I miss my Loudness Button and Tone Controls....

Anybody, all dogs included, can recognized a trumpet and a piano even in the worst room and with the worst recording...Especially for a dog his master voice...

My point about the RCA dog listening the GEAR not the room even if it is a marketing genius idea for sure and a FACT, does not hinder or replace the other fact that save for headphones and gramophone pavilion at few inches of our ear we listen to a speakers/room sound not to the gear alone....Then for decades people were conditioned by electronic market method of selling the gear FORGETTING to study and improve room acoustic... 😁😊 The creation of headphones did not help room acoustic understanding for the consumers crowd of audio... 😁😊 Then they throw money for so called upgrades sometimes without end....

HiFi is the dog hearing his masters voice on the old Edison and recognizing his masters voice.. That is HiFi..

C’est la vie

And using tone control with my amplifier is no more necessary, save the loudness button at very low sound volume...

Why?

Because i can control all the acoustic factors in my the room at will with a GRID of Helmholtz adjustable resonators YES but also a grid of Helmholtz SPECIALIZED diffusers...It is NOT the same devices even if all resonators absorb some frequencies and also diffuse some....And  these Helmholtz specialized  diffusers are  open tubes with one of their  mouths filtered with some fabric cloth with variable thickness and the other stay open...And Helmholtz resonators is a volume bottle or tube CLOSED at one end with a neck of variable adjustable perimeter and length at the other end not a large open or filtering mouth like a diffuser...

Then owning a few Helmholtz resonators is not the same that owning these 2 grids...

At least thanks to you to recognize the powerful impact of the Helmholtz devices IGNORED most of the times in small room acoustic method... Panels ARE NOT ENOUGH in a dedicated room...They dont adress the pressure zones distribution...

 

The mere fact that we MAY feel in the obligation to modify the sound balance from a recording to an another recording or from a music genre to another music style is a SURE SIGN of an acoustic room problem or of a gear synergy problem or the two at the same time...

There is only one exception for using tone control in a well controlled dedicated acoustic room : bass head who listen only bass.... There is never enough bass in their case... They dont mind about any other acoustic factors save bass... Then they will do anything to put the emphasis on bass for sure... Here my post is for jazz listener and classical listener , not metal music or cinema listener waiting for explosions...

Sound is not music, even if music is always also sound for sure... 😁😊

 

 

 

My deepest respect to you...

I use the Helmholtz tuning method also. Tune the room, the electrical grid and then minor adjustment if at all with tone control. It is usually because of a source issue.

 

😁😊

There is no problem and i loved my system/room like it is now...

No upgrade is NECESSARY... Even if a ZOTL amplifier will be better than my Sansui amplifier for example...

My mechanical equalization is satisfying like it is now...

Then no problem...

But i wanted to complete my acoustic optimization process, the only way to do this after mechanical equalization is using also AUTOMATIC electronical equalization to refine what i already have...

It is only my ongoing acoustic experiment obsession ... 😁😊 I am not a gear fetichist nor a tool fetichist...But i am an acoustic fetichist so to speak...

The gear especially when well chosen is secondary to acoustic method...This is my most important discovery in audio....

Most people think the opposite ignoring the huge power of acoustic/psycho-acoustic... They think that acoustic is ONLY the icing on their gear cake...In some case they even think that they dont need acoustic in their room so powerful is gear or tool fetichism....

i think that there exist many equivalent good pieces of gear of all kind between which we can choose, when one is chosen after that, the real IMPROVEMENT and UPGRADE is made by acoustic control of the speakers/room/ears relation...

Electronic equalization is only a tool and mechanical equalization a complementary very important tool, neither is perfect, and none of them alone is enough... Why ?

Because of the specific structure of the ear/brain for each of us and our different listening history...And because of the specific relation of the speakers /room also...

Then a complete acoustic optimization process ask for this two type of equalizations at the same time...

Is this clear?

Mahgister whats exactly the problem? You dont going to put this in your system??

 

 

My Helmholtz "mechanical equalizer" with one hundred adjusted tubes resonators and diffusers tuned by my ears, use my ears not a microphone, and not some testing frequency but a large bandwidth spectral set which is called an instrument timbre or voice to guide me in the process of acoustic optimization..

