Equalizer in a Hi Fi system


Just curious to hear everyone’s opinions on using an equalizer in a high end hi fi system. Was at work tonight and killing time and came across a Schitt Loki max $1500 Equalizer with some very good reviews. What are some of the pros / Benefits and cons in using one. Just curious. BTW. I’m talking about a top of the line. Hi end equalizer. Mostly to calm some high frequencies and some bad recordings. 

tattooedtrackman
In all your post above mijostyn you accused me of not having listen to a good stereo system in my life , as the one you claimed to have heard yourself younger with your friend who ignorant as you said he was, anyway assembled one by pure chance ... Sorry but very good stereo system dont exist much among ignorant consumers by mere luck in their living room with no electrical, no mechanical and no acoustical control...I know this for a fact ...
 
Then you claimed to correct me but instead you are saying a falsity : crosstalk FOR SURE exist between the speakers as TWO competing sound source for the ears/brain , and is a perceived effect because the two PERCEIVED speakers interacted as i said and the ears/brain loose spatial information because of this interaction differential time between the ears from the incoming waves competing between the 2 speakers ... You did not understood my post and you patronized me saying falsity , me i used a simple mechanical device experiment to sense the difference between more and less crosstalk as i said , then i know the destructive effect of crosstalk first hand on the imaging ... But it is impossible to suppress crosstalk mechanically as i did for syre but only play with it ... It takes the Choueiri Filters to suppress this competition between two sound sources differently perceived by the brain through the two ears canals .... Crosstalk dont cancel as you claimed ....read about Choueiri here ...
 
You said erroneouly that crosstalk will cancel in stereo system misunderstanding the problem completely because crosstalk is not only a phenomena explained by the two ears differential time difference as you said but also by the competition between two sound sources ( the speakers) as in all stereo playback ... In a live natural environtment as said Choeiri there is not two birds to be heard but one bird ...
Then you misunderstood completely what is crosstalk ...
 
The crosstalk you mention is not between the speakers, it is between your ears and this remains the same regardless of the sound source. live or reproduced. The effect cancels out.
 
Now this is what Choueiri explain :
 
«There’s a problem, Choueiri and many others maintain, with the way that stereo recordings have been played back for the last 70 years or so. “If you go out in the forest and you hear a bird singing, it’s not because there are two birds singing,” Choueiri explained with his characteristic intensity. “There’s one bird singing.” Stereo only creates the illusion of localized sound by manufacturing a phantom image “and your brain doesn’t believe it.” In life, a sound is precisely localized because of a slight difference in the arrival time at the right and left ears, as well as slight differences in amplitude and tonality that are attributable to the physical presence of the listener’s head and the shape of his or her ears. With reproduced sounds emanating from two loudspeakers, these relationships are considerably degraded, especially if the listening environment introduces reflections. Each ear isn’t hearing what it’s supposed to—inter-aural crosstalk is spoiling the party.»...
 
«the BACCH filter aims to solve the major well-known shortcomings of previous XTC schemes. Choueiri developed a sophisticated head-tracking mechanism that considerably enlarges the “sweet spot” for the primary listener and obviates the need to sit in your chair as though rigor mortis has set in. More critically, the BACCH filter doesn’t introduce any coloration to the signal. How is it done? At the most basic level, Choueiri found a way to shift XTC processing from the amplitude domain to the more “subliminal” phase domain, a manipulation of the signal that the brain is less likely to notice. The BACCH filter is the central feature of Theoretica’s commercial audiophile products.»
 
 
As you can understand Choueiri filters is not to be confused with any XTC scheme ambiophonics or others and has nothing to do with your equalisation decvice at any price ... You cannot suppress stereo crosstalk between the two speakers with conventional equalisation , mechanical or electronical ... Read more Choueiri to understand ...
 
Now what you said about headphones is not false but not true either ... Why? Because unlike your simplistic claims, all headphones are not equal ...
 
Anyone who has been to a live modern music performance like NIN or Tool knows this. With headphones it is missing entirely, like taking a shower with a raincoat on. Your opinion manifests because you have never heard a state of the art system that can image at the highest levels.
my AKG K340 gave me a speaker-like imaging out of my head , for sure it is recording dependant , but the imaging is there with holographic depth ... If you want to know why read the Dr. Gorike patent as i did before optimizing my K340 ... I succeeded after 6 months of experiments ...
 
Me i gave arguments i dont attack people ad hominem as you did claiming there is no audiophiles who listen with headphones or accusing me to have never heard a true imaging , but claiming at the same time that your past friend did that by pure luck with his system created by ignorance and randomness ... Did you perceive the absurdities in your post ?

