• 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

Why we need tone controls and/or equalizers

I got back into this hobby when my harman/kardon integrated finally died after nearly a 30 year stint. It had a tone defeat switch that was usually engaged. There were other times, especially on "Mix Tapes" and their ilk that the tone controls and even the loudness switch were engaged. As has been said, I think some speakers benefit from the tone controls and more importantly many recordings do. Personally, I change my program material more often than speakers in my system.
My current main system has a preamp with no tone controls. Today, for the first time in the six months it has been in my living room, I would have used them (or an EQ) if they were present. I was listening to a compilation CD that obviously had been mixed differently than I was accustomed to and I would have tweaked it if I could have.
I guess my bottom line is , I like the idea of nothing in the signal path, but I don't want to be locked into that either. I may yet hook up an EQ, as my pre has a dedicated pair of jacks and a switch for it.
 
say what, I thought we settled this debate in the last 100 threads.
I guess I will have to go thru and read them all again so I can decide if I should use tone controls or not. I am not sure what I would do if I didn't have other people telling me how my stereo should sound.
Tone controls or an eq - if u like them, use them. If your system, doesn't need them, don't - pretty simple I thought
 
donberry said:
say what, I thought we settled this debate in the last 100 threads.
I guess I will have to go thru and read them all again so I can decide if I should use tone controls or not. I am not sure what I would do if I didn't have other people telling me how my stereo should sound.
Tone controls or an eq - if u like them, use them. If your system, doesn't need them, don't - pretty simple I thought
Click to expand...

I skipped right to this last page guesting what was said. And after just reading this I agree. Its up to yourself what you prefer.
 
Just my 2 cents worth-nothing wrong with using them-I do on occasion, used to be with XM radio (thin bass), but I adjusted my antenna a little bit, better signal strength and the sound on my Polk tuner improved quite a bit-now flat is best.
The main thing I have noticed using the tone controls is the soundstage shrinks a bit, imaging a bit blurred- perhaps some sort of phase shift?
Along with the shrinking soundstage, the main problem I personally had with eq's was there was too many ways to make the sound bad-perhaps one of those constant q units would work better, but at 31 bands, it's too much work. I want to sit down and listen to music, not fiddle with controls-perhaps I'm getting too old.
I agree about better speakers, now after a through listening to my updated/rebuilt AMT3's, they sound the best with flat tone controls.
A matched system usually requires little correction, but we all don't have that blessing-something to work for though IMHO, for me it's been fun, and a chore as well in some respects, but wouldn't have it any other way- thats why I love this hobby!:music:
 
Last edited:
In regard to cwall99.. some people are colour blind and see things differently. Have you ever walked into a friends living room and noticed their contrast, brightness, color, tint on their TV ? We all see and hear different. If you want to hear how it "should sound" you need to hear the music through the equipment of the mastering engineer. You would be surprised how "off" all of our ears are.
 
GoldTop said:
In regard to cwall99.. some people are colour blind and see things differently. Have you ever walked into a friends living room and noticed their contrast, brightness, color, tint on their TV ? We all see and hear different. If you want to hear how it "should sound" you need to hear the music through the equipment of the mastering engineer. You would be surprised how "off" all of our ears are.
Click to expand...
How far back is Cwll99's post? I'd like to be able to tell what point you're answering. If you use the "quote" button, it will bring it forward and also link your response back to the original statement
 
Zygmo said:
Sorry, guys....I just have to respond again to this.

What is natural sound??? :scratch2: (Referring to audiophile's recordings, of course.)

If it was made in a studio....how can you call that natural, and how could you possibly expect to replicate it?

If it is a recording of a concert....again..I have never been to a concert that I would call the sound natural, and no possible way I could replicate it.....and wouldn't want to. You have at a minimum....hundreds of people....probably many thousands of people...clapping, sneezing, coughing, whistleing....need I go on? It might be outdoors...on in a room so big your system would just disappear.

If you want to claim natural sound....you will have to go where the artist is....tape live (which in itself will be very hard to record just like you hear), take it home and play the tape, and using the memory of what you heard (very unreliable) try to assemble the different components to replicate that sound, since you don't want to sonically adjust your recording after said recording.

I just don't know how someone can say this system sounds natural, that system doesn't. (within reason of course...obviously no one is going to claim a pocket transister radio produces a natural sound) I say I prefer one system's sound over another....but would not know if it is the most natural. (and wouldn't care, for that matter!) :D
Click to expand...

