Equalizers do you use them? love em or hate em?

[celticguitar6666]

Ok I couldn't find a thread strictly about the use or not using of EQ's. or pictures of what you have so here goes:
What EQ's do you have?
Are you using them?
Do you like them? and their sound shaping ability or lack of?
This got started over on the SP1500 thread with Nando and I talking about stuff we have and just not using.
I have an Pioneer SG 9500 that has been sitting I was using then I took it out when I rearanged my system well I did it again so I am trying fit it back in. I found it great for adjusting those comercial recordings of great music mostly classical that were less than perfect in their balance. Also for my 78/s using it as a quasi low and high pass filter to get the sonics right. I would like to build a EQ just for the 78's for curves based on year and label but this works almost as well but you have to make manual adjustments rather than flip a switch. Well what have you got? here is a stock pi form the web of a sg 9500
Dwight

[Fast Forward]

Never tried one,,I use the controls on my PRE sometimes but I mostly leave everything at Flat

[speakerman1]

Most of my stuff don't have controls so I run them flat. I try to keep the least amount of things out of the signal path. So no I don't use them.

Larry

[Elite-ist]

I have two equalizers: a Pioneer SG-90 and a Sansui SE-9. The Pioneer, I used on playback for my downstairs system, and the Sansui didn't see many hours since I bought it a few years back. I'll try to get pictures up of both, today, or tomorrow, with a bit of commentary. Each of these eqs have special features which set them apart from other models.

I do use a Gemini PMX-2001 Preamp Mixer/Equalizer, right now, in my downstairs bedroom system. But, it's mainly used for the multi inputs (7-8), and a neat way to patch in the turntables, and other sources, with the flexibility of using varied input gains.

Nando.

[El Monte Slim]

My hearing is exactly the same as every engineer that recorded and mixed every record, tape and CD that I own.

My playback equipment is the exact same equipment that those engineers were using when they mixed those albums.

And, believe it or not, my listening room has identical acoustics to that of the control room in the recording/mixing studio.

So as a result of all this, I don't use an equalizer or tone controls at all.

[Scorpion8]

I have three, but currently use none. I've always kept my tone controls on flat unless the room was a sonic mess. But I own these:

AUDIOSOURCE EQ-100
JVC S.E.A.-70
TEAC EQA-5

[Elite-ist]

My hearing is exactly the same as every engineer that recorded and mixed every record, tape and CD that I own.

My playback equipment is the exact same equipment that those engineers were using when they mixed those albums.

And, believe it or not, my listening room has identical acoustics to that of the control room in the recording/mixing studio.

So as a result of all this, I don't use an equalizer or tone controls at all.


Hi El Monte Slim,

I like that approach, because it was purposeful, right? It's rare, one would have the opportunity for duplicating all those factors that would make for such an enjoyable reproduction, the way engineers hoped we would enjoy their work for years to come.

Nando.

[celticguitar6666]

I'm thinking el monte slim is kidding I think but. Too each their own. According to an interveiw Even Ian Anderson thinks some of the studios suck and if the original recordings were so right why do they remaster? Getting things to sound right in your listening room is a very personal and sound can do funny things in your space. Any way I got my 9500 back in the loop and it works great. The gain I get for my TT especially for my 78's is very usable and clean and the cuts and boosts optimize their sound especially cutting ( pun) the cutting head noise. All in all I think they serve a very useful pourpose and look cool in the rack even if they are not being used*Hi5*
Dwight

[westgate]

haven't had or used an eq since the mid '80s and that was just for live recording purposes, not used in my stereo setup.

i do however have an aphex aural exciter that i can patch in for old cassettes that have lost some of their hi freqs. but with good quality decks it's rarely needed.

[celticguitar6666]

haven't had or used an eq since the mid '80s and that was just for live recording purposes, not used in my stereo setup.

i do however have an aphex aural exciter that i can patch in for old cassettes that have lost their hi freqs. but with good quality decks it's rarely needed.

