"MD" wrote in message
...
From text I sent to Sterophile
I have been a subscriber for about 15 years. In that time I have learned,
and tried to put in practice, good room treatment techniques. I use test
CD's and a sound meter to aid in placement and I treat all the room hot
spots like first order reflection, echo flutter and deaden the area behind
my head (my Triangle Celius speakers sounds their best in a spot that
forces me to the rear wall- I have an odd room). What confuses me is the
double speak on tone controls and equalizers as well as exactly which test
tones I should use when running the tests.
On equalizers/tone controls. I can't count how many times I have read that
these are either the bane of our collective electronic existence or a
necessary tool to help make some recordings sound right (specifically tone
controls). On equalizers I read that they induce too many problems but
your magazine has recommended several of them (all in the digital domain I
believe).
Digital EQ is definitely better than analog EQ.
In my room I have several strong nodes below 300hz (as do most people I am
sure). I have a small dent at 50hz, huge plus ups at 60hz and 120hz and a
dip at about 250hz (Here is where the test tone confusion comes in. With
warble tones the aberrations are far lower. With straight tones I have a
16db shift from 120hz to 250hz - with warble tones the shift is about 5db.
Which am I to use?
Pink noise, not warble tones.
Seems to me warble tones are more
effective because the approximate the changes that occur in music?). After
studiously using my test gear/tones, set up programs, several suggestions
from professional sources (read in your mag and others) as well as
installing some room treatment (albeit none for bass control) I am left
with the predicament described. As far as I can tell room treatments,
designed to help in the low end, are not discriminate enough. While they
will tame my hot spots they will also negatively affect my dips(?). Using
a bass tone control won't work for basically the same reason. At the end
of the day (which I assure you is a grossly understated metaphor) I
decided to try a cheap 10 band EQ I had on hand (I would try the digital
products but they are way too expensive).
You should look into pro aduio EQ's as they are more affordable although
less accurate, they are still effective.
Utilizing the EQ and other associated items I was able to smooth out the
bumps, in both directions, to a very significantly measurable degree. Now
here's the rub. When I asked my daughter to help me A/B the difference
(which is easy with an EQ - one button) I had to work at hearing the
difference - more often than not. (I should note that I could go flat to
40hz and only 3db down at 31.5hz). While I was able to discern the
difference on some recordings (bass notes ended sooner - no bloat) it was
not a startling difference. As such is it "better" that I use the EQ to
settle the bloat or run away from the wretched beast, and all it's
detriments, and deal with the bloat because its less damaging? (I should
also note that I heard no negative artifacts with the EQ - no imaging
change or high frequency issues). Finally – does anyone make an affordable
analog EQ that only affects the range below 300hz? (Or a digital unit that
is affordable and isn’t meant for subwoofers?)
Here is a link to one such digital EQ, there are others available through
the same vendor and the brand name you find there. Check them out and
perhaps you will find somehthing that will help.
Be sure to read the desciptions carefully, as it is likely you will need
cables that you might not have.
With many units available below $300.00, it should be fairly easy to find
something.
The best units are most likely to be from RANE but will run $600.00 and up.
You can review their product line at their website,
http://www.rane.com/procat.html.
Good luck.