2. tech-talk
  3. 1009119235

What's wrong with tailoring the sound?

Probably been addressed a bazillion times but I'm wondering why it is apparently so wrong to tailor the sound with tone controls? I read lots of posts on the various audio forums and hear things like "these speakers may be a tad shy in the bass but...." So whats so wrong about having a devise which will aleviate this problem in an otherwise wonderful speaker? Won't this increase the listeners enjoyment? I also read about certain cables being brighter or darker than others. It seems that the only way for this to be true is if certain frequencies are being altered in some way. Why spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on a cable to take some brightness away when one could just tweak a knob and get the same results in a few seconds (and for free) What is to be done with recordings that aren't quite up to par? The overly bright or overly dark. Should they just be discarded in favor of audiophile quality recordings, content be dammed? What do you do when you want a little more depth in your sound when the lack of it is due to unavoidable room conditions? Are there good quality units out there that will allow me to have hi-end sound AND be able to adjust/compensate for personnal preference? The recording engineer did not mix the recording using my equipment, in my room, using my ears and with my personnel taste in what I find most pleasing.
I've also read enough posts on these forums (though not usually on Audiogon) that I will ask this favor. Don't beat me up too bad, I'm relatively new.
say811
danner
202 posts
 
My approach is work with speaker placement, then fix the room, and then listen. I found my high efficiency single driver floorstanders seemed too bright (I use a sub for the bottom). At first I used some cables to calm them down some but fianally pulled out my RTA (real time analyzer) and did a third octave analysis. The speaker started rolling off at 1.6 kHz at nearly 6dB per octave. Then at 10 kHz there was an 8-9dB peak. This explained why a single 7" driver seemed to have high frequency content but also why it was hard to listen to. Out came the third octave EQ. Flattened a sag in the midrange (about 3dB) and gave the high end a nice room curve of -3dB per octave from 2kHz up (without any peaks). Bottome line: Great improvement! Suddenly my choice of cables needed to be revisited. Once that was done, I could listen to the music. Rather than scrap my inexpensive high efficiency speakers that work so nicely with tubes for much more expensive speakers, I was able to make use of equipment that was in the closet (RTA and EQ). Not everyone has this kind of equipment, but this approach is an alternative to the piece by piece looking for synergy approach. Personally, I like both and will probably take the EQ out when I can afford better speakers.
detlof
1,899 posts
 
As far as I am concerned the admirable Sean has put it magnificently into a nutshell: Personally I am more of a music lover than an audiophile, besides I hate all forms of dogmatisms. So I'll play around with the timbres of my system, according to what I'm listening to, not through tone controls, not through equalisers, the drawbacks of which Sean has so admirably explained, but by twiddling the volume controls of my various preamps, which I use to control the highs-, mids-, bass- and deep basschannels of my system.
Crazy, agreed, but to them here ears the only satisfactory way I've found to change the timbres and colourings of various recordings to my liking. I tried all the other ways, but found the aural results of the unavoidable changes in phase unbearable! It took me a lot of years to end up with this solution, but I was tired to be completely at the mercy of recording engineers and wanted to come as close as possible to the sound of voices or the various instruments in the way I remembered them to sound on live occasions. Of course there are limits inherent in this method, a lousy recording will remain a stinker, but it does give you a bit more of freedom, without the usual drawbacks. Of course it was a heavy burden on the pocketbook, less felt, perhaps, because it evolved slowly through the years. But then for a true "melomane"........
sal
31 posts
 
Hey Say,I couldn't agree with Tireguy anymore. For me, I enjoy reading the reviewers and enjoy passing time reading what philes say on sites like Audiogon, but the bottom line is my enjoyment of my system and my music. Regardless of what anyone says! Be well, Sal
hififile
227 posts
 
Dear SAY811,

Thanks for the great post! I started out in the mid 70's with top Marantz seperates with tone controls. I enjoyed the adjustment qualities, yet played much of my music "flat". In the early 90's the Audiophile gear bug, bit. I bought very expensive YBA gear without tone controls. Although this was a fine system with great sound there were times I did not get full enjoyment of the music due to lack of adjustments.

Last year I bought Mcintosh gear with tone controls and a loudness contour, all of which can be defeated and removed from the signal path if desired. I must admit I love the controls and find them most useful and pleasing. My sound has never been better on some of my older records. I may now be banned from the audiophile scene but I don't care, my music is sounding fabulous!
detlof
1,899 posts
 
Hififile...and that's what counts for me too. I think the purists are in love with their gear, the guys like us rather love the music and gear is a means to this end! Cheers,
More to discover