Are tone controls worth a second look ?



Are tone controls still prohibited from ''high end''audio?

Seems to me that with all of the advances in electronic design, they starting to make sense again.

In my humble opinion, tone controls are not unlike adding, or substracting sonic flavor to music reproduction. Like switching interconnects or speaker cables that will affect the sound in X or Y manner.

I am not reffering to a technical comparison between tone controls and cables, but rather that their effect could be similar. When you think of it, cables have their own colors. And we pay dearly for this without the opportunity of a ''tone defeat'' button.

What do you think?
sonicbeauty
Someone mentioned this briefly before, but it got lost in the shuffle: most of us have imperfect hearing. As I'm solidly in the middle age category now, my hearing has definitely declined in certain frequency ranges (no doubt due in part to too many insanely loud punk and rock concerts in my younger years, as well as listening to my car stereo WAY too loud in my 20s). I suspect I'm not the only one in this boat.

If someone's hearing has deteriorated in certain frequency ranges (usually the higher frequencies), then they aren't hearing the music as it was intended to be heard by the musicians, even with the "purest" audiophile system. If that can be compensated (at least in part) by boosting those frequencies, then why would this be considered "impure?" If anything, it would bring the music back closer to the way it was intended to be heard by the artist.

Ideally, the listener could get a graph of their hearing sensitivity at each frequency, and then plug that data into a sophisticated equalizer that would adjust the music to compensate and personalize it to the specific listener. Personally, I'd love this.
IMO, since there is such a wide difference in recording quality, tone controls just make sense.