In most cases there will (and should) be some kind of tone control between signal source and power amp. Some of the modern trends and their followers are advocating absolute and unconditional absence of any kind of tone control, defending such approach as the only way to hear "original" sound. That is such utter rubbish that it is maybe not worth even simplest explanation, but I was always mightily perplexed with number of people "falling" on that and being seduced with such approach.
These allegations would be correct and sustainable JUST AND ONLY under the following conditions:
** During the entire recording process in studio as well as production later, there were absolutely no ANY tone correction
** Audio system you are using (CD player, Amp, Speakers, etc..) are all of such ultimate quality that they are not changing any parameter of audio signal you are listening in any way
** Your listening room has ideal dimensions and shape, speakers are perfectly positioned in regards to room and its content, room content (walls, furniture, curtains, carpets, shelves, etc...) are not doing any absorption, reflection or refraction
** You are remarkable and highly representative sample of the man kind, with perfect physiologically correct hearing curve
If any of those conditions are not fulfilled, you will need some kind of tone control. Otherwise, you'll be forced to find the way to persuade yourself (that's very easy) but also all others, that that what they are just listening is the "original", regardless of how that really sound, just because it is going "directly" i.e. not passing through any tone control which will ("no doubt") introduce some impairment.
No... in 99,9% of cases, not some, but NONE of previously given conditions, won't be completely fulfilled (most of them won't come even near). Don't allow pseudo-masters and self-proclaimed Hi-Fi guru's to brainwash you. Ordinary common sense should be enough to tell you what is the truth and what is not. The very essence is that YOUR EARS are hearing the original and not that your CD-player and Amp and speakers are reproducing original, because, even if they do, sound reaching your ears could (and will) differ from the original!
These allegations would be correct and sustainable JUST AND ONLY under the following conditions:
** During the entire recording process in studio as well as production later, there were absolutely no ANY tone correction
** Audio system you are using (CD player, Amp, Speakers, etc..) are all of such ultimate quality that they are not changing any parameter of audio signal you are listening in any way
** Your listening room has ideal dimensions and shape, speakers are perfectly positioned in regards to room and its content, room content (walls, furniture, curtains, carpets, shelves, etc...) are not doing any absorption, reflection or refraction
** You are remarkable and highly representative sample of the man kind, with perfect physiologically correct hearing curve
If any of those conditions are not fulfilled, you will need some kind of tone control. Otherwise, you'll be forced to find the way to persuade yourself (that's very easy) but also all others, that that what they are just listening is the "original", regardless of how that really sound, just because it is going "directly" i.e. not passing through any tone control which will ("no doubt") introduce some impairment.
No... in 99,9% of cases, not some, but NONE of previously given conditions, won't be completely fulfilled (most of them won't come even near). Don't allow pseudo-masters and self-proclaimed Hi-Fi guru's to brainwash you. Ordinary common sense should be enough to tell you what is the truth and what is not. The very essence is that YOUR EARS are hearing the original and not that your CD-player and Amp and speakers are reproducing original, because, even if they do, sound reaching your ears could (and will) differ from the original!
Hi boraomega,
I beg to differ with you on point #1. The studio is creating the music and have license to do whatever they please.
Point #4. Doesn't matter. You hear what you hear the way you hear it. If it's live and sounds the same as reproduced, you have perfect fidelity. It does not matter that your hearing response is different to anyone else's.
I don't have a problem with your other statements. I need tone control's to cut the bass when Madonna comes on!
-Chris
I beg to differ with you on point #1. The studio is creating the music and have license to do whatever they please.
Point #4. Doesn't matter. You hear what you hear the way you hear it. If it's live and sounds the same as reproduced, you have perfect fidelity. It does not matter that your hearing response is different to anyone else's.
I don't have a problem with your other statements. I need tone control's to cut the bass when Madonna comes on!
-Chris
>>>I beg to differ with you on point #1. The studio is creating the music and have license to do whatever they please.<<<
Sorry Chris, but IMO you are wrong with that. Studio is not creating the music but musicians. At least, it is suppose to be that way! Published materials (on CD or vinyl or whatever... ) could differ a lot from the original performance depending on personal taste and "vision" of the persons involved in the recording process. Regardless of their experience or anything else, those people are not "neutral" or "flat". They have their preferences and don't be fooled that they always successfully suppress them to give you the original performance.
