Some albums seem to need a bit of EQ adjustment. Using foobar2000 and its 31-channel graphic equalizer add-on is good, but you have to set it up for each album, each time you play that album. Does anyone know of software which will take these EQ settings and apply them to the data file? This would mean that having done the adjustment once, you would never have to do it again.
Winamp.
From the FAQ:
Q: What are auto presets? What does the 'Auto' button do?
A: Auto presets can be set for specific media files and automatically load for each media file.
1. set the EQ to the way you like for a currently playing song or current file in main/player window.
2. press Presets button
3. select Save
4. select Auto-load preset...
5. press the Save button
When the Equalizer and Auto buttons are on the EQ will change automatically for each media file that has an auto preset.
But I don't think these are added to the tag.
From the FAQ:
Q: What are auto presets? What does the 'Auto' button do?
A: Auto presets can be set for specific media files and automatically load for each media file.
1. set the EQ to the way you like for a currently playing song or current file in main/player window.
2. press Presets button
3. select Save
4. select Auto-load preset...
5. press the Save button
When the Equalizer and Auto buttons are on the EQ will change automatically for each media file that has an auto preset.
But I don't think these are added to the tag.
Last edited:
Winamp's wikipedia page says "supports gapless playback for MP3 and AAC files (since version 5.3)". Nothing about FLAC. A quick internet search suggests some people get away with it, while one person reports it suddenly becoming non-gapless for no apparent reason. I'll steer clear.
Don't be disparaging about opera. Rock music has almost become an anachronism too.
Parametric equalizers seem to be preferred over graphic equalizers by my contact in the recording industry, so I'll try giving that a go and then using SoX. Thanks. It also overcomes the problem of graphic EQ algorithms being different to each other.
Don't be disparaging about opera. Rock music has almost become an anachronism too.
Parametric equalizers seem to be preferred over graphic equalizers by my contact in the recording industry, so I'll try giving that a go and then using SoX. Thanks. It also overcomes the problem of graphic EQ algorithms being different to each other.
No need for that. Many players can do gapless FLAC. Even crossfades.
John, what kind of tweaks do you generally go with EQ? Having them follow a song or album would be handy, for sure.
Good point. I have a 31 band (digital) inline but usually make broad curves anyway.
John, what kind of tweaks do you generally go with EQ? Having them follow a song or album would be handy, for sure.
There is a foobar plugin that uses convolution and selects the filter kernel based on the track's tags.
Yet Another Convolver - Hydrogenaudio Forums
With convolution you can do as many eq bands as you want.
Yet Another Convolver - Hydrogenaudio Forums
With convolution you can do as many eq bands as you want.
The adjustment I often like to make is a cut somewhere in the 8k to 13kHz range. This is to compensate for the "glassy" sound that arises from many female classical singers and the "grainy" sound of many a male classical singer. If anyone knows of a better way to deal with this I'd love to know. It's a problem that I've been aware of for my entire life, showing up on all systems I've ever had. As my system has got better, it sounds more and more like simple resonances in the upper band.
Sox is the holygrail. You also might want to start learning Linux and the JACK audio system which would allow you to filter the output inline, amongst many many other things.
You can be absolutely precise with what filtering you want to do. You could happily chain 32 (or what ever number you want... there somewhere I read an upper limit) EQ levels. Some of the SoX effects are primarily intended to be applied to a single instrument or ‘voice’.
From the Sox page Effects
equalizer frequency[k] width[q|o|h|k] gain
Apply a two-pole peaking equalisation (EQ) filter. With this filter, the signal-level at and around a selected frequency can be increased or decreased, whilst (unlike band-pass and band-reject filters) that at all other frequencies is unchanged.
frequency gives the filter’s central frequency in Hz, width, the band-width, and gain the required gain or attenuation in dB. Beware of Clipping when using a positive gain.
In order to produce complex equalisation curves, this effect can be given several times, each with a different central frequency.
The filter is described in detail in [1].
This effect supports the −−plot global option.
You can be absolutely precise with what filtering you want to do. You could happily chain 32 (or what ever number you want... there somewhere I read an upper limit) EQ levels. Some of the SoX effects are primarily intended to be applied to a single instrument or ‘voice’.
From the Sox page Effects
equalizer frequency[k] width[q|o|h|k] gain
Apply a two-pole peaking equalisation (EQ) filter. With this filter, the signal-level at and around a selected frequency can be increased or decreased, whilst (unlike band-pass and band-reject filters) that at all other frequencies is unchanged.
frequency gives the filter’s central frequency in Hz, width, the band-width, and gain the required gain or attenuation in dB. Beware of Clipping when using a positive gain.
In order to produce complex equalisation curves, this effect can be given several times, each with a different central frequency.
