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

Showing 50 responses by tlcocks

And I do read about shootouts on Gearspace with mastering engineers comparing the best plug-in digital emulations of classic analog designs, eg Knif Soma or SPL PQ, and they say similar to my observations on my own system but with a smaller margin of difference. But mastering is broad stroke. DSP great for narrow filter in mixing. I am quite sure if you don’t have a Luxman amp with tone controls and you want to adjust tone for differing recordings in your hi fi system that analog is a better chance at retaining the hi fi characteristics of the straight signal. I have no doubts though that the best digital will eventually eclipse analog for adjusting tone. Technology marches on. Look at AI. It’s inevitable. 

My guy locally says even the best DSP for room correction leaves a slight haze and grain to the mids. I want to hear on my own though. 

Sorry so excessive here. Again just my passion coming out. Let’s just leave it at I need to hear what you’re doing and you need to hear what I’m doing. Fair enough?

“mere inclusion of an analog studio mixer ”

One more thing. It’s not a mixing EQ. It’s a broad Q MASTERING EQ

Oh, and Charter Oak PEQ-1 reviews from 2010 call it a “magic box”. Literally. Sounds a bit more serious when a studio engineer says this, huh?  And don’t call that arrogant. Am simply responding to you own condescension.  I know am asking for you to react. Wanted to say that earlier but forgot. Sorry. Posting these in between sets at the gym. (Couldn’t wait til home😆). Let’s call a truce, hopefully. 

Thanks. Since I always adjust short of audible distortion I believe I’m fine as you say. That’s what 2 sound techs have said as well. Regarding phase shift, @mirolab much earlier in this thread addressed how minimum this plays into things. He’s got his own studio for mixing and mastering in his home. I’d defer to him. I like the sound of analog EQ much better than the tools you mentioned. However there are the best of the digital applications which studios use which I haven’t heard. So I can’t compare 

I am well aware that Loki Max is ANALOG. if you’d take the time to read the whole thread, you wouldn’t find me at all confused. 

“An important step communicating is knowing, or trying at least to get bearing on what’s discussed in the first place, and its context. Your use of an analog mastering broadband EQ device is likely as an active component and thus a buffer or impedance matching unit to boot (much like an active preamp), whereas my context is a different one that also involves amp-driver interfacing; it’s hardly an apples to apples comparison, on top of EQ’ing offering different opportunities - depending on the technology involved.”


yes. Fully understand and agree here too. 

“There’s much more to a DSP than that, not least also acting as a crossover at the same time (we’re talking months of optimizations in my case tailoring the speaker sound from ground up).”

I am understanding and well aware of this. That’s precisely why I want to find a show room or someone’s dedicated system and room to hear this in action. I’d probably drive or even fly a distance if I can’t find it locally in FL. 

Used to play around with that one and Aphex. Those work differently as you stated than EQ. High end EQ is more natural and true to life and indeed more resolute. I won’t deny I enjoyed their punchy sound for a while. Did you know FM radio used to broadcast using the enhancement of sonic maximizers?  Don’t know if they still do. That was why FM version sounded more punchy and enhanced than your store bought vinyl or tape or cd. 

My SS Hendyamps Michelangelo is finally shipping to me. Am excited for the new toy!  Will report here after a while once I’ve had some time with it. 

Honestly this thing is sickly good. I put all the dials on flat and turn gain way down below unity gain. Going back and forth between hardwire bypass while adjusting amp volume to correct. EVEN ON WELL BELOW UNITY GAIN THE UNIT IS TRANSPARENT. That’s truly remarkable! CO didn’t have 1) the hardwire bypass or 2) the transparency and lack of its own color with bands engaged. MA the better unit!!  

Anyone serious about tone control as hi fi as possible should check out  Hendyamps Michelangelo. It is the first unit to sound superior to my beloved Charter Oak PEQ-1 and will be replacing both of mine. Sound is stupendous, glorious!  True improvements over pure line in for many many recordings. 

Best thing about unit is that any master gain cuts are handled beautifully with no signal integrity degradation. Meaning bigger boosts are handled with aplomb and no where near distorting the line. It is another “magic box” in the analog realm to take one straight to hifi heaven. Chris Henderson builds amazing gear!

I am taking a shitty recording right now (but love the album) and REALLY punching and shining it up. Better than the CO ever did with album!  Exhilarating!

