Your not alone. I think that will offered soon. Dial in songs/albums and the pre amp/equalizer will change automatically
54 responses Add your response
No if you have a SOTA high resolution system like me sounds great on every track.I recommend you upgrade ASAP!But every track is mastered and mixed at different studios by different engineers. Imagine if you were in the mastering studio doing the mastering. You would tune the track differently than another person wouldnt you? And every track would require a different EQ curve. If not, the tone balance would shift from one track to the next.
It seems to me that I am the one hearing what a SOTA system would enable you to hear, not you. If you listen to tracks through laptop speakers everything sounds the same.
Could that be the reason Im the only one here complaining?
Relax. Its not hyperacusis. Not a psychologist myself, but suspect it would take one to properly label the problem.
The serious audiophile answer to this is there's two schools of thought. One is whatever you want. Turn it up, turn it down. EQ the crap out of everything. I say crap because that's what this approach always yields.
The other approach is do your best to do as little as possible to the source signal. Whatever that may be. They are not all perfect. But they can never be made any better than what they are. You cannot put legs on a snake. I know that is your dream kenjit, but wake up, its not a dream. Its a nightmare.
Kenjit, I’m complaining too. It’s a wonder music sounds as good as it does... you get input from...the artist,producer, label, then it’s stamped on a plastic disc and you drag a rock across it. Or it gets converted from a to d then d to a. Once it’s in your house it goes thru a bunch of electronics goes from electrical to a mechanical signal..then you factor in the room. If somebody came to you with this idea and wanted you to invest I’m pretty sure you would, like I would think the person was crazy. It’s no wonder that the music needs a little help here and there when you factor in all the places that can go wrong. I’ll never understand these guys who don’t believe in any kind of tone control. It’s their choice.
EBM what is this SOTA thing that’s so remarkable?
What speakers are they Kenjit. Homemade? If so drivers used, cabinet material?? Did you make the drivers? Active/passive?? Sensitivity? What eq are you using?? I think you can tell us some of that without giving away trade secrets! Inquiring minds want to know..
Oh and how much money do you have invested in them?? Just wanna make sure your not gettin duped..
Good so you got it working great .. It may look confusing but if you tinker with it for a bit, you can really get some good results. 1-200 profiles can be saved and recalled, just no remote.. Use the mic feed, you can EQ to your ears, on the fly, left or right side.. BUT it’s not good enough for mids and highs, The type of Active XO needed there is pure analog no memory available..
A modified First Watt B5 will work. It’s what I use, in an open baffle project, that's actually working and sounding good.. Now Baffles out of Butcher block. Cherry picker time..
Tidal is a streaming service, so I'm not sure why you'd expect that level of functionality from them. Yeah, there is an app, but that's 'just' to accomodate buffering amd unfolding higher bit rate streams.
JRiver will do what you want, albeit somewhat klugey. Or, you could run all your tracks through mastering SW, where not only can you set equalization per track, but you can pre-set clipping / muting levels for specific frequencies on the fly, you don't even have to listen to it first.
Unfortunately, the game doesn't end here because you have to set an EQ for each track at every playback volume level!
Unfortunately, the game doesn't end here because you have to set an EQ for each track at every playback volume level!You dont have to but you could if you wanted to. In fact it doesnt end there either. Ideally, you would be able to mix the entire track from scratch in order to custom tune it to perfection. CUSTOM tuning is the only way to achieve perfection.
The Palette Preamplifier is visually similar to the more expensive Cello components: tall and boxy, with double rows of circular control knobs on its face. The top row of six knobs is dedicated to basic preamplifier operation (input selection, tape monitor, left and right input balance, EQ in/out, and output level), with the lower six knobs reserved for selected equalization points: up to ±22dB at 20Hz, ±12dB at 120Hz, ±6dB at 500Hz, ±6dB at 2kHz, ±12dB at 5kHz, and ±22dB at 20kHz. The rear of the unit offers five pairs of single-ended line-level RCA inputs, two pairs of single-ended RCA record outputs, two pairs of single-ended RCA outputs, and one pair of balanced outputs via Fischer connectors (Levinson claims that Fischer connectors sound much better than the more common industry-standard XLRs). The outboard power supply is hard-wired to the main chassis via two three-screw terminal strips.
The Palette Preamplifier is visually similar to the more expensive Cello components:
What K is using 300.00 (recommended) DCX2496 or (LE no summation), daisy chainable.. laptop or direct access.
