High-end amplifiers without equalization

[Buckle-meister]

Dear all,

I know very little about 'high-end' amplifiers, but I think that I am correct in saying that they do not have any kind of adjustable equalization. In fact, they almost certainly won't even have tone controls, the ethos being that the amp should deliver the sound the way it was meant to be heard in the first place, so no adjustment by the user should be required.

I don't have a problem with no tone controls, but why don't these amplifiers have any kind of equalization adjustment? This site has taught me just how much of an impact a room can have on the final sound that we hear from our systems, and even moderately priced A.V. amplifiers/recievers (ignoring their multi-channel capabilities) permit some degree of adjustment to be made. So why not high-end amps? Isn't the full potential of the high-end system being lost?

Regards

 

[jaxvon]

I can understand an amplifier being made without and EQ, but a high-end preamp/processor should include this function. If I recall correctly Buckle, you have a Yammie Z9, right? You have EQ, but it's in 1/3 octave steps, and not for the full 20-20k spectrum. I do agree, hi-fi manufacturers need to either include a "real" EQ in their processors or add a multi-channel loops so users can hook up their own EQs.

 

[Buckle-meister]

...you have a Yammie Z9, right? You have EQ...

Yes, I do, but I was really referring to dedicated two-channel amps. Why should they be any different?

Regards

 

[jaxvon]

They shouldn't be. But perhaps it's because EQs have a stigma of "coloring" your sound. If you're looking for a good parametric EQ for your 2ch setup, I would suggest you check out the offerings from Behringer and Rane.

 

[legacy]

Your pre-amp/processor should have this feature if you use a dedicated amp.
If an amp were to have room emqualization/correction features it would require a dsp and cease being an amp only. Maybe an amp/processor.

Since newer recievers or preamp/processors mostly have this feature, it would be somewhat redundant, increase costs, and the units would possibly conflict with each other and the sound quality may be degraded. The audio into the amp would be converted back to digital, processed and then converted back to analog.

 

[Buckle-meister]

They shouldn't be. But perhaps it's because EQs have a stigma of "coloring" your sound. If you're looking for a good parametric EQ for your 2ch setup, I would suggest you check out the offerings from Behringer and Rane.

My question was purely theoretical; I don't actually have a high-end two-channel amp myself.

My home theater was purchased for a number of reasons. One of them was its ability to 'kill two birds with one stone', i.e. even integrated and multi-channel, the Z9 kicks the ar$e out of my old Musical Fidelity Pre/Power, as do my Mission Elegante speakers compared to my old ones, so that now, in addition to having a home theater, my two-channel setup has vastly improved too.

That is not to say that I do not intend on buying a dedicated two-channel hi-fi in the future; I do.

Regards

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Mono bloc or stereo amplifiers are always run through a pre-amplifier. The pre-amplifier will have all your audio controls, especially the basics such as volume, balance, bass, treble, as well as switching capabilities. You must have a pre-amp to route the source material (cd, dvd, tuner, dbs) to the amp, then to your speakers. Many mfg's do color the outputs a tad to either add warmth, depth, or sibilance. It's ever so slight, but just enough to add some character to their namebrand. With a decent pre-amp, you can easily add to, or remove this coloration. It's as simple as that.

 

[Buckle-meister]

The pre-amplifier will have all your audio controls, especially the basics such as volume, balance, bass, treble, as well as switching capabilities.

Do they though? I've never seen a 'high-end' amplifier in the flesh, but I've seen some fairly expensive amps. Even moderately priced amps that I've seen deliberately forego having tone controls on them.

...any mfg's do color the outputs a tad to either add warmth, depth, or sibilance. It's ever so slight, but just enough to add some character to their namebrand.

1. What's mfg's?

2. Even if the output from the amp is 'coloured', this wouldn't change the problem a particularly shaped room might exert. What I'm getting at here, is that whilst the sound coming out of the amp's terminals might be 'beautifull', the room might half destroy that, so why have an amp without equalization? If anything, you would have thought that that feature would be on only the most expensive amps and not those cheaper, yet the opposite almost seems to be true!

