Graphic equalizers and high-end stereo

Do graphic equalizers have a place in a high end audio system? Learn the truth from Paul.

[@fredk3548]

You don’t have to equalize for each album, just equalize for the room and leave it alone.

[@christopherbeddoe406]

Guy says get the system right the first time and then is advertising his product with a bass boost. 🤣 I'm with you. Unless you are spending 10's of thousands I'd go for a good eq.

[@Brian-qg8dg]

Not always true.. a modern agressive recording or an unplugged situation has much more bottom end than many older recordings. One setting surely doesn't work for me.

[@Kevinschart]

Strong disagree. There is no one eq setting that matches your room and the recording you're listening to. There are too many variables at play. Unless you reproduce the studio setting used to produce the record, you by definition are not listening to the original intention. You are listening to the recording through your chosen speakers and amp. If you enjoy a little eq on this or that album/song then that's exactly the way you should live your life.

[@faithhopelove6945]

By the Way... every Piece of Hardware has its own Tune, Frequency Response, Timbre, Drak bright Precence... and so on...Its already "EQued"...,once U by it. ...(: So every Person who dont want to use an Hardware EQ has not understand the Nature of Music & Physics" Furthermore, most Records are bad mixed...and with a good EQ U can play GOD and do Mastering on them. So for me an EQ is a MUST.

[@leetingler619]

I have been high end audio and pro audio and music recording in the past and have done sweetening of sound systems for many years. That being said, I feel the main reason to use EQ is to match the system to the room. As we all know many rooms are lacking to say the least. So to EQ the system to the room makes a lot of sense. The trick here is Not to fool with it once it is set. In my work l use a 1/3 band EQ for precise adjustments. Once the system is matched to the room you should hear how good or bad the actual recording is. Now that you have a great sounding room, the systems minor Tone controls can make any slight adjustment to make your recording sound better. That's my humble opinion. 😎

[@ramsaybolton9099]

Exactly! You are so correct. It amuses me that audiophile look down on equalizers when there are usually at least two or them in the audio chain. It’s in the speakers, and they are called “crossover networks”.

[@ramonbmovies]

I happen to disagree. I'm also old school, and to me old school means having an EQ, lol. Back in the 80s and 90s high end hifi systems were sold w/ EQs. My philosophy to using EQs is that you can correct for the room's lack of good acoustics. Also, a bass boost is almost always necessary, at least back in the days of cassettes and CDs, as a physics professor once explained in a class to me: low frequencies are actually very difficult to bring out in terms of the physics of sound. When audio was first invented, the high frequencies came out louder than the low frequencies because you needed lots more power behind those low frequencies for the human ear to hear equally to the high ones. So eventually someone invented a loudness button that helped to bring out those bass frequencies and therefore balance the low w/ the mids and highs. EQ's correct for that even more by giving you fine control over WHICH frequencies to emphasize. EQ's also allow a person to fine tune a song to his own ears. Sure, you want the sound a producer intended, but you also want what your ears prefer to hear. It's kind of like food. A chef may like to add more salt than me. Sure, it's nice to have what the chef intended, but I'd rather customize the flavor to my own taste buds. That's why home cooking will always be 100 times better than going to a restaurant. I also know that audio producers use EQ's when they record and mix the sound. And in live concerts, the sound engineer ALWAYS uses an EQ because it helps to correct the sound for the room's acoustics - even if they're using a $50k sound system, an EQ is required. I actually miss not having an EQ. But FYI I clicked on the thumbs up because I respect your opinion and the video was very good.

[@columbotee2652]

I find Equalizers to be a must at least 15 band, Even low end speakers can sound pretty good with just a few tweaks of what you wanna hear. Instead of going through several pairs of speakers trying to find the sound that you’re looking for, buy a decent pair of speakers and turn them into great speakers. I often hear reviews of the speakers are too bright, but the rest of it is great. Well then you are able to tweak the brightness out of them now you have a speaker that you were looking for.

[@cmessi]

Exactly my problem. Looking for the right speaker for 3 years now. Did not find it. Almost perfect is the Dynaudio Evoke 20 (non-fatiguing sound), but a bit too boomy bass. So I could.adjust that with EQ, but the Eversolo A8 with PEQ is 2000 dollars.

[@krismichalsky]

I use to not use equalizers, until I tried one out and absolutely loved it. Bass, mid and Treble tone settings are only 3 bands, and typically at 100Hz, 1kHz, and 10kHz. Now that absolutely sucks and give barely anything to work with. I use equalizers because, number one, I can't afford expensive equipment, so a lot of times what I use is lacking and needs some sonic help. I use EQ's because I want more flexibility. On most of my EQ's I use there is an EQ defeat button so that I can easily do an A to B to A test to see if what I am changing is appropriate to the room, the music and to my ear. If you really don't want to run an EQ, then don't do it. No one is making anyone here do anything. I however will continue to use them until I build a system that won't require one, but even at that.... Why limit your ability to equalize to the room?

[@cmessi]

Bass/mids/treble is the absolute minimum. Unbelievable.that 99% of the amplifiers only have bass and treble.knobs. they always take away some of the mids, where the human voice is.

[@m.9243]

In my experience there's another reason for the use of an equalizer. Room acoustics correction. I use one and, with the help of a friend who's equipped with the right software and microphone, we were able to correct a 60 Hz 'bump' on the frequency response graph of my room. I use a 32 band graphic equalizer which gives me plenty of flexibility. Other than 'dealing' with this low frequency issue, all other frequencies are left alone. The whole thing is balanced from the source to the amps and it has made an audible difference in the bass region of my room. Am I going to get 'excommunicated' as a heretic Paul? .....great video and lovely surroundings...only think missing, a glass of wine!

[@sfulmer430]

What brand and model number is your 32 band eq?

[@m.9243]

@@sfulmer430 It's a *Behringer* Model: FBQ 3102 HD 31 band 'high definition' equalizer with FQ Feedback (..sorry Steve, it's a 31 band not 32 as mentioned above) A quick look and details here: soundlight.com.au/behringer-ultragraph-pro-fbq3102hd-dual-channel-eq-w-feedback-detection/ It also has the facility to be by-passed at a push of a button so instant comparisons can be made.

[@clickbaitpro]

I use Equalizer APO for the same reason because there's a huge buildup around 140hz in my room and I just cut it down by 12 dB

[@Sams911]

If I'm paying thousands of dollars for a pre-amp (such as the McIntosh C53) and it doesn't come with an EQ... I'm not happy. Thankfully McIntosh still puts an 8-band analog EQ on their flagship pre-amps.

