• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Tilt Tone Control for Headphones / Speakers

_thelaughingman

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Messages
1,324
Likes
1,943
I've been using a 2 db Gain on the filter to mostly listen to most of my music and it does make most of my music livelier and gains good amount of tonality.
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I ended up with -5dB to tame the IEMs I am using :facepalm:
There's also Crinacle that measures IEM's, and does Oratory measure IEM's (can't remember). But you could use an EQ from one of those guys if they've measured your model of IEM that you use......so that will specifically tame the frequency response issues of that IEM, and then you'd use my Tilt Control Filter just to broadly finetune tonality on a song by song basis (to cure the Circle of Confusion issue). But if you've got no specific EQ available to you for your IEM's, then I guess my broad acting Tone Control Filter is not the worst thing in the world to use to generally correct overall tonality of the IEM.
 

Thalis

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2020
Messages
362
Likes
217
There's also Crinacle that measures IEM's, and does Oratory measure IEM's (can't remember). But you could use an EQ from one of those guys if they've measured your model of IEM that you use......so that will specifically tame the frequency response issues of that IEM, and then you'd use my Tilt Control Filter just to broadly finetune tonality on a song by song basis (to cure the Circle of Confusion issue). But if you've got no specific EQ available to you for your IEM's, then I guess my broad acting Tone Control Filter is not the worst thing in the world to use to generally correct overall tonality of the IEM.


Yes I have tried both and applied the tilt to both. Actually it all started with my 19yo daughter who complained about the piercing highs. But she likes the IEMs cos it has vol control. So I introduced Wavelet to her and taught her how to use it on her LG V40. I used Auto EQ to make a new curve for her with the tilt that I got from Peace. Her verdict was that it now sounds very balanced and no details lost (she was comparing to my Philips SHP9500 and Sony MDR-Z110 with EQ). Finally I installed Mega Switcher for her in her laptop with the same tilt for the IEMs. She couldn't be happier... (thank god). I have my own pair and I must say... I have to concur with her.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
The Quad 34's tilt control although interesting is dreadfully flawed as a solution. Far too simplistic and not flexible compared to a simple bass and treble control.

I had a few 34s back in the day too.
 

Jose Hidalgo

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
961
Likes
1,032
Location
France
Finally I installed Mega Switcher for her in her laptop with the same tilt for the IEMs. She couldn't be happier... (thank god). I have my own pair and I must say... I have to concur with her.
Thanks for your feedback. I couldn't be more pleased. Seems that we made your 19yo happy! :D
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,741
Likes
16,175
The Quad 34's tilt control although interesting is dreadfully flawed as a solution. Far too simplistic and not flexible compared to a simple bass and treble control.
I would prefer it to many poorly implemented separate bass and treble controls

1627286584877.png

source: https://www.stereophile.com/content/quad-34-preamplifier

1627286611469.png

source: https://www.stereophile.com/content/marantz-pm5003-integrated-amplifier-measurements
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
I would prefer it to many poorly implemented separate bass and treble controls

It was unique for sure. I only ever left my 34 on "flat". If you wanted some treble boost, you needed to tilt the treble up and then add bass with the secondary control. It never sounded quite right.

Not sure why you think the Marantz bass and treble is "poorly implemented". The plots above are sensible (+10dB) maximum boost for bass and treble in the upper sweep and maximum cut for bass and treble in the lower sweep. Bear in mind you have every combination in between those extremes of both boost and cut- unlike the simple Quad design. If the bass/treble are being implemented traditionally, the curves are remarkably accurate IMO.
 
Last edited:

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,741
Likes
16,175
Not sure why you think the Marantz bass and treble is "poorly implemented". The plots above are sensible (+10dB)maximum boost for bass and treble in the upper sweep and maximum cut for bass and treble in the lower sweep. Bear in mind you have every combination in between of both boost and cut- unlike the simple Quad design.
Because for example the bass filter peaks at around 85 Hz, while to change smoothly the tonality a continuous FR like from a shelve filter is preferable.

It is nice to see that quite few modern acticve loudspeakers have also similar tilt control like Nubert

1627289191060.png


and Dynaudio https://www.dynaudio.com/professional-audio/lyd/lyd-7/support/manual/en/dsp-settings

To correct specific peaks or dips of course an additional and fully adjustable PEQ is the choice of weapon.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Because for example the bass filter peaks at around 85 Hz, while to change smoothly the tonality a continuous FR like from a shelve filter is preferable.

Not true. You achieve exactly the same with bass and treble combinations with way more flexibility.

Here's a typical analogue implementation in a vintage preamplifier. 5 steps (detented) either side of zero. Vertical scale is Volts (you can convert to dB if you want)

typical.jpg


Here's another, a vintage integrated amplifier.

Boost only, bass and treble:
boost.jpg


Cut only:
cut.jpg
 
Last edited:

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,741
Likes
16,175
Not true. You achieve exactly the same with bass and treble combinations with way more flexibility.
As said not with the Marantz example I showed above where the frequency response drops again below 80 Hz while on a kind of shelving filter like at the Quad it stays constant. In some cases the differences are small but still they exist.
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Because for example the bass filter peaks at around 85 Hz, while to change smoothly the tonality a continuous FR like from a shelve filter is preferable.

