2. misc-audio
  3. 135979-20253

We give up perspective to avoid tone controls

Hi Everyone,

While most of my thread starters are meant to be fun, I realize this one is downright provocative, so I'm going to try extra hard to be civil. 

One thing that is implicit in the culture of "high end audio" is the disdain for any sort of electronic equalization. The culture disdains the use of anything other than a volume control. Instead we attempt to change everything to avoid this. Speakers, speaker cables, amplifiers, and power cords. We'll shovel tens of thousands of dollars of gear in and out of our listening room to avoid them. 

Some audiophiles even disdain any room acoustic treatments. I heard one brag, after saying he would never buy room treatments: "I will buy a house or not based on how good the living room is going to sound." 

What's weird to me, is how much equalization is done in the mastering studio, how different pro speakers may sound from what you have in your listening room, and how much EQ happens within the speakers themselves. The RIAA circuits in all phono preamps IS a complicated three state EQ, we're OK with that, but not tone controls? 

What attracts us to this mind set? Why must we hold ourselves to this kind of standard? 

Best,


E
erik_squires
ieales's avatar
ieales
1,201 posts
 
When working as a recording engineer, I tried to use as little EQ as possible, preferring to change/move microphones, cables and musicians.

Most consumer tone control circuits are poorly implemented with corners in the wrong place and less than stellar tracking. Futzing with a balance control and EQ is a royal PITA.

Fully parametric EQ would be a nice addition, but it gets very expensive for accurate tracking between channels. The additional wire and circuitry is audible in bypass and I'd prefer not to color the many for the few.

Most problem discs have far more egregious faults than can be fixed with EQ.

If I really want to hear the music and it's really bad, I'll rip it and fix it if possible. Sometimes it's just too far gone.

EQ may regain some favor as digital devices add features.
stereo5's avatar
stereo5
6,486 posts
 
Tone controls is what drew me to McIntosh.  I am much happier now that I am able to make some of the unlistenable Rock CD's listenable again by using a light hand on the tone controls.  For those that do not have them, you are seriously missing out.
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,939 posts
 
I asked about using the tone controls on my Marantz integrated a while back and for the most part, the consensus was to not use them. Being me, I used them anyway until I got my system dialed in and it is definitely better without them.

The controls that come on my JBL 4319 speakers are a different beast. Using just slight adjustments can result in noticeable results, altering the sound in a way that’s different and better than from the integrated.

Until I settled on my preferred speaker cables, they were most useful in tailoring the sound to my tastes without upsetting the audio applecart, so to speak. I’m now at a general setting that works for most recordings but if need be, a slight tweaking of the control rights things without adverse effects. I’m still slowly experimenting.
I’d like to add that although there is a considerable range to work with, I’m talking about very slight adjustments that make a difference in my room.

Can anyone chime in if they know that tone controls at the speaker end of the equation are of benefit for room interactions?

All the best,
Nonoise
ieales's avatar
ieales
1,201 posts
 
It totally depends on the location of the control in circuit. It could simply pad a driver to reduce level, change the xo frequency or a combination of both.

That being said whether they would be of any particular use in a given room totally depends on the romm
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,939 posts
 
Thanks @ieales. 
I just want to do the least amount of damage to the signal before it gets to the speaker. 
More to discover