[@larrysmith6797]

I wonder if Paul is a musician, if he's every recorded in a professional studio and if he's ever participated in a mixing session. I can tell you from experience, there's the sound and mix in the recording studio during the recording, the sound of the final mix after countless playbacks and there's mix that winds up being sold to the public. I had a couple of chances to record with a big band comprised of the top studio players in Los Angeles. Every musician was mic'd individually and the levels were adjusted by the recording engineer during recording. On play back, the levels were readjusted to the artist's liking after soliciting input from everybody, including me. Then, the recording goes through EQ. Again, with a lot of input from a lot of people. Finally, everybody's happy, except... That's not the mix that get sold to the public. You can't release an album that sounds great on a set of Miller & Kreisler reference speakers played in an acoustically perfect room. You have to remix to get it to sound decent on cheaper equipment. The only way I can get a recording I'm on to sound anywhere close to the "ideal" first mix I heard in the studio is to use EQ on playback. I don't have the same sound system the album was mixed on and my room doesn't have the acoustics of the studio where the album was mixed. The idea that anyone can assemble stereo system and put in any given room and come anywhere close to what the artist intended without EQ on playback is inane.

[@Kevinschart]

Agreed. There are too many variables involved for a listener to simply rely on a flat response out of the amp and speaker of choice. 100% chance that your setup at home is not what was used in the recording process. I like BASS. If a given recording doesn't have enough bass for me, then I'm jumping up, and giving the lows a a little nudge. People choose speakers and amps based on what sounds "best" to them. What the hell is wrong with eq'ing a mix in a way that's most pleasant to you, the listener?

[@danmarjenka6361]

Paul OWNS a professional recording studio named Octave Records.

[@rapfreak7797]

How can you call EQing sonic degradation when nearly every audio recording has gone through an EQ either on individual tracks or on the master bus?!?

[@victor42580]

EQ (whether digital or analog) induces phase and/or pre-ringing effects. Of course advantages of EQ often outweigh the drawbacks.

[@rapfreak7797]

Victor Malvolti agreed, it’s rather hyperbolic to call it sonic degradation. Everything in the audio path changes the sound and are chosen specifically for those changes. Many of these expensive high-end systems cost WAY more than the speakers the recordings were originally mixed on, mastering engineers tend to have much more expensive speaker/amp systems but even then I’ve seen many hifi systems costing much more than those.

[@xyjames]

Most people have no idea how much sounds are shaped during the recording process. The type of mic, mic placement, tube preamp, hi / lo pass filter, compression, eq, stereo widening. Almost all digital recording get a warm up treatment using a tape saturation emulator, of if you're old school, a run thru an actual studer for lovely warm sound. To say that I shouldn't add a final tiny amount eq to taste is outright nonsense.

[@4991544]

"nearly every audio recording has gone through an EQ" How does adding yet another device to the signal path, with additional manipulation cause degradation? Do you really need an answer? Maybe it's just not noticeable to you?

[@clickbaitpro]

@@victor42580 Pre - ringing effect is the byproduct of linearphase eq and zero latency eq doesn't have those side effects but it will introduce slight phase shift which is not at all noticeable than the linearphase and there's a sweet spot between zero latency and linear phase called Mixed EQ but IMO it doesn't really matter unless you're using a linearphase eq because the music you're listening have tracks before the master bus and each track atleast gone through multiple eq with compression, transient shapers, imagers, limiters and god knows what. Just funny use linearphase eq

[@CT-vl3iu]

...but,..when they remove the basic tone controls from amps,...its crazy. As we do not hear music the same way..and there is an individual taste in everything we do. Removing these tone controls is like ...the producer of the amp saying listen to our format or leave it...lol

[@jamesplotkin4674]

I wouldn't own an amp like that. Just as I wouldn't dine at a restaurant where the chef doesn't allow condiments, or custom doneness of meat because he/she is gawd's gift to food prep. Give me tone controls and ketchup, or give me a banana! All frequencies matter.

[@J0hnny8ravo]

Having a good amp, cd player and set of speakers, I rarely use tone controls, leaving it on “defeat”. However, with some CDs, I feel the need to push in some “treble” or “bass”, or both. Never had the need for less bass or treble than the defeated tones provided. The tone controls on my amp are rather conservative anyway, at -6db to +6db. So, all that being said, it’s nice to have them.

[@BertGrink]

@@J0hnny8ravo There is one case where, in my opinion, an equalizer is perfectly justified; that is if your listening room tend to either absorb or emphasize certain frequencies, then an EQ can be put to good use restoring the room's "linearity". In such a case, you would only set the EQ once, and never touch it again.

[@J0hnny8ravo]

BertyFromDK, true!

[@bcardamone]

Totally agree. “Purity” to me is a bullshit term. Everyone has different tastes in how they want their music to sound. If the “pure” recording sounds like shit, you make it sound better with tone controls and/or an eq. I appreciate the guidance we get on this channel, but purity and $2,000 audio cables go in the same category

[@squallywally]

I know I am commenting on an old video however I really like using an equalizer to make music sound the way I want it to sound. To me, adjusting the eq is part of the fun of listening to music. I still find making mixtapes to listen to on my old Pioneer super tuner III in my old car fun. Listening is a personal experience.

[@the_dude182]

An Equalizer (or plain tone control) is very important for me. I want the same sound i experienced when seeing a band live. If i've seen a band live, most of the time studio mastering becomes unimportant. I just want the same sound as i experienced live. Why? Because I WANT it. End of discussion. And that's no problem as my amp has the knobs to make it so, and i have enough headphones to choose from. I really don't care how other people do it as i have so much fun listening how i want it.

[@woohunter1]

I know what you mean, I gave up accuracy for “fun” a while ago, very happy.

[@J0hnny8ravo]

I totally agree with you. But there are other things at play here, like the venue acoustics, echoing, etc., and those cannot be replicated using tone controls. Certain speakers can help, and some DSP might be needed.

[@the_dude182]

@@J0hnny8ravo Wow maybe i'm blessed that one turn of a knob makes me happy :-) I am not going to analyse those things. Just to save myself from me.

[@classicosenvinilo2076]

Absolutely agree. 100%

[@Kevinschart]

Sometimes it's fun to sit and analyze a flat response....Sometimes. However, most of the time I want to listen to MY music the MY ears tell me it sounds best. And usually it just requires a gentle nudge here or there.

[@TheMirolab]

I love EQ!! I have lots of music where the tonal balance is all over the map, especially vinyl. Using a studio-quality EQ has increased my enjoyment of vinyl immensely. So many records have the low end reduced to increase play time. It's amazing to hear that low end restored with a good Eq.... NO, not a graphic EQ... the last thing you want is 10 narrow phasey bands. Having good tone controls, or a 3 or 4 band parametric Eq can increase your vinyl enjoyment!! High quality pressings don't need it, so i just bypass. I don't understand the "purists" who would rather listen to poor tonal balance.

[@faithhopelove6945]

100% RIGHT (: I was also a PURIST..., some Years ago...and most Time i was unlucky with the Sound..., "pure" was then rather "poor" ...and it was not Fun anymore.

[@jeffwalther]

I haven't had an equalizer in years but any of the stereos I had in the past that had a graphic equalizer I remember as being my favorites. The EQ can tweak the instruments you want to emphasize.

[@wymotome]

The "purist" audiophiles and manufacturers who are too cheap/lazy to implement proper tone controls are taking a lot of fun out of the hobby. Source direct for those folks who think they want to hear "how the artist intended" and tone controls for those who want to enjoy their music. Ironically though, to many audiophiles, tone controls = bad. But DSP = good. Still cannot figure out that line of thought.

