Equalizers in a quality music system

[@AnalogueGround]

Ignore the ‘no eq snobs’! It doesn’t matter how good or bad your system is, it’s about listening pleasure. There’s no way of knowing what the intention of the musician(s) is/was, or even whether the final master represented that. EQ with a true bypass when you don’t want it is adding to one’s listening pleasure not taking anything away. Any audible degradation when EQ is used is so small to bother about compared to the restoration of frequency balance that was lacking in the source material.

[@jimbennett2795]

OK Then why do ALL I MEAN ALL high end pre amps omit the use of tone controls? EVERY ONE !! Paul has never gotten into the phase shift that happens AS YOU TURN THE KNOBS EVEN ONE CLICK. COME ON PAUL It's time to tell everybody why and QUIT PASSING OVER THIS HUGE PROBLEM.

[@rosswarren436]

@@jimbennett2795 because audiophiles were fools in the 1970s and 1980s and demanded that, (I was one of them, jumping on the so-called "purists" bandwagon), so manufacturers were very happy to charge them more for less and take the money to the bank. Finally decades later people are realizing that no, your system and speakers don't represent some ideal "truth" in your less than ideal room, and either EQ or room correction software, and most of all room treatment are necessary to achieve anything remotely close to what was heard at the mixing console. And we note that even THAT is not any ideal "truth" but just what the engineer and producer agreed on as being "good enough". Heck, many artists never hear the raw recordings and aren't involved in the decisions the engineer makes when taking all those separate tracks and mixing them down. The 20,000 lb gorilla in the room are your speakers. None have a flat frequency response that I know of from 20Hz to 20,000Hz. So right off the bat, you are dealing with something that is imposing a sonic compromise compared to the original recording. Listen without EQ if you want, if you are lucky to only listen to a handful of "audiophile" recordings, but don't chastise others for wanting to hear something pleasing to their ears from a variety of sources, many of which benefit from a touch of EQ. You can load a .wav file into Audacity and with a Reaper EQ plug-in see the phase changes that occur when you apply EQ but you know what, many prefer the EQed sound because it is fuller (or calmer) in the frequencies needed, despite the phase changes you will see. It's all a matter of degree.

[@montynorth3009]

@@jimbennett2795 RIAA equalisation is a tone control.

[@AnalogueGround]

@@jimbennett2795 You maybe could do with some EQ on your caps lock…

[@robertbayer7935]

​@@jimbennett2795 macintosh and cello preamps and one krell amp/ preamps has tone controls. I don't like tone controls. I would constantly be adjusting making comparisons,and l would not be enjoying my stereo system. I owen Linn audio and Naim stereo systems.

[@DethFromAbove1985]

Some of us like some bass, some of us like a lift in the top end. So EQ is a must.

[@larrywe3320]

Hand it to Paul... 100% Salesman 100% of the time! - Oh the EQ... If you like the Music better using an EQ then USE IT

[@johndough8115]

Theres another Factor... one that was brought up in a recent argument. Everyones ears are different... and so what sounds Perfect to my ears... my be lacking in someone else's ears. Some may need a boost in the highs... or some may find the mids/highs too hot/harsh. The next part, is your equipment. Not all speakers are made to a good standard. Then there is the Room itself. If the room eats too much of the bass... or absorbs too much of the treble... then you may need an EQ to boost whats being lost/absorbed. And finally... there is personal preferences to what kind of sound you like to hear. Just because the original masters may have liked the way their mix sounds... doesnt mean you will agree 100% with it. Also, going back to speakers... with certain speakers, you can get even most dynamics out of them, with some EQ tweaks. They may also sound one way at low to mid volume levels... but a lot different at higher volume levels... and thus, require a bit of tweaks to dial it in. So, I disagree. For most people... just use an EQ, whenever you can. The possible amount of analog distortions from them, wont even factor into the mix.

[@Laughing_Crow]

Room dynamics play a big part of sound. I did encounter one person who had such an odd shaped room, that they could have used a EQ to help - but would have needed an audio analyzer to assist setup.

[@digggerrjones7345]

I don't even have to watch this one; PSA doesn't make an EQ *so* he will chastise, rebuke, and berate them!! Somebody tell me if I'm right??

[@davidfromamerica1871]

Paul is using a studio EQ mixer for his Octave Recordings for his FR30’s to sound good.

[@EnricoCarusoAKARicoSuave1973]

Dear Paul..... You sir are truly awesome! Your videos are great!!! I enjoy just listening to you talk briefly about anything Hi-fi. Your calm personality is very refreshing, even when you have to "rant" - Thanks for the informative videos!

[@ThinkingBetter]

A high quality EQ can be awesome to fix bass linearity issues, personal taste, Fletcher Munson effect at lower volumes and high treble age related drops. Period.

[@asx1248]

Hmm... So first Paul mentions hearing what the artist intended then mentions the fact that HE kept sending engineers back because HE isn't happy with the sound. Where was the artist in the decision making. Point is in most cases none of us really know what the artist intended so the desire to achieve it is kind of a thankless task. Then Paul gives a valid example of how there is no standard in recording studios leading to some recordings not sounding ideal on certain systems but heck don't use an equaliser to put that right, instead don't listen to that music or listen to it and don't enjoy the sound. OK to be fair Paul says digital EQ is OK but if the only option is analogue (tone controls are an EQ) go ahead and use them and make the music sound good to you!

[@joyoffilming9500]

Great topic, Paul. And, happy to learn about your balanced perspective which I'd translate into "Avoid when you can - use it when you need!" I came across EQ'ing my home stereo many years back when moving into a new home with the living room being way too small for my speakers' bass. Since then I take advantage of an old SPL Qure parametric EQ with tube powered 'sound enrichment' in the upper mids (when switched on) - and, I love it.

