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

OP: Just go for it.  It's your room, your ears, and what you prefer your music to sound like.  I bet even the basic Loki would do you just fine. Good luck, and the heck with self-styled "purists."  There is are endless variables on the user end.  The intentions of the recording artists and the recording engineers, etc,  are known only to them.  So the only thing that really matters to the listener or end-user, is "does it sound good or not?"

Thanks, helmholtzsoul...

"Tune the room, the electrical grid and then minor adjustments if at all with tone control. It is usually because of a source issue.   ...I have one friend that insists if it needs tone contour it must be bad. I insist that recording studios make mistakes. Some of the media I use is 80+ years old."

I couldn't agree more.  Modern skillful DSP and analog EQ are high-end improvement devices, no matter how good the system, precisely for those reasons, and more.          Pin

 

 

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.

 

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.

Minor tweaks between sources is not uncommon. I use Streaming, CDs, SACD, TT and Reel to Reel. 

You can fool yourself into thinking you don't need tone control, until you do. A good friend of mine made it pretty clear to me. A flip of a switch or a remote sure takes the leg work of old, out of the picture. I can set and adjust via a laptop or select a set preset functions already saved.

The bass was set up by SB (Seekers/Sound Boys). OHM's business. It's all digital, the Main speakers are all analog with passive crossovers. 

I have one friend that insist if it need tone contour it must be bad. I insist that recording studios make mistakes. Some of the media I use is 80+ years old.

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

C'est la vie

Hi barkeyzee1

Another vote for the Schiit Audio Loki Mini+ here.  Seasoned music lover with a serious/fun dedicated studio.  My post history has the details.

What I love about the Mini+ is its simplicity, yet effectiveness of choices.  Any disturbance to any "musical-purity loss" is negligible and wonderfully outdone by benefits.  Well-built purposeful tool for $125.00.  A gift to audio, really.                 More Peace, Pin

I subscribe to the old "if it sounds good it is good" approach. Otherwise, what's the point of pursuing this often wild and crazy hobby?  :)

Oh, one other suggestion, although it's more costly than the Loki, is the DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0. Dual Core, with a host of features, including room correction.

I rarely listen at volumes low enough to want/need ’loudness’, but when I do, properly implemented eq keeps the music INVOLVING, without it, just low background sounds.

It seems to me that so many of you do not listen at low volume and have no idea of the need for and benefit of properly engaged fletcher-munson adjustments,

which are TRULY advantageous, in ANY SYSTEM. ANY SPEAKERS, ANY SPACE.

I miss them too at times on a pretty high end system. One of the reasons I tried and continue to use Roon is that it has built in digital EQ- a very powerful one in fact. Among the many things it can do is it allows you to set pre set EQ curves you can toggle on and off- just like a Loudness button, or a Treble tilt, in addition, you can of course test and dial in various pretty niched tweaks to the response curve to adjust for room peaks/valley's or listening tastes.

A high end receiver i mean the top level receivers. A receiver is never high end mine fault.

Yes thats clear.

😁😊

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??

 

 

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...

 

 

Using an SAE 2400 parametric...

 

+1 for Yamaha Natural Sound loudness control. Is it not the one with variable compensation? Been a while since I’ve had one but if I could find an outboard example I’d buy it in a heartbeat for lower level listening. I also have a nad tuner/preamp with a decent loudness control.

Many of the examples mentioned are more eq than fletcher munson compensation, you don’t want the same boost at higher volumes.

Got excited about the Schiit Loki Mini only to find out it wasn’t tapered with volume. So it’s mostly just an eq? Am I correct? I think The only outboard FM loudness control I’ve heard of is a vintage Macintosh unit?

I hate to plug in another device in the signal path but I would in this case.

+1 russ69 for SAE!

