Tone controls?

[NorthStar]

What about tuning interconnects and speaker cables? ...Silver, copper, Litz, ...
Or a gentle parametric EQ, say from Yamaha pro, to tune the bass in the first three octaves or four in less than ideal acoustical rooms? Is it permissible to tune our sound to preference by using judicious tone controls in the digital domain?

Assuming you enjoy digital music. ...And even the best analog music.
A phono preamp; does it come with EQ curves that were used when the recordings were made?

 

[Rodney Gold]

Phono uses eq..hardware based
There are bass issues that only eq can fix , like 10+ db humps at 40khz and below..bass trapping will do nothing about those.
Another good use is to program in a loudness setting that will make low level listening much better even headphones are eqed these days....

 

[NorthStar]

Yes, but the purists prefer tuning the room over equing the gear.

 

[bryans]

Eh...I will go without, thank you. A truly great system does not need them.

The truth is that some albums are so horribly recorded, they should not be introduced into a reference system. Reserve those for low level listening on a boombox or equivalent IMO. No amount of EQ will help them. Need an example? Try any one of Adele's albums.

Tom

Sorry but I don't agree with this. Why limit yourself to what music you want to listen to? I personally want to listen to any and everything I own or care to hear.

 

[Al M.]

What about tuning interconnects and speaker cables? ...Silver, copper, Litz, ...

Bad, really bad idea. Never tune the tone of your sytem with cables. Resolution is the first thing that goes out the window. A neutral cable is the way to go, always.

Yes, but the purists prefer tuning the room over equing the gear.

Here. You gave the answer yourself. Even just a strategically placed carpet can work wonders sometimes, and is infinitely preferable to, and much cheaper than, playing around with cables.

 

[microstrip]

Bad, really bad idea. Never tune the tone of your sytem with cables. Resolution is the first thing that goes out the window. A neutral cable is the way to go, always.

Debating cables in a thread about tone control is confusing - cables are not tone controls as they do not change frequency response in the audio band.

But since they have been addressed, what is a "neutral cable"? Just the cable we prefer? Or just those that cost less than X?

 

[treitz3]

Sorry but I don't agree with this. Why limit yourself to what music you want to listen to? I personally want to listen to any and everything I own or care to hear.

I was referring to music in the reference system. I'll listen to my music (even bad recordings) whenever and wherever I like....just not in the reference system.

That's not really limiting myself. It's just a personal preference. One that I can live with. It makes me enjoy certain "not so well recorded" music as I'm rockin' down the highway. I know you know what I mean.

Tom

 

[Ron Resnick]

Most of us may rail against “tone controls,” and I would be happy to lead the charge, but the attack is somewhat disingenuous.

Isn’t the +1dB/flat/-1dB switch on the back of the Pendragon ribbon panels a tone control?

Aren’t many of the potentiometers and switches on the back of Von Schweikert Audio and Evolution Acoustics and Genesis Technologies loudspeakers tone controls?

Jurgen, of MBL, has a switch on the back of his 101E Mk. II speakers to adjust the type of wire going to the speaker terminals to change very slightly tonality.

So we may dislike parametric equalizers which make gross adjustments to frequency curves, but we have to admit we accept a little frequency nip and tuck capability in our industry’s top loudspeakers. I think it is perfectly rational for loudspeaker manufacturers to offer the user the opportunity to fine-tune the speaker to listening rooms with different acoustics.

 

[bryans]

I was referring to music in the reference system. I'll listen to my music (even bad recordings) whenever and wherever I like....just not in the reference system.

That's not really limiting myself. It's just a personal preference. One that I can live with. It makes me enjoy certain "not so well recorded" music as I'm rockin' down the highway. I know you know what I mean.

Tom

Gotcha

 

[Ron Resnick]

Yes, but the purists prefer tuning the room over equing the gear.

Very true, Bob!

 

[Empirical Audio]

What about tuning interconnects and speaker cables? ...Silver, copper, Litz, ...

Real bad idea. Cables are not tuning devices. Get really transparent cables or go home.

Or a gentle parametric EQ, say from Yamaha pro, to tune the bass in the first three octaves or four in less than ideal acoustical rooms? Is it permissible to tune our sound to preference by using judicious tone controls in the digital domain?

You are not serious?

Assuming you enjoy digital music. ...And even the best analog music.
A phono preamp; does it come with EQ curves that were used when the recordings were made?

A good reason to avoid vinyl and even tape unless it is 7.5ips and the latest electronics.

Listen to Bluecoast Recordings downloads. No EQ or compression.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[Empirical Audio]

Most of us may rail against “tone controls,” and I would be happy to lead the charge, but the attack is somewhat disingenuous.

Isn’t the +1dB/flat/-1dB switch on the back of the Pendragon ribbon panels a tone control?

Aren’t many of the potentiometers and switches on the back of Von Schweikert Audio and Evolution Acoustics and Genesis Technologies loudspeakers tone controls?

Jurgen, of MBL, has a switch on the back of his 101E Mk. II speakers to adjust the type of wire going to the speaker terminals to change very slightly tonality.