[@helifynoe9930]

I recall in my younger days when I could tell when listening to the music whether the curtains were open or closed, due to how that effected the high frequencies either being absorber by the curtains, or reflected off the windows. Anyhow, it was now time for an overhaul. My 1978 Soundcraftsmen PE2217 Preamp - Equalizer Faders were becoming intermittent. So I blasted them with Deoxit, and that fixed all the contact problems, but they were still extremely difficult to slide due to the lubricant now being 45 years old. So I applied a silicon lubricant to all 22 Faders. Now they slide with almost no effort at all required. These are a rare type of Faders that are made of two halves of plastic that are held together with two metal clips. In this case, you have to lubricate them both internally and externally. But the outcome is worth the effort. Plus I finally re-stained the fronts of my 1978 home made speakers, now that I managed to find some black wood stain. What an improvement. In my new apartment, the equalizer settings are set quite differently to accommodate for the current room shape/size differences.

[@gullrockgeorge9057]

It's all about what you are focused on. If you are into exploring a wide variety of music you sometimes end up with recordings that need some EQ help to sound good enough to listen to all the way through. If you are only into a high level listening experience, then you may simply invest in great recordings that don't need help. Both paths are valid. As for the issues with EQ in the analogue domain, for me that is of less concern since the recording is already "meh", hence the need for EQ. Your not really making it much worse, IMO. YMMV.

[@shipsahoy1793]

Exactly !!!👨🏻

[@InsideOfMyOwnMind]

There are still those who believe that if you would stoop so low as to listen to a recording of a performance that you like even if the mix has problems then you should be forced to suffer through it as the mixing/mastering engineers intended because "EQ bad and tone controls bad" no matter what. It sounds a lot like religion to me, not to be confused with faith.

[@davemaclellan2972]

AMEN to that!!

[@shipsahoy1793]

@@InsideOfMyOwnMind I know, right, it’s funny. I was sitting here thinking about how ridiculous all this crap is.. I really love sound and I really love music, but that audiophile moniker is so ridiculous. You have all these self-professed “purists” running around talking about what should and shouldn’t be, when the reality is that you just basically set up a system and tailor a signal path to whatever makes you happy.. Paul has to talk like this because he’s trying to support these high-end “purity” systems, it’s a business, but the reality is this is all a bunch of sales jibber jabber lol I worked in a recording studio just outside of New York when I was a kid, and we used to kill ourselves trying to make a good mix.. we wanted it to sound good on big studio monitors for high end users, and on small speakers, you name it, for the little people, broadcast band, etc. We would check the mix for all different kinds of stuff, trying to make it pleasing on all fronts, and always a compromise of sorts. We were there to make money, but we needed to make the client money to keep the business alive.

[@InsideOfMyOwnMind]

@@shipsahoy1793 What you describe mid paragraph #2 is just like what engineers go through when voicing a broadcast signal path. You could just shoot it through and everything would sound "as intended" on every receiver within its own limitations but instead they have to present as "juicy" to every listener so now you're dancing with the devil to keep it from sounding like 💩 on that one receiver you didn't know about. A ton of hair has been pulled out over that.

[@captainwin6333]

He makes a good point. He notes his own recordings have improved massively in a couple of years so if you apply that over 50 - 60 years of popular music, it's easy to see why quite a lot of recordings over the decades are poor. There seemed to be a peak in the early days of CD when recording studios were full of people who were experienced in analogue and were brand new to digital and the result across the industry was very mixed. Some good recordings and some truly awful 'ports' from analogue to digital. But there are some great remasters from analogue to digital nowadays. Can's TagoMago re-release from 2011 was remastered in 2011 from the original master tapes recorded in 1971 and that sounds amazing on CD but you can buy recently recorded music from the last couple of years that sounds like an amateur has been at the controls in the studio.

[@MrAustrokiwi]

I recently, out of nostalgia, added a Sansui SE99 to my system. Most of the time it is only used as a spectrum display/ The only component that feeds through it is my reel to reel deck. What stunned me was the sound space compensation facility( using the proprietary condenser microphone) It really makes a huge positive difference to the tape decks output.

[@JoeJ-8282]

I also have one of those EQs, so I know exactly what you're talking about. It's pretty cool!

[@johnnewcomb5162]

The SE -80 is awesome love that one, super clean and clear. Keeping that one forever, don't overlook that EQ, It's better than more expensive units.

[@ParadigmAC]

In my basement setup it's mostly analog and I use a analog 33 band EQ and I enjoy it.

[@AndersHansgaard]

Nothing like the peace of mind it brings to know that all the lows and highs you're not hearing - because of the unequal perception of loudness at various frequencies - weren't ruined by passing through a few components or an algorithm. Don't think about the hundreds of filters that were employed during recording, mixing and mastering. It'll ruin the purity of what you're missing.