[@sebdhaese]

"tone controls" or an analogue graphic EQ is, well, analogue. and basically every analogue piece of equipment degrades the sound. If you EQ a digital source with a dsp or with a parametric EQ on a pc, before going analogue, that doesn't happen. A digital EQ is also way more precise than a graphic EQ or tone controls. If your source is analogue though, using a dsp would mean: using an ADC to go digital, then EQ it, and then a DAC to go analogue again. This is in most cases worse than a good analogue EQ.

[@briansimmons5363]

EQ is best to help with less than perfect room acoustics . I have a WAF, and EQ does wonders for the speaker placement issue(s) I have. Same with balance controls. My gosh, so may products without a balance control. Many of us do not have perfect speaker and room symmetry. I could have a system without a balance control in my current room setup.

[@tjroelsma]

I think the main problem lies within the equalizers themselves: they are arguably NOT high end audio products. Maybe there are a few exceptions, but EQ's are mostly used in PA systems an/or cheap stereo systems and are therefore mostly built around cheap, or basic if you want, op amps. To high end fans that's an immediate "no". Would they consider a high end EQ? Maybe, but that's the same discussion as "tone controls and balance or no tone controls and/or balance": some will love having them, some will abhor them. Putting an EQ in to your high end system to compensate for noticable room deficiencies is a personal choice and who can say your choice is wrong? If it sounds good to you, it's the solution for your problem.

[@edjackson4389]

@@tjroelsma I have vintage Altec Lansing EQs and yes they were originally designed for PA use, but to assume they are not HiFi because of that is ridiculous. These things are built like a tank and in all my comparison testing they have no negative affects on sound stage or imaging. And as long as you use quality cables they are very very quiet

[@tjroelsma]

@@edjackson4389 I guess it's a matter of opinion what you call HiFi, but we're not talking about HiFi but high end audio and that's an entirely different ballgame. If your EQ's do the job for you who am I to say you shouldn't use them? Personally I'm more in the purist camp: for me high end means NO extra sound colouring. So no EQ's and even tone controls are not acceptable. If I don't like the sound I'm getting, to me that means one or more components aren't doing what I want them to do, so I change them.

[@edjackson4389]

@@tjroelsma You can keep believing that if you want to, but it's the SAME thing. We have the same goal. The goal of reproducing music so that it sounds real and dynamic, and fun to listen to. Enjoyable. I figured you were one of those "purist" that thinks he knows what fantastic music sounds like and the rest of us are tone deaf The only difference is the fact that when I hear something I don't like I get up and make a small adjustment and sit back down and listen to the magic. You run out and spend a couple $$grand$$ and HOPE that you made a difference. Get off your high horse Money Burner.

[@tjroelsma]

@@edjackson4389 I respect your point of view and it's kind of sad you can't respect mine. Have a nice life.

[@SachAlvarez]

paul be so chill, he don't give a damn. love this man.

[@robc4191]

I have to laugh at all these audiophile purists who will go out and buy different speakers and amps and DACs and cables and interconnects to get the 'color' or 'tone' that they think they like, but are horrified by the thought of an equalizer to do the same thing.

[@Cabal97]

I use the Schiit Loki on my TT to adjust poor recordings. Its works very well and it's very subtle to color the sound too much. Regardless I have a Tube preamp, so with tube rolling this does stuff as well.

[@subliminalvibes]

Cheapaudioman just did a video on the new Loki. 👍😎

[@QoraxAudio]

1:04 "When you equalize something, you are trying to change the characteristic of either the equipment that you're using or the music that you're listening to." This is *EXACTLY* what tube amps are used for! Trying to change the characteristics using tubes is not any different... System perfection does not exist. There are always little flaws that can be polished by using an EQ, but you have to understand what you're doing and most people don't to take the effort. At lower volume levels, loudness EQ even makes the music itself more real, since the human ear is less sensitive to highs and lows when the volume is low (fletcher munson curve).

[@QoraxAudio]

@Fat Rat When playing music at lower levels (and any other low volume sounds), the ear becomes more sensitive to midrange frequencies. It filters out lower and higher frequencies, so that the ear is better capable of hearing what others are saying (the human hearing is tuned to human voice). That's why, especially bass, seems to be lacking when playing music at low volumes, or to be overpowered when playing loudly.

[@QoraxAudio]

@Fat Rat Lol is there *any* time you're not in sarcasm mode? 😅

[@ThinkingBetter]

Most of this anti EQ narrative is just about utter ignorance. Especially those who are rejecting EQ while playing vinyl records are making a fool of themselves...their phono amp has the most aggressive EQ to compensate for the aggressive EQ in the vinyl production process.

[@QoraxAudio]

@@ThinkingBetter I think it's also related to lazyness. I mean, it's a very tedious job to properly set your EQ/DSP. But the RIAA EQ on vinyl is just factory preset, only an inversion needs to be done and that's also preset by the manufacturer of the phono preamp. But manually setting an EQ by yourself requires patience to learn.. it's not just something you can throw some money at to make it sound better.

[@ThinkingBetter]

@@QoraxAudioYes, of course the RIAA EQ is fixed, but it's nevertheless a very very aggressive EQ and never will this rather insane 40dB EQ curve in your phono pre-amp completely match the whatever 40dB curve that was used in the production process of whatever record label. Sure, using EQ in the home takes some skills, but we are audiophiles also because we enjoy tweaking and optimizing our system towards perfection, aren't we?

[@simonpru]

Correctional EQ is a must in my opinion. If you've ever been in the studio to record and master a recording. You will understand that it could sound fantastic on the equipment in the studio and sound totally different on your equipment at home. In the studio you have a different source, different power amp , different speakers and different room acoustics. It's never gotta sound the same. So correctional EQ is a must. Nothing more than a 6db boost should not sound forced.

[@ob1keno227]

I've spent hours and hours to EQ (equalizer apo + peace gui) my setup (akg k712 + fiio k3) and now I made a 300 euros setup sound like a 2000 euros one. It's really astonishing. What it takes is patience and a lot of listening. Besides I added a room simulation plugin, so now it's like listening to speakers. ps. Beware of clipping when equalizing.

[@marianneoelund2940]

Bass EQ isn't solely about trying to recover missing bass. While I agree that using EQ to force lower bass out of a system that wasn't designed to go that low in the first place is abuse of EQ, it certainly does have proper applications. I strenuously object to the wholesale dismissal of EQ for addressing system/room deficiencies. Most listening rooms will create peaks and notches in frequency response regardless of how refined and smooth the speakers are. For example, my main speakers have a resonant peak at 41.5Hz, which is also very close to one of the room's primary resonances at 40Hz. You can imagine what happens with that combination. If I want smooth bass, use of EQ is not optional. Even if the speakers lacked any resonant peak, the room would need correction. I have a 12-stage parametric equalizer and put it to good use. Graphic equalizers, however, are rarely the appropriate tool. On the other hand, one should not try to chase down and correct every response ripple across the band. First of all, it can drive one to neurosis, and second, the sharply-tuned filtering that is often required may do more harm than good to the overall sound. To some extent we should let our speakers sound the way they came.

