It’s kinda like a base boost button on your pre amps that enhances the low end and brings out the highs with some on board processing.
If I didn’t want to use it I just left in the by pass position thinking the signal was unaffected in the bypass mode. (WRONG)
Those sneaky bustards pulled a fast one.
Even in bypass mode the unit will degrade the sound so that by activating the unit it sounded better then in the bypass mode. Making the unit appear to make a positive effect when activated.
So my question is, do all eq’s really give you an uncolored sound in the flat setting or in bypass mode verses not having it in the signal chain in the first place?
Dennis
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
I used L-100's as an example. That they have a forward boomy sound is pretty much universally agreed on. I made no mention of what or how a given recording sounds like or is supposed to sound like.
I've set up my system to be as neutral as possible. I have no need or desire to editorialize the music and second guess the engineer.
One of the functions of REW (Room Equalization Wizard) is as a RTA.
Ok so what about the question everyone has about the new fad of adding compression to make recordings sound lauder?
Are you saying that I’m wrong in not wanting a heavily compressed signal on my recordings?
So your saying that if the engineer wanted it heavily compressed then I should just live with his idea of how it should sound?
Dennis
jefrodigital
Supernatural
No you just dont listen to it and go on message boards ranting about the loudness wars.
Or just sit back and listen to darkside of the moon yet again.
Doesn’t the same principle apply to eq settings as well?
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
There is absolutely nothing you can do about overly compressed recordings. It's not possible for any equalizer of any type made by anyone to correct for overcompression.
BTW, I've tried a Barcus Berry, 7, 10, 12 and 31 band equalizers, RTA's, various range expanders, sonic holographs and a sub harmonic synthesizer. All those devices currently sit unused on a shelf in my equipment storage closet.
I did say that most of the non users had tried and rejected all the devices you are mentioning.
Over compressing recordings is a topic that's been covered in many threads on this site.
BTW, I've tried a Barcus Berry, 7, 10, 12 and 31 band equalizers, RTA's, various range expanders, sonic holographs and a sub harmonic synthesizer. All those devices currently sit unused on a shelf in my equipment storage closet.
I did say that most of the non users had tried and rejected all the devices you are mentioning.
Over compressing recordings is a topic that's been covered in many threads on this site.
Don't they do the overcompressing mainly so they can be played louder on the radio?
I can remember hearing Santana's Supernatural thru Wilson Grand Slams and all Levinson front end and was not impressed at all. The louder you turn it up, the quicker you want it off. Several hundred thousands worth of gear won't even fix an overly compressed CD.
It's a shame so many recordings are done like this but I don't find it on many Jazz or Fusion discs, mainly on rock and more popular music.
I can remember hearing Santana's Supernatural thru Wilson Grand Slams and all Levinson front end and was not impressed at all. The louder you turn it up, the quicker you want it off. Several hundred thousands worth of gear won't even fix an overly compressed CD.
It's a shame so many recordings are done like this but I don't find it on many Jazz or Fusion discs, mainly on rock and more popular music.
Brett a
~◦●○o0o○●◦~
Yep. I had one of those remote controlled BSR X3000 something-or-other computer controlled 12 band with RTA and pink noise generator for the first 20 years or so. But as my equipment got better it obviously wasn't needed any more.
Why not put a system together that allows everything to sound good without tone controls? I mean, it's a commonly exercised option to put music on and enjoy it immensely without any desire to change its frequency characteristics. --and I do mean every recording.
I haven't had/used tone controls in over 10 years and the number of times I wished I had them? zero.
But I wouldn't tell anyone they were wrong for using them. I find them helpful in the car and with my vintage equipment.
I don’t know why they think over compressing everything is a good solution.
After all I have eq’s and speakers and I have a compressor that can use to get it laud if I want it laud, I don’t need or want an overly compressed signal.
My point is I can add these things myself if I want to.
But the same principle should apply to eq’ing as well.
I try not to add any eq if I can help it.
It depends on the recording and how it sounds to me weather I decide to ad or take anything away.
Just because an engineer decided it should be a certain way doesn’t mean I would agree with it.
After all my ears are just as good as anyone else’s. (Relatively speaking) so why should I trust someone else to tell me how I should like something.
