View Full Version : Debate - Who uses Treble and bass on their amplifiers
dantheman91
09-05-2012, 14:07
Hi
As above i personally love a flat sound with no bass and treble on because its a natural sound the way its supposed to be.
Come on guys have your say what you think.
:lol:
Never owned am amp with tone controls yet! Don't inted to start.
Whoops, just realised my arcam has em but they've never been used.
Thing Fish
09-05-2012, 14:40
My amps don't have them either. Can't say I miss them.
I bet that Andre and Jerry are just dying to answer this one! :eyebrows:
I'm an audio 'purist' until death, so I'd no sooner use tone controls, than as a gourmet and wine connoisseur, I'd eat oven chips, washed down with Lambrini!! ;)
Marco.
prestonchipfryer
09-05-2012, 14:57
The last time I used 'tone' controls was in the 1980s. Quad 34 followed by a 44. And even then they were not so effective. Don't think they're needed really for a well balanced system.
:)
dantheman91
09-05-2012, 15:06
The last time I used 'tone' controls was in the 1980s. Quad 34 followed by a 44. And even then they were not so effective. Don't think they're needed really for a well balanced system.
:)
Hi
My thoughts exactly
icehockeyboy
09-05-2012, 15:55
Last few years worth of amps sans EQ, but I often wonder if using it (equalisation) would save on "upgrading" stuff so regularly!
hifi_dave
09-05-2012, 15:57
I haven't seen a modern 'Hi-Fi' amp with tone controls for donkeys' years. Plenty of vintage and home cinema with all manner of controls but not 'Hi-Fi'.
I have come to the conclusion that I am not and never will be a true "audiophile". I clearly like a coloured sound and have been using an MF X-Tone for years. It will never leave my system.
snuffbox
09-05-2012, 16:21
Oh come on what about those lovely add on equalisers you used to get in the seventies,the ones with all those slidey controls on the front so you could make pretty patterns with them.
You mean they weren't to be loved.;)
Surely no hifi was complete without one.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/JVC-SEA-20-GRAPHIC-EQUALIZER-HI-FI-SEPARATES-AUDIO-/270966706893?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Other&hash=item3f16dfd2cd
seoirse2002
09-05-2012, 16:33
Well,I agree to a point.....as long as your source is supplying that "natural" sound to the amplifier and the amp is reproducing that to the speakers....and the speakers are reproducing all that to your ears....and all "faithfully" as the artist intended?....of course there is also the effects and compression etc. used in the recording studio before mastering...
Doubt it...but if the sound is pleasing to you...thats all that matters...
I think flat is just that.....flat.....I used to live in a falt and my sound was great there:cool:
But seriously,imho I find it all depends on the quality of source material,turntable,cd,sb,amps,interconnects,speake r cable,speakers...room acoustics, blah blah....oops! I forgot mains cables,conditioners,dacs, etc etc
I dont know any successful artists who sing flat..reverb rules.:cool:
Used to work in a hi fi shop in my teens.....owner became a millionaire:lol:
dantheman91
09-05-2012, 16:40
Used to work in a hi fi shop in my teens.....owner became a millionaire:lol:[/QUOTE]
Hi
Interesting allright for some eh:eyebrows:
RobbieGong
09-05-2012, 16:42
Use tone controls on my amp most certainly and dont have a problem. Would definately rather listen to a system with tone controls as opposed to one without but sounding 'natural' for want of a much better word to the point of sounding sterile / bland which I've heard. Tone controls have their place for me, I also dont have an issue with an equalizer either in a good sytem :eek: as long as the frequency sliders are not all to the hilt and have been set with a balanced approach. My system sounds wonderful to my ears and have lost count of the number of people who have listened to my system and commented on how lovely the system / music sounds and that includes people who have no real interest in hifi. Each to their own. I trust my ears and nothing else - Oh and by the way and dont do overly bright - again it's about balance - Right, I've said mi tuppence worth - Who's next lol :D
jazzpiano
09-05-2012, 17:01
Hello,
I think all equipment probably "interprets" the music,so while I don't have them, I have no problem with whatever if it helps you get into the music. Plus, if you have early, pre-RIAA standardized curve records, say '51 - '53, you may need a little boost here or there to hear the "magic". Play on.
Best,
Barry
If you've got 'em & (in your opinion) they make your system sound better why not use 'em (& 'to the hilt' if you want to!)
http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss68/Lodger56/ge.jpg
Reid Malenfant
09-05-2012, 17:06
What's a tone control? :scratch:
:lol:
Sorry, I haven't got one, or is that two & sometimes (rarely three) or a graphic equaliser :D
seoirse2002
09-05-2012, 17:06
yea...
Without tone controls,means without control of what you hear...Ive seen too many people spend fortunes trying to get "that" sound when a little tweak of a knob or slider would have done the job...its in our nature to always want better...but who says?....The ears have it... and in certain cases the eyes as well...
I think all equipment probably "interprets" the music, so while I don't have them, I have no problem with whatever if it helps you get into the music.
Exactly, Barry! All systems act intinsically as 'tone controls' by superimposing their sonic signature onto the music that they reproduce, although some do this more than others... The effect is a by-product of the various components used, altering (to varying degrees) the integrity of the music signal.
The fact is, there ain't no such thing as a truly transparent piece of kit, or system!
Therefore, far better to alter or change a component and/or the cables in your existing system, in order to achieve the balance you want, than to add another box, with tone controls, which simply adds distortion onto the distortion which was already there in the first place! ;)
All you're doing is applying a bandage - and a poor one, at that.
Marco.
I haven't had tone controls since a Trio amp I sold in the 80's and even then they were always set at 12 o'clock.
But there have been occasions when I would have used them, if I had them ;)
The Vinyl Adventure
09-05-2012, 18:49
Does this count
http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww282/hamish_gill/f1bf4eb4.jpg
I've tweaked these to suit my tastes ... I'm happy my speakers have them as its meant I can reposition them and adjust things accordingly... They are there, so I use them, and why not I say!
Don't have them but just maybe they might help tweekers of cables an such.
I belive that you have to keep changing cables to adjust the sound then maybe you have bought the wrong system for you.
dantheman91
09-05-2012, 19:38
Hi
Some interesting responces guys keep em commin
RobbieGong
09-05-2012, 19:42
Hi
Some interesting responces guys keep em commin
Best hifi forum in the world, what do you expect ?!! :eyebrows: ;) :D
dantheman91
09-05-2012, 19:46
Best hifi forum in the world, what do you expect ?!! :eyebrows: ;) :D
Hi
:lol:
Beechwoods
09-05-2012, 19:48
:yay:
I haven't had tone controls on my equipment since the mid 1970s.
Mark Grant
09-05-2012, 19:55
If you've got 'em & (in your opinion) they make your system sound better why not use 'em (& 'to the hilt' if you want to!)
http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss68/Lodger56/ge.jpg
My first and only graphic equaliser was a Technics SH-8046 back in the 80's, it looked good when I was about 23 :)
wish I had kept it in the loft rather than selling it...
hgzYacIH9_Y
If you've got 'em & (in your opinion) they make your system sound better why not use 'em (& 'to the hilt' if you want to!)
Sure... Similarly, if it sounds better listening to it dressed in sailor suit, sucking on a Satsuma, whilst whistling Dixie, then who are we to criticise? :D
Marco.
Sure... Similarly, if it sounds better listening to it dressed in sailor suit, sucking on a Satsuma, whilst whistling Dixie, then who are we to criticise? :D
Marco.
Is there a hidden camera somewhere in this room? (it's a tangerine by the way)
RobbieGong
09-05-2012, 20:20
I have this one Mark, the Techinics SH 8055 Vintage and I love it. http://www.hifidatabase.com/Detailed/Technics_SH-8055_4038.php
Tone controls in a system a sticking plaster ? I say no. There are some wonderful amps with tone controls incorporated no question. My flagship Technics SU VX800 has a very large power supply (2 x 130 watts pc at 8ohms, 2 x 180 watts pc at 4 ohms,) Twin Professional Oxygen Free Transformers and Twin Professional Oxygen Free Capacitors for starters and does give you the option of tone control bypass if that floats your boat. An amp of this spec and quality components shows the intent of the maker for quality hifi. With regards to equalizers I would totally agree that the trade off is you impart some distortion. I find I can detect a slight hiss starting to occur with no music playing when I turn the amp to about the 10 to point with the eq engaged which would obviously increase the more the volume is increased from this point, (Not a prob for me as any music at this level is very loud indeed, too loud for my normal listening anyway). Switch the eq off and the amp will literally go all the way round without any hiss. I can switch off the eq spectrum analyser light show which reduces the hiss a little, hence I'd love to find a way to out the 24 red lights on each frequency slider rather than ditch the eq because those lights are more of a problem re: imparting any distortion / noise floor over tone controls in my experience.
technobear
09-05-2012, 20:34
Unfortunately not all CDs are created equal. Most of my collection sounds good straight out of the CD player but I have a few CDs that just don't have enough bass. I also have a few that have too much.
On these occasions I whip the headphone plug out of the Audiolab and put it in the Kenwood. Fortunately the Kenwood has very good stepped tone controls - no nasty pots here - and one step of bass boost or cut as required makes all the difference. It also helps that the Kenwood is running in class A at headphone levels and sounds almost indistinguishable from the source.
WOStantonCS100
09-05-2012, 20:47
I don't have any tone controls on my preamp.
However, I use a simple Technics SH-8017 equalizer between pre and power to flatten out the frequency response of the room at the listening position. Set optimally, all I do now is turn it on or off. I also wouldn't say extensively using eq is wrong. We all hear differently. Whatever gives the most enjoyment...
RobbieGong
09-05-2012, 21:07
I don't have any tone controls on my preamp.
However, I use a simple Technics SH-8017 equalizer between pre and power to flatten out the frequency response of the room at the listening position. Set optimally, all I do now is turn it on or off. I also wouldn't say extensively using eq is wrong. We all hear differently. Whatever gives the most enjoyment...My sentiments exactly AND from experience. Set according to taste I believe they can complement a system. They were actually made to also allow the hi fi user to adjust to suit room etc
Is anyone keeping score? :eyebrows:
yes i have them and yes i use them as chris (technobear states if all cd's were the same i probably wouldn't but their not , and yes like chris stepped att's on the sansui
My sentiments exactly AND from experience. Set according to taste I believe they can complement a system. They were actually made to also allow the hi fi user to adjust to suit room etc
Yes, but why not address those problems, 'at source' instead, by using different or better equipment and ancillaries, and/or employing passive room correction treatment, than shoving a box in afterwards, as a bandage, that only succeeds in mangling the music signal?
Are we *really* into hi-fi, guys, (remember what it stands for?) or simply creating a nice noise? If it's the latter, then why be a member of a specialist audio forum, like this, where the aim is to strive for high-fidelity, other than of course for the inimitable banter and entertainment value! :D
Marco.
Rare Bird
09-05-2012, 21:43
I bet that Andre and Jerry are just dying to answer this one! :eyebrows:
Tone controls a go go :lol:
I have tone controls on the simplified main system. useless for the speakers, they worked a treat on the Sennheisers until I accidentally fried them a short while ago :( The loudness switch, which is calibrated to volume control level, is perfect for the old HD414's I'm currently using..
Stratmangler
09-05-2012, 21:51
Yes, but why not address those problems, 'at source' by using different or better equipment and ancillaries, and/or employing passive room correction treatment, than shoving a box in, afterwards as a bandage, that succeeds in mangling the music signal?
Lets not be too precious about the signal, eh?
You'd have a fit if you saw the amount of processing and conversions taking place in a recording and mastering environment.
Are we *really* into hi-fi, guys, (remember what it stands for?) or simply creating a nice noise? If it's the latter, then why be a member of a specialist audio forum, like this, where the aim is to strive for high-fidelity, other than of course for the inimitable banter and entertainment value! :D
Marco.
I'm in it for music first and music last.
I've got some more than adequate stuff to play the software on, so I'm very happy.
I find myself spending more time playing this these days.
Might even get off my backside and join/put a band together, and get out doing it.
http://doremishop.vn/files/Fender/1332335383_Fen_AM_Dlx_Strat_HSS__RW__Olympic_Pearl .jpg
Of course, I enjoy some of the banter here, so I don't intend going anywhere ;)
what's wrong with nice noise & banter :D
WOStantonCS100
09-05-2012, 21:52
Yes, but why not address those problems, 'at source' by using different or better equipment and ancillaries, and/or employing passive room correction treatment, than shoving a box in afterwards, as a bandage, that succeeds in mangling the music signal?
Are we *really* into hi-fi, guys, (remember what it stands for?) or simply creating a nice noise? If it's the latter, then why be a member of a specialist audio forum, like this, where the aim is to strive for high-fidelity, other than of course for the inimitable banter and entertainment value! :D
Marco.
In my old listening room, things were far more manageable. I used room treatments in the corners and in general the room was more conducive to my system; and eq wasn't necessary. My system is now in my living room and getting good sound has been a challenge to say the least. It is a completely different space in every conceivable way. :( An EQ was the last resort and the only way to tame a narrow band of resonances. Sometimes (not all the time) passive room correction effects a wider band of frequencies than desired. A good eq (especially a professional eq) can very specifically pinpoint trouble frequencies without affecting a wide swath (much more precise than just high/mid/low). Live venues are tuned this way routinely and automatic feedback destroyers (from what I've heard work similarly); a very valuable tool. Ideally I still prefer no eq; but, life's complicated. :)
Agreed too that some recordings are mastered so poorly it prompts one to run screaming for tone controls and/or eq sliders (if you have them). It's kind of like running for the stereo/mono switch when running up against those early "extreme stereo" recordings (musicians on the left, vocals on the right... :doh: ). I record those type of LP's on reel than hit the mono switch on playback.
Hi Biff,
A good eq (especially a professional eq) can very specifically pinpoint trouble frequencies without affecting a wide swath (much more precise than just high/mid/low).
Sure, I get that, providing that you can live with the sonic signature and distortion added by the eq device - and that is always the case, thus, as usual, it's simply a matter of choosing your compromises. There ain't no 'free lunch'! :)
I have an extremely 'wide-open', wide bandwidth system, which shines a very bright spotlight on both recording deficiencies and the increased distortion of adding any eq device. I simply could not live with the latter.
