Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
The Manley I used was called the "Massive Passive".Hello Bruce,
Have you ever had occasion to use Manley's Mid-Frequency EQ device?
The Manley I used was called the "Massive Passive".Hello Bruce,
Have you ever had occasion to use Manley's Mid-Frequency EQ device?
IMO it’s an unfortunate, dare I say, phobia. I thought the MoFi “scandal” illustrated it very well. Many LPs that have been touted as poster children for the alleged superiority of an all analog signal path have turned out to have a digital step in that signal path. This isn’t exclusive to MoFi.DSP is undoubtedly a more technically precise solution to EQ problems, but it is a solution which analog purists with state of the art analog systems are likely to find anathema, except, perhaps, for EQing bass below around 100Hz.
A totally unnecessary divide. One can enjoy euphonic analog colorations and digital accuracy together.
Our TMallin, a meticulous audiophile, reported a diminution in transparency and special information with the Loki One Max.Buy the Schiit one for $1500 and find out. If you love it, spend $8000 on one with a name that doesn't sound better.
A totally unnecessary divide. One can enjoy euphonic analog colorations and digital accuracy together.
I was only addressing other posts that were engaging in that debate. As I said, I think they can and should live happily together sans any debate.I specified "analog" in the title of the thread in the hope of avoiding another digital versus analog litigation. DSP EQ is not for this thread, please.
My purest approach always has been that I would not give up one iota of transparency to achieve manual manipulation of the frequency response curve of the system. But maybe this is wrong? Maybe giving up one or two iotas of transparency to achieve what is subjectively for each of our systems our ideal frequency response is a good trade?
I was only addressing other posts that were engaging in that debate. As I said, I think they can and should live happily together sans any debate.I specified "analog" in the title of the thread in the hope of avoiding another digital versus analog litigation. DSP EQ is not for this thread, please.
I disagree but will not comment further on anything digital on this particular thread.Digital is not free of colorations , just not euphonic as analog ..
Regards
There are many suitable products on the site, but the wes ng tube eq is the oylmp may have too many setting options for the Rons system. What's really good with this device, you can adjust everything from your listening position via the smartphone app, a very good gimmick.The KMR Wes Audio ngTubeEQ in the link is an impressive piece of tube gear that would provide a lot of flexibility. The Manley device appears to be more a “tone shaper” (similar to the bass/mid/treble controls on old integrated receivers) than a device to address the specific frequency response anomolies typical in residential audiophile settings.
Yes. And, finer gradations in the target frequency for each filter.Is this because you look at the curves on the Manley and concluded that their Q is lower (broader) than the curves on the KMR?
I will split the cost with you and we can both try it. I would be willing to divide that up a little more if others want in.Our TMallin, a meticulous audiophile, reported a diminution in transparency and special information with the Loki One Max.
But I totally agree that the Loki One Max would be easy and instructive way to get one's feet wet in analog EQ.
I appreciate the thought. But their 14 day return policy really makes it easier for anyone interested to buy it himself/herself.I will split the cost with you and we can both try it. I would be willing to divide that up a little more if others want in.
I think it likely does have an effect on phase and timing. I think the EQ likely introduces anomalies and problems to phase and timing.Ron, is there any sort of goal with an EQ. I think it should be noted, EQ is very limited in that its just frequency. It has not affect as far as I know on Phase or timing of the signal.
How does it have USB input?Here is a Rupert Neve Design for modest cost.
Neve 8803 Dual Channel EQ
2-channel, 4-band Equalizer with Semi-parametric High/Low Bands, Fully Parametric Mid Bands, Highpass/Lowpass Filters, USB Port, Combination +4dBu/-10dBV Inputs, and XLR/Parallel Outputswww.sweetwater.com
A parametric equalizer allows you to choose center frequencies, bandwidth and amplitude. It is about as analog as you can get. And Rupert Neve’s studio recording designs are legendary.
Why do you think the EQ creates phase and timing issues.I think it likely does have an effect on phase and timing. I think the EQ likely introduces anomalies and problems to phase and timing.