So we may dislike parametric equalizers which make gross adjustments to frequency curves, but we have to admit we accept a little frequency nip and tuck capability in our industry’s top loudspeakers. I think it is perfectly rational for loudspeaker manufacturers to offer the user the opportunity to fine-tune the speaker to listening rooms with different acoustics.

What you are talking about here is passive crossover adjustments, not active equalizers or software equalizers. There is a big difference. Active devices cause compression and distortion. Software DSP EQ mostly causes distortion and noise. There is the Sonic Studio exception.

Not that speaker crossovers are perfect. Far from that. The problem there is the passive components that behave unlike the textbook ideals.

This is why it is important in the future to create GOOD DSP for crossovers and transmit 3 separate files to each three-way speaker, each file with its own equalization applied to make the perfect speaker crossover tuned specifically for that particular speaker. One file for the tweeter, one for the midrange and one for the woofer. This is the future and it will take all speakers, even cheap ones to the next level.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[Empirical Audio]

Debating cables in a thread about tone control is confusing - cables are not tone controls as they do not change frequency response in the audio band.

True, but only steady-state. Dynamically, cables can have a large effect on the presentation, bringing the cymbols forward and making them recessed etc..

But since they have been addressed, what is a "neutral cable"? Just the cable we prefer? Or just those that cost less than X?

The characteristics of a neutral cable depends on the application. Analog interconnects are different from digital interconnects are different from speaker cables are different from power cables.

A neutral analog interconnect will have:

1) low capacitance
2) good metallurgy - lattice crystal structure if it is metallic
3) low dielectric absorption
4) low skin-effect

a good speaker cable will have

1) low resistance
2) low inductance
3) low skin-effect
4) low dielectric absorption

A good digital interconnect will have:

1) precisely controlled impedance
2) low skin-effect
3) low dielectric absorption
4) good metallurgical characteristics - crystal lattice

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[Ron Resnick]

We are writing about different things, I think. Or perhap we are using different definitions of “tone control.”

Why are you telling me what I’m “talking about” when you apparently have not checked what I am talking about? I am not talking about crossover adjustments.

I’m talking about one or more subwoofer and midrange and tweeter level adjustments on many of the loudspeakers made by the companies I mentioned. These adjustments are, to me, tone controls. And I am glad they are there.

The fact that active equalizers cause compression and distortion does not mean that low frequency, midrange and tweeter level adjustments are not tone controls.

 

[Empirical Audio]

We are writing about different things, I think. Or perhap we are using different definitions of “tone control.”

Why are you telling me what I’m “talking about” when you apparently have not checked what I am talking about? I am not talking about crossover adjustments.

I’m talking about one or more subwoofer and midrange and tweeter level adjustments on many of the loudspeakers made by the companies I mentioned. These adjustments are, to me, tone controls. And I am glad they are there.

The fact that active equalizers cause compression and distortion does not mean that low frequency, midrange and tweeter level adjustments are not tone controls.

These can all be considered "tone controls", although some adjust only roll-off/on frequencies and others adjust both amplitude and frequency. Historically, the term tone control was used for an amplitude adjustment with a fixed frequency roll-on/off.

All tone controls have deleterious effects like I said, with a very few DSP exceptions. Both passive crossover adjustments (including amplitude) in loudspeakers and active EQ devices and software are problematic.

These adjusments may be good to have to tweak a certain speaker, but they are far from transparent. That is my point.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[NorthStar]

Real bad idea. Cables are not tuning devices. Get really transparent cables or go home.

You are not serious?

A good reason to avoid vinyl and even tape unless it is 7.5ips and the latest electronics.

Listen to Bluecoast Recordings downloads. No EQ or compression.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Good afternoon Steve,

I agree that any cable; interconnect, speaker wire, AC power cord, ...should be as neutral and transparent as possible and not used as an EQ device for the system. Many hiend preamps come with tone controls for exactly that...depending of the music recordings.

Oh yes I am serious; a quality parametric equalizer from Yamaha can go a long way in tuning the bass in the room...dial it just that much better. ...Not adding anything that it isn't there...a dip, but substracting a main annoying peak, say from 20Hz to 200Hz.

Tape and vinyl audiophiles; they come in various flavors, mainly hi-fi stereo, and mono, without 'flowers' between the analog components. Flowers as colors, or tone alterations.
Personally, I am a daredevil, and I do experiment with acoustic EQ from my two-channel analog music listening. But that's me and with all the baggage that comes behind. My room is not tuned to a special curve of the audio spectrum. I am an amateur, a freelance sound explorer. I respect all professional audiophiles, tubes and solid state included.

 

[Leif S]

These can all be considered "tone controls", although some adjust only roll-off/on frequencies and others adjust both amplitude and frequency. Historically, the term tone control was used for an amplitude adjustment with a fixed frequency roll-on/off.

All tone controls have deleterious effects like I said, with a very few DSP exceptions. Both passive crossover adjustments (including amplitude) in loudspeakers and active EQ devices and software are problematic.