It's all in the recording that makes it worthwhile or not. Like I said mine is more the 78's and maybe some older recordings while really good need some oomph in places or cut as the case maybe because not all recordings are created equal. They can still be fun*check* They were I think made for room correction than changing the music "Tame those standing Bass nodes Lads!"
Dwight

[RedGrant]

It's all in the recording that makes it worthwhile or not. Like I said mine is more the 78's and maybe some older recordings while really good need some oomph in places or cut as the case maybe because not all recordings are created equal.
Dwight

On some rare LPs that got too much treble from back up instruments.

[JaeTee]

Tapeheads EQ poll (http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=3128)

Seems the consensus is split pretty much down the middle. Half do, half don't.

I generally prefer to record flat from the source, like to have the flexibility of using an EQ if needed. I don't feel like my Sansui SE-8X dirties up the signal path at all.

[Red_OX]

Bought my current amp in 1991/2 and it only as 3 rotary controls and a small on/off push button on it , so Volume, Play Select,and Record Select and thats it you can even bypass the headphone socket with different speaker outlets.

As for Eq somebody gave me a Kenwood model and its been in a cuboard for the last 5 years though having listend to some of the so called "remasterd" CDs they put out Im tempted to give it a go a try and correct the sound for re-recording.reelspin*

[Elite-ist]

Tapeheads EQ poll (http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=3128)

Seems the consensus is split pretty much down the middle. Half do, half don't.

I generally prefer to record flat from the source, like to have the flexibility of using an EQ if needed. I don't feel like my Sansui SE-8X dirties up the signal path at all.

Hi JaeTee,

Lots of good opinions/comments within the EQ Poll. I, also, realize now, after reading those poll comments, how many additional members have joined since then.

My brother-in-law, Chris, made many recordings, predominantly, onto TDK SA tapes back in the early 80's using his Pioneer TOTL stereo system. He used an SG-9 equalizer, RG-9 Dynamic Processor, and SR-9 Reverberation Amplifier. In his bedroom, the system, always, sounded flat out amazing. You wouldn't have thought you were sitting in a small room. If he recorded with emphasis, then he would defeat the sound processing, on tape playback. And on playback from the original sources, mainly from LPs, he would work the controls to optimize the settings to his liking. He and I had similar listening tastes, so many of the tapes he recorded for me were/are amongst my favourites.

Nando.

[celticguitar6666]

Here is SG9550 shoe horned in sounds wonderful. The Haydn on 78 was on deck wonderfully vintage sound. recorded with all tube see liner note pic
Dwight

[jimbo2k]

I have two in my system, an SAE 1800 parametric, and an Audiocontrol C101. I use them concurrently with just a small amount of EQ to flatten out the room. The only way I can get the Response close to flat without spending vast ammounts of money on non parralel walls and ceilings and ugly sound absorbing panels*reelspin*. Jim

[Elite-ist]

Here is SG9550 shoe horned in sounds wonderful. The Haydn on 78 was on deck wonderfully vintage sound. recorded with all tube see liner note pic
Dwight
Hi Dwight,

The SG-9500 looks like it belongs there. Today, I spotted an older Garrard turntable at the local mini flea market with multi speed capability, including 78 rpm. The auto function didn't seem to work, but other operations seem to be OK. It's, only, in fair shape and I think it was a Lab 2, or something close, with a Shure cartridge mounted in the tonearm.

Nando.

[celticguitar6666]

Hi Dwight,

The SG-9500 looks like it belongs there. Today, I spotted an older Garrard turntable at the local mini flea market with multi speed capability, including 78 rpm. The auto function didn't seem to work, but other operations seem to be OK. It's, only, in fair shape and I think it was a Lab 2, or something close, with a Shure cartridge mounted in the tonearm.

Nando.

Did you grab it or was it too rough or something you weren't interested in? How Much?

[celticguitar6666]

Nando al ittle off topic but I jsut noticed where you are from. My Grandparents came from Musksquash, New Brunswick Ca The name range a bell Squamish / Musksquash strange eh?
Dwight

[Elite-ist]

Did you grab it or was it too rough or something you weren't interested in? How Much?
Hi Dwight,

I'm way too picky. Too me, the tonearm felt too light and the toggle controls a little flimsy. Like I said, in fair condition, but I'm sure for something more than 40 years old, the fact it has lasted this long is amazing. Actually, four turntables came in at the same time (with the possibility of a few more to come), and about 1,000 LPs to arrive in the next few days. They are all from the same owner who suffered a stroke last year, and has been relocated to a care home to be taken care of. His name is Ray, and I know him. We both frequented the same mini flea market for the past six, or so, years.

