Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Equalise to get a flat frequency (WHY NOT?)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Equalise to get a flat frequency (WHY NOT?) - Page 8

post #106 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

If you look through rose colored glasses, roses will still look rosey. This argument is silly. I guess folks don't understand the concept of calibration to a zero line.

 

Nobody is talking about band pass filters, which is what "rose colored glasses" would be. Having a slight emphasis on certain frequencies still allows for a wide range of sounds, as does a flat response.

 

I understand perfectly what calibration to a zero line is. What I don't understand is how "you can't dislike a flat response because it doesn't have any sound" is a valid argument.

post #107 of 119

The real question is, why are you so averse towards quantifying your preferences.

Unless you do that, there is nothing to discuss, even if you use all the audiophiley flowery words.

 

Then, we can speculate why you like certain kind of colored sound.

post #108 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstralStorm View Post

The real question is, why are you so averse towards quantifying your preferences.

Unless you do that, there is nothing to discuss, even if you use all the audiophiley flowery words.

 

Then, we can speculate why you like certain kind of colored sound.

 

Where did I say I was adverse to quantifying preferences? Where did I say I prefer a colored response?

post #109 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by iXpertMan View Post

Hi!

I would just like to ask why people complain so much about a headphone or a speaker lacking in bass, mids, treble and/or not a flat frequency curve, when all this problem can be solved by equalising? (at least from what I know)

 

So what is the problem with equalising and getting a flat frequency curve?

IMO, no problem at all. If one prefers a to hear a recording without the gear emphasizing any frequency range over the other, then equalization can certainly help.

 

I think Bigshot mentioned in some other thread that most classical music was recorded without any particular emphasis in mind and therefore probably well suited for neutral gear. This may also be the case for well done contemporary recordings. That said, certain recordings may be poorly engineered and heavily colored. One has a few choices: Leave things as they are, buy a different headphone/amp for every occasion, buy better recordings (if available), use the equalizer to "fix" the poorly recorded music (may require a different eq setting for every song though), or remaster the particular problem recordings.

 

If I really liked a song that was terribly recorded, I would prefer to leave my equipment neutral (through the use of equalization if necessary to correct issues in my equipment - nothing is currently perfect AFAIK.) I would then remaster or correct the problem recordings. I could ask for professional help, or could become an amateur and do it myself (could be fun.) This probably would yield better results as different problem recordings may have different problems.

 

I would definitively make an effort to buy well performing equipment and not expect the equalizer to make earbuds behave like reference level transducers.

 

Anyway, those are my thoughts...


Edited by ultrabike - 12/2/12 at 11:19pm
post #110 of 119
Tone controls are there to quickly correct poorly engineered recordings.
post #111 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

Tone controls are there to quickly correct poorly engineered recordings.

 

And you are basing these corrections on what, if not subjective preferences?

post #112 of 119

First you set your tone controls to zero and calibrate to a flat response to create an objective baseline.

 

Then you use tone controls subjectively as needed to correct for lousy engineering.

 

The advantage is that you can always get back to the proper flat response by just zeroing out the tone controls.

post #113 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

First you set your tone controls to zero and calibrate to a flat response to create an objective baseline.

 

Then you use tone controls subjectively as needed to correct for lousy engineering.

 

The advantage is that you can always get back to the proper flat response by just zeroing out the tone controls.

 

And this offers what advantage compared to adjusting to subjective preferences from the get-go?

 

I personally have no trouble adjusting an EQ that is not flat. If a recording is lousy, then its not going to have a flat EQ to begin with either.

post #114 of 119

The advantage is that in theory, recordings should be mixed to a flat response, and every recording made to the standard will sound fine with calibrated playback. You don't want to EQ to the exceptions to that rule because some will be off in one direction and others will be off in the opposite direction. If you adjust to one that is out of calibration, everything, even the ones mixed to a flat response, will require adjustment. You spend your whole life EQing.

 

EQ to a flat response and at least the good recordings don't require fiddling. You only apply the tone controls to the crappy ones. That's the whole point of a calibrated response.


Edited by bigshot - 12/3/12 at 3:54pm
post #115 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

The advantage is that in theory, recordings should be mixed to a flat response, and every recording made to the standard will sound fine with calibrated playback. You don't want to EQ to the exceptions to that rule because some will be off in one direction and others will be off in the opposite direction. If you adjust to one that is out of calibration, everything, even the ones mixed to a flat response, will require adjustment. You spend your whole life EQing.

 

EQ to a flat response and at least the good recordings don't require fiddling. You only apply the tone controls to the crappy ones. That's the whole point of a calibrated response.

 

You are still relying on the unfounded assumption that no one can dislike a flat response.

If you like boosted bass, calibrating to a flat response will mean you spend your whole life EQing as well.

post #116 of 119
Some engineers mix albums to have boosted bass, and some don't. All you can do is calibrate and adjust with the tone controls to taste from there.
post #117 of 119

why can't we use the eq like a tone control with 10 knobs? isn't it more precise in everyway?

post #118 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

Some engineers mix albums to have boosted bass, and some don't. All you can do is calibrate and adjust with the tone controls to taste from there.

 

But as you have said yourself, most recordings are mixed to be flat. So calibrating to a flat response each time doesn't make sense if you like boosted bass.

You gain little by starting with a flat response, unless you know that you like a flat response or if you have a personal desire to hear what the actual recording sounds like.

 

Anyways, I'm starting to repeat myself. Clearly you like a flat response, as do I. But you have to realize that some people do not, and they gain nothing by calibrating to one.

post #119 of 119
Anyone can set their systems however they want, but they will have a heck of a lot more control over it if they start from a baseline and ajust the tone controls from there. That's precisely why they put tone controls on receivers.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Equalise to get a flat frequency (WHY NOT?)