[@kennethoransky4881]

I use 2 graphic equalizers in my system to compensate for hearing loss.

[@sfulmer430]

Which systems are you using?

[@kennethoransky4881]

@@sfulmer430 I use 2 Behringer FBQ800 equalizers daisy chained because my hearing is -60db at 8khz so I need at least 24db of gain to hear any highs. I set the sliders to inversely match the curve of my hearing test. The sliders on each unit are set to the same curve so the effect is doubled. The levels on each are set to just below clipping. Works very well.

[@sfulmer430]

@@kennethoransky4881 - Thanks

[@gizzy2403]

@@kennethoransky4881 very smart idea! I'm sorry about your hearing loss, that happens to b a gr8 fear of mine. If I had 2 lose either my sight or vision, itd hav to b vision. To imagine a world w/o sound terrifies me ( I pray I never lose either though)

[@OMPTraxxs]

Behringer DEQ 2496 ;-)

[@edjackson4389]

I have twin Altec 29 band EQs on my Sansui /JBL setup. I've used the EQs very successfully to get things sounding right when I move to a new house or different room in my current home. I have no need to fiddle with them once I get everything sounding right. There is no need to change them with every song. I can easily defeat them with the push of a button so I've tested their effects on fidelity many times and they have never failed to make things better by a pretty large margin, so I'm a life long EQ fan. I've also had atleast 7 bands of EQ in every car stereo install I've done

[@Grizzly1644]

Dsp and room treatment. Two musts for high end sound.

[@machintelligence]

They can also be used to compensate for failing ears (but only to some extent ... there are frequencies that I now cannot hear, no matter how loud.) Since tone controls are now passe, I would need one if I ever replace my vintage receiver.

[@TheTrueVoiceOfReason]

Come to the DIY side. We have tone, balance and volume controls. We also have DSP and all manner of other things to tailor your system to your liking. We also accept your audio preferences without prejudice. If it works for you, then Damn the torpedos! Full speed ahead!

[@ThinkingBetter]

If you don't like EQ, stop playing vinyl records please. Your RIAA phono amp is an aggressive EQ compensating for the aggressive EQ done in the mastering process of vinyl records. Studios use EQ. Concerts use EQ. So why do you need EQ in your home system? Your room and speakers are never going to be perfect and in many cases, a high quality EQ can do huge improvement even on your > US$100,000 system. Then comes your hearing. Personally my hearing is dropping above 12kHz and by giving a +4dB boost around 12kHz, I effectively rejuvenate my hearing getting some lost details balanced again. Taste is another reason for EQ. I like a bit extra sub bass even on a linear system some +3dB around 40Hz. Bass boost is also about how loud you play. If you play at concert level, perhaps bass boost is not needed, but your hearing fails (check equal-loudness contour: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour) to represent, especially the bass, at lower volume levels. Thus to get a tonal balanced music at lower volumes, you really need increased bass. And finally, EQ can be done in the DIGITAL DOMAIN or in the ANALOG DOMAIN. If you are listening to Tidal, Qobuz or other digital music, your EQ can be done digitally using DSP e.g. like in this product: www.minidsp.com/products/streaming-hd-series/shd Of course Paul is right that it's important to have a good system to begin with and not use EQ to fix a bad system! It's sort of like going to your doctor and getting pills to fix a bad diet.

[@ThinkingBetter]

@Mark Blom I work professionally in audio R&D and let me tell you one thing...even the most audiophile anti EQ folks can be fooled in a blind-test to prefer your carefully EQ enhanced setup if you fool them to think it was about a swap of a power cable to a very premium one.

[@ramsaybolton9099]

Great video. What about speakers? The crossover network is an eq, n’est ce pas? Often with more passive components in the signal path than an amplifier.?

[@larrysperling8801]

in the end its all about enjoying the music , i support whatever it takes to get there.

[@faithhopelove6945]

I own the Drawmer 1974 Stereo EQ. This EQ sounds wonderful and has helped me out of every bad recorded Music"

[@ouroborosrecords]

My thoughts: EQ should only be used to enhance aspects that you have difficulty obtaining due to short comings in your hearing. Ultimate goal should be to have the sound as close to the source material, but if you can't hear the source material at that particular frequency then a minor change to enhance that should be considered.

[@housepianist]

I tend to avoid any form of equalization if I can. I’m a 100% headphone audiophile so that means I can hear how bad some recordings are quite distinctly. It might be tempting to use some form of EQ for those occasions but even then, an equalizer is not going to make a bad recording sound “better”. All it can do is emphasize (or de-emphasize) certain frequencies to make it more listenable. The problem with equalization (analog and digital) is that it cannot change the elements within a recording. I can think of a large number of early 90’s GRP label jazz recordings for example that sound like the mics were set up 50 feet away! There’s no depth, height, sound staging, etc. Lifeless as can be. There could have been many reasons for this but the point is many of those recordings are preserved in those ways. You can certainty apply some equalization to bring out more bass or treble but the same inherent recording issues cannot and will not be changed. I acknowledge it can make these recording more “fun” or tolerable to listen to but in my opinion, it’s just an enhanced version of what was recorded at that time. Is that actually making the music better? However, with the advancement of digital editing and better DACs, remasters can be made from the original sources and a better version of those recordings can be had which could bring out more of the detail of that recording. But again, it can’t change how it was done originally so what sounded flat and distance before being remastered might sound a bit more “dimensional” and slightly more immediate after being remastered. Having said that, I’m sure that sound engineers might tweak certain frequencies through the use of equalization which arguably could enhance the sound to give it more weight and substance but I would rather listen to a remastering that way than slapping some external analog or digital equalizer and making my own adjustments. But then I’m sure there’s a segment of the audiophile populous who feel their own adjustments would better than anything coming from the original recording engineers.

[@clickbaitpro]

Look at your Headphone frequently response, you'll be amazed how inaccurate it is

[@mcaddc]

Different room dynamics, treatments, equipment specifications, recording quality, mastering, differing hearing capabilities between listeners, makes it almost required to have a good equalizer in the system. A better option, would be to incorporate a DSP into the mix, so that a perfectly balanced frequency output can be achieved through your audio system. Much more easier to tweak a knob or setting than to replace major components in your system.

[@raphaelmeillat8527]

Still think Japanese high end manufacturers like Luxman, Esoteric or accuphase get it right by providing tone control. Always prefer 3-band control (treble, mid-range and bass) but 2 is better than nothing. Allows for more flexibility depending on recording quality or speaker/recording match.

[@Ramb1t0]

The acoustics of every room is different. Its impossible to fix the massive dips that room acoustics can introduce; understanding that 100% optimal speaker placement is not always an option or practical. We need better EQ tech.

[@sean_heisler]

Really awesome deck you have there, Paul love it! Great style and decor. Love how your house is nestled up into the trees, too.

[@larrysmith6797]

Paul's never hear the term "fire break".