Usually, fully working turntables sell for $20, there.

Nando al ittle off topic but I jsut noticed where you are from. My Grandparents came from Musksquash, New Brunswick Ca The name range a bell Squamish / Musksquash strange eh?
Dwight

That is interesting. I believe Squamish translates to "Land Of Wind".

Nando.

[Iavscanada]

From a true listening standpoint, I have a DBX 2020 that is used all the time. I guess I enjoy the best of both worlds as I can either listen to music 'as it was recorded' or I can tailor it to suit my particular tonal tastes at that moment. There is certainly merit with both sides of this debate but the EQ was built and designed to do a very specific job.
And yes, you do find them in studios just like you would other gear. The only advice I would offer is IF you believe you need an EQ, then get a good one as it can and does make a difference.

[Elite-ist]

This is my Sansui SE-9 Compu-Equalizer. It's patched into my Sansui QR-4500 quadraphonic receiver and sound output is handled by a pair of Sansui SP-2000 speakers. I used my Pioneer CT-F650 cassette deck for playback of a Maxell tape recording of "Frampton Comes Alive."

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer004.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer006.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer008.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer009.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer010.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer011.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer012.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer015.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer016.jpg

http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx322/vintagevet/SansuiSE-9Equalizer017.jpg

The SE-9 has a 4-bit microprocessor, and in simple terms, can produce a flat frequency response in the room setting by emitting a pink noise signal and picking up the received signal through the special microphone and then adjusting the frequency faders, accordingly. You can customize your own frequency curves (up to 4), and lock them into the equalizer's memory, then recall them by engaging a single button. The faders are motorized and will adjust to your custom memorized presets. It has 12dB boost/cut, 8 bands of equalization per channel, and a spectrum analyzer.

It's one of my favourite eqs! But, it's begging for a custom wood case.

Nando.

[celticguitar6666]

very pretty*Hi5*
Wow the sytem is growing
Nando

[Elite-ist]

very pretty*Hi5*
Wow the sytem is growing
Nando

Hi Dwight,

Thank you. Now, I know why the ancient Mayans went with the pyramid shape: it's quite stable. It's all coming down before the end of the week, unfortunately.

Nando.

[celticguitar6666]

Hi Dwight,

Thank you. Now, I know why the ancient Mayans went with the pyramid shape: it's quite stable. It's all coming down before the end of the week, unfortunately.

Nando.
That's too bad where is it going?
Dwight

[Elite-ist]

That's too bad where is it going?
Dwight

The present spot will be occupied my "new" stereo set-up. I'm trying to incorporate the Sansui QR-4500 into the loop, to take advantage of the 4-channel capability. But, the SP-2000s, Pioneer CT-F650, and SE-9 will be set aside, until I complete the stereo den in about 2 years' time.

Dwight: I picked up the Garrard Synchro-Lab 72B today. It was, practically, gifted to me. I'm cleaning it up, and it's turning out be a better turntable than I once thought. Now, to find some 78s!

Nando.

[Big Tuna]

Very Very Nice, Nando!
I use a JVC SEA-80 Fully parametric EQ, with 10 bands per/ch, Spectrum display and pink noise generator. It is really nice to have that feature to be able to "tune" the room.
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii261/CharlieHorse1992/Picture510.jpg

[Elite-ist]

Very Very Nice, Nando!
I use a JVC SEA-80 Fully parametric EQ, with 10 bands per/ch, Spectrum display and pink noise generator. It is really nice to have that feature to be able to "tune" the room.
http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii261/CharlieHorse1992/Picture510.jpg

Big Tuna,

Thanks! Nice JVC! Do you see some similarities between your JVC and the Sansui SE-9? I do: a few cosmetic styling cues are close, and some common features, too. I'm glad EQ owners are coming out of the closet. Who's next?