Well, not sure who brought up "natural sound", but to generally answer your question, it's pretty easy for me here to know if what's coming out is close to what was recorded- I have hundreds and hundreds of recordings where I was the musician, I chose the recorder/preamp/instrument/strings/picks/sticks/skins/cables/amplifiers/speakers/etc., I selected & positioned the microphones. I mixed the multi-track (including choices of EQ, but generally the idea is to avoid having to use much if any EQ by having made better decisions earlier in the process). I've also recorded theatrical productions, orchestras, choirs, small ensembles, solo artists, bands, spoken word, etc. in stereo. I was there, I made the choices on how to capture it, and I've heard the results on multiple systems. Hearing these recordings on my systems is one very good reference for me on how "natural" the system is sounding in its current space.

je
 
Zygmo said:
Blhagstrom...you said it much better than I could! Thank you. What some people here don't understand is...if you restrict yourself to no controls, you have.....no controls! If you buy with controls, you have the choice of controls or......no controls! LOL
Click to expand...

Some of us do not need a choice. For some of us, life is uncomplicated, like that...:yes:
 
Last edited:
You should use the tone controls if you want more, or less, bass, or treble (and sometimes midrange).

In the studio, engineers usually use shelving controls for individual channels, because they feel that channel's instrument or voice needs some sort of general lift, or cut. From what I'v seen, parametric, or many band graphic eq is used less on a per channel on a recording for levels or mastering basis. The more wild eq settings are for room abberations. ... generally.
 
Last edited:
I prefer my music the way the artist intended. Their sound, not mine. Luckily, over the years, I have had the opportunity to see most of these artists live and I know their sound. I do the best I can to reproduce that at home. I do come close most of the time. I will say though that I have added lots of room treatments and use tone/EQ often
 
:lmao:My ole buddy sebrof set me straight again. You are right...I should respond to my own post!

And Kirk...you brought up a valid point. I am a mostly Rock fan.....sooo, my point of view would certainly be different from someone who hears, for instance, small Jazz ensembles live. I would say, if your system can replicate very closely what you hear when listening to that, then you can know you have a very good stereo, tone controls or no tone controls! :banana:

I defer to two experts.:thmbsp:
 
Has anybody gone from a system with no tone controls to one with extensive tone controls? I ask because I know a lot of folks who went from tone controls to none after hearing what it did for their system, and I know of nobody who has done the reverse (except for some who went to some sort of room correction device/software, which to me is something else entirely).
 
JohnVF said:
Has anybody gone from a system with no tone controls to one with extensive tone controls? I ask because I know a lot of folks who went from tone controls to none after hearing what it did for their system, and I know of nobody who has done the reverse (except for some who went to some sort of room correction device/software, which to me is something else entirely).
Click to expand...

Yup, I went from 5-band eq and tone controls, the the 'purist' route of no eq or tone, back to a parametric on my sub and whatever eq Meyer is using on their powered speakers.

I think my current setup is the best it's ever been.

I don't make any distinction between room eq software, equalizers, or tone controls. They all add noise, phase error, and tone shaping, but the right amount of anything improves things or suits tastes.
 
donberry said:
say what, I thought we settled this debate in the last 100 threads.
I guess I will have to go thru and read them all again so I can decide if I should use tone controls or not. I am not sure what I would do if I didn't have other people telling me how my stereo should sound.
Tone controls or an eq - if u like them, use them. If your system, doesn't need them, don't - pretty simple I thought
Click to expand...
At this point I don't think it's a matter of should / should not, but more about why people who use them use them, and why people who don't use them don't use them.
 
sebrof said:
At this point I don't think it's a matter of should / should not, but more about why people who use them use them, and why people who don't use them don't use them.
Click to expand...
That's good to point out. It does seem that we have settled into a conversation and not a wrestling match (so much)
 
Sorry to harken back to the discussions on new gear vs older gear, but for those of you with newer gear, what do find are the major contributors for not needing tone controls or EQ with the newer gear?

Is it the electronics, the speakers, both or something else?
 
Last edited:
When I listen to good recordings like smooth jazz, everthing is flat.

When I listen to hard rock that isn't recorded so well, I use the tone controls sparingly.

When I listen to electronic music, everything is flat but I boost the sub a little.


I've had "flat" systems.....and they were limited. Sad but true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom