AVS Forum banner

21 - 40 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
Curious that you’re having upper midrange problems with this speaker. Ascend’s measurements how a slight dip in the 3 kHz range!

I have an aversion to cheap equalizers – I’ve seen too many of them that add noise. But cutting only (as you’re going to do) you might not have any problem.

Still, a better option would have been a parametric EQ. For instance, what if the annoying frequency is situated between two of the ART’s filters? And / or what if it’s narrower than 1/3-octave?

In either case, you’ll be attenuating frequencies that aren’t a problem, along with those that are. A parametric EQ could nail the exact offending frequency and the correct bandwidth.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #22 (Edited)
Curious that you’re having upper midrange problems with this speaker. Ascend’s measurements how a slight dip in the 3 kHz range!
Wayne, thanks for your feedback.

I am not so quick to blame the speakers. I think it is a combination of the speakers, my preamp, and my room. Also, from my understanding, if there is a slight dip around 3000, this will tend to accentuate the surrounding frequencies that don’t dip. For example, 2000 and 4000 may appear boosted because of the dip at 3000. I’m not sure where the problem frequency is, but it may not be at 3000.

Still, a better option would have been a parametric EQ.
I am assuming that the parametric equalizer would be placed at the same location in the signal chain as an analog graphic equalizer. This would require yet another conversion from analog to digital and back to analog again. So the entire process would be D > A > D > A. Doesn’t seem like that’s a good thing. Would you agree?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
I meant to ask, does your pre-amp have any built-in EQ that could be causing the problem? I wasn’t able to find a manual for it. On the same note, its EQ could be used instead of something outboard, possibly.


I am assuming that the parametric equalizer would be placed at the same location in the signal chain as an analog graphic equalizer. This would require yet another conversion from analog to digital and back to analog again. So the entire process would be D > A > D > A. Doesn’t seem like that’s a good thing. Would you agree?
There is no shortage of good analog pro-audio parametric EQs out there. However, most are out of production, so you’d have to get a used one.

Regarding digital EQs, I felt the same way you did until I got my hands on a Yamaha YDP2006. It blows away any analog EQ I’ve ever used. I’ve seen people using other digital EQs that were noisy, despite excellent specs. By contrast, the Yamaha is dead silent and as transparent as any top-flight analog EQ. Check my review in my signature.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt
 

·
The Village Idiot
Joined
·
9,536 Posts
That's cause you didn't try the flavor XT32...;) There really is THAT much difference between flavors. It's 'HYUGE'. ;)
I think it depends on the room how much of a difference room correction software makes. I've had a couple of AVR's and preamp processors with XT32. For stereo it made some corrections that you could hear but it wasn't 'night and day' different. I've also had a Harman Kardon HK990 integrated amp that had room correction. There were (IIRC) three DSP programs and straight. Slight differences were heard but once again it wasn't 'night and day' different. I do have a very easy to set up living room. The ceiling is 1950's acoustic tile. Heavy carpet and overstuffed chairs and a couch. All very soft. Just like the guy holding down the recliner much of the time! I have a dog that helps out.

I've also had similar experience with Yamaha's YPAO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
647 Posts
i use the digital mini dsp for parametric eq. Affordable, effective, and no other analog circuitry in the signal path. You need to have an external Dac or a digital in however. No extra analog circutry is good for audiophile sensibilities, however even if you have to do an additional ADC and DAC the benefits of DSP will outweighs any potential compromises.



Only downside is I cant use it for the turntable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #26 (Edited)
I received the EQ today and have spent a little bit of time dialing it in. All I can say is WOW! Just a very slight decrease in a few of the upper midrange frequencies make all the difference in the world! Just enough to take the edge off. Also, my worries about adding noise or distortion were unfounded. I’m so glad I made this purchase!

I understand that a dsp would have given me far more control and accuracy. However, this EQ is more than sufficient to solve my problem and saves me the expense of purchasing an additional dac.

Wayne, to answer your question: no my preamp has no tone controls at all.

Thank you all for your input!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
871 Posts
Schitt audio make a nice eq called the Loki . The brightness is From your gear . I have been through tons of gears and dacs with some stuff sounding like magic and some stuff needing eq to tame the midrange down . Nothing wrong with eq
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Nesto

Yeah, that’s the conclusion I have reached. I have good gear, but when combined, they definitely had a forward sound signature. I feel that I did everything I could with speaker placement and room treatment but it still needed a little tweaking. The EQ was a very effective and relatively inexpensive way to tame the upper-mids.

