Adding a 10-band PEQ to a DAC - What is holding manufacturers back?

[Trell]

The other issue is, if this is a desktop product, you have access to a desktop, so most makers won't bother seeing as most folks can do it on their computers anyway.

I’m one of those that prefers to have this outboard for my desktop, where I use Genelec GLM for room EQ and the ADI-2 mainly for dynamic loudness and tone controls. For my headphones I do use one PEQ to knock down the Beyerdynamics treble peak at 8kHz.

Sure, one could do this by software and many are happy with that, but not my preference.

It’s worth noting that the RME ADI-2 Pro was squarely targeted at the pro audio market (mastering), and when RME got this huge unexpected success outside the pro audio market they made the ADI-2 DAC for the hifi market.

 

[Brianc]

That is basically what a MiniDSP Flex is.

I'm tempted by the Flex but it has way more functionality than I need so can't justify the price. I basically want a Topping DX3 pro with analog inputs and PEQ for ~$300.

 

[Rja4000]

Because
1. Nobody can actually use a 10 band PEq manually.
Did you try to use 5 bands already ?
You need automation to make it usable.
Buy Dirac.

2. DSP power has a cost.
Therefore, and given the above, it makes more sense to use DSP power for more channels with less bands

 

[tomtoo]

Because
1. Nobody can actually use a 10 band PEq manually.
Did you try to use 5 bands already ?
You need automation to make it usable.
Buy Dirac.

2. DSP power has a cost.
Therefore, and given the above, it makes more sense to use DSP power for more channels with less bands

Ahh come on, its like saying nobody can drive a car with manual gear shift.

 

[Rednaxela]

Nobody can actually use a 10 band PEq manually.
Did you try to use 5 bands already ?
You need automation to make it usable.

How is that? It’s only 30 values max to dial in. Tedious? Sure. Doable? For me definitely. YMMV.

 

[Rja4000]

How is that? It’s only 30 values max to dial in. Tedious? Sure. Doable? For me definitely. YMMV.

Sure
But then, how do you define settings?

You'd need measurements and an algorithm to deduct the right parameters.
That's what I call "automation".

Managing 5 bands eq by ear is quite a challenge already.

 

[7jm]

I have to say that I now consider PEQ a very important tool for headphone listening.
Even with room acoustics not playing a part in the sound it can be very difficult and expensive to find your perfect or close to perfect headphone sound.
Having PEQ available with phones that closely match your preference is phenomenal, it basically allows for individual 'season to taste'.
My previous PEQ was a Beringer deq2496 which was a rack mount, optical in and out, I sold it a couple of years ago as I found it too big for my headphones setup. Recently I set up a raspberry pi with hifiberry dac and DSP and also qudelix 5k, having PEQ available in such small packages is fantastic, however it is quite a niche market and I can't imagine that there would be much return on the engineering/programming investment.

 

[Weeb Labs]

It's really very straightforward to offer a PEQ function (as well as psychoacoustic bass for that matter) and is something that I have implemented myself in an afternoon, complete with encoder controlled GUI. The 1701 between the XMOS and DAC along with the requisite passives do increase part count somewhat but any commercial manufacturer feeling sufficiently motivated could do it without a problem.

The Rokit RP5 G4 is one such example. It is a €145 active monitor and manages to include an LCD, encoder and fixed-band EQ. This is not an engineering problem.

 

[Trell]

It's really very straightforward to offer a PEQ function (as well as psychoacoustic bass for that matter) and is something that I have implemented myself in an afternoon, complete with encoder controlled GUI. The 1701 between the XMOS and DAC along with the requisite passives do increase part count somewhat but any commercial manufacturer feeling sufficiently motivated could do it without a problem.

The Rokit RP5 G4 is a €145 active monitor and still manages to include an LCD, encoder and fixed-band EQ. This is not an engineering problem.

Really, in an afternoon with user interface and all?

 

[rgpit]

I would like to see a DAC/Pre with built in xover channels implemented.

 

[Rednaxela]

Sure
But then, how do you define settings?

You'd need measurements and an algorithm to deduct the right parameters.
That's what I call "automation".