However, it handles the former in a way which doesn't detract from music still being enjoyable to listen to - just not as enjoyable as the best recordings are! That, for me, is a trick that only the best systems do - and almost all of those, in my experience, complicate the signal path in the least way possible.
Agreed too that some recordings are mastered so poorly it prompts one to run screaming for tone controls and/or eq sliders (if you have them).
I honestly have never experienced a problem as bad as that with any system I've had. Sure, I can hear when recordings are shit, but the systems I've put together always succeed in getting the 'musical message' across, regardless.
Maybe I've just been lucky? :cool:
Marco.
My amplification doesn't have tone controls and my attitude is that they have no place in hi-fi. There are more effective ways of making gross tonal shifts to the sound as a whole - if that is what you want to do!
My amplification doesn't have tone controls and my attitude is that they have no place in hi-fi. There are more effective ways of making gross tonal shifts to the sound as a whole - if that is what you want to do!
Indeed. Where have you been, daftee? You've been rather quiet of late, as has Simon... :)
Marco.
A few of my preamps had tone controls, the ones I use now don't. I rarely if ever used them.
Tone controls were originally introduced to try to compensate for the shortcomings in recording. At that time they were not used to compensate for system inbalance, nor listening room aberations.
The problem with the traditional Baxandall tone control circuitry was it was too crude, offered a ludicrous range of cut or lift and generally buggered up the sound. Even when set at level or 12 'o clock, their presence intruded, and if you could do so, were best switched out (by, for example, using the 'Cancel' control on the Quad 33 preamp).
Quad later introduced a 'Tilt' control on their 44 preamp. This effectivly rotated or pivoted the frequency response around ~ 1kHz by either +/- 1 or 2dB. This was only a little better, but I did find it an occasionally useful facility. Again for example, I have always found the recording of Shirley Collins's 'For the Roses' rather 'thick' sounding. Tilting the response so the bass is down by 1dB and the treble lifted by 1dB helped.
Tone controls disappeared with the advent of graphic equalisers. Even the sanctimonious Naim originally claimed their preamps were not fitted with tone controls, because they expected their preamplifier to be used with a graphic equaliser. Not because tone controls (of which a graphic equaliser is but an example) degraded the signal.
Even graphic equalisers have their problems - they are likely to introduce intrusive phase shifts.
But let's not become too smug about the use of 'tone controls'. They don't have to be electronic and alter the response of the system up to and including the speakers. They can be passive and be used to alter the response of the listening room. This is what 'bass traps' do, as do the egg boxes or pieces of carpet some people fit to their walls or ceiling. They are all in their way altering the frequency response of the entire system, including the room; and as such are 'tone controls'. It's just that they are not readily adjustable.
BTH K10A
09-05-2012, 22:26
Although my preamp has none, some of the best preamps ever made had tone controls.
As long as they have a defeat function I see no problem with having them. Properly executed they can provide a solution to numerous issues such as recording anomolies, room resonant frequencies etc.
One of the best systems I ever heard used two parametric equalisers to resolve a few room issues and produced a fabulous balanced presentation af all genre of music.
Rare Bird
09-05-2012, 22:28
Although my preamp has none, some of the best preamps ever made had tone controls.
:thumbsup:
End of the day if you use Tone control thats fine, no one else is listerning to your stereo but you. I mean i don't go decorating the living room in what colour the mothering law feels comfortable in! :)
I know i'll get shot down for this but i believe the reason people swap & change amps like they are going out of fashion is because they are not happy with the flat as a fart level, no tone control to put this right, the only option is to jump out of the frying pan & buy yet another tone controless amplifier :D but if people get kicks out of what they hear in the flat world they are more than welcome..
I gotta say ive owned quite a few Tone controless amp & heard many ive never liked a single one of em..
WOStantonCS100
09-05-2012, 22:28
I honestly have never experienced a problem as bad as that with any system I've had. Sure, I can hear when recordings are shit, but the systems I've put together always succeed in getting the 'musical message' across, regardless.
Maybe I've just been lucky? :cool:
Marco.
Hey, Marco
Maybe I'm just drawn to the bad ones?
Michael Franks - Skin Dive: digitally recorded LP, I like the music, sonics make me wanna heave
Racer X - Second Heat: 80's CD, no bass, all tinny treble, beyond horrible... if your system can make that sound even passable... :youtheman: and much :respect:
Etta James - At Last: reissue LP
Johnny Watson - I Cried For You: original Canadian pressing
I can't listen to these (fake stereo) with the cans on, extremely irritating. I would have to sit completely off axis (like another room) to enjoy these without the mono switch engaged. What were they thinking? I know... "oooooo... new toy..." :)
Hi Chris,
Lets not be too precious about the signal, eh?
You'd have a fit if you saw the amount of processing and conversions taking place in a recording and mastering environment.
Yes, but once is enough! You don't need to recreate the same process at home when reproducing those recordings through a hi-fi system.
Indeed, if the goal is, as far as possible, fidelity to the sound which left the studio (count me in), I.E. whatever musical information/sound is already on the record or disc in your possession, then buggering about with that is exactly what you should NOT be doing... ;)
I'm in it for music first and music last.
That's cool. However, I appreciate good sound as much as I do great music, otherwise I wouldn't be doing what I do, or be a hi-fi enthusiast as well as a music lover.
I find myself spending more time playing this these days.
Might even get off my backside and join/put a band together, and get out doing it.
Just do it, mate. I envy all musicians. I'd love to have the patience and talent to play an instrument to a reasonable standard.
Of course, I enjoy some of the banter here, so I don't intend going anywhere
Nice one - and you know that we enjoy having you here! :cool:
Marco.
I know i'll get shot down for this but i believe the reason people swap & change amps like they are going out of fashion is because they are not happy with the flat as a fart level, no tone control to put this right, the only option is to jump out of the frying pan & buy yet another tone controless amplifier...
I totally agree. However, the reason you'll never see me do that is because I know exactly what I want from a system, and crucially, how to achieve it! ;)
As such, it'll be a long time before you see me changing my amps, or indeed any major part of my current system.
Marco.
maxrob200
09-05-2012, 22:51
I've never used them in the home but lots of "tone" needed for the car environment! Always too bright for my tastes.
I suppose rooms do need EQ and well designed equalisers can ameliorate woeful room acoustics
I remeber fondly the good ole' 1/3 Octave Parametric Equalisers from Luxman and Pioneer (et al) where the Smiley Face was the preferred setting for DJ and studio guys back in th 70's
The Vinyl Adventure
10-05-2012, 06:44
I'm intrigued to know what the folk who are against tone controls (or i suppose room eq controls in my situation)
I bought my active speakers based on a home dem, they sounded absolutely spot on right out of the box
I then knocked a wall out of my living room and repositioned the speakers .. The system sounded completely different, and not quite as good as it had done previously! I adjusted the room eq on te speakers ad returned it to a sound I liked - actually somewhere between the two presentations which. I prefered to the first one
What would you have done? Bought a different system?
What would you have done? Bought a different system?
Nope - changed the room treatment.
Rare Bird
10-05-2012, 07:41
But why.
What would you have done? Bought a different system?
It seems this is what folk seem to do in most instances! on the other hand i for one cannot be arsed to keep changing cables & amplifiers till my system sounds right in the enviroment i listern, all for the sake of a flat responce & i for one dont want to hear about the 'masking a problem' bullshyte..
If the anti tone control mob walked into a room & heard a system they thought sounded fantastic but noticed the amp using tone controls they would still slag it off regardless.. :doh:
I think id rather listern to some wholesome music slightly adjusted to my taste instead of flat lifeless music.People should stop living with technical ideals & start using their ears :D
It's all very well getting the sound YOU want, but the secret is in being able to get a sound for others that THEY want :lol:
I think id rather listern to some wholesome music slightly adjusted to my taste instead of flat lifeless music.People should stop living with technical ideals & start using their ears :D
I completely agree, Andr'e. The only difference is that I adjust the room (and my TubeTrap tuning) rather than using tone controls that I don't have.
The Vinyl Adventure
10-05-2012, 07:47
That would require me to have some ... That would require me to get it past Hannah ... And that wouldn't happen!
I suppose my point is that maybe in an ideal world we might all have the time, budget, room, understanding other half and know enough different shops to try as vast array of kit enough to determin what's right in our room and for us ... But in my world, that's just not a reality! In my reality have some subtle room eq controls is a much more viable option than any of the alternatives ...
One of the other considerations is that we haven't all got fortunes to spend on changing/upgrading our kit
Rare Bird
10-05-2012, 08:00
I completely agree, Andr'e. The only difference is that I adjust the room
Well in my case & i guess a hell of a lot of married men use the living room which is not just my room but the wifes, she doesnt want to see ugly room adjustments nor do i tbh, & as Hamish points out, time buget & other things are more important.. If this hobby is more of an obsession, fine! over kill the hobby with ideals like most hobbyist's do,thats your choice, but people, don't throw the 'Tone Controls' are wrong down people throughts that aint into the hobby in the same kind of way.
There aint no rights or wrongs, it's what pleases your ear at the end of the day. This is why i would never have an hifi contact in my home listerning to my stereo because i don't want to hear what they think to it..
Hi dude,
If the anti tone control mob walked into a room & heard a system they thought sounded fantastic but noticed the amp using tone controls they would still slag it off regardless..
Well, I wouldn't. If the system had sounded "fantastic", then I'd have willingly acknowledged it as such, as that's what my ears would've obviously told me at the time - simples! :)
However, that doesn't mean to say that the system wouldn't have sounded even more "fantastic", if the amp had been substituted by another (possibly better) one, minus tone controls... ;)
I think id rather listern to some wholesome music slightly adjusted to my taste instead of flat lifeless music.
But how do you know that people, like me (for example) using high-quality, very carefully selected amps, without tone controls, aren't listening to "wholesome music"? You haven't heard our systems....
You're confusing the personal (and valid) experiences you'd had, with amps without tone controls, with the contrary (and equally valid) experiences others have had with similar (although most likely very different) amps.
I can assure you, dude, that the last thing I'd tolerate listening to is "flat lifeless music"! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Hi Hamish,
I'm intrigued to know what the folk who are against tone controls (or i suppose room eq controls in my situation)
I bought my active speakers based on a home dem, they sounded absolutely spot on right out of the box
I then knocked a wall out of my living room and repositioned the speakers .. The system sounded completely different, and not quite as good as it had done previously! I adjusted the room eq on te speakers ad returned it to a sound I liked - actually somewhere between the two presentations which. I prefered to the first one
What would you have done? Bought a different system?
Nope, you did what you should've done, and were able to do, given the nature of the system you're using.
Tuning an active system to work properly in a specific room, is a different thing from applying a bandage to a passive system, in the form of an EQ device, in order to mask (sorry, Andre) inherent problems elsewhere.
If you'd shoved a passive EQ device in between your source and speakers, in order to attempt 'solving' the problem, then it'd have been different. Active systems require a different thinking and set of priorities, in order to be optimised, as you have done, so you're off the hook, amigo! ;)
What I would stress is that people are entitled to create whatever form of 'pleasurable sound', with their systems, that they wish. At the end of the day, it's all about enjoying a sound with your favourite music that YOUR ears consider as being 'right'.
However, if it involves manipulating the music signal, by introducing a passive EQ device/tone controls into the chain, just don't call the end result 'hi-fi', simply because, by definition, it isn't.
Marco.
RobbieGong
10-05-2012, 12:11
I still dont see the use of tone conrols as a bandage masking an inherant problem. Good kit is good kit tone controls or otherwise. Therefore and in the context of good kit and anxilleries there's more than one way to skin a rabbit In this game we all know ultimately it's about using your ears. People go about what they want to achieve in hifi in different ways for different reasons some already expressed in above posts. If I listen to a system and the music flows and plays in a relatively natural, dynamic, cohesive, transparent and detailed manner also giving me a sense of getting inside the individuality of each recording whilst displaying good seperation of instruments / parts then that system will float my boat regardless of the factor of tone or non tone controls. If it sounds 'right' then it sounds 'right' Right ?!! :lol:
anthonyTD
10-05-2012, 12:14
Tone controls can be an advantage when dealing with an inviroment that is difficult to get a resonably flat response from equipment, however, i personaly dont use or make equipment with tone adjustments, mainly because the added circuitry complications can be detremental to the over-all performance of the equipment, yes its perfectly posible with most preamp circuits to switch out the tone circuits but again its added complication that most people would rather do without.
Anthony,TD...
Hi Rob,
I still dont see the use of tone conrols as a bandage masking an inherant problem.
Simply because you're 'correcting' problems heard with the sound, by injecting distortion into the signal path (which is what happens as soon as you use the tone controls on an amp), rather than fixing the problem properly 'at source'.
For example, if you have a boomy bass, then rather than reducing the bass output of your amp, via its tone controls, fix the room issue instead, which is causing the boomy bass, and/or use different speakers, reposition them, or whatever, to remove or reduce (as far as possible) the bass boom.
That is called fixing the problem 'at source' - and it's the most effective way of doing it, as there are no 'side effects' with any genuine improvements gained.
EQ's and tone controls are a simply a lazy way of 'fixing' a problem (they don't actually do that; merely alter the sound so that the issue becomes more tolerable), although I appreciate that it's the only way some people can achieve the sound that they like, quickly, cheaply and unobtrusively :)
Marco.
Hi
As above i personally love a flat sound with no bass and treble on because its a natural sound the way its supposed to be.
Come on guys have your say what you think.
:lol:
Not strictly true in that the ear responds to bass and treble differently at different volume levels.
So in reality, if you want things to be flat at low levels, you need a good variable loudness control ! The one on my Tandberg pre is/was good and the digital one in my Meridian 601 was good too.
Sometimes I'd like some tone controls though because of room interactions, bass booms to control late at night so the neighbours don't complain.
Rare Bird
10-05-2012, 12:49
But how do you know that people, like me (for example) using high-quality, very carefully selected amps, without tone controls, aren't listening to "wholesome music"? You haven't heard our systems....