It is nice to see that quite few modern acticve loudspeakers have also similar tilt control like Nubert

View attachment 143530

and Dynaudio https://www.dynaudio.com/professional-audio/lyd/lyd-7/support/manual/en/dsp-settings

To correct specific peaks or dips of course an additional and fully adjustable PEQ is the choice of weapon.
Your pic there is essentially what the Tilt Tone Control Filter that I "discovered/created" does, albeit starting from 100Hz rather than 30Hz: High Shelf, 982Hz, Q0.2
1627319825558.png

(first post of this thread)

To me I think a Linear Tone Control like this makes the most sense (and like the one you've just shown), because it's a simple tilt that is only changing tonality rather than EQ'ing the speaker. "Circle of Confusion" by definition can only be broad tonality (linear tilt) because it's impossible to stipulate any differences between studios where the music was recorded beyond broad tonality.....so it's not just more bass or less treble, instead it's a "linear seesaw effect"/ linear tilt.....(the broadest epitome of tonality).
 
Last edited:

Jose Hidalgo

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
961
Likes
1,032
Location
France
I just don't see the point in creating a LINEAR tilt effect with a PARAMETRIC filter. Those two are antagonists : parametric is everything but linear.
Hence the EAPO GraphicEQ code that I posted earlier, which allows a perfectly linear tilt effect, at exactly the desired frequency, no more, no less.
Of course you can achieve an "almost linear" effect with parametric filters and a very low Q (0.2, or even lower : 0.1, etc.), but why do it when you can do it perfectly otherwise ?
(if it's just for the sake of toying with REW, I totally understand, it's fun and I do it too sometimes ;) )
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I just don't see the point in creating a LINEAR tilt effect with a PARAMETRIC filter. Those two are antagonists : parametric is everything but linear.
Hence the EAPO GraphicEQ code that I posted earlier, which allows a perfectly linear tilt effect, at exactly the desired frequency, no more, no less.
Of course you can achieve an "almost linear" effect with parametric filters and a very low Q (0.2, or even lower : 0.1, etc.), but why do it when you can do it perfectly otherwise ?
(if it's just for the sake of toying with REW, I totally understand, it's fun and I do it too sometimes ;) )
That's good too, I remember you posting that. I'll try it out. I think you said there was a latency penalty? Also your GraphicEQ only works in EqualiserAPO so it's no good when I use it in my miniDSP for TV & movie watching - that's when I use the parametric filter tone control in Post#1 of this thread. So even though your solution is good, it's only for use with EqualiserAPO, so limited uses. My parametric filter tone control can be used anywhere where parametric filters are accepted, and is effectively linear anyway (like I showed in the graph), so it's a moot point additionally.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,741
Likes
16,175
To me I think a Linear Tone Control like this makes the most sense (and like the one you've just shown), because it's a simple tilt that is only changing tonality rather than EQ'ing the speaker. "Circle of Confusion" by definition can only be broad tonality (linear tilt) because it's impossible to stipulate any differences between studios where the music was recorded beyond broad tonality.....so it's not just more bass or less treble, instead it's a "linear seesaw effect"/ linear tilt.....(the broadest epitome of tonality).
Yes, like Toole wrote

Old fashioned bass & treble tone controls and modern "tilt" controls are the answer and they can be changed at will to compensate for personal taste and excesses or deficiencies in recordings.

Source: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ut-room-curve-targets-room-eq-and-more.10950/

Also such a tilt tone control above 200 Hz is used at the Harman personal preference experiments
1627334836768.png


see also https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17042 and https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=19252
 

Jose Hidalgo

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
961
Likes
1,032
Location
France
Nah, there's no latence penalty. I pointed to a topic where somebody said incidentally that there could potentially (as in "theoretically") be, which is always good to know, but I have noticed nothing at all. Maybe for real-time musicians where milliseconds are critical, but for Hi-Fi users it's all good. :)

tenor.gif


It works with Equalizer APO (or another EQ software with similar syntax). But for EAPO users, it would be the way to go. If we want perfectly linear --> GraphicEQ. If we want smooth --> Parametric EQ. Both can be used at the same time anyway.
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Nah, there's no latence penalty. I pointed to a topic where somebody said incidentally that there could potentially (as in "theoretically") be, which is always good to know, but I have noticed nothing at all. Maybe for real-time musicians where milliseconds are critical, but for Hi-Fi users it's all good. :)

tenor.gif


It works with Equalizer APO (or another EQ software with similar syntax). But for EAPO users, it would be the way to go. If we want perfectly linear --> GraphicEQ. If we want smooth --> Parametric EQ. Both can be used at the same time anyway.
Well, for gaming you'd want to know how many milliseconds latency penalty there was. It's not "all good" though (to use your words), can't use it with miniDSP hence my Parametric Tone Control Filter in post #1 of this thread. Man that gif is annoying that you posted, it's a real eyesore! I don't really want to hear anymore about your GraphicEQ Tilt Control because we've discussed it enough already, but if you ever find out how many milliseconds latency penalty it is (if it is), then post it back up - without smartass gif's that make you sea sick!
 

Jose Hidalgo

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
961
Likes
1,032
Location
France
I don't know a single gamer who would need to use a tilt effect though. Maybe there are, but how many ?

A serious gamer who really cares about latency would probably discard everything that could affect CPU, GPU and/or latency, possibly including EAPO itself.

Anyway, if there is a latency penalty but that penalty is inferior to the screen's refresh rate, then once again, "it's all good". Even for a 144 Hz display, the penalty would have to be bigger than 7ms to even become remotely noticeable. And I doubt a single GEQ or PEQ filter has such a penalty.

My guess is that only for musicians that could make a difference. It's as good a guess as the guy who posted in the other forum's topic.

Here, this one is not a gif.

Hausser épaules.jpg
 
Top Bottom