He's happy, what else you want..
Don't answer that..LOL
Somebody I know has a patent on drivers that minimize back wave reflection and others on absorbing the remaining wave. Of course designers with cones flapping around out of phase to the input don’t care much about reflections unless they juice efficiency....
The Cello Palette was brilliant, something better in the development pipeline... innovation since 1977
Bought this LP one time Jacintha, Here's to Ben, and the music and a lot of the recording quality was first rate. But I never could get into it. In fact it was hard to endure a whole side. Actually gave me the creeps. Would sit there listening trying to figure out what was so wrong? Technically it was hard to pin down. Eventually settled on it being excruciatingly sterile and technical. Like, everything utterly wrong, yet nothing you could put your finger on and say why. Tried listening to this several times because in a lot of ways its the kind of thing I would love to play, put on for people, you know one of those show off your system kinda things. But no way I'm playing anything gives me the creeps.
Wondering what it could possibly be I went scouring through the liner notes. There it was: Mark Levinson Palette mixing board! How a guy who ruins everything he touches ever built up so much street cred is beyond me. But there it is. So now the solution to fixing this mess is to run it through ANOTHER Palette? ? ? !
Give it up. Don't put legs on a snake. Just don't. https://youtu.be/6ZdVqF-Rlmo?t=118
"Dont you dare ask me to provide such detailed information about my methods and parts used.
If you want me to assess the quality of your sound system Mofojo, I will gladly come round and do this. Charges will apply naturally.I will find things wrong with your speakers that you never knew existed. You will be shocked."
Lol. Alright chief, I give, I will no longer post in any thread of your threads. Can't tell if this Gomer is for real or just F -ng with everyone.
I custom tune every track using the Volume control. You should try it sometime.
I actually have so much perfection in the system that at times it is a bit unnerving. Most humans cannot stand to be in the presence of such perfection, but I have trained myself to take it. It’s a labor of love for the community, to balance the people struggling under imperfect sound. I am happy to do this for the sake of humanity. ;)
The person was looking for recommendations so I gave him a couple. Whether I had heard them or not is not relevant.
What is relevant is that you need to understand how to listen. Many audiophiles are simply not capable of hearing high quality sound even if it hits them in the face.
Just like a piano needs to be tuned by ear, a speaker also needs to be tuned. If you go to a concert, the sound quality you hear is dependent on the acoustics. With a speaker, the quality is dependent on the acoustics AND the way its tuned.
They never believed Einstein either when he invented his theories until after he had died...
" The person was looking for recommendations so I gave him a couple. Whether I had heard them or not is not relevant."
Kenjit, over time I believe I understand your motivation and thought process more. It seems to me now that your big secret is to DSP whatever you listen to, literally track by track. It seems that you feel the speakers don't matter as much - because you can manipulate the DSP.
I actually did some experimentation with that during the review of Legacy Audio speakers using the Wavelet processor, which allowed for more gross, and some fine tuning. It's fun! I think I now get your points you have been trying to make here. It seems you are pushing hard on the idea that there is fundamental weakness in traditional systems, and that the capacity to run DSP manipulation actively is best. As the system had resets on the calibrations, it was instructive to discover that as I continued to manipulate the sound in what I thought was a holistically pleasing fashion, over time it was in reality skewed. It was chasing minutia in particular pieces of music, and that led to overall worse sound with all music. When I reset the settings, it became evident. So, I do not advocate continuous manipulation of DSP for that reason.
It's one way of doing listening, but imo it's not a very HiFi result. It seems more like a video game, where the variables shift and you make the music on the fly (what you seem to call "tuning"). As long as you accept that you claim no standard, no actual means to compare what you are doing with consistency, as you are advocating changing DSP with every performance, then it certainly can be your thing. But, something tells me it won't become the norm, much less a big breakthrough. It's a different activity, like playing DJ, versus attempting to find a standard of beauty. Not wishing to be rude, it's more like playing with Lego than making a piece of art.
Personally, I think you are pushing a bit too hard in your comparison to Einstein. I look at your methods as closer to Dariwn, whose theory (in terms of Macroevolution) I do not accept, and I see the acceptance of both as leading to a quagmire. :)
Kenji, I don't know why you waste your time on this forum. You don't seem to respect anyones knowledge or experience. There are several very good audio societies in California that have recording engineers, musicians, designers, and builders as members who would be glad to evaluate your work and do in person comparisons and shootouts. All you have to do is join them and start really having fun with your ideas.