T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
153.1 | Not which but If? | TASTY::JEFFERY | What's the slipperiest thing you can think of? | Fri Feb 23 1990 13:32 | 11 |
| This is bound to start a few replies.
I think the general opinion is that you should never NEED a graphic equaliser,
but that if you decide your graphics really need to be equalised, then you need
a damn good one to make sure that music comes out the other end.
I would have thought a couple of grand for a studio quality one.
How badly do you want to use an Equaliser?
Mark.
|
153.2 | | DUCK::TAYLORG | Bodybuilders do it till it hurts | Fri Feb 23 1990 13:50 | 9 |
| re-1
2 grand !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not after something that exotic. It has taken me 2 year to
save 2 grand I don't want to spend it yet.
Grant
|
153.3 | Thought they went out with the Ark! | TASTY::JEFFERY | What's the slipperiest thing you can think of? | Fri Feb 23 1990 18:09 | 12 |
| All right then, maybe I'm being a bit over the top trying to discourage you from
getting one of those evil boxes.
My rationale between the (guessed) high price, is that Equalisers only seem to
come in at an entry level price (found cheap at Richer Sounds), and that seems
to be it. Therefore to get decent quality, you have to fork out for the studio
stuff, which has (I hope!) to be good.
I must admit I've never been impressed with them. Why do you need a graphic
equaliser?
Mark.
|
153.4 | | SUBURB::COLEJ | Set Head/full=jelly(s2020).yuk | Tue Feb 27 1990 13:51 | 8 |
| If you need an eqaliser, surely you cannot be happy with the way
your system sounds. Is an electronic audio blanket really the
right answer? Forget an eqaliser, save and get somthing to make
the system sound better.
Juju
xxxx
|
153.5 | to answer your question ... | BAYES::HIGINBOTHAM | Dr. Hook: Proctologist | Thu Mar 08 1990 20:23 | 17 |
|
you can always count on audiophiles to enter 10 notes on why NOT
to do what you want, and none whatsoever to actually offer some
help. Such an interesting hobby ...
I have found that a good equalizer can be a useful tool in a
variety of applications, however, anyone with a _perfect_
listening room and reproduction system, and those who do no
recording whatsoever may not need one. The one I settled on is
the USA made Soundcraftsmen AE2000 (list 849$, factory direct
for less). This unit has a pink noise generator, real-time spectrum
analyzer and unity gain, among other things.
There are outrageously priced units from other outfits and less
costly units which may serve your purpose.
Brent
|
153.6 | | TASTY::JEFFERY | What's the slipperiest thing you can think of? | Fri Mar 09 1990 12:21 | 23 |
| Hi,
.5 was a bit of a slur. My whole system costs less than the spectrum
analyser you mentioned. My room has no carpets, and is therefore far
from perfect. I still wouldn't touch graphic equaliser's with a barge
pole!
They sound to me like a con trick, telling people that they need to
"equalise" their systems to follow room acoustics etc. Surely if there
was any REAL attempt to adjust for the acoustics of the room, then
you'd connect a home computer, enter the dimensions of the room, and
what furnishing there is in it, and then you would be "equalised".
My point is that "equalisation" is impossible, and far from improving
the sound could actually cause degradation. There are probably far more
cost effective ways to improve the sound of a setup.
Because of my low spending on HiFi, and high spending on records. I see
HiFi, less as a hobby, and more as a means of listening to records.
Never could see the attraction in pink noise! ;-)
Mark.
|
153.7 | | BAYES::HIGINBOTHAM | Dr. Hook: Proctologist | Fri Mar 09 1990 15:05 | 51 |
| > .5 was a bit of a slur. My whole system costs less than the spectrum
analyser you mentioned. My room has no carpets, and is therefore far
from perfect. I still wouldn't touch graphic equaliser's with a barge
pole!
No slur was intended. I was merely trying to answer Grant's original
request for information where no one else had. On the other hand, I'm
not sure how you can put down a piece of equipment that 1. you seem
to know little about, and 2. costs more than your entire system.
