 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.164.80.137
I like to listen to music at relatively low levels (60-70db) sometimes by choice (to save my ears) sometimes by necessity (e.g. when my family is sleeping).Unfortunately at low levels, thanks to the equal-loudness curve (the way we subjectively experience loudness at difference frequencies and sound levels), even the best systems don't sound that great. I know, I test every system I get my hands on at low levels. Without some equalization, at low listening levels the sound is thin, flat, anemic, un-involving, and lacking in bass and top end.
After reading a review of a very affordable ($300) digital equalizer (the Behringer DEQ2496) in the Sept issue of AffordableAudio (www.affordableaudio.org), I decided to give it a try.
The item arrived last night, and in just a couple of hours I was able to get my system to sound better than it ever has. I used the parametric equalizer to create two pre-sets for low level listening (LOUDNESS1 - for 60 to 65db, LOUDNESS2 - for 65-70db). I created the presets after studying the Fletcher equal-loudness curve and compensating for it.
I also used the EQs build-in pink-noise generator and auto-eq function to automatically adjust 61 EQ points for the flattest possible response in my room.
In a rush to try the new toy I violated a bunch of audio rules with respect to cable/connector quality, cable lengths, adding junk to the signal chain, etc. But I'll be damned if my system does not sound the best it ever has.
At low levels there is no comparison. The loudness curve is a fact of life. The music sounds 10 times better with the right boost in bass and treble. Screw the purists, for those of us who can't listen at 90db+ all the time, tone controls (especially loudness) are a necessity.
Equalizing for the room acoustic has improved the sound very noticeably at "regular" listening level (I don't use the loudness boosts at 75db+). This is not one of those subtle differences, I did some A/B testing with my wife (who had no idea what was going on) and she picked the equalized/corrected sound every single time.
I feared that the new sound would be impressive at first but would ultimately become fatiguing. Quite the contrary, I have listened to more CDs today than I have in the past several weeks combined. For a vinyl-head like me this is a major breakthrough.
Originally my audio chain consisted of:
Thorens TD125 mkII --> SME 3009 Series II (not imp.) --> Clearaudio Aurum Beta Wood --> Bellari VP129 --> PrimaLuna Prologue One --> Quad 22Ls. And a Rega Apollo for those rare times I listen to CDs.
Now I have the following:
Thorens TD125 mkII --> SME 3009 Series II (not imp.) --> Clearaudio Aurum Beta Wood --> Bellari VP129 --> Acurus PreAmp --> Behringer DEQ2496 --> PrimaLuna Prologue One --> Quad 22Ls. And a Rega Apollo for those rare times I listen to CDs.
I used old and cheap connectors, cables, and adapters I had around the house since the DEQ has XLR in/outs.
Audio rules I have broken:
- Doubled the lenght and complexity of my audio chain (in addition to the EQ, I added pre-amp before the integrated amp so I could pass multiple inputs through the EQ).
- Took a nice clean analog signal and subjected it to A to D conversion, mangled it digitally, then converted it back to analog.
- Used (cheap) adapters (2 XLR-->RCA)
- Used cheap AND long cable (2 * 10' XRL to RCA cable)
- And, of course, I am using tone adjustmentsBy all account, I should have screwed-up the sound of my system big-time. Instead, I can't tear myself away from it and being able to listen at low-level means I can listen more without hurting my ears or being fatigued.
What can I say. Biggest epiphany yet since I re-discovered vinyl.
Alberto
Follow Ups:
I live in a flat, and unfortunately have a surly retiree directly beneath me who will go spazzo at the slightest provocation, I had to make a point of putting a system together that would 'work' at low levels.A lot of transistor amps need to be making serious amps before they come to life.
For satisfying music at 'miniature' in-room levels, you need to look for 'class A/B' hybrids (Rotels and others), or even pure class-A (such as some Musical Fidelity models). Or a single-ended triode valve, of course.
Horses for courses.
The relatively small negatives one may incur from the DEQ2496 are simply dwarfed by the positives if your room needs some EQ, and if your room has walls, it probably does.Breaking rules? Here's how I use my DEQ when I listen to vinyl (have a barfbag ready): Turntable to Creek OBH12 preamp, tape output of OBH12 to my Alesis Masterlink digital recorder which samples at 24/96 - output Alesis digital signal to my DEQ2496 (with a non-digital cable bought at a guitar shop) - DEQ reads 24/96 signal and outputs back to my Creek. Oh yeah - because the output of the DEQ is so high (5v or something - like all pro gear) I don't put it's output directly back to the Creek, it first goes through an intervening preamp a Sonic Euphoria. HA!
Sounds great - nice tonality, soundstage way beyond the speaker boudaries, nice depth all things considered. Sure, I can bypass that entire digital loop and play my turntable directly to my preamp - but it's such a muddled bass mess that it's not even possible to compare. I could put the turntable output directly to the DEQ2496 and let it to the A/D, but I want to be able to record to my Alesis anyway so it might just as well stay there.