Regards

 

[jaxvon]

Buckle: you need to stop and think. You're using logic in a very illogical hobby. Now just run along and play nice

 

[Buckle-meister]

Buckle: you need to stop and think. You're using logic in a very illogical hobby. Now just run along and play nice

Will you please stop calling me Buckle! My name's Spock!

Regards

 

[Josuah]

The confusion here seems to stem from an incorrect definition of amplifier. An amplifier does absolutely nothing except take a low power signal and turn it into a high power signal.

With separates, you have a pre-processor or a receiver. You connect that box to the amplifier. And then the amplifier goes to the speakers.

With a receiver, you are basically putting the pre-processor and the amplifier into the same physical box. And this changes the name to a receiver.

There are some "integrated amps" which is basically just like a receiver, but with a fancy name because they're considered higher quality.

An amplifier will only have a power button on it. A pre-processor, receiver, or integrated amp will have a remote control and buttons to change the volume, or do other things like treble and bass.

 

[jaxvon]

Acutally Joshua, an integrated amp isn't just a fancy name, a receiver is named as such because it has a radio tuner. A receiver is, in essence, an integrated amp with a radio tuner built in.

 

[Buckle-meister]

With a receiver, you are basically putting the pre-processor and the amplifier into the same physical box. And this changes the name to a receiver.

Erm, no.

There are some "integrated amps" which is basically just like a receiver, but with a fancy name because they're considered higher quality.

Erm, no. All amps consist of a Pre stage and a Power stage. An integrated amp is simply a single box with both stages inside it. Pre amps and Power amps comprise seporate boxes for each stage.

An amplifier will only have a power button on it. A pre-processor, receiver, or integrated amp will have a remote control and buttons to change the volume, or do other things like treble and bass.

Erm, no.

Regards

 

[Privateer]

Do they though? I've never seen a 'high-end' amplifier in the flesh, but I've seen some fairly expensive amps. Even moderately priced amps that I've seen deliberately forego having tone controls on them.

Because some companies as well as customers want to keep the music a pure as possible. When you get into the higher end products they assume that you have a treated room so you can hear the equipment and what it can do.

 

[Buckle-meister]

Because some companies as well as customers want to keep the music a pure as possible. When you get into the higher end products they assume that you have a treated room so you can hear the equipment and what it can do.

Understood. But even with a room treated, might there not be (many?) instances where equalization would be beneficial? From what I understand of room treatments, sometimes (many times?) they cannot fully cure the room's problems.

Regards

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Do they though? I've never seen a 'high-end' amplifier in the flesh, but I've seen some fairly expensive amps. Even moderately priced amps that I've seen deliberately forego having tone controls on them.

I didn't say amplifier. I said pre-amp. Big difference.

1. What's mfg's?

Krell, Mark Levinson, MacIntosh, Hafler, Carver, Classe, Adcom, Proton, Niles - should I go on?

2. Even if the output from the amp is 'coloured', this wouldn't change the problem a particularly shaped room might exert. What I'm getting at here, is that whilst the sound coming out of the amp's terminals might be 'beautifull', the room might half destroy that, so why have an amp without equalization? If anything, you would have thought that that feature would be on only the most expensive amps and not those cheaper, yet the opposite almost seems to be true!

Regards

That's why we spend so much time positioning our speakers, adjusting the angles, and tweaking our room acoustics. Not all listeners care for re-eq'd music. Once they figure out the room acoustics, and place their 2 channels out into the room in front of their favorite chair, they're finished. Happy as a clam. Those who have spent thousands most likely have their pre-amp set flat, wanting to listen to the music exactly how it was recorded. Top recorded music has painstakenly gone through the equalization process. They've done their best to take out the mud, sibilance, and so on. When you spend that type of money on a system, you expect your equipment to reproduce what was recorded in the studio as close as possible. And that means pouring money into your dedicated listening rooms acoustics.

