[Oregonian]

And if not, can anyone comment on why not?  Seems it would allow you to fine tune the sound to your liking, as I am able to do with my vintage amps.
 
Not trying to be a smart arse but it would seem to make sense to have the ability to add adjustabilty for treble and bass - at least to me. 
 
Disclaimer - I'm 100% a vintage speaker amp fan - have 8 systems in use in various parts of the house and one at work - and have only owned the Magni as far as headphone-specific amps go. 
 
I'm trying to understand - "seek first to understand"..............

 

[ProtegeManiac]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oregonian /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

I'm curious................do any of the headphone-specific amp makers (Schiit, etc) offer tone controls...?

And if not, can anyone comment on why not?  Seems it would allow you to fine tune the sound to your likings, as I am able to do with my vintage amps.

 

OK, first off, an amplifier's job is to amplify the signal, not "fine tune the sound;" in a similar sense, that's also why I cannot understand why there are people who refuse to use EQ to fine tune the issues with their system's overall response, but will only use an "amplifier" that is better described as a "euphonic boombasticator" than simply amplifying the signal, ie, the stereotypical "tube sound."

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oregonian /img/forum/go_quote.gif

it would seem to make sense to have the ability to add adjustabilty for treble and bass - at least to me. 

 

The problem even if one is fine with using EQ is that analogue controls installed on amps (or DACs) aren't that precise; same issue even with some digital-level graphic EQs. If the goal of an amplifier is to amplify the sound in terms of what "Hi-Fi" - "high fidelity" - means, then applying EQ should be seen in two ways: either it is also added distortion, or it should be strategic and precise distortion to correct for the response of the transducers, like the in-room response of speakers. That means you need a baseline, like using an RTA in your home audio room or inside your car's cabin from the driver's seat (which also helps tune the timing corrections to simulate equidistant driver mounts), or more commonly, auto-analyzer and auto-EQ  DSPs, like YPAO on Yamaha receivers, and Audyssey on Denon receivers and ///////ALPINE processors. Clamp force and earpad wear affects headphone response, but given the problem of the need to own a mannequin head (which should come with pressure sensors to standardize clamp force if you're really OC about all variables) , online graphs for headphones are useful enough.

 

Past the need for a baseline comes the problem with hardware tone controls: they are not precise enough for strategic correction of the flaws in the headphone's or speaker's response. What if the knob labelled "Bass" doesn't match the center frequency or the Q-Factor necessary to correct the problem with a headphone? Let's take the HD600 for example - at 50hz it's roughly level with 1khz, however it drops below that, and above which is a wide plateau stretching ll the way to roughly 700hz IIRC. If that Bass knob has a center frequency of 50hz, cutting it will make everything below it disappear effectively, but boosting it will just exacerbate the bass plateau and doesn't fix the relative loudness at 100hz compared to the weaker 20hz. Or it might be at 100hz, but if the Q-Factor isn't wide enough, you punch a hole down at 100hz, and then leave a peak at one if not both sides of it.

 

Software implementation however is more precise, whether it's purely software or hardware-based dedicated DSP as long as it has the proper features either way. At minimum, you can get for example a 20band Graphic EQ like one of the Foobar plug-ins. You get enough bands to likely get close enough to whatever the problem frequencies are, and Q-Factor is likely set so you can use two bands for example to trim a wide enough peak between them. Preferably, however, you use a parametric EQ that has variable center frequency and Q-Factor, and in the case of Neutron Music Player for example, you don't choose pre-set bands (as on an //////ALPINE DSP or receiver for example) but input a specific frequency you want, on top of which you get up to ten bands to adjust (not that you always need that many).

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oregonian /img/forum/go_quote.gif

 

...loudness switches?

 

Do you mean gain? Because some amps have gain switches, and then there's Replay Gain on the software end. If you're referring to "low level listening compensator," that's basically just a combined and pre-set boost to the bass and treble to compensate for the midrange bias of human hearing, plus some headphones have people on Head-Fi got around to calling as having a "V-shaped response" (in reality it's more like a wide-set, upside down, asymmetrical "W"). Again, an EQ with the features of Neutron's Parametric can do that - set low-shelf and high-shelf EQ bands so they boost mostly frequencies (and at some point a relatively flat adjustment) above the center freq of the high shelf and below the center freq of the low shelf.

 

-----------

 

If anything the limitation of such features is the sources from and through which they can be applied, like how Neutron is an Android and iOS app (with a player interface that is less intuitive than MediaMonkey, although it isn't horrible, just needs getting used to at first), so only devices running such operating systems can use it. Foobar similarly is for fullsize computers (although they're coming up with an Android app). Car DSPs, even if they take an analog input from a stock system, still essentially need to use a digital source like the stock system's CD player and USB inputs (the latter not compatible with FLAC, and not widely compatible with VBR, although the real problem with a car will be corrected by time alignment DSP anyway). That basically means analogue sources are out, along with some digital sources from which you take analogue outputs (like CDPs and some music servers), but then again, from a marketing standpoint, chances are that nearly all people who use such sources are signal "purists" who don't like EQs anyway (although some prefer euphonic boombasticators instead of amplifiers), making hardware tone controls not likely a wise decision from a business perspective in terms of how many actually want it vs how much it would impact production time and cost.