anyone using an EQ with surround?

[BARRACUDA1968]

I don't see or hear much about equalizers. I have seen audio control units but not much else? Is anyone using an EQ with their surround?

 

[MACCA350]

Many of todays receivers have built-in EQ's. My Denon 3805 has an 8 band Parametric Equalizer that uses a calibration Mic to help equalize each speaker in the room. I have this engaged full-time.

There has and always will be a debate about the benefits of EQ's in Music or HT systems. I personally am of the belief that the use of an EQ in these systems can help to counter the many acoustical problems of different rooms that cannot, or is not feasible, to be corrected with the use of acoustical treatments. Many systems are setup in lounge rooms etc where it is not desirable to have acoustical treatment present due to aesthetics or WAF

cheers

 

[bpape]

Unless you have mismatched voicing in the speakers or the speakers have serious issues in driver linearity or xover issues, you generally don't need EQ above say 200-300Hz. Below 300Hz you're correcting room issues (or attempting to).

I run an EQ on my sub only and most of the people I know do the same. I have a 5 band parametric EQ and all 5 bands are set below 80Hz to smooth the room response and subwoofer integration.

 

[WmAx]

There has and always will be a debate about the benefits of EQ's in Music or HT systems.

Well, it is a matter of fact of what equalizer can and can not do. To claim that equalizer is not useful would amount to simple ignorance(or perhaps just bias) on the behalf of the one claiming equalizer was not useful.

An equalizer can....

- Correct very low frequency room errors.

- Compensate for baffle step anomolies in particular setups that the speaker was not designed for initially(for example: using a speaker intended for placement far away from walls, but placing it close to walls, or compensation for various acoustic properties/irregularities that may effect baffle step).

- Compensate for high frequency rolloff vs. distance(upper treble attenuates faster than the rest of the band due to the co-efficient of air; if you use a speaker at considerably longer(or closer) distance vs. what was initially intended for in the design of the speaker this is an addressable issue.

- Re-voice the speakers(some people are just 'revoicing' when they buy new speakers, so why not do it yourself?).

If you look around, you can find a debate on just about anything, no matter how rediculous the notion.

-Chris

 

[BARRACUDA1968]

Thanks for the info

 

[mulester7]

Re-voice the speakers(some people are just 'revoicing' when they buy new speakers, so why not do it yourself?).

-Chris

.....aaahh......

 

[mtrycrafts]

If you look around, you can find a debate on just about anything, no matter how rediculous the notion.

-Chris

How true.
My favorite is ID. The only controversy is by the opponents. How interesting. Like ID was a scientific theory in the first place to get equal seat at the table, LOL

 

[BARRACUDA1968]

are there any EQ's specifically designed for HT?

 

[Tritonman]

IMO..

You should always spend the time treating your room way before you consider an eq. There are plenty of things out there for free that will enable you to measure your room and see where your weak points are. Besides..you cant "officially" eq a room until you know whats wrong with it

I personally have 3 eq's

2 Art 351's 31 Band 1/3 octave...only being used for 2 channel listening. Its very difficult to optimize your Surround Experience and have musical optimization in speaker placement at the same time.

DSP1124 Behringer Feedback Destroyer Pro ...a must have if you intend on getting the best out of your sub.

As far as Surround Eq's are concerned most "high" end receivers have some type of eq interally but are generally very limited in the frequency adjustments and bands. If you really wanted to purchase some type of dedicated Surround Sound eq..be prepared to pay a hefty cost.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

are there any EQ's specifically designed for HT?

Sure, Behringer (pro audio) and AudioControl (high end HT). The issue is surround sound, if digital, cannot be eq'd until it is converted to analog. That means you cannot put one of these eq's in between your dvd player and surround receiver. You must use the rca pre-outs on the surround sound receiver fed into one of these HT equilizers,then to a surround amp. The old style "tape monitor" buttons on older receivers were analog, and would serve no purpose with ditital audio such as satellite, digital cable, dvd, and dvd-a.

What can you do? Get a great pre-amp, multi-channel amp, and a Behringer eq. It will cost you more, but with proper room setup, acoustical treatments, and eq tweaking, you'll have the best sounding system in town.