[@rosswarren436]

Reality. Yes,

[@beardymcbeardface69]

At the end of the day, *_no_* audio transducers have a perfectly flat frequency response and *_all_* voice-coil based audio transducers cause phase distortion which varies throughout the audible spectrum. As such, both of these phenomena are causing audio to be heard which differs from the recording. Equalisation can be used to correct the former, to _some_ degree, in order get _closer_ to the original recording and sub bands can be given variable delays (interestingly, how analog eq works) to correct for phase distortion, to _some_ degree. Depends on whether you're happy with the sound. If you are, don't touch it! But if there's an aspect that you feel is a little lacking and it bothers you, that aspect can be addressed. I saw someone recently commenting on a blog, who referred to himself as an, _"audiophile_ _purist"_ and proclaimed that he would, _"never_ _adulterate_ _his_ _music_ _with_ _equalisation_ _or_ _upsampling"._ He then boasted about only listening to vinyl through his tube amplifier. LOL Okay then mate, your idea of a purist might be grounded in nostalgia. I know vinyl and tube amps can sound great, but pure? What likeminded audiophile "purists" who enjoy the digital domain need to understand (those who even reject eq in the digital domain), is that they are almost all listening through a low pass filter on the output of their DAC, used to reduce aliasing noise. Upsampling *_effectively_* performs this task but within the digital domain, so that aliasing noise gets thrown far up into the ultrasonic range (even the lower harmonic side lobes). With this, that low pass filter after your DAC has an extremely easy job on its hands! Take this to an extreme and you can get away with no low pass filter after the DAC, at all, since the rest of your audio system after the DAC, essentially *_is_* a low pass filter for that ULTRA ultrasonic aliasing noise (your power amp and transducers are not passing audio at 150+kHz and nor could you hear it or artefacts from it). ;) Equalisation is a tool that can be used for *_correcting_* distortion! You'd think these audiophile purists would actually want to inch further and further towards the pure, but apparently not!

[@jimsteinmanfan80]

One of the biggest needs for an eq is that my ears at 53 years of age are not the same as 35 years ago yet I want the music to sound as close as possible to what it did then so I have to have some way to boost the level in the frequencies where my ears/I have lost the most.

[@paulaj2829]

Hi Paul..As you know I always try to listen to the system I'm listening to & always try to find the true sound.. With my main system I love to listen to my music from what it is with no Equalizer & that to me is the best I can hear.. Now when I listen to music which has a Equalizer fitted I find that I can play around with it & enjoy all different types of sounds.. knowing that what I'm listening to is as good as I need it to be.. But I would always say that what gives you the best performance from that system is how it makes you feel good.

[@corbinangelo3359]

Exactly, some types of music i listen too sometimes need to be tamed down a notch on the low end, else my windows and eardrums might blow. That is why i put my tone control on the tape monitor loop so its always off. I have set it so that when i switch from source to monitor there is no audible difference. From there i can adjust to a bass level that's not shaking the foundation of my house.

[@rosswarren436]

The key of course is to have a good preamp that allows you to have an external loop going to a good EQ that you can turn off or turn on, so when you don't need to EQ, you can have it out of the signal path. But yes, the variability in recordings is huge and maybe always has been. Some studios fortunately get it right (and we are grateful for that) but many do not and many so-called "remixed" or "remastered" albums can be a crapshoot of either being good (Steven Wilson) or being atrocious, needing some taming to not hurt your ears or sonic sensibilities. Then there are times when "accuracy" isn't as important as mere "fun", and you might want to turn up the bass and jam for a song or two just because you can.

[@jonthurston8275]

What about these new Schiit EQs? They're getting good reviews in a lot of places including for transparency when switched out of the signal path...

[@howardskeivys4184]

When I sit down to enjoy a serious listening session, I want to chill, relax. I don’t want to be constantly playing around with the EQ settings to optimise individual tracks to my preferred listening reproduction. Likelihood is that I would do that if the facility were available to me. That’s why I’ve put together a rig that best suits my listening preference. That rig is completely void of any balance or tone controls or any EQ adjustments. If your listening pleasure is augmented with tone or EQ controls? Then that is the right system for you.

[@aceofspades6667]

I owned a klark teknik dn370 and it was a fantastic addition to my chain. I actually liked it better for headphones than speakers because I could tweak the sound signature much more to fit the music I was looking for.

[@glenncurry3041]

EQ'ing is like ketchup, or salt, pepper, mustard, soy sauce, ... If everything is prepared and served properly to begin with, none are needed at the table. If you like your heavy metals, add some salt. If the food sucks or is just lacking, ketchup and mustard are great additions.

[@artyfhartie2269]

I remember the Crown EQ2. What a beast. Together wirh rhe Crown amps of the day, made for professionals and serious music lovers

[@Foxrock321]

This is why most studios keep around the Yamaha NS-10s to mix on because most people’s music system aren’t much better ..And this is why Rudy Van Gelder had his hand on most of the BlueNote Recordings

[@elk3909]

i think eqs are absolutely needed for every stereo setup. i want to hear the ultra highs and lows and only an eq will allow that. i also hate the 70 to 180 hertz range. and the 1.2 to 4 kilohertz range my ears are about 12 decibels more sensitive at those frequencies i also need to boost 10 to 15 hertz since that is where my ears high pass filter starts to block out. and 8 khz and up also needs boosting as my ears drop off at those high frequencies. as someone who designs equalizers they don't introduce phase shift withing the 20hz to 20 khz ranges. this is something you can test for in a spice simulator.

[@DxModel219]

well said

[@garycarnevale2530]

That's what I love about the digital eq in my Emotiva processor. I use it in 2.2 channel primarily and it does my bass management, dac, and has the ability to store several user eq modes that can be utilized or bypassed. Hey guys tweak until your hearts content and never let a purist tell you otherwise. Human hearing is not flat so correct for it! Some of these snobby audiophiles have phase shift of the brain! Of course NOT our friend Paul!

[@bksve6505]

Agreed. A PEQ in the DAC does not hurt the signal, but can be very effective to dial in a room curve that sounds good to the ears of the owner. My room, my ears, ymmv.

[@scottyo64]

A good system reveals the shortcomings of a recording. Take my Jeep, almost everything sounds good in it, but it is a crapy stock system.

[@deadandburied7626]

Does need an EQ, as there are so few good masterings and mixings out there.