[@yesacoustic]

I remember seeing the Cello Audio Palette reviewed in the HiFi Answers mag decades ago. It cost a fortune. But I have an old Pioneer Graphic Equalizer, must be 30 years old, which I switch in through my tape loop for bad recordings - noticeably Pink Floyd's Animals on vinyl. Love the music but hate the recording. Haven't heard the latest Immersion Remaster; it might be better. I have to confess, I love watching the little green flouro bars go up and down in time with the music. 55 and I haven't grown up yet.

[@HouseofRecordsTacoma]

you are correct sir, if every session were well recorded. Why are there still 2 or 3 star quality reviews of new recordings?

[@Kaiyox27]

I use a good quality parametric EQ to compensate for lack of wall and room acoustics.... we use Mac, Denon and other high quality equipment. So maybe Paul is right for source material but he left out compensation of room characteristics. My problem is wife refuses to let me improve room acoustics with floor and wall treatments.... so I installed the EQ!! 😬

[@davidsagarra9841]

Totally agree with Paul; a graphic EQ is a nice thing to have but better to have it off the chain. I have a Yamaha EQ550, ok, I know is not, by any means, an audiophile device but I have it there almost always off; when I want to listen to a recording that needs help I just turn it on and use the processor loop of my preamp.

[@bodybywallypersonaltrainin4217]

My Goldenear Triton Fives are passive woofers, (anthem 225w amp, Yamaha pre, and 10" KELF Sub). Using the base control via Yamaha's app, I get perfect crossover for base. When I put the Towers to FLAT even using the crossover on the KELF, I cannot get it 'just right' without going 3/4 on the preamp bass control for the towers woofers. For me, it seems i have to have a EQ/bass control (listen mostly to classical and some pop). But then again, this works for me. LOVE the vid's Paul - thanks for all the time you give us.

[@brandonburr4900]

Been more into headphones lately and many folks seen to have a place for equalizers for headphones. Even companties have specific eq correction curves in roon for specific headphones such as audeze. You see many plannar headphones that respond well to equalization. Some dynamic headphones not so much.

[@the_dude182]

Same. My planars handle EQ very well. And i mean the tone control on my integrated amp. As mentioned earlier, i want the freedom to hear music like i want it. I would encourage everyone to not follow the stupid rules that limit the creative experience. For example: i've seen Metallica several times and know i must turn up my bass a tiny bit to re-live the concert. Because the joy it brings when those drums almost knock me out :-)

[@justanother9184]

Hey Paul, you mentioned this idea quite a while ago.... still waiting..... and its a great idea. YOU CAN DO IT!!!!!

[@S.A.S.H.]

I don't often disagree with Paul's videos but this one I most definitely do. Most of us have neither the space nor the finances to replace components over and over until we get the "perfect" sound for our ears and musical tastes. While this is precisely what this one bit of equipment can do for us. At the end of the day what someone else says is not as important as what you hear. I have gone with and without EQ for about 50 years now and find that with the correct one for the system, one that is of comparable quality to the rest of your components, you can end up with a more pleasing audible end result.

[@user-ui2zw4mi4j]

Hi Paul McGowan, kindly recommend 2- 3 small equalizers able to deliver 20-25Hz subbasa. Thanks.

[@loupasmi]

Is there a way to have a parametric equalizer on a turntable and if we do so, does it means that our sound will be processed like it would be with a dac?

[@HillsWorkbench]

I guess its hard for Paul to go too deep into the weeds on this issue for a short video, but there can be big differences in the degradation that EQs can add to a system, beyond noise and distortion. Phase shift on some units can be terrible, especially when each band has a different amount of shift, can really blur the image of the music in a way that's hard to explain but definitely noticeable.

[@geoff37s38]

I have a graphic equaliser from 1877. It is a pair of socks left to me by my Great Grandad. I use them to reduce volume from my wind-up phonograph. I stuff them in the horn, or “put a sock in it”.

[@laurentzduba1298]

The sock can also be used as a string damper / mute when you play late 1980s era Steve Vai tunes on a cello.

[@finscreenname]

95% of the recording out there are "poor recordings" and deserve nothing more then a Walmart clock radio. Rock and roll, 99.9%. It a total misconception on you are fooling with a EQ every 10 seconds. Most set and forget. Maybe if something is recorded as bad as say any Go Go's CDs then you actually may move a slide but at least you have the option. Sounds like you added a "loudness" switch to the Sprout. As for the "pathway"....that stuff is bat crap crazy. Start counting how many connections you have between where your music starts and where it comes out you speakers. Speakers connected to crossovers (by wire), crossovers connected to amps (by cables), a number of interconnects between pieces and we have not even been inside of any of the equipment yet. But one more thing with insane benefits in the pathway is just a bridge to far. I would really like to know how many "hi end" folks on here have acoustic players come to your home and they compare what they sound like compared to their system? I will put money on it's a lot less then 1%. I've tried but it's really had to get someone that has made a legitimate recording to play my basement. So you have to take the builders word on it that it will work the same in your space even though they put their stuff together and judge it in a totally different environment. Start mixing in different equipment, different rooms, different environments, different recordings.... unless you are in the studio at the time of the recording (not the sound booth because it's been changed by the time it gets there due to mic set up and the room they are playing in) you will never hear a prefect recording. As for "a high in system that is lacking bass you should buy new speakers...." I have 4 Infinity RS IIIa's and as good as they sound they are pretty lifeless and flat without a EQ. Not sure what speaker I could buy that would fix that being I have multiple sets of pretty good speakers around me that don't even sound close to what they sound like. So I will save my money and hassle and just move the slider up a tiny bit. Last, what it sounds like..... Just bought the same EQ I have had for almost 40 years (Technics SH8025) on my main system for a little project I'm doing. Someone had 1/4" jacks install in it so they could use it before their amp. So what was supposed to be "live" was actually already "EQ'ed".

[@ford1546]

you are absolutely right in one thing! too many recordings have too bad sound! But you can't always blame the recording! The biggest cause of bad sound is the speakers you have!

[@michaelangeloh.5383]

I think you're exaggerating with how many recordings are bad recordings. - Well... OK... There's a large share of crappy generic pop and all that which doesn't help the average. - 99.9% of Rock 'n' Roll aren't good recordings?... I don't know about that. There's definitely many older ones that might be legendary in songs but don't really sound good or high fidelity at all, because of the limitations of the equipment back then, but there's also a lot with great production on them. - Then you also have more modern records that are way more polished and have a way broader range in their sound. Anyway, there's a great variety in recordings, as there are definitely fantastic albums out there that have great quality in their sound, from range to detail and fidelity and so on, which they might never get credit for. - Those are the ones you have to test and tweak your audio-system with. Get to know the recordings, listen to what the intent of their sounds are, then put all of them through the equipment and tweak until all of them together create a balanced sound-image. - That's indeed as close to "perfect" you're going to get, a balance of frequencies, which is achieved by good enough equipment and tweaking the frequencies by tweaking the equalizer and room. But the source will be the source indeed, it will just have a character that was produced in some kind of studio, and you should try and retain its original sound, no matter how good or bad. - Let's say "Thriller", one of the most revered recordings in terms of sound out there (which even as a fan I disagree with), is quite dry and boxy though very tight with popping beats, with surely full bass-lines but not very deep lows, nice crisp higher frequencies though not the most sparkly high-end, but... it's a Motown-style record, you basically know what it should sound like. I mean, if at any point during that record the low-end is creating an earthquake, that's not right. If it's ever shrill, that's not right either, the record has neither of that. I mean, in that way you can try and be as true to the source as possible. Not the source that was recorded, but the commercial recording being the source.

