How many of you are using equalizers on your 2 channel rigs?

hearingimpared

Polkersince85 wrote:

I have one of my rigs setup as a vintage silver face. Contained within are a Soundcraftsmen SP-4001 preamp & MA-5002 amp, an Onkyo T-4055 tuna, a Pioneer CT-F900 cdeck and a Dual CS5000 table driving the SRS 2's. The equalizer functions on the 4001 preamp comes in handy. Not ashamed of it.

Lights, bells, and whistles.. .. . . .I love that old stuff.

Dean guitar pla

I have a few also; Audio Control C-101, BSR EQ-3000 and a Yamaha EQ-630 for my various room systems

I also have a BBE 482 which is not really an EQ which I use for my guitar rig

I find them invaluable for cleaning up less then ideal audio listening environments due to furnishing, drapes or constraints on speaker placement

treitz3

schwarcw wrote:

Using the EQ should not be considered such an audiophile sin.

Boy, that's a debate in itself!

Here's my two cents.
When I was young, dumb and full of **** I used to use Two EQ's on the same system. One on the loop from the CDP, and then another one on the amp.

The following is a quote of mine before I got my Dual-30 EQ, and I was talking about this very setup... "I learned alot back then about how to tweek sound to compensate for the shortcomings in either the recording or the gear that I was running it in at the time. That particular system was stolen, and I decided not to get another EQ at that point and just concentrate on getting better gear to make up for my system shortcomings. As soon as I am satisfied with a system that does not need an EQ to make up for system shortcomings, Then I will once again entertain the thought of another EQ. to make up for the recording shortcomings. Until then, I will run with a flat signal."

That was 20 years ago.

Now I have a Dual 30 band EQ, which as you would imagine can shape the sound to infinite degrees with each speaker separately. On [for example] a crap recording, such as Meatloaf, or Heart....I will engage the EQ just so the sound is tolerable. When listening to most music, I NEVER touch the tone controls, and the EQ is not in the loop. I have a high rez rig.

That's my experience and opinion on EQ's. Now to answer the question (or statement...I forgot) from the original post on this thread as to **** in=**** out. I am going to have to agree with you on that one. You can't make chicken soup out of chicken ****. That's a given.

BUT, with your budget and not being able to get the new tweeter, you might want to go ahead and get an EQ just for a band-aid. 10-12 band at least. You can pick them up for pennies on the dollar at most pawn shops. If you don't like it, toss the thing. When I did have a system in the very beginning of my audio journey, it did "help" [if you will] shape the sound a little better for the shortcomings of my gear at the time.

My honest opinion, I wasted my hard earned $$$ on the Dual-30 once I had achieved the level that I have arrived at. Over the course of the two or so months that I have had it.......I have used it three times.

scottnbnj

cnjvh wrote:

Wouldn't an EQ be useful in two-channel to create a house curve?

up until sound starts shaking the room, i think the most part of what the room adds is reflections from the ceiling, walls, floor and all other room contents. the room does not just change the volume, it adds to and subtracts from direct sound (from the speakers) its own sound signature.

reflections arrive at the listening position later and from different directions than direct sound from the speakers. it's like echoes that arrive so soon after direct sound that it's usually difficult to distinguish one from the other. some frequencies arrive out of phase and cancel a bit of direct sound at those frequencies, like what sda's do only in narrow frequency bands. often when folks talk about things like muddiness, sibilance and lack of clarity, these are the causes or they at least reinforce or contribute to the problems. they also throw off the image and soundstage and create ghost images, but the list goes on and on.

the sum total of direct and reflected sound is what you hear, think of the difference between direct sound and the sum total as distortion, not a change in volume. an equalizer simply boosts or cuts the sum total of the direct *and* reflected sound. it does not change the proportions of direct v. reflected sound.

to change the proportions, look to things like placement of speakers, listening position, room contents, acoustic treatments and traps.

i don't think equalizers are evil. i think they can be fun and you can learn a lot from them, and depending on what you listen for can be useful for correcting problems with your hardware and software that originate before air starts moving. just the same, my equalizer and analyzer haven't been out of their boxes since i put my racks on a strict diet in the late 80's.

)

bikezappa

hearingimpared wrote:

AARRRRGGGHHH!!! I'm so sorry to hear that.

