EQ - Barrier to Transparency, or Tool for Reality

[miklorsmith]

Srajan has been on an EQ kick since his aquisition of the WLM monitors and subs.  I've been using TacT preamplifiers for some time and find them quite handy.  What do folks think of this contentious concept?

[bpape]

EQ in the lower octaves is a reality in most rooms.  However, most people don't have access to an EQ of the quality of a TACT and/or aren't willing to give up their preamp just to get EQ.

That said, IF a system has a sub (which most should for best performance), I agree totally for EQ on the sub - as long as it's not in the chain of my mains.  Now, a plugin for SlimServer that will do EQ in the digital domain  prior to the DAC and preamp is something that should be considered - though it does nothing for the other sources.

Bryan

[WEEZ]

I have no idea what you all are talking about. But keep talking....

WEEZ

[gonefishin]

Personally, I don't mind it.  I've got my mains using the deqx-p and my IB subs (which I've still got to install/hook-up) will be eq'd.  One minus to an eq'd system (with my limited time/knowledge) is that any time there is a change, it takes some time and effort to remeasure and set everything up again.

   I think it really depends on the system...and the person  

    I also enjoy some Lowther system run from a 45 based amp too.

  who knows???
   dan

[Ryno]

For my system, to eq or not depends on the music. I have a DAC with optic and coax ins, the coax is direct from the source, the optical goes through a digital eq.
With more simple, well recorded music things are better without the eq. The soundstage is a little wider, and the frequencies that need the most eq, bass, tend to be less used. With full frequency range, more complex music, ie rock, the benifits of eq outweigh any sonic degredation. Most of my music of this type isn't recorded well enough to take advantage of removing the eq.
The post about what you would do if you could start over makes me think about a biamped three way with eq on 200Hz on down. MMMM
Ryan

[miklorsmith]

The primary downsides as I see it of the TacT are:

1)  I do not like the DACs
2)  Everything gets upsampled to 24/96 for processing.  This is an asynchronous upsample from the native 44.1.  My DAC accepts the upsampled rate, but that makes THREE clock signals that are all trying to get along.  Lessloss says this is a significant compromise.

I'm currently assembling an alter-ego for my rig to be able to compare their ideal "master" solution with the one I have now.  Along the way, I'll be trying the Inguz plugin for Slimserver and probably Uli Brueggerman's Acourate filter program for same.  Inguz also upsamples to 24 bits, I'm not sure what rate.  I'm planning to get the SB remodded to disengage the clock crystal so it can be slaved to the Lessloss.

What does all this mean?  It's a pain in the ass to do EQ without giving up transparency.  If it's done in the digital realm, which should be completely transparent, there are resolution concerns just as there would be in the analog realm, though obviously with different sonic consequences.

The WLM solution sounds quite elegant, though it would be interesting to see how much their circuitry is detracting from "ultimate" resolution.

For me, the ideas of EQ and room correction are no-brainers.  Executing them in the real world is another matter entirely.  I would really like to see some cool, well-built integrated amps or preamps with tone controls.  This seems like a choice that should be available to consumers.  For that matter, some intelligent boxes like WLM is doing without terrible complexity and adaptable to different systems is an untapped market.

[Carlman]

Mike,
It sounds like you want it all!  (Or, you asked for it so here it goes....)

NOS:
Non-oversampling is the answer if you hear that weird, digital sibilant edge to things that you can't quite put your finger on... It's not a big deal unless you hear what the NOS DAC does that removes the 'issue' you didn't know you had.  The best oversampling dac's I've heard still have that digital-edge to the 'corners' of the sounds.  The worst is female vocalists... whatever frequency range that's in, is the upsampling DAC's downfall.

Some will not be bothered by this and will enjoy a slight increase in overall detail... and extension.  I'm in line for a new, NOS tube DAC with XLR outs, and all the popular inputs.  I've heard the predecessors and they've really come a long way over the years.  So, I'm not giving up much when I go this route... and I'm gaining that NOS sound that once you decide sounds more like real music, you have no choice but to stay with it.

TacT Gear:
The TacT became the PRAT-master, after Anthony/Aberdeen did his mods to the board and DAC.  Transparency and detail were also greatly improved.  I enjoyed the room correction capability but in the end I sold it in favor of that NOS sound... and to add a turntable easily into my system.  If you like your TacT now, please send at least the DAC to him to upgrade... and of course, the power supply.

However, it sounds like you're going to the NOS-side. So, no level of perfection is going to beat what sounds more like real music, in your room.

Hantra and I have been doing comparisons every few weekends of our systems and finding our likes/dislikes... and he put it best... and I'm paraphrasing... "with the NOS, it sounds more like what I want to hear as a performance in my room... whereas with the upsamplers, it sounds more like what the recording engineer hears."  So, which is better?  That's up to you.

