Poll: do you use EQ/DSP, and if so what kind of system is it used on.

[JRS]

The problem is that we don't listen to the signal; we listen to the signal on an environment and reproduced by a system. Luckily, at this time, the gear can be summarized to just the speakers or headphones, as the rest of the chain is relatively easy to keep transparent.

EQ is a way to clear as much of the room and gear as possible so I can get closer to the signal and just the signal.

Perhaps I wasn't clear--what I meant is the signal presented to the amplifier(s)--that of course being the product of the input and compensatory transfer function.

So in total agreement with your view.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I have three systems. They all have an EQ. Those EQ's are used judiciously... no smiley faces. Just a little tweak.

Definitely.

 

[sigbergaudio]

"...why would you need to adjust the bass for different recordings?" Simply because not all recordings are done equally well, in identical venues, by the same recording engineers, mixing engineers, mastering engineers.

"Assuming a good recording..." can't be "assumed". They are mostly/all "different". That's the point. That's why, if one's system/room produces deep flat bass, adjusting the bass for different tracks is essential. Now if one's system/room isn't capable, one likely won't hear/perceive what they're missing.

A symptom of a well tuned system is that the need for changing the tonal balance for each track mostly goes away.

 

[sigbergaudio]

The most common use of eq/dsp is as mentioned by others to correct bass response / in-room problems. I suspect few people use it to emulate tubes or vinyl.

 

[sigbergaudio]

It also appears that this may be my frustration with some things that are said on this site regarding "tailoring" the sound to ones specific desire.
Example. Stay away from vinyl, stream your music and add the distortion with your EQ. Or
Tube amps suck. Get a class D amp and add the distortion with EQ.

I agree these are somewhat silly statements. While it's true that you can emulate tubes or vinyl (to an extent) with DSP, people who say you should rather do this than actually have a tube amp typically don't do this themselves, or even want tube sound to begin with. So why they offer advice on the subject I'm not sure.

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

For me, I prefer the audio when I dont mess with it and let it play as it should.

I prefer the audio with Room Correction I use: Dirac Live.
I can't stand modal bass, it completely ruins the experience for me.

As for headphones: I just dialed in a gentle bass boost to add a touch of warmth.

EQ for me is a "set once and forget it" affair.
So in all practical aspects it would be the same as playing component (read: impedance) matching with traditional audio hardware.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I agree these are somewhat silly statements. While it's true that you can emulate tubes or vinyl (to an extent) with DSP, people who say you should rather do this than actually have a tube amp typically don't do this themselves, or even want tube sound to begin with. So why they offer advice on the subject I'm not sure.

Well, I think it often arises after a long discussion about the relative merits and so forth...and the determination that "tube sound" remains a somewhat contentious notion - it's existence, or the actuality of it as a preference separate from the pretty glow of all them warm tubes - I think around these (ASR) parts many of us would contend that if one were to somehow set up a blind test of a bunch of different amps (tube or not) it might be discovered that the preference for (or ability to identify) tube sound would be far lower than might be expected even if all the people taking the test were tube advocates. I think in general, good tube amps measure pretty much the same as any good amp...in other words they measure basically neutral. If they don't, then the differences are likely to be replicable with EQ because they would likely be non-neutral frequency response. (and if they don't, would they really qualify as a "good" amp even?)

 

[ZolaIII]

It really, really depends on equipment used. With hedaphones I use 16-32 band EQ, with speakers I use PEQ for corrections (with mic of course). I use PTEq-X (VST) on PC for tube emulation, sometimes and as EQ (for speaker's mostly). On PC (deticated laptop capable working fanless) I use JRiver, on mobile (which is very rarely now) I am on HiBy Music. For local (WiFi) network streaming which is basically what I use mostly (for music) I use JRiver as DSP and (DLNA) server client, on receiver side its MusicCast (tied to power amplifier I have). I dropped down web streaming services for now (unable to use comprehensive DSP chain with it as I wish...). I use equal loudness normalization on both ends (EBU R128 on source side when possible and ISO 226 on analog reproduction side [with hedaphones with two program EQ's and with speakers directly on amplifier]). That's pretty much a usual DSP - effects chain that I use regularly. I even use PCM to DSD conversion with some ESS DAC's (I will pretty much use all what helps with given peace of equipment).
For me DSP makes night and day difference and it's a must.
It's not completely hassle free but then again nothing is.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Well, I think it often arises after a long discussion about the relative merits and so forth...and the determination that "tube sound" remains a somewhat contentious notion - it's existence, or the actuality of it as a preference separate from the pretty glow of all them warm tubes - I think around these (ASR) parts many of us would contend that if one were to somehow set up a blind test of a bunch of different amps (tube or not) it might be discovered that the preference for (or ability to identify) tube sound would be far lower than might be expected even if all the people taking the test were tube advocates. I think in general, good tube amps measure pretty much the same as any good amp...in other words they measure basically neutral. If they don't, then the differences are likely to be replicable with EQ because they would like be non neutral frequency response.

It's typically a combination of non-neutral response and harmonic distortion. However, the owner of a tube amp doesn't buy it for the sound alone. They like the way it looks, perhaps its build quality, they find it fun to experiment with different tubes, etc..

