Tone controls

How often do you guys use the tone controls of your amplifier to adjust the bass and treble?

On almost 9 out of 10 of my rock and metal LPs I am forced to use the tone controls to add bass and reduce treble because so many of them are so poorly recorded and poorly mastered (in most case excessively bright and thin). Without tone controls most of my albums would simply be unlistenable. On for example Metallica's new 45-rpm double LP MFSL mastered "Kill 'Em All" I was forced to use the tone controls to increase the bass and reduce the treble by large amounts to make the album listenable and even then it was still a below mediocre listening experience. The sound was so thin and bright on that release it made my system sound like cheap earphones connected to a pocket cassette recorder.

I recently upgraded my system...new needle, new phono preamp, new turntable absortion feet, new turntable audio interconnect table, all with the result of an improved sound with most acoustic music but with the unfortunate side-effect of actually making most of my rock and metal sound worse due to the improved fidelity and higher resolution of my new components.

I would like to get rid of my solid-state amp one day and upgrade to something with tubes but no tube amps that I have seen have tone controls for adjusting bass or treble, so I am forced to stick with solid-state amplification. *SIGH*

 

I never (ever) use tone controls. It's not an elitist thing, I just never feel like they help...whatever you try to fix you make something else worse. I have just learned to live with the limitations of the source - if the music is good enough and there's no better sounding version, I will still play a recording even if it's no audiophile gem, and just continue to leave my tone controls disengaged (my preamp has a defeat function that takes them completely out of circuit).

Hard for me to describe this - I know some will be skeptical - but I also found that when I got a truly transparent, neutral rig most recordings became more listenable. It's not like I can't hear the flaws in many - they show up clearly - but the lack of a grating high end quality, for example, in a truly neutral system means you can (I think) tolerate flawed recordings more easily. The big difference for me was getting truly full range speakers with adequate bass production and lack of high end over-prominence. That made a HUGE difference, and it's now hard for me to find a recording that sounds so bad I simply can't listen to it, even with tone knobs out of the loop.

So I'm not quite sure that your system is heading in the right direction if you find you can tolerate fewer and fewer recordings without feeling compelled to adjust tone controls...

 

There was a time that I used tone controls and eq. When I started building my own amps and modifying CD players, I stopped completely. But then again, if a recording sounds that bad, I either look for other sources for it or stop listening to it.

I think we've done this thread before once or twice.

 

Not for speakers, too dangerous, but for headphones sure- Gotta fix those bright rykos somehow!

 

I don't because I can't. My amp and pre-amp have no tone controls. Way back I used to have a parametric equalizer in my system (still have it but in storage) and you'll never get satisfied playing with it all the time. As mentioned, a good neutral system may not need tone controls.

By the way, it would be helpful if you could fill in your profile.

 

Consumer style tone controls are helpful, but limited, in dealing with unruly recordings. But when you need EQ, you need real, parametric EQ. With it, you can enjoy recordings you otherwise could not.

I might add there is a big difference for those of us who like full range recordings vs. the midrange fetishists. For them, no EQ is good EQ because they don't care about bass or treble anyway, it seems.

 

I used to think a lot of my CDs sounded too bright but my Creek amp had no tone controls. Instead I fitted a Musical Fidelity x10d tube buffer to tame the brightness of the CD sound - bass seems more extended as well.

 

Tone controls can be useful; there are times when I wish my Naim amp had a treble knob at least, to tame the brightness of some reissue CDs. Instead, I've been on a long-term search for just the right speakers for my setup and room.

Wish I could afford big Spendors or Harbeths...

 

I use tone controls all the time. There's no such thing as a flat room.

 

I find they can help but obviously it's better to get well mastered versions of your favourite music if at all possible.

 

What kind of equipment, speakers, are you using? If you are using mid-fi solid state and metal dome tweeters, combined w/your taste for music w/a lot of high frequency distorted energy. Well, I can only guess at your room full of glass and hard surfaces.

If you find yourself always using tone controls, then there is probably a room and/or system, mis-match.

The problem with tone controls is that they cause distortions in the phase relationships in the signal. These phase relationships are one of the indicators to the brain of live music. According to some research that is.

