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
Johnnyb53 - Good advice. Practical, to the point, thought outside the techno box. It is refreshing to see common sense.
Most of high end preamps don't even have tone controls and all amps sold in Best Buy do. This alone should suggest something.

That audio purists are masochists and would rather buy several amps until they get what works in their room rather than tweak a few db with a tone control? Just kidding LOL ;-)

Tone control destroys imaging, clarity, and even tone. It changes harmonic structure by improper summing of harmonics (high quality constant group delay Bessel like adjustable filters ain't cheap).

In EXCESS absolutely - but most tone controls are used very lightly - or at least they should be.

Purists would also say that capacitors shouldn't even be in the signal path.

They should use active speakers in this case (and actively powered by amps that do not use coupling capacitors in the signal path)

In addition - system should restore original concert performance. So here is the question: How do you adjust treble when you are at the concert?

Yes but...the mix engineer and mastering engineer has already monkeyed around so much with what you hear that this "purity" goal becomes a "mute" point. (And these guys start by selecting mikes and placements that help create the sound they desire from the get go - so there is never "purity" to begin with)

Another way to apply this "purity" logic would be to say that "I want to hear as close as possible to what the recording engineer hears". In this case buy the same equipment (speakers are the most distorting) as are used to mix/master your favorite music - or get what your favorite artists likes to use. At least, then you can conclude that you are perhaps hearing things a little closer to how they were intended to be heard. Although, I'll admit even this is a weak argument and not as strong as the logic that says "I'll use _______ because if it is good enough for "- insert your favorite classical audio label -" then it will be good enough for me." Kind of a Stereophile A list approach, however, without the nagging concern that stereophile makes money from advertisements and therefore has a vested interest to have an all inclusive extensive A list.

Good discussion....tone controls have caused serious angst with audiophiles for many years and no doubt will continue to do so.
I've come to the sad realisation that my 40-year old ears no longer have their original upper frequency response.

It is not a severe problem. Treble above 12KHZ is of very little of interest anyway in music.

If you are suffering much lower down in the midrange then you must see a doctor. Use this to check to see if your hearing loudness curve is "normal" - it should look like the typical equal loudness contour - if it does not then see a doctor.

Don't be surprised if you can't hear the 16 KHz tone - most people over 40 can't.
"Yes but...the mix engineer and mastering engineer has already monkeyed around so much with what you hear that this "purity" goal becomes a "mute" point."

Final product of this Monkeying around is what performer approved and want me to hear. If I cannot change (adjust) tone at the concert then why should I be able to do this at home?

Fixing shortcomings of the system (or room) with tone controls is not a good idea.
there is an implicit assumption that that the engineer and the performer want the purchaser of a recording to hear "something". i disagree. the recording is a stement from both engineer and performer, as to what they want to hear. they don't care what you hear, because they have no idea what your stereo system is.

therefore, it is not logical to assume that altering the sound of the recording is not a good idea. it is neither good nor bad. it is just an idea.

i think it is reasonable to expect a listener to "hear" the recording any way he/she desires, without regard to accuracy of transmission.

the problem with this hobby is that there are too many prescrip[tions as to how one should listen to one's recordings and too much dogmatism as too what is good and what is not good.

it's all subjective and a matter of preference.

accuracy still has meaning. however, some audiophiles are not motivated to achieve it.