prof, glad it worked out.....Enjoy ! MrD.
I like my system flat, no tone controls, no eq..........what is your preference, and why.
A poster on another thread here has encouraged me to post this. Been an audio professional and a hobbyist for 50 tears. I had my time with eq, tone controls ( even reverb and time delay units ). I am currently at the point where I need nothing to alter the recordings I listen to, nor to compensate for room aberrations. I have spent lots of money on equipment , had equipment on loan, of all types ( pretty much a bit of everything, for the most part ) and I have tweaked, and tweaked, and tweaked. I have recently tooled down to a much simpler and less expensive system, and I find I am the happiest I have ever been. Might be my amp, my passive unit, my speakers...…….yes, all of that. Yes, all of that is important, but it is the system synergy that has made me realize that changing anything with an eq or tone controls took me further from that synergy, that balance. I accept, and enjoy my recordings for what they are. Some better than others ( sq ). But, I am enjoying the brilliance of all the studio work put into them, exactly as they were intended to be listened to. This is me. I do not believe in right or wrong, better or worse, newer vs older, yada yada yada. I have believed, and have stated, particularly in this hobby, to each his own. I hear fuse differences, power cable differences, etc. Some believe I was born a bat. I am happy of my gift, not just hearing well, but through the years, teaching myself " what it is I like ", which is the key for most of us. I am not sure where this thread will go, but I put it out there, and hope folks will drop in, even though much of it might have been stated before in other threads. Thank you A'gon family, be well, and Enjoy ! MrD.
98 responses Add your response
mrdecibel Though I don’t use eq, I still certainly desire a system that is more-flat-than-not. My listening room has a wide room opening and for a long time my 2 channel listening room had the listening sofa near a back wall, and speakers placed well forward of some bay windows. There was some acoustic magic in the room because no matter what speaker I placed in the room, I got fantastic, smooth sound. Then when I wanted the room to accomodate home theater as well, I had to switch this situation 180 degrees so now the sofa was near the bay window, speakers out front of the back wall. My acoustics in that configuration went to crap. The response of speakers were no longer close to flat and it just sucked. It took a full remodel of the room with the input of a professional acoustician, to accommodate the home theater and 2 channel listening speakers. Fortunately in the end of judicious room design/acoustic treatment, the room sounds better than ever and any speaker I place here tends to sound really smooth and even. Whew! |
prof, yes, I should have worded it differently ( which I corrected later in the thread, as pointed out by Doug S. ). Although I have measured my room with a RS meter / test tone discs, I cannot claim my room is ruler flat, but it is excellent, specifically at my normal listening levels, which admittedly is higher than most. A big part of this is not having walls near my speakers and my listening chair. Just careful tweaking, and a bit of luck. I used eq and tone controls a long time ago ( in different homes ), but as I became more affluent and experienced in room set up, and most important, the realization of what I like, it is all good. It is a dedicated room, and my live in gf has no problem. I am in this home going on 5 years. The ex wife had a problem in a previous home, which had a living room as my sound room. She lives in that house now, with no interest in high fidelity. Thank you for your response. And again, in no way have I suggested tone controls or equalization are bad. That was never the point. Always, and Enjoy ! MrD. |
mrdecibel, The thread does indeed have a confusing title. I kept looking at your posts wondering how you had determined your system was "flat" in the first place, and I saw no mention of measurements. But then it appears you have used the term "flat" commonly understood to refer to "flat frequency response" to simply "not using any EQ." (I originally thought you meant you'd achieved a flat response without the use of EQ/tone controls). Personally, I have nothing ideologically against EQs or tone controls. I simply found I had little use for them. In fact I had a Z-Systems RDP-1 for probably 17 years, at the time the most highly lauded "invisible" eq. But I just found not reason to add that extra complexity because I could always find a good position for speakers in my room that provided, at least subjectively, very even, pleasing sound. I finally sold the thing this year. That said, I have some new subwoofers I want to get around to integrating and I plan to use room correction (e.g. Anti-node) for those. |
