Graphic Equalizers

[cpjvej2012]

Are they worth it ?


They sure do look good when playing tunes, and they are cheap enough. I used to have one on my old Technics system, after a year of having it in the system I boxed it up and stuck it in my loft. It was only 3-4 years later I dragged it out of the loft and hooked it back up again and to be honest it was used just to show off my hi-fi because it looked good when tunes where playing, but the actual sound wasn't any better or worse when I actually set it up and used it.

The one I had was a Technics, it came with the Technics system which I bought.


so who uses one on there system and does it improve the sound ?

[Marco]

:sofa:

Marco.

[John]

Most of us would say best to avoid as the graphic is adding another element into the signal
I use a bit of DSP in the bass but I am lucky I keep my bass signal separate from my mid and treble

[Stratmangler]

Graphic equalizers is a topic that surfaces time and again, and always ends up with circular arguments that go nowhere.

[istari_knight]

They can be handy to mask inadequacies in poor quality equipment but overall they do more harm than good IME.

[Rare Bird]

:goodthread:

:lolsign:

[Marco]

Aye, one of the best!

:lies:

:lol: :lol:

Marco.

[Werner Berghofer]

Chris,


so who uses one on there system and does it improve the sound ?

I use an impressive looking, huge, black and ancient 10-band Sansui SE-7 in my main headphone rig. According to my ear specialist doctor my left ear’s internal auditory canal is unusually curved. I adjusted the equalizer’s setting to compensate for the drop in the medium and high frequencies as plotted on a frequency chart handed to me by my doctor. My right ear’s performance is still on 98 percent and nearly perfectly flat.

So, in my case: Yes, using an equalizer certainly does improve the sound, since it enables me to hear subtleties which I wouldn’t perceive otherwise.

My other two speaker reproduction chains also are equipped with Yamaha EQ-550 equalizers, but because of natural crossfeed effects (hearing part of the left channel with the right ear) the adjustment settings for the left channel are much less “drastic” on these systems. Most of the time I even defeat the equalizer completely when listening via speakers in the living room, since I feel the left channel is too pronounced.

Werner.

[Macca]

They sure do look good when playing tunes, and they are cheap enough. I used to have one on my old Technics system, after a year of having it in the system I boxed it up and stuck it in my loft. It was only 3-4 years later I dragged it out of the loft and hooked it back up again and to be honest it was used just to show off my hi-fi because it looked good when tunes where playing, but the actual sound wasn't any better or worse when I actually set it up and used it.


I think you are talking about a spectrum analyser rather than a graphic equalizer, although some GEs have an SE as well. Lots of little blue lights going up and down. Yes they are cool, if a bit pointless. Like VU meters, really.

[Marco]

I use an impressive looking, huge, black and ancient 10-band Sansui SE-7 in my main headphone rig. According to my ear specialist doctor my left ear’s internal auditory canal is unusually curved. I adjusted the euqalizer’s setting to compensate for the drop in the medium and high frequencies as plotted on a frequency chart plot.

By Jove, that's first time I've read an eminently sensible and indisputable argument in favour of using a graphic EQ! :eek: :clap:

Marco.

[Werner Berghofer]

Marco,


that's first time I've read an eminently sensible and indisputable argument in favour of using a graphic EQ!

thank you! You already liked it two years ago, as I announced and/or confessed to use an equalizer (see → here (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?11546-Werner%92s-system&p=228010#post228010)).

Werner.

[walpurgis]

I've found a graphic equaliser useful for modifying the balance of old sixties and seventies records when recording onto other media. Much old vinyl sounds very flat and lacking in bass and treble and the general recording quality is low enough to make the added effects of using an equaliser the least of your problems. Many old Tamla Motown recordings for instance, benefit from some correction.

[Rare Bird]

Exactly Geoff, i refuse to listern to flat sounding records just because the Hi-Fi fraternity says it's naughty to use an EQ within your system.. Anyone that just sits there listerning to flat records when something can be done about it, must be bonkers..