Just put the MA in my loudspeaker setup. In the Bryston tape loop. It’s dead quiet, completely transparent with hardwire bypass in and tape loop toggled on and off. Couldn’t hear any difference. That’s great. I now know for sure it is transparent in bypass mode. And how do the bands sound on my big rig?  As good or even better than CO in there previously. This equalizer is fabulous. The mids are very smooth and resolute both. Easily 10% better than my beloved CO PEQ-1. Great great tone box!  

As I keep listening to MA in my big rig, I am impressed upon by a couple of thoughts. One is that I have posted too much here and now no one cares to listen to me. The second thought is that that occurring at this point in time is tragic because this EQ is the easiest to use, the most transparent on bypass (completely transparent, like Loki Max and Lokius), with the best sounding band boosts and best signal integrity with master gain cuts (so the signal still pristine but not too hot with band boosts).  In other words, this is a perfect hardware EQ for any hi fi system, no matter the cost, if you wish to alter bass and treble without degrading ANYTHING. Period. Having now heard in my home 5 pro pieces (all valued new at 3-6K) and the Loki Max, I would say two things. 1. I know what I’m talking about. And 2. I seriously doubt, and I mean this, that there is a better sounding hardware EQ on the planet for tone adjustment in your hi fi system. 
Yes, it’s frustrating the crickets. You all know how much I love my Charter Oak. This is the only one that’s better with no drawbacks. 
IF YOU LOVE YOUR HI FI AND WISH YOU COULD ADJUST BASS AND TREBLE FOR DIFFERENT RECORDINGS, YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELF TO TRY ONE OF THESE. If 3200 is in your budget. Front end audio has a 30 d ret policy if you don’t like it. 

Thanks @jtcf for the response. And @unreceivedogma, you are right. Whatever works for you. I am just hoping to save any other avid EQers some trial and error, as I’ve made it my sub hobby to explore as many high end hardware EQs as I can. To both of you, happy listening!

Genius quote from Chris Henderson at Hendyamps. When I posed the question of digital vs analog EQ in the studio, this was his response. Enjoy:
 

“Honestly, digital and analog are two completely different beasts.  When you want precision tools that can break the laws od physics, then you need digital.  When you want a tonal enhancement and intangible “mojo” then analog is the way.  I have been a part of the process in designing the Oven and the Michelangelo digital emulations and while the final product is excellent, you are still in the world of trying to make an emulation of something else.  And this emulation is extremely limited by the ability to actually capture all nuance of boiling electrons and quantum field interactions on a fundamental level, which will never produce results that satisfy serious engineers and serious hifi consumers.  It really is that simple. They are amazing products, but it is much like wanting to fly an F-16 fighter jet and then claiming that the high end simulator is the same as flying the actual jet.”

Further thoughts on CO and MA. CO’s mids hold together better with larger bass boosts. No winners here. Calling it a tie. MA sounds better with milder EQ. Both great pieces. 

Oh, and I’m posting on Gearspace forums now. Quite fun, talking analog EQ mojo with recording engineers, some famous. 

I have made a huge decision. As the MA is a lateral move from my CO in the final analysis. Each has different strengths. I couldn’t stop looking, however, at the Wes Audio NGTubeEQ. So I traded in the MA for it. It comes Monday. It has serious rails of power, all passive bands with custom inductors, SS output as well as tube output. It has all kinds of features I may never use. But I think this thing is the real deal. Oh and it does bells or shelves on all four bands. +/- 15 db each band. Or switch to 5 db mode for finer tuning. Most importantly, it can operate as a stereo program EQ where the right controls are slave to the left and auto adjust to your left settings in real time perfect level matched. It arrives Monday and I cannot wait! 

Regarding the YouTube videos, they are somewhat helpful, but ultimately one needs the gear in one’s home on one’s system. Yes, my 2 CO’s have that amazing treble dial, with its sparkle and beauty. The Michelangelo did that really really well also. CO could hit deeper and harder with the bass dials though. Without noticeable phase effects/ mids blurring. The MA could do same up to a point. Really great piece of kit it is as well. 