[@trutmaasfull]

The best surround receiver i’ve ever had, is a simple Sony 5.1 Without room EQ. It Sound so nice. It’s a str-590hd…😄

[@skip1835]

I have no problem with a listener wanting to tailor the sound a bit - personally, I come to enjoy "hearing" the recording as it was made - good, bad or otherwise - it's more like exploring every recording as opposed to just wanting to "tap my foot".

[@D1N02]

Don't get high end audio, get high en recordings ;) The better the source the better the amplification. Because if the source is bad the bad stuff is amplified as well.

[@jmfloyd23]

I use the BBE 462 Sonic Maximizer between the amp and preamp. It works wonders for my vintage McIntosh system

[@joemcsweeney3923]

Wow! For real? I'm a guitarist and used to use the BBE thru FX loop in the amp. I liked what it did, but was so subtle I did away with it. I can def see how it would add improvement in the hifi signal chain. Pretty wild.

[@jmfloyd23]

@@joemcsweeney3923 Hello! Then you know what I mean about it doing wonders for HiFi. I’ve come to be immune to the sound of it. I run the process and lo contour at 3 o’clock.

[@Andries_van_Aarsen]

In the past there was a truly high-end equalizer, the Cello Audio Palette.

[@oliverbeard7912]

Although not ideal (few things,if any ever are),providing a listener has speakers that are easy enough to move,there is a ready made "equaliser" of sorts. Toeing the speakers further out,or in,coupled with moving them closer to their rear boundary may "help" with the "brighter" sounding recordings.Obviously not always practical,but provided the attention span is long enough for the listener to consume an entire album with the altered set up,then a "warmer","bassier" sound might appear a little more palatable to them.This is somewhat dependent on their design,but doesn't cost anything for the end user to try.

[@derekcottrell2448]

For me PEQ is essential. As we get older we will all suffer from hearing loss to some degree. When this loss gets more noticeable it is called deafness. Usually, the high frequencies are the first to go, it does not mean you can't hear them, it is just that they get lost in the mix. This is perhaps when audiophiles throw in the towel and believe hearing aids are the only solution. I have found I can still enjoy listening to music on my hi fi by using a PEQ curve to counter my hearing loss. Which, in reality is what a hearing aid does.

[@joemcsweeney3923]

Brilliant point.

[@adamant3844]

I think going to separates makes a more audible difference to the sound than using an eq. I use an eq to help process the sound coming out of my cassette deck but nothing else.

[@AllboroLCD]

old school EQs are essentially just pots and op-amps in a box

[@helifynoe9930]

The 1978 Soundcraftsmen PE2217 Preamp - Equalizer, which I use, has no op-amps at all.

[@stevesmyth4982]

A PA hire company usually has an equaliser to adjust the sound of the PA system to a specific venue. As for an equaliser on a stereo system, do you really want the phase shifts that occur when multiple filters are in the signal path? Unless as Paul says you do it digitally and use well designed FIR filters.

[@mikeschlup5279]

After doing sound for 30 years, a quality eq is needed to adjust to room hotspots...had a few customers that built sound rooms and 100k plus on the equipment...not much eq is needed.

[@jimbennett2795]

FIR filters WILL NOT CONTROL the phase shifts that occur as you turn the tone controls. It just messes with the sound stage so bad that ALL HIGH END pre amps omit them. It's that easy. Must be beyond Paul because he always avoids this topic. Come on Paul lets do one on TERRIBLE Phase Shifting problems inherent with tone controls please

[@stevesmyth4982]

FIR Filter Properties 2.1 Linear Phase 2.1.1 What is the association between FIR filters and “linear-phase?” Most FIRs are linear-phase filters; when a linear-phase filter is desired, a FIR is usually used. 2.1.2 What is a linear phase filter? “Linear Phase” refers to the condition where the phase response of the filter is a linear (straight-line) function of frequency (excluding phase wraps at +/- 180 degrees). This results in the delay through the filter being the same at all frequencies. Therefore, the filter does not cause “phase distortion” or “delay distortion”. The lack of phase/delay distortion can be a critical advantage of FIR filters over IIR and analog filters in certain systems, for example, in digital data modems.

[@johnmcquay82]

It's a very interesting question. I don't have an EQ in my audio system at home, but when setting up my audio system for live shows, I wouldn't be without one. I have yet to arrive at a venue where I don't need to make some sort of alteration to the system. At home, you can tweak speaker placement, change furnishings, install acoustic treatment etc. to get things to sound the way you want. In the live setting, other than speaker placement, I have limited ability to do what we would do at home, so I have to tweak the system to fit the environment. I think it has to be said though; some recordings simply sound like shit. Great recordings I find always sound great on a decent system; if the recording is poor, I find a highly resolving system just amplifies how bad they really are.

[@wezzman1]

EQ is a must!! Why do some audiophiles think that everyone listen to boring ass music that doesn't needs EQ. No one listens to Soca or reggae/dancehall without nudging up the hights and bass. Let ppl be and stop being the police of sound 🤬

[@ptg01]

Love your Bach LP's !!! Is this one of the ones you are proud of or is it considered one of the earlier mixes ?

[@mooseweather314]

If I see an audiologist and find I have hearing loss, would EQ be useful to boost certain frequencies?

[@spacemissing]

ALL systems CAN use tonal correction when a recording isn't good enough. I have done my best to not use tone controls or an equalizer, but Sometimes there Is a need, and I don't hesitate to turn a knob to make an improvement.

[@ford1546]

Remember that all EQ. frequency adjustment must have its own preamplifier IC. or transistor? A 15 bond EQ. has 30 amplifiers or 15 stereo amplifiers. If you think about noise, this is not good to have in a sound chain!