Bump :eyebrows:

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?25367-Wanted-ADC-EQ

[Haselsh1]

I honestly don't see the harm in them unless you are spending silly money on them and then it simply isn't worth it for what is effectively a glorified tone control.

[StanleyB]

Mine disappeared in the loft a few years ago, and I am yet to locate the spot where I left it. But until then I used the spectrum analyser function on it to do various checks on the audio signal. I didn't use it in the actual signal path for any sort of signal correction though.

[Marco]

I've found a graphic equaliser useful for modifying the balance of old sixties and seventies records when recording onto other media. Much old vinyl sounds very flat and lacking in bass and treble and the general recording quality is low enough to make the added effects of using an equaliser the least of your problems. Many old Tamla Motown recordings for instance, benefit from some correction.

Honestly, each to his or her own, and as Werner has ably highlighted, there are obviously times for some people when a graphic EQ is useful, and Geoff, I'm sure that this also applies to you.

However, I own over 2000 records, and as many CDs, and I can honestly say, hand on heart, that when listening to ANY of it I've never sat there thinking 'Jeez, this sounds very flat and boring, I'd better boost the sound with a graphic EQ'.... In 25+ years of using high quality hi-fi equipment, to listen to music, that has never happened, so I've never had to suffer it.

The problem with graphic EQs, for me, whenever I've used them (and that's not been for years), is that whatever problems they 'cure', on one hand, are outweighed by the problems that they generate; namely the effect of added distortion on the signal path. The fact is, *that* effect is much more audible, to my ears, than anything that they're supposedly 'fixing'!!

Anyway, as I said, each to his or her own, so if using a graphic equaliser is of benefit in your system, and allows you to enjoy music more, then carry on doing so! :cool:

Marco.

[Kember]

Honestly, each to his or her own, and as Werner has ably highlighted, there are obviously times for some people when a graphic EQ is useful, and Geoff, I'm sure that this also applies to you.

However, I own over 2000 records, and as many CDs, and I can honestly say, hand on heart, that when listening to any of them I've never sat there thinking 'Jeez, this sounds very flat and boring, I'd better get myself a graphic EQ'.... In 25+ years of using high quality hi-fi equipment, that has never happened, so I've never had to suffer it.

The problem with graphic EQs, for me, whenever I've used them (and that's not been for years) is that whatever problems they 'cure', on one hand, are outweighed by the problems that they generate; namely the effect of the added distortion on the signal path. The fact is, *that* effect is much more audible to me than anything that they're supposedly 'fixing'!! ;)

Anyway, as I said, each to his or her own, so if using a graphic equaliser is of benefit in your system, and allows you to enjoy music more, then carry on doing so! :cool:

Marco.

Gents,

I'm not intending to drop a grenade in here - on other fora, opinion divides massively - and I'm sure it is quite a graphic equaliser as such but does the Behringer DEC2496 not do something similar and it can do room correction, albeit in the digital domain?

At least some people interested in quality sound rate it.

I am quite tempted to use it to tame a very odd and boomy room with my AVR and 5.1.

Any thoughts?

Peter

[Haselsh1]

I have only ever found that they have a similar effect to that of a passive preamp in that they completely kill the dynamics of the music.

[Marco]

Killing dynamics is certainly one of the things I hear, along with creating a very audible 'falseness'. I guess it's to be expected, running an audio signal through an extra load of 'gubbins' - all of which is guaranteed to introduce its own sonic signature.

The argument boils down to whether or not that sonic signature spoils the music more than improves it - and for me it's a resounding YES! :exactly:

Marco.

[John]

Gents,

I'm not intending to drop a grenade in here - on other fora, opinion divides massively - and I'm sure it is quite a graphic equaliser as such but does the Behringer DEC2496 not do something similar and it can do room correction, albeit in the digital domain?

At least some people interested in quality sound rate it.

I am quite tempted to use it to tame a very odd and boomy room with my AVR and 5.1.