Pete, THANK YOU for your kindest of words!  Yes this whole thing when implemented correctly is a great passion of mine. Using this gear really opens up the too often boxed, sterile sound of the straight signal. I listen to a lot of rock and for this genre I cannot live without high end EQ. It’s that simple!  Yes, the loudness switch on my old Kenwood integrated was a gem as well. I used it ‘on’ while putting a JVC 10 band in the tape loop back in the 80’s, and that is what started my journey that I’ve been on ever since. Many years ago I resurrected that exact 80’s stereo and compared it sonically to the CO Bryston combo. As much as I loved that old stereo, the modern day set up blew it away. Even without a loudness switch!  So I would say to you thank you, and you’re on the right track. I will provide feedback on the Wes next week. Very much look forward to doing so!

Pete, I sure hope the person you spoke with re the Wes is wrong!  You and I are cut from the same cloth when it comes to HF air band!

For all the unit’s rails of power and with it using passive circuitry and high quality inductors, it should be able to do air band with aplomb. 

I have been demoing the Wes Audio NGTubeEQ the last 3 days. It is Uber expensive but what you get is a super clean sounding unit with all the musicality of my Charter Oaks, in other words amazing SQ. It is finicky at first as a full parametric with a gazillion permutations on how to set it up. I won’t lie. It has been 3 full days of intensive tinkering to get it dialed in. Now that I have it dialed in I can say it sounds utterly amazing. As it should for 6 grand. But the greatest thing about this unit is that you can give it huge bass boosts if necessary and it won’t distort the line like the CO sometimes would with loud compressed rock recordings. For 6 K the Wes is bulletproof against this kind of distortion. Love it!

And a big congratulations goes out to @petieboy12003 for his purchase of that 2018 Charter Oak which he and I verified that Mike Deming made. I now have played with enough EQs, including the most recent Wes Audio, to say with assurance that Pete just bought one of the very best sounding hardware equalizers on the planet. As I suspected and have now proven you have to spend 6 K to get something that sounds like my beloved CO. No wonder I’ve been so in love with this piece for over 10 years!

Yes, the NGTubeEQ is something. I am currently listening to Alice In Chains - Dirt on it. I have chosen with this album, as I’ve always done with it, to get very aggressive with the U shape. I’ve never though enjoyed cuts with any equalizer, either in bands or master gain. I have always found that that sounds worse than boosts with a high quality EQ. This new EQ is no different in this respect. Essentially I build two tone dials with the EQ. Bass and treble. That’s how I like to do it. Others may do it differently. The challenge with this method is clean boosts without distortion or blurred mids from phase shift. My CO has always done this unbelievably well. Now back to the album Dirt. The Wes does it even better with extreme settings. There is zero distortion that I hear. Zero phase shift that I hear. The best way I can state it is it’s as if the band took a time machine to the modern day, and mixed and mastered all over again in the studio with one of the best studio engineers. The album is modernized. It is rich, layered, textured, nuanced. It is full throated. The mids have taken zero damage. IT DOESN’T SOUND EQUALIZED. No artificial etch. No blurring. No phase shift. It sounds DEEP too. Not 2-D like many digital algorithms impose. Or cheaper analog solutions impose. THIS EQ IS THE REAL DEAL. I’m fairly flabbergasted. It sounds BETTER in all audiophile respects when engaged as compared to true bypass. Is it louder?  Yes, because I’ve not cut master gain, which even on this unit denigrates SQ. The key point here is thankfully I don’t have to because 6 grand buys you rails of power and massive headroom. Oh, and all comments are wrt the SS output. Not tube output. Don’t like the tube output. Stock tubes are JJ. I can and will do better and one day roll them. I’m in no hurry though, with what I’m hearing!

You will love CO in your system. Actually, my headphone chain is higher fidelity than my loudspeaker system. So I’m taking my time soaking up the best SQ I’ve ever heard on headphones for a bit longer. But the Wes will be checked out in the big rig though. Don’t worry!  Actually, I’m afraid it’ll sound so amazing there that I’ll be inclined to go a little crazy and buy one for there too!  Uhhh, then the divorce and the REAL cost begins!!

Am enjoying the heck out of this instrument. It is a joy to equalize with such a precision high end device. It is so clean and accurate. BUT…I still love the CO sound!  I love both of these equalizers!  The CO is more rounded but more euphonic. The bell curves on it sound beautiful. The CO has an air of sophistication to its sound that’s hard to deny. I will never get rid of my two. 
I am now playing with tube mode on the Wes and have emulated my same settings but backed down on the bass Q width. Treble filter identical. NOW, this mode sounds really great!  Such fun! 