@erik_squires Depends on listening level and music. I could listen to music a lot lower volume if I could have old-school loudness controls like the Denon's and now some rare Yamaha integrated amps have. Is exactly true. I am a purest, in that I like to have as little in the signal path as possible, but the fact is: Our human hearing is not equally sensitive to all frequencies in the musical/vocal spectrum (28-16K Hz, excluding harmonics) until the overall db level at your listening position is at about 65db. which is at the moderately loud level. At 30db the highs we hear will balance out to the mids, but the limit of low end frequencies that we hear at 30db is about 150Hz and is the reason that some of the old school receivers and integrated amps had loudness controls. By raising the listening level up to around 45db the human hearing (good, undamaged hearing) becomes equally sensitive to all frequencies from about 60Hz up to 18K Hz. Add a bit of boost to your sub below 60 Hz and you should be good. At 65db your hearing will be equally sensitive to frequencies from 28 Hz - 18K Hz (down to 20 Hz @ about 85db) so if you like listening loud at 65db and up, you're good but then there is the room and the louder you listen the more the room and everything in it has an effect and the more need for treatment. Not to lecture but keep in mind (for those that like it loud) continual listening at levels 87 db and up will take it's toll on hearing and then it won't matter......Jim |
Only tone control in my system is an analog PEQ in the sub that does not affect the mains. No tone control on the preamp. My room is a sonic mess but it is treated with a collection of purchased and DIY treatments placed strategically using REW. Speaker placement and the sub were also dialed in using REW, including trying to line up the phase of the sub to the mains at the crossover frequency. It helps that the sub has a very flat phase response across frequencies. As long as I play the hifi game, I wouldn’t have it any other way. |
In my listening room the floor is flat as are the walls and ceiling, although the latter does slope up fairly high in a flat way. And I can say I’m VERY judgmental about this stuff, as I’m a purist. I’ll say again that the Loki doesn’t degrade anything except my reputation as I previously stated prior to denying I own one, which I do...both things...deny and own... |
I think 2 channel purest believe using EQ or tone controls degrade the signal. Using room treatments, proper speaker placement and fine tuning with cables is their cup of tea....To boost midrange or treble frequencies defusers are used. To reduce energy, absorbers or traps are used. After years of experimenting with both schools of thought I have concluded that whatever works best for you, your room and your music is the way to go. |
I totally agree that if one is to own a Loki, one must deny ever using it or at least explain those rare times that you do use it, with a damn good explanation by the way, of why you would violate the unspoken rules of True Audio Geek Authenticity by allowing a tone control of any kind anywhere near your well sorted heap of hifi. I may now deny ever owning the thing but I’ll continue to use it...SPARINGLY...I swear...so "win win." |
@gibsonian I wasn't inferring that having tone controls means one needs to adjust for every recording...I'm all for tone controls (if you need them). I meant I prefer to adjust EQ for the problems with the speaker/room interaction one time and then take the good recordings with the bad...not fuss over each recording. I'm OCD enough....lol |
Tone controls? Isn't that just admitting that your gear/room are crap or that you prefer colored music? Preferring colored music is the realm of tube enthusiasts. For some of us, the presence/use of tone controls is admitting that some recordings are substandard. I think adjusting tone controls for every recording would drive me nuts. Yes, it would drive me nuts as well. Having tone controls does not mean one needs to adjust for every recording. I sure don't and most recordings are fine just the way they were created. |
Ron17, I was prompted to start this thread because of the viper experience on WC’s amplifier / speaker thread, as you know quite well. As I have said so many times, and yes it has become repetitive by me : anything we audio folks need to do ( whether it be eq, cables, fuses, whatever ), to get us ever closer to that musical nirvana we are all chasing, so be it. I would not consider myself lucky, per say. My room is nothing special, but my speakers and my listening chair are all away from walls, and I played and played and played, tweaked and tweaked and tweaked, until I was happy. My biggest challenge was finding, and blending, a pair of subwoofers with my Lascalas, which I accomplished years ago. I am with you, as eqing for each recording would drive me nuts. I accept each and every recording, as they are, as I enjoy all of them. The greatest upgrade I made was to go passive, using a Luminous unit, the best they have ( rca ), as they also do xlr. It works for me. I am really enjoying the feedback on this thread, and find we are all a bunch of passionate music listeners, not satisfied with the sound coming from a Bluetooth speaker. There are many roads to take, as no two of us are the same. Enjoy ! MrD. |
Hey Mr.D nice thread, I use EQ because of the room/speaker interaction not to compensate for poor recordings. I have measured a peak @ 42hz in my room that I have not been able to eliminate by speaker placement or room treatments.....When a bass player plays an open E (lowest note on a conventional stand up or electric bass is 41hz) and that note plays louder than all of the other notes being played, it's very annoying. If you are lucky enough to have a good sounding room that needs no room treatment or EQ I envy you! I think adjusting tone controls for every recording would drive me nuts. I hear huge differences between poor recordings, great recordings, heavily compressed recordings etc... I just don't get the uneven deep base I use to. |
