Equalizer in a Hi Fi system

The track “playing for time” is about to make me cry, it sounds so beautiful. I love Peter Gabriel. Going on a PG binge for a bit!

For all you Peter Gabriel fans. His new release “I/o” at 24/96 FLAC on Qobuz is awesome as well as sonically a production treat as well. Nothing like hearing our favorite artists from yesteryear recorded today with all the saturation, richness , and fullness of the modern day’s studio’s capabilities. Real treat. Listening to this album on lunch break right now on my HEKse chain. Mind scrambling!

Highlights:

Auralic Aries streamer > Bryston B135 SST2 integrated amp with onboard DAC > Martin Logan Montage dipoles.  Transparent cabling. 
The Bryston has an unbalanced tape loop that is completely transparent. In it is contained the CO PEQ-1. They are mated with 4 Cardas Clear Sky RCA to XLR cables which are custom grounded by Cardas to provide full unity gain with every pro piece I’ve put in the loop with the one exception of the Skyline. 

Actually it’s all on page 3. See that page.

I haven’t done all that at Audiogon yet. It’s all on Head Fi. For HP chain. Sorry I haven’t done it on Audiogon for my loudspeaker chain yet. But I discussed all my gear down to the cabling pages ago. I’ll find it and paste it here again. It’s in along narrative earlier in the thread. Be prepared…

@tlcocks What does your system consist of ? I don’t see any posted photos ? Why ? 

Rush is my favorite band of all time. Many of their albums varied considerably in production quality. Most of them benefit massively from high end EQ. The better the EQ, the better the enjoyment!  It’s interesting. I’ve found that some of their hi res remasters are worse and sometimes better. The Redbook remaster of 2112 was a huge sonic improvement. The Metallica Black album remaster a big improvement too. Many remasters suck though. Yes production and remasters are so highly variable it’s nuts. I therefore cannot live without EQ. 

@au_lait  this quote from your post above :

I have very large variety of music that falls outside of what most audiophiles consider well produced, and I view all art as a spectrum like that. Some of the most amazing music I own is some of the worst produced, but there is an undeniable magic

Me too. I particularly enjoy live recordings and older recordings that benefit from a small tweak here and there to clean it up a bit.

Thanks @au_lait !  Awesome. Agree totally with that 20khz and not higher. Yes, the 50khz boost sounds good on my CO, but it’s too thin down lower in the audible frequencies. While I have no doubt that switch is the bomb in a mastering studio, I find the 20 kHz on my CO is the absolute BEST treble tone dial I’ve ever heard 

There are 2 Palettes (3 actually if you count the single input version) - the legendary and expensive Cello Audio Palette MIV and the more home-use version the Cello Palette preamp. If memory serves, the Stereophile article (read it moons ago) is for the consumer preamp and most of the studio engineer discussions refer to the MIV. Easiest visual distinction is the knobs and the size of the PSU, but the bands controlled are also different. The MIV has pots for 15hz, 120hz, 500hz, 2khz, 5khz and 25khz whereas the Palette preamp has pots for 20hz, 120hz, 500hz, 2khz, 5khz, 20khz – the latter is much more useful tbh as I’ve never really yearned to boost anything lower than 20hz or higher 20khz.

Most importantly, and what the article speaks about, is that not all recordings are the same - this is so important to me personally because I have very large variety of music that falls outside of what most audiophiles consider well produced, and I view all art as a spectrum like that. Some of the most amazing music I own is some of the worst produced, but there is an undeniable magic contained in there. Also, unless you’re listening to music in a vacuum, there is over a hundred years of advancement in the artform and while I have different cartridges and a couple amps that try to keep things somewhat "period-correct", there will never be gear that averages everything perfectly, and even if there was that’s probably not ideal for the margins of the spectrum. So, I find the Cello a very useful tool in accommodating my variety of listening, the key is to boost or cut things in moderation, a pinch more cymbal sizzle here, a pinch more guts in the stand up bass there, or very subtly taming a bit of glare. It is not a "loudness" switch.

In terms of sonics, I will say its bone-dry neutral verging on analytical, which can paint very vividly, but admittedly there are times where I do need something more forgiving and switch over to my tube pre. 

What I will say is a pain in the ass... is yes, maintenance. I had a DC issue on one channel that required some parts to repair, and as you can guess with Levinson, the parts are somewhat proprietary and unobtainable, Vishay was no help therefore I’ve been in over a year having to create a couple replacement parts. But that said, I scored mine for a very very good price so this repair isn’t hurting my soul too much.

I’ve never heard one. But I would venture to say yes, from what I do know. It’s legendary. Many in recording and hi fi circles consider it a landmark piece and a benchmark to which units over the years have been compared. Its sonics are from Mark Levinson. Recommend again the Cello Palette Stereophile review from yester year. Even today the article’s arguments to EQ are compelling. I totally live and die by that theory. It’s a great read. Page 1 or 2 i referenced with a link. 

