Parametric / graphic equalizer recommendations

Cdc, No answers yet to your specific question, but good responses nonetheless. I don't think you'll find anyone here who has actually used one of these equalizers, so, since they're so inexpensive, why not blaze a trail and let everyone know about your experience?

In response to two of your questions, you need two channels and 1/3 octave (31 band). You need 2 channels because if you are trying to undo room reflection problems (ignoring Rives's very good advice), they won't be the same on each side. You need 31 band because unwanted peaks are sometimes very narrow and you dont want to create a suckout in a nearby frequency.

I agree with Rives, however, that you should only use an equalizer to correct low frequency room problems. I have had brightness problems in one of my rooms, and tried almost everything you can think of, finally deciding that the speakers I had in that room were not suitable for that room. Now, with different speakers, no problem.

I am tempted to ask what speakers you are using. As soon as you answer, however, you'll get 20 recommendations of other speakers, and I know you are pretty familiar with the sonic attributes of a variety of speakers. Others would ask what cables you are using, etc. Let's not go there. It may be that your speakers are just bright. I noticed you commented once that a certain small inexpensive speaker was dull sounding, where I find the same speaker a little rolled off but not dull. Most audiophiles' systems and speakers are too bright for me, the inevitable result of the neverending quest for "detail."

Some things to consider: any glass or other hard reflective surfaces in the room? coffee table between you and the speakers? drapes over windows? how low is the ceiling, and what distance between the speakers, ceiling and you? Speakers tilted back at all? have you tried them in a different room? What happens when you set them up in a nearfield configuration so the sound you hear does not include any reflections?

Good luck,

Paul

I need more info to really answer your question. First, what is your system? Second, what do you mean by bright? Are you talking about an emphasis in the 5-8khz range, or do you mean excessive high frequency (>10khz) content? As a rule it's always better to address the root cause of tonal imbalances. My experience is that parametrics are something of a band-aid and of limited effectiveness. Graphic EQs are even less effective.

Well, I'm so impressed by the thoughtful responses I'll say more than I want.
1) Spent a week with our local symphony orchestra and going back to my system, made me realize how bright, even tizzy on a bad CD it can be. At one point I listened to the orchestra with a Yamaha MS-100 monitor up to my left ear and orchestra in my right ear. I could instantly go from the monitor to real music and compare the two. The active monitor was bright even with treble turned way down. It was like shining a spotlight on the high freq.
2) I had a high quality mini system for 18 years. When the recorder stopped working on one speaker, and since I could afford it, stepped up to Nautilus 804 / Musical Fidelity. My room is 13' x 15'. No carpeting, hard walls, and windows on one side with a thin drape. Got the system in Oct. 2001. You can't imagine the amount of stress this whole stereo stuff has been as this was a huge sum of money for me and not even sure why I did all this. I do not part with my money easily. I'd sell it all right now except for the thousands of dollars I would loose. This is because now this whole mess has given me recruitment with associated permanent hearing damage. There are times when in only 10 minutes at 65 dB (conversational level) my ear is burning and in pain. Mild pain which goes on for days. People talk in my room louder but after 10 minutes the stereo is killing my ears. Understand that I never listen above 80 dB and usually around 70 dB so I have not been some smart ass who did this to himself.
I did cover all the walls and floors with carpet and blankets and this cut the reverb but it took something on every wall to help. But this is not enough in my case.
I refuse to turn my living room into an anechoic chamber and I'm not looking at different speakers because of some preference issue. The high frequencies need to be attenuated in a precise and adjustable way. If someone wants to suggest interconnects, I'd want to see measured high frequency attenuation, not just what they hear.
I agree that the reverb has to be addressed, maybe with a carpet. But need to stress: This Is NOT Enough. So if I cannot roll off the highs my whole stereo will go and in a way I'll be glad. I used the CD input on my boom box today, turned down the treble, and listened to music for the first time in almost a month. But even with this, now my ear is paying the price.
Any suggestion would be welcome.
I wonder:
- Why won't a parametric eq. work on high freq's?
- What is exactly bad about graphic eq?

How precious. Right down to the use of "loose." I see I apparently missed where you said room treatment didn't work, but no one responding above intended any offense. Sometimes we're distracted, or sleepy.

Back to your questions. Either, or any, kind of equalizer should help immensely, though I have to add, there is a difference between brightness and harshness. Maybe you should just get a nice receiver or an integrated amp with a treble control that you can turn down.

Whew! Have you been to an ear doctor? (I'm serious.) It seems very unlikely to me that your stereo caused this problem, but if I were you I'd certainly want to find out what did, and what I could do about it.

Your concern is not with "good" sound in the home, but with sound that is personally tolerable to you. If a boombox with the treble turned down can give you pain, an EQ may not help you much with your system. You need to get some auditory testing done. No one wants you to "turn your room into an anechoic chamber", and besides it seems as if you have already gone a long way towards that end. Attenuating the treble may do something, but it won't make your CD's sound like a live orchestra - the differences you heard have as much to do with the effects of mic'ing as they do with your system's balance or the CD medium.

To address your specific questions from above:

1) A parametric EQ will work fine on high frequencies. I think you may be misunderstanding what Rives is getting at with his description of his company's device. It sounds like a brilliant bit of applied engineering to me, but in any case not what you are after here. It is designed to deal with bass frequency room modes specifically.

2) Nothing is "bad" about graphic EQ for your application. In fact, a graphic model might well be the easiest thing to try out in order to satisfy your curiousity.

You are obviously not primarily concerned with "audiophile-approved" solutions, and besides it's not at all clear that there will even be a satisfactory solution to your dilemma. It would be easy to say, with the benefit of hindsight, that a B&W/Musical Fidelity system probably wasn't the best choice for your particular set of ears in your small room, but that's no guarantee you'd feel very much differently had you bought something like a tube electronics/electrostatic speaker system or a SET/small monitor system instead, or even purged your CD's and went all-analog. The devices you are looking at are relatively cheap, so buy one and do some experimenting if you like, but by all means get yourself to a specialist who might be able to help you with your fundamental auditory issue. Best of luck to you!