Like Wolf, I shelled out the $150 for the Loki. I use it sparingly between my DAC and my tube integrated. When using it, it's most often to push the bass up a tad (to about 1 or 2 o'clock) in the form of a makeshift loudness button when I'm listening at lower levels. Other times, I dial the treble down from noon to about 11 o'clock to deal with overly bright recordings. Rarely do I ever do more than that. That little difference though can help with quieter late night listening levels, add some realism to a solo piano, warm things up or cool things down. I do not use the Loki when playing vinyl--less of a need for me, but I suppose I could. I pretty much listen without controls, but boy are they nice to have for certain situations. The Loki is a great little toy. You cannot go wrong for the money. It's well made, dead quiet to my ear, and cheap Schitt. Great thread! |
I listen to old school FM radio, to CD's, and phonograph. From mono recordings pressed in the 50's to compressed over bassed CD's from today. I would not be able to listen to all of that on one system without eliminating some recordings if I did not have tone controls. Sitting thru some of the modern CD's without being able to turn down the bass a smidge to alot, or increasing bass on some really thinly recorded albums would not be enjoyable. I'd rather turn a knob 10 degrees and enjoy it than listen to it as recorded or pitch it in the trash is my take on this subject. Most recordings require nothing, and usually those are the best overall to listen to. I think there were some fine artists making fine music that did not receive the proper service from the folks who handled their music once they placed it in the air. |
All my preamps have zero (no) tone controls except one. And the one that has them, are all in the straight up position, (neutral) if in the extremely rare scenario I use them, I tweak only slightly. i still have my Onkyo EQ-540 top of the line integra one, but it’s been in my closet for 20 + years. I like the natural sound of my amps and speakers playing through my speakers. |
about 3 or 4 pairs of different brands and sizes should cover the spectrum.more speakers does a gr8 job with stereo...can never get enough...i make changes often as i vinaled the floors...left with a hollow sound, I run 3 pairs in stereo.AR, JBL and aiwa...18 drivers in total fixed the hollow sound. |
Back in the day I couldn’t wait to bypass the tone controls on my Dynaco Pas 3x. All the cool people did it (yes, it did sound better on most records). I use equalization extensively with my pro audio gear (API 5500 for analog, but there are excellent digital solutions too; the DBX DriveRack units are ubiquitous. The EQ in my Bose ToneMatch engine that I use for small gigs is excellent). You have to adapt to a room quickly. Graphic EQs for quick adjustments, and parametric for dealing with comb filtering and feedback. I guess the assumption is the EQ is set while recording and during mastering. The results are ostensibly as good as possible, but they are always a compromise. The record companies have to master their records so they sound good on a car stereo, earbuds, or a bluetooth speaker. Some companies will master for us HiFi nuts, but you have to seek them out (I could go on about MQA - makes me wonder if the motivation is to appeal to the 1% audio enthusiasts or to sell new product, but I digress...). I think I’m going to try the Schiit Loki. Might be fun! |
Have a top o the line Onkyo eq 540 not hooked up in years, no tone controls on my preamps used. B&K pro 10 mc onkyo p308-never used, always at zero sanders sound preamp- no tone controls sounds better Ted when I can hear the sound straight from the amp/preamp speakers. Seems more matural mYbe somed I’ll hook up the EQ. TIL THEN it’s straight wire only. |
Great thread. I’ve enjoyed reading the responses of experienced audio heads on this topic. My second system uses a 40 year old Yamaha receiver with the loudness control that Erik mentioned. The Yamaha receiver powers a pair of Klipsch Heresy speakers. I make a modest adjustment using the tone controls, down on the treble and up on the bass, to compensation for the room. My primary system has an old Classe’ Audio preamp/amp with no tone controls. It drives a pair of Sonus Faber Auditor M speakers. One audio magazine’s (www.i-fidelity.net) measurements show the speakers have a modest bass bump and a slightly turned down treble by design. REW measurements taken in my listening room agrees with i-fidelity. Before I read Toole’s articles about room curves, I bought a DSP and flattened the bass bump on the SF Auditors. REW measurements showed it worked well (at that one listening spot). The trouble is I didn’t like the sound - too anemic. So now, I listen with no DSP/ no adjustments which somewhat aligns with the room curve of my Yamaha system (although the speakers are significantly different). |
I did some research and found that quite possibly Schroeder and Schneider are the same person. Nothing conclusive yet, but agents are combing through thousands of documents including high school yearbooks and restaurant receipts to get to the bottom of this issue, and plan to have completed the research before more damage has been done...or any damage has been done...or anybody is damaged by being done. Note that this investigation has been widened to include everybody claiming to be named "Douglas," and this could delay final reporting on this for at least a decade. |