You're confusing the personal (and valid) experiences you'd had, with amps without tone controls, with the contrary (and equally valid) experiences others have had with similar (although most likely very different) amps.
It's me again :lol:
If your happy great stuff..that must be why you keep changing bits :eyebrows:
How many toneless control amps do i have to own & listern to (even ones ive heard that were suppose to be carefully matched with the rest of a system) to proove i do not like Tone controless amplifiers? I need the tone controls to give me what i want right there & then (ME not anyone else)...
I mean the last bake off i visited :rolleyes: if those Hi-Fi systems are what audio is suppose to sound like regardless of the room enviroment they were in (typical excuse) then i must have the best sounding stereo ever, because to me they were just so horrid it's beggars belief. :D
However this topic hopefully isnt going to turn nasty as i believe it could with the right members..At the end of the day (a term i like to use) It's the people slating Tone controls that gets right up my arse. I mean if people are absolutly happy with what they hear with a tone control whats the problem with anyone else? Last thing i need is lecturing by members about tone controls like i'm thick or something, i know exactly what Tone control do.
If people had a good EQ to hand, as part of their audio tool box so to speak, I think people would learn that many subjective feelings about their gear was down to frequency response (probably many down to room interactions they're not aware of).
This is only a hunch but I'd like to see what I could change - make something more 'musical' by emphasising some part of the mid-range, give more treble sparkle by tweeking some high frequencies.
I'd also like a phase control box to adjust phases at certain frequencies and ranges for the same reasons.
Without these tools, how do we know what we should change without proper knowledge and experience?
Does anyone know if there is a studio tool for adjusting phase over frequency ranges?
Beobloke
10-05-2012, 13:26
My amp has no tone controls and I haven't used an amplifer in my main system for years that has. I also believe that they should not be strictly necessary in a well balanced system that is optimally set up in a properly treated room whilst playing high quality source material.
Sadly, very few people are able to have all of the above and so judicious use of well designed and subtle tone controls is often highly advantageous - I've done it myself in the past and have no problem with it. Sadly some tone controls are far from subtle!
But let's not become too smug about the use of 'tone controls'. They don't have to be electronic and alter the response of the system up to and including the speakers. They can be passive and be used to alter the response of the listening room. This is what 'bass traps' do, as do the egg boxes or pieces of carpet some people fit to their walls or ceiling. They are all in their way altering the frequency response of the entire system, including the room; and as such are 'tone controls'. It's just that they are not readily adjustable.
And by changing cables and supports and blah blah, speaker positioning - all tweeking in fact.
So are we talking about controlling tone or are we talking about seperate electronic tone control circuits?
The former, people have no qualms about. When you move speaker position or change room treatments, unless you're measuring for flat response each time with proper equipment, you're doing nothing more than changing tone to suit taste (disregaring the possible results on stereo of course).
The latter - well... maybe people aren't thinking things through? With vinyl you are already using EQ - the RIAA correction. Is that adding distortion?
Yes, but you have to live with it and get the best you can. If you have to use RIAA EQ anyway, then why can't you adjust this? You won't be adding any extra circuitry will you? FM acoustics do (did?) something like this but was supposed to be for tweeking to match the curves used in each pressing - which is acceptable and has a good nerdy justification yet is physically no different to changing curve to suit taste.
Digitally I'd say that, perfectly done, digital EQ to a digital signal won't add distortion at all. Whether the algorythms are perfect is a matter for your own choice in gear. You'd also want it to be within the DAC rather than adding another box and all the potential extra interface hang-ups you might have. There are so many other things going on in the digital domain for example error correction and oversampling etc that mostly those might have a larger effect, particularly on-chip upsampling algorythms (different if you're going down an Audio Note style digital purist route).
When you reduce arguments to discover that people are really arguing over something very specific (whether the tone control is specifically an added electronic box or not, in this case), the whole argument looks rediculous and people hopefully agree to differ slightly.
I haven't had tone controls since a Trio amp I sold in the 80's and even then they were always set at 12 o'clock.
Congratulations on overcoming the OCD! I've not come across this time based tone adjustment one before..
Must be a real pain to feel the need to change the controls at noon each day..
Did it need to be plugged in at home or could you take it with you?
dantheman91
10-05-2012, 13:39
Hi
I think i may have started something here :scratch:
Interesting results lads. i dont use the tone controls because my system well balanced i love it. :D
I have always owned amplifiers with tone controls but have never used them each to there own if it sounds good to me i dont care what anyone else thinks thats all that matters.
Hi
I think i may have started something here :scratch:
Interesting results lads. i dont use the tone controls because my system well balanced i love it. :D
I have always owned amplifiers with tone controls but have never used them each to there own if it sounds good to me i dont care what anyone else thinks thats all that matters.
Hehe - you'll always be starting something here! People love a good vibrant discussion.
If you use vinyl then you are definately using some EQ - just that they haven't allowed you any control..
jandl100
10-05-2012, 13:47
Ah well, time to have my say, I guess. :)
Tone controls were originally introduced to try to compensate for the shortcomings in recording. At that time they were not used to compensate for system inbalance, nor listening room aberations.
Yup, exactement, mes amis.
To me, there is nothing sacrasanct about a recording.
I totally agree. However, the reason you'll never see me do that is because I know exactly what I want from a system, and crucially, how to achieve it! ;)
OK, so I don't use an equaliser on my main digital source (CD player), but everything else goes thru my trusty Akai 7 band equaliser. Yup, even my vinyl. :D
Old classical LPs are often too bright and scrawny sounding. Some are the opposite and dull and rolled off. I don't really want to replicate that if I can avoid it. The equaliser allows me to avoid it. Simples. :thumbsup: With the equaliser set to flat it sounds just fine to me. I reckon they can be pretty much transparent. I hear no distortion or wrongness - and I'm as nutty as anyone else here, I reckon, and I wouldn't put up with inferior audio component if I didn't have to.
Far too many recordings are less than perfect. Especially older ones on vinyl. So why not give them a helpful nudge to make them better? Sure, you can suffer for the sake of an imagined and self-delusional concept of "purity" - but why would you want to? It genuinely baffles me that so many folks kid themselves on this issue.
Sure, I would guess that 75% or so of my LP collection needs no 'correction' but I have some wonderful vintage classical LPs that benefit massively from being equalised. It's the difference between wanting to listen to an album and not wanting to. The music comes first not audiophile self-obsessed purity. ;)
I also use the equaliser in place of Dobly B noise reduction for my pre-recorded cassettes. The Dolby B "standard" isn't for a lot of pre-recorded tapes - and tuning in just the right amouint of treble reduction can work major wonders in musical enjoyment for these as well.
dantheman91
10-05-2012, 13:48
Hehe - you'll always be starting something here! People love a good vibrant discussion.
If you use vinyl then you are definately using some EQ - just that they haven't allowed you any control..
:lol: love this forum.
Sure, you can suffer for the sake of an imagined and self-delusional concept of "purity" - but why would you want to? It genuinely baffles me that so many folks kid themselves on this issue.
Exactly!:cool:
How many toneless control amps do i have to own & listern to (even ones ive heard that were suppose to be carefully matched with the rest of a system) to proove i do not like Tone controless amplifiers? I need the tone controls to give me what i want right there & then (ME not anyone else)...
I mean the last bake off i visited if those Hi-Fi systems are what audio is suppose to sound like regardless of the room enviroment they were in (typical excuse) then i must have the best sounding stereo ever, because to me they were just so horrid it's beggars belief.
However this topic hopefully isnt going to turn nasty as i believe it could with the right members..At the end of the day (a term i like to use) It's the people slating Tone controls that gets right up my arse. I mean if people are absolutly happy with what they hear with a tone control whats the problem with anyone else? Last thing i need is lecturing by members about tone controls like i'm thick or something, i know exactly what Tone control do.
Dude,
I don't have one single problem with what you've written above. My prevous post was simply in response to this:
I think id rather listern to some wholesome music slightly adjusted to my taste instead of flat lifeless music.
...and to point out, not to assume that all amplifier's without tone controls, particularly what I'm using myself, produces "flat lifeless music", when that is FAR from being the case.
That's it - as you were! :)
Marco.
P.S I periodically change 'bits' in my system, not because I'm unhappy with the sound of my system, but simply to further increase its sonic performance. There is a difference.
Personally I've always preferred amps without tone controls but hey, that's just me ;)
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 14:48
Old classical LPs are often too bright and scrawny sounding. Some are the opposite and dull and rolled off
Sounds like a classic case of the wrong EQ being applied by the phono stage.
That's why Graham Slee came up with these
http://www.phonostagepreamp.com/images/jazz-club-365.jpg
http://www.phonostagepreamp.com/images/revelation-365.jpg
Hi Jerry,
Sure, you can suffer for the sake of an imagined and self-delusional concept of "purity" - but why would you want to? It genuinely baffles me that so many folks kid themselves on this issue.
Well, in my case, there's nothing "self-delusional" about it. It's simply the results of my valid listening experience, to date, over many years.
Let's put it this way: I'm no more kidding myself on that I can clearly hear the distortion caused by using a passive EQ device or tone controls, in my system, than you can clearly hear "no distortion or wrongness", with them in yours... ;)
I've tried it umpteen times in the past, matey, and every time, the same thing happens! Ok, in reference to purity, please tell me which of the following gives the most 'pure', unadulterated, taste of potato (not what you prefer the taste of):
A) Chips with ketchup and vinegar smothered all over them.
B) Chips, 'au naturel', with no ketchup or vinegar.
Your answer should state simply 'A' or 'B', nothing else.
Marco.
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 14:55
I've tried it umpteen times in the past, matey, and every time, the same thing happens! Ok, now tell me which of the following gives the most 'pure', unadulterated taste of potato (not what you prefer the taste of):
A) Chips with ketchup and vinegar smothered all over them.
B) Chips, 'au naturel', with no ketchup or vinegar.
Your answer should state simply 'A' or 'B', nothing else
Bad example - chips don't give an unadulterated taste of potato :eyebrows:
Lol - I said the "most" pure, unadulterated, taste. The use of "most", in that context, was deliberate!
Besides, you know exactly what I'm driving at, and it's a check-mate... ;)
We can use raw potato as the example, if you wish!
Marco.
jandl100
10-05-2012, 15:08
Nah, not a valid comparison, Marco. :nono:
My point is that sometimes the original engineering is poorly done*. So the potato isn't a healthy one in the 1st place. What you'd do is throw it on the compost and get another one. :eyebrows:
*accepted some of this may be down to different non-standard equalisations,as pointed out just now. But I have an acceptable solution for £40. How much does that clever doo-hickey cost? :eek:
And ... I'll bet a fair amount of £-wonga that a sizeable proportion of those 'orrible sounding earlier recordings are just down to crap engineering, not different equalisations.
Hehe - you'll always be starting something here! People love a good vibrant discussion.
If you use vinyl then you are definately using some EQ - just that they haven't allowed you any control..
Why do people feel the need to state the obvious, and take things to extremes, in an attempt to 'disprove' someone's valid observations? :rolleyes:
Yes, of course, Nat, if you use vinyl, then the sound you're listening to has been subject to equalisation. You cannot avoid that. However, that's not what my argument regarding EQ is about.
It's about minimising it as far as is possible, within the context of your system, and having the least 'stuff' in the signal path, as possible.
You CAN avoid having or using tone controls on an amp, but if you listen to vinyl, then you can't avoid the effects of equalisation, during a stage of the sonic reproduction process, which you have no control over.
Pedantry can often be counterproductive, you know! ;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 15:18
I'll bet a fair amount of £-wonga that a sizeable proportion of those 'orrible sounding earlier recordings are just down to crap engineering, not different equalisations.
What labels do these recordings appear on?
There's a fair bit of information about the EQ curves used by various companies at various times - Decca FFSS being one example.
FFSS do not use RIAA EQ so to play them with an RIAA phono stage will produce a harsh, bright sound.
The early Rolling Stones records suffer from similar problems - it not just down to the recording - the mastering EQ was different to RIAA.
Now as most Rolling Stones fans would have played their records on a warm and cuddly sounding Dansette or similar the rising treble response was probably desirable, but with a flat hifi TT it is most certainly not.
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 15:21
Lol - I said the "most" pure, unadulterated, taste. The use of "most", in that context, was deliberate!
Besides, you know exactly what I'm driving at, and it's a check-mate... ;)
We can use raw potato as the example, if you wish!
Marco.
Raw spuds?
Eeeugh:spew:
What kind of sicko are you?:eyebrows:
Nah, not a valid comparison, Marco. :nono:
Of course it's a valid comparison, Jerry! I'm not taking about recordings: I'm taking about how a circuit works inside an amp.
By adding ketchup and vinegar to a potato, you're adulterating the pure taste of the raw potato itself, the same as you're doing to the music signal in an amp, by complicating the signal path!!
The 'ketchup' and 'vinegar', in that instance, are the capacitors and resistors, etc, in line with the signal path, necessary to give you the 'flavour' that you like listening to, when manipulating the sound of poor recordings, by using an amp with tone controls, or in your case, a graphic equaliser.
There's no denying that you prefer the sound of certain recordings with added 'seasoning', and that's fine, but you cannot argue that what you're hearing is more pure, as you're changing the sound of the recording that left the studio, simply to suit your tastes.
Whether it's a good recording or not, doesn't matter: it is what it is. You cannot state as fact, other than it simply being your preferred result, that what you've done by manipulating the sound, has made the recording better or more 'real'. That's entirely subjective. Others may disagree, paricularly those who hate ketchup and vinegar! ;)
The fact is, you've adulterated the sound from its original form, therefore by definition, what you've created is NOT as pure. Fact: you cannot make something purer than what it was in its original state...!! A healthy potato is a healthy potato, and bad potato is a bad potato. Without changing it for something else completely, you CANNOT make either 'purer' than what it was originally.