Any thoughts?

Peter

DEQ Is different but I think you be a lot better of treating the room around this mode something similar to what Martin doing with his system
DEQ can be good at eliminating bass modes but you do not want the Berhinger going anywhere near the mid or treble and most systems you cannot do this
I tend to use mine to control slopes crossover and gain which gave me a lot better for my system, yet again this in the bass region and parts of the joys of having active bass

[Magna Audio]

Since going DSP X/O I have EQ'd a different setup for streaming Spotify - does make most stuff on it a little more acceptable tbh.
Some things now give CD playback a run for it's money.

Not sure you could do the same with a graphic equalizer, I do it using a proper measuring mic and Holmimpulse and then of course check with the lugs...

[RobbieGong]

My eq sits in a fairly decent system, with good interconnects, speaker cable etc and a nicely modded Techie which sounds very good indeed. Some of the good Technics flagship amps were made with an external adapter to facilitate an eq ( no messing around looping throught the tape input / outputs). One thing I would say though is that by switching off the busy blue spectrum analyzer on my eq there is a definate cleaning up of the sound to my ears which has to be down to elimating the noise the lights impart. I've shaped it so that the presentation is fairly balanced (no extremes) and to the room, very detailed and I love it - ultimately in this particular case, I let my ears be the judge not 'purist audiophile' opinion :eek: :lol: :)

[Marco]

And you'd be quite right to do so! Now, if you've discovered that defeating the blue 'spectrum analyzer' lights cleans up the sound, just for fun one day, try 'defeating' the whole bloody thing and report back what happens... You might get a shock! ;)

Marco.

[Kember]

DEQ Is different but I think you be a lot better of treating the room around this mode something similar to what Martin doing with his system
DEQ can be good at eliminating bass modes but you do not want the Berhinger going anywhere near the mid or treble and most systems you cannot do this
I tend to use mine to control slopes crossover and gain which gave me a lot better for my system, yet again this in the bass region and parts of the joys of having active bass

John

Thanks. Interesting. It will only be for Sky and DVD playback but I'll research further.

Peter

[RobbieGong]

:lol: Hi Marco, I've done the whole defeat, no tone controls etc, it aint for me - yet. Dont get me wrong I dont like extremes ie overly trebly, or bass dominant. In my modest system tone controls and eq are a part of what I'm getting and enjoy very much indeed. One day, funds permitting I may well go a whole different approach with a completely new system ie: top notch mc, awesome valve set up with no tone controls speaker upgrade and not an eq in sight. Til then I'm very happy with my current 'undefeated' set up ;)

[Marco]

Hehehehe... Well, that's cool. However, who knows what the future might bring? :)

Marco.

[Marco]

Incidentally, one of the reasons why I think Andre feels it necessary to boost the sound he gets with a graphic EQ (and he can correct me here, if I'm wrong), is because he lives solely on a musical diet of early prog, a lot of which (especially the original recordings) sounds quite poor, perhaps because most of it was released on minor record labels, and the owners behind them couldn't afford to invest in the best recording equipment? Or perhaps because audiophile sound quality wasn't a priority?

Regardless, it certainly explains why Andre cherishes owing any decent re-masters of his favourite music... Therefore, under those circumstances, I can also fully understand why he finds the use of a graphic EQ beneficial.

For me, it's a very different kettle of fish. My musical tastes are hugely wide and varied, and the vast majority of it is well recorded on CD or vinyl, so I simply don't encounter the issues that Andre does. Any less than perfect recordings I own are still rendered as perfectly acceptable without the use of a graphic EQ, so we're approaching this matter from two entirely different angles. It's no wonder, therefore, that we disagree, but hey, who wants to agree all the time? :)

Marco.

[Rothchild]

As a small aside I'm concerned about the doctor who led someone to believe that their hearing response was 'flat'. Our hearing is decidedly not flat (see 'fletcher munson' or 'equal loudness contour'). In a nutshell we're evolutionarily pre-disposed to hear more in the 'intelligible speech' range than any other (which is why our ears have a sensitivity 'bump' just around 5kHz).

