|
Post by ricardojoa on Dec 9, 2009 10:19:03 GMT -5
Hello, does anyone know if it is possible to add an external Eq with emotiva USP and amplifiers? LIke for example, EQ's from Behringer. www.behringer.com/EN/Products/FBQ6200.aspxI know that behringr uses XLR connectors which The USP doesnt, but isnt it jsut finding the right cable? thanks
|
|
|
Post by mintzar on Dec 9, 2009 10:27:31 GMT -5
You could conceivably use a rca>xlr adapter or cable if it was something that interested you. An external digital crossover from Behringer will be FAR superior to anything you will ever have in a speaker. The crossovers in 90% of speakers are the biggest bottleneck in a system. Even some of the highest-end speakers lack in terms of crossover design.
Long story short, it's possible with an adapter cable. You would need to bi-amp to take advantage of the crossover, however.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Ben on Dec 9, 2009 12:35:27 GMT -5
Hello, does anyone know if it is possible to add an external Eq with emotiva USP and amplifiers? LIke for example, EQ's from Behringer. www.behringer.com/EN/Products/FBQ6200.aspxI know that behringr uses XLR connectors which The USP doesnt, but isnt it jsut finding the right cable? thanks It's possible, but I don't think it would work as well as it could. The USP-1 does not have an external EQ loop, and the tape loop won't work either because you don't hear the tape input when it's engaged (you hear the source that's getting sent to the tape output. See emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=preamps&action=display&thread=5324&page=27#87420). You would need to put it between the preamp and the power amp, which is after the volume control. I'm not positive, but I don't think the EQ will work as well with the lower and variable output levels that are sent to the amp. Maybe I'm wrong on this.
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Dec 9, 2009 13:17:00 GMT -5
I have don this preamp -Eq 31 band - amp with great success in the past so it shouldn`t be a problem , I used a peavey 31 band EQ but any EQ will work
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Dec 9, 2009 15:45:05 GMT -5
You could use an external equalizer with the USP-1, but you could not toggle back and forth to compare the sound because the USP-1 does not have what most of us think about a "Tape Monitor" function. This may or may not bother you, but if it does you could always use the Emotiva RSP-1, RSP-2 or XSP-1 pre-amps. They all have an "External Processor Loop" that allows you to do anything you want with EQing from and external equalizer.
The RSP is discontinued, but you can keep an eye out for used units (one is now in the Emporium); or you can wait for the XSP-1 to be released. The release date has not yet been established, but it should be within the next month or so.
|
|
|
Post by SticknStones on Dec 9, 2009 18:06:13 GMT -5
I deleted my response given that it was inaccurate. ;D
|
|
|
Post by ricardojoa on Dec 10, 2009 2:29:47 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies. I was actually thinking of having the EQ connected in between the Preamp and amp. The only way to bybass is if the EQ has a Bypass. Also, i noticed that the EQ gain level is lower, so i will assume that this will effectively reducing the overall loundness and capability of Emo Amps at 32 DBs.
Anyway, i was wondering why isnt EQ talked much in home audio? I mean, people use it on car audio, profissional use them, studio's use them , why not in home audio?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2009 5:26:45 GMT -5
Anyway, i was wondering why isnt EQ talked much in home audio? I mean, people use it on car audio, profissional use them, studio's use them , why not in home audio? Unfortunately any use of tone controls or EQ has for many years been considered as less than pure, not audiophile like, sacrilegious, heresy, newbie stuff or simply as something that knowledgeable audio folks simply would not be caught dead using. It is mainly a snob attitude based on the fact that altering the frequency response of ones system was a forbidden sin. There of course was some legitimacy in the fact that many over used the tone controls or EQ to produce boomy bass or over emphasized highs plus the inherent distortion and or noise that some poor quality equipment did in fact add audible detractions to the sound. However, careful use of frequency response correction is actually one of the legitimate ways of attaining flat in room response. Very few systems reproduce relatively flat response in the typical room. I would not have a pre-pro or preamp that did not have a fairly sophisticated EQ system for attaining this flat response. External EQ systems of course are an acceptable alternative. Many still consider anything in the form of EQ as adding audible contamination to their pure audiophile sound. They simply ignore or wish to forget all the signal and frequency alterations that in fact have always occured between the original performance and their golden ears. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Wideawake on Dec 10, 2009 17:01:54 GMT -5
Well said chuckienut!