I agree with the need for EQ adjustment. But unfortunately the Rogue doesn't have pre-amp in & out or a tape loop, so the eq has to be between the source and the Rogue. If you have more than one source this can become tricky. You'll need an equalizer or dac with switchable inputs. This same problem just happened to me. I've been happy for 20yrs with my Rotel separates with a Rane ME60 between them. Wanted you upgrade my Revel Performa F30 studio monitors, always though the top end was a little lacking, In the process of ordering speakers I also got a PrimaLuna integrated. My speakers weren't lacking it was the amps. Fell in love with the PL but could not install Rane between pre and power portions. Had to exchange the integrated for a PL power amp, and still waiting for pre to show up.

My one recommendation to anyone getting an equalizer is be sure it has a by-pass mode. (was mentioned earlier)

For LPs, R2R and CDs, I have not used tone controls or loudness adjustments for 40+ years. 

However, my 2 TVs use Yamaha CR620 receivers, with speakers which are high end but not optimally positioned.  I use the loudness control judiciously to boost the warmth/balance out the beryllium tweeters.   

Otherwise, my main listening room uses hallographs and correctly positioned speakers to obviate the need for tone controls.  A poorly mastered recording is not altered but with 35,000+ LPs, R2R and CDs, most are still musically enjoyable despite their deficiencies. 

I do use either a parametric equalizer and/or a Marantz 7c for my 78 rpm records.  My 7,000 78s have no standardized equalization (especially acoustic recordings) that require adjustment.

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...

 

 

Do receivers really count as high end audio?

A high end receiver can never give the sound as a good two channel amp.

 

 

You’d be amazed on how well a good a higher end receiver can sound once “professionally “ calibrated using its built in eq (parametric in my case.) Those built in auto eq systems don’t hold a candle to a manual professional calibration. When done properly, the results, ime, have always been better vs bypassing the tone controls or equalizer. Of course, bypassing tone controls is the way to go IF your room acoustics are near perfect, but that’s rare in most cases.

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...

 

Yes, the loudness and tone controls us older folks used in the 70s were crappy circuits with crappy parts. 

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)?.

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

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. The same is with magnepan why people put a subwoofer behind it is so wrong. The problem is not the maggies but the amps. And the low from the Maggie is so naturel but people wants a boom box. So that's why i hate loudness also.

"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... 😁😊

 

 

I love having a loudness switch and tone control as well. But if it just the loudness switch that need to add to your system then I would recommend looking for Micro Ifi Tube buffer II which has a Xbass loudness switch that you can adjust from 0 to 6dB and 12dB and there's a 3D Holographic enhancer for your speakers. You can also adjust the tube buffer from 0 to 9dB as well.  This Ifi Tube buffer work well for me and you can research on Ifi's website before making your decision.

Nothing against equalizers with digital. But my vinyl gets as clean a path as I can make. The amps are simply a mechanism to amplify, RIAA notwithstanding, and drive the speakers. If all is on order, you shouldn’t even be thinking of modifying the sound with additional stuff. Transparency is key to the best sound retrieval. Additional modifying circuits impact that micro-detail transparency.

 

’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....

 

erik_squires +1

Inexpensive Sound Meter (get one with a tripod mount hole on the bottom)

 

I feel like an idiot for not getting one of these earlier. So easy, so revealing, such help.

You need a source of individual frequency bands to measure/chart against each other, see the results of changes, positioning, treatments, level controls, tone/balance controls.

This CD including 29 tracks of 1/3 octave tones is my favorite

 

 

"loudness’ is sooooo misunderstood, back then, and more so now. a ridiculously named feature.

It is not a button or switch per se, but an EQ circuit that is engaged or not, via button/switch/potentiometer connected to the loudness eq circuit.

It should ONLY be engaged below your ’low normal’ volume.

It should be progressively engaged as volume decreases below ’low normal’.

The PROPER coordination of the ’normal volume control’ and the ’loudness volume control’ (or loudness circuit on/off) was/is tricky. Some vintage amps had two volume controls, one to use only for low volume listening.

.....................................

The Chase unit I mentioned has been mis-applied by many, they hate, some trickily disable the loudness circuit.

proper setup:

1. Chase at factory default volume (no ’loudness’ is involved at default).

2. Preamp or Integrated volume set to ’your normal low’, i.e. focused listening, just not loud.

3. Use ONLY the Chase for Volume after setting #2 above.

4. Chase UP is simply less attenuation.

5. Chase Down begins and progressively engages their adaptation of ’Fletcher Munson Loudness EQ’ as volume is reduced (further attenuated).