Yep. Back to Charter Oak after all weekend with Wes. CO is with a sweeter air band, a tighter punchier bass and an overall more euphonic lovely sound. However it’s less of a detail monster than Wes, being essentially more rounded. I have always said the CO turns my solid state into the best sounding tube sound you’ll ever hear. It’s a very sophisticated sound. Beautiful sheen and gloss. Can’t honestly say which unit I like best. Both. For different reasons.

I have put the Wes Audio NGTubeEQ in the loudspeaker system. It’s even better there. Has SOTA resolution and musicality. Endlessly tweakable, if so desired. You can sonically sculpt the sound anyway you want with incredible fidelity. That’s what you get for 6 K in the hardware analog EQ department. Kudos!

Have reached new heights of audiophilism with the aforementioned Alice In Chains album with Wes in big rig. For 6 K you should with decent hi fi gear be able to get this album, which is recessed cymbals and decreased bass kick and forward mids due to loudness wars/ studio compression, to sound great. It’s even greater than before with the use of tube output combined with use of gain and iron pad dials. Great great feature on Wes. You turn up the gain say 3 dbs to slightly overdrive the tubes then iron pad attenuates that extra output. The end result is more resolute saturated mids and better bass heft. Meaning not only does it sound better but you can back off a tad on bass gain, always a good thing with EQ in general. AND every new move you make can be directly instantly compared to your last setting with the stored presets. 
And more importantly, I can be EXTREMELY exacting with listening and instant A-B comparisons as I sit in my listening spot with my Bryston remote and go back and forth with tape loop monitor button, toggling between the sound of my source > DAC > preamp > amp (purest way possible, true true bypass I call it) versus source > DAC > preamp > EQ (active) > amp. Note that pressing ‘Bypass’ on the EQ, the circuitry in this nomenclature looks like this: source > DAC > preamp > EQ in bypass > amp. 
I have been an utter mad scientist for days now with this thing, but what I’m getting out of it is incredible.

I still though stand by my conclusion that CO PEQ-1 is a MORE MUSICAL sounding equalizer. Which, in the end, trumps detail/ resolution for me. 

I would love to hear what you’ve accomplished thus far. Also, if you ever come to know of someone in Florida doing what you’re doing with DEQX and can demo it then please let me know. I wish you the best of luck with your continued success with DEQX. 
I have had a great deal of fun exploring the various analog boxes. My curiosity over DSP remains strong though!

@mijostyn ,Mike, do you recommend any other DSP processing services/ software that’s nearly as good as DEQX and can be demoed in Florida?

Thanks,

Tim

@mijostyn , which sounds best?  Trinnov, Dirac, or the mini DSP?  I have conversed with the Trinnov dealer and have access. Want the one that SOUNDS best. Price no object. Want good tone curves superimposed on all the microphone measurements based correction. This DSP preamp correction will, once tuned in, be compared directly against my best analog EQ. 
Thanks Mike!

Best,

Tim

Thinking Trinnov. You tell me. Also can operate Trinnov preamp from iPad. Like that. Don’t want use computer. 

@mijostyn , so I’m looking at manual. You DO need a computer connected to the SHD via wired to use Dirac Live, yes?  iPad only a remote for basic functions?

Yes, agreed to all. But I love having hi fi tone controls. I have learned in my experimentation with many different pro EQ’s that some certainly are more appropriate in post production playback than others. I think the less complex EQ coupled with good circuit design and quality parts can lead to a very musical and gratifying listening experience. While more complex instruments with more functions and more filters can be too clinical or analytical. My next steps in my hi fi evolution are trying room corrective digital EQ as I’ve previously mentioned, but at least as important, upgrading speaker cable or even speakers and streaming sources to provide the higher fidelity foundation BEFORE any EQ is dialed in. Luckily, I have had for a while now a SQ that I’m really into in a big way. 

Thanks for sharing!  Very cool. I own 3 CO PEQ-1 now. Nothing else sounds quite like it!

Unfortunately I don’t anymore. Mike quit supervising the other company s work around 2018 and they changed production. Changed faceplate. Sounded inferior from that point on.