EQ:
I think room correction is best done physically.  As in, buying a house with a room dedicated to 2-channel listening, with all of the best principles employed, to your tastes.  I may like more absorption than the next guy, maybe less.  But, using bass traps, corner treatments, etc. are mandatory.

Now, for the 90% of us that can't do that, there's electronic EQ.  In my opinion: You can't have perfect microdynamics, absolute transparency, etc. AND have an electronic processor in the chain.  However, the benefit of 1, will outweigh the other... So, having EQ in a room that really needs it is worth the other (small) compromises.  

So, the answer is yes, you can have your cake and eat it too especially if you are ok with oversampling dac's like the TacT.  If you use the old-school EQ, man... I don't know... I've never heard one that was worth the compromised sound quality... but it may be out there.... I've never heard a Behringer setup, so, I'm not sure if those would be a better NOS-EQ system for you or not.

-C

[bpape]

Exactly.  You can do a lot with treatment and placement.  Sometimes EQ is needed but usually only down below say 100Hz - hence my comment about only on the sub.

I'm also an NOS guy at this point.  

The last thing I want to have to do is to run my non-digital sources through an A->D converter just to get a little room EQ.  Would you really want to do this to your vinyl rig?

Bryan

[miklorsmith]

Good, good, good!  I would not run vinyl through an A>D step.  For that reason alone, I think you did the right thing Carl.

On using treatments instead of EQ - I have a decently treated room but I still find benefit from room correction - thus the Inguz/Acourate idea through the SB.  Bass will be controlled via parametric EQ, so I'll be covered from 70 hz down with any source.  The SB is the primary source in the rig, so only having correction for it isn't a big deal.

Or, I might find the 24-bit upsampling isn't worth it.  I was planning to sell the TacT to free up dough to pursue this other angle, but I chickened out.

Inability to achieve pristine sound with a processor in the link - this is an interesting observation.  I have to say that with the TacT I agree.  But, I'm willing to pursue other alternatives to see how close they get.

The Altmann will arrive at Mike Galusha's place today and I think they have a get-together planned with Wayne and the other Denver guys tomorrow.  Keep your eyes peeled for that.  I agree about the NOS props, I've had three of them.  But, the Lessloss DAC is something else.  It is hyperdetailed yet musical and does not create anxiety like every other OS DAC I've heard.  Expect to hear more about this one.  

[Carlman]

Good, good, good!  I would not run vinyl through an A>D step.  For that reason alone, I think you did the right thing Carl.

The Altmann will arrive at Mike Galusha's place today and I think they have a get-together planned with Wayne and the other Denver guys tomorrow.  Keep your eyes peeled for that.  I agree about the NOS props, I've had three of them.  But, the Lessloss DAC is something else.  It is hyperdetailed yet musical and does not create anxiety like every other OS DAC I've heard.  Expect to hear more about this one.  

I've never actually heard vinyl through a TacT but I would like to... If for no other reason than the cool-factor.... How cool is it that you're listening to a 60's pressing of an album through something as high-tech as a TacT with room correction employed?  I just think that's nifty-neato.  

I may have made the right choice but now I have a bit more bass 'bloom' from 100Hz down... again... But, one more thing that weighed into my choice to go back to analog is that we're moving to a new house later this year... with a dedicated soundroom... it will be my undergound lair...  However, it will initially be unfinished.  Depending on work, it could get finished real quick or may be a while.... but looks like the main listening area will be roughly 17' wide and 22' long... will know more next week.

I'm looking forward to hearing the Denver gang's results.  Feel free to post a link to it somewhere on AN.... maybe someone from the meet can post in the West-Regional section... ?  MGalusha?

Thanks,
Carl

[miklorsmith]

I've got the first, half-baked iteration of the alternate setup running now.  It seems a little more dynamic and clear, though the bass isn't figured out yet.  The parametric I'm trying out has more freakin' functions than the TacT.  Fun.  Not.

Of course, this could all be in my head based on prior expectations.  Man, I wish I could just throw up a microphone to tell me if it's different and how.  

[bobrex]

I'm running VMPS RM30Ms with the powered bass option.  I'm thinking of adding EQ to the bass section, well actually it's more than the bass section - it runs to just above middle C.   I'm thinking of the Behringer FBQ, maybe swapping RCAs for the quarter inch jacks.  It does mean running analog (I use 98% vinyl at home) through a A>D>A process, but I'm hoping that the limited bandwidth will minimize the artifacts.

I would have loved to use the RDES, but it rolls off too early.  The SMS-1 is over a grand if I want separate channel control.  Are there any other cost effective options besides the Behringer line?

[jbtrio]

Mike,
  You could use a Rives PARC for bass EQ and still use your turntable,it is analog.
                   Joe