Dennis
Although I run all my systems that have tone controls flat, I agree with you and would never tell anyone they should not do it if they so choose. I may question why they don't just get better gear that will need less of it but that is as far as I would push.
I know the vintage thing is a bunch of fun for some here, and when I keep seeing those folks talk about how expensive newer gear is, I have to wonder....to myself. Why not sell those 20 receivers and 20 pairs of speakers and get one of each that performs awesomely? With or without tone controls.
20 receivers = 1 nice Integrated amp
20 pairs of 20 y/o Sansui speakers = 1 nice pair of Dynaudio speakers....or whatever brand
Bottom line I think we all should do what make us happy. If you like it one way then by all means let’r rip.
There no good or bad, it’s up to the individual and no one else.
Personal taste is just that, personal.
So let’s just put on our favorite disk, LP, Tape or what ever and enjoy them the way we like.
Dennis
There no good or bad, it’s up to the individual and no one else.
Personal taste is just that, personal.
So let’s just put on our favorite disk, LP, Tape or what ever and enjoy them the way we like.
Dennis
Brett a
~◦●○o0o○●◦~
I will ad that perception has a great deal in how we look at something.
I read an article in an audiophile magazine on an experiment that was conducted some 20 years ago.
The perception was that the more expensive speaker wires that were on the market were vastly superior to the low end stuff.
They set up an experiment to try to find an answer.
All the top audiophile critics that had been doing all the testing and subsequent write up’s in most or all the popular magazines were invited.
The test was done in 2 parts. In the first test they were told what cables they were listening to and given the data that went with each one.
The seconded part was a blind test and they were asked to evaluate each one.
The result was nothing short of amazing.
In the first test where they knew what they were listing to they gave great revues to the high end cables and poor results for the low end stuff.
In the blind test the results were almost opposite of the first test.
In the blind test zip cord (lamp cord) was judged to be one of the best sounding wires of them all.
Witch tells me, “perception” can have a great deal to do with how we see things.
Dennis
I read an article in an audiophile magazine on an experiment that was conducted some 20 years ago.
The perception was that the more expensive speaker wires that were on the market were vastly superior to the low end stuff.
They set up an experiment to try to find an answer.
All the top audiophile critics that had been doing all the testing and subsequent write up’s in most or all the popular magazines were invited.
The test was done in 2 parts. In the first test they were told what cables they were listening to and given the data that went with each one.
The seconded part was a blind test and they were asked to evaluate each one.
The result was nothing short of amazing.
In the first test where they knew what they were listing to they gave great revues to the high end cables and poor results for the low end stuff.
In the blind test the results were almost opposite of the first test.
In the blind test zip cord (lamp cord) was judged to be one of the best sounding wires of them all.
Witch tells me, “perception” can have a great deal to do with how we see things.
Dennis
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
First of all, it's not a new fad. Posters (me included) here and on other sites have been complaining about it for several years. Santana, Supernatural (I have a copy) is a good example of an overly compressed recording.
I'm saying there is absolutely nothing you can do to compensate for it. That's a fact. If you take the time to investigate other threads here and discussions on other sites you'll understand that this a very common complaint about many pop music recordings.
I'll try this again.
There is nothing you can do to compensate for overly compressed recordings. No equalizer, no Barcus Berry, no real time analysis will have the slightest effect. You can change the frequency balance (that's what an equalizer does) all you want. That has no effect on the amount of compression.
Download a copy of Audacity and take a look at a waveform envelope. Try eq'ing anything you want and observe the resulting waveform. You will see that the signal is just as compressed.
Re-equalizing a signal does not effect the amount of compression.
The problem doesn't impact on me that much. I listen mainly to Classical and Jazz. Classical and Jazz recordings have been largely free from the compression wars influence.
In this post I thought I explained that trying to make changes to a post mix is not the same as a pre fader (dry signal) that had not been tampered with.
If you have the dry master then you can do much more to tailor the sound to your individual taste.
Your rite when you say compression can’t be fixed in the final mix, nether can eq’ing a single instrument or vocal.
You have to get to it before the final mix is done.
Dennis
lol............Thats cool, to each his own!
