Equalizer in a Hi Fi system

Exactly @mahgister !

I just took a look at the Charter Oaks equalizer.Interesting and it actually looks very attractive. Somehow I expected a more industrial appearance. Plus they sell them online and Mac online retailers do not,which is important to me being nowhere close to a retailer.I'm not motivated enough to spend most of a day driving back and forth to listen to the Mac with unfamiliar equipment.

After doing as much as I can with my room it might be just the thing for a few minor adjustments.Still mulling it over and appreciative of @tlcocks listing brands to look at.

Same for me ...

I learned a lot about the difference between analog EQ and digital EQ ... Thanks to @tlcocks

For sure i cannot afford this product for my low cost system ... Anyway i am happy with what i had ...But i am interested in this discussion because i like to learn ...

Still mulling it over and appreciative of @tlcocks listing brands to look at.

@tlcocks 

I am a gladly retired FP. 

The shop I use to work with was Sound Components in Miami, FL when Peter McGrath owned it. Peter was heavily into recording and we had all kinds of professional equipment in house including equalizers. I have not used one in my current system. I do not have access to one and I certainly am not going to buy one. 

Flat is boring and usually too bright. I have my own "house" curve that I use. How many target curves have you drawn and listened to? What happens if I boose 4 kHz 3 dB. What happens if I cut 125 Hz 3 dB. What happens if I do both? With a low Q? With a high Q? 

@mahgister 

I do not use the term room tuning. The most significant part of acoustic management is designing the room specifically for sound reproduction then you touch up with treatments as needed. The only acoustic treatment I use in my room which was designed for sound reproduction is 3 floor to ceiling rows of  4" acoustic tiles behind both loudspeakers. These kill the back wave of the ESLs above 250 Hz. Because they are line source Dipoles that is the only first reflection point. There is no rear wall. The room is open to the rest of the house. The nearest solid wall is 75 feet away. 

The quality of music reproduction is not subjective. We may have different ways of trying to describe the experience and there is considerable variation to the live experience, so it is a moving target. If I blindfold you and walk you into a media room and you think you are at a live performance, that is a great system. This only works with certain types of music and requires a live recording. Studio recordings are fun and can sound great but they never convince me that I am at a live performance. The best test for imaging is the string quartet. Attend a live one to get a reference. Then play any one of the Luigi Cherubini string quartets performed by the Melos Quartett Stuttgart. Nr 1 in Es-dur is my favorite. If you can close your eyes and feel as if you are at a live performance you have a great system. 

@mahgister

I do not use the term room tuning. The most significant part of acoustic management is designing the room specifically for sound reproduction then you touch up with treatments as needed. The only acoustic treatment I use in my room which was designed for sound reproduction is 3 floor to ceiling rows of 4" acoustic tiles behind both loudspeakers.

The fact that you use or did not use the expression "room tuning" will not change the fact that passive material treatment are not to be confused with Helmholtz resonators grid tuned for the needs of a specific system/room/ears ... It could be professionnally integrated in the walls by a pro acoustician or by anyone at low cost for his needs...it is room tuning in the two case ... This is a word necessary to distinguish absorbing-reflective-diffusing panels of various materials from mechanically tunable devices as are the resonators who can modify the pressure zones distribution in the room if well located ...

Then room tuning exist in architecture too ...It can also inspire some homemade music lovers as me to experiment with it to learn acoustics with his own ears... This is what Helmholtz did with his ears and the correlated computations of parameters and his ears/brain perceptive experience ... It is called Helmhotz theory of hearing Egyptian priest were masters in this room tuning ...

Then room tuning exist...

The quality of music reproduction is not subjective.

The quality of music experience must be also subjective and not only determined by objective parameters ... Guess why ? Without human brain/ears with a heart there is no perceived qualities only a statistical chaos at best ... The word "qualia" refer to subject not to a dead object ...

We may have different ways of trying to describe the experience and there is considerable variation to the live experience, so it is a moving target.

Here you confuse a moving target with a moving hunter... Because the acoustic target is there and not moving because it is defined by all parameters in acoustic and psycho-acoustics... Even if two maestro dont have the same subjective musical experience they generally most of the times agree about what is musical in acoustic experience ...They differ not by so much...The same is true for acoustician who can agree about the best sonic space , or recording engineers accord about what his a good recorded playback ...

Gear obseesed people call the goal a frustrating moving target by ignorance , musicians and acousticians called " the hunter" moving toward a standing target : a training session for his ears ...

The best test for imaging is the string quartet. Attend a live one to get a reference. Then play any one of the Luigi Cherubini string quartets performed by the Melos Quartett Stuttgart. Nr 1 in Es-dur is my favorite. If you can close your eyes and feel as if you are at a live performance you have a great system.

I agree with that...

And i am happy to say that with Beethoven quartet by Talich for example the imaging is pin point but with a soundstage out of my head as if i was listening speakers ... My headphone modified and optimized are the AKG K340 ... An hybrid never replicated about which Kennerton representative said to me that it will cost too much to make one with a good profit margin because of the complexity of the design and the cost of this research ... They thought about it and renounced ... This does not means that an hybrid will not exist someday...

But myself i guess that with BACCH filters and any top magneplanar or dynamic headphone or a top electrostatic we can create a soundfield out of the head very easily at no further costs and better ... Then there is a strong probability that a new AKG K340 will never be born again ... It will not be necessary ...The Choueiri DSP will create in a much precise better way the same out of the head impression.. but for now it is my reference 100 bucks system with my 300 bucks Sansui alpha ...