Forgive me if this sounds ignorant to the people who design and build tube amps, BUT, why don't so many amps out there on the market have Bass & Treble controls. 
I have these but I would only buy gear that did sport these features. That excluded a lot of amps that I would have otherwise been interested in.
A bit peeved off about it cause I have to do the major overhaul on old gear ( as interesting and satisfying as it has been), I could gave saved a lot of time & bother (and many expletives) !
Cheers & regards to all,
Andrew.
PS: This is in no way meant to offend anybody !!!
I have these but I would only buy gear that did sport these features. That excluded a lot of amps that I would have otherwise been interested in.
A bit peeved off about it cause I have to do the major overhaul on old gear ( as interesting and satisfying as it has been), I could gave saved a lot of time & bother (and many expletives) !
Cheers & regards to all,
Andrew.
PS: This is in no way meant to offend anybody !!!
Because an amplifier just 'boosts' the signal at its input .
You mean integrated amps ...
Well , the tone controls are put before the amplifier signal 1) to correct the deficiencies of the record 2) to suit listeners taste 3) to correct speaker's ( and room ) deficiencies .
Once you have the perfect recording , the perfect speakers and optimal listening habitat , it is obvious that you don't need a pre-amplifier with the tone control defeat button always pressed
You mean integrated amps ...
Well , the tone controls are put before the amplifier signal 1) to correct the deficiencies of the record 2) to suit listeners taste 3) to correct speaker's ( and room ) deficiencies .
Once you have the perfect recording , the perfect speakers and optimal listening habitat , it is obvious that you don't need a pre-amplifier with the tone control defeat button always pressed
Well,
some time ago you could get bass, Middle, Treble controls..Before Eq became popular..It all comes down to Audiophile ideas...The more you put in a signal path the more it degrades the signal, Thats why some have two mono volume controls (Left and right) so you get balance with only two pots...With the tone controls you are using the controls to overcome the non linearities of the system and listening room..The best way to do it is build a pre-amp and put anything in it that you want..if you change your mind you can have a "Flat" switch that shorts them out..Also it means that you can use any power amp that takes your fancy..I always put a volume control on my power amps because it means you can use it "on its own" with just a single Ipod or CD etc..
Here is an interesting question...How many on here wish they had tone controls but don't have them because they think its not "HiFi" to have them or not fashionable?
Be honest when you answer.. If you had them would you use them?
I notice some HiFi tube amps sneaking them in on the side out of view, It looks quite appealing and tastefully done...I guess if you asked them the answer would be there was no room on the front..
Regards
M. Gregg
some time ago you could get bass, Middle, Treble controls..Before Eq became popular..It all comes down to Audiophile ideas...The more you put in a signal path the more it degrades the signal, Thats why some have two mono volume controls (Left and right) so you get balance with only two pots...With the tone controls you are using the controls to overcome the non linearities of the system and listening room..The best way to do it is build a pre-amp and put anything in it that you want..if you change your mind you can have a "Flat" switch that shorts them out..Also it means that you can use any power amp that takes your fancy..I always put a volume control on my power amps because it means you can use it "on its own" with just a single Ipod or CD etc..
Here is an interesting question...How many on here wish they had tone controls but don't have them because they think its not "HiFi" to have them or not fashionable?
Be honest when you answer..
If you had them would you use them?I notice some HiFi tube amps sneaking them in on the side out of view, It looks quite appealing and tastefully done...I guess if you asked them the answer would be there was no room on the front..
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Second thoughts,
I remember many moons ago..when my equipment had tone controls..I didn't keep adjusting them I found a "Sweet spot" and it stayed their untill dust built up on the Knob..That was also the case in the 60's with the single tone knob on the old auto changer (I was very young then LOL)..Now I find that interesting.. no one else seemed to adjust from this setting..
I also remember my father talking to a salesman about buying some audio equipment..and the talk was this amp has great tone and this is a bit edgy etc...no talk of imaging..etc This is on reflection that the old gear is still considered quite good by some people.. Perhaps a 300B has great tone?
Regards
M. Gregg
I remember many moons ago..when my equipment had tone controls..I didn't keep adjusting them I found a "Sweet spot" and it stayed their untill dust built up on the Knob..That was also the case in the 60's with the single tone knob on the old auto changer (I was very young then LOL)..Now I find that interesting..
no one else seemed to adjust from this setting..I also remember my father talking to a salesman about buying some audio equipment..and the talk was this amp has great tone and this is a bit edgy etc...no talk of imaging..etc This is on reflection that the old gear is still considered quite good by some people..
