Software EQ vs Hardware EQ vs Analog EQ

[LegionOfHell]

Software EQ: By software EQ I mean an EQ done by a computer program like Equalizer APO.

Hardware EQ: By hardware EQ I mean an EQ done by a DSP chip in units like Creative X7 or Monolith 124459.

Analog EQ: By analog EQ I mean an EQ done to an analog signal by units like Schiit Loki/Lokius, Subjective 3 and something like this.

Which EQ gives you the best sound ? My experience is that digital EQ can corrupt the sound a little bit...Which one would you recommend for an audiophile ?

 

[Lambda]

Hardware EQ = Software EQ with pre installed software.

So the best is Software EQ.

 

[Doodski]

I have had good and bad analogue old school EQs. A Fisher EQ I had was very hissy but the Technics ones where not bad. So I'm not into those if I can use my PC for PEQ.

 

[dlaloum]

Hardware and Software are identical - they apply filters via mathematics which is the same in both - however, there is a wide range of different filters that can be applied, with no two sounding quite the same.... so you are effectively asking " which cuisine tastes better, the one cooked on gas or the one cooked on electric"...

Older style analogue EQ is based on circuits, and typically only have a single type of "filter" - this can be accurately reproduced mathematically by hardware or software EQ.

A "Good" implementation across all 3 - using the same filtering methods, will sound identical ( to the same degree that 2 differing DAC's sound identical ... perfect sound forever!) .

Levels of flexibility and ease of deploying upgrades goes from Software (easy) to Hardware (slightly harder) to Analogue (you have to replace the whole unit).

Software will be prone also to limitations imposed by the computer it is being run on.... you have to make sure your CPU is fast enough, you have enough RAM, etc.... and when the overall platform has issues, it can impact the sound. - Hardware solutions tend to be more stable.

 

[Nicholas B]

I'm using a Behringer Ultragraph Pro FBQ6200 (31 band GEQ) combined with REW and UMIK-1 to equalise things.

This solution worked better than I expected. FR is flat at higher frequencies and it is only in the bass that cancellations are difficult to address. Certainly room bass peaks (such as at around 30 and 60 Hz) were brought under control.

After using the equaliser, everything sounded way better than ever before. The only downside was that the Behringer introduced just a little hiss. However, this is in no way audible from the listening position through my 90 dB sensitivity speakers.

Incidentally, the Behringer has a few other potentially useful features, such as a pink noise generator, separate facility for rolling off bass and treble below and above selected frequencies, and so forth.

 

[tvrgeek]

OK, I think I am in a catch-22 here.
I was running a Schiit Asgard DAC with a Windows 10 system music server. No special drivers. I am using Windows Media Player as it is the ONLY player whose UI is intuitive and easy. Currentlly, my library is local FLAC copies of all my CDs. No HD. I had EQ APO/Peace running as I need something close to the Walker curve with a little correction lower.

I "upgraded: to a Topping D30pro. I was looking at some streaming for HD files and I had hoped a cleaner and more stable path. But, when I installed the driver, it seems to bypass the all of Windows including the EQ. It makes it way to bright and brash for my room.

So, it seems my options are:
Run a music server I hate, but with eq built in
Delete the driver limiting the functionality of the DAC
External analog EQ. I plugged in my little JDS Subjective. It helps, but too crude. The Schiit is 6 bands and could do the top end curve better, but not the little low end tweaks. No, A Berhringer or DBX is not in the mix. Had them in the past and way too much distortion.
External DSP, like a MiniDSP. No. Flat out no way am I running through another so-so A2D/D2A. I can hear the differences even between the Schiit and Topping DAC. Even had a DEQ and gad was it horrible sounding. Fine for a cheap PA, not HI-FI.

Do I have my head around the problem correctly? Or is there a host based EQ that could work with the direct to IO bypass windows Topping driver? Is there another scale of software that works with dedicated drivers AISO etc? Or even a music server with sufficient ( variable freq, variable Q) that has a UI similar to WMP? Mist are just confusing lists or you have to make up some play list in advance. I like to just drag a bunch of skins to the right for whatever strikes me at the time.

 

[garbz]

Software EQ gives objectively the "best" sound. By "best" here we're talking about the ability to give a measurably perfect filter without negatively affecting the signal in other ways.

Hardware via DSP as others have said is just Software, but what they neglect to mention is that the taps are limited compared to what what software can do. This reduces processing power and latency which is generally quite important. But the reality is you're not going to hear any audible difference between an identical filter implemented in software or a hardware DSP.

Analogue EQ is objectively the worst. Each individual filter applied requires active components which add distortion. Each requires passive components which add noise and some (hopefully minor) distortion. Additionally they will all impact the phase response as well whereas digitally we can implement linear phase filters with ease. There's also a lack of precision due to part tolerance.