[@flyingbrick5639]

The Schiit EQs don't have any ICs in the path. They use pure LC-inductor-capacitor filtering with 80% nickel-core inductors. And, they have a path-thru that is transparant...at least to my ears.

[@ford1546]

@@flyingbrick5639 You have 2 types of EQ. One active and one passive. One only uses capacitors and resistors and a potentiometer and the other is a basic EQ. with 2 preamplifiers on weather stereo EQ. bond. Both types have their weaknesses. everything you run the sound through has an impact. Better to fix the root of the problem which is most likely the speakers you used. If you have passive eq. then you can't connect more things to the damn cable since the resistance then changes and the EQ. tone control changes

[@ford1546]

just for mentioning it. Another thing is that the metal core coil in a speaker crossover is negative as core coils create weaknesses such as noise. In sub bass, you can get a phase shift by using large coils. On a sub bass, active is the way to go

[@helifynoe9930]

No op-amps at all in my Soundcraftsmen PE2217 Preamp - Equalizer.

[@cletusberkeley9441]

I'm essentially an "analog old-fart" relying on analog (tape) and digital (2tb HD) storage and a DAC as my "front-end", from there, straight into my tubes via an attenuator. As such, I really hate anything messing with my signal chain. That said, I agree, some recordings can do with a little TLC from the listeners perspective/taste, contrary to the producers' intent. I personally tend to stay away from EQ units and thus don't own one. But at the end of the day, music "the food of love", is to be enjoyed and whatever it takes to fulfill your particular enjoyment, have at it by all means.

[@sirtimothyjasonwellsakaelduce]

This is why I value my Miller and Kreisel speakers I collect and restore from the 80s and up to mid 90s, different inputs on the back for adjusting the midbass and highs through M&K's crossover design . I rebuild the crossovers with Solen capacitors and high end resistors to the exact numbers and vualaw , when some recording are to bright for what Paul explains I just hook up the crossovers for the recording I am listening to. EQ's are a poor solution as for the dirtying the signal path .

[@YuengsNwings]

I'm not a fan of EQ because it's not worth the fuss to worry about recording to recording. DSP on the other hand is inarguably the most important upgrade I made to my system.

[@almart8991]

Are you listen to music or fidelity? I want to listen to music. The genre, arrangment, musicians interpretation, improvisation etc etc etc. I dont see any wrong of using an equalizer to makes MUSIC more enjoyable to my ears even if I introduce some (in some cases inaudible) "distortion".

[@davidfromamerica1871]

Do the FR 30’s need an external equalizer to sound good with other types of music playing on those speakers. Any one buying those for their home using many different types of audio gear using them should use an equalizer…??

[@JonAnderhub]

Equalizers and more importantly Digital Signal Processing has ALOT more applications than what is being discussed here. Let's face it not everyone has a "special listening room" built specifically to hear Pauls's mixes on a pair of Aspen FR 30s so DSP can help compensate for the fact that you don't have a pair of 21-inch subwoofers in your room like Paul does to compensate for the FR 30s lack of low end. More importantly, DSP can help to compensate for room anomalies through equalization AND time alignment. It can also help to compensate for the fact that not all audiophiles have a 20 Hz to 20 kHz hearing. In fact, most "audiophiles" don't. So while Paul may be pleased with the way his FR 30s and 21-inch subwoofers sound in his mixing studio and will create his mixes to sound good on that combination, others might consider the benefits of Digital Signal Processing or Equalization to make those Octave Record and DSD Studio recordings sound decent on their system.

[@philipslighting8240]

Great advice. I dont even have tone controls.

[@johnnewcomb5162]

Sansui SE-80 is very nice and super clean, better than mire expensive units, don't over look it.

[@geddylee501]

Have used equalizers but ended up ditching them in preference to a bad recording sounding bad. You cant fix a bad recording

[@L-Noble.YT_Hi.Res-Soundminds]

IF YOU WANT TO HEAR THE BEST MUSIC YOU WILL FIND IT IN HEAVEN!!! STOP LUSTING OVER JUNK. YOUR NOT TAKING THE AUDIOPHILE SPEAKERS AND GEAR TO THE GRAVE. THINK!! THE TREASURE IS IN HEAVEN WHERE IT WILL NEVER BE GONE

[@KenTeel]

This is kind of a funny subject. If you have a transparent system, you're kind of "tasting what the chef intended." If you're more sensitive to high notes, than the "chef's" ear is, then you're going to hear it differently than the chef did. (This is the physiology element of this subject.) That can color your perception of the music. Adding to this is personal taste. Maybe the chef likes more bass in his "recipe" than you do. If you play your music on a transparent system, and you get the bass as the "chef" intended, you'll get more bass than you like. This isn't a failure in your system, it's a matter of personal taste. Are you going to like the "recipes" that all of the "chefs" in the audio studios produce? It's unlikely. It's unlikely, you're not going to agree with all of the mixes that you hear. So, you need EQ. Of course adding electronics to the signal path will change, at least to some degree, the sound. But, what I'd ask is: Do you need your sound to be pristine to enjoy it? Have you ever danced around to a song being played on an inferior stereo? What problem are you trying to solve? Do you want and audio lab, or do you just want a sort of "listening to the radio" experience? What is your goal with your sound? Personally, I play music. I'm a musician. I play in all kinds of envrionments, and I use my homemade speakers. Compared to high end systems, my homemade boxes are probably inferior. However, lots of people dig the music that I play, so I don't think that they are listening for an audiophile experience. They just want to have some fun. This has taught me that it's the soulfulness of the tunes, and not the equipment that I'm using, that reaches people. Paul, no doubt makes terrific equipment that would be a real joy to listen to. However, to quote and old friend of mine: "What problem are you trying to solve?"