Perhaps a 300B has great tone?Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Simply because in the '60s there was a vast growing market , so a console would have to face an infinity of possible mix between the parts . Also , positioning of cabinets was not sufficiently studied ...and also nowadays submitted to the convenience of having a clean sitting room .
SWBO still rules and children putting fingers INSIDE the cones made bookshelf famous , possibly out of reach and out of sight , so a little tilt in the treble for correct off-axis... Then came the boombox era with the Ultrabass EQ, with a little parenthesis of good '70-'80 design , where Japan was first , at least in semiconductor production technology .
in the '60s there was a vast growing market , so a console would have to face an infinity of possible mix between the parts . Also , positioning of cabinets was not sufficiently studied ...and also nowadays submitted to the convenience of having a clean sitting room .SWBO still rules and children putting fingers INSIDE the cones made bookshelf famous , possibly out of reach and out of sight , so a little tilt in the treble for correct off-axis... Then came the boombox era with the Ultrabass EQ, with a little parenthesis of good '70-'80 design , where Japan was first , at least in semiconductor production technology .
Simply because
SWBO still rules and children putting fingers INSIDE the cones made bookshelf famous , possibly out of reach and out of sight , so a little tilt in the treble for correct off-axis... Then came the boombox era with the Ultrabass EQ, with a little parenthesis of good '70-'80 design , where Japan was first , at least in semiconductor production technology .
LOL,
OFF topic..I remember looking at an LP (record) that said "this is a Stereo recording" on it early 60's and discussing if it would work on a mono record player..the first stereo recording I or my friends had seen...LMAO...
These moments are very precious when you are very young..Regards
M. Gregg
I use to think that way...but Im a purist. I am perectly happy with no tone controls on all of my equipment. I had a Mac pre that had them..and didnt like how the sound was altered. Though, they didnt call them tone controls on the Mac...they had some other way of describing what the controls did.
Post 3 by Gregg is the correct one.
Also throw in the Fletcher-Munsen curves for aural sensitivity vs. audibility at differing frequencies. Douglas Self did an excellent technical book "Loudspeakers" which deals with the issues.
The crafty bit is to manipulate the loudness control (+10dB Bass) plus the bass headroom on the tone control if ones pre/main amp can take it. A good method to sound-out the bass handling.
richy
Also throw in the Fletcher-Munsen curves for aural sensitivity vs. audibility at differing frequencies. Douglas Self did an excellent technical book "Loudspeakers" which deals with the issues.
The crafty bit is to manipulate the loudness control (+10dB Bass) plus the bass headroom on the tone control if ones pre/main amp can take it. A good method to sound-out the bass handling.
richy
The first few replies sum it up pretty fairly I'd say. Power amps don't need tone/EQ controls, period. Depending on the quality of your source and overall system linearity, you may need them in a pre-amp.
Remember how cassette tapes always had that tone sweep at the start? I think most people don't realise that was meant for EQ calibration. Once you got that tone sweep to an even amplitude all the way through, then your system was calibrated to what the recording studio intended, making up for variance between setups, so that you could hear the music the way the band and producers intended. Or it could be just that cassettes were an '80's thing and everybody had a graphic EQ and liked to watch the cool lights go from left to right when they started their tapes.
Now with CD's, being all digital, I'm assuming they figure that all systems should be fairly linear and reproduce the music the way they intended. This is usually not the case, especially when you include the room as part of the system. Most rooms are not ideal shapes for sound, and tend to cause nodes and voids.
What about vinyl? Who knows what the expectation was there? All I know is that with my vinyl listening setup at home I have all the tone controls on 0 and every album I have sounds perfect like that.
Remember how cassette tapes always had that tone sweep at the start? I think most people don't realise that was meant for EQ calibration. Once you got that tone sweep to an even amplitude all the way through, then your system was calibrated to what the recording studio intended, making up for variance between setups, so that you could hear the music the way the band and producers intended. Or it could be just that cassettes were an '80's thing and everybody had a graphic EQ and liked to watch the cool lights go from left to right when they started their tapes.
Now with CD's, being all digital, I'm assuming they figure that all systems should be fairly linear and reproduce the music the way they intended. This is usually not the case, especially when you include the room as part of the system. Most rooms are not ideal shapes for sound, and tend to cause nodes and voids.
What about vinyl? Who knows what the expectation was there? All I know is that with my vinyl listening setup at home I have all the tone controls on 0 and every album I have sounds perfect like that.
Was that boost/cut or coloration ??
