Tone controls- to use or not?


Thanks to years of playing in bands, and more recently working in a noisy environment, I've come to the sad realisation that my 40-year old ears no longer have their original upper frequency response. Adding a bit of "treble" on my amp's tone controls helps, but I'm normally loathe to use these controls.

Should I be looking at changing my setup to incorporate "brighter" sounding components, or is adding a little treble with the tone controls legitimate?

My system is a Cambridge 640C player, NAD c720 stereo receiver (based on c320 amp) and B&W DM602 speakers, Monster cable IC's and heavy guage "Kordz" (Australian) copper speaker wires.
carl109

Showing 4 responses by rodman99999

Ralph and MR E- I've purchased 8024's and 2496's for a number of venues over the years. As far as inexpensive auto-EQs for live sound: They do for a cheap, fast curve. Much more convenient than the old Ivey! I've got one in my listening room to check my response on occasion. Yes- There is a sonic price to pay with it in the system, so- It's not. It resides across the room, on a shelf and use one of a number of pink noise records/CDs that I own. Mr E is correct in that another 61 band RTA cannot be found for the money(makes it worthwhile). Too bad Behringer(or anyone else) doesn't offer an inexpensive mic that is accurate between 16 and 100Hz.
Mr C- Once upon a time the definition of, "audiophile" implied one that did as little harm to the original signal as possible. Basically- your straight wire with gain types(no tone controls, EQs, etc.). Of course, that term was coined back in the early 80's, and has been watered down to nothingness. Everyone with a system better than a Bose radio believes they're an audiophile. Who cares? If using the tone controls on your system gives a presentation that you like: What do you care what anyone else thinks about it? When I am running a sound board, setting up an acoustic venue, or recording(in my capacity as a Sound Technician): it's my job to present the music that is being created in as natural a tone, timbre and voice as possible(just louder when "plugged in"). That's providing the artists don't require something extra added, which(of course) is their artistic license. BUT: There is no "right" or "wrong" in your private listening environment. YES- Anything you add into the signal chain will degrade the sound to a degree. If you can live with the degradation, and the component utilized adds to your pleasure- DO IT!! What ever makes YOU happy!
Mr K- You are correct that each channel on a typical mixing board has it's own EQ. Used correctly, these can be adjusted to convey that instrument or vocalist with as natural a presentation as possible. There are also "pan" controls that can move the performers/vocalists around the sound stage at the technician's(or the artist's) whim. The entire mix is generally adjusted for balance, loudness and EQ'd(often distorted) during the "Mastering" process(nowdays mostly utilizing computerized digital editors). Then too- You almost never get back what you send to the people that produce and press the records or CD's(those guys love their compressors/limiters). My personal philosophy has always been, "Less is Better!" with regard to signal manipulation. To me the best results are always accomplished with a really good setup in the studio, and as little after-tweeking as possible.
Mr M- If you'll re-read my post, you'll note I said the definition has(since coined in the 80's) been watered down to nothingness. Your points prove mine precisely(Thank you!). Further: I offered no "hypothesis" at all about anyone's system. I only suggested he make himself happy in his listening room, and the hell with anyone else's opinions.