It's as simple as that, muchacho. But none of that denies the fact that your ears prefer the sound of poor recordings, when sonically manipulated by your equaliser, so enjoy! I'm more of a 'raw potato' man, myself, or rather, chips, with no added condiments :)
Marco.
surely anyone who has an amp with tone controls and then set them to 12 oclock are doing just that , using tone control :rolleyes: simply setting to 12 oclock does not mean you are not using them , you are simply setting midway up the scale that was factory set , and if you don't know the factory settings , without measuring equipment you simply wont know you are on flat , you are simply adjusting to a soud you like , same as the rest of us i suppose , thanks to Mmar i have tried some high end stuff in my room without tone controls and they seemed fine , but till mrs lotto arrives i will use what i have , but it does not sound shabby :)
surely anyone who has an amp with tone controls and then set them to 12 oclock are doing just that , using tone control :rolleyes: simply setting to 12 oclock does not mean you are not using them , you are simply setting midway up the scale that was factory set
Spot on, but then there is something called a 'tone defeat button' ;)
However, if you think that you're listening to a 'flat sound', even by pressing that button (with all the 'added gubbins' still in the signal path, as before) then you're similarly as deluded :eyebrows:
Marco.
snuffbox
10-05-2012, 15:51
Lets not be too precious about the signal, eh?
You'd have a fit if you saw the amount of processing and conversions taking place in a recording and mastering environment.
I'm in it for music first and music last.
I've got some more than adequate stuff to play the software on, so I'm very happy.
I find myself spending more time playing this these days.
Might even get off my backside and join/put a band together, and get out doing it.
http://doremishop.vn/files/Fender/1332335383_Fen_AM_Dlx_Strat_HSS__RW__Olympic_Pearl .jpg
Of course, I enjoy some of the banter here, so I don't intend going anywhere ;)
Thats a very tasty looking strat,you have good taste sir
Spot on, but then there is something called a 'tone defeat button' ;)
However, if you think that you're listening to a 'flat sound', even by pressing that button (with all the 'added gubbins' still in the signal path, as before) then you're similarly as deluded :eyebrows:
Marco.
I refer your honour to the learned gentleman's previous statement:
I'm in it for music first and music last. :cool:
Lol - what's that got to do with it, Dave?
I'm talking about undisputable facts, within electronic equipment, not people's personal preferences and/or what they consider themselves to be in this hobby.
I'm in it for the music too, but at the same time, I'm also a realist! ;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 16:02
Thats a very tasty looking strat,you have good taste sir
As Elvis said, thangyooverymuch.
Indeed, it's a lovely instrument to play too.
seoirse2002
10-05-2012, 16:10
Just because an amplifier doesent have tone controls doesent mean it is playing "flat" otherwise we wouldn't be seeing reference to certain amps as "bit low on bass" or "great bass" etc etc.....and then we get to the speakers....
As I said in a very early post,a friend of mine became a millionaire selling tone control-less amps and such and made his money on the interconnects,speaker cables,speakers,mains cables,conditioners,room treatments,and on and on
Reminds me of the Californian Gold Rush....
More people became more wealthy selling the picks and shovels etc. than the actual goldiggers.
I rarely use my tone controls,and my tone defeat is always on, but its nice to know its there if you need it.
Ive just checked the average speed on my car computer over the last month....its 20 MPH!!!!! I should be driving a smart car at that rate.....but every now and then I get out to the motorway and use those horses big time!!
There when I need it......just like the music:cool:
Just because an amplifier doesent have tone controls doesent mean it is playing "flat" otherwise we wouldn't be seeing reference to certain amps as "bit low on bass" or "great bass" etc etc.....
Indeed, George, but at least there's nothing extra in the signal path adding more coloration on top of what was already there in the first place!
As I said in a very early post,a friend of mine became a millionaire selling tone control-less amps and such and made his money on the interconnects,speaker cables,speakers,mains cables,conditioners,room treatments,and on and on
Well, when used correctly, those items can often fix problems properly, rather than acting as a bandage.
However, the discerning amongst us use tube-rolling, or altering internal components inside equipment, as our 'tone controls', thus any problem is fixed much closer to the source, with far less side effects :eyebrows:
Marco.
seoirse2002
10-05-2012, 16:29
Hmm...
Tried that in the 70s....but didn't inhale...I swear:cool:
Sorry Marco,coulden't resist and I cant comment about something I know nothing about,so I will reserve judgement until I get the opportunity to hear such a setup....but arent you still at the mercy of the original studio mixers?
I've tried it umpteen times in the past, matey, and every time, the same thing happens! Ok, in reference to purity, please tell me which of the following gives the most 'pure', unadulterated, taste of potato (not what you prefer the taste of):
A) Chips with ketchup and vinegar smothered all over them.
B) Chips, 'au naturel', with no ketchup or vinegar.
Your answer should state simply 'A' or 'B', nothing else.
Marco.
God, some people like to really muck up their systems!
RAW potato is the only way to get that pure unadulterated taste of potato!
Any cooking of said potato is just a form of 'colouring' the taste, making it sweeter and also easier to digest.
I can't stand it when people cook their potatos - idiots.
Sorry Marco,coulden't resist and I cant comment about something I know nothing about,so I will reserve judgement until I get the opportunity to hear such a setup....but arent you still at the mercy of the original studio mixers?
Yes of course!
The bottom line with this is that I simply accept bad recordings for what they are, and don't fruitlessly try to polish a turd!! ;)
But if that's what you want to do, then cool :)
Marco.
God, some people like to really muck up their systems!
RAW potato is the only way to get that pure unadulterated taste of potato!
Any cooking of said potato is just a form of 'colouring' the taste, making it sweeter and also easier to digest.
I can't stand it when people cook their potatos - idiots.
:lolsign:
Marco.
Anyone got a joke about what a hot potato this subject is?
seoirse2002
10-05-2012, 16:44
Dont you just hate the chips with everything brigade? and then the apples with everything?
Vinyl tastes lovely:lol:
dantheman91
10-05-2012, 16:45
Yes of course!
The bottom line with this is that I simply accept bad recordings for what they are, and don't fruitlessly try to polish a turd!! ;)
Marco.
:youtheman:
Why do people feel the need to state the obvious, and take things to extremes, in an attempt to 'disprove' someone's valid observations? :rolleyes:
Yes, of course, Nat, if you use vinyl, then the sound you're listening to has been subject to equalisation. You cannot avoid that. However, that's not what my argument regarding EQ is about.
It's about minimising it as far as is possible, within the context of your system, and having the least 'stuff' in the signal path, as possible.
You CAN avoid having or using tone controls on an amp, but if you listen to vinyl, then you can't avoid the effects of equalisation, during a stage of the sonic reproduction process, which you have no control over.
Pedantry can often be counterproductive, you know! ;)
Marco.
You missed my earlier post then Marco. I was saying that a variable EQ at the RIAA stage wouldn't be adding in an extra unit. The EQ is already there in the system so you just need to make it variable.
FM Acoustics made such a unit and the Graham Slee one mentioned above too, if slightly restricted in their variability.
EQ at a digital level as part of a DAC, if done properly, won't be adding anything either unless you have perfect CDs with perfect error correction and no oversampling or digital filters or all the other number crunching that is already happening in your Sonys..
Are you saying that you would even hear the variable parts of an RIAA curve? In which case I presume you have all your components hardwired, having thrown out all valve sockets and phono plug and sockets etc etc? Otherwise your purity is compromised.. That bit might be pedantic but perhaps it goes to show that you are already living with some compromises down to convenience.. so one more won't be making a difference (maybe even make it the only compromise and do hardwire everything! Once spoke to a guy who had done that with his LFD system with silver wire..)
Are you saying that you would even hear the variable parts of an RIAA curve? In which case I presume you have all your components hardwired, having thrown out all valve sockets and phono plug and sockets etc etc? Otherwise your purity is compromised.. That bit might be pedantic but perhaps it goes to show that you are already living with some compromises down to convenience..
Owning an audio system is ALL about choosing your compromises, so of course there are some present in my system, the same as there are in everyone else's.
I simply choose not to add more compromises to those that already exist, if I don't need to. Tone controls or graphic equalisers come into that category, as they are totally superfluous to my requirements.
Are we done yet, or is this thing going to go round and round in circles forever, instead of people just accepting the facts, and that the chosen compromises in our systems will always be different?
Marco.
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 17:05
All this talk of chips has made me feel hungry - I'm off to the chippy (http://www.grandmapollards.co.uk/#/family-history/4547823108) for me tea :)
Good idea. Have you lot won the league yet?
Marco.
Chris, grab a Vanilla Slice for me when you go to Granny Pollards, they sound delish... :D
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 17:21
Good idea. Have you lot won the league yet?
Marco.
Tough game to play yet on Sunday - t'aint a foregone conclusion.
My fingers are crossed for ya, dude! For a change, I'd love to see someone, other than Man Yoo, win the title.
If that happens, it might signal the retirement of Fergie, and then there would be some big changes in the Premier League, and who would have the capability of winning it....
Marco.
jandl100
10-05-2012, 17:45
Yes of course!
The bottom line with this is that I simply accept bad recordings for what they are, and don't fruitlessly try to polish a turd!! ;)
But if that's what you want to do, then cool :)
Marco.
Ah, but it's not fruitless, is it.
As I said before the difference for me can be as much as wanting to listen to a recording that had previously been unlistenable.
Not fruitless at all.
I don't hold the choices made by, and abilities of, all recording engineers to be beyond reproach.
If I can adequately correct a plonker's cockups, then I reckon it's worthwhile.
A choice between honouring a sound engineer's ability and that of the musicians' they have recorded is no choice at all for me. :)
The music comes first. Always.
Fruitless for me, Jerry, given my sonic predilections, not fruitless for you :)
Marco.
Reid Malenfant
10-05-2012, 18:02
Yes, of course, Nat, if you use vinyl, then the sound you're listening to has been subject to equalisation. You cannot avoid that. However, that's not what my argument regarding EQ is about.
Marco.
That is a totally different kettle of fish though at the end of the day. The RIAA response is a known factor & the equalisation to compensate for it can get the electrical response back to well within 0.5% of where it should be with decent kit, which will be undetectable by your ears.
It might as well not be there... It's a million miles away from a bass & treble control with no manufacturer probably agreeing on a centre frequency for either bass or treble controls, let alone the amount of boost or cut available.
Even a high quality dual gang potentiometer may well have track resistances that could be 5% or more out in the way of matching when they are set to zero detent. Thus while it may appear that nothing is happening & no cut or boost is applied, the two channels will be out of balance at certain frequencies. Admittedly a bypass will cure the problem.
I'd rather not have the problem in the first place.
jandl100
10-05-2012, 18:02
There's no denying that you prefer the sound of certain recordings with added 'seasoning', and that's fine, but you cannot argue that what you're hearing is more pure, as you're changing the sound of the recording that left the studio, simply to suit your tastes.
Ummm ... actually, I can argue. ;)
I know what a human voice sounds like. And the sounds emanating from many (e.g.) 1970s CBS classical recordings do not realistically portray a human voice. The same can go for the sound of acoustic instruments.
Playing back the hallowed recording as left to us by an incompetent recording engineer is not a "pure" representation of the original musical event. It can't be. It sounds obviously and demonstrably wrong!
You have made your choice to honour the recording engineer, I have made the choice to honour the musicians.
Err.... joining in rather late, and I confess I have not read EVERY post, but does anyone really give a toss as long as the end result gives as much enjoyment to the listener as possible? :scratch:
Just a thought, like.....
<Yawn>
I could continue, Jerry, and showcase the glaring holes in your argument, but I've lost the will to live, and have no stomach for further mundane and circular debate...
I've made my point crystal clear for those who wish to acknowledge its factual content, and have also made my personal position on the matter very clear, so I've nothing left to say on the subject.
Marco.
Rare Bird
10-05-2012, 18:43
Err.... joining in rather late, and I confess I have not read EVERY post, but does anyone really give a toss as long as the end result gives as much enjoyment to the listener as possible? :scratch:
Just a thought, like.....
:thumbsup:
Rare Bird
10-05-2012, 19:01
Thats it ive had enough of all this im gonna buy a Tone control less amp & live in mysery all my life, last thing id want is to be ostracized :booty:
Jeez, that sounds painful! Can you get cream for it? :eyebrows:
Marco.
Go on, touch it, you know you want to!
http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss68/Lodger56/tone-2.jpg
I'm used to stroking bigger knobs than that, dahling! :kiss:
Marco.
Go on, touch it, you know you want to!
http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss68/Lodger56/tone-2.jpg
:lol::lol::lol:
I'm used to stroking bigger knobs than that, dahling! :kiss:
Marco.
The top end is enlarged when twiddled with
Stratmangler
10-05-2012, 21:38
Chris, grab a Vanilla Slice for me when you go to Granny Pollards, they sound delish... :D
Unfortunately all the vanilla slices had gone - it's been a busy day over there across the border.
Had to make do with Haddock & chips and a cuppa tea :)
<Yawn>
I could continue, Jerry, and showcase the glaring holes in your argument...
I can't see what they are to be honest.. assuming you're seeing the same argument as I am.
Music being more 'pure' if you correct an impurity rather than leaving that impurity there seems obvious to me.
Unless you're talking about the consequential different impurity of the equaliser even if the other impurity is removed.. which Jerry covered in a previous post, to which you just have different opinions rather than one being glaringly wrong. :scratch:
jandl100
11-05-2012, 05:47
Hmm. Yeah. I don't understand Marco's thoughts on this issue, either, Nat.
Just different definitions of purity, I guess. And different reasons for having decent hifi kit.
And different music collections.
And different outlooks and philosophies.
And different priorities.
And different musical tastes.
Just plain different, really! :)
:cool:
Go on, touch it, you know you want to!
http://i562.photobucket.com/albums/ss68/Lodger56/tone-2.jpg
Genius!:lol:
I can't see what they are to be honest.. assuming you're seeing the same argument as I am.
Music being more 'pure' if you correct an impurity rather than leaving that impurity there seems obvious to me.
Unless you're talking about the consequential different impurity of the equaliser even if the other impurity is removed.. which Jerry covered in a previous post, to which you just have different opinions rather than one being glaringly wrong. :scratch:
Nope, it's got nothing to do with that, or what Jerry has listed in his last post. If I exposed the holes, it would only fuel another circular argument, which I just can't be arsed with, or worse, really piss him off.