I am yet to hear one without tone control, but as you say and has been said ( I am aware of also), the signal path through all theses differing types of tone control components can interfere with the original sound.
But even just to be able to "back the bass off a tad" "a little twitch of the treble" or vice versa to get a believable sound. On tracks where the bass guitar snarls, guitar growls, crisp percussion etc etc ...
On some CD's records, a sweet spot can definately be found, but on other CD' & records etc I am constantly "on the tweak" for what sounded great on one track will have the spkr cones almost bursting out of the box.
I'm OK with that as I am very aware of this so I am never far from the system. When I have it cranked I turn it down at the end of each song in anticipation of the next track so as to avert any damage that could arise. Now this may sound like lunacy to some (when I say cranked, I don't mean Vol on 10,that'll never happen here, 4 is getting loud,6 is pumping )
but this is how I like it. If something blows ( not so far ) it's back on the bench for some TLC. And I do care about them a lot. On a hot day I am a little loathe to use them at all.
Cheers,
Andrew.
Was that boost/cut or coloration ??
I am yet to hear one without tone control, but as you say and has been said ( I am aware of also), the signal path through all theses differing types of tone control components can interfere with the original sound.
But even just to be able to "back the bass off a tad" "a little twitch of the treble" or vice versa to get a believable sound. On tracks where the bass guitar snarls, guitar growls, crisp percussion etc etc ...
On some CD's records, a sweet spot can definately be found, but on other CD' & records etc I am constantly "on the tweak" for what sounded great on one track will have the spkr cones almost bursting out of the box.
I'm OK with that as I am very aware of this so I am never far from the system. When I have it cranked I turn it down at the end of each song in anticipation of the next track so as to avert any damage that could arise. Now this may sound like lunacy to some (when I say cranked, I don't mean Vol on 10,that'll never happen here, 4 is getting loud,6 is pumping )
but this is how I like it. If something blows ( not so far ) it's back on the bench for some TLC. And I do care about them a lot. On a hot day I am a little loathe to use them at all.
Cheers,
Andrew.
The bottom line is there is something wrong..If you have to keep tweeking!!
The system is not linear...And if you don't like the way its recorded on the disc then your probably not going to like the song played live...this is what HiFi is...trying to create the sound in the studio or venue..
Its interesting that some people don't like HiFi..I remember someone saying they could hear an annoying sound in the back ground and now they don't like the track that they have always loved..well thats HiFi..you should get what is on the disc..not anything missing...
Regards
M. Gregg
Yeah , that's right The fact is I seldom or almost never start a new thread , just participating by putting boring answers written in perfect english
but I'm elegant because I stop myself for me more boring
Indeed , you may want to know how many times in 30 years I've rotated knobs
and pushed buttons....
Decreasing ...more and more with time
The fact is I seldom or almost never start a new thread , just participating by putting boring answers written in perfect english but I'm elegant because I stop myself for me more boring
Indeed , you may want to know how many times in 30 years I've rotated knobs
and pushed buttons....
Decreasing ...more and more with time
Mr. Douglas Self wrote :
-"Tone-controls cause an audible deterioration even when set to the flat position."
This is usually blamed on "phase-shift". At the time of writing, tone controls on a preamp badly damage its chances of street (or rather sitting-room) credibility, for no good reason. Tone-controls set to 'flat' cannot possibly contribute any extra phase-shift and must be inaudible. My view is that they are absolutely indispensable for correcting room acoustics, loudspeaker shortcomings, or tonal balance of the source material, and that a lot of people are suffering sub-optimal sound as a result of this fashion. It is now commonplace for audio critics to suggest that frequency-response inadequacies should be corrected by changing loudspeakers. This is an extraordinarily expensive way of avoiding tone-controls.-
I agree with him ! , nothing is wrong to use tone controls .
Douglas Self Site
Best Regards !
-"Tone-controls cause an audible deterioration even when set to the flat position."
This is usually blamed on "phase-shift". At the time of writing, tone controls on a preamp badly damage its chances of street (or rather sitting-room) credibility, for no good reason. Tone-controls set to 'flat' cannot possibly contribute any extra phase-shift and must be inaudible. My view is that they are absolutely indispensable for correcting room acoustics, loudspeaker shortcomings, or tonal balance of the source material, and that a lot of people are suffering sub-optimal sound as a result of this fashion. It is now commonplace for audio critics to suggest that frequency-response inadequacies should be corrected by changing loudspeakers. This is an extraordinarily expensive way of avoiding tone-controls.-
I agree with him ! , nothing is wrong to use tone controls .