Nando.

[20tajk7]

Hi, I use a Teac EQA220 graphic equaliser (2x10 bands, spectrum display and tape monitoring), it's very good for copying tapes but the ideal adjustement very is hard to find. *Hi5*

20092

[vidguy]

I've got 2 EQs.

BSR-3000, 10 band/ch, with mic and spectrum. (Neato lit sliders.)

Sansui SE-88: 14 band/ch gigantic spectrum display, detatchable remote, 5 presets.

The Sansui is wonderfu, it's very clean sounding, love the presets.

[Socal Sam]

I have 31-band Roland SEQ-331 monoblock EQ's. I use them to cut in a sub-woofer. I never use an EQ for full range listening.

[R-2-R]

I currently have two in my rack system, both Numark, the main one is the Numark EQ-2600 Stereo Frequency Equalizer with the Tone Computer Display the other is a smaller addition that is part of my Numark DM1200 mixer that is also in the loop. It all sounds good to me and that's all that matters, no complaints here.

[ke4mcl]

dont use one at home on the main system but do use one on a 58 magnavox concert grand and i did stuff an eq in the cabinet to taylor the sound a bit.

[eric123]

To playback music on the hifi I don't use eq or any type of noise reduction. There are tone controls on the amp but I don't use them, I think they are set at the wrong frequencies anyway. For computer recording I do use equalisation, filtering and compression only sometimes. A lot of this correction stuff was for those noisy'er prehistoric gear or marketing. Computers do make a difference. I do like the sound of tubes and Iv got them in preamps, reel-to-reel and maybe a hifi amp in the future.

[Robroy]

I use 1/3 octave in my pa system. I use 9 or 10 band in all my stereo systems. There is no such thing as a flat speaker. The Bose 301's in my Seattle condo would be almost worthless without EQ.

[PioneerRT-2022]

I use EQ for playback all the time, I need to control the music, not the other way around*bigthumbup*.







.

[El Monte Slim]

I'm thinking el monte slim is kidding I think

Too bad we don't have a type font for sarcasm. *sarc*

[J B S]

I’ve been using this old ADC SSlll IC for 30 years. It died on me twice but is running again. I use it and a spectrum analyzer with calibrated mic to set my speakers up for the room.

[macman007]

I haven't used or had a need for an EQ since the late 80's. For me a properly set up room with good acoustics and proper speaker placement is sufficient. I then use my pre-amp's tone controls sparingly.

Loudness contour is only used under half a watt or so and mine is continuously adjustable from 0 to 100%.

Just my 2 cents....

[rjag46]

Use it all the time 1 especially for those old pre recorded cass.*flame*

[Ricardus]

I have three, but currently use none. I've always kept my tone controls on flat unless the room was a sonic mess. But I own these:

AUDIOSOURCE EQ-100
JVC S.E.A.-70
TEAC EQA-5

Was the EQ-100 the model that Ferris had in Ferris Bueler's Day Off??

[Ricardus]

I'm thinking el monte slim is kidding I think but. Too each their own. According to an interveiw Even Ian Anderson thinks some of the studios suck and if the original recordings were so right why do they remaster?

They re-master because A/D converters have improved dramatically in the past 20 years... and to get you to AGAIN buy the intellectual property that you paid for in the 70s when you bought it on vinyl, and paid for again when you bought the CD. They want more of your money for the same IP, so they re-master.

[Ricardus]

I've been debating for the last 30 mins about whether or not I should weigh-in on this EQ debate. I have strong opinions, and a strong personality (it's the Aspie in me), so sometimes when I say things, it rubs people the wrong way. But anyway, here are my thoughts on EQ.

I use EQ every day in the studio. It's an invaluable tool for sculpting the spectrum of the tracks (and entire mixes) that we work on. However, I run everything flat at home. If the recording I am listening to is so messed up that it needs enough EQ correction, so that I would WANT to change it, then I turn it off, and find out the mastering engineer's name and send him a SHAME ON YOU email. :-)

Sure, if you want, add some flavor with EQ to what you're listening. It's just like salt and pepper. Flavor to taste. But to the person who uses pink noise to shoot their room, and tune it.... ummmm... NO. All you MIGHT have done is flatten the response a little, EXACTLY where the microphone is in space. And since our ears are 6 or 7 inches apart, our heads can never exactly occupy the same point in space where that reference mic was.

