Equalizers

In theory, you may be correct with a very hi quality parametric eq that allows those corrections without ringing or phase shift. Don't think you are going to get there with a Behringer graphic eq (or any prosumer sound reinforcement gear) though, sorry.

 

A really good EQ is something to behold. Pultec EQP1a, Manly Massive Passive, GML EQ 8200. These are all studio units but if you ever had a chance to hear something on this level it would show you what is possible.

TonePub tried a Manley unit once
http://www.tonepublications.com/review/manley-massive-passive-equalizer/

 

I think the OmniMic may be suitable. The Behringer offers 'phantom power' for a mic through an XLR terminal. I don't use the Behringer for measurements but you can by inputting the mic's signals.

I used the Behringer's ADC and DAC when I played vinyl for a short time and the music sounded good to me at that time. Some say that the Behringer ADC and DAC are best avoided. However the fellow that made my speakers, VMPS, used the Behringer DCX for active crossovers, and said that its ADC and DAC were neutral in effect such that you could hear the differences between different DACs in rest of the system. He was impressed with the DCX even with the unintuitive double ADC/DAC conversions. I don't know if the DCX and DEQ2496 have the same ADC and DAC.

Some integrated CD players have digital ins and outs so that you can use other DACs or input other digital sources.

My guess would be though that the DEQX would have better ADC and DAC but there is of course only one real way to find out.

Do YOU hear these mild peaks or are they from room measurements? You may find they have no or little affect on the sound. Don't get carried away with measurements. They are a guide but the real test are your ears.

Here are my REW readings, at 1/24 smoothing, left and right speaker. They look dreadful but the sound is good (to me!):



The roll off after 10Khz is because I can't hear much above that frequency. My speakers are flat down to the mid 30s and then roll off. The peak at 42Hz I mentioned above but traffic sounds interfered with measurements below 50Hz so I wasn't sure about it until I heard it in some music. I can't hear any of the nulls below 300Hz (such as at 50Hz and 72Hz) by using test tones and have no way of confirming by test tones any nulls above 300Hz. You could argue that the region 2-5kHz looks a bit low and indeed I'm looking at that and thinking the same thing! But I like the sound I get so maybe I'll resist!!

 

Rant mode on! Digital EQ, not allowed in my system. PERIOD. Consumer equalizers likewise except a very tiny minority of those made except for very specific reasons. Reasons why. Why take my nice room, nice sources, and nice music played through nice McIntosh and other gear, then run it through a $129 IC chip and cheapie component and long signal path filled consumer equalizer? Because that cheapie consumer equalizer is now the weakest link in an otherwise well thought out system. None of these units most folks can manage to own are transparent. When it is in the signal path, you can hear it there. Phase artifacts, distortion artifacts, and other issues. Rant mode off! Invest in room treatment first. Get your room right. Chances are you will not want the equalizer. I need one which does the intended purpose but can be neutral when off. As in out of the whole path.

 

Rant away old bean! You're not alone.

Meanwhile I, poor sap that I am, continue, in my pathetic ignorance, to enjoy the benefits of digital EQ.

 

Until the digital is transparent, won't work for me. I dislike digital broadcast audio processing on formats which are not current based. I can hear it's grit, it's smeary sonics, it's colorations. McLover's Law #1, if the midrange is right. Then 99% of your sound will fall in place. Do no sonic harm. Simpler means of solving your sonic problems give the best results.

 

Same here. I have two custom settings: Bass+ and Bass++, which add +3 and +5db @ 80Hz, mostly to correct bass anemic mixes, mostly from the 50s, '60s, and '70s. I do try to respect the intentions of the original mix and master, but sometimes adding a bit of bass just makes them more listenable and less austere to my ears.

Otherwise, I'm very into flat listening.

 

I probably need to re measure my speakers - I've fiddled around with some of my treatments while paying attention to focus, soundstage, and other similar things. I should pull out the OmniMic and see if I screwed it up a bit since my old measurements.

