Equalizer in a Hi Fi system

"Equalizing" is typically thought of as more or less elaborative tone controls as an extra measure on top of preconfigured passive speakers, and being able to attenuate a usually limited range of frequency bands. The rub mostly centers on the "extra layer" that is introduced with an equalizer, certainly as a separate component and in the analogue domain, which then messes up with the purity of the signal.

Essentially though an "equalizer" is not defined by what it usually does, how and where it's implemented or is regarded as, but rather its mere function of being able to modify a signal. This can be done in different ways and more or less intricately (/successfully), and in that sense a passive crossover is an equalizer just like a DSP/digital crossover, electronic crossover, acoustics, speaker placement, etc.

As such equalizing doesn't have to be an extra layer, but instead one that can be accessed at the very core of what is already the central "equalizing" device of the speakers; a DSP acting as a digital crossover - that is, replacing a passive ditto between the amp(s) and drivers entirely (lest not forget: the passive XO being a layer in itself that is here eradicated) - can be an extremely elaborative signal modification measure through a range of parameters that isn't only about attenuating a few, fixed frequency bands.

Indeed: why fix with limited aids as an extra, detrimental component addition when you can do it at the heart of the design with what's already there, from the listening position on the fly, and with a much broader range of parameters to boot?

I won’t go into how much better (again) studio mastering analog ideally with a hardwire bypass sounds compared to DSP. Read the whole thread. This war was fought already. It’s actually a great thread. Go back and read if if you’re so inclined. 

@tlcocks wrote:

I won’t go into how much better (again) studio mastering analog ideally with a hardwire bypass sounds compared to DSP. Read the whole thread. This war was fought already. It’s actually a great thread. Go back and read if if you’re so inclined.

I wasn’t aware there was a war to be fought here. So what are you, a guardian of this thread who wants to be right about "studio mastering analog" being the best approach in equalizing, telling everyone who deviates from this line of thinking to put a sock into it?

Maybe you should reread what I just wrote above and think it through in terms of a suggested, different way to approach equalization, i.e.: one that involves a quality DSP - and it needn’t be a DEQX device for that to be the case, even with all the trimmings settings and parameter-wise - as a digital crossover only (with room correction being optional) for fully active configuration with several PEQ’s for each driver section with gain setting in 0.25dB increments, Q, delay, filter types and slopes, presets, etc. A digital platform gives you far more options here, and as an active approach it’s important to note that one avoids an analog layer - between the amp and drivers not least - in the form of the passive crossover.

I skimmed through most of the thread btw., and seeing how a number of people get caught up on analog devices (like the McIntosh one), where looks are apparently also important, it’s quite obvious there’s an understanding of equalization that permeates the way of thinking about it, which - apart from a conservative mindset - appears to be founded in a general disdain towards digital (and thereby DSP) and the fact that most use passively configured speakers. If that was my outset I’d get the speaker/acoustics/placement part right to begin with, and likely avoid any kind of additional, electronic equalization - be it analog or digitally based.

Being however my setup context is fully (outboard) active with a digital crossover, I have a very elaborate "equalization" device at hand as an integral part of the speaker system already, and as such am afforded the opportunity to make corrections - if I so choose - on the fly and from the listening position via my laptop.

There is indeed many views about equalisation...😊

I prefer myself my own system/room/ears mechanical equalization with a grid of tuned resonators.

I dont spit on electronical equalisation i used it anyway...

But most people have no idea how powerfully transformative large band mechanical equalization with a grid of resonators could be .

«There is also an adjustable type, called a universal resonator, which consists of two cylinders, one inside the other, which can slide in or out to change the volume of the cavity over a continuous range. An array of 14 of this type of resonator has been employed in a mechanical Fourier sound analyzer. »

Oh I’m not closed minded to hearing it all. I’ve said that many times I want @mijostyn or you or someone to put me in touch with a good demo. Always exploring. The journey never ends. I was impressed by BACCH preamp. I’d love to be impressed by DSP to. Happy to hear and compare!