View Full Version : Equalizer done right ! Digital or analog?

07-22-2005, 06:05 AM
I would like to be teached on your experiences introducing an EQ in your stereo hi-end system.
Please do not reply with "never do it" because I took already the decision to do it.
I am more interested if anybody of you has experience in choosing a digital or an analog equalizer.

I am targeting the following products that seems to receive consistent consensus:
Digital : Weiss EQ1 MKII
Analog: Millennia NSEQ2 or Massenburg or Focusrite 2

Is it true that analog EQ still has the charm of making the manipulation less invasive ?

What can you say about this? Have you tried one of the above EQ'zers ?

07-22-2005, 08:04 AM
I don't have any experience with the particular pieces you mention, but I am a confirmed fan of digital EQ, having used both a z-Sytems RDQ-1 and (currently) a Behringer DEQ2496

07-22-2005, 05:42 PM
and I like my White 4400,s

07-22-2005, 05:51 PM
I have an ADC equalizer and like it. Do you mean the controls for the equalizer being digital (up/down) as opposed to analog (slider)? If the sliders are in good condition, its my preference. I don't know the models your speaking of?

07-22-2005, 06:13 PM
By digital, do you mean adjustment made in the digital domain or adjusted digitally in the analog domain?

07-22-2005, 07:30 PM
By digital, do you mean adjustment made in the digital domain or adjusted digitally in the analog domain?

Dunno what our threadstarter meant, but I mean adjstment made in the digital domain.

07-22-2005, 07:37 PM
I've never used a truly digital EQ, other than the one built into my receiver, a Sony STR-DA5ES. It is pretty predictable and seamless. I have a Pioneer SG-777 in my garage rig along with a Sony TA-F500ES and ST-S ES tuner. The SG is digital in the sense that there aren't sliders - only electronic 'buttons' to adjust your frequencies. I suppose it is more of a spectrum analyzer with adjustable EQ. I like it!

Reel 2 Reel
07-22-2005, 07:40 PM
Easy!!...Equilizer..Just do it...and if you like it ...Cool!!..if not...then......go from there...

I use an EQ to tame a bad Bass managment......but in the bottom only......Every once in a while I use it to tame a harshness in the 4K they have their useses....

You can't always go with what the recording engineer likes...or with what the Medium throws at you you can control it yourself...not just rely on somebody else to make that decision for you....

"Think For Yourself"...'Maynard' of 'Tool' says....

in other words...if you like it with it...if not.... :dunno:

07-22-2005, 07:45 PM
for 3 decades now. I always end up pulling them out mainly because there's just too many dang knobs/sliders/buttons to deal with.

Outside of that, its whatever you like.....just try and see....



07-22-2005, 08:43 PM
Massenburg and Focusrite? Wow. Those things are money. I was unaware, however, that Massenburg or Neve made hifi gear, being strictly pro studio audio. Actually, recording consoles. I know focusrite came out with that lunchbox about 15 years ago so you could use console module's as stand-alone units.

In my opinion, I prefer analog EQ's, but I gererally prefer analog anything. Your ear is an analog instrument, so anytime you manipulate sound with an analog device, it just sounds more natural to me. So in that way I would agree an analog EQ would be "less invasive".

While White makes top of the line Eq's, Massenburg and Focusrite are beyond top of the line. George Massenburg and Rupert Neve are not only legendary for being pioneers in recording console development, they are considered electronic geniuses (Massenburg, for instance, invented the Graphic EQ while Neve built the first console with EQ and Foldback on each channel). Most Sound Engineers would consider any piece from either of them as a prized possesion. I've worked on both Massenburg and Neve/Focusrite consoles and could not recommend either of those EQ's more highly. The only other EQ manufacturer in their league would be Pultec.

Like I said, I didn'rt know either of them made any gear for the HiFi market, so if you're going to use gear that was designed for professional use remember that a line level signal for HiFi is -10Db, while for professional gear a line level is +4Db. A stereo won't have the power to run through a pro EQ. The output of the EQ will be so low you'll have to turn it way up, and even running full out you may not have enough power to hear it, although you'll also be amplifing any electrical noise. You'll need a level matcher to fix the problem, like this one:

edited for spelling, I type way to fast

07-22-2005, 11:51 PM
Have not used an Eq for many years, but EnjoyTheMusic just had a review of one here:
Digital Equalizer (

They make this Behringer sound very worthwhile, and the price through any of the online musical instrument stores (i.e.- would make it a fair bargain if you're in the market.

