Using a Studio EQ for Vinyl playback

EQs are used daily in recording and mastering studios worldwide. If it makes your music more enjoyable, I say knock yourself out.

You will hear from the "purists" and "techies" that EQ will create and add "unwanted" distortion and phase anomalies. As if only playback should remain absolutely unfettered and unadulterated. There is no such thing as a recroding without EQ of some type; the first transducer (microphone) imparts equalization at the very beginning of the recording > media > playback chain. That's why microphone selection is such a big deal to engineers everywhere.

If you need an EQ in high-end system then something wrong with the system, normally in a very well balanced system you will forget about knobs and disappear in the music with a smile on your face. Remember that musicians and mastering/cutting engineers already prepared your vinyl media to sound as the master tape which is the reference.

In mediocre system EQ will help to adjust the weakness a bit, but in reference system EQ must be avoided. Normally we can still add different flavour to the music with different cartridges, speakers, cables etc.

Some phono stages comes with different RIAA EQ curves for different vintage records, but all new records must have standard RIAA curve.

I think the main target for audiophiles is neutrality of the audio system, but the EQ is like cooking with too much salt, paper or sugar.

Normally we can still add different flavour to the music with different cartridges, speakers, cables etc.

Why do this when you can use a well designed EQ?

So chakster....
I DO have an excellent system that sounds amazing with well recorded and well mastered recordings.  Sorry, but I disagree with you.  
I have many LPs that do NOT sound great, but have great music on them. (I have around 2500 LPs)  Take LPs from the 70's for example.. funk, jazz, rock, disco.... yeah i said it..... Disco.... (once in a while).   Many records were rolled off in the low end to fit more minutes of music on them.  They were not mastered for audiophile ears, nor for level of quality of audio systems we have today.   THESE records need some help, and CAN sound amazing when the low end is restored, or maybe adding a touch of HF shine.  Why should I suffer the mediocre sound of great music that I love??   
This is the purist audiophile attitude that I'd like to turn around. (respectfully, of course!)   

Less equals more sound quality ....and more hardware equals less sound quality.

Every wire, connector, cable, resistor, capacitor, inductor and so on - degrades sound quality.

Less is more. and the less it is in the way of parts and more those limited numbers of internal parts are of a high quality, the higher quality of sound will be obtained.

the idea of not having eq, not having tone controls, not using active circuits as additional pass through of the signal, is all about getting closer to a higher fidelity to the the original recording. To do no more damage to the signal, as much as is possible.

In that direction is audio nirvana. No new piece of equipment added in, be it analog Eq, digital room eq, anything complex..all of that is sonically degrading. It’s a total backwards move.

It’s a down slope into a black hole of circular motion into a nothing and/or less.

Less. is. more.

It is an important lesson in the direction of getting to the actual and whole "raison d’être" of the audio endeavor.

By all means, try an eq. But, if one tries moving in the direction of less is more, one might find that the whole EQ thing becomes meaningless (and worse, ie, detrimental) in one’s discovery of a greater, far more rewarding fundamental.

Every single piece of gear and every single internal component, every single speaker, every single cable.., every switch, every potentiometer, every chip, every circuit board, every metal alloy or element......all of it damages audio quality. Period. This is the heart of the known problem. Therefore---- Less really ~IS~ more.

You will not find a single knowledgeable, intelligent, and experienced audio designer - that disagrees with any part of what I’ve written here.

It’s a simple logic involving the physics of electrical function. All known aspects of conductive and non conductive materials, when integrating with electrical function, damages the signal integrity. No exceptions known to humanity.

The fight for highest fidelity is actually, in truth, a fight to reach the least amount of signal degradation or damage.

So, one can see, in the face of such simple logic ..which may not be as well known or understood as it should...that this is why audiophiles generally do not want anything to do with an EQ.

There is no solution but that of tossing complex and additive equipment out the window.