Well if you are ever in this neck of the woods (New Hampshire is not that far) you are always welcome to listen to Amanda or any other artists that I have in my collection. As a matter of fact, if you still have a turntable let me know and I will lend you the Amanda LPs for a week or two.:)

Thank you for your generious offer. I have a Thorens TT from the 60's but it is in storage, so I must pass at the present time.

I really don't miss LPs, I love the control of CDs and hated the poping noise from LPs even when brand new.

hearingimpared

bikezappa wrote:

Thank you for your generious offer. I have a Thorens TT from the 60's but it is in storage, so I must pass at the present time.

I really don't miss LPs, I love the control of CDs and hated the poping noise from LPs even when brand new.

Anytime, I have some new and older LPs that are very quiet. I think most popping noises on new LP are due to static but you are correct popping noises can be distracting.

bikezappa

hearingimpared wrote:

Anytime, I have some new and older LPs that are very quiet. I think most popping noises on new LP are due to static but you are correct popping noises can be distracting.

I tried for many years to get rid of or reduce the poping noise. I tried many washing processes with very little success, but I never had a record cleaning machine. I used the antistatic devices but with little success also. The siblance of a woman singing was never correct also. And it got worse with each playing. Maybe I needed a better cartridge but my cartridge budget was limited to about $100 back in the 80s.

Everything had to be Clean, Clean, Clean in search for the holy grail with LPs.

hearingimpared

bikezappa wrote:

Everything had to be Clean, Clean, Clean in search for the holy grail with LPs.

LOL, if you would see the gyrations I go through before actually cueing up a song on and LP it would make you tired just watching me. But to me it is so worth the trouble.

madmax

hearingimpared wrote:

LOL, if you would see the gyrations I go through before actually cueing up a song on and LP it would make you tired just watching me. But to me it is so worth the trouble.

Its not that tough... You just clean with the cleaner, then clean with the other cleaner, use all three brushes, vacumn several times, use the anti-static gun, dry brush once, clean the stylus, set the arm for the right height, level out the table, get the platter spinning, sit the needle down, select the right preamp loading and off you go.

Really no different than slapping in a CD and hitting play.

madmax

candyliquor35m

I have and still use an eq on an old vintage receiver. To me they make them sound 100% better. But once I started buying separates, I never found a need for them for these systems.

Mother Mooch

candyliquor35m wrote:

I have and still use an eq on an old vintage receiver. To me they make them sound 100% better. But once I started buying separates, I never found a need for them for these systems.

This is what i am doing now, As others were saying about the "bandaid" I think that's what i'l do for now! But i just sold my house and hope to have a little change left over, So my first step will be an amp and pre amp! Then a good CD player!

I have to say that i am highly impressed with the replies on here! A lot of you guys know WTF you are talking about~!

Thanks
Steve

bikezappa

I have to say that i am highly impressed with the replies on here! A lot of you guys know WTF you are talking about~!

Thanks
Steve[/QUOTE]

It's all Smoke and Mirrors

steveinaz

madmax wrote:

The BIGGEST problem I have with EQ's are the output stages. They are typically the cheapest part available. You are wasting your time with good equipment if you at some point run through a lesser component. The sound can't be any better than the worst component you run it through.

The second BIGGEST problem I have with EQ's are phase shifts. Each frequency pot changes the phase of the frequencies going through it. It can be right on frequency but the tone of the instruments is lost.

The third BIGGEST problem I have with EQ's are they provide a crutch rather than making you pick parts with synergy and allow your room to not be optimized. (at least until you figure out you are doing more harm than good).

The Fourth BIGGEST problem I have with EQ's are that no one sets them up properly. Live with any sound for a short while and it becomes your standard. They ruin your perception of what sounds good.

The Fifth BIGGEST problem with EQ's are that they add yet another component in line with all the others.

TRUE. Even in a best case scenario where the EQ was properly mic'd/pink noise generator calibrated, etc, etc, you'd still have Max's list above of other disadvantages...

hearingimpared

madmax wrote:

Its not that tough... You just clean with the cleaner, then clean with the other cleaner, use all three brushes, vacumn several times, use the anti-static gun, dry brush once, clean the stylus, set the arm for the right height, level out the table, get the platter spinning, sit the needle down, select the right preamp loading and off you go.

