Equalizer in a Hi Fi system

@ellajeanelle For looks AND performance, it would be hard to beat the new McIntosh MQ112. 

mirolab  Thank you, someone recommended that one to me.  Although I know they make good stuff because I had a few components long ago I am no longer into McIntosh.  I know that their newer stuff is more neutral as opposed to their older warmer sound, but their overall looks and voicing are just not my preference. 

I have the Loki...Love it....But I'm ordering the new McIntosh MQ 112...For 3K it's a winner.

tlcocks  No offense to you or anyone but I gave Schitt a try by buying 3 components for a guest room and all 3 had issues of some sort and had to return them all.  Horrible customer service and subpar product in my opinion, and yes I am talking about their so-called top of the line stuff.  The saying you get what you pay for definitely applies to Schiit based on my own personal experience with them.  As far as well regarded, as you mentioned, definitely not to me. Perhaps as paper weights.

To anyone reading this, if you enjoy and are happy with your Schitt products, congratulations and enjoy, just don't try to convince me, because I won't even respond. They have made my permanent "never buy again list", together with other companies which I will not mention for the sake of not initiating a back-and-forth and time-consuming discussion in vain.  Peace...

@mbmi I have had the brand new Mac MQ112 now for about 4 months or so. And all I can tell you it’s a fantastic EQ. And it looks awesome with my ARC gear. Another reason I didn’t want to go with the others mentioned is that they looked very industrial to me also. That alone was a big reason not to buy them. U will be extremely happy with the MQ112. 👍

“Thanks to both of you for the info on the EQ.  I am definitely going to do more serious research into the API equalizers.  It may sound picky, and you can call it girl stuff, but I want them in black and no rack mount ears, or removable ears.  Only one of them will be going on a rack, the others not.  I like everything to match! “

totally get that. My EQ has to look black, full height, and beautiful. Not just sound great. Yeah…that with needing stereo ganged controls leaves, like, 2 units out there that fit the bill!

“tlcocks  No offense to you or anyone but I gave Schitt a try by buying 3 components for a guest room and all 3 had issues of some sort and had to return them all.  Horrible customer service and subpar product in my opinion, and yes I am talking about their so-called top of the line stuff.  The saying you get what you pay for definitely applies to Schiit based on my own personal experience with them.  As far as well regarded, as you mentioned, definitely not to me. Perhaps as paper weights.

To anyone reading this, if you enjoy and are happy with your Schitt products, congratulations and enjoy, just don't try to convince me, because I won't even respond. They have made my permanent "never buy again list", together with other companies which I will not mention for the sake of not initiating a back-and-forth and time-consuming discussion in vain.  Peace...”

Amen, sister!! Offense?? Are you kidding me?!  @ellajeanelle , you are singing to the choir!  I’ve been saying this the whole thread.  You just say it better!  Schitt is sh*t!

@tlcocks Not entirely true TL. Room control is going to change amplitude response across the entire audio band and it will give you a flat system to start with. All the Room Control units I know of also allow users to control amplitude just like an equalizer or by using target curves. Your preference settings will be different after room control is set up.

Understood. Thanks. Room correct to flat. Then impose target curves to tonal preference. The second part for me is the hearing is believing part. If I’m gonna tonally adjust in the digital domain, I’ve gotta hear that it is as 3D and saturated sounding, and as musical, as analog. Gotta hear a DEQX in action. Let me know where I can. You know how to reach me. 

I would like the opinion of those using EQs on whether an EQ can assist with hearing differences between left and right ears.. in my case the left is more deficient than the right that shows minimal age-related decline. I have seen elsewhere that this might be a better solution than a single hearing aide.

Besides needing to differentially apply EQ to left and right, I tend to switch from listening with speakers in front for critical listening to speakers behind me as I work. Therefore, I need a solution that can quickly be set to reverse (mirrored) application. Any advice/guidance would be most appreciated!

I would think high quality EQ would be very useful in this use case. Might sound more natural than compensating with a hearing aid. I admit to knowing more about EQ than hearing aids though!  I believe some hearing aids utilize digital EQ, if I’m not mistaken 

For sure you are right !

I will trust more analog EQ too than this panels behind my ears...These panels are like my wood foldable screen, a device i used in my room , i could not use it without a balance between absorption-reflection-and diffusion in the room and on the foldable  screen... ...

