iTunes Sound Enhancer

[BluePotato]

I've always had the Equaliser in iTunes switched off but tonight I stumbled across the 'Sound Enhancer' setting in iTunes. I've turned it on and switched to 'High' - I've not played about with the setting on too many songs just yet but I must admit on the majority of the ones I did try I quite liked the sound - seems to add a bit more 'ooomph' and sparkle to instruments. Just curious what others thought?

 

[Rethep]

I did never try because i like the purity of "neutral" equalising. To me it seems there is a kind of "loudness" equalising activated by that "Sound Enhancer". My system does not need that! But if you like it, go ahead.

 

[fr0g]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

 

[davedotco]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Er, in this case it doesn't sound better, it sounds 'enhanced'. A not so subtle bass and presence boost to give the system some weight and bite.

This is not a degree of corrective eq, it is a boom and tizz generator. I'm not the 'thought police' so if people want to use it that's fine but it has nothing to do with music or hi-fi as far as I am concerned.

 

[chebby]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Peter Walker who founded Quad (The Acoustical Manufacturing Company) and coined the 'motto' "The Closest Approach To The Original Sound" put bass & treble and slope controls and filters on the Quad 22 and 33 pre-amps and 'Bass Lift', 'Tilt' and filters and slope controls on the 34 and 44 pre-amps.

(I am pretty sure even current Quad amps/pre-amps have the same controls.)

A&R Cambridge's (ARCAM's) first product - the legendary A60 amp - had tone controls.

Audiolab's first product - 8000A amplifier - had tone controls.

Even Naim (!) now have a variable loudness control on their UnitiQute. (A first for Naim.)

Many fine amplifiers, past and present, have tone controls.

I'd say fill 'yer boots, get the sound you like and don't get too close to anyone scratching away in their 'hair-shirt' of purity. They'll cost you money.

This post from Alan Shaw of Harbeth says it all far more eloquently than I have...

http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?466-Tone-controls-equaliser-or-tilt-controls-at-home (Worth reading the entire first post twice.)

 

[davedotco]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Peter Walker who founded Quad (The Acoustical Manufacturing Company) and coined the 'motto' "The Closest Approach To The Original Sound" put bass & treble and slope controls and filters on the Quad 22 and 33 pre-amps and 'Bass Lift', 'Tilt' and filters and slope controls on the 34 and 44 pre-amps.

(I am pretty sure even current Quad amps/pre-amps have the same controls.)

A&R Cambridge's (ARCAM's) first product - the legendary A60 amp - had tone controls.

Audiolab's first product - 8000A amplifier - had tone controls.

Even Naim (!) now have a variable loudness control on their UnitiQute. (A first for Naim.)

Many fine amplifiers, past and present, have tone controls.

I'd say fill 'yer boots, get the sound you like and don't get too close to anyone scratching away in their 'hair-shirt' of purity. They'll cost you money.

And get you closer to the music, which is what the hobby is all about. Your choice to spend or not.

Personally I love the modern (for Quad) controls, I would have the 'tilt' and 'bass' controls in an instant if they were available on different amplifiers but I find conventional bass and treble controls to be, in the main, crude and often unusable.

I have no liking of 'graphic' equalisers either, whether hardware or software, they have no place in a playback system for me unless you have some very odd, and perhaps non commercial recordings.

What I do find useful is the ability to mildly adjust the tonal balance from a 'bit bright' to a 'bit dark', the tilt control in other words, generally I find this sufficient for the variations in recording and production styles.

I would ideally like some bass eq too, in this case to help fine tune a speaker to the room, a 'shelving' control that adjusts bass level uniformly below about 300hz and some low bass filtering would be ideal.

The bass controls mentioned are relatively common on inexpensive active studio monitors and I find them immensely useful as they can be set to suit the room and speaker positioning and left, but they are no help in making the 'light/dark' adjustments that I also mention.

 

[fr0g]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Er, in this case it doesn't sound better, it sounds 'enhanced'. A not so subtle bass and presence boost to give the system some weight and bite.

This is not a degree of corrective eq, it is a boom and tizz generator. I'm not the 'thought police' so if people want to use it that's fine but it has nothing to do with music or hi-fi as far as I am concerned.

Seems to me that the OP thinks it sounds better. Ergo, it sounds better. Only the person listening can decide. If you prefer it off, great, keep it off, if he prefers it on, great, he should switch it on.

It may indeed be nothing to do with "Hi-Fi" in the strict sense, but it quite obviously has everything to do with music, or rather the enjoyment of music, which is surely what we are all trying to do.

And to deny yourself an increase in that enjoyment because of some spurious purist BS, is, well, a bit silly.

 

[chebby]

I'd say fill 'yer boots, get the sound you like and don't get too close to anyone scratching away in their 'hair-shirt' of purity. They'll cost you money.