This mechanical equalization work to optimize the room /speakers ---> relation and this grid of Helmhotz resonators and diffusers modify the pressure zones distribution in the room being a permament WORKING part of my room...

This mechanical equalizer is useful to fine tune the relation " from the room TO the speakers with my ears"...

 

But i can use also with it a useful tool to complement it : an electronical equalizer...

Why?

Because with it i will fine tune the relation "from the speakers TO the room without my ears" using not instrument timbre for my ears, but a tested frequency for a microphone and using an intergated pink noise generator in the Sansui  and an automatic equalization process....

Then the two process are complementary and add something the other CANNOT add ...

But unbeknowst to most people electronical equalization is not enough ALONE for helping our specific ears to recreate all acoustic factors like listener envelopment for example... And mechanical equalization so wonderful it is, is not "accurate" nor perfect but is like  our imperfect ears are imperfect ...But imperfection is not a defect here it is the way our bbrain interpret sound experience... 

my dream now is buying this:

 

Only a mechanical equalizer or only an electronical equalizer is not enough to OPTIMIZE a small Speakers/ room/ears complex relation...

Acoustic is the sleeping princess all the pieces of gear are only the 7 working dwarves...

 

 

Do receivers really count as high end audio?

Certainly not less "high end" that an alleged high end amplifier in a non treated and uncontrolled room for me...

Acoustic trump any design of a singular piece of gear in S.Q. improvement /price tag RATIO...

High quality sound means more than just a high-end quality design of an amplifier .... No ?

They are not EQUAL expression and equal realities, save perhaps modulo acoustic methods...

To sound good something MUST be well embedded in his working dimensions: mechanical,electrical, and especially acoustical...

Then owning a very good receiver does not means a low sound quality  "de facto"...

But a good receiver comparable to a good amplifier are not so much numerous indeed...

The very good Kenwood receiver i one times own was inferior to my Sansui amplifier on all counts...

But i never compared them in a well controlled environment for sure... It is my deduction...

 

 

The SAE Parametric Equalizer in the early seventies was considered to be a very high end piece of audio gear. I used it for a while until I figured out that if a loudspeaker can’t do a particular frequency to your satisfaction, you can’t force it to sound better. You can emphasize it, but you can’t correct it (if that makes any sense)?.

 

Very interesting post... Thanks especially this part:

You can emphasize it, but you can’t correct it (if that makes any sense)?.

In the case of "mechanical equalization" of a room it is like in "electronical equalization" also, we cannot CORRECT a defect in the speakers/gear interaction or in the speakers alone, but we can put the emphaze on some frequencies range that will compensate without correcting the specs and defects or limits of the  gear itself...

 

I forgot to say that i enjoy TWO listening positions in my room which neither of one i can choose over the other one so good the two are...I listened half the time in each position equally...

3 feet from the speakers and 8 feet from the speakers in my square 13 feet room...

The loudness button may be useful ONLY at very low level in my near listening position...

They are not useful for me in my 8 feet location because the decibel level is put higher in this position and the room acoustic give me all necessary bass and highs impact clearly already...

 

By the way it is another false dogma that a room must be tuned and can be tuned ONLY for one listening position... I enjoy and tune my room for two....With more headphone intimate details effect in near listening but more lively natural sound in the distant position but keeping enough intimacy to beat all my headphones though or rival them...

In the two postions the soundscape encompas me and is "almost" spherically around me because in some recording i am betwen the periphery and the center of the soundscape...Is it not good for a stereo system? When some claim wrongly that the sound can only and must be ONLY between the speakers plane and cannot encompass the listener...

 

 

Acoustic method is the audio miraculous wonder over the gear itself....

 

First i dont need to use the loudness button of my Sansui because of my acoustic control of  gear and room...In fact even if they can be useful i forget to use them because of the very quality of my system/room at all level...

Second i dont like generalization that are evidently wrong: loudness is useful at VERY LOW volume listening for some people in particular in MOST ordinary non dedicated room... I dont use them but i tested them...The usefulness of this button is dependant of the very low level of decibel used and asked for ...