There are times when, for the sake of harmony, you need to know when to let go, and pull out of a debate. This is one of them :)
Marco.
jandl100
11-05-2012, 08:02
Oh, it takes quite a lot to really piss me off. :ner: And even that is better than being patronised. ;) Go on, show me the glaring holes in my pov. :thumbsup:
Clearly Nat thinks similar to me ... if it makes the music sound more realistic (or more enjoyable, if you wish) then it gets the thumbs up from me. Simples. :)
Oh, it takes quite a lot to really piss me off. And even that is better than being patronised. Go on, show me the glaring holes in my pov.
We'll have a chat about it in person, next time we meet at Scalford, where I'll be able to get my point across more effectively, without having to go round in circles doing it here, because of the limitations of this type of communication.
That's my final word on the matter, shweety :cool:
Marco.
jandl100
11-05-2012, 08:29
I look forward to having the error of my ways explained to me! :lol:
... no fisticuffs, mind. :nono:
Gross tonal shift isn't what makes music sound realistic (or unrealistic) - perhaps you need to strap another graphic equalise onto the end of your others?
jandl100
11-05-2012, 08:32
:ner:
I look forward to having the error of my ways explained to me!
... no fisticuffs, mind.
Over a cup of tea, in the lounge, perhaps, with some cucumber sandwitches, like gentlemen do?
Nah... :beer: :barrel:
Marco.
Oh, it takes quite a lot to really piss me off. And even that is better than being patronised. Go on, show me the glaring holes in my pov.
Ok, Jerry, I'll give you something to think about, before we discuss the subject properly, mano-a-mano...
You wrote earlier:
I know what a human voice sounds like. And the sounds emanating from many (e.g.) 1970s CBS classical recordings do not realistically portray a human voice.
Just like you, I also *know* what a human voice sounds like, so here's the scenario:
I pop down to your place, to hear your system, and you play me a 1970s classical recording on CBS, where the human voice is featured prominently, first 'au naturel', with your EQ completely disconnected and out of line from your system, and then with 'added seasoning', with the EQ in line, and switched on, using the settings you've chosen.
After much discussion, I'm adamant that the voices sound more natural and 'real', with the EQ totally absent, and you're equally adamant of the opposite.
Who is right?
Marco.
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 09:35
Gross tonal shift isn't what makes music sound realistic (or unrealistic) - perhaps you need to strap another graphic equalise onto the end of your others?
:)
I realy cant see the point in people owning all the exotic equipment they have if all that is needed to correct all the cock ups of the studio engineers is a graphic equaliser; ie another load of chips and complicated circuitry, :rolleyes:
But if it makes music more pleasureable for those that use them, so be it,eveyone to their own.:)
It just makes me wonder how someone can evaluate any piece of kit on its own merrits if the signal is always going through a device that completely reconstructs the signal and therefore negates any character that each individual piece of kit would otherwise have.
A...
Spot on, mate! :clap:
Particularly this bit:
I realy cant see the point in people owning all the exotic equipment they have if all that is needed to correct all the cock ups of the studio engineers is a graphic equaliser; ie another load of chips and complicated circuitry,
But if it makes music more pleasureable for those that use them, so be it,eveyone to their own.
I'll get to the bit in bold later, as it's fundamental to the whole point I'm making, once Jerry answers my question. Clue: "pleasurable" is the operative word... ;)
Marco.
P.S Mark's also equally spot on with his comment!
Rare Bird
11-05-2012, 09:58
:sucks:
Totally typifies why forums are a total & utter waste of time...
StanleyB
11-05-2012, 10:02
:)
It just makes me wonder how someone can evaluate any piece of kit on its own merrits if the signal is always going through a device that completely reconstructs the signal and therefore negates any character that each individual piece of kit would otherwise have.
Who is evaluating equipment with tone controls :scratch:? I read through the whole thread but cannot find anyone mentioning anything about evaluating any piece of kit that way. Am I missing a page from AoS somewhere?
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 10:06
Who is evaluating equipment with tone controls :scratch:? I read through the whole thread but cannot find anyone mentioning anything about evaluating any piece of kit that way. Am I missing a page from AoS somewhere?
Sorry Stan,
that part realy dosent belong in this paticular thread, but it is relavent to certain parties.:)
A...
Stan, Jerry has stated that he listens to everything, apart from his CDP, through his graphic equaliser. See here:
OK, so I don't use an equaliser on my main digital source (CD player), but everything else goes thru my trusty Akai 7 band equaliser. Yup, even my vinyl. :D
...therefore, Anthony's point is valid.
Marco.
:sucks:
Totally typifies why forums are a total & utter waste of time...
So what do you suggest we all do, dude, just shut up and agree with each other? That sounds like fun (not)!
Robust (friendly) debates are what forums are ALL about. There's nothing I love better than getting my teeth into a nice juicy, in-depth, debate! :exactly:
Marco.
StanleyB
11-05-2012, 10:23
Stan, Jerry has stated that he listens to everything, apart from his CDP, through his graphic equaliser. See here:
...therefore, Anthony's point is valid.
I can't see any mention of Jerry evaluating things with the aid of his equalizer. That's the part that I need clarification on. Perhaps Jerry can enlighten us on this aspect.
Jeez, Stan, how more clear can it be, mate, if he says that his graphic EQ is permanently in line with EVERYTHING ELSE, bar his CD player?
That means, effectively, that when he's evaluating equipment, using anything other than CDs, the music is going through his EQ!! Read what he's written again:
OK, so I don't use an equaliser on my main digital source (CD player), but everything else goes thru my trusty Akai 7 band equaliser. Yup, even my vinyl.
It's cut and dried, mate. As far as that's concerned, there's nothing to confirm!
Marco.
StanleyB
11-05-2012, 10:39
It's not that cut and dry ;). Only Jerry can tell us if he uses it to evaluate single pieces of kit or not. I doubt that he does his evaluation with the EQ, but no doubt he'll let us know.
Well, if that were the case, then he should've written:
"OK, so I don't use an equaliser on my main digital source (CD player), but everything else goes thru my trusty Akai 7 band equaliser. Yup, even my vinyl, [but not when evaluating single pieces of kit]"
;)
But yes, I know what you're getting at.
Marco.
jandl100
11-05-2012, 10:48
Ok, Jerry, I'll give you something to think about ....
Just like you, I also *know* what a human voice sounds like, so here's the scenario:
I pop down to your place, to hear your system, and you play me a 1970s classical recording on CBS, where the human voice is featured prominently, first 'au naturel', with your EQ completely disconnected and out of line from your system, and then with 'added seasoning', with the EQ in line, and switched on, using the settings you've chosen.
After much discussion, I'm adamant that the voices sound more natural and 'real', with the EQ totally absent, and you're equally adamant of the opposite.
Who is right?
Marco.
Durrrr. Another non-question from Marco.
.... "What if I disagree? - what would you say then?" Jeez - talk about an empty question!
What if the Martians landed half way through? How would that affect things?
Suppose you agreed with me?
Suppose ....
My point is that I feel sure that you, too, would think the portrayal of the human voice in those circumstances would be more accurate when equalised.
Really, you would! It's fukkin' obvious, matey! :lol:
Anywayz, as you say this hypothesising is a bit pointless, innit - well, actually it's a LOT pointless :eyebrows: (and I shall continue to disdainfully ignore the ongoing snide digs from the luvverly Anthony :ner: - yes, he's been on my case before about my reviewing for the Hifi Pig webzine :rolleyes:. For some reason it seems to upset him. Tsk, tsk - wot a shame.). There's not much point in this circularisation type discussion is there, particularly when you haven't heard the musical examples that I have.
I agree with some folks here and disagree with others. Quelle surprise! ;)
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 11:01
Durrrr. Another non-question from Marco.
.... "What if I disagree? - what would you say then?" Jeez - talk about an empty question!
What if the Martians landed half way through? How would that affect things?
Suppose you agreed with me?
Suppose ....
My point is that I feel sure that you, too, would think the portrayal of the human voice in those circumstances would be more accurate when equalised.
Really, you would! It's fukkin' obvious, matey! :lol:
Anywayz, as you say this hypothesising is a bit pointless, innit - well, actually it's a LOT pointless :eyebrows:
(and I shall continue to disdainfully ignore the ongoing snide digs from the luvverly Anthony :ner: - yes, he's been on my case before about my reviewing for the Hifi Pig webzine :rolleyes:. For some reason it seems to upset him. Tsk, tsk). There's not much point in this circularisation type discussion is there, particularly when you haven't heard the musical examples that I have.
I agree with some folks here and disagree with others. Quelle surprise! ;)
Jerry,
I realy have no idea of what the hilighted part above is about :scratch:
I Can assure you that if someone else had expressed that they feel their system sonics or the music being played through it can be somehow put right by the use of a graphic or tone controls my comments would have been the same. If you think i have issues with you for some other reason other than that then maybe you should elaborate a bit more.
Yes it is true that i find your comments on certain equipment a bit odd and posibly alien to mine and others here sometimes, but its your system, you use what you like in it to get a sound thats right for you, but if your going to evalute products that you have used in your system, and therfore put your opinions on a forum then all i am saying is be sure that you are actualy listening and hearing what a paticular piece of kit is actualy doing in its own right and character, not what its been manipulated to do by certain other bits of kit in the same signal path.
Anthony,TD...
seoirse2002
11-05-2012, 11:04
http://theartofsound.net/forum/picture.php?albumid=122&pictureid=903
this is all getting too much for me...so something new
which do you prefer? Before or after EQ(with makeup).......:stalks:
I think the one on the right sounds much better
Hi Jerry,
Durrrr. Another non-question from Marco.
My point is that I feel sure that you, too, would think the portrayal of the human voice in those circumstances would be more accurate when equalised.
Really, you would! It's fukkin' obvious, matey!
Ok, it's time to get a little more serious... I was going to let this go, but I think it needs to be said.
It's not a "non-question"; it's a highly relevant one - and the key to this whole argument. Allow me to explain:
The fact is, it's most likely that if we conducted the test, I would clearly hear the euphonic coloration (imparted on the music) by adding the EQ, and whilst appreciating why you preferred the sound with the EQ in-line, my preferred balance of compromises, along with my ears, would most likely dictate that I would be of the opposite opinion to you.
We could carry out the test, if you wish, to confirm my suspicions?
Therefore, the answer to the question of: "who is right?", is: NO-ONE!!
Why? Because it would simply be a matter of personal preference.
And now this is where we get to the whole crux of the argument.....
What you're doing is mixing up what your ears consider as being the more pleasurable sound, with what is in fact 'purer' or more realistic, when you cannot do that because you or I do not know what the original sound was!
All you're doing is judging what that might be, based on, from experience, what you *know* human voices sound like, as indeed I'd have done in the same test, based on what I also *know*. However, the fact is that neither of our respective opinions on that matter would be conclusive, and so one opinion cannot be more 'correct' than the other.
Basically, Jerry, the argument boils down to this, so please take the time to digest it carefully (and that applies to everyone else reading, so we don't end up going round in circles):
If your position was simply that you preferred the more pleasurable sound of music (to your ears), played through your graphic EQ, because you enjoyed how it euphonically coloured the sound (which is exactly what graphic EQ's do), then you wouldn't have heard a single peep out of me, as that's fair enough, but the problem is, that's NOT what you're doing...
What you're doing, is claiming that your graphic EQ somehow magically cures all the sonic ills of certain recordings, and makes them intrinsically better, more believable and real, when in reality, that is simply your subjective perception, which you're entitled to, but it is NOT FACT.
If you think otherwise, mate, then sadly, you're just kidding yourself on :)
Marco.
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 11:21
http://theartofsound.net/forum/picture.php?albumid=122&pictureid=903
this is all getting too much for me...so something new
which do you prefer? Before or after EQ(with makeup).......:stalks:
I think the one on the right sounds much better
:lol:
in that case i'l take the equalised version.:)
Just this once though!.
A...
Rare Bird
11-05-2012, 11:46
So what do you suggest we all do, dude, just shut up and agree with each other? That sounds like fun (not)!
Hows about getting the last word in regarding Tone controls are a no no & lock the topic ;)
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 11:55
Hows about getting the last word in regarding Tone controls are a no no & lock the topic ;)
Hi Andre,
I dont think thats what anyone here is saying, tone controls can help make a system in a difficult enviroment sound and perform much better, for me its the added complication to the circuitry that tone controls make that i am protesting about, i have made equipment over the years that have had tone circuits, therefore, i know what needs to be added to the circuit to get them to work, and for me if i had to choose i wouldnt want them or their added complications if i could get the equipment and the enviroment in which they were in to work perfectly well without them.
Now thats my opinion, its not fact.
Anthony,TD...
Beobloke
11-05-2012, 11:56
I'm still puzzled by Marco's chips analogy. Yes, chips on their own are purer, but everyone knows that it is ESSENTIAL to have vinegar and salt on them before consumption. To not do so is just plain wrong.
Consequently I feel that tone controls do not accurately represent salt and vinegar in the context of a chip/audio analogy; it would be more correct to use tomato sauce or mayonnaise in this context, both of which are optional and therefore more correct, especially as they only really work with some types of chips.
Also, where does a loudness button fit in? Is this a pea fritter or the slices of bread required to make a chip butty?
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 11:58
I'm still puzzled by Marco's chips analogy. Yes, chips on their own are purer, but everyone knows that it is ESSENTIAL to have vinegar and salt on them before consumption. To not do so is just plain wrong.
Consequently I feel that tone controls do not accurately represent salt and vinegar in the context of a chip/audio analogy; it would be more correct to use tomato sauce or mayonnaise in this context, both of which are optional and therefore more correct, especially as they only really work with some types of chips.
Also, where does a loudness button fit in? Is this a pea fritter or the slices of bread required to make a chip butty?
And compresion and limiting circuits, ie; jukeboxes sound great [i have a few]
But do they have any place in a hi fi system ?
A...
Hows about getting the last word in regarding Tone controls are a no no & lock the topic ;)
Soz, dude, we don't lock threads here, unless it's absolutely necessary to do so, E.G. when discussions have decended into threats or abuse.