[@kizabgd6191]

@@ford1546 .. .. and your room - 50:50

[@slipagent6]

Im using a vintage stereo with bass mid treb and adjustable freq turnover. It actually sounds pretty good as is but when I use pink noise and rta the room its all over the place. Just ordered a 31 band 2 channel eq. I hope it sounds good, I think it will be fun to flatten the room and eliminate the frequencies below my speakers response and see the difference.

[@simopo1]

Like you....I'm older! My hearing has lost some of the high frequencies. I find much TV and other broadcast speech is unintelligible. I have to put the subtitles on. Lyrics on songs are not so bad. I have a high quality hifi set up(s) and feel a high fidelity graphic equaliser could put things right for me. Can you review or point me towards some please? Simon

[@tpc3416]

EQs are as necessary to the end user as they are the sound engineer. Especially for surround sound. Speaker efficiency and quality of amplification always differ, just as volume preferences differ. There's always a sweet spot with dB. And a flat Hz curve isn't linear as the volume adjusts. To be able to smooth out that Hz can make a tremendous difference in sq. Parametric EQs take it one step closer. Long live the EQ!

[@davidwilkins797]

I love my Pioneer GR 777 with my amplifiers loudness button pushed in !!! Systems sound bland without an EQ! And the dancing lights is an audiophile bonus any day!

[@DannyoRaiden]

For headphones may it help better?

[@ELECTECHNUT]

EQs can help compensate for poor recordings, imperfect rooms, speaker shortcomings, and the listeners personal auditory health.

[@visionop8]

Thank you for the great advice! I used to lean pretty heavily on graphic eq's and I've since learned to fix issues with amps, speakers and gain settings. I do use the built-in digital graphic eq in my receiver however because I find the tweeters on my floor-standing L/R speakers to be a bit loud and crisp so I pull down 4k, 8k and 16k a little to soften the treble a bit and that's it. Everything else is flat.

[@stephenwhite5444]

There are excellent reasons for eq, one being because NO speakers when measured 360 degrees all the way around are perfectly flat, which means it would be appropriate to make adjustments with a eq. Additionally a speaker measures different from room to room so you can compensate with that using a EQ. Lastly, unless your using the same speaker and equipment as the recording engineer when they produced the sound....your not hearing it exactly the same as the engineer did anyway!! He heard it one way, made adjustments, then you play it back on different equipment in a different room and it sounds different....so you may as well compensate it to your liking anyway. The purest feasible way to listen is to set up all your equipment in the room and EQ each channel to be perfectly flat at the listening point....you can NEVER get that without EQ, doesnt matter how much your spending. Go watch Erin's Audio Corner, he will show you with his very high end test equipment.

[@marcosvictor4935]

But Paul, aren't Crossovers EQs? A a DIY audiophile I use parametric EQs a lot, for crossing over components and also for fixing holes and bumps in the frequency range. Usually get the highest increase I made like, say I made a +3db increase in 400hz because the response was low in that region, so I'll also lower 3db the entire signal so it doesn't clip the preamp. But yeah, I do it a lot for great results and it ends up room's correcting, not only speaker-correcting as I do the measurements inside the room the speaker will be used.

[@travelworld9566]

compare to using eq you will spend much more money to tune your hifi system by upgrade system equipment ,cable or even room condition...

[@clarencecarter2956]

I use an EQ for my cassette dec. It brings the audio cassette quality up to the match the other elements of the system. I can see where it might degrade the other inputs, but to me, it makes the cassette deck sound as good as the rest of the system. I am using an Integra DTm40.7

[@larrysmith6797]

You can't use an EQ to improve the quality of shit to match the other elements of your system unless the rest of your system is shit.

[@poserwanabe]

@@larrysmith6797 bullshit.

[@quagmyer7230]

I love using an EQ with all my music, like you said Paul, some songs might not have the low or high frequencies you would like to enjoy in a song, in my personal opinion, no song is perfect, or at least acceptable for every listener, at the end of the day, it’s about we as listeners enjoying the music we like. Love your videos Paul, you are a world of help to us who want to learn and enjoy the magic of music.

[@anandshah71]

There are many recordings that I am not satisfied with and would love to occasionally use an eq also with advent of streaming and various sources sometimes I feel eq is a good thing to have. I use a clarion eq in my Car will think of a way to use on my active 3 way system at home on mac or windows as eq software instead of a hardware equaliser

[@Lfunk1983]

EQ is a must. You can bring tones and instruments to the front that you’ve never heard. It opens up new sonic options and is good for room correction.

[@DxModel219]

absolutely I agree. Even a $100K system would benefit

[@bootsarmstrong8421]

Sorry Paul. You have probably never heard a system that has been properly eq'd with test tones (pink noise). I've done this with my stereo system many times and it makes a world of difference. Every room is going to interact with sound differently and an eq helps to fix the hills and valleys in the sound. High quality eqs degrade the sound very little. Audio Control used to make a super 1/3 octave eq. Everything sounds "right" when a system is eq'ed. Of course you need to tweak the top end a bit so it's not too bright. The pluses out way the minuses. You (and the other purist) would probably have a heart attack if you knew how many signal processors I have in my system. 😄😄😄

[@stephenhargreaves9011]

I know this is a couple of years old, but now I'm finding conflicting information. You used an example where you boost the bass. However, what I've read is that you rarely use an EQ to boost anything, but rather to take away, and then up the volume. So back to your example of boosting the bass on bookshelf speakers, the alternative view is that you leave the bass alone, but lower the mid tones and treble, and then up the volume on everything to get back to where you want to be. Bear in mind, my experience right now, whilst I wait for speakers to arrive, is that I'm taking my turntable through an EQ that then feeds in to my PC Speakers (not via the PC, the Sub/Power unit has a separate input), and this most definitely needs EQ tweaked. When the speakers arrive, I'll start from a flat EQ again and simply adjust for the environment. My point is that, from what I've read, increasing (especially bass) can make it sound muddy. Do you have a view on this.

[@velchuck]

I have a eq. It is just another bullet in my gun. It helps compensate for my hearing issues. Use it or not.

[@StewartMarkley]

I've lived with equalizers in studios and in home environments and in both cases it comes down to judiciously using the right tools for the job. Graphic equalizers are rarely appropriate for home use because the user even audiophiles are rarely able to properly use them as they are too complicated for casual use and should be setup with the assistance of an analytical tool. Today that tool exists called Room EQ Wizard for a free download and needs a calibrated microphone which is very affordable. Also today a superior method of EQ exists by virtue of DSP called miniDSP which is leaps and bounds better than analog equalizers. While it is smart to use good speakers and room treatments especially bass trap absorbers, the use of modern methods of speaker and room correction equalization can really help to get a good sounding setup. After that, a simple analog equalizer is all that is needed to allow the adjustments for variations in recordings, non acute hearing loss, playback volume, or genres.