> They sound to me like a con trick, telling people that they need to
"equalise" their systems to follow room acoustics etc. Surely if there
was any REAL attempt to adjust for the acoustics of the room, then
you'd connect a home computer, enter the dimensions of the room, and
what furnishing there is in it, and then you would be "equalised".
That's a fairly good description of how an equalizer works. The
Soundcraftsman unit I mentioned is a sophisticated device that
"reads" a room's acoustics and suggests how to compensate for
it. It will also point out weaknesses in your speakers and other
components. An equalizer can remove a certain amount of boxiness
or boominess from cheap speakers. Pink noise is useful in calibrating
for various tapes when you record. It is also in invaluable tool in
the recording process itself: I have used equalization to record from
78's, 45's, poorly recorded casettes and other sources with excellent
results.
No one has ever told me I _need_ an EQ to make my music listenable.
But it is there for the times when something needs to be tested,
compensated for or tailored to my needs or taste.
> My point is that "equalisation" is impossible, and far from improving
the sound could actually cause degradation. There are probably far more
cost effective ways to improve the sound of a setup.
Yes, if used incorrectly, equalization could cause degradation.
Much like tone controls, loudness contours, tape EQ switches and
biasing controls, poor speaker placement and tens of other ill -
considered matters.
> Because of my low spending on HiFi, and high spending on records. I see
HiFi, less as a hobby, and more as a means of listening to records.
I spend high on both. As a musician, a large collection of records
means nothing to me without a high quality reproduction system.
I would not suggest an 850$ EQ to someone with 200$ speakers and a
receiver; other upgrades would certainly have precedence.
Brent
|
153.8 | | TASTY::JEFFERY | What's the slipperiest thing you can think of? | Fri Mar 09 1990 15:39 | 14 |
| Fair enough,
The accent of .5 did seem to label us non graphic equaliser people as
"freaks", at least the way I read it, it did!
If the Equaliser is that good, then I'd be interested in having a
listen, but still not convinced of the point.
Please forgive my prejudices and carry on ...
Mark.
P.S. Are you based in the UK? I think I must have thought of �'s, my
system is worth about 1,000 U.S. dollars..
|
153.9 | >And so to.....< | PEKING::GERRYT | | Wed Apr 04 1990 14:45 | 27 |
| Surely what really counts in the end is that Grant is satisfied
with the sound he can get from whatever system he choses.
If Grant likes playing with a graphic equaliser......good for him.
After all, even most of the Japanese products with whistles lights and
bells actually meet a need, and "haven't they done well ?"(in
marketing/sales terms.
All Hi-Fi is a compromise......surely it's just a case of reaching
your own personal minimum acceptance threshold ?
I have been through 15 years of so called Hi-Fi changing and swopping,
and I have got almost as much enjoyment from this activity, reading
magazines and discussing matters in this notes file as listening
to the music !
It is remarkable how some people with very expensive hi-fi can actually
'like' the sound of lesser systems just because it sounds different
from their own!
How many of us can actually remember what a 'system' sounds like
unless you run a head-to-head comparison ?
Let's get back to enjoying music.
Mr.Angry from Purley
Sorry to dump this out, but it is a subject dear to my heart.(ears)
|
153.10 | | PEKING::TAYLORG | Bodybuilders do it till it hurts | Wed Apr 04 1990 15:35 | 15 |
| Well I have been using my system without an Equalizer now for a
while and the system sounds a hell of a lot better. I think when
I got the EQ my system was so poor that the EQ made it sound better.
My original system was a JVC AK100 amp (�59) ,Turntable (�25) including
cartrage & stylus (Sp?) and a pair of 25wpc National Panasonic speakers
(7 years old) and I then bought a JVC KD-V100 Cassette Deck (�79).
I was only 17 at the time (We all make mistakes :-) )
Now that I am old and wise (21) :-) I now have a real HiFi and I
have no need of the EQ.