mrdecibel, just a clarification; I am Doug Schroeder and I write for Dagogo.com, not Doug Schneider who writes for SoundStage. We often are confused by audiophiles. A few times a year I get emails asking my impressions of a component I reviewed, but it was Doug Schneider. No issue; I have never met the man in all these years. Perhaps someday! :) |
About 5 years ago I got back into this hobby. It started with an Amber 70 power amp and preamp I got from my brother. Since then I have acquired and sold a lot of equipment searching for that audio nirvana. I spent 8 years with Rockford Fosgate as an engineer at their speaker plant in GR. During my time with RF I had the opportunity to buy/demo a lot of car audio gear. People were always amazed by how good my system sounded. Really simple cd transport to power amp to speakers. I always ran my system flat, no tone controls. For me having a good and stable power source is key. Today I am quite content with a few items, Dynaco ST-70 which I updated, Toppings TP60 amp, Douk 12AX7 tube Preamp, SMSL DAC, Project Genie 1.3 TT, set of Klipsch RF-82 II speakers and my PC. I do not have a lot invested but the returns are great. Synergy can be found in many ways without spending much. The tube pre has a volume and input pot, that;s it. This is what works for me and the amps are stable and produce good clean power. |
MrDecibel, I dig where you are coming from. There comes a time when the current settings and setups have lost the sweetness once presented. I feel it is good to step back and bypass everything to understand the baseline. Experiment with different electronics to judge the sonic characteristics. I use a MEN220 and like what it can do. In my case, it allows me to use dissimilar amplifiers (CJ & Mc) and have some room correction. |
Hi I am new to posting on the forums. But have been reading and learning for years. I have a decent mid level system runs in the 20k range all in. It’s seems very flat and revealing of the true recording whether good or bad it comes through how it was engineered. My take for what it’s worth is to have tone control and/or eq available (bypassable if possible) so you can improve the bad recording and make it tolerable to your own taste especially for those tunes you really enjoy. I’ll admit I do gravitate toward the audiophile hi-res recordings to get that live experience in my home. for those interested I have Coda CP preamp, PS Audio M700 mono blocks, Marantz SA-14s1 SACD/DAC, Technics SL-QL1 turntables, Ortofon X3 MCP cart and PMC OB1 speakers and an ADC SS-525x eq. |
I have always understood "flat" to mean that if there are tone controls on your amp, leave them centred - no promotion and no restriction of high, mid or low frequency. It used to be said that if you were using them, your gear was sub-standard. You come to realise what a load of bollocks that theory is when you move your set-up to a different room or install acoustic treatments and it suddenly comes to life. Or when you take into account, the differences in quality of some productions and recordings. Late last year, I bought a Loki to augment the bass in my system which uses various valve amps with no tone controls. To a lesser extent, I also needed to tame the occasionally harsh high ends on some albums. I enjoyed the effect it had on some recordings. More recently, I moved to a different room and found I needed the Loki less often. After an external power supply grid issue, I bought a power conditioner that also delivers a constant voltage. I no longer need the Loki at all. It seems that apart from now being in a more sympathetic room, a clean and constant power supply to the amp, Dac and server was the missing ingredient in my system. I now have a more substantial bottom end as well as a more refined high end. |
Two problems that i see with the "I like my system flat" ideal. 1. The room itself affects the sound. 2. everyone's hearing is different. Take a test cd, (stereophile) play white noise at listening levels, use the audiotools app (free) to look at the frequency response at the listening position. are there peaks and valleys? If so, your system and/or room isn't flat in the first place and needs correcting. It could be the electronics or the room or both. The real PITA comes when it is the room and room correction devices (hopefully not butt ugly) are needed. The second is the listener. A real eye opener comes when one takes a hearing test in a proper setting. This also tells you where the peaks and valleys and shortcoming happen with your personal hearing. This is where equalization comes in and is absolutely needed. I would do room correction first if I see on the graphs that the room/equipment is having issues. Bass traps, etc. But, if my hearing is failing, then EQ is needed. The problem with EQ (unless) you have a bypass switch to put it back to flat, is that when you are listening at your EQ levels, it doesn't sound quite right to anyone else. it is adjusted to you. Which is fine if you are alone. People also purchase equipment just for this reason also. Some equipment emphasizes bass or mids or highs just so, and the purchaser buys certain equipment to suite their taste. The designer made it that way. Certain Krell equipment back in the day was way too bright for me. Also other equipment over emphasized the bass. I agree that flat is the way to go. All equipment should be designed to be absolutely flat from at least 20 hz to 20 KHz. If that is the case and you measure your room's response, then it is the room that is causing the peaks and valleys in the sound playback. but, what equipment is actually flat in that frequency range? not many. Get the test cd, get the audiotools (or similar) app, play the white noise and see that your equipment and room is actually doing. It can be an eye opener. enjoy |