 

[Buckle-meister]

...surround sound, if digital, cannot be eq'd until it is converted to analog. That means you cannot put one of these eq's in between your dvd player and surround receiver. You must use the rca pre-outs on the surround sound receiver fed into one of these HT equilizers,then to a surround amp.

I don't understand. Why can't you use the RCA analogue out's from the DVD player through EQ and on to the RCA in's on the Receiver?

Regards

 

[Tritonman]

If you use the analog outs..thats what your getting..analog..you are not getting a digital 5.1 signal. In theory you would be essentially eq'ing 2 channels as a simple way of putting it.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I don't understand. Why can't you use the RCA analogue out's from the DVD player through EQ and on to the RCA in's on the Receiver?

Regards

You can use that with an analog EQ. Apparently those two mentioned were digital. So, it needs to be in the digital stream but one where each channel is split, most likely, as the EQs don't have DD/DTS in it?

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

I don't understand. Why can't you use the RCA analogue out's from the DVD player through EQ and on to the RCA in's on the Receiver?

Regards

Those are most likely used for SACD, which is analog. You need to use Toslink, coax, or HDMI for DD and DTS. None of the eq's mentioned have those style inputs.

 

[Buckle-meister]

Those are most likely used for SACD, which is analog. You need to use Toslink, coax, or HDMI for DD and DTS. None of the eq's mentioned have those style inputs.

But surely one could simply use two or three EQ's to cover all the separate channels?

Am I getting confused here? Aren't the separate analogue out's from a DVD player able to output discrete channels, just not in digital?

Regards

 

[shokhead]

But surely one could simply use two or three EQ's to cover all the separate channels?

Am I getting confused here? Aren't the separate analogue out's from a DVD player able to output discrete channels, just not in digital?

Regards

Remember,when you use the 6 analogs out from player to receiver,the receiver for the most part does nothing but volume.

 

[WmAx]

If you use the analog outs..thats what your getting..analog..you are not getting a digital 5.1 signal. In theory you would be essentially eq'ing 2 channels as a simple way of putting it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with dealing in analogue, when using devices of extreme high signal quality such as the Behringer DEQ2496 or DCX2496 discussed here. They will not insert any audible losses if used correctly.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

But surely one could simply use two or three EQ's to cover all the separate channels?

Am I getting confused here? Aren't the separate analogue out's from a DVD player able to output discrete channels, just not in digital?

Regards

Right, you can most easily use Behringer DCX2496 for this purpose, because they have 3 analog inputs each, and you can daisy chain them with ethernet cable and use one as a master control unit and the others as slave units.

-Chris

 

[bloosquare]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with dealing in analogue, when using devices of extreme high signal quality such as the Behringer DEQ2496 or DCX2496 discussed here. They will not insert any audible losses if used correctly.

-Chris

my understanding is that the DEQ A->D conversion leaves something to
be desired (most of the negative reviews on the DEQ come from people
using the analogue in). It also would be ideal to avoid the extra A->D-A
step. Ideally the trick would be to find a dolby decoder that sends the surround channels in digital mode, the meridian receivers do this but other than that I think it seems that the way to go is do use a computer setup w/ a couple of toslink outputs.

 

[WmAx]

my understanding is that the DEQ A->D conversion leaves something to
be desired (most of the negative reviews on the DEQ come from people
using the analogue in). It also would be ideal to avoid the extra A->D-A
step. Ideally the trick would be to find a dolby decoder that sends the surround channels in digital mode, the meridian receivers do this but other than that I think it seems that the way to go is do use a computer setup w/ a couple of toslink outputs.

Sorry, but those reviews are total B.S.; the equivalent credibility of wire reviews. Are these reviewers using level matched double blind test protocol? Or the standard (and highly flawed) sighted listening protocol? I have measured the DCX and it does not produce any noise or distortion that would be anywhere near audible to a human, assuming one knows how to properly use/set up the device. Do you realize that the DCX, in fact, uses the same standardized AD/DA and op amp buffer stages as modern mega-dollar studio recording/mastering equipment? To observe someone saying that this level of performance "leaves something to be desired" makes me(for one) laugh. I suspect these same people also talk about how different (well designed and properly functioning) amplifiers have such clearly unique sound signatures.

-Chris