Managing 5 bands eq by ear is quite a challenge already.

I see, thanks. So you say what holds manufacturers back is the fact that it’s hard to find the right values by ear?

 

[Weeb Labs]

Really, in an afternoon with user interface and all?

There are a plethora of libraries available (such as LiquidCrystal) which greatly streamline the creation of simple GUIs.

 

[Rednaxela]

It's really very straightforward to offer a PEQ function (as well as psychoacoustic bass for that matter) and is something that I have implemented myself in an afternoon, complete with encoder controlled GUI.

Most interesting. Have you documented this somewhere? A blog or forum post or so?

 

[NikJi]

What do you mean?

Most EQ I have seen have +/- 6db boost/cut on each band. That totally changes the music reproduction. The +/- 0.5 db will ensure that you adjust but don’t change the music.

 

[NikJi]

Requires designers. Both hardware and software. Those sorts of people can command high price if you want the job done properly. I know you say "no software interface required", but if you're already going to put it in a desktop product, then it wouldn't really make much sense to do so otherwise since MiniDSP can offer this as is. You actually want an intuitive or capable system like the way RME handles it, all in-box, and all accessible with a proper interface. Whether that be a touch-screen or just hardware buttons to the side of the screen is not paramount, but having one or the other would be.

The other issue is, if this is a desktop product, you have access to a desktop, so most makers won't bother seeing as most folks can do it on their computers anyway.

In case you haven't noticed, audio companies don't really care much about things other than looks and only recently, performance. There's lots of money to be made with simple boxes (which is why DACAMP combo boxes aren't too common either compared to separates). Anything with many features and you (potentially as a Asian manufacturer) run the risk of having your product come really close to the cost of things like the RME DAC. So unless you thoroughly beat their implementation, good luck with competing with a Made in Germany label. And to be frank, software consistency and quality outside of the US and EU isn't so great.

Also at the pace which some of these desktop products release, they're not meant to have staying power on the market since their design is due to be replaced soon anyway, if you have to take into account new hardware and making sure it functions properly for every iteration, I imagine R&D costs keep becoming a problem when you want to carry all that functionality over to the newer iteration without it being bug ridden. Matrix Audio, for all the praise I give them in terms of build quality, you can see on threads dedicated to there devices on this forum, constant reports of software issues and quirks. This is the sort of thing you invite once you want to start producing something with more features in the box beyond audio specs.

Audio companies don’t like EQ on their DAC or amplifier because that limits their sales. They can make those adjustments internally and sell 6x more from 6 products ranging from a warm sound to a cold clincal sound.

 

[Weeb Labs]

Audio companies don’t like EQ on their amplifier because that limits their sales. They can make those adjustments internally and sell 6x more from 6 products ranging from a warm sound to a cold clincal sound.

Almost every amplifier ever measured on this forum exhibits a frequency response that is ruler flat throughout the audio band.

 

[EJ3]

Roon does it better, rip CD to hardisk and stream everything, no need for hardware eq when it can be done from the IPad

I don't think that a person that is in the places I usually am(at sea, on Islands in the Western Pacific, or in my cabin on a wild river where, if you are not standing in a specific spot, you wont get a cell phone signal won't get Roon unless they have a satellite set up & it comes from somewhere else. I want the EQ built in. It is likely I will never Roon (whatever that is). If a system is not self contained & needs anything from an outside source that is not on site, then that system is not for me.

 

[EJ3]

Almost every amplifier ever measured on this forum exhibits a frequency response that is ruler flat throughout the audio band.

But rooms do not.

 

[Weeb Labs]

But rooms do not.

The question was regarding supposed reasons for manufacturers' unwillingness to implement amplifier PEQ functionality; not rooms.

 

[EJ3]

Yes I have frequently looked at that.

I also found my minidsp2x4hd good, as it has four remote presets (that I used for common things like bass up 2 db). The Minidsp flex version might be good choice to get decent performance, and I am leaning that way.

Me too! (Leaning that way). On the other hand, it will be 6-8 months before I, & something even better that I would be able to afford may have come along by then.