And hearing aids use digital EQ for creating tailor made hearing aids for specific frequencies loss...

Psychoacoustics rule audio in any form...

I would think high quality EQ would be very useful in this use case. Might sound more natural than compensating with a hearing aid. I admit to knowing more about EQ than hearing aids though!  I believe some hearing aids utilize digital EQ, if I’m not mistaken

I was/am interested in the McIntosh MQ112 equalizer.  I saw the Skifiaudio video on this unit and one thing that struck me was internally, the unit incorporates op-amps.

I was looking for a fully discrete unit without op-amps.  

I'm not sure about incorporating op-amps into my system.  According to the video interview, the unit was really intended for McIntosh owners that have older systems without equalizers or tone controls.

I'm still thinking about this one.

enjoy

@minorl   I went to Skyfi audio and purchased this a few months ago. I told him what I had in my audio system. My system is ARC Ref 750s mono blocks. ARC Ref 6SE. ARC Ref CD9. B&W Matrix 800s. Mac MQ112 eq. Straightwire Crescendo tri wired speaker cables and XLR interconnects. 4 Audioquest Dragon PCs. 2) HC and 2 Source. This Mac MQ 112 is phenomenal. It’s just exactly what I needed to tame the high frequencies and not so good cd recording. I can’t recommend this MQ 112 enough. It’s an awesome unit that also looks beautiful with all my ARC gear. That was also very important to me as I did not want anything industrial looking. With or without mounting brackets. 

Okay, that's a pretty darn good system.  

Thank you for the recommendation.  I was concerned with adding op-amps to the signal path, but hmmmmm, might be worth a try.  

Thanks much

enjoy

vacountryboy It's very simple. Just take a look at your audiogram printout. It will show what frequencies you are deficient in on each ear as well as the decibel loss.

Then just find an equalizer that covers those frequencies and boost those frequencies by the same number of decibels to match the deficiencies on the printout, while leaving the remaining bands centered (not boosted or cut).

I added a McIntosh MQ112 to my system last night. Between a Benchmark HPA4 and AHB2. So far, so good. The intention is to use it more or less like a loudness button. I had a Dangerous Music BAX EQ for a few weeks, but one of the switches developed a problem. (Returned to Sweetwater for refund.) Apart from that, I can recommend the D. M. BAX EQ, especially for its separate controls for L and R channels. And the fact that (apart from the low and high cut filters), it is a shelving EQ. So why not try another D. M.? Fair question. I don't have a great answer. I did try an SPL Vitalizer after the D. M. Lots of fun. Might be worth a try. At low volumes, worries about "high fidelity" seem a bit ridiculous to me, if pushed too far. The SPL has a hard bypass. I don't recall if the D. M. does and I haven't experimented yet with whether signal passes through the McIntosh with it powered off. Again, though, I have no complaints yet about the MQ 112. It was between it and an API 5500. (Allegedly hard/true bypass also.) Could have gone either way. And I might still.

Yeah, I still wanna hear that MQ112. Good stuff!

I scheduled a hearing test, at 75, I’m sure they will find something, if nothing else I am guessing one ear slightly different than the other.

Any equalizer that is single band is going to make same adjustments for both speakers.

I advocate Dual Band (L&R separate adjustments), and 31 bands of adjustment

6.8.10.21. 31 bands gives you more precision for both your space and your hearing with no aids in, or aids in. 31 bands gives individual control of 1/3 octaves

I bought/returned one that had no detents at zero position of each slider.

I chose DBX 2231 /dual Channel 31 Band with Detents.

One advantage is that it is 3U 5-1/4" high, thus the sliders are ’taller’, more precision adjusting the sliders.

I went for Chinese Made Clone (identical, dbx are made in Malaysia, dbx manual in the box). They are a metal box with a power supply, printed circuit boards, identical controls, i.e. same parts.

Amazon (unit already in USA, others ship from China, if problem ....)

EMB Professional Sound System EB831EQ Graphic Equalizer/Limiter with Type 3 NR

@vacountryboy the only issue is when an instrument or vocal is emanating from only from the side where your hearing loss is. If there's no or little information from that speaker to begin with turning the balance towards that side or the levels up wouldn't help.Mono recordings would work of course.