I believe a good equalizer can do wonders for your SQ. As chuckie pointed out, tone controls and EQ are considered to be anathema by the so-called purists, however, there is a noticeable shift to accepting the value of equalization, even in high-end audiophile circles. The purists' position in untenable at best and disintegrates quickly upon cursory scrutiny.
EQ away if that's what blows your hair back. :-)
|
|
|
Post by roadrunner on Dec 10, 2009 17:35:17 GMT -5
Gee, I must have been out of step, or I was something other than an audiophile, or I was ahead of the curve. Some 35+ years ago I was using a graphics equalizer with my Crown IC-150A and Crown DC-300A . I never gave a thought as to what "others" were doing. I just wanted the best sound I could get. Shame on me... I've been an outcast all these years and never knew it. ;D
Seriously, I knew quite a few people, back in the 70s and 80s that were using equalizers, but I must admit most of them were not using "esotieric" equipment; and Chuckienut's observation seemed to be pretty accurate for those people who did own the super high-end gear. You would have thought that they would have been the group to be trail blazers when it came it improving their sound. Strange world we live in...
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Dec 10, 2009 17:51:26 GMT -5
I have always used a 31 band EQ in my system I even used two 31 band EQ`s when I had four speakers in my 2 channel system and it sounded phenomenal , I moved a lot back when I was a explosive tech so I had to keep tailoring my system to the new rooms and that was the easiest way for me and it worked great , but when I went to a multichannel system with DTS/DD system I stopped using EQ`s because I didn`t think it was needed with DTS etc.. processing , if I still listened to two channel music I wouldn`t hesitate to put in a 31 band EQ
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,746
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 10, 2009 22:03:19 GMT -5
I must fit the purist mode. I had an EQ way back, but for many years I have done without and like it that way.
Until now, with any system I have had (1981-2006), the only thing I found ever lacking was bass or volume potential, and I never felt the mid's or high ends were too hot. EQ's never solved the lack of bass or lack of volume potential - that was mainly a speaker and/or amp issue.
Now that I have Emo amps and the fronts/sub that I do, I like the sound + volume potential of mine as is.
I've tried Audessy in my Denon and didn't like what it did, and I figure I could not do much better fiddling on my own with a dB meter and and EQ.
And besides all that...the USP-1 noise floor is SO good and the frequency response is SO good...I figure I can only muck it up by adding other components between the source and speakers or trying to adjust the frequency response. If my room were an issue, I'd rather spend time figuring out what was not right w/it and correcting it. I mean - the electronics seem to be great...why mess w/success?
|
|
|
Post by handree on Dec 11, 2009 10:24:23 GMT -5
I'm not using an equalizer.
If you own high quality speakers then the designer should be able to tune then within +/-2 db between 400-20000 Hz. Thus in this range there's very little need for equalization.
Many inferior designed speakers do not take into account the drop off because of baffle step problems. This can cause the base below 250-500 Hz depending on the size of your speakers to drop off significantly. The best place to correct this is in the speakers.
Now there's in room response. This can be all over the place. In general the smaller the room and the close the speakers are against the wall the louder the bass. Equalization in the lowest octave (20-50Hz) does have it's place.
However this only applies if you have full range speakers. Bookshelf speakers do not have much outut below 50 Hz and the sound can be corrected by proper placement of the speakers.
When I build my fu8ll range speakers I aim for an anechoic response of -3 dB 35-40Hz. This brings speakers in a small-medium room down to about 20 Hz. For really huge rooms you would need a bass boost.
In principle there's nothing wrong with adding some equalization. However much of the equipment is poor quality and ads noise to sound. The loss in the mids and highs in my opinion is not worth the improved in room response.
However I see that the UMC-1 has bass equalization. I have the Clio speaker measurement system. So I would use that to get a flat in room bass response.
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Dec 11, 2009 15:14:07 GMT -5
Just remember if you are not carful and you don`t use the EQ sparingly it can make things way worse , if you do use a EQ especial a 31 band do not make any big adjustments + or - or lots of band/frequencies consecutively , make small adjustment little at a time with 2 or 3 bands at first and in one section of the frequence at a time like the bass frequencies then mid etc... . audio systems have come a long way and with room treatments there is a lot you can do before adding a EQ to the mix
|
|
|
Post by ricardojoa on Dec 13, 2009 10:14:31 GMT -5
Thanks for the advise flamingeye.