@au_lait   The CP is also a preamp? Sounds really good but what if u have no use to use it as also a preamp. Is it still worth the very high used price ? 

The CP is excellent. 

@au_lait , care to tell our digital EQ lovers here a little more about the sonics of the CP?

Oh wow. The legendary Cello Palette. NICE

I have 6 band on my Cello Palette and it is 🤌🏼

Not all music is fabricated in studio...

I listen classical and jazz and Persian and Indian mostly and a bit of Africa ...

i cannot support most commercial and rock pop and anything too much artificial ...

i use analog tone control , even EQ for my headphone optimization Harman curve ...

I prefer acoustic instrument as a piano with a well done recorded timbre by a talented sound engineer ...

Studio music created by mixing , no thanks ...

I would have tinnitus ...

Music heal or kill say my body to my brain ...My heart listen ...

Pretty much every track we ever listen to gets run through something like this dude before we ever hear it. So why would a little EQ in the home listening room upset any purists?

I don’t get it.

Understood.  Any crappy component in the signal path can possibly do more harm than good. 

But then again, compared to the distortion in frequency response from speakers and room modes, seems like at least room correction done properly would be big improvement.  I have heard a lot of folks mention they do room correction and I cannot remember any of them less than seriously happy with the improvement.

I don't know for sure but I expect that most of those mix boards nowadays used in music production are op amp based electronics. And no track is getting to our systems without going through those...

@ltmandella   I felt the same way as all the other pursuits, because I only wanted to hear the very best sound that my equipment were producing. And I thought that any other source adding to it would degrade the performance of my gear. JMO. 

Pretty much every track we ever listen to gets run through something like this dude before we ever hear it.  So why would a little EQ in the home listening room upset any purists?

I don't get it.

@tlcocks Gotcha. + Really looking forward to hearing your impressions with the MQ112. 

@tattooedtrackman , I am stoked that you love your MQ112. Don’t be afraid to laud its praises repeatedly here. Because there’s a strong tide we’re swimming against of all digital EQ lovers who have never or not recently tried a high end analog piece and they simply don’t know what beautiful sound they are missing. The more of us who speak out, the more will try. 

Thanks @tattooedtrackman , alas I am not a professional. Just an avid listener and passionate tweaking audiophile. I may know a lot about how they sound in my home, but @mirolab is the professional with his own studio. He’s heard more than me. Both analog and digital. And @mijostyn is pretty well dialed in on digital post playback. I’m just a guy who’s lucky enough to have found a very special piece of hardware in the Charter Oak. It’s sound quality surpasses some peers costing twice as much. 
But yes, I want to hear and learn all. And I will make it a point to hear your MQ112, @mijostyn ’s DEQX, and last but not least the BACCH SP. 

@tlcocks I have not knew anyone with more knowledge about equalizers. As u know I have the MQ112 I really wish that u could demo it sometime and tell him what you think of it compared to the other 3 that you love. I also really think u owe it yourself to demo the MQ112. There is also a great utube video of it from where I purchased it from Ski Fi audio in Glen Rock NJ. If u haven’t already watched it I encourage you to see it. I really would love to hear your professional opinion on it. 

Hate to disagree. I’ve commented extensively on this pages ago. My Charter Oak PEQ1 I’ve directly compared against Roon DSP using some digital shelf or bells in bass and treble regions. It DIDNT COME CLOSE to the SQ of the 2700 dollar analog piece. I have done this already previously in the thread. Am not going to repeat again here. Notch filtering and room correction digital better. Tone shaping analog better. I intend to try @mijostyn DEQX though, to be sure. That’s a summary. There are PAGES of debate previously 

Traditional analog equalization is somewhat dated and very limited 20th century technology. 😉

But, I will be attempting Room correction using Roon DSP shortly. Will be using Room EQ Wizard software to create convolution filters for several rooms. Currently use similar 3-rd party filters with Roon and headphones and the results are a big leap forward that would be costly otherwise.

Digital convolution filters can be thought off as traditional analog equalization on steroids. Roon Room Correction

I know many have tried this. I myself have not. Generally hear mixed to favorable through the grapevine. Not having heard the MQ112 either, I’d bet good money the MQ112 sounds alot more musical and natural than the RME EQ suite

The RME ADI-2 has full DSP processing with Bass, Treble, Loudness, 5 Band Parametric EQ, and Crossfeed.  Has anyone found this to be a good solution for improving their SQ?  It comes with both a remote and an app to allow control all of its functions with remote software.

“As for your assessment of Skyline vs. PEQ1... I very much agree about the superior flexibility of the PEQ1's design... I just wish my unit had sounded better”

based on your earlier description of your PEQ-1 experience, I am fairly sure you got a bad unit, @mirolab 

“Do your 'custom' cables have the ground connected from end to end?”