I just threw on my technics recently because I wanted to start collecting records - my parents drove it to me 1500 miles in the trunk of their car, under luggage, without removing the platter. It was my turntable in high school actually. Threw a DJ cartridge on it, got a preamp from a guitar store (click here ). Sounds bloody good!
The interesting comparison will come when I record to the Alesis, cut a CD, and play the CD back with my better DAC from my computer hard drive - same bits as go to the DEQ, but now played back through a better DAC. Haven't really gotten around to that yet, I kind of like watching the records spin, plus when I cut a CD it will have to be 16/44 instead of 24/96
if you like the way it sounds, you win.
That's weird! I can listen to my set amp at low levels, clear as the blue sky without the need for "equalizer".maybe your rig wants to be "violated".
> That's weird! I can listen to my set amp at low levels,
> clear as the blue sky without the need for "equalizer".My second system is an SET/high-eff setup (Bottlehead). Which I bought for low-level listening. It sounds great, but unfortunately it has exactly the same issues at low level because SET/high-eff does not change the ears' sensitivity to frequency. By "low listening level" I mean an average of 60-65db (A-weighting) - perhaps we have different notions of low.
But I grant you that SET/high-eff comes "alive" at lower volume than PPs. My SET/high-eff, comes fully "alive" (i.e. I don't feel much need for loudness eq) at ~70db, for my main, PP, system I need about 75db before some loudness eq becomes unnecessary.
> ... "clear as the blue sky" ...
It's not a matter of clarity, but of rich and realistic sound at lower listening levels.
Alberto
Me too. SET + efficient speakers = good at any volume, I find.I wouldn't dream of putting EQ into my system.
Since every phono preamp has RIAA EQ?OK, so it's a smart alecky question, but with a serious point. Both phono and analog tape have EQ and de-EQ as part of the picture. In fact, I understand that a lot of record mastering facilities have their phono cartridges individually EQed to get flat response so the mastering engineers can get the best evaluation of the cut lacquer in comparison with the master tape. A lot of audiophiles seem to equate equalization, tone controls, etc. with herpes, but proper equalization has the potential to IMPROVE sound quality, even with the extra circuitry involved. IMHO, YMMV.
Smart alecky indeed.A good designer of a phono stage will go to great lengths to try and get as close to the ideal De-EQ as possible to 'decode' the RIAA encoding. Do you think that same designer would ever put a big dial on the front so that user could have a tweak for themselves?
No, because it would end up wildly inaccurate.
Also, let's look at the type of EQ that's being talked about here. It is a digital EQ - if I'm not mistaken then this means turning the signal into a digital one - applying algorythms - and turning back into analog. It's proably like most digital out there - initially sounds extremely accurate and lifelike BUT becomes tedious and hard to listen to over long periods - the exact opposite of straight analog.
> You obviously can't hear any better than I. Such is life! ;-) (nt)John, I may not have golden ears, but I might be in the silver category for a few more years if I keep the volume low :-).
Seriously, I believe that two of the weakest links in audio are our hearing and room acoustics. I don't believe anyone doubts that there is such a thing as a perceived loudness curve that's affected by frequency; and unless you are willing to listen at full volume all the time, you are going to distance yourself from the most realistic sound without some EQ.
Same thing for the room. If one can afford a perfect acoustic environment that's great. But if you can't do that, reluctance compensate for bad acoustics with EQ in order to keep the signal chain "pure" is, in my new-found opinion, a mistake.
Alberto
What a wise decision you made Albertoderoma.., the Behringer is by far the best upgrade for the average system ( no matter what price ) and an apropriate cure against Audio-nervosa.
I got one after being frustrated that my long sought after and very much revered LS didn't match the different acoustical circumstances of my new listening room, I bought the JMR Offrandes about a year and a half before I moved and never realised the importance of acoustics.
I had mine modified .., with great results.
I'm using 'el cheapo' XLR> RCA's and vice versa too and experimented with more sophisticated cables but gave up on it.., as far as I'm concerned not worth the time and spending.The Behringer may have drawbacks, although I've not yet discovered them, but the advantages are much more obvious.
Hi Alberto,Does the new equalizer have something that reduces gain? I'm curious how you can get away with all that gain, i.e., phono amp > preamp > integrated amp, which of course already includes a preamp), and still be able to turn the volume control up to a reasonable level so that you don't get channel imbalance from the integrated amp?
And you didn't get noise problems either?
Terry
Hi Terry,The EQ has a way to reduce (or boost) gain, but I did not have to use it. Until you get past the "noon" position on the pre-amp volume knob you are not adding gain but reducing it. As a matter of fact, with this set-up I can get the PrimaLuna to work closer to its optimal range even at lower volumes (i.e. I can turn the volume knob more than I normally would).
Alberto
I was curious because I have an Art Audio Vinyl One phono pre going into a Plinius 9200 (integrated amp) tape input and I have so much gain that I can't raise the Plinius' volume control past nine o'clock. I have the Plinius' gain set on "low" and I need to keep the Vinyl One's adjustable gain knob at a certain position to obtain the best dynamics from the music.
Dave
Later Gator,
Crank up your talking machine, grab a jar of your favorite "kick-back", sit down, relax, and let the good times roll.The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