NOTE: If you raise the Preamp or Integrated above ’normal low’, and lower the Chase unit to get ’normal low’, then the ’loudness’ is engaged at normal volumes, thus tubby bass, simply misunderstood, mis-used..

 

acoustic research made a 'Stereo Remote Control'.

remote volume, remote balance, mute no loudness or tone controls, switched power outlet up to 600 watts.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/acoustic-research-stereo-remote-control-specifications

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

’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.

Tone controls are a broad fix, irrespective of volume, certainly better than nothing if they are needed. They are a simple way to adjust for a particular space, specific track, listener’s preference, our hearing capability changes as we age.

Equalizers, advanced tone controls can do a refined job if needed/desired.

.......................................

The Chase Remote Line Controller RLC-1 lets you adjust from your listening position:

1. ’loudness’ built in, automatically and progressively implements the Fletcher Munson curve as volume progressively decreases.

2. tone controls for bass and treble.

3. remote balance, many small steps. a wonderful feature for tracks that need it, or a space that needs it. a very small balance tweak can make a surprisingly large improvement.

4. mute

5. 4 inputs (thus you may not need a preamp).

6. two simultaneous pairs of outputs. marked front and rear, identical, early quad era, 4 identical channels before they tried processing of quad.

7. switched rear mounted power outlet (verify-not all versions)

it’s 120db s/n ratio is real: Neither I or any of my friends can tell if it it in the system or not.

........................................

It retains your last adjustments. It reverts to factory defaults when unplugged or it’s power source turned off.

I have two active, 1 loaned to a friend, and looking for a good deal on a spare. You must have the remote, absolutely no controls on the unit.

.......................................................................

This one is pricey, but the only one with a remote that hifishark found.

 

 

seems costs are rising. if you eliminate a preamp, sell the preamp, you might make some money and get what you want.

@mirolab +1. Your use of the term re-master is perfect.

Loudness button??? That's i am using in mine car hifi end 1970.

I love having an EQ for vinyl playback. So many 70’s-80’s LPs have the low end rolled off, and it’s amazing how much it can be restored. I’ve been using a studio EQ for this. The Vintage Audio, Skyline M3D. It’s 6 bands of very wide overlapping bands. It’s a mastering EQ with gentle curves and minimal phase shift.  It’s extremely musical sounding. Unfortunately for HiFi, it’s balanced operation only. I’m using the XLR outs of my Parasound JC3 preamp, and go balanced into my main preamp. It’s just SO easy (and fun) to re-master a mediocre sounding LP, and make it sound amazing. Forget all your precious audiofool rules about EQ. This EQ makes music sound BETTER... when the source needs the help. On great sounding pressings, I use its hardwire bypass. BTW... it’s $1400.

Styleman . . . Sorry, You misspeak

The MA252 comes with electronic tone controls for loudness, bass and treble.

The controls can be set separately for each of the 4 inputs and can be turned on or  off - while keeping the levels at the desired setting - with the push of a button. 

So much better than knobs that stick out - Except only bass and treble can be adjusted, not the five different tone settings on the MA352 🙄
 

 

I was in the same boat as you sir! Even so far as to pull up the Cello Audio Palette circuit diagram and see what was so good about it.

There are a couple simple solutions:

A. get the Schiit tone controls

B. get a DAC with LOUDNESS feature.

I went with an RME as my DAC, it has a unique loudness feature. Google the manual for it. It changes with volume. I also remapped the EQ front button to turn loudness on or off. I use a different Preamp.

Have fun and take care, let us know what you get. It’s a common problem.

Posted and saw your phono problem, looks like Schiit for now. Or get another Preamp. I'm A/B ing the RME, I have the Anniversary edition for the extra analog input to run my phono. Will let you know how it goes. 