07-23-2005, 01:09 AM
Imeant EQ done in the digital domain or just in the analog.

Nothing was referring to typeof controls.

07-23-2005, 10:32 AM
Looks like AD010685 will have to clarify. A digital equalizer (bit twidler) seems like it would have to be built-in. Or software controlled. Kinda like Microsoft Media Player or Real Player. Jay1066 - your probably the only AKer that knows what a Massenhurg and Focusrite are!

Hey...I know from Massenburg and Focusrite too! :D

TP, general-purpose studio rodent

07-23-2005, 03:22 PM
Jus' havin' a leetle laugh...slow day today. :D


07-23-2005, 04:37 PM
I finaly bought a few EQ. 2 ADC and then a Harman / Kardon EQ 8. At first I loved the H/K EQ 8 then a funny thing happend. I installed better jumper cable's and at first sounded the same, I replaced the Rat/Shack cables with Audiobone (spell check). About two week's later I happen to by pass the EQ and was shocked, I like the sound better flat than colored? I had all wise colored my music before, not now.

Not sure what happened, was it the cable's broke in or did my taste change :scratch2:

EQ is hardly used but still has a use, help's older CD's sound better.

I was talking with Dr Hi Fi and told Chris I play my system flat now, said "Guess you finaly got the system to ture audiophile level". Guess he know's what he is talking about. Just know I am happy and that is what counts.

I do not claim to know anything.

Cuda Ken

07-23-2005, 04:57 PM
If you want real training on room acoustics and eq's, try SynAudCon. It was founded by Don Davis-the creator of the first 1/3 octave eq decades ago. I have taken some of their classes and have learned a lot from them!

07-23-2005, 05:13 PM
Just got an EQ 8 yesterday, using it the basement system (SX-780 driving HPM-100's). So far, been experimenting with subtle corrections, I like what it does down there. But the HPM's still sound good flat. I prefer flat, but sometimes I run into a recording that needs some help...sub-par old recordings as well as any Rush albums produced by Peter Collins...thin city.


ToTo Man
10-23-2005, 05:09 PM
Gee, I never knew you could get standalone digital EQ's! Does this mean I'll be able to EQ the DTS soundtracks on my favourite DVDs???

10-23-2005, 05:16 PM
Gee, I never knew you could get standalone digital EQ's! Does this mean I'll be able to EQ the DTS soundtracks on my favourite DVDs???

Not in the digital domain, I'm afraid. The only digital format generally available for digital processing by add-on devices is red-book CD. Any other format, the manufacturers will give you to manipulate pretty much only in the analog domain, after conversion. Some high-end home theater receivers have some digital EQ capability, don't know at what point in the signal chain they actually apply it.

10-24-2005, 09:02 PM
I use horn based speakers and an EQ is a must to tame the horns down in the mid frequencies. I have tried several EQ's over the years (Technics, Pioneer & a matched to my main rig Phase Linear 1200 paragraphic) and have stayed with a vintage ADC Soundhaper II Mark II, I have yet to find a more useful and cleaner sounding unit that does not muck up the sound. I guess the ADC has just the right frequency adjustment and good circuit design. I guess I am saying that analog is the way to go. Just my two cents.

10-24-2005, 09:30 PM
I have read good things about the Behringer digital EQ, if I remember correctly model 8024, esp when trying to tame bass response. I was set to try one, but from what I understand you need an amp with volume control, which my Sunfire 300 lacks.

I currently don't own and EQ, but there is this cool looking Sansui at thrift that has me jonesing to try it again. Good luck!

10-24-2005, 11:42 PM
The Behringer 2496 is a bargain. If you're looking for the best sound look no further, at least for the money. This thing is amazing. There's no reason to use the adc or dac in the 2496 because it has digitial in/outs so all is done in the digital domain. All rooms have modes, even mine which is a custom built and fully treated room. If there's walls, floors and ceilings you have modes that can be pretty strong. I don't know how many of you have measured your rooms but it's quite enlightening. An amplitude variation of + or - 15db is common! In my opinion even an analog equalizer is a good idea in some rooms. Another benefit is just having the ability to adjust the tone how you like them.

For those of you who have not experienced a good acoustical environment, meaning a well treated room, and some properly implemented equalization you're in for a treat. To make a long story short: A 50,000 dollar system will sound less good in a poor room than a 5,000 system properly set up in a good room. This is the gospel and this is common. You'd be surprised how much just a little bit of room treatment can help.