[@milkman100001]

hi paul. ive got to disagree a little regarding being able to change the sound of song tracks .i listen to all sorts of music , either a lot of bass for dance music or hardly no bass for classical , jazz etc..i have your stream dac and the bhk 250 to process my music.but when the dac is plugged straight into the amp for me the bass is too much on some tracks.it sounds great ,dont get me wrong, but some times over powering. so what i do is use my yamaha pre amp to adjust the treble or bass and by going so i can usually get all types sounding great.i have to turn the bass and the bass trim all the way down as far as it will go on some tracks so its not over whelming . i was going to buy a bhk pre amp to replace my yamaha . however ive learnt theres no bass or treble control and because of this i wont be purchasing it. a direct decision because of no control . maybe in the next gen of the bhk it may be something you may build in to the appliance? otherwise im left with my yamaha that even though cost 3 times as less, for me personally does a better job.especially having bass boost on sprout , you must know that all music is not the same and needs a tweak now and then.

[@petezyr1059]

Oh come now, room Acoustics drastically alter the sound of everyone's speakers regardless of what you had for equipment. Once you have your speakers place where you want them you should always get the best EQ you can afford and run a full spectrum analysis on the room to EQ your system then from there tweak tiny bits here and there if you haven't done this you have no idea what I'm talking about and no idea what a vast difference it can make in any system, so anyone out there who can't afford the absolute top-tier equipment that these people are all raising about should give this a shot believe me if you do it right and you have a good Spectrum analyzer with good microphones properly calibrated you will be absolutely shocked at how great your system sounds. And guess what how about some blind A B testing, you know the things the so-called audiophiles fear the most??

[@petezyr1059]

@@sfulmer430 what system? You're kidding right there are millions of systems quality components are endless. I prefer vintage stuff I like horns Altec model 19 Pioneer spec Sansui vintage separate components ADS model 910, B&W 801 Matrix, that kind of stuff but that's just me. I also have some Sonic Frontiers stuff tube stuff that's great too Audio Research that's great too KLH Model 9 when they're working right fantastic speaker, any of the Old Mac stuff, tube Marantz, all the way down to Vintage Harman Kardon receivers which also sounded wonderful with a nice old pair of dynaco a25 or dynaco stereo 70 with the same speakers. Preamp choices old audio research, Mac, luxman, tandberg. But it's all about what your ears like you got to do blind testing if you don't do that everything is full of shit you have to hear the difference when you don't know what you're listening to if you can't hear it when you don't know what it is then you can't hear a difference

[@petezyr1059]

I guess you spent too much money on the wrong stuff! Oh the Horrors, they have a true story of an acquaintance who spent well over $150,000 on a system and I went to his house to listen to it basically told him it sucked and after we both agreed on it we went and listened to his vintage system with this tannoy speakers, and good old-fashioned Rotel amplifiers with tone controls and we were smiling again instead of cringing, true story, how much money you spend has nothing to do with how good the music sounds, thus the blind a b test.... but then again I listen to my components I don't sit there and Ponder the expense of them in to look at them

[@petezyr1059]

Yes I have had systems like that you have to pick out your recording is because you know this one is going to drill a hole in your ear or that one is going to sound absolutely horrible, you want to be listening to the same stuff over and over again? Keep all that digital crap away from everything get some good old analog equipment with vintage capacitors in it that are not crap if you start replacing all the caps you going to make it sound like a modern piece and that destroys the whole point don't like talking about old tube stuff those things are usually in dire need of replacement but in the 70s they made some great capacities if you replace the bad ones and leave the rest you keep the Vintage sound of the system and that's what makes them musical put on a great pair of speakers something with horns like the tannoy or Altec nineteen and you can enjoy the music again oh yeah and some 16 gauge zip code AS speaker wire to remember it will easily handle a thousand Watts

[@petezyr1059]

Oh please not the cable thing don't even go there, however find yourself a good EQ to pretend it's not in the system and just listen to the music if you can find a crown that has been reworked they are pretty damn good I have many different models and makers also some of the old soundcraftsmen are pretty good if they are worked on every once in awhile you'll get one that just plain sounds great put it in and out of the system making a b switch if you have to set your volume to Unity gain and switch it in and out until you find one where you can't hear the difference that's the one you want to use ive set up a lot of recording studio monitors, klark teknik makes decent eqs too, so does whites

[@michaelangeloh.5383]

I've gotten two smaller speakers that were actually surrounds (meaning they were the surround-effects to larger front speakers in a set) to sound pretty great as stereo front speakers with the 3-band equalizer in a receiver, especially in combination with a well-set subwoofer. - On their own without EQ they're quite... lame, to keep it simple. Just not enough bottom, of course, the mid-range is kind of lacking as well as the high-end. - But with a little help at the right frequencies they suddenly come alive, then the subwoofer takes care of the missing bottom.

[@DavidLee-xz2tl]

I have been a purist all my life and my equipment reflects my listening goals. But what I hear in my editing room through monitors and in my living are not the same. And here's the real sad truth: as I get older, I don't hear the same way, especially in the high registers. When I'm home and enjoying music in the living space, there will be times especially with older recordings, and A/D converted recordings where something of the vibrancy of the acoustics of the instruments don't come through. Between me and my ears, the addition of an equalizer achieves a simple goal: Making my perception of the recording as transparent as my mind imagines it. I don't think about it and I don't obsess, but for me it's a great tool if a given recording seems to be lacking what I feel is a natural sound. In other words, sometimes I use it and it's all I need to be happy.

[@LA-db9xj]

"The way that the artist wanted to hear it?" And how do you determine that?? If you're not there to discuss it with them. And unless you can duplicate that environment at home. What happens when you change the music to another artist and they want to emphasize their music their way? Then you have start all over again. I want my music to sound the way I want it to. Whatever it takes including an EQ to get there, that's what I want!

[@trutmaasfull]

I use graphic equalizers in my system, because of the roomgain, because my diy magnestat loudspeakers!! I meassure with REW before the amp on the equalizers so the tube preamp still colour the sound!!

[@anthonyhfe6450]

I always enjoy Paul's vids and sense of humor. Thanks Paul. My favorite method of equalization is on my vintage receivers/amps with triple tone controls. This enables you to scoop out the midrange and boost the bass and treble. Gives you the classic smiley face equalizer curve as required. But Paul, you speak of equalizers as tools to "correct" or "compensate" poor recordings. And I 100% agree with you on that. But also, on the otherside of the spectrum (probably a bad place to use this expression but too late now), there are those of us who like to enhance the music with a bit of tweaking, even if it's a close to perfect recording, source material, etc. We may be doing this due to the limitations of our own systems, or we may be doing it because it's fun to have this kind of control. As far as the purists go, I bet most of them will NOT be able to hear any distortion or aberrations cause by a quality equalizer. And if they say they can, they're probably full of it and should go be a salesman somewhere. Yes, we all want one wire with gain. But live a little, will ya? Pull out all the stops. Lose that clinical, dry sound and enjoy the music like you never have before. At present, I have none of my equalizers in any of my systems, but I certainly use tone controls and loudness buttons at will. Enjoy the music 🎶 ! EQ or no EQ, as long as it sounds good.