Obviously this hasn't happened so far, unless you want to change that? :guns: :punch:
:D :D
Besides, I'm waiting on Jerry's reponse to my earlier post, which no doubt will be suitably entertaining!!
Marco.
I'm still puzzled by Marco's chips analogy. Yes, chips on their own are purer, but everyone knows that it is ESSENTIAL to have vinegar and salt on them before consumption. To not do so is just plain wrong.
Consequently I feel that tone controls do not accurately represent salt and vinegar in the context of a chip/audio analogy; it would be more correct to use tomato sauce or mayonnaise in this context, both of which are optional and therefore more correct, especially as they only really work with some types of chips.
Good point! Consider my previous analogy amended accordingly ;)
Marco.
Rare Bird
11-05-2012, 12:30
Hi Andre,
I dont think thats what anyone here is saying, tone controls can help make a system in a difficult enviroment sound and perform much better, for me its the added complication to the circuitry that tone controls make that i am protesting about, i have made equipment over the years that have had tone circuits, therefore, i know what needs to be added to the circuit to get them to work, and for me if i had to choose i wouldnt want them or their added complications if i could get the equipment and the enviroment in which they were in to work perfectly well without them.
Now thats my opinion, its not fact.
Anthony,TD...
I think this Topic is drifting off into all sorts of other Tangents tbh..I use an amp with Tone controls for one reason:
I dislike the sound of tone controless amplifier because i don't like a flat sound to me, it sound lifeless regardless of what people say to the contrary. No use trying because ive done all that & it aint working..Maybe it's because i'm not an Hi-Fi enthusiast as such & don't really care for all this stuff :scratch:
The Tone controls give me a sound i'm comfortable which, weither it be adding all sorts of nasties to the sound, i dont really care but thats the reason i use them because i like what they add .
However when i use CD i find i seem to leave the controls at 12 o'clock but since the sound quality of Vinyl is generally rubbish i tend to then use them a lot because i may be listerning to a good sounding record & on the other hand one that's dreadfull, i'm certainly not gonna sit there listerning to that dreary LP when i can at least do something about making it a bit more enjoyable!
So here's the Question:
a}Nice sounding LP
b}Poor sounding LP
Your amp has no tone controls , you enjoy the nice sounding LP but when it's the turn to listern to the poor sounding one, do you just sit there & put up with it?
I know i wouldnt, but i can do something about it, you can't.
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 12:33
I think this Topic is drifting off into all sorts of other Tangents tbh..I use an amp with Tone controls for one reason:
I dislike the sound of tone controless amplifier because i don't like a flat sound to me, it sound lifeless regardless of what people say to the contrary. No use trying because ive done all that & it aint working..Maybe it's because i'm not an Hi-Fi enthusiast as such & don't really care for all this stuff :scratch:
The Tone controls give me a sound i'm comfortable which, weither it be adding all sorts of nasties to the sound, i dont really care but thats the reason i use them because i like what they add .
However when i use CD i find i seem to leave the controls at 12 o'clock but since the sound quality of Vinyl is generally rubbish i tend to then use them a lot because i may be listerning to a good sounding record & on the other hand one that's dreadfull, i'm certainly not gonna sit there listerning to that dreary LP when i can at least do something about making it a bit more enjoyable!
:)
It's kind of like that old rugby chestnut, Union or League. Which is the purer form of the sport? Hell, what does it matter, as long as it's a cracking game... :sofa:
The Tone controls give me a sound i'm comfortable which, weither it be adding all sorts of nasties to the sound, i dont really care but thats the reason i use them because i like what they add...
Hear, hear, dude - there's BUGGER ALL wrong with that view, because *that* is ALL that those babies CAN do :)
Now, you see, if *that* was all that Jerry was claiming, we could've cut this debate by about 10 pages!! ;)
Sadly, however, he thinks that his graphic EQ performs an entirely different function. It's skills, as a mere electronic device, therefore, are altogether more 'magical', and in fact, impossible. :exactly:
Until he admits the truth, and that what he's hearing with the bad recordings he's sonically manipulated, post EQ, is not factually more 'pure', but simply his subjective opinion of such and personal preference, then I fear that this thread could run for another 20 pages - and some would still spectacularly be missing the point! :doh:
Marco.
And talking of continuing to spectacularly miss the point...
It's kind of like that old rugby chestnut, Union or League. Which is the purer form of the sport? Hell, what does it matter, as long as it's a cracking game...
:brickwall::brickwall:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGRRRRRRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!! :door: .......... :wave: :wave:
:acid:
Surely, for the sake of my sanity, you're being deliberately obtuse?
Marco.
Gmanuk101
11-05-2012, 12:54
I am for tone controls or equalization, my ears are not as good as they were when I was 10, so I need a bit more treble sometimes. The 2nd system as an old Kenwood Trio, and I like the treble turned up to 9.
It's your music, enjoy it the way you like it.
And talking of continuing to spectacularly miss the point...
:brickwall::brickwall:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGRRRRRRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!! :door: .......... :wave: :wave:
:acid:
Surely, for the sake of my sanity, you're being deliberately obtuse?
Marco.
:lol::lol::lol:
It's all very well laughing, but I'm seriously losing the will to live, by seemingly being surrounded by so many dunderheids!! :lol:
Seriously, can you appreciate the difference between what Andre's claiming about why he likes tone controls, and what they do, compared with what Jerry thinks?
There is a major fundamental difference!!
Marco.
StanleyB
11-05-2012, 13:35
Peter Baxandall should be celebrated not berated.
No-one is being "berated" here, Stan; merely robustly challenged on the difference between a subjective opinion, and fact.
Marco.
It's all very well laughing, but I'm seriously losing the will to live, by being surrounded by so many dunderheids!! :lol:
Seriously, can you appreciate the difference between what Andre's claiming about why he likes tone controls, and what they do, compared with what Jerry thinks?
There is a major fundamental difference!! Clue: the word 'impossible' is significant ;)
Marco.
I totally get it Marco, just playin' wi'cha :D
Frankly I couldn't give two hoots at the moment, too busy groovin' to Propellerheads, Decksanddrumsandrockandroll!!! (minus any tone controls I might add) :gig:
Just out of interest, how pure is a live performance?
I totally get it Marco, just playin' wi'cha :D
Ha - at last we make some progress!! The hari-kari is cancelled (perhaps only temporarily)...
Now, does anyone else feel like 'cottoning on', or is that concept rather too radical? ;)
Marco.
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 14:13
Peter Baxandall should be celebrated not berated.
Baxandall was one of the true inovators, i have great respect for "true inovators" this debate is not about the people who designed the circuits, it is more about the context in which they are used, and for what purpose.
A...
Just out of interest, how pure is a live performance?
It depends what you mean by "pure".
A live musical performance of un-amplified acoustic instruments, in a jazz club, for example, (the sound of which is what the best hi-fi systems seek to emulate, as closely as possible) will generally be 'purer', sonically, than the sound heard at a PA-amplified rock gig.
Marco.
I would have thought an outdoor acoustic gig would be more 'pure' simply because it cuts out the venue acoustics :)
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 14:21
Jerry's gone quiet,:scratch:
perhaps he's gone off to list his system on e*ay and has decided to buy something with a "wave guide" instead:lol::lol::lol:
Yes i am taking the piss, and hopefully he will take it as that and see that i too have a sense of humour.:)
A...
I would have thought an outdoor acoustic gig would be more 'pure' simply because it cuts out the venue acoustics...
It depends on what the acoustics were like at both venues. Being outdoors is no guarantee of a great sound, and often isn't. There are too many potential variables, in order for there to be one conclusive answer.
Marco.
Jerry's gone quiet,:scratch:
perhaps he's gone off to list his system on e*ay and has decided to buy something with a "wave guide" instead:lol::lol::lol:
I think he usually knits tea-cosies, around this time.
Marco.
I tend to think we can never truly get a totally uncoloured sound, just the illusion, but its a dam powerful illusion.:)
Agreed.
The problem is, when someone sets themselves up as a reviewer and 'audiophile', it's tricky admitting that their use of a graphic EQ is simply to make bad recordings sound more acceptable to them.
No, siree, that's no good at all. In order to protect one's audiophile credibility, the device must be seen as having some alternative, other-worldly, magical and hitherto unseen purpose.... :eyebrows:
Rumour has it, Jerry's Akai doubles as a time machine.
;)
Marco.
lol I think I seen the Akai in the TARDIS;)
StanleyB
11-05-2012, 15:19
Agreed.
The problem is, when someone sets themselves up as a reviewer and 'audiophile', it's tricky admitting that their use of a graphic EQ is simply to make bad recordings sound more acceptable to them.
No, siree, that's no good at all. In order to protect one's audiophile credibility, the device must be seen as having some alternative, other-worldly, magical and hitherto unseen purpose.... :eyebrows:
in my Japanese set up I got an amp from around 1980 with loads of filter switches and tone control option. I enjoy using it when firing up a couple of old disco and reggae tunes, especially when there is a party in the house :eyebrows:. Nothing wrong with getting those windows rattling with some exaggerated bass from the tone control. It's the way we used to do things in dem dayz.
Indeed, dude, nothing at all. I used to do the same... Then I discovered hi-fi! :D
Marco.
Sorry, I missed your question earlier, dude (too much to read and digest properly)...
So here's the Question:
a}Nice sounding LP
b}Poor sounding LP
Your amp has no tone controls , you enjoy the nice sounding LP but when it's the turn to listern to the poor sounding one, do you just sit there & put up with it?
I know i wouldnt, but i can do something about it, you can't.
The answer is (and I'm being 100% honest here), that these days, the way my system presents music, there is never an occasion where the sound of the albums I'm playing is *so* bad that I'd feel the need to 'boost' it, by using tone controls (or a graphic EQ), in order to make the music I'm playing listenable.
I think part of the reason for you feeling very different about this, is something that you've touched on before... A lot of the music you like (early prog) was originally very poorly recorded, and so the need for you to alter that, and make it more listenable, is likely to be far greater than it is in my situation, playing different music which, in general, is far better recorded.
Therefore, if I don't need tone controls, then there's no point in having them.
Does that seem reasonable to you? :)
Marco.
jandl100
11-05-2012, 18:10
Well, things have progressed in my absence and I see that Marco has decided not to wait til next year after all.
Clearly my delusional state requires addressing more urgently. :lol:
I think he usually knits tea-cosies, around this time.
Marco.
No, not knitting tea cosies (although I see nothing wrong with such an activity) but one of my half days as a volunteer at the local Cancer Research UK charity shop. :)
... sadly, no new classical LP donations today. :([/COLOR]
Hear, hear, dude - there's BUGGER ALL wrong with that view, because *that* is ALL that those babies CAN do :)
Now, you see, if *that* was all that Jerry was claiming, we could've cut this debate by about 10 pages!! ;)
Sadly, however, he thinks that his graphic EQ performs an entirely different function. It's skills, as a mere electronic device, therefore, are altogether more 'magical', and in fact, impossible. :exactly:
No, now you are responding in an extreme way, which i recall you berating Nat for doing a little earlier in the thread. :eyebrows:
All I said (or intended to say) was that an equaliser, in some circumstances, improves on the presentation. I never claimed it was perfect - I wouldn't be daft enough to do that. I merely claimed that it made the sound more realistic.
Until he admits the truth, and that what he's hearing with the bad recordings he's sonically manipulated, post EQ, is not factually more 'pure', but simply his subjective opinion of such and personal preference, then I fear that this thread could run for another 20 pages - and some would still spectacularly be missing the point! :doh:
Marco.
Hi Jerry,
Ok, it's time to get a little more serious... I was going to let this go, but I think it needs to be said.
It's not a "non-question"; it's a highly relevant one - and the key to this whole argument. Allow me to explain:
The fact is, it's most likely that if we conducted the test, I would clearly hear the euphonic coloration (imparted on the music) by adding the EQ, and whilst appreciating why you preferred the sound with the EQ in-line, my preferred balance of compromises, along with my ears, would most likely dictate that I would be of the opposite opinion to you.
We could carry out the test, if you wish, to confirm my suspicions?
Therefore, the answer to the question of: "who is right?", is: NO-ONE!!
Why? Because it would simply be a matter of personal preference.
Actually, I'm fine with that. As I said at the end of my last post, I agree with some folk here and disagree with others. That implies that I accept that differences of opinion exist on the matter. I do feel (very) strongly though, that not many folk would take an opposing view if they could hear what happens in my audio system. I guess tonality may be less important to others than it is to me, and that the downsides of a moderate degree of equalisation - of which, of course, there must be some as nothing is perfect -may then be more important to those others.
And now this is where we get to the whole crux of the argument.....
What you're doing is mixing up what your ears consider as being the more pleasurable sound, with what is in fact 'purer' or more realistic, when you cannot do that because you or I do not know what the original sound was!
Ah well, here you are incorrect. The singer on the EMI LP I mentioned is Ben Luxon. I have heard him several times live in concert. He does not sound like the non-equalised presentation, but he does sound remarkably closer to his real self with a couple of dB of midrange lift and a bit of treble reduction on the recording I have.
All you're doing is judging what that might be, based on, from experience, what you *know* human voices sound like, as indeed I'd have done in the same test, based on what I also *know*. However, the fact is that neither of our respective opinions on that matter would be conclusive, and so one opinion cannot be more 'correct' than the other.
Basically, Jerry, the argument boils down to this, so please take the time to digest it carefully (and that applies to everyone else reading, so we don't end up going round in circles):
If your position was simply that you preferred the more pleasurable sound of music (to your ears), played through your graphic EQ, because you enjoyed how it euphonically coloured the sound (which is exactly what graphic EQ's do), then you wouldn't have heard a single peep out of me, as that's fair enough, but the problem is, that's NOT what you're doing...
What you're doing, is claiming that your graphic EQ somehow magically cures all the sonic ills of certain recordings, and makes them intrinsically better, more believable and real, when in reality, that is simply your subjective perception, which you're entitled to, but it is NOT FACT.
Oh dear, exaggeration again. I have never, and never would, say that all sonic ills are cured on certain recordings, just that a worthwhile improvement is to be had, sufficient to make the recording sound acceptably plausible to me, being familiar with the sound of real acoustic instruments, includin voice and including specific examples of voices.