Obviously, some parts of the market dislike this simple truth ...and drag people down the wrong path. You see it play out at audio shows. The simple set up rooms vs the behemoth complex things. Who and what is right? Depends on one’s personal level of accomplishment in hearing training vs capacity for hearing vs brain power thrown at the problem.

@mirolab

So chakster.... I DO have an excellent system that sounds amazing with well recorded and well mastered recordings. Sorry, but I disagree with you. I have many LPs that do NOT sound great, but have great music on them. (I have around 2500 LPs) Take LPs from the 70’s for example.. funk, jazz, rock, disco.... yeah i said it..... Disco.... (once in a while). Many records were rolled off in the low end to fit more minutes of music on them. They were not mastered for audiophile ears, nor for level of quality of audio systems we have today. THESE records need some help, and CAN sound amazing when the low end is restored, or maybe adding a touch of HF shine. Why should I suffer the mediocre sound of great music that I love?? This is the purist audiophile attitude that I’d like to turn around. (respectfully, of course!)

This is exactly my choice of music, except for the rock! Some original records are bad, but most of them are amazing to my ears, and much better that modern reissues of the music from the 70s. I do not use EQs at home. I just prefet to play well recorded original pressings from the 60s, 70s and early 80s. But i have an option on one of my 3 different phono stages. Gold Note PH-10 - maybe you have to buy that preamp.

6 EQ CURVES TO CHOOSE:
Select between 3 equalisation curves and experience outstanding performances. You will finally be able to switch from the internationally recognised RIAA curve, to the DECCA LONDON or the AMERICAN-COLUMBIA curve, always graphically shown on the front display. And there’s more, because you will also be able to “enhance” each curve with a modern Gold Note proprietary design for superior dynamic and powerful results.

Teo_audio.....  I would agree with you on a theoretical level... if I were playing back audiophile pressings.   When I do play well mastered LPs.. or newly remastered pressings, I bypass the EQ and it sounds fantastic.  I will pose it to you again...   
I know my system is well balanced because when I play well mastered material, it sounds exactly perfect.  But then I put on a record that is clearly deficient in low end.  Should I just grin and bear it? Should I not play this music?   Why should I be deprived of the kick drum moving some air for a set of made-up ideals?   
And to Chalkster..... why should I have to pick from 6 EQ presets that have nothing whatsoever to do with the record that I am playing right now?  ..... when all that's required is +4dB at 50Hz to restore the kick and bass to where they SHOULD be.   Yes... i know what a real band sounds like, and I know that the kick and bass should move some air in the room.  If the record has been rolled off due to mass market commercial concerns, why is it an audiophile crime to use an EQ to fix this problem?  

Then why don't you just buy a sub or two if its all about bass? 

Different RIAA is just a tone control to make darker records better. 

As for the EQ in general it's old fashioned, remember 70s and 80s hi-fi. Each system contained separate EQ unit back then. 

You will not make it sound better with EQ, it will sound just as bad in a different way. Unless you really want to have a mastering studio in your listening room, I see no reason to bother with these devices. It would also be too much work, I would want to correct every recording I have.

This comes under my heading of “if it makes you happy, it can’t be so bad” to plagiarize Sheryl Crowe. I personally like to use a graphic equalizer to compensate for the effects of the way room acoustics play with my speakers, to arrive at something that (to me) sounds like what the producer wants the listener to experience. In my case, that is accomplished via a -1dB tweak at 31.5 and 63Hz, even with my speakers located several feet from the wall behind them, they still sound a little bass-heavy unless I do this. And, I’m pleased with the result to the point where it makes me happy.... so, problem solved. One day, I’ll break out the spectrum analyzer and pink noise generator, and see if the test gear agrees with what my ears subjectively tell me. Even then I will probably not change the equalizer settings. 

teo is absolutely correct regarding maintaining the fidelity of the signal, but he fails to mention the enjoyment of the music.  If the latter is your priority, then certain EQs can prove very effective.