I recommend stick to software or hardware DSP.

I "upgraded: to a Topping D30pro. I was looking at some streaming for HD files and I had hoped a cleaner and more stable path. But, when I installed the driver, it seems to bypass the all of Windows including the EQ. It makes it way to bright and brash for my room.

Never seen an audio driver bypass the windows audio subsystem, at least not one that doesn't talk directly to compatible music players like ASIO does. I suspect one of two things: Your D30pro has "Disable all enhancements" ticked in the advanced settings of the windows sounds settings (which bypasses all APOs), or you haven't applied EQAPO to the output after installing the driver (EQ APO is not a system wide setting, but a per device setting you need to run the configurator every time the drivers change).

 

[tvrgeek]

So, it does run through WAE. Mistake in APO config. I am trying to set up FOOBAR with WASAPI plugin. So I guess I then have to install a router like Voicemeter to put APO back in the loop.

But, one gentleman said post Vista/7, the WAE does not mess with the stream anymore anyway, so it does not mater.

There is much I don't know about DSP eq. Intuitively, boosting one band could lower the resolution of the rest on peaks. APO actually lowers the entire file level by the amount of maximum boost. Analog does not do this. The Schiit is pretty clean. I would not swear my Subjective is audible when set to zero and switched in and out. An old DBX, yea, big time. Had an MXR in the old days. My best "fix" may be to put a first order filter in the main crossover to get close to the "Walker curve".

 

[garbz]

I am trying to set up FOOBAR with WASAPI plugin.

The purpose of WASAPI is to bypass APOs and the windows mixer. The only thing which would make sense here is either to use Foobar in DirectSound mode (making use of the APO), or applying any EQ directly in Foobar itself with WASAPI in use. Windows audio very much does still mess with things, but it's not actually horrible like it used to be. The exception is for full signals (as windows applies a limiter to prevent any signal hitting -0dbFS) but that shouldn't come into play when listening to music normally.

I take the latter approach. I have EQ APO applying an impulse filter for all windows sounds, and Foobar in WASAPI mode with the convolver plugin applying the same filter so its not bypassed. The reason for this is I often use multiple outputs which allows me to use Foobar on headphones and windows audio on speakers both at the same time, both with different EQs.

APO actually lowers the entire file level by the amount of maximum boost. Analog does not do this.

Both run into the same problem. You can't boost beyond a pre-determined maximum. In theory in analogue you can boost up to your voltage rails, in practice there's no guarantee that this won't cause peak clipping in downstream equipment so even in the analogue world it makes sense to lower the gain if your EQ boost is large enough. I'm not sure what you mean APO "lowest the level". EQ APO does not. In fact it specifically shows on the interface the peak gain and will highlight the EQ red in areas where you exceed -0dbFS, the pre-amplification setting allows you to low the overall level.

 

[tvrgeek]

OK, following this.
What is this impulse filter doing for you?
I have not played with the FOOBAR eq yet. Not as granular and not variable Q. Maybe good enough.
I thought I see APO automatically sliding the pre-gain down as an octave slides up. At least in Peace.

With analog, my pre has huge overhead with a buffered volume control, so when I reduce volume, it is equally applied by ration to the entire signal, where to re-calculate to a lower level by definition produces some reduction in resolution that can't be regained by amplifying.

The other advantage of analog is where it sits. I can run my CD or remote background feed into the D30 and get the same eq the room needs. Host based is stuck on just the player. There should be a way to feed my other inputs into the PS with a simple dashboard to act like a preamp source selector. I am sure a Javascript programmer could whip that up in an hour. Unfortunately, I was only the manager and I had geniuses who did that for me. ( Actually for the taxpayer)

Biggest issue is getting FOOBAR or other player that can do direct IO to look like WMP. Nice big screen of skins I can just drag over to play.

 

[cata02]

I have another question: is the DSP in Genelec 83xx smarter doing more than simple EQ?

 

[garbz]

I have another question: is the DSP in Genelec 83xx smarter doing more than simple EQ?

I'm not sure, but Amir did a review on GLM a while back https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/genelec-glm-review-room-eq-setup.26397/ that may have more info on it.

What is this impulse filter doing for you?

Oh sorry. An impulse is basically a filter in its final form. That EQ you adjust, the back end of that is an impulse function. Many DSPs allow you apply an impulse directly. The implementation of an EQ can vary between DSPs, but an impulse file allows me to get the same response from every software. So I made an EQ using the software rePhase, export the impulse file. That file is applied in EQ APO, in Foobar2000 using the convolver plugin, and on my Volumio Streamer using the BruteFIR plugin. For me it just achieves consistency, but it's not required providing you have the ability to set EQs as you need.