I was wondering, when u were using the peavy EQ, how did u over come with the connection, since emo preamp are unbalanced in/out, where Peavey are balanced? Also, peavey uses XLR connector, did you just use a cable converter?
thanks.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Dec 13, 2009 12:27:47 GMT -5
I must fit the purist mode. I had an EQ way back, but for many years I have done without and like it that way. Until now, with any system I have had (1981-2006), the only thing I found ever lacking was bass or volume potential, and I never felt the mid's or high ends were too hot. EQ's never solved the lack of bass or lack of volume potential - that was mainly a speaker and/or amp issue. Now that I have Emo amps and the fronts/sub that I do, I like the sound + volume potential of mine as is. I've tried Audessy in my Denon and didn't like what it did, and I figure I could not do much better fiddling on my own with a dB meter and and EQ. And besides all that...the USP-1 noise floor is SO good and the frequency response is SO good...I figure I can only muck it up by adding other components between the source and speakers or trying to adjust the frequency response. If my room were an issue, I'd rather spend time figuring out what was not right w/it and correcting it. I mean - the electronics seem to be great...why mess w/success? Most people dont know how to properly use an EQ correctly or use one with very poor control. EQ's should be used last, after optimal speaker placement and sound treatments to the room have been added. Once thats been taken care of, some type of 30 band RTA or RTA program thats relatively accurate should be used to smooth out frequency bumps in the listening position area, assuming you have a good compentent EQ component. The best results always occur when the speakers and room have been smoothed out for a nice smooth response. Even the best designed speakers, which may have a nice flat anechoic chamber response will significantly benefit from room equalization. Its not going to hurt the "purity" of the sound at all, if anything it will only help it.
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Dec 13, 2009 12:28:49 GMT -5
Yes I used a XLR to RCA cable and at the time I was using a Yamaha preamp to 2 x Peavy EQ`s to 2x Carver amps it was quite the killer system if I say so myself
|
|
|
Post by ricardojoa on Dec 13, 2009 17:53:43 GMT -5
Thanks,
What about balanced and unbalanced connection. Can i simply connect a unbalanced out(emo preamp) to a balanced input(Peavey EQ) to an unbalanced Input(Emo amp)? It doesnt seems right though. I am still searching for answers about balanced and unbalanced connections and is pretty confusing.
|
|
|
Post by trevordj on Dec 20, 2009 22:23:58 GMT -5
Thanks, What about balanced and unbalanced connection. Can i simply connect a unbalanced out(emo preamp) to a balanced input(Peavey EQ) to an unbalanced Input(Emo amp)? It doesnt seems right though. I am still searching for answers about balanced and unbalanced connections and is pretty confusing. It is perfectly fine to go from unbalanced to balanced. Simply connect the shield on the balanced end and do not connect it on the RCA end. Here is a great website on making pretty much any cable combination you could ever think of diy-central.com/HowToCreateYourOwnDIYCablesXLRTRSStudioCables.aspx. I currently have a USP-1 hooked into a Behringer 31-band graphic EQ. I am feeding this into a upa-2 and then a set of orb audio mod-2s and a cheap energy 10" sub for my computer setup. I am able to get my frequency response laser flat from 27hz to 17khz (a true two way system!). My only complaint is the Behringer EQ introduces some noise into the system (not volume dependent, so my solution is to just crank up the volume ).
|
|
|
Post by ricardojoa on Dec 21, 2009 10:27:52 GMT -5
Thanks, What about balanced and unbalanced connection. Can i simply connect a unbalanced out(emo preamp) to a balanced input(Peavey EQ) to an unbalanced Input(Emo amp)? It doesnt seems right though. I am still searching for answers about balanced and unbalanced connections and is pretty confusing. It is perfectly fine to go from unbalanced to balanced. Simply connect the shield on the balanced end and do not connect it on the RCA end. Here is a great website on making pretty much any cable combination you could ever think of diy-central.com/HowToCreateYourOwnDIYCablesXLRTRSStudioCables.aspx. I currently have a USP-1 hooked into a Behringer 31-band graphic EQ. I am feeding this into a upa-2 and then a set of orb audio mod-2s and a cheap energy 10" sub for my computer setup. I am able to get my frequency response laser flat from 27hz to 17khz (a true two way system!). My only complaint is the Behringer EQ introduces some noise into the system (not volume dependent, so my solution is to just crank up the volume ). That pretty cool to hear at least there are members who is doing this and using Behring. The down is, the noise level. Honestly, how apparent is the noise? By the way, behringer eq actually is quiet cheap, so is hard to argue about the quality of it. thanks for the site u recomended for the cables.
|
|