To claim that their experience can be replaced by DSP is a failure to grasp the nature of their hobby. It's like saying to someone who are into old cabriolets that they should rather buy a new one, they will still get wind in their hair. While that is true, wind in their hair is only part of the fascination.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

It's typically a combination of non-neutral response and harmonic distortion. However, the owner of a tube amp doesn't buy it for the sound alone. They like the way it looks, perhaps its build quality, they find it fun to experiment with different tubes, etc..

To claim that their experience can be replaced by DSP is a failure to grasp the nature of their hobby. It's like saying to someone who are into old cabriolets that they should rather buy a new one, they will still get wind in their hair. While that is true, wind in their hair is only part of the fascination.

well, if they refuse to accept the visual component as part of the equation though? I mean I think most of us would fully, completely agree they aren't bought for the sound alone. That's sort of the issue that it ends up coming down to in these debates. I certainly don't have any problem at all with someone saying "I love tube amps! I love the way they look and sound!" I do however have a bit of an issue with someone saying "I love tube amps! There's no way to get the same sort of musicality, depth, warmth...real tonal beauty out of a non-tube amp!"

 

[Chrispy]

It's typically a combination of non-neutral response and harmonic distortion. However, the owner of a tube amp doesn't buy it for the sound alone. They like the way it looks, perhaps its build quality, they find it fun to experiment with different tubes, etc..

To claim that their experience can be replaced by DSP is a failure to grasp the nature of their hobby. It's like saying to someone who are into old cabriolets that they should rather buy a new one, they will still get wind in their hair. While that is true, wind in their hair is only part of the fascination.

In a way that's similar to those who go for the straight wire with gain goal....

 

[sigbergaudio]

well, if they refuse to accept the visual component as part of the equation though? I mean I think most of us would fully, completely agree they aren't bought for the sound alone. That's sort of the issue that it ends up coming down to in these debates. I certainly don't have any problem at all with someone saying "I love tube amps! I love the way they look and sound!" I do however have a bit of an issue with someone saying "I love tube amps! There's no way to get the same sort of musicality, depth, warmth...real tonal beauty out of a non-tube amp!"

Sure, but then we agree that the answer to the OP is that no one is actually suggesting to use DSP instead of tube amps, they're just trying to make a point about the fact that it's possible.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Sure, but then we agree that the answer to the OP is that no one is actually suggesting to use DSP instead of tube amps, they're just trying to make a point about the fact that it's possible.

Yeah I mean it's obviously not going to be a suitable solution because of course a huge part of the appeal of tube amps is the look of them. But I've made the suggestion at times...but it's from a specific perspective. It's this - IF I'm going to add distortions of the recording to my system (which if a tube amp actually is audibly distinguishable from any other good (meaning neutral) amp, it by definition HAS to be doing something to distort (aka alter) the sound of the recording in some way) I'd prefer to do it in a way that I can control (even if just to turn it off or on) rather than in a way that is always on.

 

[ZolaIII]

Sure, but then we agree that the answer to the OP is that no one is actually suggesting to use DSP instead of tube amps, they're just trying to make a point about the fact that it's possible.

It's possible to DSP hell out of input source for cheap and on almost anything this day's (general purpose CPU core's and FPU units). And it can be accurate emulation of your favourite peace of gear (instrument, amp and such & only valid for those whose makers really put effort perfecting and ironing out their VST and such plugin's).

 

[sigbergaudio]

It's possible to DSP hell out of input source for cheap and on almost anything this day's (general purpose CPU core's and FPU units). And it can be accurate emulation of your favourite peace of gear (instrument, amp and such & only valid for those whose makers really put effort perfecting and ironing out their VST and such plugin's).

Yes, but again that's not the point. The owner of a tube amp doesn't want to EMULATE it, they want the actual amp.

 

[gnarly]

A symptom of a well tuned system is that the need for changing the tonal balance for each track mostly goes away.

Totally agree. A well tuned system is much more in accordance with the center of the majority of recordings' tonality distribution.

That said, there are still recordings on the ends of that tonality distribution, that often sound just plain off, to my ears...
And there is still Fletcher Munson, I feel the need to overcome, given the SPL variations I enjoy.

 

[ZolaIII]

Yes, but again that's not the point. The owner of a tube amp doesn't want to EMULATE it, they want the actual amp.

I want to emulate it and can live with it, regarding light effects I am one foot in prog sprites. My point is owner of tube amp can hear some of gems of their time same as modern keyboard owner can hear and see how old Korg sounded for instance (everyone can). Digital emu domain can be and our legacy keeper (when done correctly of course).

 

[Dj7675]

For me, I prefer the audio when I dont mess with it and let it play as it should.
It also appears that this may be my frustration with some things that are said on this site regarding "tailoring" the sound to ones specific desire.

No need to “tailor” at all. But room modes exist and will negatively affect the sound in your room with generally being peaks of 20dB or more. You don’t have to get carried away. You can either manually enable 1-2 filters to hit the worst offending peaks and you are done. Or use your existing Audyssey, purchase the app and EQ below around 200-300hz. Apply simply bass boost of 3-6dB below 200hz, raise sub levels about the same amount of boost you add in your room curve, done.
Always a good recipe... buy good speakers, tame some room modes, enjoy.

 

[JWAmerica]

PC source + EQ APO -> AVR

 

[billyjoebob]

Sure, but then we agree that the answer to the OP is that no one is actually suggesting to use DSP instead of tube amps, they're just trying to make a point about the fact that it's possible.

Weather anyone is actually suggesting it or making a point is of no consequence.
It's not my job to understand ones intentions.