>>>Point #4. Doesn't matter. You hear what you hear the way you hear it. If it's live and sounds the same as reproduced, you have perfect fidelity. It does not matter that your hearing response is different to anyone else's.<<<
Ohhhh... It does matter. There are many of us having more or less damaged or altered hearing sensitivity in some areas of audio spectrum due to age or prolonged environmental influences of various kinds. If you know that for any reason your hearing is, say, 30% worse above 10KHz and at the same time know that there are a lot of details in that area of spectrum in the performance you are listening, are you accepting such "crippled" enjoyment or reach for tone control to compensate that?! All people are potential buyers of audio equipment and you never know who of them and for what reason might need tone controls. Those that don't need them can always bypass them or leave them flat. Some people might have some bad experience with ill-conceived preamps or tone controls, but they shouldn't generalize things like "...all tone controls are bad for sound...".
Sorry Chris, but IMO you are wrong with that. Studio is not creating the music but musicians. At least, it is suppose to be that way! Published materials (on CD or vinyl or whatever... ) could differ a lot from the original performance depending on personal taste and "vision" of the persons involved in the recording process. Regardless of their experience or anything else, those people are not "neutral" or "flat". They have their preferences and don't be fooled that they always successfully suppress them to give you the original performance.
>>>Point #4. Doesn't matter. You hear what you hear the way you hear it. If it's live and sounds the same as reproduced, you have perfect fidelity. It does not matter that your hearing response is different to anyone else's.<<<
Ohhhh... It does matter. There are many of us having more or less damaged or altered hearing sensitivity in some areas of audio spectrum due to age or prolonged environmental influences of various kinds. If you know that for any reason your hearing is, say, 30% worse above 10KHz and at the same time know that there are a lot of details in that area of spectrum in the performance you are listening, are you accepting such "crippled" enjoyment or reach for tone control to compensate that?! All people are potential buyers of audio equipment and you never know who of them and for what reason might need tone controls. Those that don't need them can always bypass them or leave them flat. Some people might have some bad experience with ill-conceived preamps or tone controls, but they shouldn't generalize things like "...all tone controls are bad for sound...".
Hi boraomega,
Part of the creative process lies with the producer and engineer. I've done a lot of time in recording studios. Thank god for the engineer! And the effects rack. If they are attempting to capture a performance, then I would agree with you.
If my hearing were 30% down at 10KHz, and I go to a symphony. I then play a recording of the same performance and it sounds identical (I hear no difference), I'd have to say the reproduction was perfect. By definition.
If I choose to alter the sound via tone controls - then fine. Most of my preamps have tone controls that are sometimes not set at "flat", normally they are. I never did say that tone controls are bad because I don't agree with that statement either.
-Chris
Part of the creative process lies with the producer and engineer. I've done a lot of time in recording studios. Thank god for the engineer! And the effects rack. If they are attempting to capture a performance, then I would agree with you.
If my hearing were 30% down at 10KHz, and I go to a symphony. I then play a recording of the same performance and it sounds identical (I hear no difference), I'd have to say the reproduction was perfect. By definition.
If I choose to alter the sound via tone controls - then fine. Most of my preamps have tone controls that are sometimes not set at "flat", normally they are. I never did say that tone controls are bad because I don't agree with that statement either.
-Chris
boraomega said:
RIGHT.
Simplicity usually pays-off in transparency.
boraomega said:
Let's simplify all this, ok?
1. You NEVER know what's in the disc (CD, vinyl, whatever).
2. There's no such thing as a source component ("of ultimate quality") that doesn't change anything.
3. You never get to know what they have done in the studio, and it doesn't matter.
Here's my advice:
Good recordings sound good, bad recordings should sound bad on a decent system.
Trash them. Don't listen.
If you have a good source and a good system that's how it is.
If you go on trying to salvage a bad sound from a bad recording with tubes
to "sweeten" the sound or with tone controls/EQs to make it sound as you want, you are just fooling around and getting away from reality.The reality is: some discs sound very good, some sound very bad.
The good ones need no EQ.
Some sound so bad that there's no EQ that can salvage them.
Some would dream to have an EQ with 1000 presets, one of every disc.
As for the room... it's usually the excuse for a bad system.
You can improve your system a lot, maintaining the same room.
Without EQ.
Nope. Hate to bust your bubble but ... Compression absolutely had to be done. Mike selection = tone control. Mike selection was not corrected to any great extent, everyone would just use an SM58 or something if it could be done well. The mike was selected for pickup pattern and sound.
It's great to talk about direct to disc, but we are talking about the average, normal recording process. You don't want to know.
Recording is, by design, a creative process. The producer shapes the sound they want. The engineer makes it happen. The musician plays on command and his work is interpreted. Explain Phil Specter (not his recent alleged activities). Even a live gig is interpreted by mic selection and placement at the very least.
I normally leave my tone controls flat, but I don't always agree with the producer / engineer. Recordings that sound bad don't get played, if purchased in the first place.
I agree therefore, with Carlos. With the exception that I've heard some terrible rooms.
-Chris
It's great to talk about direct to disc, but we are talking about the average, normal recording process. You don't want to know.