Most people have rooms with parallel walls, floors, and ceilings. These create reflections which due to standing waves, and constructive and destructive wave interference, create things called Room Modes. These are peaks and nulls in the frequency spectrum, and they exist all over the room, in every place, and that means moving that reference mic an INCH will cause it to measure a completely different response.

Studio owners pay guys like John Storyk tens of thousands of dollars to design studio spaces with flat responses, and given enough budget you can more or less do that. But unless you've paid someone like him lots of money to come in and measure your room, and treat and tune it, all you're doing is flavoring to taste.

Further, after using all sorts of EQs from all sorts of manufacturers, I can humbly assure you that there is a HUGE difference between Mackie EQ, and Neve EQ. As someone in here already suggested, you're probably better off NOT putting another piece of equipment in your signal chain, unless it's a real deal EQ, and those don't come cheaply.

Anyway, I hope I didn't offend. :-)

[Elite-ist]

Ricardus: it's well worth listening to the point of view of a sound engineer. One always wonder what sort of a system would make a sound engineer happy in their home environment. I can say it wouldn't be easy or inexpensive to accomplish.

Nando.

[Ricardus]

My home systems aren't so extravagant. I am pretty easy to please. If you search around you can find really good deals on quality used gear, and make a very nice home system, without having to spend too much. Of course everyone here already knows that. The most interesting piece of kit I own is a set of ribbon speakers that I use in my home mastering suite. Those are the real deal.

[Elite-ist]

My home systems aren't so extravagant. I am pretty easy to please. If you search around you can find really good deals on quality used gear, and make a very nice home system, without having to spend too much. Of course everyone here already knows that. The most interesting piece of kit I own is a set of ribbon speakers that I use in my home mastering suite. Those are the real deal.

Did you have the opportunity to build, or refit your mastering room to sweeten the acoustics? Any cost effective ideas you could offer for improving an existing room? Unfortunately, my mastering room is the master bedroom.

Nando.

[Ricardus]

I am actually still working on that. I will be adding some commercially available bass traps and a few other things from Real Traps. The room didn't sound too bad out of the box. A few dB pregnant between 60 and 100 Hz I'd say. The key is knowing your room. I've listened to any number of things I've mixed in other rooms, so I have an idea what the new room is doing.

I've already done a few projects in there and have had good results. Having the mastering room at home is a new thing. I only got it up and running a coupla months ago.

[bob955i]

....Most people have rooms with parallel walls, floors, and ceilings. These create reflections which due to standing waves, and constructive and destructive wave interference, create things called Room Modes. These are peaks and nulls in the frequency spectrum, and they exist all over the room, in every place, and that means moving that reference mic an INCH will cause it to measure a completely different response....

Yup - and there's also audience absorption that has to be factored in as well if dealing with a venue. I used to do PA years ago and 1/3 oct equalisers were a must for most of the venues we covered - one town hall in particular was a real b*tch as it had an extremely high arched ceiling with side balconies and a rear balcony we nicknamed "The Gods" as it was so high up.

This hall had a particularly nasty node just above the stage that was excited by applause and which gave you a slap-back ring echo. We got hold of one of the first Sabine feedback eliminators for a demo and what a difference it made to the overall equation as we were then able to have the box notch out the main nodes plus have tracking and manual sweep for anything else.

[Ricardus]

Yup - and there's also audience absorption that has to be factored in as well if dealing with a venue.

I took a course in acoustics that dealt a bit with that. We were essentially calculating the reflections in rooms based on the absorption coefficients of the various materials on the walls. Our reference materials listed HUMANS as well, because as you pointed out, when you do a sound check in an empty 20,000 seat arena, it's dramatically different at 8pm, when the band starts, and the entire interior is lined with 20,000 humans.