Poll: How many here use an outboard equalizer???

[minn_male42]

in a related discussion on this forum, i made a comment that most of us here do not use an outboard equalizer in our systems.....

a couple of members disagreed with me vigorously.....

stand up and be counted....

do you use an outboard equalizer and/or sound enhancement processor in your system??? if you do, please let us know make and model ....

dolby 5.1 and/or dts processors built-in to your preamp or receiver do not count.....

thanks

[formica]

I don't currently have an EQ as I'm waiting to complete and familiarize myself with my new sub... but I am planning on purchasing the BFD to tame my room/sub response eventually.

I saw the other thread... I think you'll find that those who have an EQ, most will be using it with a sub (or LFE) simply because the low frequencies are the most room (resonance) dependant and noise is less easily detected.

Also with the popularization of HT, it would require 6 to 8 channels of EQ and many hours to set up a room response on a series of parametric EQs. As you probably know, JBL's top of the line HT systems are fully EQed but come with an acoustician.

[middlecreekguy]

I use my Audio Control to give myself a little extra way to dial in the mid to high range. Most of the time I listen to all music with my tone controls on my integrated at flat. I want to hear what the recording sounds like through my system with no enhancements. Then I`ll decide if it needs a little tweaking. Most of the time it`s the high end I play with if I do anything at all. I originally got the equalizer to give my ESS`s a fuller mid-bass. But since I got the Cornwalls I don`t use it as much anymore. But I do use it and am glad I have one. It`s only a 5-band per side. I could have had 10 or 15 slider-pots per side but it just gets to be overkill at a certain point for me. I`m happy. It serves it`s function well.

[PhilMays]

In my second system, which is a Onkyo TX-DS 797, I use a 10 band Yamaha EQ-550 for music on the CD player. I find the Onkyo to have a more flat responce than the Yamaha on my main system. I used to have a Denon that made the music sound different than the previously two mentioned systems. The EQ really lets me hear music the way I want to hear it. BTW, CD player never changed.

I know this is contraversial, however, different systems sound different thereby altering the original recording in and of itself.

I have never had the pleasure of owning tube equipment and music could sound completely different going that route. But for solid state, I prefer to EQ my music.

For Dolby or DTS I do not EQ.

[bkrop]

I used an outboard EQ until my stereo went south last year. My new HT reciever doesn't have the ability to hook up an outboard EQ but does have a internal 5 band EQ that I do use.

The EQ is in storage and I have not felt the need for it in my Scott/LaScala set up but may try the next time I am able to get at it.

[mark1101]

I use an old Soundcraftsman 3rd octave EQ. Don't know the model # (at work). It is OLD. Over the years I have maintained it by cleaning it carefully. I recently got a rebuilt Scott amp and tried the system with and without the EQ. I can make the system sound better with the EQ. No doubt you need to know how to use the unit. The LAS show up noise easily as we all know. I still say I have better sound with the EQ. (I also can purposely misuse the EQ and get noise and distortion.)

I guess I am using it for both room compensation and higher resolution tone control.

I have used various models of Klipsch speakers for the past 26 years (all Heritage), and have never been without an EQ. Growing up, everyone I knew that had Klipsch speakers used an EQ as well.

The variety of source material alone can be a reason to have one.

You very high end guys don't seem to agree, but that's fine. I'd love to hear some of your sytems. I'm sure I'd be impressed.

At some point, just like everything else, it cost big bucks just to achieve small incremental improvements. All ears being equal, it's all relative to how much we spend to get to that next increment.

You asked, so I'm telling ya, I use one. I know lots of people that do.

[Frzninvt]

Well I obviously use an EQ as well as what I would consider other high end processors. I use them when they are called for, and can switch the entire array out of the loop at the press of a button. Some of the newer CD's that I purchase these days are so over-recorded it is sad. Without my EQ or DBX 5BX-DS I could not bear listening to them.

As an example play a CD produced say in the mid to late eightes, then go pick up a copy of something recent you will certainly see what I am talking about, the recording level is insanely high. I use my array primarily for listening to DirecTV, some of my CD's that need help, and a number of albums. I no longer use cassette tapes but they would certainly benefit as well. Alot of times I am using the EQ to cut not boost signals unless the source calls for a boost in a certain frequency range. The 14/10 is a 2/3 Octave EQ and has a tighter range in the more critical low frequency region.

Even with all my DBX processors engaged I get NO noise or undesirable artifacts through my Klipsch speakers. All interconnects are the twisted pair variety and of good quality, I keep my equipment clean and treat the RCA inputs to Caig's DeOxit and ProGold every so often.

To each his own I suppose but for my personal tastes I like the advantages that my EQ has to offer. The auto EQ'ing feature is the best, instead of playing a pink noise CD, walking around with an SPL and mic, the EQ does it all. It generates its own pink noise and can EQ a room in 15 seconds, you can repeat this process from 10 different locations and commit them to memory for recall. You can even average all the memory banks and create a unique curve, or choose the banks you want averaged. It also has a High Frequency Rolloff (HFR) button if the room is a little bright. It can measure line voltage and SPL in real time, the display is also in real time and has an adjustable response setting "fast" or "slow" so you can accurately monitor the curve as it is happening. It can hold the peaks as well if you so desire. The mic can be plugged in the back or front of the unit so you can leave it connected without detracting from the looks of the face. These are just a few of the things it can do.

I cannot imagine being without such a useful tool, it takes all the guess work out of it, not to mention it elimates you having to use your ears to guess at the response.

In conclusion, I realize EQ's are not for everyone and you may have a room that may not require the use of one, that's great! I also realize their are alot of poor quality EQ's out their that can do more harm than good. With the right EQ in the right hands it is an invaluable piece of equipment. Nuff Said.

[DrWho]

at home i don't, but in my studio and the 3 PA systems i mix with, we use ashly, behringer, and dbx EQ'ing units. we use both parametric and 1/3rd octave. it all just depends on what problems you're having and selecting the solution with the least (negative) compromises.

[khorn58]

I use eq in my home studio and my pro studio but not the home hifi sytem.

In the main studio we use klipschorns,Hersey,Altec 604B,electrovoice,Genleric,audix.

All the above go through many diffrent Eqs from Urei 1/3 and 10 band to Neve and Quad eight.

I also always use 1/3 eqs for live sound with my large modern pa sytems.

Tthe small all tube and Horn PA (lascala and altec) use no Eq. But has the warmest sound

for smaller blues clubs ect.

[PYRO]

No EQ here.

[Daddy Dee]

nope

[Dflip]

I used an SAE parametric eq when I was using the Acurus amp and preamp, until two years ago. I changed wire, capacitors in the Cornwalls and a few other mods and was happier with the clearer sound without the eq. It took too much away from the sound.

Since I began using the Scott, the eq sits unused at the moment. I might hook it up to the Acurus and Paridigm set to see what it sounds like, but it is not a big priority.

I would vote no.