Recording is, by design, a creative process. The producer shapes the sound they want. The engineer makes it happen. The musician plays on command and his work is interpreted. Explain Phil Specter (not his recent alleged activities). Even a live gig is interpreted by mic selection and placement at the very least.
I normally leave my tone controls flat, but I don't always agree with the producer / engineer. Recordings that sound bad don't get played, if purchased in the first place.
I agree therefore, with Carlos. With the exception that I've heard some terrible rooms.
-Chris
anatech said:I agree therefore, with Carlos. With the exception that I've heard some terrible rooms.
-Chris
Me too.
But you can do something to the room, without using EQ.
Sometimes a normal carpet and curtains on the windows makes wonders.
Just let your wife put the furniture in, and keep an eye on her.
An empty room is bad for sound, it echoes.
That's the problem of most listening rooms on hi-fi distributors: too empty.
A normal living room is not so bad, you just need the right speakers for your room.
Big speakers on small spaces sound boomy, small speakers on large spaces sound anaemic.
No need to EQ, you just need to be conscient of what kind of system you can have on your place.
I'm a fan of loudness controls. Even if you had a perfect recording it will only sound correct at the same volume it was recorded at, due to the nonlinear frequency response of the ear. At low listening level you will need to boost the bass and treble to make it sound flat. At high levels the opposite is true. Music is often mastered at a high level; higher than normal listening levels.
Sure, you can do a lot to improve things by treating the listening room, but no matter what you do there is currently no combination of room and speakers that is perfect; there are always going to be compromises. With signal processing (be it tone controls or something more complex) you have the freedom to choose what to compromise at will.
Lastly, there is personal taste. Maybe you want the most accurate recreation possible, or maybe you like something a little different. For music that was created electronically, there is no 'real' at all, so you can fiddle with the sound without destroying fidelity as such.
Having said that, my current system does no processing at all, except a simple conversion from stereo to 5.1 (where needed).
Sure, you can do a lot to improve things by treating the listening room, but no matter what you do there is currently no combination of room and speakers that is perfect; there are always going to be compromises. With signal processing (be it tone controls or something more complex) you have the freedom to choose what to compromise at will.
Lastly, there is personal taste. Maybe you want the most accurate recreation possible, or maybe you like something a little different. For music that was created electronically, there is no 'real' at all, so you can fiddle with the sound without destroying fidelity as such.
Having said that, my current system does no processing at all, except a simple conversion from stereo to 5.1 (where needed).
Maybe the truth is somewhere in between. I am a believer of giving people choices and letting them decide what to listen.
99% of the times, none of us have a clue as to how the life performance is and how the musicians intend us to hear. There is far more to music than just tone or loudness. And each individual has his or her own interpretation of what is intended by the musician thus a level of subjectivity is involved.
So it makes zero sense to eliminate tone / loudness control and as does insisting on tone / loudness control in every box. It is far better to provide the feature and let people decide what they want.
99% of the times, none of us have a clue as to how the life performance is and how the musicians intend us to hear. There is far more to music than just tone or loudness. And each individual has his or her own interpretation of what is intended by the musician thus a level of subjectivity is involved.
So it makes zero sense to eliminate tone / loudness control and as does insisting on tone / loudness control in every box. It is far better to provide the feature and let people decide what they want.
Interesting discussion. Long ago I noticed that I was always listening to music with tone controls in neutral position. Any change of bass or treble controls was not specially pleasant for listening. I must admit that in that amplifier I had volume control with three taps which was enough to arrange the circuit that had response compensated according to Fletcher Munson curves (http://www.webervst.com/fm.htm) that describes change of ear response depending on sound level. Perception of music and coloration does not change if you change volume with this control. At least you have the right to listen at low levels with no harm to your impression from the music. Later I came to conclusion that there was no any sense to have preamplifiers except phono preamp. In fact most power amplifiers have input stages that are no different from the circuits of preamplifiers and sensitivity is absolutely adequate to the signals we have from sources available. Earlier circuits and components did not give much freedom in building pwer amplifiers with high parameters and these parameters could be achieved only by applying deep feedback (open loop gain was low) and as result sensitivity suffered. To get more flexibility I use that compensated loudness control followed by usual linear level control (sensitivity). Combining these you can get affordable sound at any level. Confusing moment is that if you use loudness after some fixed sensitivity is adjusted you do not feel the change of sound coloration. Some people can argue that loudness control like that has altered phase response but I believe that the best way is to listen… If you want loudness to be disabled just turn it to maximum and use only “sensitivity” control. Potentiometers with one tap are absolutely bad for that purpose. Additional loudness regulators in Yamaha and some other amplifiers use potentiometers without any taps and their response is far from the one we need. Maybe that is the reason it is not being used as main volume control.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.