 

I will occasionally if I think something needs a bump up or down, but generally
keep them set neutral.

 

I never use tone controls.

 

The reason that manufactures of modern and vintage high end preamps provide a tone control "defeat switch" on their equipment is because they know that it will eliminate the distortion and phase problems introduced by the use of tone controls.

Here is a quote taken directly from the Assembly / Operations manual for my vintage HK Citation IV preamp.

"TONE CONTROL DEFEAT SWITCH:"
"When the switch is placed in the "OUT" position, all tone control circuitry is bypassed to give absolutely flat response. This eliminates transient distortion and phase shift inherent in all tone control circuits."

HG

 

In my personal experience tone controls always impaired the sound. I have not had an amp with tome controls for many years. I spent a long time and no little effort to get the system well matched and balanced - I never need or want to change the sound that I have achieved.

 

I don't have the option, but I don't think I would use tone controls even if I could. In the past I have used rugs and tapestries on the walls to tame any unwanted brightness.

 

I use 'em, but most of the time I listen flat. I would be satisfied with just a treble pot to tame bright records. Multiband EQs give me a headache because I never seem to be satisfied with the sound -- no matter which way I set it.

I remember when I was a kid about 11 or 12, I used to hate bass. I used to cut the bass by 3dBs on the receiver. Now my ears like it flat.

 

Never

 

Yep. I never boost anything, I usually just tame the treble when I need to.

 

I am with you and I find that some records are very hard to listen to and un-enjoyable without some judicious tone controls.

I have a pretty darn good system (McIntosh + Sonus Faber Guarneri) that, on great recording, sounds amazing, but on poor recordings highlights the inherent flaws - exactly as I would expect from a transparent and detailed (though not overly detailed) system.

I did not have Dr J's experience that " ... I also found that when I got a truly transparent, neutral rig most recordings became more listenable."

I have learned my lesson (i.e. Dire Straits, Diana Krall, etc. will sound good, to great, to amazing on most systems), so I take my "challenging" recordings (e.g. Springsteen's Magic, Flaming Lip's Yoshimi, etc.) with me when I audition audio components and system. And my experience has been 100% consistent - flawed recordings (too harsh, too thin, overcompressed, etc.) tend to sound worse as the fidelity (neutrality, transparency, etc.) increases.

I listened to $200K+ systems, in perfectly treated rooms, with dedicated power line, power conditioners, $3K cables (lifted off the carpet even), etc the crappy recordings sounded crappier. The same systems sounded amazing, jaw-dropping, non-fatiguing, realistic, etc., with great recordings.

I am not out to convince anyone - having had this debates many times already - but I have convinced myself 100%.

Alberto

 

The second half of your statement is true, but the first half really has nothing to do with it...you simply can't adjust for room problems with tone knobs, you either need a sophisticated equalizer or (ideally) room treatments.

 

To me it's a huge problem if the "better" your system becomes, you can only stand to listen to a handful of recordings. If that were really for me true - I'd personally have hung it up long ago and bought an iPod or something.

Thankfully I've had the opposite experience as my system has evolved, but this situation of less and less listenable recordings with each "upgrade" seems to be the case for many audiophiles. Gee, what fun...buying umpteen audiophile editions of the same 10 recordings over and over again, rather than being able to listen to the tons of great music out there that isn't so pristine sound wise.

Again I know it seems somewhat paradoxical, but with each improvement in my system I am more immediately able to pick out flaws in recordings, but the flaws have to be really bad before said recordings are completely unlistenable. Maybe the best way to say it is this: I can't stand to listen to a thin, bright recording on my inexpensive home theater system for even 5 minutes, it is so shrill it just kills me. On my main rig, sure I can hear it's not a gem, but it is much more listenable (assuming the music is good enough that I am willing to listen past the flaws), there's some body and life.

Sounds like purgatory to me, spending more and more to be able to listen to less and less, but I guess some people enjoy it.

 

I don't have them at the moment...however, they can be useful in regards to recordings. Why be at the mercy of the recording?

 

Never. I would also never consider building them in to an amp. Absolutely not.

 

Don't have any so never an option. But when I have used amps with them in the past I ended up usually turning up the bass.