As for trying to then set a different spectral balance for each side, to make up for an asymmetry in one's hearing, is a bit like chasing rainbows. Does the Dr's chart show the the hearing deviation for the full frequency range at all sound pressure levels (because sensitivity changes according to frequency and spl) and how would one set an eq to work through the fletcher munson curve?

On the general (on topic) point my belief is that equipment choice, set-up and room treatment should be the important aspects of an 'audiophile' rig, leave the mastering to the mastering engineer. Graphic EQs are predominantly for live sound foldback and, occasionally, mixing.

[jandl100]

Well, I guess it's a few months since the last graphic equalizer thread :lol: ....


I've found a graphic equaliser useful for modifying the balance of old sixties and seventies records when recording onto other media. Much old vinyl sounds very flat and lacking in bass and treble and the general recording quality is low enough to make the added effects of using an equaliser the least of your problems. Many old Tamla Motown recordings for instance, benefit from some correction.

I picked up an LP of Alice Cooper's Billion Dollar Babies a few weeks back. The treble is severely rolled off, really muffled, boost it back up with an equalizer and it is more than listenable.
The same goes for many early classical recordings, imo. Although they can be too bright, as well, or lacking bass, or boomy. And skewed in stereo presentation. Honestly, they can sound awful.


Exactly Geoff, i refuse to listern to flat sounding records just because the Hi-Fi fraternity says it's naughty to use an EQ within your system.. Anyone that just sits there listerning to flat records when something can be done about it, must be bonkers..


:exactly:

I have a Behringer DEQ2496 that I use for making execrable recordings sound half decent. Job done. :thumbsup:
It's on a separate signal path, so when I don't need it, it isn't in the way.
If it didn't sound good, I wouldn't use it. :nono: :exactly:

[Rare Bird]

Killing dynamics is certainly one of the things I hear, along with creating a very audible 'falseness'.

Myself & Geoff have pointed out that some records are Flat, dull sounding, we are trying to make them sound more like acceptable, so there's no dynamics to kill.. No way on earth am i going to sit & listern to a crap sounding recurd when i can just switch in the EQ & make it sound ok.This is the only time i use EQ, it's out of line other than that.

[Marco]

I get that, dude. However, I'm not sitting there listening to crap sounding records either - perish the thought! Did you read what I wrote earlier in post #16, namely this:


However, I own over 2000 records, and as many CDs, and I can honestly say, hand on heart, that when listening to ANY of it I've never sat there thinking 'Jeez, this sounds very flat and boring, I'd better boost the sound with a graphic EQ'.... In 25+ years of using high quality hi-fi equipment, to listen to music, that has never happened, so I've never had to suffer it.


:)

Marco.

[jandl100]

That's fine.

But what has that got to do with those of us who do have music we want to listen to that is recorded in a crappy but fixable manner? ;)

[Marco]

Absolutely nothing. I simply wanted Andre to know that I'm not sitting there listening to flat and boring sounding records, just because I'm too stubborn to use a graphic EQ, out of some misplaced purist values! :eyebrows: I don't use them, because to my ears, they sound shite - pure and simple.

I'm not sitting there suffering a bad sound - that's the crux of the matter.

My decision not to use devices such as these is based entirely on the fact that, to my ears and in my system, with my music, graphic EQs do more damage, sonically, than good. In fact, in my circumstances, there is no 'good' aspect to it whatsoever...

However, that in no way demeans or devalues the polar opposite effect Andre or you are getting with graphic EQs in your systems :)

Marco.

[icehockeyboy]

Anyone that just sits there listerning to flat records when something can be done about it, must be bonkers..

Bump :eyebrows:

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?25367-Wanted-ADC-EQ

But if the record isn't flat, it'll make the arm bounce up and down! :lol:
Ill get me coat..........

