Equalizers - Graphiic, Parametric & Channel Balance


I know this topic has a history on these forums but my question has more to do with channel balance than to their theory of operation. Primaily due to personal hearing deficiencies but also to deal with unfortunate room acoustics, I will be installing/keeping an EQ in my system, so the question of whether or not to do so has already been settled.

I began experimenting with a graphic EQ simply because it's operation seemed at least visibility like it would be more direct and simple to use. I was wrong in at least one respect; to get good results, it's not all that simple. Anyway, the overall results have been good. Based on recommendations found here on Audiogon as well as other sources, though, I decided to experiment with a borrowed parametric EQ which I found to have better control and, in some ways, at least as easy to use.

Anyway, I like the PEQ better except for one important issue; with it I have no channel balance control. This is important because of the room layout and because my hearing loss is not bilaterally equal. For reasons discussed in other forums I can't / won't use hearing aids and, for the present at least, I'm sticking with my Peactree Audio pre and power amps. So the question is whether there exists such a thing as a parametric equalizer that has this control? I suppose that one alternative might be to use one parametric EQ for each channel, and if that's what it takes, so be it. Any suggestions?

My sources are Shanling CD S-100 or Apple TV using lossless files and the speakers are Martin Logan Ethos.
128x128broadstone

Showing 4 responses by ivan_nosnibor

Broadstone, I agree that the DEQ would be an excellent solution for you. I have a Ric-Schultz(EVS)-modified version I've used, until very recently, since 2007 that I'm getting ready to sell. I can let you have it for $250 + shipping, if you're interested. I think the mods cost me about $300 over the cost of the unit. The most relevant here might be the power supply mod that quiets some noise in the SMPS. Also a Canare RCA dig. out jack has been installed in place of the original AES/EBU and has been converted to 75ohm. I used it as a DAC and enjoyed it very well. Has been very reliable and has operated without fault. I intended to list it here anyway, but I can give you the heads up on when exactly it's going to be listed, if you like.
Broadstone, I went through the reliability issue too when researching before buying. From what I read, most of the failures were on firmware revisions 1.1 through 1.4, thereafter they began to show at least some indication of being improved enough to not fail at such a high rate...mostly of either microprocessor faults or power supply problems. The ps problems I don't know that they ever effectively solved. As near as I can tell, the Behringer is designed so cheaply as to be less expensive to replace than repair (for the Pro users) and to take the burden off Behringer's customer service (which is generally regarded as terrible). They are essentially considered to be disposable. I certainly understand where notion of only buying new comes from, but a majority of the posts said that most of the units that failed did so within the first year or less. Mine, I can say at least, has had a perfect track record for 7 years. The Jantzen 4-pole cap and other substitutions in the ps may help it run cooler, which I believe, is one of the main problems with the ps...just ends up being too hot. The Behringer has rack ears which I've always left uninstalled to allow at least a little ventilation. My version is a 2.1 and you can confirm the version of any you have by powering up and going to the "main" screen and it will tell you there. Good luck, however you decide to go.
Good to see that you're hanging in there and that it's beginning to work out for you.
Broadstone said:

"I'm aware that many believe that any additional added artifacts are unnecessary and degrade sound quality. This argument seems based on the premise that if one were to put together a properly thought out system in the first place, adjustments to it would be unnecessary. I doubt that, except for a few, regardless of how well reviewed and ultimately expensive their systems are, that approach is consistently satisfying".

Amen, my brother.

"IMO, the relationship that a listener has with their system is intimate and so individually subjective that the ability to fine tune is necessary".

Never truer words were spoken.