I’m sure that Schitt EQ is a quality piece of gear, although seems a bit pricey for only having 4 bands. For only an additional $40, the ART unit I bought has 2-channel, 31-band control. And it doesn’t seem to add any discernible distortion or coloration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
I received the EQ today and have spent a little bit of time dialing it in. All I can say is WOW! Just a very slight decrease in a few of the upper midrange frequencies make all the difference in the world! Just enough to take the edge off. Also, my worries about adding noise or distortion were unfounded. I’m so glad I made this purchase!

I understand that a dsp would have given me far more control and accuracy. However, this EQ is more than sufficient to solve my problem and saves me the expense of purchasing an additional dac.

Wayne, to answer your question: no my preamp has no tone controls at all.

Thank you all for your input!
Welcome to the free world where we listen to music the way we want... the way it makes us happy...

The world where we're not imprisoned in another man's opinion on what good music should sound like and how you're meant to listen to it...

I have four analog and two digital EQs and switch at will just to amuse myself anytime I feel like it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
A good free way to test an EQ if you can run PCM to your AVR or PRE is a program called Equalizer APO. I guess technically you could use an analog soundcard output, but PCM would be better. Completely free and more powerful than just about any EQ hardware you can buy. Really no limit to bands and boosts that can be made. Since my computer is the only source in my system I can use REW to measure virtually any speakers in any environment, then use EQ APO to mimic that exact sound signature with my relatively budget system in my home environment. I've never felt the need to upgrade since I can have the sound of almost any speaker made with just a few tweaks...although I've found I prefer the relatively flat "Harmon" research curve. I realize that makes purist audiophiles cringe, but people could save thousands of dollars if they adopted this approach.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
933 Posts
I've always been a big fan of manual eq's, even though many very knowledgable members dismiss the idea. After many years of playing with this stuff I know what I like, and how to get it :).

The thing I like about Pioneers Advanced MCACC is that it lets you pick the speaker sizes and crossover setting before running it, and lets you tweak the frequencies after running it. It also has 6 different eq settings for different situations. I'm sure a parametric eq would be even better but sometimes you have use what you've got. After adjusting my eq it sounds like there are 5 Mordaunt-Short 902's across the front instead of just one on each end. Sweet!

There's nothing wrong in playing with your avr's manual eq, especially for two-channel audio. If you screw it up :eek:, just turn it off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
505 Posts
OP...get rid of that ups-1... Jesus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
A good free way to test an EQ if you can run PCM to your AVR or PRE is a program called Equalizer APO. I guess technically you could use an analog soundcard output, but PCM would be better. Completely free and more powerful than just about any EQ hardware you can buy. Really no limit to bands and boosts that can be made. Since my computer is the only source in my system I can use REW to measure virtually any speakers in any environment, then use EQ APO to mimic that exact sound signature with my relatively budget system in my home environment. I've never felt the need to upgrade since I can have the sound of almost any speaker made with just a few tweaks...although I've found I prefer the relatively flat "Harmon" research curve. I realize that makes purist audiophiles cringe, but people could save thousands of dollars if they adopted this approach.
This is the only way to go for me. I'm fully digital though so when people have analog sources it may not be for them. Using my pc's hardware to perform all the EQ is a godcent when i want to keep all upstream in the digital realm then send the files to my more expensive dac. I never understood why people would buy a nice dac then send the analog signal to a cheap minidsp only to have another ADC. To each his own i suppose. EQ APO or Dirac Live on your PC or Roon endpoint is the way to go in my opinion (digital sources only).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
I received the EQ today and have spent a little bit of time dialing it in. All I can say is WOW! Just a very slight decrease in a few of the upper midrange frequencies make all the difference in the world! Just enough to take the edge off. Also, my worries about adding noise or distortion were unfounded. I’m so glad I made this purchase!
I have the USP-1, and have replaced it with the XSP-1. The USP was a real bargain unit, but it has a couple little down sides. The gain is too high for almost any system and the analog volume control isn't quite up to the task of handling that. I know you already got the EQ, but there is something I found really did the trick, that you might want to try. I got a pair of the best attenuators I could find and connected them between the USP-1 and the amp. This was something I kept reading about as I researched it, several years ago. I was skeptical, but the USP sounded smoother with the volume control at a higher level. Your EQ does have level controls, so you might just try zeroing them out and dialing the overall level down until the loudest you would ever want to play it is with the volume control at about 3 O'Clock.

