2. amps-preamps
  3. 175792-134479

I miss my Loudness Button and Tone Controls....

So I recently upgraded my system to a Rogue Audio Sphinx integrated amplifier, V2.

Prior to this purchase I was using a NAD C162 preamp, and an Emotive UA-200 amplifier.

After a month of listening, I have to say, I miss the tone controls and the loudness feature on the old NAD pre-amp, especially when listening at lower volumes. The Rogue amp sounds great when played at a minimum of 50% of its output, but at lower volumes, it just seems flat. I do use a sub (SVS SB-2000 pro, and I'm using a very efficient speaker (Zu Audio DW's).

I've toyed with the idea of buying an EQ of some sort that has a bypass so that I can boost some of the frequencies when listening at lower volumes, and then bypass when I listening at higher volumes.

Any thoughts on this? Anyone experience anything similar? I'm about to pack and sell the Rogue amp, as the cons outweigh the pros for me.

 

 

barkeyzee1
hifi59's avatar
hifi59
51 posts
 

You’d be amazed on how well a good a higher end receiver can sound once “professionally “ calibrated using its built in eq (parametric in my case.) Those built in auto eq systems don’t hold a candle to a manual professional calibration. When done properly, the results, ime, have always been better vs bypassing the tone controls or equalizer. Of course, bypassing tone controls is the way to go IF your room acoustics are near perfect, but that’s rare in most cases.

gerrie
107 posts
 

A high end receiver can never give the sound as a good two channel amp.

 

 

invalid
1,247 posts
 

Do receivers really count as high end audio?

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,196 posts
 

Do receivers really count as high end audio?

Certainly not less "high end" that an alleged high end amplifier in a non treated and uncontrolled room for me...

Acoustic trump any design of a singular piece of gear in S.Q. improvement /price tag RATIO...

High quality sound means more than just a high-end quality design of an amplifier .... No ?

They are not EQUAL expression and equal realities, save perhaps modulo acoustic methods...

To sound good something MUST be well embedded in his working dimensions: mechanical,electrical, and especially acoustical...

Then owning a very good receiver does not means a low sound quality  "de facto"...

But a good receiver comparable to a good amplifier are not so much numerous indeed...

The very good Kenwood receiver i one times own was inferior to my Sansui amplifier on all counts...

But i never compared them in a well controlled environment for sure... It is my deduction...

 

 

fleschler
2,029 posts
 

For LPs, R2R and CDs, I have not used tone controls or loudness adjustments for 40+ years. 

However, my 2 TVs use Yamaha CR620 receivers, with speakers which are high end but not optimally positioned.  I use the loudness control judiciously to boost the warmth/balance out the beryllium tweeters.   

Otherwise, my main listening room uses hallographs and correctly positioned speakers to obviate the need for tone controls.  A poorly mastered recording is not altered but with 35,000+ LPs, R2R and CDs, most are still musically enjoyable despite their deficiencies. 

I do use either a parametric equalizer and/or a Marantz 7c for my 78 rpm records.  My 7,000 78s have no standardized equalization (especially acoustic recordings) that require adjustment.

More to discover