Many people anyway listen music at high level then they dont neeed this button before reaching premature deafness .... 😁😊

By the way , I am pretty sure that i had learn already how to listen if i was able to tune my own room even creating a " mechanical equalizer" myself in the last 2 years of my listening experiments in acoustic...

And also it is impossible to tune a room by listening experiment and using the loudness button at the same time, then i never use it during the tuning process...

But this fact dont make the loudness button a device for acoustically unrefined ears only.... it is useful at very low level listening... This is an EVIDENT fact....

Then buy a mirror before judging device or other people around your own navel ...

The sansui au7700 is a amp 1975 i had the au417 that was mine first amp. That was 1977 with AR speakers and a dual turntable. I never used the loudness button.

Sorry but if you like loudness you dont know how to listen

"Theological" audiophile dogma which are false or off the mark when taking by itself alone:

-

-An amplifier with tone control or loudness control cannot be a high end product or be a qualitatively very good design..

--You dont need room control or treatment if you are in near listening position ( the speed of sound contradict this because the waves cross my room 13 times during one second and my brain/ears use the reflected waves and not only the direct waves in the fraction of second they need to CREATE sound impression)

-- Cables dont make a difference even a small one...( they did in general but a small one )

-- Acoustic treatment is enough, acoustic mechanical control, will add nothing more ( sorry but Helmholtz will not accept this one)

-- Ionization devices and Schumann generators are snake oil even at low cost ( I experimented with them sorry and they are very evident reason why some people dont perceive their action at all)

-- Speakers cannot own the same intimacy impression quality than headphones ( sorry but it is false if we can use well acoustical simple facts)

-- ALL "tweaks" are useless ( so wrong i will not comment)

-- we can measure everything....(It is false because the ears brain only mesure everything that matter for us in sound perception not the other very specialized tools by themselves alone and it is even trivial and common place to say so )

-- all that matter is our subjective impression ( that is no more false than the last dogma above saying that we can measure everything that matter)

--Unlike the RCA dog logo we listen to the system/room not to the system only...

 

The most important audio fact for our journey perhaps is how to learn to CORRELATE precisely measured and located phenomena and devices with our own subjective perceiving apparatus IN OUR ROOM...

 

 

There is many others false dogmas help me to find them... 😁😊

 

 

 

’Loudness’ is for any system, any speakers, in any space.

fundamental to maintaining involvement at low volumes, i.e. bass player in a Jazz group. sparkle of triangles ... It should be progressively engaged as volume lowers.

Good description...

LOUDNESS is very well done circuit with the Sansui AU 7700...

I forget to use it because my room is so acoustically good that even at near listening (3 feet) i forget to use it BUT i just test it now, typing these words and i have 2 choices? : boosting only bass or boosting bass and the highs...At very low volume it is very interesting to use them....

I dont need it and i forget about them because even if i listen at lower volume i dont feel i need it.... But It is impossible to contest his usefulness in normal non controlled room...

Contrary to a well know opinion even at near listening passive material treatment and acoustic mechanical control of the room make a huge difference on sound quality and perception....it is one of the general opinion that is trusted but is FALSE, when listening at three feet of the speakers like me half of the time, the difference in near listening was HUGEif i compared  before and after room control especially and room treatment...But even there i will reminf myself like noiw that at very low level it is a useful feature this loudness button indeed...

 

If you needs a loudness button or tone controle or equalizer throw your set at ebay.

Too harsh opinion or too uncompromising one are take us often is simplification and misunderstood...

loudness button is not a feature on under par lower designed product generally, especially in the golden age of audio where designer expanse without calculating so micvh on quality parts in their war to take the market.... I know that Sansui is generally well designed...

loudness button may be very useful for people who are in the obligation to listen very low because of their partner or by their own choice....

 

I understand why people want tone controls...I had very good one said my repairman, a very experienced guy who even say they are top notch in the Sansui AU 7700 not toys at all... I am then lucky .... 😁😊

I was so glad to have them FOR YEARS, and i used also refined filtering controls to this day ...

This is the reason i bought the Sansui technology : no negative reviews at all on all counts...I read all for 6 months before buying.... 😁😊 I dont regret my choice...

