To tone control or not to tone control


I recently stepped up to a Conrad Johnson PFR preamp to mate with my CJ MF-2200 amp (200 wpc). Was previously running an Adcom GTP-450 pre/tuner which had bass/treble controls which help to compensate for those recordings which are recorded poorly. Though the CJ PFR sounds really good on most of my cd's there are some of my favorite artists whose recordings are really pitiful. Is there a good tone control which I can use on the PFR to use for these poor recordings? Is there a way to connect both preamps to one system. I do have an older cdp that I could connect to the Adcom preamp for the poor cd's and use the main system for the good stuff. I have also thought of trying a subwoofer to help with filling in the bottom end since most of the poor recordings are R&B and Rock N'Roll and that is where they seem to be lacking the most. The rest of my system consists of a Sherwood Newcastle 980 cdp and Infinity RS 5000 speakers (12 yrs old) and next to be replaced. As always your help is appreciated
128x128artemus_5
Jimbo, the thread is about TONE CONTROL, and my points were:
(1) There is nothing inherently evil about EQ as it exists in almost all of your source material to begin with.
(2) Tone controls are a basic feature and it should be possible to incorporate high quality, defeatable tone controls in even moderately priced gear.
(3) The high-end audio manufacturers and their supplicants have chosen instead to spread illogical claptrap about the pernicious effects of EQ, and many audiophiles are only too willing to perpetuate this myth without critically examining the underlying premise.

Your insulting response is interesting as I've said nothing that you should have taken so personally, assuming that you weren't squeezed from the birth canal of a vacuum tube. But your reaction regarding tubes only reinforces my thesis about the high-end.

Going back to the computer analogy, can you imagine discussion boards where people flame back and forth about the relative computational efficiency of vacuum tubes vs. IC's? The rapid pace of innovation in that industry has rendered any such discussion absurd.

Yet in high-end audio, arguments regularly rage on about the relative merits of tubes vs. solid state ... and rightfully so because the competing technologies are still so close that differences in their relative merits remain arguable. This is because the slow rate of innovation in audio has not significantly widened the gap between solid state and those arcane and silly vacuum tubes!

And before you flame back on that one, consider where many of your beloved tubes are manufactured -- in communist or former communist countries. Have you ever asked yourself, gee is it because there are so damn many communist audiophiles? No, it is because they are mired in a system which does not innovate well and they still have to rely on the silly damned antiquated things. Beyond being so technologically enlightened, they also know how to put people with dissenting views in their place.

So, flame away about the wonders of the vacuum tube and those noble manufacturers that charge you ridiculous prices to enjoy them. While you're at it, let me have both barrels about the wonders of the horse-drawn carriage vis-a-vis automobiles, and the evils of indoor plumbing. I wait with eager anticipation, pointy head and all.
Whats up Doc? I'll buy the tone control argument, but I got real problems with the tube one. Have you witnessed the evolution of solid state since the early 60s? I have and can tell you that it took solid state untill the 1980s before it became even mildly competitive with tube circuitry. The reaction we had to early solid state was the same one we had with early digital. "Is that a violin or a buzz saw. It turned this wonderful, all tube, Living Stereo recording of Heiftz into a buzz saw...on BOTH occasions! Today, solid state amplifiers are of course much improved, but high end manufacturers are trying to get them to sound tubelike, not vice versa. Even RCA and Mercury saw it that way when the reissue series for Living Stereo and Living Presance began. They just were not able to get the desired result with Solid State. By the way I have never heard a solid state amp or preamp sound as real as a tubed one...not even once. Sorry, but thats the reality of the situation.
I want to know which one of you weasels gave me negative ratings on my posts without having the backbone to state your reasons. If you have a problem with my post, let me know what it is so we can discuss it.
Let me rephrase that. It should read, who is the weasel, not "which one of you weasels". I did not mean to imply that everyone on this forum is a weasel. Just those that vote negative without bothering to state their reasons.
So let's assume I have tubes. Do I use a tone control device to help out these poorly recorded CDs, or should I be listening to LPs and... and... should I use MC or Mag cartridge and should I use silver or is copper ok for the cables?

Come on boys and girls Lighten up a little. Doc makes some interesting points and has an interesting writing style as well. Frap also makes some good points also. The first digital recordings were fit only for a skeet shoot and nothing more. I don't think Doc was trying to blast tubes as much as he was the industry and its marketing techniques. Do I really need to spend $300 on an interconnect or $2500 on speaker wires? As for SS vs tubes that is a matter of preferance. Every technology has its adherents. But at the end of the day it comes down to: "This music sounds fantastic" or " This music sounds crappy". I am trying to obtain the former at the least amount of hassle and money.