And get you closer to the music, which is what the hobby is all about. Your choice to spend or not.

I should have said "they'll waste your money".

 

[davedotco]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Er, in this case it doesn't sound better, it sounds 'enhanced'. A not so subtle bass and presence boost to give the system some weight and bite.

This is not a degree of corrective eq, it is a boom and tizz generator. I'm not the 'thought police' so if people want to use it that's fine but it has nothing to do with music or hi-fi as far as I am concerned.

Seems to me that the OP thinks it sounds better. Ergo, it sounds better. Only the person listening can decide. If you prefer it off, great, keep it off, if he prefers it on, great, he should switch it on.

It may indeed be nothing to do with "Hi-Fi" in the strict sense, but it quite obviously has everything to do with music, or rather the enjoyment of music, which is surely what we are all trying to do.

And to deny yourself an increase in that enjoyment because of some spurious purist BS, is, well, a bit silly.

See, this is where I disagree, it is neither BS nor silly.

Firstly if someone wants to muck around with the sound in the belief that it sounds better then that is fine, as I said I am not the 'thought police'.

But as you say it is nothing to with hi-fi and in this case I think the user is loosing out. A good system will, in my view, open up the user to music that is different to that normally played and this is, again in my view, one of the great delights of a good system.

Not my place to be telling anyone what to listen to, I can only express my delight in the different kinds of music that I listen too, much of which I would not have appreciated without a decent system.

 

[davedotco]

I'd say fill 'yer boots, get the sound you like and don't get too close to anyone scratching away in their 'hair-shirt' of purity. They'll cost you money.

And get you closer to the music, which is what the hobby is all about. Your choice to spend or not.

I should have said "they'll waste your money".

"Sigh".

 

[BigH]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Er, in this case it doesn't sound better, it sounds 'enhanced'. A not so subtle bass and presence boost to give the system some weight and bite.

This is not a degree of corrective eq, it is a boom and tizz generator. I'm not the 'thought police' so if people want to use it that's fine but it has nothing to do with music or hi-fi as far as I am concerned.

Seems to me that the OP thinks it sounds better. Ergo, it sounds better. Only the person listening can decide. If you prefer it off, great, keep it off, if he prefers it on, great, he should switch it on.

It may indeed be nothing to do with "Hi-Fi" in the strict sense, but it quite obviously has everything to do with music, or rather the enjoyment of music, which is surely what we are all trying to do.

And to deny yourself an increase in that enjoyment because of some spurious purist BS, is, well, a bit silly.

See, this is where I disagree, it is neither BS nor silly.

Firstly if someone wants to muck around with the sound in the belief that it sounds better then that is fine, as I said I am not the 'thought police'.

But as you say it is nothing to with hi-fi and in this case I think the user is loosing out. A good system will, in my view, open up the user to music that is different to that normally played and this is, again in my view, one of the great delights of a good system.

Not my place to be telling anyone what to listen to, I can only express my delight in the different kinds of music that I listen too, much of which I would not have appreciated without a decent system.

I can see that but in some rooms, you may want to reduce the bass or even increase it, whether thats hifi I don't know but it may work for some people. This enhancer just seems like a loudness button boosting bass and treble.

 

[MajorFubar]

The iTunes Sound Enhancer is a bit of an enigma. No-one seems to know exactly what it does. To a certain extent it seems to lift the bass and treble frequencies, but also it seems to act as a spacial widener, which of course only works on stereo recordings. In fact the more obvious the separation is in the original recording, the bigger the effect seems to be.

 

[davedotco]

This is one area of "Hi-Fi" which has always puzzled me.

People spend thousands and more on "perfecting" their systems, but a simple tone control adjustment could give better results, but is avoided as it isn't purist.

People spend silly sums of money on wire trying to change the sound yet are unwilling to simply turn up the bass, or turn down the treble, or equalize!

If it sounds better (to you)...use it. If you don't use it even if it sounds better, then what's the point??

Er, in this case it doesn't sound better, it sounds 'enhanced'. A not so subtle bass and presence boost to give the system some weight and bite.

This is not a degree of corrective eq, it is a boom and tizz generator. I'm not the 'thought police' so if people want to use it that's fine but it has nothing to do with music or hi-fi as far as I am concerned.

Seems to me that the OP thinks it sounds better. Ergo, it sounds better. Only the person listening can decide. If you prefer it off, great, keep it off, if he prefers it on, great, he should switch it on.

It may indeed be nothing to do with "Hi-Fi" in the strict sense, but it quite obviously has everything to do with music, or rather the enjoyment of music, which is surely what we are all trying to do.

And to deny yourself an increase in that enjoyment because of some spurious purist BS, is, well, a bit silly.