These adjusments may be good to have to tweak a certain speaker, but they are far from transparent. That is my point.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

I'm really curious where you are getting this from

I don't know what you are basing this information off of but I disagree 100%. When done correctly there is no loss in transparency. During blind testing I got just as many wrong as I did right. I couldn't tell if the control was in or out. And the purpose for the control is not to cure a bad crossover. It is to provide flexibility for placement and listener preference. We don't all like the same thing.

In a passive speaker the crossover itself is the EQ. Where we shape the frequency response of each driver for a flat response, and then combine with the other driver(s) to achieve flat response throughout it's entire response. Our volume control does not effect the linear response of the driver. It is just a volume control. The shape of the drivers response does not change. But since you are adjusting the speakers overall frequency response, technically you could call this tone control.

DSP has a long way to go to match up to a well designed speaker in a good room. But that's my opinion. There are a few things DSP doesn't calculate that is used in designing a passive crossover and this is what separates them. Also in a passive crossover the enclosure itself is factored in to all the measurements which are not with DSP. But like I said.....we don't all like the same thing.

 

[Mark Seaton]

Most of us may rail against “tone controls,” and I would be happy to lead the charge, but the attack is somewhat disingenuous.

Isn’t the +1dB/flat/-1dB switch on the back of the Pendragon ribbon panels a tone control?

Aren’t many of the potentiometers and switches on the back of Von Schweikert Audio and Evolution Acoustics and Genesis Technologies loudspeakers tone controls?

Jurgen, of MBL, has a switch on the back of his 101E Mk. II speakers to adjust the type of wire going to the speaker terminals to change very slightly tonality.

So we may dislike parametric equalizers which make gross adjustments to frequency curves, but we have to admit we accept a little frequency nip and tuck capability in our industry’s top loudspeakers. I think it is perfectly rational for loudspeaker manufacturers to offer the user the opportunity to fine-tune the speaker to listening rooms with different acoustics.

I'm really curious where you are getting this from

I don't know what you are basing this information off of but I disagree 100%. When done correctly there is no loss in transparency. During blind testing I got just as many wrong as I did right. I couldn't tell if the control was in or out. And the purpose for the control is not to cure a bad crossover. It is to provide flexibility for placement and listener preference. We don't all like the same thing.

In a passive speaker the crossover itself is the EQ. Where we shape the frequency response of each driver for a flat response, and then combine with the other driver(s) to achieve flat response throughout it's entire response. Our volume control does not effect the linear response of the driver. It is just a volume control. The shape of the drivers response does not change. But since you are adjusting the speakers overall frequency response, technically you could call this tone control.

DSP has a long way to go to match up to a well designed speaker in a good room. But that's my opinion. There are a few things DSP doesn't calculate that is used in designing a passive crossover and this is what separates them. Also in a passive crossover the enclosure itself is factored in to all the measurements which are not with DSP. But like I said.....we don't all like the same thing.

I fully agree with the above sentiments. I do get a kick out of how audiophiles are happy to let a speaker designer do any amount of response shaping to the speaker going in their room, and will change out massive speakers to find one that was voiced appropriately for their room and tastes, but abhor the concept of an elegantly simple tilt/shelf control to help optimize the broad band balance in the room.

Most audiophiles don't realize just how sensitive we are to very broad, 0.5-2dB changes in level. I would certainly agree that most past tone controls are not designed in the most useful manner. We really need high/low shelving controls with fine adjustment of both level and center frequency. If we can possibly also have an overall "tilt" function, that's extremely useful as well. These are not complex circuits, and can be very easily integrated into any preamplifier or digital front end.

 

[Al M.]

I fully agree with the above sentiments. I do get a kick out of how audiophiles are happy to let a speaker designer do any amount of response shaping to the speaker going in their room, and will change out massive speakers to find one that was voiced appropriately for their room and tastes, but abhor the concept of an elegantly simple tilt/shelf control to help optimize the broad band balance in the room.

Most audiophiles don't realize just how sensitive we are to very broad, 0.5-2dB changes in level. I would certainly agree that most past tone controls are not designed in the most useful manner. We really need high/low shelving controls with fine adjustment of both level and center frequency. If we can possibly also have an overall "tilt" function, that's extremely useful as well. These are not complex circuits, and can be very easily integrated into any preamplifier or digital front end.

Yes, I don't get the purist non-adjustability of speakers either. Especially after having heard someone's excellent system where he successfully tuned his heavily modified Martin Logan speakers to his room.

One of the reasons I love my monitor/sub system is that it allows me to adjust bass easily between recordings, with always a high-quality outcome when done carefully. Simply turn up or down the sub volume, and everything is fine, with appropriate low- and mid-bass adjustment simultaneously going hand in hand (even though the monitors put out considerable mid-bass on their own if it's on the recording).

As we all know, bass output varies wildly with recordings (I hear that on any system, even the most expensive one). I just don't see why I am supposed to be at the whim of recording engineers' tastes or of their limitations of monitoring (the in-room response of their studio monitors may vary from ideal in ways that they may not even be aware of). I rather create my own reality. The whole purist 'reproduce-what's-on-the-recording' schtick is full of logical holes anyway; I just mentioned two.

 

[still-one]

Real bad idea. Cables are not tuning devices. Get really transparent cables or go home.


Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Get cables that make the sound of your system closer to what you are looking for.