Cardas did 4 of them for 1000 dollars. I sure hope they grounded them properly. They are completely sonically transparent. I now know this because when I had the Skyline in the Bryston tape loop on ‘bypass,’ which you’ve stated is a true hardwire bypass, I could not hear any difference at all A-B ing with tape loop in and out. They are great cables

“I have a very fragile ego. I'm going to go cry in a glass of Tequila.”

😂 hilarious, Mike

a brand called Golden Age Project EQ81.It's designed to distort and ad noise to simulate older recordings played through older tubed equipment.

@jtcf That's called an EQ81 because they are emulating the sound (and circuitry) of the classic Neve 1081 4-band eq.  This is a 70's era Neve console EQ  designed for mixing and tone shaping.  This EQ has color & personality, and is really meant for mixing.  It's not super transparent and does not emulate a tube eq.  It's solid-state all the way.  I've got a Great River EQ-2NV which is also a "Neve-alike" eq.  It sounds amazing for shaping individual instruments and buses.  The high & low shelfs do make good bass & treble controls for a stereo mix.  The mid bands have a bit of color, but are a bit narrow for a stereo mix.  Look up the original Neve 1081... it's beautiful!  I've used Neve preamps, but not the 1081.        

I have a very fragile ego. I'm going to go cry in a glass of Tequila. 

@tlcocks Sorry, if Revive audio themselves cannot tell you why their unit is finicky with certain cables, then I certainly cannot.... not without a schematic, which I'm certain they would deny me!  They even put tape seals on the lid screws so if you take the lid off, you might void the warrantee.  I took the lid off anyway!   Do your 'custom' cables have the ground connected from end to end?   Some cables have the ground terminated at only one end (like a ground lifter) which is NOT a Pro thing to do.     

As for your assessment of Skyline vs. PEQ1... I very much agree about the superior flexibility of the PEQ1's design... I just wish my unit had sounded better.  Let's also keep in mind the PEQ1 new, cost exactly TWICE as much as the Skyline!  That makes Skyline a relative steal for what it is.    

A note on the Lokius eqs.... they are not noisy, but they are more 'sensitive' due to legit L-C circuitry.  They use real inductors for each band, and they will more easily pick up stray magnetic fields.  You'd think Revive Audio could learn a thing or two from Schiit, on providing BOTH balanced and unbalanced I/O.  

Thanks @wolf_garcia   I appreciate the words. I may have touch of fragile ego. It’s possible. But I am passionate about listening and love to share my thoughts, for what they’re worth, about EQ in high end home audio. And yes, I know I talk too much. My wife tells me all the time!🤣

Relentless fragile egos around here...note to self: I really have to try to be more gentle. The Max I have is utterly quiet, but Schiit warns about locating these things near gear with transformers (I worried about that as I have a Bryston Bit-15 with its huge Piltron transformer, but all is well with the Max) ...I also haven't heard any hiss from it when testing higher frequencies so maybe I'm just lucky. I have a couple of Lokis also and they're very quiet. Results may vary I suppose but the Max is superb in my rig. 

@mijostyn this may interest you regarding deliberate distortion. While looking at the Charter Oaks and Skyline units  a brand called Golden Age Project EQ81.It's designed to distort and ad noise to simulate older recordings played through older tubed equipment. I'm guessing it might emulate the warm sound that I hear from the old Telefunken radio that I inherited.Everything sounds warm and comfortable.

@mbmi I too have the MQ112 for about 2.5 weeks now and absolutely love it. I would love to know your impression with it when the time comes. 👍

“…the excellently designed Max...a great item that's I've used for far more than 20 minutes (a few months actually)”

To this other snide comment from @wolf_garcia , I’ve got ONE DECADE of familiarity with the CO PEQ-1, and nothing I’ve heard sounds better. 

You probably got a bad unit...my LOKI Mini @ $149 is silent and does a great job cleaning up bad recordings...BUT  I'm picking up the MQ112 today...I LOVE EQ.

I’ve plugged back in the CO and listening to Moving Pictures again. Now I’m totally engaged and toes a tappin’ !  CO beats Skyline at more significant V shape sound signature for sure. I cannot live without my CO. I love this unit. It’s such a shame you cannot buy one like it nowadays, since Mike quit producing them. You’d have to go 4 grand and up to get anything with both the SQ and the powerful bands. I’ve heard 2 with the Millennia and the Avalon that do this. But you need ganged left and right stereo for home on the fly ease and convenience. I’d defer to @mirolab for options there. I don’t know of any. 

I don’t hear any audible hiss at all when listening to music at normal AND loud levels on ANY of the gear we’ve discussed. Good chain through and through and is a non issue. Cannot however speak to Lokius or other non Loki Max Schiit products. Of their line, I’ve only heard the Loki Max. 