I have no doubt I'm going to be ridiculed about this suggestion, but I'm not new to this, just to this site, I have that pre-amp and I was using it with Thiel CS 3.6s, which do have a tendency to a little emphasis at that frequency. Just give it a shot. If it sounds better, at least try a pair of in-line attenuators in place of the EQ. That preamp would be incredible, if not for that one vulnerability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
This was something I kept reading about as I researched it, several years ago. I was skeptical, but the USP sounded smoother with the volume control at a higher level. Your EQ does have level controls, so you might just try zeroing them out and dialing the overall level down until the loudest you would ever want to play it is with the volume control at about 3 O'Clock.
So i turned the levels down on the EQ. I have to admit I was also a little skeptical about this tip, but it definitely DOES sound smoother. I am thrilled! There is also the added bonus that the volume steps aren’t so large when using the remote. Thank you JohnCO!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
I have always been a bit of an audio "purist". In other words, I've never liked the idea of adjusting tone or frequency controls to modify the signal. Instead, I believed that good equipment, speaker placement and room adjustments are the audiophile way to achieve accurate sound.

However, I have recently upgraded much of my equipment and, although the sound has improved in many ways, there is one gremlin that I can't get rid of. The upper midrange frequencies are a bit overbearing and even harsh at times. I believe it's a combination of my new speakers (Ascend Sierra Tower RAAL) and pre-amp (Emotiva USP-1) which both tend to be a bit on the forward side. I have tried adjusting speaker placement, moving furniture, acoustic panels. Nothing seems to tame the offending frequencies. The problem is especially noticeable on female vocals, snare drums and certain electric guitars.

Although I am loathe to buy an EQ and add another device to the signal path, I feel I am running out of options. Any thoughts?
Rather purchase a sound processor, EX200 or such, much better and easier to run.
usually 3 knobs or so.
I used 1 before i went retro, now running HK AVR 5000, rdp980/rdd980, ar8 with qsc/qst main drivers and nsx90 speakers.
Nice small speakers and sounds amazing.
Setting all the graphic controls to set different types of music is a hassle,spend more time fiddling than listening.
BR
44ct357
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
The EQ tailors sound to your ears more than to the music so no real need re-set EQ with different types of music unless you just want to.

This thread has been very helpful to me. I have a mild hearing loss mostly above 8000 hz and I usually listen to music with a hearing aid on the setting programmed for music but it's not perfect. After reading this thread, it dawned on me that if listening alone, I could I could easily use an EQ to boost the frequencies where I am weakest.

Got an open box Art 341 last week for $90 delivered. Dual channel, 15 band, either 6db range or 12 db range, and a defeat button to compare. Great addition. Now I can listen with or without aids. Most of us above a certain age have varying degrees of hearing loss so it's a cheap alternative to consider.

In that case, the "purity of the music chain" argument is out the window because that argument presupposes great hearing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,192 Posts
Nesto

...

I’m sure that Schitt EQ is a quality piece of gear, although seems a bit pricey for only having 4 bands. For only an additional $40, the ART unit I bought has 2-channel, 31-band control. And it doesn’t seem to add any discernible distortion or coloration.
It may only be 4 bands but the way it works, it covers a good range. Sometimes less is more. It is also completely analog and transparent. You can instantly turn take it in and out of the chain with the flick of a switch.

I think its funny that someone who is apprehensive about using a EQ in the first place would disregard a good option because they want MOAR bands :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
It may only be 4 bands but the way it works, it covers a good range. Sometimes less is more. It is also completely analog and transparent. You can instantly turn take it in and out of the chain with the flick of a switch.

I think its funny that someone who is apprehensive about using a EQ in the first place would disregard a good option because they want MOAR bands :p
I agree...I just bought a schiit Loki and it works out great.plenty of adjustment to make music or movies sound they way I enjoy.less is more in my book and the Loki is pretty powerful in the bands it has...

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muskeg
21 - 40 of 40 Posts
Top