kren0006,
You are being truly nice these days, which I appreciate, thanks. I agree with most of you said today. You have an open mind, which is more than I can say for Jay. Words have been wasted on trying to bash me. Everyone should just listen to the videos of the GTA on p 280 of this thread, playing the same 1st and 2nd songs as the Alexx, on both videos of Boulder and Gryphon. Also, everyone should be honest at how close in quality the Ulf comes to the Alexx. A few people said they prefer the Ulf. I like some aspects of each speaker.
Since you are nice, I will answer your valid post about whether EQ of higher freq affects bass. YES, it does. The reason is that natural bass instruments like string bass, lower brass instruments like trombone, tuba, bass sax, kettle drums, etc., have a wide freq range. These instruments have lots of bass energy, but a spectrum analyzer shows a surprising amount of energy much higher in freq. These higher freq harmonics are perceived as "growl" or "buzz." For a male voice, you hear the body and chest for lower freq, and raw vocal cords and throat as higher freq components of the sound. So the total sound includes this wide range of freq. If you are careful with the HF boost, you can bring out the higher freq components of the total sound which are often submerged in dull recordings played on rolled off speakers and electronics. The sound will be natural as long as HF are not aggressively boosted. It is really Goldilocks, done by ear--not too hot, not too cold. Some recordings are so dead and laid back that they need much boost, and others which are already EQ'ed hot, need little. I might like what a particular engineer did, or not, and then make adjustments according to the recording and what speaker I am listening to. Some speakers are so dead and rolled off. Maybe I can improve them a little with EQ, but they are so hopeless that I can't do much to get satisfaction from them.
When the day comes that we have perfect speakers and electronics and recording engineers who do the job the way I want, I won't need EQ. But until that day in the 25th century, EQ will be essential. There are much more benefits from a cheap judicious EQ than big bucks cables. Realistically, I estimate that as a line stage without EQ, my Rane tweaked by mrdecibel is comparable to an average $10K line stage. Whatever superiority a Boulder or Gryphon preamp may have, that superiority is much smaller than the benefits of engaging the EQ. Any doubters should say no more, but just do the listening. Most important, OPEN THEIR MIND.
You are being truly nice these days, which I appreciate, thanks. I agree with most of you said today. You have an open mind, which is more than I can say for Jay. Words have been wasted on trying to bash me. Everyone should just listen to the videos of the GTA on p 280 of this thread, playing the same 1st and 2nd songs as the Alexx, on both videos of Boulder and Gryphon. Also, everyone should be honest at how close in quality the Ulf comes to the Alexx. A few people said they prefer the Ulf. I like some aspects of each speaker.
Since you are nice, I will answer your valid post about whether EQ of higher freq affects bass. YES, it does. The reason is that natural bass instruments like string bass, lower brass instruments like trombone, tuba, bass sax, kettle drums, etc., have a wide freq range. These instruments have lots of bass energy, but a spectrum analyzer shows a surprising amount of energy much higher in freq. These higher freq harmonics are perceived as "growl" or "buzz." For a male voice, you hear the body and chest for lower freq, and raw vocal cords and throat as higher freq components of the sound. So the total sound includes this wide range of freq. If you are careful with the HF boost, you can bring out the higher freq components of the total sound which are often submerged in dull recordings played on rolled off speakers and electronics. The sound will be natural as long as HF are not aggressively boosted. It is really Goldilocks, done by ear--not too hot, not too cold. Some recordings are so dead and laid back that they need much boost, and others which are already EQ'ed hot, need little. I might like what a particular engineer did, or not, and then make adjustments according to the recording and what speaker I am listening to. Some speakers are so dead and rolled off. Maybe I can improve them a little with EQ, but they are so hopeless that I can't do much to get satisfaction from them.
When the day comes that we have perfect speakers and electronics and recording engineers who do the job the way I want, I won't need EQ. But until that day in the 25th century, EQ will be essential. There are much more benefits from a cheap judicious EQ than big bucks cables. Realistically, I estimate that as a line stage without EQ, my Rane tweaked by mrdecibel is comparable to an average $10K line stage. Whatever superiority a Boulder or Gryphon preamp may have, that superiority is much smaller than the benefits of engaging the EQ. Any doubters should say no more, but just do the listening. Most important, OPEN THEIR MIND.