Douglas Self Site
Best Regards !
I used to think I was an audio connoisseur. I used standard Yamaha or Sony integrated amps and speakers, and yes, I was constantly fiddling with the tone controls.
Then I built my first set of DIY speakers.
Then I built my first DIY tube amp, then more speakers, and more tube amps.
I don't use tone controls at all anymore. Not too long ago I dialed in one of my previous favorite presets on my laptop. Not good.
I will agree that the room has to be compensated for whether by way of treatments, EQ or a combination of both.
That's just my experience though.
Then I built my first set of DIY speakers.
Then I built my first DIY tube amp, then more speakers, and more tube amps.
I don't use tone controls at all anymore. Not too long ago I dialed in one of my previous favorite presets on my laptop. Not good.
I will agree that the room has to be compensated for whether by way of treatments, EQ or a combination of both.
That's just my experience though.
Last edited:
You have to look at the whole system....
including the listening room. The object of equalization is to overcome deficiencies in the union of electronics-loudspeaker transducer and room acoustics BUT and this is a big BUT....for each 3db of equalization boost you are asking the last link in the electronics chain, ie the power amplifier, to produce 20% more power output to the loudspeaker. Power amplifiers can quickly run out of steam, ie torque, ie the ability to accomplish the work the preamplifier-equalizer is asking it to accomplish. It's like encountering a hill too steep for a bicycle to climb. As the power amp ceases to amplify and approaches clipping, distorion goes through the roof exponentially. So some think that is just best to let sleeping dogs lie so to speak and not worry about equalization. Ray Hughes
including the listening room. The object of equalization is to overcome deficiencies in the union of electronics-loudspeaker transducer and room acoustics BUT and this is a big BUT....for each 3db of equalization boost you are asking the last link in the electronics chain, ie the power amplifier, to produce 20% more power output to the loudspeaker. Power amplifiers can quickly run out of steam, ie torque, ie the ability to accomplish the work the preamplifier-equalizer is asking it to accomplish. It's like encountering a hill too steep for a bicycle to climb. As the power amp ceases to amplify and approaches clipping, distorion goes through the roof exponentially. So some think that is just best to let sleeping dogs lie so to speak and not worry about equalization. Ray Hughes
I think the matter breaks down several ways.
In a perfect world, you dont want to use EQ. It does produce unwanted side effects, phase, distortion, ect... But the crux of the matter is that good sound is a balancing act. The lesser of several evils if you will. How many of you had a album whereby you really liked the music, but the treble was so hot, you couldnt enjoy it? Or it was deficient in bass? And so on......In these cases, tones controls may make something listenable / enjoyable that without isnt despite EQing's unwanted side effects.
-Whats fashionable plays a part (as previously mentioned).
-It adds a bit of cost to the unit.
-Simple bass and treble dont always / usually? address the task adequately, so its assumed that someone with such needs will buy an outboard EQ to handle things, so tone controls on the receiver / pre amp become redundant.
I remember back in the 70's Marantz receivers used to get added attention because of their extra tone control in the form of a "midrange" knob. Also, the wheel instead of a knob for selecting your FM frequency. Neither of these attributes made it sound better, but I bet it sold them a few more units
In a perfect world, you dont want to use EQ. It does produce unwanted side effects, phase, distortion, ect... But the crux of the matter is that good sound is a balancing act. The lesser of several evils if you will. How many of you had a album whereby you really liked the music, but the treble was so hot, you couldnt enjoy it? Or it was deficient in bass? And so on......In these cases, tones controls may make something listenable / enjoyable that without isnt despite EQing's unwanted side effects.
-Whats fashionable plays a part (as previously mentioned).
-It adds a bit of cost to the unit.
-Simple bass and treble dont always / usually? address the task adequately, so its assumed that someone with such needs will buy an outboard EQ to handle things, so tone controls on the receiver / pre amp become redundant.
I remember back in the 70's Marantz receivers used to get added attention because of their extra tone control in the form of a "midrange" knob. Also, the wheel instead of a knob for selecting your FM frequency. Neither of these attributes made it sound better, but I bet it sold them a few more units
There is another aspect of this that people are not being perfectly honest about. The fact is, your ear is not linear across the audio frequency band at different audio power levels. In the old days, there was a 'loudness' button on many integrated amplifiers to try to correct for this at low volumes. This was of course a very crude solution, but it certainly helped.
So while it may be true that your gear is perfectly linear, your head is not.
So while it may be true that your gear is perfectly linear, your head is not.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.