I looked at one taken after I spent a bunch of time moving speakers around, then room treatments, then I changed furniture around and started over, finally getting something reasonable. Fairly flat from below 20 to 500, but I had a bad null centered between 45 and 65 that I worked a long time to smooth out. I had a rise centered around 1k. I have what I believe to be a very high sensitivity to peaks in the 1k to 5k region, and that's what I want to work on next. I'm afraid if I add any more absorption, I'm going to get too "dead" - it's borderline dead already. My waterfall plots above 2k or so are ugly.

I just hate doing it this time of year as my system is upstairs and it gets bleeping hot and nasty (for me) really quick.

 

Just a quick thought, since the plots above 2k are irregular, I think you may be having early reflections from the side walls. Just as a general starting point, room treatment is more successful when the near field is treated, near to the speakers, ie: side walls, and leaving the back more reflective. The hand clap test will tell you how much is enough. The hand clap should sound sharp with a short decay. The decay should be non-repeating, or "non-flanging".

 

I've done a bunch of room treatment including GIK Freestanding Acoustic Panels at the first side reflection points. http://www.gikacoustics.com/product/freestand-acoustic-panel-gobo/

I did take more measurements yesterday morning. I'm glad I did. Had a couple of dropouts in the lower frequencies that I was able to dial out pretty well by adjusting phase and crossover points on my OB bass panels.

No clue what to do about my uneven upper frequency roller coaster. Moving the microphone a few inches forward or backward changed the results quite a bit. Heck, even changing the orientation of the Mic altered the results.

Starting to think active EQ might be another long chase based on what I saw

 

I actually wouldn't mind a quality EQ in my system. Something with a defeat. That being said the main reason I don't have one is I have no more room in my rack.

 

I got/use that Realistic! Fantastic unit.

 

I personally do an equalizer setting using the best recording of a simple piece of music that I have (i.e, solo piano, string quartet) and leave it there. I use tone controls (bass, treble) for any additional adjustment. Some recordings seem to need both, some one of the two, some neither. I like to have the choice, personally.

 

They've improved over they years (digital equalizers), you might be surprised how much of what you are listening to has already been through one at the mastering stage, via something like the Weiss EQ1 that is in almost every modern mastering facility. Never say never.

 

First of all has anyone examined the circuit of their RIAA phono amp? It is basically a series of resistors, capacitors and op amps AND an equalizer network.
http://sound.westhost.com/project25.htm

These are very benign circuits with respect to affecting the quality of the audio signal. Same with your decent analog equalizer or DSP equalizer for that matter. It is very economical and fairly easy to achieve great signal quality and signal to noise ratios (e.g. 127db, which bests most amps, pre-amps, CD players and certainly turntables).
The notion that it somehow will corrupt your high end system is simply not true. Speakers have equalizers (filters) in the form of crossover networks. Some speakers actually build in some equalization by creating a dip in the ear sensitive frequencies- example Monitor Audio and KEF. It's as if they made some frequency cuts on the old EQ slider at the 2K, 3K and 4K positions (BTW most people would reap huge benefits in their system if they had a mini-EQ that could adjust only those bands).
Phase shifts are certainly a concern with equalizers. However, this effect is predominantly at the lower frequencies where phase shifts can cause destructive cancellations. Go easy on low frequency adjustments (e.g. below 250Hz). The goal is for your system to sound better. Say you have an annoying bass peak at 25oHz and your system sounds bloated and cloudy. You can live with it, try to treat it with acoustic materials (often a crap shoot at higher frequencies, gives your room that recording studio look) or you can try and tune it out with judicious cuts at key frequencies, resulting in an overall much better sound experience despite the slight trade-offs of possible phase shift effects. In other words, the net result is a much improved sound experience.
Your system should sound amazing with 99% of your recordings. If it doesn't, and you have to live with so called "bad recordings" which are in essence thin sounding to which it will exacerbate systems that are overly bright in critical ear sensitive frequencies (see the M/A and KEF equalizing crossover).
I used to be this way- tone controls on flat and be-damned anything that doesn't sound quite right. Until I entered the world of high end mobile audio, where within the confines of a vehicle interior the best amplifiers, sources and speakers (example Focal Utopia Be) will sound horrible without significant equalization. A car's interior makes for an environment where EQ is a must.
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_091NO7...97825&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=47439237625&awdv=c