I don't regret buying the Lokius.It was always meant to be temporary, an inexpensive way to experiment.I kept it past the return period to continue trying balanced cables and while considering the next step to a pro model. If the API was available in black or silver it would be unobtrusive in a home system. It's the same standard width as most components at 19" and the "ears" aren't obvious. It's nowhere near as attractive as the MacIntosh EQ though.😍

Op amps are bad as a blanket statement is NOT TRUE. My Charter Oak has op amps in circuit and is the best pro studio EQ hardware I’ve ever had the pleasure of hearing in my home. And I’ve heard several. It’s all in the implementation and the quality of parts used. Like the old saying goes, the devil’s in the details. 😊🎶

No audio pro would attempt to set up a sound system in a venue without using EQ.  Rooms are different and getting decent response in any room usually requires a bit of EQ.   I use the DSP in Roon and a pro audio 32 band equalizer for other sources that costs far less than that Loki and has more control.   The idea of opamps sounding bad is ludicrous.  The recordings you listen to went through dozens if not hundreds of them unless you are listening to nothing but 50+ year old vinyl.

I use a White Instruments Inc EQ 4100 10 Band/Channel, very transparent see here.

Mike

@ditusa that's a lot of knobs to adjust:-) That's not a criticism. Too many for me as a newbie though!Concerning noisy opamps - I can only speak from my limited experience. My API is dead silent.Nary a click or hiss.There's no issue having it stacked on my dac or preamp either.

I know that Schiit admits to experiencing noise issues with the Lokius and recommends to keep it isolated from other components.

@jtcf , I am so happy the API has worked out so well for you. Furthermore, am happy for the others who have dared to try pro analog EQ or MQ112, branching out from the Schiit products, and being richly rewarded!  This has been an illuminating forum for many. I am so glad. 😊🎶

So is Audiogon's search good for ANYTHING??

I really like this thread, purely about equalizers, but if I search discussions for "equalizer" it doesn't find it.... at all!  Even if I type all the words of the exact title "Equalizer in a HiFi system" it does not find it.   Oops... you see my tiny mistake? I missed just ONE tiny space in the title and it did not find this thread.  

This is the exact opposite of computers helping us! 

Wow. Speechless!

@mirolab ,

One more trick you can do, if you know a few words in a thread's heading. Go to google and type like this:

"equaliser in a hifi system" site:audiogon.com

I purposely made the spelling mistake in "equalizer". But Google got me THIS thread as the FIRST hit. That last part is very important. "site:" followed by the specific site you want to search. You might be aware of this, but I thought this might help others.

@milpai  Thanks, that's a great tip. Didn't know that.

But it does make sense.  Many times the official Help within a program is lacking, and I just ask the same technical question in Google and get the answer I need. Very often there's a Youtube video showing me how to use the feature I want! 

@mirolab , you are welcome!

I found another new to ship high end analog pro balanced EQ that has full function stereo ganged controls with stereo link. You can operate in full stereo link from EITHER side, L or R, all the dials. Which is GREAT. it’s by Wes Audio with both tube and transformer balanced output. Super product. Call NGTubeEQ. Cool 6 grand, but looks uber high end. Serious EQ! 🎶😊

So one of my Charter Oaks is in the early stages of age related decline. But it’s still good for now. But naturally, being the EQ freak that I am, I’ve decided on a replacement for it. I’m having Hendyamps build a SS version of their famous tube EQ the Michelangelo. Don’t wanna mess with tubes. I’ve bought it and am just waiting. Absolutely cannot wait to hear it and compare it to my CO PEQ-1 and report to y’all!😊🎶

The Michelangelo is raved about its sonics on Gearspace.  It’s beautiful as well. 2 rack unit height and 19” wide. Same as my CO. All dials are stereo. No left and right dials. Check it out online, if you’re so inclined. 

If you can locate one, the DEQX Premate is beyond phenomenal, add’s time delay and sub integration…two other fairly important components when dialing in.  Lyngdorf made a unit, RP-1, if you can find one, another excellent piece.  

I do want to hear an in room demo of one of these DSP preamps. I know the pros talk about professional plugins emulating classic analog designs having gotten closer to their analog counterparts. As mentioned many times here, room correction is something else altogether. I think that’s where I’d want a DSP preamps 

2 weeks until my Michelangelo arrives. Can hardly wait!

Now it’s late next week. Arghh!  Being built now. 

"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.