What is a tone control?

[microstrip]

Debating high-end is not a trivial subject - the audiophiles do not even agree on the objective of sound reproduction and on the importance of perceptual sciences in high-end.

But I have found that most of the times our debates are due to different meanings we associate with certain key words. One of them is "tone control". For me a tone control should be a device that has variable gain with frequency, nothing else. It should add no noise and be distortion free. Do you agree?

I think the clarification is needed, as several times I have read posts considering "tone controls" in a broader sense, for example that cables are used as "tone-controls", and we know that the frequency response changes due to cables are 99.99% of times beyond audibility.

 

[Steve williams]

I'm with you 100%

 

[tony ky ma]

The best tone control is a multi amps ( 3 to 5 ways) system with a electronic crossover directly to drive each speaker's driver
tony ma

 

[Bruce B]

When I think of tone controls on pre-amps and such, it's just an adjustablle lo/hi shelf EQ

When referred to cables, I think of them again as a shelf EQ... it the high end tilted up or down? is the low end boosted or attenuated?

 

[naturephoto1]

I also think of tone controls on pre-amps and at one time also on some receivers. I am not sure if a graphic equalizer would be considered a tone control, but perhaps.

I do not consider IC and Coax cables, power cords, speaker cables as tone controls. Additionally, I do not consider caps, resistors, and other electronic parts as tone controls; they can however when installed in the correct portions of component circuitry have a very noticeable affect on the sound.

Rich

 

[RogerD]

In my system a engineer friend designed a circuit that my tech told me produces part of the spectrum,highs,mids and upper bass. I drive it from my 2'nd set of outputs from the preamp to a dedicated amplifier. The amplifier has a output level control so I can adjust the volume level. I use a separate pair of speakers mounted up above my main speakers. All the information comes from the source,nothing added. I find that it enhances the stereo image and enables me to hear ambient information that my room shortcomings might cancel out.

I don't know if it is a tone control,if it is ,I thinks it is a ingenious adaptation of one.

 

[caesar]

When referred to cables, I think of them again as a shelf EQ... it the high end tilted up or down? is the low end boosted or attenuated?

This is exactly what I hear when I listen to different cables.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

I'd love to see a return of tone controls on preamps and integrated amps (Luxman has done just that on some of their new IA models). I know audiophiles tend to be purists and we should listen at neutral levels, but some recordings need help. And even if they don't, I might just prefer it with a little more/less treble/bass.

 

[Bruce B]

These are my favorite "tone controls"...

 

[JackD201]

AFAIC No Q, No Go. I'm perfectly fine with parametric EQ but have never liked graphic eqs no matter how many bands there are. I can never seem to really dial those in. I'm also not a big fan of boosting frequencies and would rather attenuate everything else then employ some make-up gain on the whole kaboodle later so the chances of overloaded or overdriven stages are left to just two channels. Saves a lot of hassle in back tracking to see where I messed up.

 

[Bruce B]

. I'm also not a big fan of boosting frequencies and would rather attenuate everything else then employ some make-up gain on the whole kaboodle later so the chances of overloaded or overdriven stages are left to just two channels. .

Yeah, you should never use EQ gain, only attenuation.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I think some people are taking things a bit too literally here. The people who say audiophiles use cables and components as "tone controls," and I'm one of them, don't mean you have a knob on your interconnect cables to turn the treble up and down, though that would actually be more useful. What we mean is that you are adjusting the tonality of your system through the use of cables, caps, etc. Things like cables and caps can't be additive (other than adding noise and distortion) so it is a passive process in which the part attenuates some frequencies and lets others through, resulting in a "sound," a change in frequency response. There is nothing wrong with it if you like the results but to hold the tweaking of passive components to achieve tonal synergy up as the pinnacle of the audiophile art while dismissing equalization is, as Spock might say, "illogical."

Tim

 

[c1ferrari]

AFAIC No Q, No Go. I'm perfectly fine with parametric EQ...

I recently acquired an analog tape, which was EQ'd for vinyl pressing...I'm thinking about a GML equalizer.

 

[Bruce B]

I think some people are taking things a bit too literally here. The people who say audiophiles use cables and components as "tone controls," and I'm one of them, don't mean you have a knob on your interconnect cables to turn the treble up and down, though that would actually be more useful. Tim

I thought there was 1 or 2 brands that actually had knobs that you could turn or you could replace components that affected the freq.

 

[JackD201]

I recently acquired an analog tape, which was EQ'd for vinyl pressing...I'm thinking about a GML equalizer.

I've never heard of the GML. Looks like a pro model.

Question: Pro and Consumer work at different references even when both are using XLRs. How difficult is it to slot in a pro EQ between say a consumer Pre and a consumer Amp or using he tape loops?

 

[Bruce B]

I've never heard of the GML. Gotta link Sam?

George Massenburg Labs

 

[c1ferrari]

I've never heard of the GML. Gotta link Sam?

Hi Jack,

Here ya go, http://www.massenburg.com/c/gml/browse.html?open=

 

[JackD201]

Thanks guys googled it then edited. Good reputation?

 

[Bruce B]

Yeah... they're pretty good. For mastering I prefer EQ's from Rupert Neve, EAR and Sontec

It's not hard at all to incorporate them. Some have 2 I/O config for -10 and +4.

 

[microstrip]

(...) There is nothing wrong with it if you like the results but to hold the tweaking of passive components to achieve tonal synergy up as the pinnacle of the audiophile art while dismissing equalization is, as Spock might say, "illogical."

Tim

Tim,

If you call the things by their proper names there is nothing illogical on that.

Tone controls change the frequency response of the system. Cables, or some passive components change the perceived sound in a different way, that can not be explained by our usual measurements, but sometimes suggest a change in the sense of what we perceive by using a tone control. But, unhappily, no tone control can add the extra perceived resolution, detail or musical sense given sometimes by what you properly designate by tweaks.

Perhaps I should reformulate - what is a tweak?