See, this is where I disagree, it is neither BS nor silly.

Firstly if someone wants to muck around with the sound in the belief that it sounds better then that is fine, as I said I am not the 'thought police'.

But as you say it is nothing to with hi-fi and in this case I think the user is loosing out. A good system will, in my view, open up the user to music that is different to that normally played and this is, again in my view, one of the great delights of a good system.

Not my place to be telling anyone what to listen to, I can only express my delight in the different kinds of music that I listen too, much of which I would not have appreciated without a decent system.

I can see that but in some rooms, you may want to reduce the bass or even increase it, whether thats hifi I don't know but it may work for some people. This enhancer just seems like a loudness button boosting bass and treble.

Read post 5 above, it is just that few amplifiers have tone controls that are actually useful.......

 

[davedotco]

The iTunes Sound Enhancer is a bit of an enigma. No-one seems to know exactly what it does. To a certain extent it seems to lift the bass and treble frequencies, but also it seems to act as a spacial widener, which of course only works on stereo recordings. In fact the more obvious the separation is in the original recording, the bigger the effect seems to be.

The 'presence' lift will tend to spread the stereo effect as much of the directional information is in this region.

This selective boost is bad enough but if they mess with the phase as well.......... :silenced:

 

[Woodchippie]

The way I see it is, and I might be wrong as I,m no expert.

Music is produced by the producer twiddling his knobs till he get the sound of the recording how he wants it to sound. And then the album or song is produced.

This may not be how all people like that track to sound but we are not able to do the producing, however tweaking the music to change the levels may increase your enjoyment of the music.

I find that not all music tracks or complete albums have not been produced to a high standard for some reason, which is disappointed when you've paid good money for it.

 

[chebby]

I'd say fill 'yer boots, get the sound you like and don't get too close to anyone scratching away in their 'hair-shirt' of purity. They'll cost you money.

And get you closer to the music, which is what the hobby is all about. Your choice to spend or not.

I should have said "they'll waste your money".

"Sigh".

What else do you call the insane cable swapping that goes on in the cause of trying to get the 'right sound' from speakers and amps in your living room? It gets worse when people start adding outboard power supplies and swapping speakers to achieve a sound balance that they can enjoy.

How many 'harsh' or 'bright' amps and speakers (or even cables!) do you see people moaning about? How many times are people told... "Wait until the speakers / amps / cables have run-in." ?

It is sentiments like yours... "by all means use some equalisation if you enjoy that kind of thing, but don't call it hi-fi" (my paraphrasing) ...that makes some people almost feel guilty about using a perfectly legitimate form of adjustment to the tone of their system to make it sound more enjoyable.

I will quote a little bit from that Alan Shaw Harbeth link (that you conveniently left out when quoting me earlier)...

"In short: if your amp has a tone control you are more likely to get the best overall fidelity because you can tune the speaker/room interface to suit you. Tone controls empower you not some marketeer who has decided on your behalf that tone controls are evil."

Here is the link again.

 

[davedotco]

I'd say fill 'yer boots, get the sound you like and don't get too close to anyone scratching away in their 'hair-shirt' of purity. They'll cost you money.

And get you closer to the music, which is what the hobby is all about. Your choice to spend or not.

I should have said "they'll waste your money".

"Sigh".

What else do you call the insane cable swapping that goes on in the cause of trying to get the 'right sound' from speakers and amps in your living room? It gets worse when people start adding outboard power supplies and swapping speakers to achieve a sound balance that they can enjoy.

How many 'harsh' or 'bright' amps and speakers (or even cables!) do you see people moaning about? How many times are people told... "Wait until the speakers / amps / cables have run-in." ?

It is sentiments like yours... "by all means use some equalisation if you enjoy that kind of thing, but don't call it hi-fi" (my paraphrasing) ...that makes some people almost feel guilty about using a perfectly legitimate form of adjustment to the tone of their system to make it sound more enjoyable.

I will quote a little bit from that Alan Shaw Harbeth link (that you conveniently left out when quoting me earlier)...

"In short: if your amp has a tone control you are more likely to get the best overall fidelity because you can tune the speaker/room interface to suit you. Tone controls empower you not some marketeer who has decided on your behalf that tone controls are evil."

Here is the link again.

What complete and total nonsense, quoting things that have not been said then arguing against them, pretty silly but all to common.

If you want to reply to my posts, at least read them and respond to what has actually been said.

Perhaps you would like to read my posts and see how much I actually agree with Alan Shaw though no doubt you will choose to 'paraphrase' my language to make it look otherwise.

 

[chebby]

...I actually agree with Alan Shaw...

I can imagine his relief!

 

[lpv]

my marantz pm6004 got bass extension positioned at 50Hz so was better suited for my kef's q300 ( added some gentle/ natural bass) while m-cr510 got it at 100Hz so I'm not using it cause it's adds only unpleasant boom.. on some yamaha amps I've seen bass on 20Hz and I wonder what they have been thinking about to put the bass at 20Hz mark !!! which speakers can play this low frequencies? that's why - if needed - computer based eq got far greater control over specific frequencies more precise.. Mac's AU Lab got 32 band.. however - after experimenting with speakers placement recently and some pictures on the wall, rug etc - I found my speakers behave much better to the point where I've got any eq, tone controls etc off.. but still there are recordings poorly made that would benefit from some bass or treble boost but then majority of music I listen too is properly mastered...

still need bigger sound.. but that's another story...

 

[chebby]

... no doubt you will choose to 'paraphrase' my language to make it look otherwise.

What is the essential difference between your actual words....

Firstly if someone wants to muck around with the sound in the belief that it sounds better then that is fine, as I said I am not the 'thought police'.

But as you say it is nothing to with hi-fi ...

...and my paraphrasing?...

"by all means use some equalisation if you enjoy that kind of thing, but don't call it hi-fi"

Not much it seems.

 

[fr0g]

The way I see it is, and I might be wrong as I,m no expert.

Music is produced by the producer twiddling his knobs till he get the sound of the recording how he wants it to sound. And then the album or song is produced.

This may not be how all people like that track to sound but we are not able to do the producing, however tweaking the music to change the levels may increase your enjoyment of the music.

I find that not all music tracks or complete albums have not been produced to a high standard for some reason, which is disappointed when you've paid good money for it.

The end result of the production is fairly irrelevant. Unless we all use the same equipment, and sit in an exact replica of the studio where the music was produced, then we are not going to hear the same thing anyway. It's far more likely that in your untreated living room, with more than likely the speakers a bit too close to a wall, they will boom, and a touch of bass reduction will improve the sound, and bring it more in line with "what was recorded".

A total lack of any tone controls in this instance are less Hi-fi.

 

[Overdose]

There are two choices in how you wish to listen to your music, either you aim towards neutrality and hope to avoid colouration as much as possible, or you are inclined to prefer a particular type of sound presentation and aim to achieve this. Arguably the only hifi path is the neutral one as it aims to avoid any extraeneous colouration or change in the signal. This is not for everyone though and some prefer the alternative.

It seems that the route of choosing a coloured sound is the one the exhibits the most hypocrisy and snobbery though, as some would frown upon tone controls but be quite happy to change the sound they get by swapping equipment and even cables to achieve it, either way is colouring the sound and changing the source signal, so it would make the most sense to me to use tone controls or EQ to achieve what sound is desired. The statement about 'getting closer to the music' seems like pretentious BS to me, particularly if it involves tweaking away from the original source material. 'Getting closer to the sound you like' would seem a more appropriate and honest statement.

 

[davedotco]

... no doubt you will choose to 'paraphrase' my language to make it look otherwise.

What is the essential difference between your actual words....

Firstly if someone wants to muck around with the sound in the belief that it sounds better then that is fine, as I said I am not the 'thought police'.

But as you say it is nothing to with hi-fi ...

...and my paraphrasing?...

"by all means use some equalisation if you enjoy that kind of thing, but don't call it hi-fi"

Not much it seems.

So you think 'muck around with the sound' and 'equalisation' mean the same thing? In the context of my other comments?

Seriously?

 

[davedotco]

The way I see it is, and I might be wrong as I,m no expert.

Music is produced by the producer twiddling his knobs till he get the sound of the recording how he wants it to sound. And then the album or song is produced.

This may not be how all people like that track to sound but we are not able to do the producing, however tweaking the music to change the levels may increase your enjoyment of the music.

I find that not all music tracks or complete albums have not been produced to a high standard for some reason, which is disappointed when you've paid good money for it.

The end result of the production is fairly irrelevant. Unless we all use the same equipment, and sit in an exact replica of the studio where the music was produced, then we are not going to hear the same thing anyway. It's far more likely that in your untreated living room, with more than likely the speakers a bit too close to a wall, they will boom, and a touch of bass reduction will improve the sound, and bring it more in line with "what was recorded".

A total lack of any tone controls in this instance are less Hi-fi.

This is entirely correct.

Judicious use of eq to correct room issues or gently shift the balance to suit the environment is ideal but 'normal' bass and treble controls do this very poorly, hence my entirely positive comments on the Quad system mentioned much earlier in the thread.

But this thread is about the 'enhancement' of the music by 'global' eq and in some cases other processing. Even assuming that it 'improves' some material (highly debateable) it is just as likely to make other material worse. Not a good thing and not hi-fi.

Edited for layout.

 

[bigboss]

I do like to sprinkle a bit of black pepper on my pizza even if it's made by the world's best chef!