Why (are)/(are not) EQs morally acceptable?

[kelly]

Here. You people can banter about in this thread and have a good old fashion internet debate. Leave my other EQ thread for comparing different EQ component models, please.

 

[chadbang]

Please see the second part of my "loudness button" arguement below for my take on the purist approach.

 

[dougli]

Oh, how I wish I had never started to use EQs. Sure, people had warned me about exposing my ears to EQed sounds. They had begged me not to every hook up that first EQ, so long ago, to my headphone rig. But oh yeah, I knew better. I knew that I could steal a listen or two, try some different settings with a few albums, and still walk away and leave that EQed sound alone. I was stronger than any seductive sounds which might waft into my mind through an EQ.

But now, horror of horrors, I cannot even listen to un-EQed music without uncontollable thoughts of recording criticisms. As I insert a CD into my player, my hands shake as I reach for the EQ power button, and my anxious mind reels in ungrounded anticipation, only to be calmed by the wonderous sight of the EQ control panel powering up.

Boys and girls, learn from this glimpse into my self-imposed prison of audio technology. Please, oh please, stay away from EQs.

 

[kelly]

So dougli... do you feel using the EQ in your rig compromises some aspects of the sound on headphones? If so, what?

 

[dougli]

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly So dougli... do you feel using the EQ in your rig compromises some aspects of the sound on headphones? If so, what?

kelly, I couldn't resist that making that last post.

The truth is, I deliberately adjust my EQ to suit my damaged hearing, which lets me listen longer, louder and with a greater grin factor than if I didn't use the EQ. I adjust balance and various specific frequency bands, having been unable to achieve what I wanted so far with the parametric EQ and shelving features. When I let the curious listen to my rig, I start out with it all set up for me, then I switch out the EQ after a few seconds, and the listener invariably thinks that the resulting sound is better. But since I don't feel that way, I consider myself more of a practical EQ user than an EQ audiophile (there I go again; just couldn't resist using that term). Furthermore, I still use different headphones with the same EQ settings, although I'll soon expirement with setting up a different EQ program for each headphone.

 

[kelly]

dougli
I knew this from our previous discussions but I don't think I asked my question well enough. What I meant was, hearing damage issues aside, do you hear flaws in your headphone rig that you can particularly trace to use of the equalizer component?

 

[dougli]

Gotcha, kelly. I cannot detect a change in sound when I switch out the EQ after having all of its settings placed at neutral. Neither can I when I remove the EQ from my system, although that type of test always is lacking, since I don't have the duplicate equipment to do a true A/B comparison. When I remove the EQ, I must substitute "better" quality interconnects to reattach everything, so if anything, I might expect a sound improvement due to that change alone. So maybe I'm just unaware but content as I steep in my hearing-impaired ignorance, and there is really a change taking place that I am missing.

 

[Sovkiller]

There is nothing wrong in using an EQ if you use it the right way, most of the times recordings need a boost on this or that area, that what this devices are made for, remember that not all the recording were made the right way, in fact just a few of them are well done....particularly I use it all the time instead of using a Cardas cable with the HD600...

 

[dougli]

kelly, I wanted to clarify this point too: when I listen with everything switched in, I do not detect anything that is objectionable that I attribute to the EQ. The changes are all in the area of improvements, there are no tradeoffs that I'm aware of. I can distort the sound with extreme EQ settings, but they are those that no one would ever use in practice.

 

[kelly]

Quote:

Originally posted by dougli Gotcha, kelly. I cannot detect a change in sound when I switch out the EQ after having all of its settings placed at neutral. Neither can I when I remove the EQ from my system, although that type of test always is lacking, since I don't have the duplicate equipment to do a true A/B comparison. When I remove the EQ, I must substitute "better" quality interconnects to reattach everything, so if anything, I might expect a sound improvement due to that change alone. So maybe I'm just unaware but content as I steep in my hearing-impaired ignorance, and there is really a change taking place that I am missing.

dougli
This was my expectation and there are reasons:
1. Your system simply isn't that high of resolution. No offense, I'm obviously quite a fan of the stuff you own as I own a lot of it myself, but hairsplitting precision isn't something the HD600 and Corda Blue pairing are known for, and I forget which source you're using, but that plays a role too.

2. The differences manifest by phase distortion would likely be most easily noticed in front to back imaging and immediacy. Headphones are largely unable to reproduce this speaker quality regardless of the introduction of phase distortion. Thus, it hurts most where you can't hear it very well anyway.

