Do you use an eq,tone controls, loudness?

[gasolin]

I assume you're talking to me here.

Most HiFi speakers aren't flat. As your graphs show, they often head towards boom/tizz (elevated bass and treble), which is impressive for two minutes and then sounds lifeless and fatiguing. For a short demo in a HiFi shop, that tonality will sell boxes. I wouldn't want to listen to them for long, though, before trying to find a way of balancing them out and bringing the midrange forwards. After all, most music is in the midrange.

I try to get them to have a flat response because that sounds the best to me. It's getting as close as possible to "high fidelity", by using speakers that introduce minimum colouration.

Yes, I've heard of studio monitors. I've used a fair few of them, too. Studio monitors can be used for HiFi (and by the above definition and your graphs, they do a better job, too!), and HiFi speakers can be used as studio monitors.


The problem is that even a flat speaker doesn't guarantee a good listening experience. It does help, in my experience, but the book doesn't stop there.
I've mentioned it before, but I'll say it again: at all listening positions, my room has a large peak in the bass. Since it would benefit all listeners, I use EQ to knock that peak down. That means my in-room response is now flat in the bass - the sound went from "boomy" to "tuneful".

So, there are two places where EQ can be useful:
- Non-flat speakers
- Non-flat rooms

I built my own speakers because the speakers I want* are too expensive for me to buy right now.
* Dutch & Dutch 8C or
Gedlee NS15 or
JBL 708P

Something you'll note about those models is that they all feature some method of controlling directivity. That is, they can control (to some extent) where the sound goes, and where it doesn't. In my experience, that's a really important factor that doesn't seem to get considered much in the HiFi world.

Chris

If your system is good but not your room, why do you choose eq,equalizer instead of room treatment like bass traps ?

Isn't room treatment better than using an equalizer ?

 

[chris661]

I use low-frequency EQ to correct the room because:
- In my case, it works at every seat.
- Reducing the SPL the speakers need to produce directly lowers distortion
- 15dB of absorption at 40Hz is a lot! When you consider the wavelengths involved, the bass traps need to be massive. SAF would be in the negatives.

My listening room is also the living room, so any treatments need to be inconspicuous. Currently I'm on a campaign to put some kind of absorb/diffuser on the wall above the sofa, as there's a slap echo that bounces between the HiFi wall and the sofa wall.
The slap echo isn't always noticeable, but when you do notice it, it's very distracting.

Chris

 

[Hawkmoon]

I use low-frequency EQ to correct the room because:
- In my case, it works at every seat.
- Reducing the SPL the speakers need to produce directly lowers distortion
- 15dB of absorption at 40Hz is a lot! When you consider the wavelengths involved, the bass traps need to be massive. SAF would be in the negatives.

My listening room is also the living room, so any treatments need to be inconspicuous. Currently I'm on a campaign to put some kind of absorb/diffuser on the wall above the sofa, as there's a slap echo that bounces between the HiFi wall and the sofa wall.
The slap echo isn't always noticeable, but when you do notice it, it's very distracting.

Chris

" Currently I'm on a campaign " I take it this is the age-old campaign to persuade the other half. Man I have been there many times....