I've yet to find an equalizer that doesn't add hiss or noise. I am familiar with the Schiit equalizer you mentioned.  I tried one and got rid of it the same day!  It had to be placed far away from other components or it would cause hum.  It also put out excessive audible noise/ hiss whenever you turned the dials too far clockwise.  If noise and hiss is a concern to you, a digital equalizer would be the answer, but those are very expensive and not really a necessity if your equipment and your room are right. 

It basically comes down to remote vs better V or U shaped sound signature versatility 

Not considering remote, Skyline is just as easy to use, sounds completely transparent, and honestly gives a more hi fi take on bass and treble with more flexibility there. I’d say with 2 db cuts here and there and not much boost elsewhere the two units sound very similar. They are set up similarly as well. Both simple to use. But if you wanna add fun factor V shape for average older and newer rock recordings then Skyline wins. 

Agreed, but there is not a single thing the Max does BETTER. except for the remote, which can be huge for some 

There is simply nothing made anywhere from pro audio or home audio that comes close to ease of tonal tweaking provided by the excellently designed Max...a great item that's I've used for far more than 20 minutes (a few months actually), and it's performed brilliantly. Great reviews generally everywhere, including from me. It cuts  and boosts wherever I need it to, looks great, makes no noise. I've used pro EQ for many decades in studios, live concert mixing, and home recording and the Max fits in my hifi system beautifully. Nothing will replace it anytime soon.

Ok…impressions of Skyline vs Charter Oak in my HP chain, which is X Sabre 3 balanced streamer/ dac > EQ > Headamp GSX Mini > balanced out to Hifiman HE1000SE. 
 

The Skyline sounds great. The mids are resolute and fully saturated and accurate. Well recorded music is an absolute joy with this piece. With well recorded music and gentle EQ you might get a better experience than CO, although I’d be razor thin. Now with loudness wars over compressed rock music I tend to EQ in more bass and treble. In this scenario I would describe the Skyline as quite capable delivering the goods. The SUB and 40HZ dials do their job well. Quality and quantity of bass added is very satisfying without sacrificing the mids. And the attenuation dial on far left and clipping meter leds work great. There is a broad range on that dial that sounds good, so it’s very useful in a master trim situation when boosts have been applied and it’s needed. Kudos. The Atmosphere shelves are wonderful and all sound great with even vigorous boost without adversely affecting the mids. This unit has TONS of headroom for clean boost. Now, in comparing this unit to CO with more aggressive use of bass and treble dials, I find that the CO treble bands are absolutely gorgeous, and to me just sound more textured and shimmery and sweet. But not by a lot. But yes by a lot compared to Loki Max. Schiit users, again, don’t go for any kind of sizable treble boost. And y’all probably don’t. Skyline and CO hands down beat Loki in that limited use case. In comparing bass dials on Skyline to CO, I’d double down on yesterday’s comments. Bass articulate and very good, but not as textured, layered, nuanced as CO and not as much sub bass kick or mid bass slam. The CO does this better.

In conclusion, I like the Skyline very well for very well recorded modern recordings where you wouldn’t need to boost bass or treble much or at all. But as I type and listen to Red book version of Rush album Moving Pictures, through the Skyline it’s excellent sonically but I am left wanting to put the CO back in the chain. It’s not more resolute in the mids, but really no less either, to be honest. but the kick, slam in lower range and shimmer and sheen in the top octave I can get out of the CO leaves me more pleased for your average older rock recording. My original Mike Deming CO remains on top of the hill for me, Skyline is a wonderful piece. It’s beautifully finished and built like a tank too. 

@mirolab , can you explain why my custom grounded Cardas XLR to RCA cables work for CO, Millennia, and Avalon (all strictly pro +4dbu balanced) but not with the Skyline?  Is that not bizarre? Jason at Revive Audio said it’s “something about the topology of the circuitry in the Skyline.”  ??

That’s fine. You’re entitled to your opinion. I’d avoid words like “nonsense “.  There are nicer ways to disagree. We all have extensive listening experience, and some have extensive pro recording experience. Let’s respect each other. @wolf_garcia ive said this before.  Our experiences don’t necessarily diverge. It depends on your use case. If you are cutting at 6khz to avoid sibilant recordings the Schiit products are great. However, if you are using your EQ simply like a tone control bass and or treble boost without cuts, there are many pro hardware solutions that do this better than Schiit. 
I don’t like cuts in the middle of the frequency range. I prefer broad gentle bass shelf increase to fill in the frequencies below the sibilant area. I just think it sounds better. I have NEVER heard a sibilant or shrieky record that was well bassed if you will to the point that you couldn’t add more

Tlcocks...sorry to ruffle your feathers but you're simply wrong. Nuff said.