3. Finally, the art of headphone listening is an adaptive one. Headphone imaging is, as I said, NOT like speaker listening and enjoying our hobby (even with equalizers, crossfeeds and DPSs) requires some amount of retraining our perception. Because we are already doing this, adding in slight differences that are incurred by phase distortion is not so challenging as an addition.

4. And, one last thing -- I believe the detriment of equalizers to be grossly overexaggerated by audiophiles to begin with. It amazes me that the same people who subscribe to "synergy" by mixing tonally unbalanced equipment, cable rollign with very expensive cables and tuberolling with very non-linear tubes complain about the hazards of equalizers. Furthermore, equalizers and all of their negative traits were likely used in the recording studio anyway so much of their problems are inherit in professionally recorded music. Personalizing your system with your own EQ settings for a specific recording, for your rig and for your own ears simply isn't much worse than what you likely started out with.

I believe the primary reason equalizers are frowned upon is misuse. Bass-heads will crank one or two bands up by 10db and the audiophile will turn his nose up at it. Equalizers should not be used to fix great defficiencies in hardware and should instead be used for fine tuning or when fixing the equipment or recording is no longer an option. Professional audio engineers use equalizers and mixing boards every day.

This is my feeling, but I do not have the experience or equipment that some of you guys have. I'm on a quest to track down what I'm looking for in an equalizer component in another thread. I probably won't have much else to contribute to this one until I have more opportunity to gain experience.

 

[dougli]

Well said, kelly, and I agree with all of your points.

By the way, you are correct, my NS500V is not a hair-splitter either. Fortunately, with my hearing, I can be happy with this sort of stuff, although a source upgrade may be on the horizon. And those DT880's may sound intriguing, when they finally come out.

And...

And...


OK, let's hear again from some folks in the "ban the EQ" camp.

 

[Brad Harper]

I will respond as a proffessional location sound mixer for film and video production as well as a studio engineer and musician. All of which means very little.

First let me say that equilizers are just a tool. we use them to correct/destroy the timbre of recordings. The best approach is proper matching of microphone/preamp to the voice or instrument. The problem with using EQs is unless you can afford a very expensive one (several thousand), they will shift the phasing of the sound. In other words; when you boost or cut (you sould only cut) a frequency it will have an adverse reaction to the adjacent frequencies. You are actually cutting little holes in the sound. This is especially true with graphic EQs. That being said, EQs are a very important tool for the engineer, especially the mastering engineer, but the EQs in mastering facillities such as Pultecs are many thousands of dollars.

I would suggest a studio engineers perspective of trying to fix the other things first. The first and last pieces of the chain (microphones/speakers and headphones) will have the greatest impact on the sound. If you want more low end extention, find a pair of headphones/speakers that will provide it. Try a different cable, or source. Every album you listen to is going to sound different. They are recorded by different bands with different engineers and producers, and are mastered by one of many mastering facilities. They will not all have gut pounding bass or shimmery highs, but try to appreciate each one for what it has to offer.

My most important advise would be to find a combination that will work for you, get used to it, and stick with it. You guys spend a fortune on trying to get that perfect sound for all these different music formats. These albums are recorded in studios with two sets of monitor speakers (one large and one small nearfield) using 50cent/ft Canare mic cable if you are lucky. You should see the crap most studios use for interconnects and patch bay cables.

It's all about the music.

Brad Harper

 

[puppyslugg]

Well said, Brad Harper.

 

[fredpb]

Equalizers????? Each to his own.

The bottom line for me would be two self tests.


1) In and out of your home system a few times. If you can't hear a "quality" difference, why not use them?

2) Do what I do. Take the component in question to a local high end shop and find a sales person who will let you try out your stuff with/against theirs.

I like #2. It keeps my credit card debt up, keeps me in old cars,
but gives me the joy of nice sound. And it keeps the dealer happy too, who knows me by name, and even the sound of my voice over the phone.

I can hear the difference, unfortunately. So no equalizers for me anymore. Used to use them.

 

[dparrish]

I think the primary use of equalizers in the professional realm is to make up for imbalances caused by the acoustics of a particular performance room/hall.

If your usage is primarily for a headphone system, you don't have room reflections, dead spots, etc., to deal with.

On the other hand, I'm enjoying the built-in eq on my new SlimX IMP-400. It IS nice to be able to tailor the sound to your liking.

For a high-quality rig, however, if I were to invest in an equalizer, I would be careful to get a very high-quality one (as I'm sure you would, Kelly), especially since this introduces one more component into the audio chain along with a potential for increased noise, etc.