[@davidfromamerica1871]

I use the volume control..😀👍 Everything sound good at low volume..😎 Problem solved.✅

[@rollingtroll]

On my system pretty much everything sounds nice. It's not always good, the Ramones are not all of a sudden an audiophile experience, but they too sound nice. Old reggae, sounds nice. Sixties pop, sounds nice. Audiophile recordings, sound mindblowing and revealing. I always looked for a mix of a calm presentation, but transparency and depth and apparently that's possible. I also have a little studio setup where I digitize old recordings and, when necessary, fix them up a little while they're digital. In that studio I have a pair of Tannoy SRM10B studio monitors. Though overpriced, I never found anything that does the job better for what I'm doing. The Tannoys, being nearfields, lack sub bass, and they have the typical tannoy 'trumpet' (though not as bad as that horrid mess they sell these days, with those copper pipes). Also they are not THAT transparent, slightly rolled off in the highs. Finally the room has a bit of a hollow 'oomph' to it, and the table the tannoys are on also has some reflection/refaction issues. So I do have an old fashioned analog equalizer to adjust these tannoys so they match better with good sounding stereo rigs. Without it, my remasters often sounded dull, with way too much bass. And with the EQ, it's a very usable setup. So when all you do is remaster and your studio monitors are a bit lacking, sure, EQ away. But if you actually want to reproduce a good recording, or even record something with a proper soundstage and whatnot... Absolutely not. The downsides are not worth the upsides. And I think that's even more the case with DSP. If anyone is curious: i.postimg.cc/zvXQt61P/ashley-eq-2022.jpg

[@NoEgg4u]

@4:09 "The results: In one case was good. In one case -- awful. Bright, aggressive. Like wow! What is this guy thinking! And here's the thing. He's a really good engineer. And he hears really well. ... @4:32 It's his monitoring system". Paul, that has been my contention for a long time; that many mixing and mastering engineers never heard a professionally set-up, high-end stereo. It explains why so many of our hit songs have sub-par sound quality. At least your engineer was able to have a reality check. Now, if you could only get other studio engineers to have a listen on a professionally set-up, high-end stereo. Paul, did your engineer go back to his personal monitoring system, and compare his original mixed/mastered song to the one done properly using the FR30s? Did the one done with the FR30s sound better on his personal monitoring system? Or was his "bright, aggressive" version still his preference on his personal monitoring system? The one created with the FR30s should sound better, no matter where it is played. Which version sounded better on your engineer's personal monitoring system?

[@humanitech]

I sometimes think part of the whole music creation and listening experience, adventure and dilemma... is that it is highly subjective, dynamic and variable in regards and relation to all involved! For example the sound(?) often reflects the different personal (and dynamic) tastes of the musicians, then the producers, sound engineers and mixers, then the all variable sound variables from the different play back mediums, sources and materials ...and finally the hearing qualities and tastes of the audience, listener and buyers. Who all might like or want to hear things very differently! Some may want lush, rich, deep, wide, musical and spacial soundscapes, others want totally intimate, accurate sound capsules...while others want fast, forward, punchy, or bass heavy or v curved sparkly sounds... and so on. Therefore under such dynamic conditions and variables... I often find some great recordings but also some really horrible grating ones too!...where I wish I could just adjust the sound stage or move the instrument levels and positions and vocals etc ..not just raise the tone controls So having the means to adjust some things to suite our personal taste makes totally sense...but not with too many options to drive us crazy 🤣🤣🤣 or as frustrating as finding the right hifi components. But subjectively speaking... adding a tube preamp in the mix was a pretty great option and compromise...but only for me 😂

[@shannonmiller5648]

This whole idea that eq’s can’t be transparent and aren’t beneficial to a system is a load of nonsense. Granted a lot of eq’s do add their own color to the sound but even then in some cases I haven’t found that to be a bad thing. Then you have something like the Schiit Lokius 6 band tone bank which is truly transparent. Something like that can be sooooooooooooo beneficial to even the most resolving systems because it gives you complete control over tailoring a particular recording to your liking without adding any negative coloration whatsoever. You can set it flat, listen, remove it from the chain and listen again and there’s absolutely no difference between the eq being in the chain and not being in the chain. That being said I fail to see why eq’s have this negative stigma within the audiophile community. There’s really good ones out there. I personally don’t believe in not having some available eq within a system. Everyone hears things differently and eq can make what is an otherwise un enjoyable recording for some people fairly enjoyable. I personally don’t see passing up good music just because it might be a recording that doesn’t agree with my ears when I can fix it up with a series of boosts and cuts. Not to mention an eq can make a big impact in achieving a flat response in a given room which is really their intended purpose in the first place. There’s simply all kinds of benefits to be had from having eq available in a given system. Opinions vary but I like eq’s. Always have.

[@birgerolovsson5203]

Some recordings sounds bad, most of them sounds "normal" and a few of them sounds exceptionell. That has nothing with YOUR stereo to doo.

[@kobusbender2896]

Not all commercial recordings are good. If you get a recording not so good, it makes bad stuff more listenable, especially if you are a music collector. Not all the music is available on Octave Records quality.

[@joemcsweeney3923]

Lol, I agree. Regardless of source component and signal chain quality, there are some recordings out there that are just awful compared to others.