If you think otherwise, mate, then sadly, you're just kidding yourself on :)
Marco.
So, in summary, I'm afraid that while I agree that one of us is kidding themselves, I think you are pointing at the wrong culprit. ;)
But it's OK, I'm happy to differ with you - we generally agree on things audio to a remarkable extent - although it would be great if you were close enough to just pop down the road and have a listen yourself. :)
Oi, what's with the bloody red text? It makes what you've written look like scribbles on a schoolboy's 'jotter'! :D
Anyway, I accept where you're coming from to an extent, and life is too short to continue arguing about the rest!!
But it's OK, I'm happy to differ with you - we generally agree on things audio to a remarkable extent - although it would be great if you were close enough to just pop down the road and have a listen yourself.
Indeed - and that's what puzzles me most: how we can so vehemently disagree on some things (such as the 'audiophile value' of graphic EQs or tone controls, and Tannoys), and yet so comprehensively agree on many other issues, usually pertaining to what equipment we consider as sounding 'musical'.
I think you're right. It would be very beneficial sometime for both of us to hear each other's systems, in order to get a better handle on where we're both coming from, in terms of certain aspects of audio. I feel sure, however, that we'd both leave the experience feeling that we have much more in common than not :cool:
Marco.
jandl100
11-05-2012, 18:40
Sorry about the red text. I just wanted to make my responses easily visible without getting lost in a maze of [Quote], [/Quotes]! I'll tone 'em down. :)
Yep, N. Wales is a fair old trek from me.
I suspect you'd like my system in many ways; we agree on too much for that not to be the case, I reckon. :cool:
Gmanuk101
11-05-2012, 18:41
if I may, this thread should be paired with this question; What is Art?
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 18:55
Just had a look at Hi Fi pigs website, interesting,
Now i understand [partly] what Jerry was refering to in an earlier post.:)
A...
the apple cart might tip here :eek:
every single amplifier uses tone control :mental:
it is simply a tone control knob , IE bass , treble , loudness , or ,
someone who designed the amp (either the designer or the self build man ) chose the caps to give it a tonal balance he / she prefers , simples in it , tone everywhere , thats why synergy occurs with some gear and not others , the designer used one source and built his "perfect" amp , and none of us can get it to work , unless you do a bit of tweeking :eyebrows:
Just had a look at Hi Fi pigs website, interesting,
Now i understand [partly] what Jerry was refering to in an earlier post.:)
You're so out of touch sometimes, daftee! :D
Marco.
the apple cart might tip here :eek:
every single amplifier uses tone control :mental:
it is simply a tone control knob , IE bass , treble , loudness , or ,
someone who designed the amp (either the designer or the self build man ) chose the caps to give it a tonal balance he / she prefers , simples in it , tone everywhere , thats why synergy occurs with some gear and not others , the designer used one source and built his "perfect" amp , and none of us can get it to work , unless you do a bit of tweeking :eyebrows:
I've covered the basics of that, Tommy, in previous posts! :)
Marco.
Reid Malenfant
11-05-2012, 19:08
the apple cart might tip here :eek:
every single amplifier uses tone control :mental:
it is simply a tone control knob , IE bass , treble , loudness , or ,
someone who designed the amp (either the designer or the self build man ) chose the caps to give it a tonal balance he / she prefers , simples in it , tone everywhere , thats why synergy occurs with some gear and not others , the designer used one source and built his "perfect" amp , and none of us can get it to work , unless you do a bit of tweeking :eyebrows:
I think you'll find that any competently designed amplifier is likely to have a nice flat frequency response from well below 20Hz to well over 20KHz. Therefore it isn't acting as a tone control.
If it doesn't then I guess it's in a pocket radio :lol:
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 19:13
You're so out of touch sometimes, daftee! :D
Marco.
I know, its shocking!:doh:
I dont have time to come on here as much as i should, let alone see what the rest of the world is up to :lol:
A...
Well, the good thing is, if you didn't even know what Hi-Fi Pig was, you couldn't have been guilty of what Jerry was accusing you of!
Marco.
I haven't seen a modern 'Hi-Fi' amp with tone controls for donkeys' years. Plenty of vintage and home cinema with all manner of controls but not 'Hi-Fi'.
What about Luxman?
realysm42
11-05-2012, 21:43
I used a tone control on my amp back in t'day; it helped a lot with some of tapes I listened to.
My amp now doesn't have one and I don't miss it really. TBH, I don't think I've got hat critical an ear, things would have to be pretty bad for me to notice them; perhaps it's best that way :D
I think you'll find that any competently designed amplifier is likely to have a nice flat frequency response from well below 20Hz to well over 20KHz. Therefore it isn't acting as a tone control.
If it doesn't then I guess it's in a pocket radio :lol:flat earth then :scratch: sorry my world is round :)
Reid Malenfant
11-05-2012, 22:04
flat earth then :scratch: sorry my world is round :)
Not at all :eyebrows:
Any amplifier should have a flat frequency response in the audio band, if it doesn't then it wasn't well designed - simple as! These are generally designed to run into a resistive load though.
It's not hard to design as the bandwidth is is pretty narrow at the end of the day ;)
When you couple speakers to this flat response amp then interesting things can happen admittedly :) Speakers don't tend to have a flat impedance, so if the amp doesn't have a great deal of damping (or if you like a low impedance) then things can get interesting & you might end up with a system response that isn't flat.
anthonyTD
11-05-2012, 22:07
Well, the good thing is, if you didn't even know what Hi-Fi Pig was, you couldn't have been guilty of what Jerry was accusing you of!
Marco.
I must admit, that was the initial reason for checking out their site, Although as stated it looks interesting so well worth the effort.
I have commented on Jerry's constant box swapping in the past, but not in a nasty, or snide way as he put it, at least that wasnt how it was intended, i tend to say what i feel in the monent and thats it i move on, life is too short.:)
A...
Rare Bird
12-05-2012, 00:08
I'm glad this topic came to a peaceful end without the roof falling in.. all this bickering doesnt half lower the tone of the place :eyebrows: right i'm off for a quick cut & boost before bed :)
Is that another word for a 'ham shank'? :eyebrows:
Marco.
I'm glad this topic came to a peaceful end without the roof falling in.. all this bickering doesnt half lower the tone of the place :eyebrows: right i'm off for a quick cut & boost before bed :)
+1
Blimey you lot have been busy, i leave this thread unread for a few days now 200 odd posts long :eek:
I had a couple of mates around the other night for a sess with the MK3 Loftin White now fitted with C cores and sounding very good by the way so i dug my TT out and Yello the Race 12 inch single happened to be near the front of the Vinyl box so on it went but in my haste i had forgotten that i had no pre amp in the circuit as my dac that we were previously using has a volume control fitted so i just pulled out the interconnects and plugged them straight into the amp , what we ended up with was the TT into a phono stage which then went straight into the power amp, no volume pot and no attenuation, it was load but not ear busting as the Loftin only puts out about 1.5 watts but we all sat there with smiles on our faces it was increadilbly good and i suppose you could say unadulterated, i could hear a marked difference sans controls even when i added a passive with a good quility stepped pot to lower the volume and to stop our ears bleeding all it really did was attenuate the sound as there was a noticible drop in quility.
My favorite control is still the Loudness button on my old amps especiallly for low level listening.
So I'm now in the camp of "with or without" both have their merits and place in this world
StanleyB
12-05-2012, 07:15
Like many of us on AoS, I have more amps than I can use at any given moment. But my favourite is still my 1979 Aiwa AA-8700 amp. It is not short of tone controls and frequency adjusting points options :D.
But with the filters and tone controls switched out of circuit, which is possible on this amp, it's just as pleasing to listen to.
http://www.homehifi.co.uk/aos/aiwa.jpg
This is a picture of it that I took after having stripped it down and cleaned it up so that it looks as good as new.
+1
There was no "bickering" - just good, robust, in-depth and friendly debate; just the sort we love here on AoS!! :)
Marco.
jandl100
12-05-2012, 08:48
I must admit, that was the initial reason for checking out their site, Although as stated it looks interesting so well worth the effort.
I have commented on Jerry's constant box swapping in the past, but not in a nasty, or snide way as he put it, at least that wasnt how it was intended, i tend to say what i feel in the monent and thats it i move on, life is too short.:)
A...
Please accept my apologies, Anthony. :)
Sometimes I just get a bit carried away. :rolleyes:
:cool:
And btw - I've had my speakers for 2 years and my power amp for nearly 1 year, now. ;)
jandl100
12-05-2012, 08:52
There was no "bickering" - just good, robust, in-depth and friendly debate; just the sort we love here on AoS!! :)
Marco.
Well, perhaps there was a bit of bickering. :whistle:
But mostly good robust debate, albeit some of the time at cross-purposes! :lol:
http://www.homehifi.co.uk/aos/aiwa.jpg
This is a picture of it that I took after having stripped it down and cleaned it up so that it looks as good as new.
That's a lovely looking amp, Stan! :)
You don't worry about tone controls with vintage amps - just enjoy them as they are, which is also probably why Andre accepts them as normal :cool:
Marco.
Well, perhaps there was a bit of bickering. :whistle:
But mostly good robust debate, albeit some of the time at cross-purposes! :lol:
I guess it's subjective, Jerry. For example, I didn't consider that we were "bickering", but rather both just staunchly defending our point of view, in a debate between two adults. I see nothing wrong with that :)
But perhaps there are some sensitive little flowers around who think differently ;)
Marco.
jandl100
12-05-2012, 09:04
I guess it's subjective, Jerry. For example, I didn't consider that we were "bickering", but rather both just staunchly defending our point of view, in a debate between two adults. I see nothing wrong with that :)
But perhaps there are some sensitive little flowers around who think differently ;)
Marco.
What?! :steam:
That's a completely ridiculous thing to say. :mental:
You have absolutely no idea what real bickering is about do you? :rolleyes:
:D
Hehehehe....I'd imagine when you're 'battle-hardened', from years of posting on the 'Wam, a girly little tête-à-tête, like that, would hardly penetrate! :D ;)
Marco.
anthonyTD
12-05-2012, 09:19
Please accept my apologies, Anthony. :)
Sometimes I just get a bit carried away. :rolleyes:
:cool:
And btw - I've had my speakers for 2 years and my power amp for nearly 1 year, now. ;)
hi Jerry,
Apologies accepted but there was no need, :)robust discusions are good for clearing the air sometimes.
Good news on the amp and speakers, maybe you have at last found a combination that has the right synergy going on for you.
Anthony,TD...
jandl100
12-05-2012, 09:19
Hehehehe....I'd imagine when you're 'battle-hardened', from years of posting on the 'Wam, a girly little tête-à-tête, like that, would hardly penetrate! :D ;)
Marco.
Hmmm, yeah. Actually - that can a real problem, where the Wam and AOS are my main forums.
I sometimes forget to take off the reactive body armour and leave the riot gear in the cupboard when posting on AOS. :oops:
StanleyB
12-05-2012, 10:28
That's a lovely looking amp, Stan!
Cheers Marco :). I am actually contemplating doing a write up on the AA8700 in the Past Masters section since there is absolutely nothing to be found on the net about it and its performance, other than it being mentioned in passing. That's not withstanding the fact that it was the top of the range amp from Aiwa, and superior to the highly priced Pioneer SA-9800 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Pioneer-SA-9800-Amplifier-/270973962202?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Vintage_Separates&hash=item3f174e87da) from the same period. The discussion on tone controls has made the case for a write up a lot stronger.
Mr Kipling
12-05-2012, 10:41
Hi,
People have entrenched views, and change is never easy.
Isn't it fair to say there was a time when some engineers mixed recordings with the end-user listening on an AM transistor radio in mind? And isn't that why there is such poor-sounding material ? And couldn't you say re-mastering is professional tone control use?
The problem for me with tone controls is that they don't really do what I want them to do, ie steep/sheer-drop boost or cut of the frequency extreames without affecting the rest of the rang. At least that's been my experience. It used to be said that the only way to manipulate the signal correctly, was to use a parametric equaliser. But then you have the added signal degradation introduced by such a unit. In recent years I've been wondering if digital filtering would do a better job. Some like what a BBE Sonic Maximizer does which "doctors" the signal. Back in the 80s even Jimmy Hughes and Keith Howard of Hi-Fi Answers were somewhat surprised to find that such a unit had some merit.
I've never understood the bass boost on portable audio. Do people really use it when the effect is so gross? Have to say however I do have a Sony 725 dvd player which has various digital sound filters. 99 % of the time they're a waste of time, but on the odd occassion one of the settings does sound better than using the flat one.
My first amp was an Amstrad EX 330 (!) and I tended to use the loudness with the rumble switched in and a bit off bass cut. If I didn't, the sound was pretty flat as I used to listen at quite low levels. I've had other amps like Audiolab 8000 and A&R Cambridge A60, but I didn't really bother with the tone controls.
Perhaps what I want from my hi-fi has changed over the years. What's important to me now is transparancy, small scale dynamics, spatial clues and lack of compression. And for me, I tend to think that tone controls seem to get in the way of these. But that's just my opinion.
Kind Regards,
Stephen
Rare Bird
12-05-2012, 10:44
Stan:
The only Aiwa product ive ever owned was an 'AD6900 Mk.II' cassette deck.
StanleyB
12-05-2012, 10:55
Stan:
The only Aiwa product ive ever owned was an 'AD6900 Mk.II' cassette deck.
The AD6900 and AA8700 were made to go with each other. The AD6900 is still one of the best decks ever built at any price.
Sorry to go back so many pages.. has advanced quite far since I was here last.
And now this is where we get to the whole crux of the argument.....
What you're doing is mixing up what your ears consider as being the more pleasurable sound, with what is in fact 'purer' or more realistic, when you cannot do that because you or I do not know what the original sound was!
All you're doing is judging what that might be, based on, from experience, what you *know* human voices sound like, as indeed I'd have done in the same test, based on what I also *know*. However, the fact is that neither of our respective opinions on that matter would be conclusive, and so one opinion cannot be more 'correct' than the other.