Your vehicle's OEM audio system will sound MUCH better to your ears than a 20K system with no EQ capability. It isn't even close. You learn that an EQ is basically harmless once you tune it properly.
A 3K home system with proper EQ will (most of the time) sound much better than a 25K system without EQ.
By all means, using EQ properly has a steep learning curve along with investment for RTA measuring software and hardware. And you need at least a 2-channel 1/3 octave 32 band model. But once you have it mastered, once you have heard the results, learned that its ill effects are exaggerated and relatively benign, once you can play 99% of your recordings, regardless of music type, loud and clear and full volume, and they all sound incredible. Once you get there- you never go back- and you feel sympathy for those that never get the chance to hear it done right. Because their investment is not yielding the best returns. Oh, BTW try and find a new amplifier with a tape monitor circuit. Using an EQ is all but eliminated by the market place and the predominance of the technically challenged audiophile.
Did I mention that measuring and correcting individual left / right channels so they are "Equalized" at your listening position within one db at all frequencies creates such a refined precise stage image that takes your great sounding system and turns it into an amazing sounding system?

 

Thin, narrow peaks are OK and best left alone. The "plateau" between 1K and 2K will make your system slightly forward and possibly irritating with thin recordings. That zone could use some EQ cuts of 2-3db and it will sound much better. You have a fletcher munson dip between 3 and 4K which is a good thing. Probably because of the speaker's crossover design. Overall this should sound great lots of the time.
It's when people have peaks between 3-5K that sounds bad- throw your system in the trash bin bad. And a little EQ can easily salvage even that type of mess.

 

Amen. Which is why I've always questioned the prices of some high end gear. Quality components, yes, engineering, research - I understand. But a lot of these devices are simply overpriced beyond belief, and if you add up the cost of the parts, it doesn't make reasonable sense. Especially so with circuits like equalizers, which are more or less based on classic schematics that are well known, and have been around for decades. Then along comes another product which has almost the same parts / design as a pricey one, but is way cheaper, and people just assume it can't possibly be good because it doesn't cost an arm and a leg!

 

It's threads like that this that I love. I have nothing to contribute outside of soaking up information like a sponge. Or the Bulleit Whiskey. And more Allman Brothers.

I've been very happy with the amp changes and Focal speakers in my car. An EQ in there would be quite nice too.

 

Benign! NO! They can not be bypassed unless you disconnect it. What part of that is not understood? Even in bypass, your entire audio path goes through it complete with the colorations, added hum and noise, and the grit. I respectfully disagree. If you like it fine. But understand that some of us prefer more benign means which are worth investigating. Treat Thy Room. Listen to better sources. Upgrade the weak link as you can. Room Treatments well done can be equal to a major upgrade.

 

Many designs have a hardware switch or relay, which disconnects the circuitry altogether, and routes the input directly to the output. What's wrong with that? It's like having a foot or so of extra cabling, that's all.

 

Many still run it through their line stages in bypass mode if not most all. Which means you have to take it physically out of the audio path.

 

Yeah, but you are basically soaking up a heck of a lot of misinformation mixed with a large helping of complete and utter bull$hit.

It's threads like this that cause the audio professionals here to collectively roll our eyes and shake our head in disbelief.

But hey, whatever. It's all subjective in the 21st century, right?

 

Thanks for your comments. As I say I am very happy with the sound (apart from the boomy 42/43Hz which I am addressing) and don't wish to tamper with it but I appreciate both your posts.

After one has done room treatment and positioning as best as possible you still don't get a perfect room.

A summary of your argument is that I should do yet more room treatment, even better positioning, or buy new gear, because EQ causes more damage then benefits.

As Avanti has pointed out, you are just plain wrong in your assertion that damage (coloration, noise, hum and grit as you say) enter the sound. Firstly I don't hear it in my set up and secondly if it is there, the damage is as nothing compared with improvements generated.

Have you actually used a decent EQ device?

 

Yes, but good ones are severely expensive. I need discrete components, no IC of any kind in the path. I have used Pultecs, UREI, Bozak, EV, and Cello which I have had on loan. Those are what I call a proper equalizer.

 

It's funny how audiophiles like to make things out to be waaaaay more important than they actually are.
Tone controls and equalizers are the equivalent of deciding whether or not to have sauce on your prime beef.
See ? ....... dumb huh ?