[@mpi5850]

Sorry, but it doesn’t matter how good the source material is. The fact is your equipment and room will greatly impact the sound you hear. I highly recommend amps with tone controls and an equalizer is also an option. In the end, the music needs to be pleasing to your ears. Audio is the only industry that preaches this nonsense that you should not adjust the sound whatsoever. Part of me wonders if it’s an industry strategy to keep audiophiles endlessly unhappy with their sound and constantly chasing better sound. Televisions come with extensive tuning controls. My house comes with heating and cooling control adjustments. My fridge comes with temperature controls. I can adjust the temperature on my coffee machine. This “you must not affect the purity of the original artist’s intent” is pure baloney.

[@MrCarlsonsLab]

You are 100% correct! This subject goes so deep, but what you said sums it up nicely.

[@tommyK7282]

I use a EQ.

[@patricklarocca1674]

Yeah... Having high quality audio equipment, doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get better sound. A lot of times, you'll hear a lot of the audio imperfections in the recordings themselves. On the flipside, what sounds great and amazing to me...May not sound the same to you. On the other hand, when you hear music on a higher quality system, and you hear and feel the differences, you can't unhear it.. And then you end up in the endless wormhole that is home audio.

[@osbert43]

I always have thought that if you needed an equalizer maybe you are trying to make a bad stereo sound better by patching it with a band aid like cure all. An equalizer has never corrected for me a bad recording to a satisfactory level. Not once. It can help (I'm guessing) to compensate for bad room acoustics, but then I find changing the room by adding more dampening materials or taking them out is far more effective. And cheaper. I know many folks in this fun world of the pursuit of audio enjoyment make a case for an EQ to be in place. Forget the EQ. Get a better amplifier, speakers, cartridge, DAC. I've gone down the rabbit hole of pursuing great audio gear and found that an EQ just does not play any useful role as it might have done for me many years ago. As a means to counter Fletcher Munson curves...hmmm...well, ok, I get that sort of, but get the right speaker and low level playing can be equalling satisfying without adjusting specific frequencies that drop at lower volumes. Equalizers: Some people need them, some people don't need them. Going up the ladder, I've found I don't need them.

[@wendellgayheart9228]

No ears are the same 🥴

[@djphat1736]

So, this issue is due to those engineers having to play back that music on a wide variety of systems. It has to sound good "everywhere" and on almost everything that can play it back. Octave focuses on well, the hi-end. Which is magnificent. But, it WILL sound drastically different on say an iPhone or your car. Where most music is played back on. So, I'm sure you using other speakers and playback systems to hear the mix as well (I very much hope you are). But, if your focused on the system that you also sell. Then it will sound amazing on it, but not as much on lesser equipment. Also, the reverse is true as you mentioned. If you have a monitoring system that is lesser, and you brought a mix from it to Octave. It's going to sound very different. There is science in the great equipment, but the art is to make it enjoyable across a wide range of equipment. Or as best you can.

[@rosswarren436]

Not a studio, but I record live music at bars and arenas and try to get it to sound as good as possible on low end stuff like a cellphone, computer speakers, or a good car stereo or a "real" stereo. I find that it is bass that is the hardest thing to do so it sounds good across as many systems as possible. What sounds good and punchy on one can sounds bloated and muddy on another. So hat's off to the engineers who can get it right. I generally go for making it sound good on my car stereo because I know that's where many of the people who download my shows will be listening to them.

[@brrryan2908]

The delusion that fantastic sounding music will sound equally good in any type of room just because you're using the same equipment as the studio, is laughable at a minimum. It's more absurd than removing the springs in your car's suspension because you believe in a "flat roads" philosophy. Equalizers can't fix everything that goes wrong in sound reproduction, but they can smooth out some of the potholes caused by speakers, rooms, placement, amplifiers, and yes... mediocre recordings.

[@AndersHansgaard]

... and our horribly nonlinear perception of sound, too.

[@keithmoriyama5421]

Paul never misses an opportunity to diss studio speakers. He takes a rookie mistake and mickey mouse gear and compares it to his RS5's. Come on. Do you really think a $10 million dollar, world class facility doesn't contain quality systems that rival or blows the doors off the Infinity?

[@stanmountain6060]

You called exactly the whole point -- music sounds bright, aggressive ( so in other words bad)? I can't understand why sounding good means being warm, not aggressive, highs just barely present etcc. -- not everybody seeks in music relaxation etc. I listen mainly to heavy metal, have huge collection of CDs ( already cured of streaming services becuase what they stream is light years from what I can hear from CDs) and seek in music boost of energy, bit of aggression, not only bass ( which seems a kind of Goly Graal for majority of people) but also enough of highs ... exactly what I can hear while on concert. So whenever I read in test about musical sound, mildness, relaxed way of presenting the music I know that I will never even consider such equipment . Opposite -- when in tests I read about V-plan sound ( strong bass and highs), aggression attacking seensitive ears of author I know that this may be something interesting for me. And frankly speaking the opinion of so called proffessionals is often rubbish -- it's enough to watch films that you can hardly hear what actors were saying and you ask yourself the question -- what was the guy responsible for sound doing and how could such film with that terrible sound be released? And last thing -- if digital equilizers are OK why don't you install them in your equipment?

[@Harald_Reindl]

Deezer has FLAC and physical media are for monkeys when I can have 100k FLAC files on my LOCAL STORAGE running mpd and connected to the amplifier

[@scottyo64]

@haraldreindl82 guess I am a monkey!