Now for the rest of us, with our 3 year old's chalkboard, the 7' tall ficus plant, and the wife's family photos on 3 walls, equalization may be a necessary evil. I'm all for it, but I am not running a 150lb Krell amp, pre-amp, tuner, and a pair of Watt Puppies in a dedicated room. Home theater is a totally different animal. It's tough enough just to get your 7 channels to blend properly. To get the center channel correct, and the fronts angled properly is another issue. Now try to throw in a multi-band separate eq. I've got an entire thread on the subject. My Denon has an internal 8 band eq, but it doesn't have the flexibility as, say a Behringer. But it sure beats bass/treble controls. A parametric eq would be ideal, but not many HT receivers have them. They can be added between the receiver/pre-amp and the power amps though. And thus, there is your answer. If you need equalization, especially with surround sound, go with a pre-amp and power amp and run a Behringer between it.

This guy probably doesn't use an equalizer.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Dear all,

I know very little about 'high-end' amplifiers, but I think that I am correct in saying that they do not have any kind of adjustable equalization. In fact, they almost certainly won't even have tone controls, the ethos being that the amp should deliver the sound the way it was meant to be heard in the first place, so no adjustment by the user should be required.

I don't have a problem with no tone controls, but why don't these amplifiers have any kind of equalization adjustment? This site has taught me just how much of an impact a room can have on the final sound that we hear from our systems, and even moderately priced A.V. amplifiers/recievers (ignoring their multi-channel capabilities) permit some degree of adjustment to be made. So why not high-end amps? Isn't the full potential of the high-end system being lost?

Regards

The hi-end crowd doesn't want their signal path corrupted with extra circuitry. They want it rather simple, like a SET amp based on a triode tube of 50 years ago. But their premise is way off, hearing it the way it was meant to be. That is accurate reproduction of the original. They forget the speakers and the room response exactly what studios account for in mastering. Hence, they will never get to their dream state

 

[WmAx]

Those who have spent thousands most likely have their pre-amp set flat, wanting to listen to the music exactly how it was recorded. Top recorded music has painstakenly gone through the equalization process.

They've done their best to take out the mud, sibilance, and so on. When you spend that type of money on a system, you expect your equipment to reproduce what was recorded in the studio as close as possible. And that means pouring money into your dedicated listening rooms acoustics.

Now for the rest of us, with our 3 year old's chalkboard, the 7' tall ficus plant, and the wife's family photos on 3 walls, equalization may be a necessary evil.

Evil? That sounds like a distorted perception of the issue(s). I'll wager that anyone that is highly against E.Q., whether they are wealthy or not, is ignorant of the facts/technical issues involved, as well as the relevant perceptual factors. I doubt that such person even knows how to properly use a powerful equalization device. A powerful equalizer will improve the response of anyone's system, regardless of price. Yes, even the stereo in the picture[which is probably more impressive looking than it is sounding. ] you provided would have an easily improved response by using a proper equalization system.

-Chris

 

[Rob Babcock]

I used to be more of a purist, but honestly now I just want my music to "sound good." And give Buckle-meister a bit of a break; I've noticed that many Continental audiophools (and even the hifi rags there) call both integrateds and recievers "amps."

 

[Buckle-meister]

I used to be more of a purist, but honestly now I just want my music to "sound good." And give Buckle-meister a bit of a break; I've noticed that many Continental audiophools (and even the hifi rags there) call both integrateds and recievers "amps."

Thanks Rob. You are correct. I am perhaps being too loose in my definition of an amp. I do know what integrated, pre, power, mono-block (bloc?) and reciever objects are, but do have a tendancy to refer to tham all as amps.

But really, can you blame me? I mean, come on. Surely nobody would call a reciever a tuner which amplifies signals from various inputs and disperses it to multiple speakers; it's primary role is to drive multiple speakers. An integrated amp is simply a one-box solution; a pre/power a seporate box solution, and pre/mono-block (bloc? ) a multiple box solution.

Regards