The other advantage of analog is where it sits. I can run my CD or remote background feed into the D30 and get the same eq the room needs.

That's an advantage over software, but not an advantage over hardware. The poster immediately underneath yours talks about Hardware EQ which sits in the speakers themselves (as do the ones I'm eagerly awaiting in 6 weeks as a late Christmas present ).

Biggest issue is getting FOOBAR or other player that can do direct IO to look like WMP.

Yep. Downside of software designed by Techies, it's not always eyecandy The Hydrogenaudio forums may be able to help you a bit in the right direction. Foobar has a very rich plugin / modification ecosystem and I've seen some pretty wild skins.

GitHub - kbuffington/Georgia: Dynamic foobar2000 theme

Dynamic foobar2000 theme. Contribute to kbuffington/Georgia development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

Search 'foobar2000' on DeviantArt - Discover The Largest Online Art Gallery and Community

DeviantArt is the world's largest online social community for artists and art enthusiasts, allowing people to connect through the creation and sharing of art.

www.deviantart.com

I thought I see APO automatically sliding the pre-gain down as an octave slides up. At least in Peace.

Ahh okay, maybe Peace does that. I don't use the Peace UI, just the standard EQ APO so disregard what I said.

 

[ozorfis]

I know it's an old thread, that I've just found whilst researching why digital filters sound so bad
Obviously I have a different opinion than most here, but I am speaking of speaker crossovers as well.
To my ears a crossover modification always sounds better than a digital EQ.
Of course the digital EQ is more versatile and can do things the analog crossover cannot. Yet I'd rather live with a small flaw in the speaker response than employing a digital EQ. Of course it is possible that my EQ Software (Jriver and Ozone) is just bad.
Yet should I ever get around to build active speakers. they will have an active analog crossover.

 

[Doodski]

I know it's an old thread, that I've just found whilst researching why digital filters sound so bad
Obviously I have a different opinion than most here, but I am speaking of speaker crossovers as well.
To my ears a crossover modification always sounds better than a digital EQ.
Of course the digital EQ is more versatile and can do things the analog crossover cannot. Yet I'd rather live with a small flaw in the speaker response than employing a digital EQ. Of course it is possible that my EQ Software (Jriver and Ozone) is just bad.
Yet should I ever get around to build active speakers. they will have an active analog crossover.

Why fight across or against the current? Digital filters don't have a sound other than the coloration they are supposed to do. I've had analogue crossovers and they hiss a lot.

 

[ozorfis]

I have to do some more research, how it is possible that I dislike them so much, but I do and have tested it soo often now.
With discrete Jfets and a proper PSU it shouldn't have much noise. With cheap opamps on the other hand..

 

[solderdude]

The reason could be you did not use negative pre-amp when boosting the signal digitally (I assume you did).
It could be that the software used for digital EQ did not have the same Q or slopes or even the same frequency setting as the HW EQ.
It could be the program used for the EQ is not very good (but expect you did test other programs too)
It could also be the type of digital filters being used.
Dislike for something can also be a bias thing which can be extremely powerful even when knowing placebo exists.
Could even be a level difference thing.
Some people seem to prefer a, nearly inaudible, amount of added noise (so I am told).

Yes, analog filters can hiss like crazy, especially the cheaper graphic and even parametric ones but they don't have to depending on the design.

When digital EQ sounds poor it is highly likely someone is doing something wrong.
After all almost all recordings have been digitally EQ'ed 1 or more times during the production stage.

 

[ozorfis]

Many thanks for the recommendations.
I want to fill in a narrow 2 dB dip at 1 kHz on my center and a narrow 1.5 dB dip at 5 kHz on my left/right channels. Negative preamp was used but so far only "cheap" software EQs were tested and with this issue I just can't do anything about in the crossover hardware so I cannot compare in this case.

After all almost all recordings have been digitally EQ'ed 1 or more times during the production stage.

Exactly and this why I will try the FabFilter Pro Q 3 next.

It could also be possible that a surgical fitler with a Q of 6 is just too narrow and introduces nasty phase shifts.
But still from previous tests like adjusting the tweeter volume an autoformer sounded so much better than a digital EQ. And one can influence single drivers at the crossover region in hardware. For what it's worth, here is somebody, who had a similar inmpression: Why Do Digital Equalizers Sound Digital? Part 1

I do agree that negative bias can be a powerful thing and I hope FabFilter can lift my disgust for digital filters. Will have to upgrade Jriver first though as my current version will not work in multichannel with FabFitler.

Edit: I forgot to mention, that I have analog sources and SACDs where I just cannot use a digital EQ.