I have found that electronic tone controls are far less offensive than mechanical pots that are used for tone controls. Given that, on some recordings it is nice to make suttle adjustments that render the music more listenable.

When my equipment had a loudness button, I rarely used it, tone controls a little. Only used the loudness button to show off when I had visitors. Other than that, the sound was much clearer and detailed with it out! Once I found a good parametric equalizer, that was the best for slight adjustments but prefer nothing in the loop for most music.

I'm really enjoying my Outlaw 2150 receiver. It has all the right stuff +  bass management feature to boot. Hard to beat for the price as well.

I believe it may have been deliberate. Yes, the loudness and tone controls us older folks used in the 70s were crappy circuits with crappy parts. So throw the baby out with the bathwater? Really the beginning of the sham that high end audio has largely become today.

In comes high end marketing. Knowing that few had the knowledge, skills or flexibility to optimize listening/speaker position and acoustics (I agree with a few posts above; if possible those parameters should be optimized before applying equalization or room correction), in comes the marketing nonsense; use expensive wire/coupling/isolation as tone controls or better yet swap out components and speakers in a circular audiophile dance that has made more than one audio manufacturer/distributor/dealer wealthy. Of course, none of that is a cost effective solution, more like polishing a turd.

Like I said earlier, this is the dawn of a new age. Ignore the marketing and high volume e-commerce salesmen (you know who they are, each has at least one full page ad in Stereophile; who do you suppose pays for those?) and use your own ears and brains.

This is where high end does not deliver sometines.

I thank you all for your detailed responses and recommendations, I'm elated that the topic inspired so many responses and expressed “love” for tone controls and the loudness feature.

There were quite a few responses that mentioned room treatment / optimal space design. Truth be told, my system is located in the family room, which is approximately 16’ x 24. Hard wood floors, big couch, recliners, etc. “It is what it is” until I can claim a room within my house to be used solely for the purpose of a listening room.

Sources: I’m either playing vinyl or streaming from Apple via my phone. When I’m streaming, I sometimes connect with a wired connection to take advantage of the lossless quality streaming, or if I’m listening from another room, I connect with Bluetooth via a Audioengine B1 adapter. The sound quality is pretty good from the Apple device, and I have started using some of the built in EQ functions that are present through the music settings.

I’ve found that the issues I’m experiencing are most noticeable when playing vinyl. Based on quite a few recommendations, I may purchase the Schiit Loki Mini, and install it between the turntable and the integrated amplifier and see if the results are favorable.

Lot’s of room for improvement.

Thank you everyone!
Rene

Another option, would be to have a DAC with a nice set of DSP options; continuously variable loudness control using a recent, advanced algorithm, full range of user programable equalization or even user programmable room correction (not an algorithm, simple method of doing it by ear with frequency sweeps) and anything else a full featured DSP engine can provide..

The RME unit above, appears to be the value choice. Many folks report excellent sound quality and the nice set of DSP options are icing on the cake. I have not heard the RME.

At a completely different level of sound quality and, of course, price is the Weiss DAC501 which I own. It has all the features mentioned in my first paragraph, many useful remote controlled options including volume, balance and the very important feature of switching absolute polarity on the fly from your listening position (roughly half of all digital music is the wrong polarity which can be heard if you have good ears and a highly resolving system). One can also program up to twelve presets which can be switched remotely on the fly. For example a combination of loudness and equalization settings for quiet, late night listening based on your ears, room and speakers. Also a world class headphone amp with cross feed and factory equalization curves (currently only Audeze curves are included). Finally, direct connection to your network via wired ethernet (saves the purchase of a rendering computer wihich most DACs require externally).

For those who don't want to give up their uber expensive uber DACs, one can add all these DSP functions with a DSP501 (no DAC but everything else).

I, like many of the folks above, feel that loudness and equalization options done right will enhance any system.

For those of us with turntables, the Schiit products at the lower price range or the vacuum tube Manley Massive Passive for much more money (I'm saving for one) are excellent options.

The tide is turning. Congratulations to the OP and those that chimed in; you are at the forefront of a major shift in high end audio.