Now we are going circular argument, dog chasing tail. . I won’t try to convince you further. Please though, we must not conflate room correction digital EQ with tone control!  You have already said you never boost treble with your digital applications. So I know in that all that I need to know. (Namely that digital treble boost is quite audibly inferior.) I DO like that you attempt to get your amp loudspeaker synergy to a measured flat out to 20khz. That’s obviously ideal for treble extension. The less EQ the better, of course. However, you are just another audiophile who knows everything there is to know about room correction/ phase/timing corrective applications (which is great), but will never know the joys of the analog air band boost. That’s ok 😊. At least Miro knows!

incidentally, I believe digital “tampering” with all these variables creates unnatural sound and more problems than good. Get a good listening room and tonally adjust with an MQ112, Vintage Skyline, Charter Oak or whatever the analog choice and THAT delivers the best sound!  I’ve compared my home experience with 100,000 dollar systems in perfect rooms and prefer mine with EVERY recording, good or bad. 

tlcocks dont be upset ... 😊

read what mijostyn said :

NO analog EQ unit can claim ANY of this. There is literally no comparison. You might as well use an abacus rather than a computer. There is no frequency that analog EQ is even remotely equivalent. As Rob himself suggests, it is the kind of distortion some people find Euphonic. I do not.

Mijostyn dont understand that we can use an analog electronic EQ or a mechanical control of the room , which is a way using tools to transform an acoustic situation to another one by LISTENING as the main guide ...Or we can use a tool and forgetting the territory as he do , confusing it with the map, because we never trusted our ears to begin with and we will never trust them ....Mijostyn brain is mandated to perceive as real the maps he created with his toys ... I myself as you do use some tools to correct and refine our own hearings which stay always at the command post ... We trust our ears ... Not mijostyn, he distrust his ears ...

Not only mijostyn dont understand crosstalk as i demonstrated in the post above , he really believe that spatial information encoded in the sound perception is only a subjective illusion , forgetting how evolution trained the human ears for tracking the sound sources information at the cost of our survival and forgetting that precise speech sound modulations perception is also mandatory for our survival ...

He does not know that evolution did not use only Fourier mapping tools to do this but more complex tools unknown to us in the brain ... It is the reason why hearing can beat the Fourier limits 10 times and more ...

The Fourier limits resulted from the constraints imposed by the linear mapping of the audible territory in a linear abstracted time domain with abstract concepts as frequencies,phase amplitude etc instead of the real perceived qualities , and the ears/brain beat the Fourier maps and cross over them in identification of frequencies because the brain works non linearly in his own time domain...

The brain hear the real qualities it was trained for by evolution , not abstraction ; and the brain is more than a Fourier machine ...From the works of J.J. Gibson in visual perception , Science going toward more ecological theories of perception had established that visual and audible perceptions are not maps created by a computing brain , but participated interacting phenomena not reducible to abstracted linear maps ...

 

Read this :

https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html

 

«We have indications that the hearing system is highly attuned to the sounds you actually hear in nature, as opposed to abstract time-series; this comes under the rubric of 'ecological theories of perception' in which you try to understand the space of natural objects being analyzed in an ecologically relevant setting, and has been hugely successful in vision. Many sounds in nature are produced by an abrupt transfer of energy followed by slow, damped decay, and hence have broken time-reversal symmetry. We just tested that subjects do much better in discriminating timing and frequency in the forward version than in the time-reversed version (manuscript submitted). Therefore the nervous system uses specific information on the physics of sound production to extract information from the sensory stream.»

I’m not mad at all. Just adamant that I know what I hear is universally true. I’ve had too many people tell me my stereo sounds absolutely surreal to believe otherwise. You will never ever hear Pink Floyd Echoes from album Meddle cause your friend who’s an avid concert goer to sit bolt upright and state “oh my god, it sounds like you’re in the studio with them!”  
not mad @mahgister , just ADAMANT. By the way, the BACCH concept is fascinating but would have to hear to believe in it of course. 

By the way, the BACCH concept is fascinating but would have to hear to believe in it of course.

For sure you are right ... ...

But the explanation by Choueiri well understood without replacing the listening experience is enough to understand why this is an acoustic revolution for playback system , not a mere toy or gadget ... Choueiri wrote scientific papers in acoustics not marketing articles for digital equalization 😁... His DSP is patented and unique and grounded in psycho-acoustics ...

Anyway when i will bought it it will be without any hearing experience before because i cannot travel and will not be able to go where i can test it ... But i understood what he talk about and it is enough for me ...