Basically, Jerry, the argument boils down to this, so please take the time to digest it carefully (and that applies to everyone else reading, so we don't end up going round in circles):
If your position was simply that you preferred the more pleasurable sound of music (to your ears), played through your graphic EQ, because you enjoyed how it euphonically coloured the sound (which is exactly what graphic EQ's do), then you wouldn't have heard a single peep out of me, as that's fair enough, but the problem is, that's NOT what you're doing...
What you're doing, is claiming that your graphic EQ somehow magically cures all the sonic ills of certain recordings, and makes them intrinsically better, more believable and real, when in reality, that is simply your subjective perception, which you're entitled to, but it is NOT FACT.
If you think otherwise, mate, then sadly, you're just kidding yourself on :)
Marco.
Oddly, this is always my argument in a subjective/objective debate.. Those who call themselves subjectivists normally follow the same 'taste' preference and so don't show much consideration to what was actually intended (which remains an unknown) but then the comeback is always that people know what a violin sounds like etc.. but really it is very hard to seperate real sound memory and imagined sound. Need to check in theory that your gear is being transparent, neutral as much as pos (adding taste if you want to of course).
If it's glaringly obvious something is missing something around 4KHz for example because its effects can be heard all across the recording then it's different - changing the sound will be no different to what the engineer was doing and he didn't know how it should be either (cos he can only hear through the speakers and mics and desk and has to make the same judgement as Jerry - if it sounds real. If the mic is picking something up that sounds wrong because of placement etc and it's too late to change then the engineer has to EQ it). If both Jerry and the engineer can perform the same work on the piece then why will one be more correct than the other?
But, let's not go down that route (hope I don't regret mentioning the s and o words!).
Stan:
The only Aiwa product ive ever owned was an 'AD6900 Mk.II' cassette deck.
Ohh! I've got one of those.. Bought it from Loot back in the Loot days when you could actually search their site properly and before I'd heard of e-boy or whatever the new fangled thing was. £20 I think.
Was lovely to use for a bit until the belt slowly stretched (now entangled in their somewhere) - a future project.
I love the transport bottons.
Friend had the 6800 with built in IR remote. Will have to look out for the 8700..
BTH K10A
13-05-2012, 10:30
The last word
http://www.accuphase.com/historys/dg-28_e1.htm
:ner:
anthonyTD
13-05-2012, 11:22
The last word
http://www.accuphase.com/historys/dg-28_e1.htm
:ner:
Yes, thats exactly what we need, another load of chips, and complicated circuitry to put things right!
Who cares if you actualy also end up having to EQ the sonic signature that this new bit of kit has now imprinted on the original signature,:rolleyes: you now have the power to totaly manipulate the original signal into almost any version of it you desire.
Take no notice of me i'm just rambling again,:eyebrows:
Everyone to their own, if it sounds right to you, and the added complications of another piece of kit in the chain seems to have no deteremental affect on [as far as you can tell] what your striving to achieve then thats all that matters.
A...
StanleyB
13-05-2012, 11:31
I can live with the loss of original sonic signature when manipulating a tone control. But I couldn't live with the loss of soundstage, timbre, and emotional impact.
Everyone to their own, if it sounds right to you, and the added complications of another piece of kit in the chain seems to have no deteremental affect on [as far as you can tell] what your striving to achieve then thats all that matters.
A...
"As far as you can tell" is at least based in reality and not a philosophical stance, afterall it's all about the actual experienced sound.
Over objectivity - 'that can't work because of this and that' rather than listening to it - for me is what stops enjoyment, to much thinking only to find that those hang-ups were unfounded on listening.
I can live with the loss of original sonic signature when manipulating a tone control. But I couldn't live with the loss of soundstage, timbre, and emotional impact.
Me neither - that would be my hang-up against using eq, at least till I try it (though still to this day don't know what emotional impact is in sound terms - that's psychological and can apply to any aspect of sound depending on your culture and brain and learnt experience)
RobbieGong
13-05-2012, 13:57
Hi Nat, I use an equalizer in my set up and can tell you that I've never lost timbre and texture of instruments etc. I'm sure this is due to good anxilleries, decent speaker cable (QED Genesis Silver Spiral) etc. I was also going to say that my Ortofon 2M Black cartridge is superb at that but I can vouch for good timbre and texture through cd player too :)
anthonyTD
13-05-2012, 19:56
Just a thought to remember, every time a signal has to go through an amplification stage the original signal gets reconstructed, so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
Bearing in mind that every piece of kit, and amplification stage in the signal path is not perfect, and will impose its own signature in some way or another on the signal its fed, then i hope you can see where i am coming from.
Anthony,TD...
Bearing in mind that every piece of kit, and amplification stage in the signal path is not perfect, and will impose its own signature in some way or another on the signal its fed, then i hope you can see where i am coming from.
Indeed - you get progressively further and further away from any notion of fidelity to the original sound.... ;)
That's the question you have to ask yourself: are you a music lover, who also values the ultimate in high-fidelity sound (getting as close as possible to what was heard in the studio, where the artist performed, or what is on the CD or record - good or bad), or one who just likes listening to a 'nice noise', tailored to what pleases your ears most?
There's nothing wrong with either approach, but you should be honest with yourself. I'm 100% in the former category! :exactly:
Marco.
Reid Malenfant
13-05-2012, 20:47
Bearing in mind that every piece of kit, and amplification stage in the signal path is not perfect, and will impose its own signature in some way or another on the signal its fed, then i hope you can see where i am coming from.
Anthony,TD...
Not forgetting the worst bit of all in 99% of cases, the dreaded passive crossover :eek: Of course most drivers distort quite a bit as well, no driver is perfect.
Pick your own poison :eyebrows:
Anyway, back to the tone controls which I can't seem to find :scratch:
Active has its own 'signature' too, dude. Nothing is perfect. Like I've said before, the only way I'd go active is if I could do it with my Tannoys and some Copper amps ;)
If it invloved going SS, forget it! :nono:
I must have (minimum) 50W of Pure Class A bottle power...... :fingers:
Marco.
music first and last without it none of us would be here , unless you like chug chug steam trains
Reid Malenfant
13-05-2012, 20:55
Active has its own 'signature' too, dude. Nothing is perfect. Like I've said before, the only way I'd go active is if I could do it with my Tannoys and some Copper amps ;)
If it invloved going SS, forget it! :nono:
I must have Pure Class A bottle power...... :fingers:
Marco.
They'd look superb with one sat next to each Lockwood :hmm:
:exactly:
:eyebrows:
It's defo gonna happen soon-ish, trust me (probably next year)! Anthony has a copper chassis, all ready to go ;)
Marco.
michaelhigh
14-05-2012, 17:13
I find myself making up for an average speaker by adding a touch of bass (not ashamed) and even my recent acquisition (Zen Triode Select) has a dual 15-band to juice up the bottom a little. The computer's EQ (MediaMonkey) is much smoother and natural-ish, and I cut 250 and 1k ever-so-slightly (one notch) EVERYWHERE. I HATE 250 hz.
Active has its own 'signature' too, dude. Nothing is perfect. Like I've said before, the only way I'd go active is if I could do it with my Tannoys and some Copper amps ;)
If it invloved going SS, forget it! :nono:
I must have (minimum) 50W of Pure Class A bottle power...... :fingers:
Marco.
Pah! What's the point of 50W valve power?
My new valve amps are 200W ! (hope that's right or I'll look a fool - goes off to check) .
Errr... Pah! My new amps are 150W ! Anything less would embarrass me..
Got some tasty Nestorovic amps - not started playing with them properly yet.
Reid Malenfant
16-05-2012, 18:55
Pah! What's the point of 50W valve power?
Errr... Pah! My new amps are 150W ! Anything less would embarrass me..
I very much doubt that your 150W amp is pure class A, that is the difference :)
Besides which going from 50W to 150W will only increase the volume by about 4.5dB which is next to nothing in reality ;)
To double the physical volume level you'd need to go from 50W to 500W, which would give a 10dB increase in volume or as I stated, a doubling of volume level.
Indeed... I think Nat rather missed the point, especially in relation to the (huge) sonic benefits of running a quality valve amp in pure Class A! ;)
Marco [who 'retired' his 200W solid-state monoblocks, 4 years ago, in favour of a (then) 30W Chinese valve amp - and for good reason].
Just a thought to remember, every time a signal has to go through an amplification stage the original signal gets reconstructed, so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
Bearing in mind that every piece of kit, and amplification stage in the signal path is not perfect, and will impose its own signature in some way or another on the signal its fed, then i hope you can see where i am coming from.
Anthony,TD...
I get where you're coming from and that would be my thoughts too.
Where you're coming from though is somewhere deep in your logical brain with no real way of gauging the magnitude of these things or the reality of hifi.
It is also normally the way I decide upon things too - an imaginary analysis of a system and imaginary changes of that system, being too much in your own head and not enough ... "doing".
Listening is the only way to judge.
If you definately hear the effects of what you mention above (and not just hearing 'changes' and using those changes to justify your beliefs) then that's good to know.
Others seem to be saying that adding EQ doesn't tend to ruin things for them (there are a fair few forum go-ers who have still praised Jerry's system as being the best they're heard even with the EQ in line, I presume it is in line anyway) so perhaps it's not as clearcut as a thought experiment might suggest.
The ancient Greeks were very keen on thought experiments over experimental evidence and it led them to conclude some very bizarre things..
I'll hold off judgement until I try for myself (don't think the only EQ I have, a digital Roland Parametric, is going be a good test though!).
Also think about the detrimental sonic effect the extra cables have on sound quality (needed to connect the graphic EQ, in-line, in the first place)...
Jeez, I can hear the obvious sonic degradation of connecting more than one source component at a time to my preamp (which is why I only ever have my CDP or my turntable connected, when listening to one or the other), never mind anything else!! :eyebrows:
Marco.
RobbieGong
16-05-2012, 19:36
I get where you're coming from and that would be my thoughts too.
Where you're coming from though is somewhere deep in your logical brain with no real way of gauging the magnitude of these things or the reality of hifi.
It is also normally the way I decide upon things too - an imaginary analysis of a system and imaginary changes of that system, being too much in your own head and not enough ... "doing".
Listening is the only way to judge.
If you definately hear the effects of what you mention above (and not just hearing 'changes' and using those changes to justify your beliefs) then that's good to know.
Others seem to be saying that adding EQ doesn't tend to ruin things for them (there are a fair few forum go-ers who have still praised Jerry's system as being the best they're heard even with the EQ in line, I presume it is in line anyway) so perhaps it's not as clearcut as a thought experiment might suggest.
The ancient Greeks were very keen on thought experiments over experimental evidence and it led them to conclude some very bizarre things..
I'll hold off judgement until I try for myself (don't think the only EQ I have, a digital Roland Parametric, is going be a good test though!).
I agree with you Nat, I really am not quite that precious about it. I've gone the eq and tone controls route and put together what I (and others) regard is a very nice sounding system indeed. That said if I ever came into some money i wouldn't right off the idea of building another system without eq or tone controls to see where that would take me :)
Just a thought to remember, every time a signal has to go through an amplification stage the original signal gets reconstructed, so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
Bearing in mind that every piece of kit, and amplification stage in the signal path is not perfect, and will impose its own signature in some way or another on the signal its fed, then i hope you can see where i am coming from.
Anthony,TD...
Whoaaa, steady there Anthony. you’re almost sounding like just about every other amplifier builder I have either read off or spoken to. Tsk tsk mate, you wont last long here writing stuff like that.:doh::D
so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
The bold bit; that would be the speakers then. ;):D
Stratmangler
16-05-2012, 20:03
Whoaaa, steady there Anthony. you’re almost sounding like just about every other amplifier builder I have either read off or spoken to. Tsk tsk mate, you wont last long here writing stuff like that.:doh::D
so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
The bold bit; that would be the speakers then. ;):D
Flawless logic :rfl:
i like the bold bit , indded what i run now was indeed built around the koss's , took a long time to understand , and i did know they were special , but still took almost 2 years to get it right
Whoaaa, steady there Anthony. you’re almost sounding like just about every other amplifier builder I have either read off or spoken to. Tsk tsk mate, you wont last long here writing stuff like that.:doh::D
so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
The bold bit; that would be the speakers then. ;):D
anthonyTD
17-05-2012, 16:04
Whoaaa, steady there Anthony. you’re almost sounding like just about every other amplifier builder I have either read off or spoken to. Tsk tsk mate, you wont last long here writing stuff like that.:doh::D
so what you actual hear is the last piece of kit in the chains interpretation of the interpretation of the last bit of kits interpretation etc,etc.
The bold bit; that would be the speakers then. ;):D
Hi john,
We wernt discussing speakers, but yes, if you want to put it like that as they are the final part of the chain that actualy moves air to let us hear what the previous piece of kits interpretation of the signal is, however, the speaker has to be the most poluting part in the signal path as far as distortion.
And lets not forget its the" only" piece of kit in the "final part" of the replay chain that has the job of changing an electrical signal to mechanical so not realy relevent to what we were discussing.
Anthony,TD...
anthonyTD
17-05-2012, 16:42
Flawless logic :rfl:
:scratch::scratch::scratch:
Stratmangler
17-05-2012, 16:51
:scratch::scratch::scratch:
John's way of saying it's the speakers have the biggest impact on sound :D
anthonyTD
17-05-2012, 16:54
John's way of saying it's the speakers have the biggest impact on sound :D
Ok, i see,
we are all entitled to our opinions here.:)
A...
Stratmangler
17-05-2012, 17:05
Ok, i see,
we are all entitled to our opinions here.:)
A...
I thought the way the post was worded was more than mildly amusing :eyebrows:
anthonyTD
17-05-2012, 17:08
I thought the way the post was worded was more than mildly amusing :eyebrows:
John's or mine ? :)
A...
Stratmangler
17-05-2012, 17:12
John's or mine ? :)
A...
John's :)
anthonyTD
17-05-2012, 17:17
John's :)
:)
Daft isn't it, all this sound pressure to electrical signal to sound pressure and then electrical signal again in our nerves. Can't we just hook up some electro- magnetic pads to the right part of our brains?
Don't they wire up contacts behind people's ears and directly attach hearing aid type things to restore hearing to people completely deaf?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.