Listen folks, I should have started this thread as : I like my system " set to flat ", as opposed to flat, which many thought acoustically flat, as Doug Shneider, in his original response, caught on to. Keep in mind, this as an important a topic as any, since the strides in digital has allowed equalization and tone shaping to be something huge, as I believe it once was. As each of us progress on to a new piece of equipment, it brings us closer, generally, to hearing more information from our systems. Better acoustical room set up. How many different ways to set up speakers, from all kinds of " professional " people ? When I walk into a room, I have a pretty good idea what the room needs, acoustically, and the approximate speaker location once the listening chair location has been determined. You, your equipment, your room, your music, and ultimately, siting, relaxing, or headbanging, to an experience that was all worth it. Whatever the means to get there. Enjoy ! MrD. |
Interesting topic with interesting responses , so with that being said everything that I say is either male bovine droppings to some or rings true to others . It seems like a lot of responders are very experienced and long term audiophiles , not like myself who while having systems since the 1970s didn't take listening to the audiophile level until about 10 years ago . The term Flat is very elusive but I agree with the concept . I am a minimalist using a passive preamp with only a stepped attenuator and 2 inputs , one for a Tavish Designs Adagio tube phono preamp and the other for a Carver SD/A-490t CD player . Hoping that less is more , or less electronic interpretation . Flat on my system will sound different than anybody else's Flat . So how are you and I supposed to know what Flat is or what it is really supposed to be . We all set up our systems to please our own senses , thus the tube vs. solid state , single speaker speakers vs. 3 way speakers , subs or no subs . I have learned a lot from reading many of the forums here on Audiogon , especially from the Thiel speaker thread and the discussions concerning power amplifiers , any one component can change the entire dynamics of your system and that the Synergy that we all strive for can be elusive and frustrating , but if to your senses you have found your nirvana then you should not need to use or even have tone controls ( or subs in my opinion because to me that is artificially boosting lower frequencies ) . Weather you agree or not with my BS I agree with mrdecibel . Happy Friday |
While I agree that tone controls and equalizers do have often degrading effect on overall sound (I am not talking about frequency balance), some recordings will benefit from such treatment. One way to accomplish this to some extent, is using an active crossover. This does not degrade sound as it is basically replacing the passive crossover and usually sounds better, if setup correctly. Depending on what equipment you use, it could add substantial expense or very little. thanks, giri |
I can't stand the, IMHO, over the top high end just about any speaker has. I thought by the time I got to be as old as I am, 62, that that would change, as it seems to have for every friend of mine, man or woman, even close to my age. But no, I still have to cut the high end, and even simple bass and treble do that ok. Not a huge cut, but definitely a couple of notches. I've recently heard some great systems that have a great low and midrange, that were runined by a sizzling hot high end. My one friend has severe hearing damage from being around jet engines when he was in the USAF. I don't stay inside his house for long, he's got his HT's treble cranked to the max. When he comes over here, he complains how "dead" my system sounds. We're all different, and we hear differently, so some kind of EQ is a must, just due to some of the rotten recordings there are out there. |
I think someone may have linked to this video somewhere above but I didn't see it. Nothing much said about the Loki that hasn't been said here but towards the end it does show the frequency curves for each of the dials. https://youtu.be/i6oyxHGJbsM |
The 20 hz knob on the Loki is "centered" at that frequency and effects the frequencies nearby, so the effect takes away or adds low bass. It’s not a notch, it’s a smooth curve. Although I augment my (seriously underrated and amazingly great sounding) Heresy IIIs with 2 REL subs, I agree that the bass that the Heresy IIIs produce alone is really nice and seemingly accurate, and I think since they're on the floor getting reinforced acoustically it makes sense. I have turned my subs off and cranked the Loki 20 hz knob just to see what's what, and it's interesting...there's some bass hidden in those 12s! Otherwise I say again I rarely use the Loki, and when I do it's primarily to deal with reticent or overly aggressive high frequencies on a few recordings. |