The filter is described in detail in [1].
This effect supports the −−plot global option.
Its classic sibilance you're describing. Do you find it on the recording (call up the wav file in Audacity to check)? If its not been introduced at that stage then the problem is almost certainly out of band interference from various sources, coming into and out of your various components via the grounds of your signal cables. Regrounding is one solution (rigorous adoption of star earthing within a component), power supply (including mains) filtering is another. I don't find its so common on recordings as professionals tend to use balanced signal cables which mitigates it. But I do have a couple of prized tracks to demonstrate it
I reckon I lived with it for dozens of years without paying any attention. Then noticed it for certain in the past couple of years. Since noticing it, I've been chasing it down relentlessly...
Yes, I take it its intermodulation between HF energy and interference but I don't know why it always seems to have the signature you've described.
I haven't got Audacity. For some reason I thought it had to be paid for, but I see that it is actually free. I'll try it out and report back in due course.
I'm surprised by what you say about interference. I did have a serious problem with radiation from the rectifiers in my power amp. When I changed to a Musical Fidelity CD player it made occasional random dropouts - which ceased when I put 4x100nF capacitors across my amp's rectifiers - so I guess that was pretty bad. Maybe there is some residual? I do use a mains filter.
As far as grounding is concerned, the amp is strictly star-grounded. My DAC is supposed to be earthed but I've tried de-earthing it (making everything floating) but that makes no difference.
John
this is one of the best free Parametric EQ's i have found so far it is a VST type.
KVR: Christian Budde Noname-EQ - Virtual Effect
JER
KVR: Christian Budde Noname-EQ - Virtual Effect
JER
Yeah, I was surprised to discover it too.
Yes I had a audio design which used a bridge rectifier which failed conducted EMC testing because of just that. I prefer to use snubbers these days to absorb the RF rather than just recirculate it. Having an amp's rectifier noise affect a CD player is really something
What kind of mains filter may I ask?
Are you sure its really really strict? Just as one example, Doug Self violates strict star grounding (in his book) at one place that really does make a difference to the sound - the input.
What kind of transformer does the DAC contain? Does it have its own dedicated mains filter - internal or external?
Interesting questions, abraxalito. Sorry I've been so slow to respond.
I'd be interested to know more about your snubber arrangement.
My only possible doubt about star grounding is at the input. To eliminate hum (because the PSU is in the same unit) I take a twisted pair from the RCA socket, which is isolated from the grounded chassis. This takes the input signal to the PCB, accompanied all the way by the ground, with the ground wire then bent back to the star point without making contact with the PCB.
Audacity has proved there is recorded sibilance on some recordings, others just show an excessive top end but without specific peaks. It is these latter ones I find most troublesome. Some sound as though there is very significant sibilance around 11-12kHz, requiring -18dB or so of cut to eliminate (using foobar's 31 channel graphic equalizer).
My DAC is a Benchmark DAC1 and I don't know what sort of PSU it's got. Input to DAC is by optical fibre.
I'm thinking about further quietening the rectifier emissions by a 0.5 ohm resistor in the power circuit to the reservoir capacitors. Do you think that would be worth trying? It will reduce the voltage by a volt or so but I'm not worried about that.
I'd be interested to know more about your snubber arrangement.
My only possible doubt about star grounding is at the input. To eliminate hum (because the PSU is in the same unit) I take a twisted pair from the RCA socket, which is isolated from the grounded chassis. This takes the input signal to the PCB, accompanied all the way by the ground, with the ground wire then bent back to the star point without making contact with the PCB.
Audacity has proved there is recorded sibilance on some recordings, others just show an excessive top end but without specific peaks. It is these latter ones I find most troublesome. Some sound as though there is very significant sibilance around 11-12kHz, requiring -18dB or so of cut to eliminate (using foobar's 31 channel graphic equalizer).
My DAC is a Benchmark DAC1 and I don't know what sort of PSU it's got. Input to DAC is by optical fibre.
I'm thinking about further quietening the rectifier emissions by a 0.5 ohm resistor in the power circuit to the reservoir capacitors. Do you think that would be worth trying? It will reduce the voltage by a volt or so but I'm not worried about that.
These days I'm using a 1uF Z5U ceramic (50V) in series with 47R across each diode.
That sounds fine, doesn't violate the star grounding.
Judging by the pictures Google found it has a toroidal, so moderately high capacitance to mains. Not easy to tell if there's any mains filtering going on behind the shroud over the mains inlet - my guess is not. So there's a potential culprit for sibilance.
A resistor like that will tend to dampen down ringing on the secondary of the transformer and tend to reduce higher order harmonic magnetic coupling in to the rest of the circuit but do little to quench rectifier emissions methinks.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.