Really no different than slapping in a CD and hitting play.

madmax

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

There is one really good thing that needs to be taken into consideration with all the "work" with LPs. When I put a CD on especially a new one that I may not be familiar with, I have a tendancy to quickly and easily flip to the next track if I am bored with the track that is playing or it isn't doing it for me thus possibly missing out on what could be a really good piece.

LPs force me to have the disipline to sit through all tracks because I'm too lazy to get up, lift the tonearm, line up the stylus to the gap before the next track, quickly run back to the sweat spot before the stylus touches down and listen. I've found some really great music exists that I wasn't aware of because of that.

So LPs are better than CDs because they are NOT convenient!:D

joeparaski

Joe, before you sit down in the "sweat" spot, I'd put a towel over it or something. Or perhaps a quick shower before listening will prevent that sweat spot from occuring in the first place.:p

hearingimpared

joeparaski wrote:

Joe, before you sit down in the "sweat" spot, I'd put a towel over it or something. Or perhaps a quick shower before listening will prevent that sweat spot from occuring in the first place.:p

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

SWEET SPOT!!! No sweat spot is right after all the crap I go through before playing a record I feel like I ran a couple of miles. . . but it's worth every single bit of trouble.

Mother Mooch

bikezappa wrote:

I have to say that i am highly impressed with the replies on here! A lot of you guys know WTF you are talking about~!

Thanks
Steve

It's all Smoke and Mirrors[/QUOTE]

LOL... I don't believe you...

madmax

Another point was made that most everything we listen to has been run through some form of equalization before it was recorded.

Although this is true, running it through yet another loop of equalization during playback is still degrading it further.

Audio is a fun thing and I'm serious about it but sometimes I think it is fun to change it around to my liking, even if it does add noise etc. At the end of the day though all the toys get put back in the closet.

madmax

Mother Mooch

madmax wrote:

Another point was made that most everything we listen to has been run through some form of equalization before it was recorded.

Although this is true, running it through yet another loop of equalization during playback is still degrading it further.

Audio is a fun thing and I'm serious about it but sometimes I think it is fun to change it around to my liking, even if it does add noise etc. At the end of the day though all the toys get put back in the closet.

madmax

Very good point Mr Madmax... I have fiddled with this Eq thing long enough! As you said, i am putting it back in the closet and going back to original set up!

treitz3

Mother Mooch wrote:

Very good point Mr Madmax... I have fiddled with this Eq thing long enough! As you said, i am putting it back in the closet and going back to original set up!

*dancing* YEAH!!!:D

scottnbnj

Mother Mooch wrote:

...BUT still have issues with muddy mid bass and harsh high end...

wait a second. did i miss something? is that this system?

)

Mother Mooch

scottnbnj wrote:

wait a second. did i miss something? is that this system?

)

I was playing around with my set up last night and came to the conclusion that i will deal with the muddy midbass and harsh highs as long as i drink more beer!

What i was doing was running my cd player thru my old JVC reciever (as a pre amp) with the inboard Eq... It did cut down some of the highs and tighten up the bass a bit, but lacked that good quality imaging from the Polks, So i stripped everything back off, hook up the cd player direct and ****, it sounded better than i remember!
I just sold my house, So i am going to be getting some money from the sale, So i'll be looking at buying a real amp and cd player!

Cheers
Steve

scottnbnj

got it. congrats on your sale and good luck on your buys.

)

reeltrouble1

Mother Mooch wrote:

So i'll be looking at buying a real amp and cd player!
Cheers
Steve

You might want spend your new wealth on the Chord Mono-blocks.

Just Kidding,

Congrats on the sale.

RT1

Mother Mooch

reeltrouble1 wrote:

You might want spend your new wealth on the Chord Mono-blocks.

Just Kidding,

Congrats on the sale.

RT1

I suspect they are VERY expensive? But i will say this, most of you will be involved in my purchase some way or another!

I am not going to go expensive ( 500 for amp and pre ) and couple hundred more on a cd player... So i will need a LOT of advice...

Steve

Mother Mooch

scottnbnj wrote:

got it. congrats on your sale and good luck on your buys.

)

Thanks Scott and like I just told Reeltrouble... I will be needing advice SOON...