2. amps-preamps
  3. 1211935390

The use of equipment as "tone controls"

Several times in my Audiogon reading and posting over the last couple of years, I've noticed this or that contributor commenting along the lines of: "You shouldn't use your amp/cables/cartridge/whatever as a tone control."

I assume what this is supposed to mean is that there is some absolutely correct sound out there, and we ought not have audio equipment of any kind that deviates from that absolutely correct sound.

I might be able to buy into this if we were listening to live instruments (although their sound is, of course, affected by the space in which they are played, the position of the listener, etc., so is not itself "absolute"). But we're not listening to live music. We're listening to recordings. There are microphones, cables, recording equipment, mastering equipment, storage medium, etc, all of which come between us and the original sound--not to mention the taste and perception of the engineers, producers, etc. In that sense, what we hear coming out of our speakers is all illusion, anyway. And the illusion comes in quite a few "flavors." On one system I had, Bill Evans at the Village Vanguard sounded like he was in my living room. But Leonard Bernstein conducting the NY Phil in the early 60's was so shrill it made me run screaming from the room. In my current system, Bill Evans doesn't sound as "right there" as he used to (now I'm a few of rows back, yet still quite happy), but Leonard Bernstein doesn't make my ears bleed, either.

How did I work that? I experimented with different equipment. I used the equipment as "tone controls" (I guess). It's all respectible equipment: ARC, VTL, BAT, Cardas, etc. Maybe it reduced the "accuracy" of the reproduction of Bill Evans, but it increased the "accuracy" of the reproduction of Leonard Bernstein. Maybe. But who knows for sure?

We all tailor the sound of our systems to suit our preferences. What's wrong with that? And, most equipment has it's own sound character. That seems like a good thing, to me. It allows us to tailor our sound.

Now what we REALLY need is a good set of tone controls on our fancy pre-amps, so we can really tailor our sound!

Food for comment?
eweedhome

Showing 5 responses by wireless200

wireless200
415 posts
 
For instance, I once heard a very beautiful sounding system that was absolutely wonderful. Some recordings sounded as if the performers were in the room, but they were all great. Then I realized that everything sounded not only good, but practically the same. That cannot be right.

"You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize?"
[Takes a bite of steak]
"Ignorance is bliss. "
wireless200
415 posts
 
IME, I found that the amp made more difference than anything. Speakers put a particular spin on the sound but for musicality and brightness the amp held sway. Speaker placement, room acoustics, power source did not make much difference in my sytems. I switched to a McIntosh amp and most if not all the brightness problems disappeared. Cables help fine tune the sound. I listen to the Mc and say to myself "that doesn't have the bass punch of the Krell, the strings don't sound as sweet as the Krell, the warmth is not as much as the Musical Fidelity, then I forget those things in 10 seconds and sit and listen blissfully to the music for extended periods. It's the oddest thing. I don't sit and analyze my system constantly. I just think man this sounds good.
wireless200
415 posts
 
Eweedhome, I'm using an MC402. I had planned to buy a pre-amp - either a c45 or a c2x00 for the tone controls. I'm holding off right now or I should say I'm in no hurry. I don't exactly have room for it on my rack and the mc402 is sounding fine. All I can say is the McIntosh worked in my system. I'm using Cardas cables and running a Slim Device Transporter (DAC) straight into the amp.

I used to marvel, ooh and ah, at the dynamics, punch and resolution of my other amps and then need to leave the room after a song or two or three.

Lovin' the Mc and not really spending a lot of time every day looking and thinking "what do I need to do to this system to get it to sound great." I can't tell you how glad I am to get away from that mindset. Now I casually think maybe I'll upgrade my speaker cables, maybe I'll buy a pre-amp. That's about it.
wireless200
415 posts
 
A classic trap most of us fall in to when auditioning new components

It's how Pepsi won the "Pepsi Challenge" and caused the New Coke debacle. Pepsi is sweeter than Coke. They were legimately winning the "sip" test because the normal person will pick a sweeter taste over less sweet. In the panic the Pepsi challenge caused, what Coke executives didn't realize is customers drink a whole coke - not one sip. After they made New Coke sweeter than classic Coke people didn't like it. The rest is history.

I chaulk up many of the systems I've owned to that mistake. They sound "incredibly detailed" with "high resolution" and with great bass, the whole nine yards. But drink in a whole CD and they weren't so sweet.
wireless200
415 posts
 
While some may note lack of bass, the majority of complaints are about harsh highs. This is most often the result of the recording IME. I've yet to hear a piece of equipment that completely corrects boosted highs and compressed recordings. If someone wants the accuracy of these recordings, more power to 'em. Myself, I'd prefer to roll it off with a tone control.
More to discover