[saint.panda]

I've been wanting to try out a good EQ with my cdp for a long time but never went down the external DAC route, so that ruled out digital EQs like the Behringer DEQ 2496.

Therefore I'm wondering if there are decent analog EQs that won't break the bank. RCA in/out.

And should I go for parametric or graphic?

 

[bigshot]

A parametric equalizer is more flexible, but it's a little bit more complicated to use and will cost a bit more for a good one. If you want a graphic equalizer, get a 31 band dual channel. The best ones are made by Rane and DBX and they cost between $300 and $400. You can get a pretty good DOD, Nady, Sampson, Beringer, etc for as little as $50 used on ebay.

See ya
Steve

 

[saint.panda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot A parametric equalizer is more flexible, but it's a little bit more complicated to use and will cost a bit more for a good one. If you want a graphic equalizer, get a 31 band dual channel. The best ones are made by Rane and DBX and they cost between $300 and $400. You can get a pretty good DOD, Nady, Sampson, Beringer, etc for as little as $50 used on ebay. See ya Steve

Thanks Steve, are there particular cheap models you would recommend?

I've actually read a bit about the rane models when I was browsing their libraries on audio info in general; I love their website. But $300-400 is a bit steep, especially since I'm trying to downgrade a bit at the moment.

Actually, do you know if the Rane ME 15B is any good? http://www.rane.com/me15b.html
These are rather common on ebay.de and can be had for a price I'm still willing to pay

Edit: The DBX 1231 is 370€, which is pretty expensive but if it's worth it, I could give it a try. There's a money-back guarantee on it and I like studio gear since it's usually good/better value.

 

[ooheadsoo]

I'd highly recommend a parametric eq for more fine and precise control although I have no idea if they're any good in this price range. The digital software controlled one that comes with the emu1212m does wonders for me.

 

[bigshot]

I have a DOD that I'm happy with.

See ya
Steve

 

[ooheadsoo]

The behringer does take analog inputs. After a few searches on musiciansfriend and zzounds, I think I would definitely still take the behringer over anything else out there, dac/adc conversions and all.

 

[saint.panda]

I did some research on pro audio boards and found this most interesting graphic eq shootout: http://www.roaddog.com/bink/index.php.

And it seems there was an auction for a Rane GE60 just a week ago on ebay.switzerland and it went for $300, damn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ooheadsoo The behringer does take analog inputs. After a few searches on musiciansfriend and zzounds, I think I would definitely still take the behringer over anything else out there, dac/adc conversions and all.

Do you mean the 2496 or 8024?

The posts I read on the boards seemed to suggest that the dbx, ashly, bss, rane, etc. units are mostly preferred over the Behringer models for sound.

And for some reason I'm not quite comfortable with the fact that the signal will go through a less inferior AD/DA conversion compared to my cd player. Kind of makes a high quality cdp redundant or do I have an error in reasoning somewhere?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot I have a DOD that I'm happy with. See ya Steve

Which one? Thanks.

 

[ooheadsoo]

For my room correction purposes, a graphic eq does not give close enough resolution.

I'd like to see that shootout with digital eqs.

 

[saint.panda]

So I borrowed a Technics SH-9010 5-band parametric EQ from headfier JaZZ and I'm astonished what eq-ing can do to the sound. Amazing.

The downsides is that the technics unit, compared to the original signal, compresses dynamics and loses some resolution. So I guess I simply have to get a somewhat decent EQ that's more up to date. The Technics EQ is a top model from the 70s.

Now I wonder whether a graphic eq can also pull off what I'm experiencing with the parametric one. What exactly are the downsides to graphic EQs if I'm not specifically trying to cure certain frequency bands as in speaker audio? Shouldn't a 31-band GE with constant-Q offer sufficient flexibility?

Also, I'm still thinking about the Behringer DEQ2496 but am worried that the Behringer's DAC stage will be the bottleneck in the signal chain since everything has to undergo AD and subsequent DA conversion.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint.panda Also, I'm still thinking about the Behringer DEQ2496 but am worried that the Behringer's DAC stage will be the bottleneck in the signal chain since everything has to undergo AD and subsequent DA conversion.

You may want to use your Marantz's digital out to feed the Behringer, which will act as DAC then (no A/D conversion needed). But of course this destroys every benefit from your Marantz's high-quality DAC and output stage (including modifications).

I really wonder if today's analog equalizers are any better in terms of signal accuracy than my old Technics, which once was sort of a flagship and a benchmark in home-hi-fi equalization. The loss of clarity and resolution it introduces is significant -- enough to have kept me from using it in my setup. It just served for tuning crossover networks.
.

 

[bigshot]

You're only hearing the tip of the iceberg of what a good equalizer can do. A five band graphic equalizer is basically a toy. Bass / mid / treble tone controls are better for balancing than that.

I get by with a 15 band for my 78 rig, but for LPs and CDs, you really need a 31. No, there isn't a detectable sound quality loss with a good 31 band equalizer... only improvement from having a better balanced signal. Tone pots aren't rocket science. Any pro grade equalizer in good condition should sound clean and other than the correction be totally transparent.

See ya
Steve

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot You're only hearing the tip of the iceberg of what a good equalizer can do. A five band graphic equalizer is basically a toy. Bass / mid / treble tone controls are better for balancing than that.

Not sure if that's the answer to my post. The Technics in question -- presented by saint.panda -- is in fact a 5-band parametric equalizer, not a toy, as you name it, and not a graphic equalizer.


Quote:

I get by with a 15 band for my 78 rig, but for LPs and CDs, you really need a 31. No, there isn't a detectable sound quality loss with a good 31 band equalizer... only improvement from having a better balanced signal. Tone pots aren't rocket science. Any pro grade equalizer in good condition should sound clean and other than the correction be totally transparent.

I'm sure you can imagine that I generally mistrust such statements of yours, as to your ears all electronics components seem to sound more or less the same.
.

 

[bigshot]

Okie doke. He was asking if 31 bands was better than 5. I didn't register that it wasn't a graphic equalizer. A 5 band parametric is an entirely different animal than a 31 band graphic. Ideally, having both would be best. That would allow you to do the basic broad strokes tuning on the graphic equalizer and do fine tuning of wolf tones on the parametric.

Neither a parametric nor graphic equalizer should add noise or alter the dynamics. If it does, there is something wrong with the equipment, or perhaps something wrong with the settings. Recording studios have equalizers built into their signal path and it doesn't add noise there. The only reason home equipment doesn't come with equalizers built in is because of the learning curve on how to apply equalization properly. Many engineers don't even use an EQ properly.

I'd suggest playing with the parametric a little more. It isn't quite as intuitive as a graphic equalizer. It might take you a week or two of listening and adjusting to hit on a setting that sounds pretty good.

See ya
Steve

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot Neither a parametric nor graphic equalizer should add noise or alter the dynamics. If it does, there is something wrong with the equipment...

This obviously belongs to the same category as «no amp / no cable... should alter the sound, otherwise there's something wrong (audio isn't rocket science)»... I would really wonder if there was any electronics device of a certain complexity which doesn't audibly corrupt the signal and expect the same from other, contemporary equalizers, from the affordable ones anyway.
.

 

[keiron99]

What is the difference between a parametric and a graphic equalizer?