[@johndough8115]

If you cant hear vocals well on movies, its probably because you are trying to listen to a stream of Surround Sound, with only Stereo speakers / headphones. Or you are using a bad quality "Center" channel (or need to boost the center, and lower the others... in your Amps settings). There should be a function on modern players, for a Stereo output, that reduces the overall volume levels of the surround-speaker output.. so that all of the channels would be in better balance when digitally "Flattened" for stereo-only playback. Another factor again, is when people are trying to use these tiny "Sound Bars". You cant get adequate sound quality from such small drivers. As for your comment about highs... realize that is likely a factor in your speakers / headphones. If your speakers lack the ability to deliver good clean highs.. then you are not going to hear highs well, until you push them with great loudness, and boosted treble levels. If you have tweeters that are far more revealing... they will be playing highs that your gear isnt able to reproduce... and thus, if the recording is poor, it might be too "Harsh" and will fatigue your ears when listening more than an hour or so. It can also be due to your ears. If you cant hear highs as well as someone else... you will want to boost the highs... "Higher". What may hurt my ears, may not hurt yours.

[@Harald_Reindl]

@@scottyo64 maybe

[@truthnaut7829]

@@johndough8115 You nailed it. As a huge fan and listener of Heavy Metal myself I would agree with your statement and go a step further and say that most Heavy Metal music is always mixed harsh in the highs, especially modern HM, and will fatigue my ears quicker than an hour.

[@syavagor]

У меня PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC я слушаю директ.

[@richardt3371]

Getting a bit fed up now of this constant stream of "we at Octave are bothered by mastering as opposed to other studios", which is just untrue. Most, I'd go so far as to say virtually all, recording studios do excellent work, easily on a par if not better to what you produce at Octave. I'm also concerned by your insistence on hands-on guidance/overseeing of the mastering engineers - and perhaps that's why I find your releases flat and uninspired. The great Herbert von Karajan was given similar carte blanche with Deutsche Grammophon's "Karajan Gold" recordings, where he personally oversaw the mastering process, whilst the engineers sat with their heads in their hands, hearing the old man take great recordings and ruin them by mastering them to how HE thought they should sound with his age-affected ears, whereas to everyone else they sounded awful. DG spent the years after HvK's death trying to recapture what was there before he killed the sound - it's why nobody, ever, has a Karajan Gold recording at the top of his recordings. Mastering engineers know what they're doing and what they're listening for, and I guarantee you that 9/10 and more they will do it right. Your engineer turnover, and your dismissive comments about some of the engineers being "not so great" speaks to a culture where your "opinions" become de facto orders. It's not healthy, and it's not good for the music you produce. I understand it's how you work as an engineer with your products, but music production doesn't work the same way.

[@davidfromamerica1871]

It’s the only way Paul can get his FR30’s to sound good. He is stuck with a speaker design that only sounds Half Way decent with EQ..ing the hell out his Octave recordings on a mixer.

[@laurelhardy4064]

@@davidfromamerica1871 Your comment is just utterly rediculous.

[@carstenjensen6728]

That is so true 👌 It's all about the sales 💰😂 People's hearing degrade with age - Paul is no different.

[@davidfromamerica1871]

@@laurelhardy4064 You really think so..?? Design a slim speaker cabinet with large opposing speakers on each side wall. What possibly could go wrong..😳🙄

[@larrywe3320]

@@carstenjensen6728 "People's hearing degrade with age - Paul is no different." -- Paul claims he can pick-out 24/192 vs DSD 4x

[@stephenstevens6573]

Seems the height of hubris to insist that YOUR system is the be all of all systems...smh ..

[@finscreenname]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. You are listening to what some engineer on a good or bad day thought it should sound like. And more than once a band listened to what the engineer told them, "that's the way it should be". It can go both ways, Metallica almost removed all the bass tracks from the And Justice For All album because the drummer didnt like the new bass player. You dont have a way to put that back in and you might as well throw the CD away. Signal chian.....sorry that is the biggest pile of BS. There is like 400 things between your "transport" (CD player) and your speakers. The speakers have connections, the crossovers have connections, the speakers are connected to cables that are connected to Amps on the other side, the Amps have connections, the interconnects between each component all the way down to the volume knob have connections or are "in the pathway" but just one more so you have tone control is a bridge to far?

[@duanewalker1011]

Finally!! Thank you for stating the obvious! I whole- heartedly agree!

[@noahbirdrevolution]

Most of the time I see someone with an EQ it is a smiley face & sounds cold.

[@analogguy5548]

Yes it can be a god idea but I wouldn’t recommend it🤔

[@jimbennett2795]

Equalizers and tone controls are NOT USED BECAUSE OF PHASE PROBLEMS THAT CAN'T BE FIXED. So that's why high end pre amps don't have them.

[@AndersHansgaard]

Never mind that each channel of out many, many channels that make up most music for the past many decades probably has from 1-2 filters at minimum, and often many more than that - say, a 75 track project might employ some 200 to 400 filters easily...

[@SJMessinwithBoats]

Jim, And it will never change, that’s the difference between high end and hifi.

[@affalindk8004]

yes, that might be a good idea. I cannot recommend it. 🙃

[@georgeradulescu7175]

I don't understand the desire to make recorded music fit your idea or expectation of what it should sound like. This is the problem I have with so called audiophiles. On the one hand they want to hear the music "as the artist intended" but then if they don't like it they want to EQ it to make it sound like how they would like it to sound. So which is it? There is nothing wrong with a recording that sounds too boomy, shrill, laid back, lacking detail, distorted, etc... The recording is the output of an artistic process, and that process yields a result that you either like or don't like. Would you buy a painting or photograph and then alter its contrast, brightness, saturation, or sharpness because you think it would look better that way? Enjoy the music for what it is and stop being so insecure. Equalization should be used to optimize the performance of your system in your listening room / position, not to tweak during each song played.

[@signalfixer]

Digital is harsh in general. Hat d to listen to for long periods of time do to the high odd harmonic content imho.

[@donalddeorio2237]

You have no idea of what the artist intended, because then an Engineer tweaks the recording.