2. misc-audio
  3. 1137452459

EQ's... why doesnt everybody have one?

Just browsing around the systems on this site, i knoticed that very few have equalizers. I realize some claim they introduce unacceptable noise but i would hardly call my Furman Q-2312, at %>.01 20Hz-40kHz, unacceptable. This $200 piece of equiptment ($100 on sale at musiciansfriend.com) replaces several thousand dollars in assembling a perfectly linear system in perfectly linear room, and in my opinion, accomplishes the task better than any room design could no matter how well engineered. It brought my system (onkyo reciever, NHT SB-3 speakers and Sony CD changer) to a level i could not have dreamed. It extends the SB-3's frequency response by at least 10 Hz to a satisfying 30 Hz without any rolloff or sacrifice in clarity, but the greatest improvement was definately in the Mid-range, around the SB-3s crossover frequency of 2.6kHz. The clarity of vocals, strings, guitars, brass... anything in this range rivals that of uneq'd systems costing well into the thousands of dollars... my total cost; $800. One of the more supprising differences is a marked improvement in immaging, it think this might have to do with eliminating several resonances in the right channel caused by my back wall (the left back wall has a curtain over it). The second my dad heard the difference he got on my computer to buy one for himself, he couldnt even wait to get back to his own, he then kicked me outa the listening chair and wouldnt get up for the better part of an hour.
-Dan-
dk89
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,651 posts
 
Dan wrote: "I owned a TacT for a while and, while I never had great results with it, I continue to believe in the technology and think Peter Lyngdorf is one of the few genuine geniuses in high-end audio."

TacT is now run by the original software developer (see BOZ) and Peter Lyngdorf showed a new device under his own name at CES. It is similar to the TacT but differs a bit in hardware and in its approach to multisite measurements.

Kal
Ag insider logo xs@2x
drubin
3,267 posts
 
Oh, I did not know that. Will have to check it out.
unsound
7,315 posts
 
The new TacT gear promises to adjust room correction relative to volume as suggested by Fletcher-Munson et al. I'm very interested in this type of gear. That the TacT gear can be kept in the digital domain right through cross-overs and amplification is most interesting. Too bad the power options are limited. Some have argued that by adjusting for the room effects one can't help but pervert the initial primary sound. The counter argument is that the majority of sound is effected by the room. Countered by the brain has the ability to seperate the two so long as there is enough time between original and reflected sound. Most seem to agree that below 150 to 200 Hz that this type of correction will be beneficial to most. Does a high quality digital room correction device that only effects sound below this point exist?
Ag insider logo xs@2x
drubin
3,267 posts
 
Well, just don't do any correction above your preferred frequency.
robm321
932 posts
 
The difference with the Parc is the fact that it uses high end components inside that are less likely to degrade the sound. A $200-300 EQ is like running your hifi gear through a clock radio. Your system is only as strong as it's weakest link. It will destroy the suttle sounds. I'm glad you enjoy and were blown away by the low priced EQ, and I realize we shouldn't judge until we try it. But frankly, there are a lot of hyped up ideas here, and I'd be nuts to buy into them all.

For those that enjoy this EQ, good for you, don't stop enjoying on my account, but it just doesn't make any sense that detail, harmonic structure, etc. isn't lost through a cheap power supply, cheap components and cheap connectors. If that was the case all hifi hear would be around $200-300.

What components are you using with this EQ?
More to discover