[@garthreid7114]

When it comes to playing deep dub or reggae, one of the requirements is the ability to drop out the mid range to reduce overall volume, and increase the bass levels. Very difficult to do without a graphic equalizer, its not about volume or decibels, its about maxing the power vibe at the deep end, without, ' loud'.

[@honeyken316]

The original entry into this EQ stuff came when Altec developed the "Acousti-voicing" system for PA systems. That was a number of tuned filters that went between the pre amplifier/mixer and the power amplifier. Its sole purpose was to attenuate room resonance frequencies that could cause feedback. This worked very well and made many systems have much more gain before feedback occurred. It did alter the character of the sound from the system. Later electronic "graphic" equalizers also permitted boosting frequencies as well as attenuating them. The only thing worse than a tone control is a graphic equalizer with boosted frequencies. Unless your audio system is in a very resonant room, equalization is a band aid. Either fix the room or put up with the known problems.

[@Alva2323]

What Paul was talking about at the end is dynamic EQ which is being heavily researched in car audio as a DSP feature. B&O 3D+ systems on recent high end Audi's have this feature and possibly others but I have heard it and you barely notice it's there(not intrusive), still enough to make a noticeable improvement added on top of DSP and ANC in a noisy environment

[@danielmiller469]

Imo when using an eq always cut never boosts that's what an amp is for to boost your eq is for cutting

[@yuckysamson]

HiFi Owners: Making Hifi is a labor of love. We do not get rich off it. Trust me. Paul: So here's my backyard patio....

[@housepianist]

Rich is relative. Perhaps because of your economic circumstances, his lifestyle appears rich even though he may not actually be, all things considered. It’s all about perspective.

[@yuckysamson]

@@housepianist , it was really just more of a 'joke', or 'kid'. It wasn't meant at all as a critique of someone's life choices or status or wealth. Paul has earned every penny he has and is a very, very nice guy, and a good designer. I don't believe in the redistribution of assets.

[@housepianist]

Jeff Glickman i agree. Paul is a nice guy and he does deserve everything he has. My commentary was not meant as a critique.

[@joz411no8]

I like the idea of being able to create a different profile for each song. Years ago, I stumbled upon that feature in iTunes that allows you to make adjustments to the individual tracks stored on your library. I tried it out more than a few times, and for it being a part of Apple's architecture, for the iTunes user, it could be a godsend.

[@payaso25us]

i am guilty of using an eq (rotel re 860)… streaming via bluesound node to equaliser, good recordings the eq is on Bypass, something heavily compressed like U2 then and only then i switch to Normal Eq.

[@serg2963]

I listen to a lot of music that was poorly recorded; a little tone control/EQ is imperative for a good listening experience. As for EQing a system itself... a huge advantage of active speakers, is the ability to trim/adjust bass for room response. I don't own active, but I see that as a major plus.

[@VBshredder]

When i'm listening to an album it's not like i'm trying to mix a record. I like to set an EQ to my own listening tastes, often depending on the genre of music. Sometimes i'm the mood for mega-bass, sometimes I want to hear it closer to the intended levels. Although i've noticed with 5.1 and up channel stuff I tend to stick with no EQ as i'm usually aiming for the intended experience.

[@pennybarker9756]

Yes u need one because no company makes gear good enough to make all music sound good

[@Guiltless765]

I find treble and bass through my AVR to be enough at the high levels i listen to music. I have 3 amps and i found adding an EQ brought about clipping at much lower volumes. Yes even flat. I do use an EQ just for the dancing lights though. 😊 Kenwood GE 7030

[@illiniheel67]

The Poweramp app for Android systems has this digital EQ function that you mentioned. I can set the EQ by artist, by genre, album, etc., or by output device. It is a lifesaver when I switch vehicles that are tied to my phone's Bluetooth.

[@Impackon]

What about room correction, like with Dirac? In my point of view that's a multiple EQ in freqency, balance, timing etc. But also based on one or the other optimum, which is choosen by Dirac. Is this also not done in high-end, even if it solves a lot of issues (in an easy / digital way)?

[@AllboroLCD]

EQ's without a shadow of a doubt HELP correct deficiencies in crappier systems like all in ones & things of the sort.

[@screenshot123]

If you’re fortunate to be in a recording session and want to replicate that sonic experience in your listening room, congratulations. You’re one of the lucky few that can attempt that. For the rest of the world who weren’t there, applying random EQ hoping to reproduce sound like we were there with you is a crap shoot. The best we can do is attempt to make our listening room and speakers as neutral as possible, to reduce any coloration to the recorded playback. The resultant sound is closer to what the recording engineers recorded. If the listener prefers a different sonic experience, they’re free to play sound engineer in the privacy of their own studio (living room, home theater or equivalent). Good luck.

[@nelsonscattabingus5751]

Paul the cosmic mystery still remains that if you Listen to anything with a decent dac and switch to direct then back to dac instantly sound is enhanced so isn’t the dac basically already a EQ ????

[@tubefreeeasy]

All I know, I like the sound after EQing over the bypassed sound I was hearing before. The Schiit Loki Plus doesn’t seem to create a deteriorating sound from my system.

[@DxModel219]

Yup an EQ can make a $10K system sound like $50K… why spend all this money just when you can use an EQ to bring out the best of your system.

[@mrsmith8436]

Equalizers should be used to make the music sound better(totally subjective). Anything that doesn’t sound good ( totally subjective) is a degradation. This is all a totally subjective and pointless discussion because everyone hears differently within a range.

[@HotMetalVideos]

Paul, is there any progress on your digital EQ?

[@mmetmalachite2653]

Actually i love analog EQ more than software ones .. don't know why exactly ! .. but i find that digital EQs harms the sound more ! BTW .. Neutron android player can do remembering a specific eq preset to a specific track or album

[@gotham61]

Was that an added sound effect @ 5.12, or something you somehow made yourself?

[@jonaskeusch]

Would it make sense to correct a hearing loss of specific frequencies (everything over 3khz is -10db and more / everything under 1khz is minus 10db and more) with an equalizer? And if yes, how would you do it? I would really appreciate if someone could point me a direction :)

[@SzilardPusztafalvi]

Use an ND filter on your phone. Moment make a case and adapter for it.

[@darrens7603]

Just pushing exposure down should be enough

[@brucesamuelson7541]

Idk what monotone purist audiophiles are talking about when they say an eq takes away from the sound quality but a good eq adds so much more clarity and brilliance to music I just can't wrap my head around your perception otherwise...

[@robertsupercalifragilistic7404]

I use a Manley Massive Passive in my high-end system. I don’t use it all the time, but it will leave you speechless because it’s absolutely amazing. Granted it’s $6K, but it’s money that your ears will thank you.

[@michaelfarkas2257]

its not about adjusting the sound per song or the recordings, its about eq-ing out the sound of the your room, which you cannot account for with pieces of equipment, so you are left with just the inherent sound of your system. live sound engineers do this at every gig.