But i dont use tone controls nor the loudness button after years with them...Only one filtering control button....

Why?

Because contrary to the belief of some who wrote it above, tone controls compensate the gear/room relation with your "taste" and ears, yes, but DONT FIX the room/system acoustic nor can they replace it at all... They can only alleviate the sonic harm of an acoustically untreated and uncontrolled room in relation to the system, or alleviate some wrongly matched piece of gear, thats all...

HOW did i know?

Because i stop using them almost a year ago when my room acoustic begin to be optimal , i did not need them ever for ANY album now, nevermind the recording quality...

Tone controls can alleviate some harm coming from a lack in synergy between pieces of gear or between the room and gear, but IN NO WAY can replace acoustic... it is an ILLUSION, a deceptive belief...

I am not against tone controls, i think most sophisticated amplifier for the general public must have them, and filtering controls , because most people need them anyway...

But dont bent the acoustic truth: tone controls are useless if the gear is well match in an acoustically optimized room...But this situation is the exception among all audiophiles...Not the norm at all ....

Why this is so ?

Because when you tune the room, you tune it for your specific gear in relation to the specific acoustic general content of the room and your specific ears history and specific functional structure in relation to the the brain ( i prefer to use these words than "taste" because i associated taste with the gear fetichism in my posts)..

No audiophile with well matched piece of gear and a well controlled room need any tone controls for any albums...

Mechanical acoustic tuning , what i call Helmholtz mechanical equalization in a well treated room, is a mechanical tone control itself between room new zones pressures distribution and the speakers characteristics and your own tuning specific ears....

Then yes most people can enjoy tone controls, but when acoustic is completely under control there is no more needs for it...

And for those who think that each recording being different it is useful to adapt each one to our "tastes". ..I will say that what is the most astounding fact in a treated and controlled room is the fact that we can NOW perceive all acoustic cues CHOICES of the recording engineer the way they are made because the acoustic settings of our room made them AUDIBLE and they are interesting in itself, nevermind the sound quality of the album compared to another one... ALL ALBUMS ARE SONICALLY INTERESTING NOW , even if the recording remain bad for sure compared to many others;  this is the acoustical hallmark impression of a tuned system/room : emerging acoustical recorded cues choices of the recording engineer for our ears and we become more conscious of  the way some other acoustical choices were let aside because recording art is a trade-off process.......

This is the reason why some "purist" lucky enough to have a good room, treated and under control, "spite" with despise on tone controls, and it is the reason why all of us need for some time like me or forever like most of us tone controls...

Like usual dividing people in two groups is childish to say the least....For or against tone controls, objectivist and subjectivist, ETC and other human distinctions which separate us in misunderstood opposition instead of uniting us in understood differences...

Here’s the thing. Mahgister always advocates for rigorous (some would say obsessive; check out the photos of his system!) room acoustics treatment. Yes, room acoustics are hugely important. The room is one of the very most important components in your music system, no question. BUT...not all recordings are created equal! Tone controls give you the option of adjusting for a recording that is harsh in the upper midrange, or lacking in bass, or a host of other deficits that would be, shall we say, grossly inconvenient to do by re-arranging one’s entire acoustic space for each new piece of music.

 

 

 

 

I own a Sansui AU 7700 a vintage marvel with sound controls sophisticated in design ( my knowledgeable repairman said so repairing all amplifiers for all his life) an a three tone control and other features like a separated filtering system with three other buttons to filter at different Hertz scale...

Before Acoustic treatment and control of my room i used the tone controls with success... Not now after acoustic done right i dont use them at all... Only some filtering......

At any sound level all acoustic cues are optimal for me now in my room ...

Look for some low cost acoustic improvement...Not to a new costly amplifier....

Electronical equalization is most of the times a worse way acoustic solution instead of room acoustic done right...Especially when someone EQ each of his album... 😁😊 it is a symptom of acoustic defect of his room....Then he EQ each album because EQ is a plaster on a wound not a therapeutic...And most EQ choices apply to a restricted set of albums to compensate  for the speakers/room bad acoustical synergy...