Anyone use equalizers?

[Allan F]

8 hours ago, NOMBEDES said:

I have a very nice Yamaha S2000 amp.  It still has a "tone control".  I don't use it much, but some recordings need a boost one way or another.  So, all in all, I find it useful.  Your system, your room, your ears may vary.

 

Tone controls, if they can be defeated without affecting SQ, are not necessarily a bad thing and can make some awful recordings listenable. It's just that most tone controls add another element to the circuitry which does affect SQ, especially in transparent, high resolution gear. That's why almost all quality, high end preamps or integrated amps don't use them.

[Allan F]

3 hours ago, NOMBEDES said:

 

and "transparent, high resolution" gear makes "awful recordings" worse! 

 

Perhaps, it would be more correct to say that ""transparent, high resolution" gear often makes "awful recordings" worse.

 

[Allan F]

19 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

That's the current culture, anyway.  I remember a day when equalizers were popular. And I still see them in studios.

 

My post was about tone controls on preamps or integrated amps, not equalizers in studios. But tone controls were common many years ago, before their deleterious effect on sound quality was generally appreciated, especially in regard to phase.

[Allan F]

On 10/25/2017 at 7:52 AM, Samuel T Cogley said:

And it's the additive euphonic colorations that are the domain of high end analog interconnects.  They really can and do change the sound depending on the gear on each end of the cable.

 

I'm sure that you also realize that a change of sound that follows changing the gear on one or both ends of the cable may be a desirable attribute, unless that gear all sounds the same. It''s called transparency, which is anything but additive coloration.

[Allan F]

7 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

I was really thinking of boutique gear with attributes like non-standard input impedance on the line-ins ("standard" is around 10k ohms) or sources with unusual output impedance (some tube-based phono preamps come to mind).  In my experience gear like that (often this means tubes) predictably add euphonic colorations.  Is it undesirable?  To me, yes, but I don't begrudge those who seek euphonics in their setups.  I understand the colloquial use of the word "transparency" in this context.  But that's not what I would call it.

 

I wasn't using the term "transparency" in a colloquial sense, but rather in the generally accepted audiophile technical sense, i.e. clearly revealing the inherent sound characteristics of the gear. I understand that is not what you were referring to. My point was simply that truly transparent interconnects will change the sound, reflecting changes in the sound of the connected gear.

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

Allan

I haven't seen any references to a "standard" input impedance of around 10kohms, and it seems highly likely that a relatively low 10k input impedance which suits many Power Amplifiers for technical reasons , is unlikely to be optimum for most PreAmplifiers that receive their Input from a cheap opamp in a DVD player etc.

Therefore, it is highly unlikely that you will find a universal "transparent" interconnect.

 

Regards

Alex

Alex

You are right. I am not suggesting that there is a "universal" one. Like most things in audio, it is system dependent. I was contrasting "euphonic" with "transparent", which are very different results when the sound produced through interconnects changes when the gear changes. The former detracts from accuracy, while the latter fosters it. As you know, the goal in choosing and matching components is synergy.

Regards,

Allan

[Allan F]

On 10/28/2017 at 8:42 AM, Samuel T Cogley said:

Unpacking the "generally accepted" bit a little, you mean, "believed by real audiophiles".

 

Sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. Are you trying to act out your membership description?