cleanest/ easiest EQ

[rick57]

What is the (sonically) cleanest/ best way to have EQ in a system, that you’re building from scratch?

Aim: to compensate for older recordings (back to 1920s blues) through to compressed contemporary rock, and the occasional well recorded piece.

Haven’t looked into it at all before, but am thinking of using the Behringer DCX2496 EQ Crossover (or better if affordable) direct from the CD digital out, and use maybe half a dozen memories.


Also might look into something like Adobe Audition to adjust dynamic range, but I don’t want to remix recordings.

Anyone know if Audition (the old Cool Edit Pro) or soemething else affordable allows you to do it satisfactorily real time ~ on the fly??

Cheers

[neutron7]

if you want to use real time processing through PC as you suggested with adobe audition, you could even use winamp which is free.

set input to "nullsoft CD/line in plug in"

and use the included graphic EQ you might want to use this eq plug-in

http://www.winamp.com/plugins/details.php?id=143894

you could get this spectrum analyser plug in too but it costs 20 dollars

http://spectool.megafongsm.net/download/

[rick57]

I was thinking of using real time PC processing maybe only when I would need to enhance the dynamic range, maybe 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 recordings, not necessarily all the time.

I could reconsider that, but what else is there in EQ, apart from those PC products, and standalone Behringers??

[rick57]

I know many think of EQ as “non audiophile”, but surely some others here have dabbled in this FR trickery ?

[rick57]

Hey guys,

Siegfried Linkwitz EQs to his heart’s content ~ doesn’t anyone else??

[PHEONIX]

Hello Rick57

What domain do you want to perform the EQ in analog or digital.

Regards
Arthur

[brianuk]

I dont think there's much wrong with Analog if you are carfeful. The trouble with commercial EQ's that have 10 bands and dont cost much is that the components have to be the very very cheapest, thats just simple economics. If it costs $150 then they probably manufacture it in total for less than a third of that, thats not the parts cost - thats labour, factory overheads etc.

Given those overheads its quite easy (if you judge your time to be free!) to build something better for the same cost.

Pick the bands you want to eq carefully for example by doing some room monitoring (there's a nice mic kit gruop buy on here somewhere at the moment) then apply just the bands you wish to do a little correction on

You'd probably do very well with 3 to 5 bands and then you might be able to afford reasonable components. Of course limiting the bands keeps the components down and the sound quality high IE only fix what you need to do and maybe add a band for a liitle naughty bass when needed hehe

Goodluck and let us know what you end up doing.

[rick57]

Brian was basically right, just do what’s needed.
You referred to room EQ, which we all have problems with, and probably Analog may be easier.

I sometimes think it could be implemented into the XO?

Analog or digital?
I’m open on that ~ whatever gives the better sound quality for (parts & time) cost. In my case to compensate for older recordings (eg 1920s blues) ~~~ if direct from the CD digital out, is digital now easier/ better?

Cheers

[PHEONIX]

Hello Rick47

You can get linear phase EQ in the digital domain that does not have changing phase with frequency , you can increase levels at a particular frequency and not get a phase shifts as you do in Analog EQ which is superior sounding than the anlog EQ approach. The phase shift audible changes the sound of the software you are listening to in perceptable a negative way.

But to do this you need an computer , mastering software with the appropriate linear phase EQ.

Regards
Arthur

[rick57]

Hi Arthur

What price would mastering software start at??

And does any do dynamic range expansion
easily – I believe Adobe Audition does, but is quite fiddly.

Cheers