[Werner Berghofer]

Marc,


As a small aside I'm concerned about the doctor who led someone to believe that their hearing response was 'flat'.

look, I’m neither a scientist nor a doctor. Being the “someone” who quoting my doctor claiming that my right ear’s frequency curve was “flat” meant that there are no significant drops or increases between 40 Hz and 16 kHz, since this is the frequency range my doctor examined. I’m pretty sure my ear doctor is aware of the differences in audio perception between a human ear/brain or a condenser microphone and the device specific meaning of “flat”.


As for trying to then set a different spectral balance for each side, to make up for an asymmetry in one's hearing, is a bit like chasing rainbows.

Maybe yes, maybe no, and I don’t care if I set my equalizer according to the Fletcher-Munson curve, to Brigitte Bardot’s curves or the famous “Parabolica” curve from the Monza racing circuit. All I want to achieve by using a graphic equalizer is to match what I’m hearing with my left ear as closely and exactly as possible to what I’m hearing with my right ear, especially when listening via headphones which I do a lot. I use my HiFi equipment to enjoy music as much as possible, and if a graphic equalizer makes it easier for me to do this, I’m more than happy.

I’m not interested in algorithmic or linear acoustic curves, but in music and lyrics instead. I sincerly hope you can accept this.

Werner.

[Tim]

I’m not interested in algorithmic or linear acoustic curves, but in music and lyrics instead.
I think you have identified a major difference in how many here view both their systems and their music collections Werner and I agree 100%. I stopped listening to my system sometime ago after my last upgrade and I don't hear it anymore, I just hear the music, the lyrics and how the album as a work has been put together and wonder about that? A lot of other folks listen to their system and their new upgrade or change in the room, etc., etc. . . . its whatever floats your boat really and I also learned awhile back that these two diametrically opposed personalties will never agree, but hey who cares, we all listen to music at the end of the day and we all have our different ways of enjoying it.

But as you know Werner, I sit on your side of the fence especially when it comes to music (and something like Brigitte Bardot’s curves) ;)

[Rothchild]

I’m not interested in algorithmic or linear acoustic curves, but in music and lyrics instead. I sincerly hope you can accept this.

Werner.

Of course, I've no issue with people enjoying what's enjoyable, indeed I am keen to encourage it!

I'm surprised that we ever manage any discussion, because this point (be it about digital sound, use of EQ, or polarity) essentially all comes down to 'well I like the sound of x' and 'I'm glad you think that but I believe y is better' I just find that a bit of technical info helps to illuminate our understanding sometime.

And, yes, I concur the Bridget Bardot Curve is far more interesting than the fletcher munson curve! ;-)

[John]

I actually get where Andre coming from I have a few records which are recorded flat and due to that I hardly listen to them. Its a shame as used to love those albums

[sumday]

many years back...15 to be accurate...I used a smart looking ADC graphic to shelve off the upper treble on a very 70s sansui receiver..8080 something.
the receiver was quite a beast in size AND power and with the top end tamed sounded non too shabby.
what was always a worry with other users in the house was a huge switch on surge through the graphic....switched on first, no probs but if the sansui was already good to go the ADC would trigger the sansui's protection circuit!! happy days!!

[jandl100]

It's always nice when someone puts their money where their mouth is.

Remote control parametric equaliser.
Sony ES sound quality.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/321160657411?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

How could I possibly resist?
Answer - I couldn't! :carrot: :D

http://audio-heritage.jp/SONY-ESPRIT/amp/ta-e1000esd.JPG

:drool:

[Reffc]

EQ's are fine as long as they're 32 channel or more. Any less is regarded as too crude in adjustment terms. Trouble is, that each recording is different and unless you're tuning in compensation for room suck out or boom issues then you'd be up and down all the time fiddling. I can see the merit but those lucky enough to have a decent listening room free of vices and a reasonably flat speaker response probably wouldn't need/use one.

[jandl100]

Some of us just like to have a bit of fun. ;)


.... then you'd be up and down all the time fiddling.

:nono: --- remote control! :dance: