To Equalize or Not to Equalize: That Is the Question

[Kal Rubinson]

2. Parametric digital EQs are more productive (1/3 octave + separate 'Q'),
but they don't correct for delays (reverbs, or reflections).

That is not entirely true. If you just look at the magnitude response as you adjust the PEQ, you cannot see the effects on decay due to reflections but you are varying them as well. Every filter configuration has a fairly unique time signature which can be used or misused. The solution is to have measurement and frequency synthesis tools that predict and assess decay as well as magnitude with respect to frequency.

A nice example of such an application is Meridian Room Correction. It makes no effort to correct FR but, rather, attempts to standardize decay times up to 300Hz. It does this by inserting filters that compensate for unusually extended decays that occur at certain frequencies and, as a byproduct, it has an ameliorative effect on FR.

 

[NorthStar]

Quite interesting Kal; I did not know that.

Like you said too; seems that you need the proper tools and to know how to use them properly.
A sound recording engineer perhaps with his mixing console?

* I would put Chris Kyriakakis (Audyssey) and Bob Stuart (Meridian) in the same team,
and see what they can come up with in the next generation of Sound Correction.
Throw in few guys from the Lexicon (HK & QLS) and Anthem (ARC) technical sound engineer team for good measure.

Trinnov equalizers?

 

[c1ferrari]

I'm Looking to Equalize...

not the room, per se, but the recording. I've come across a few EQ'd master tapes and I need to adjust their audio spectral balance. Saving up for a GML parametric

 

[Bruce B]

not the room, per se, but the recording. I've come across a few EQ'd master tapes and I need to adjust their audio spectral balance. Saving up for a GML parametric

My EQ of choice is either the Sontec or EAR

 

[c1ferrari]

E.A.R. is a contender...

My EQ of choice is either the Sontec or EAR

I think Paul Stubblebine/Tape Project may use E.A.R. gear when he believes it's warranted

 

[jdza]

not the room, per se, but the recording. I've come across a few EQ'd master tapes and I need to adjust their audio spectral balance. Saving up for a GML parametric

It would be great if someone with experience can share a little about parametric eq in RtR use in a domestic setting.

I have never felt the need to use an equalizer for other than bass purposes but some reel tapes clearly do need this.Would a simple 3 band Pultec tipe equalizer (Manley,EAR) be an alternative to diving into a Reel Recorder's underbelly for adjustments on every tape played (The Levinson ML5 must have the most fiddly useless pots ever invented)? Also should one use a more complex 5 band eq instead of the Pultec tipes? It seems to me is that all I want to do is adjust the 100Hz and 10kHz settings somewhat on some tapes .

One of U47s You Tube videos shows a tape dubbing at Charlie King's with a Cello type eq clearly put to good use.A King Cello with built in Parametric (and VU meters!) instead of a single pot for high freq sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[Bruce B]

It would be great if someone with experience can share a little about parametric eq in RtR use in a domestic setting.

Not a domestic setting, but when I do tape transfers for HDtracks and other audiophile labels, I often use either a Neve 1515/1517 modules or my EAR 825 to give a little top end air that was lost.

 

[jdza]

Thanks Bruce

When you receive a tape do you often find that the test tones at the start are at different levels and need re eq for replay on your machines? As a strictly amateur buyer of so called master dubs for personal use I often find test tones at wildely varying levels,so one never knows if the seller just tacked these on and taped the music from a CD or are those the actual tones from that tape.

 

[c1ferrari]

Not a domestic setting, but when I do tape transfers for HDtracks and other audiophile labels, I often use either a Neve 1515/1517 modules or my EAR 825 to give a little top end air that was lost.

I'd like to tame the hot highs.

 

[Roger Dressler]

It would be great if someone with experience can share a little about parametric eq in RtR use in a domestic setting.

I have never felt the need to use an equalizer for other than bass purposes but some reel tapes clearly do need this.Would a simple 3 band Pultec tipe equalizer (Manley,EAR) be an alternative to diving into a Reel Recorder's underbelly for adjustments on every tape played (The Levinson ML5 must have the most fiddly useless pots ever invented)? Also should one use a more complex 5 band eq instead of the Pultec tipes? It seems to me is that all I want to do is adjust the 100Hz and 10kHz settings somewhat on some tapes .

The Cello Pallete seems much more intuitive for me unless you want to take a deep dive and become conversant with the peculiarities of yesteryear mastering EQs. A stroll through great analog studio tools of the past is in the UAD Manual.pdf available here, describing their reincarnations as DAW plug-ins.

Are you trying to stay all analog?

Despite the claims of sonic nirvana for the Cello Pallete, its EQ looks like conventional graphic EQ that could either be emulated or further tweaked with a parametric such as the UAD Cambridge EQ or a Rane PEQ 55. The plot below is from the Stereophile 2004 article on the Cello.

 

[c1ferrari]

Roger,

Thanks for the graph.

 

[jdza]

Thank you for a detailed respons on what,to me, is a confusing subject and a path I'll embark on with great trepidation!

The Cello Pallete seems much more intuitive for me unless you want to take a deep dive and become conversant with the peculiarities of yesteryear mastering EQs. A stroll through great analog studio tools of the past is in the UAD Manual.pdf available here, describing their reincarnations as DAW plug-ins.

The Cello does seem to be what one needs. It seems to be very popular in the Far East and prices are really high. I have been reading about parametric units from Avalon,Manley,Crane Song, Buzz, MSL ,Neve etc .and am more confused than ever.Again there seems to be a huge gap between pro and audiophile.Most Mastering engineers seem to keep a number of these Equalizers to inject a specific "flavour". I want to use one to remove flavour on far too bright and bass shy old commercial 1/4 tracks and dodgy "master dubs"where one has to wonder on the settings on the recording deck.If they describe the Manley as "colorful"is it too coloured,the Crane Song as "crisp" is it sterile and harsh,the MSL as"clean",is it bright?

Are you trying to stay all analog?

I use analog replay 99% of the time as a sonic preference. I would like the chain to stay that way.

 

[Roger Dressler]

I want to use one to remove flavour on far too bright and bass shy old commercial 1/4 tracks and dodgy "master dubs"where one has to wonder on the settings on the recording deck.If they describe the Manley as "colorful"is it too coloured,the Crane Song as "crisp" is it sterile and harsh,the MSL as"clean",is it bright?

Good questions. Not having used those devices, I can offer no insights there.

I use analog replay 99% of the time as a sonic preference. I would like the chain to stay that way.

I suspect this unit will not be your cup of tea, since even though it is analog on/out, it is DSP inside. Nonetheless, have a read of the PEQ-55 product information to get familiar with a great set of features aimed at doing the kind of work you describe.

A key capability is the linked stereo option as that makes sure both channels do exactly the same thing, thus maintaining imaging. This is not as easy to do with analog EQs unless the controls are stepped the way Cello did it.

Note that your first equalizer does not have to be your last. Get something, start playing with it. It will inform your next choice immeasurably. And it's fun.

 

[kevinh]

There are 2 separate issues being addressed her the System/Room EQ. the first post (and Nyall's response) was correct that you want to do that as much as possible but optimizing the speaker room interface/acoustics without any electronic intervention especially at lower frequencies. Units like DeqX and Tact can make adjustments to optimize the speaker room interface.

The second issue is program eq, many most recordings weren't eq'd in a room with speakers or room acountics or electronics anything like what you are using at home. That is where a system like the Cello Palette comes into play it is a Tone Control for adjusting program material not really an EQ to adress the room speaker interface.

D Burwen has designed software to duplicate what the original Palette did as a tome control. He is calling the software the Bobcat. I will get a copy sometime to play with.

The interface looks easy to use run the software on a laptop getting music from a music service the saem sort of ease of use that the Palette has + you can store the settings for a particular recording so once it is set on your system you don't have to apply it again. It doesn't modigy the orginal Wav, Flac or mp3.

http://www.burwenbobcat.com/BBTB_Home.html