Grant
|
153.11 | better late than never! | UFHIS::JMASLEN | The wheels fallen off your day yet?! | Wed May 08 1991 16:03 | 19 |
| This will ruin my already questionable crediablity.....if you were like
me in earlier years, moving from flat to flat, then the room s varied a
lot. I bought a temporary fix which I trust will one day do itself out
of a job......AUDIO CONTROL in the USA make a unit with a pink noise
generator and LED screen to analyse and EQ your room......costs around
350 pounds........there is also a professional unit for 1500pounds
which you can use with a PC. Well set up, this machine managed to
compensate for some pretty rough rooms I had my systems in. The
Japanese companies that build EQ units are nothing more than toys IMO
but this thing is a good work tool which one day will help me build a
room so I can both live and hear music in it without upseting domestic
affairs.......then I guess i will retire it to a study system or some
humble corner of the house, its last 'ultimate' job having been done.
It cannot compensate for delays, only room frequency reponse.
BTW. this firm only builds these things...it is a specialist product
from a specialist company.
cheers fjeff
|
153.12 | Optimal or Optimistic | GENIE::MORRIS | | Thu Nov 21 1991 15:34 | 62 |
| Interesting... Having looked at one of these "Japanese toys" I got to
thinking (a dangerous thing)
What may follows may be herecy to the die-hard purists (no offence
intended) but seems a reasonable directions for the future of mass
market commercial systems.
Yes, if you know what you are doing (and the mass populus probably
haven't inclination to find out ) you can probably select all the right
components,place them optimally,move all the furniture around to the
amusement/anger of the spouse, ban people from opening doors/windows
cause it upsets the acoustics etc. With the result you end up with a
reasonably sounding systems for a particular type of music at a
certain listening level.
Now the trouble is put all the parameters together, level,music type,
source, room etc and I guess that the system is never really optimal
for more than brief period.
So how about combining the clever chips A/D/A in the "Japenese Toys"
(they must be available somewhere given the volumes they are now
selling) with a reasonable microphone, A PC and an electronics engineer
and make a 3 dimensional dynamic feedback Equalizer (TM !).
Now what happens is as follows.
1) Follow all the normal steps and get the best system components
you can afford. Place them optimally as before etc.
2) Plug in the "3D-DFE" where the normal Graphic equalizer goes
between pre-amp and amp.
3) Put the mic in you normal listening place
4) Put on you favourite CD and let the systems take control
It..... A) Analyses the spectrum from the mic and compares
it with the spectrum from the source.
B) Adjusts the digital filters to correct any
deviations from flat and cycles back to A)
This will happen every few second and the changes would be
progressive so as not to make the sound tone jump all over the
place.
Now this should help with:-
o Quite passages mixing with loud ones
o Room accoustics changes etc
o output volume
Any electronic engineers out there or am I just dreaming !
Chris
|
153.13 | It's been done already (by Philips??) | BAHTAT::SALLITT | | Thu Nov 21 1991 15:54 | 0 |
153.16 | Lately ??? or circa 1975 | GENIE::MORRIS | | Fri Nov 22 1991 16:09 | 20 |
| What lately ?
The only Philips system that I can think that you might be talking about is
the one that was born and died in the Seventies which was a speaker that
had a feedback circuit to the the driver. Basically a piezo electronic sensor
attached to the driver that measured the acceleration of the cone. If when
comparing it to the input it wasn't going fast enough it pushed up the power
etc. This allowed the small speaker to have an extended bass but depended on
and internal power amp. It did't measure sound/acoustics just one piece of the
system.
It died because of the rapid improvement cost/performnce of small conventional
monitor/bookshelf design which exceeded the sound quality if not the range.
Now if Philips have come up with something else lately that I've missed
point me in the right direction.
Chris...,
|
153.17 | Yamaha Equalizers | GENIE::MORRIS | | Sun Nov 24 1991 11:52 | 11 |
| Well I picked up a Yamaha Catalogue at the weekend and suprise suprise
they make an Equalizer that does just about what I described.
It has a built in mike which monitors the room acoustics and updates
the Digital Equalizer to compensate for acoustic deviations. It claims
to to do all this in realtime (but doesn't explain how) It also has a
pink noies generator on-board.
Anyone have any experience with Yamaha Equalizers/amps etc ?
Chris
|