BFD-like device for mains and surrounds?

[lovingdvd]

OK now that I've had great results with REW and BFD to tame my sub, naturally I now would like to turn my attention to my main and surround speakers.

Are there any parametric equalizers like BFD but designed to allow you to create filters on a per channel basis (front L/C/R, surround L/R)?

If not are there any receivers that have such a parametric equalizer built in that allows you to EDIT the tables and create any arbitrary filters you want? I know some receivers I've looked at offer PEQ and editable results but the frequencies are fixed at pre-determined numbers. Thanks.

[terry j]

What is it that you are trying to do??? eg correct their bass response if they are large, or what?? Trying to change their inate FR full range??

Not sure what it is that you'd be after here.

[lovingdvd]

Basically I'm looking to balance the mid range and upper range that plays from the surround and rears. My receiver has built in calibration and a parametric EQ for this (it does not do the sub however so I have a BFD for this).

So what I am looking for is a way to bypass my receivers "basic" PEQ (which does not allow any editing or setting of results - you get what it chooses and that's it) and install my own.

Basically exactly what I did for the sub with the BFD, I'm looking to add a device that will let me fine turn the rest of the spectrum. I'm sure the receiver's built in calibration (YPAO) is doing an "ok" job but I better with a tool like REW and an external PEQ device I can do much better manually.

[brucek]

EQ works fine for low frequencies, but no so much for the rest of the spectrum.

For that, best results are realized from room treatment and speaker positioning..

brucek

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

Basically I'm looking to balance the mid range and upper range that plays from the surround and rears.

Your receiver’s tone controls should be able to do that for you, if all you want is to say, increase or decrease overall bass to better blend with the sub, or tame the highs of some bright-sounding speakers, or boost the highs a little if they need a bit more definition.

The parametric EQs in receivers these days are pretty flexible and can actually do a lot. Plus, all the equalizing is done in the digital domain, which minimizes artifacts like noise and phase shift.

A good buddy of mine has a Sony receiver probably 7 years old or more, and I was able to smooth the response of his mains considerably, using my old-fashioned 1/3-octave RTA and his built-in three-band, quasi-parametric tone controls. We were both impressed with the improvement, him even more so than myself.

If you think you’re hearing sharp spikes in your speaker’s response, that’s another thing. You’d need an outboard parametric more like the BFD, but I don’t know of anyone who makes a multi-channel parametric.

But the problem there is you’re talking about a lot of money. Good equalizers typically aren’t cheap, and even if you can find a good one for cheap, by the time you get enough of them to cover all your channels, it’s not cheap any more. Not to mention, any channel you don’t have pre-out and main-in jacks, you’re going to have to add a power amp.

All the more reason to utilize the on-board EQ.

Regards,
Wayne

[Peter De Smidt]

Wayne A. Pflughaupt wrote:

If you think you’re hearing sharp spikes in your speaker’s response, that’s another thing. You’d need an outboard parametric more like the BFD, but I don’t know of anyone who makes a multi-channel parametric.


Regards,
Wayne

TacT does, for about $10000. Another possibility is using a software based solution. There are a number of them available for free, but they look fairly complicated. There are parametric plugins for Foobar2000, for example. I've been thinking of going the latter route, but it's a little intimidating, as there are a number of programs that one would have to get working together, and this could take a lot of effort. It is really convenient, though, to make lossless copies of all of your CDs and use your computer to "play" them. I have a digital coax line running from my computer to my pre-processor, and it works very well.

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

Another possibility is using a software based solution. There are a number of them available for free, but they look fairly complicated. There are parametric plugins for Foobar2000, for example.

How do those work – by equalizing the source material?

Regards,
Wayne

[Peter De Smidt]

I've just started looking into this, and movies complicate things over CDs; but yes, they adjust the source material in digital form.

Here's a few links:
http://www.inguzaudio.com/RoomCorrection/
http://www.thuneau.com/products.htm
http://www.duffroomcorrection.com/wiki/Main_Page
http://convolver.sourceforge.net/
http://www.acourate.com/

[Hakka]

Start saving your pennies.

http://www.deqx.com/

[blazerman]

lovingdvd wrote:

Basically I'm looking to balance the mid range and upper range that plays from the surround and rears. My receiver has built in calibration and a parametric EQ for this (it does not do the sub however so I have a BFD for this).

So what I am looking for is a way to bypass my receivers "basic" PEQ (which does not allow any editing or setting of results - you get what it chooses and that's it) and install my own.

Just for the kicks, you may want to look at this device, old school Bijou. Retails for $1190 but on sale for less than $800 at brightandsleek.com for 6 EQ channels. Everything else seems to be around $5K or higher. But as Wayne wisely pointed out, you need to have pre-outs and line-in back to your receiver to provide power...otherwise, you need a separate amplifier for each channel. Looooots of $$.

If you have 2 quality fronts (L/R) the mid-high response should be good enough, or even better than what most budget external PEQs could contribute. My front towers deliver sweet music with just some minor tweeks from the receiver's eqs. Its a matter of being cost-effective. In my case, the end result does not justifies the expense. Little to gain, too much to lose (money-wise). Well, those are my 2 cents.

Blazerman
Hearing is believing!

[terry j]

not sure if this helps, especially as I personally am not into HT in the slightest, but if it's good enough to only have the front mains eq'd ( the rest are just effect channels??? and so less important??) then of course we shouldn't leave the Behringer DEQ 2496 out of the equation.

Added bonus of nicely fixing your mains for 2 ch. Makes the BFD a bit redundant tho, and you need the ecm 8000 to set it up properly.

[Malice]

Not sure about other amps compared to my Denon, but if you use the DEQ2496 to EQ the front speakers there are a couple of options to achieve this and neither of them are ideal.

(1) Take the Front L+R pre-outs and feed the DEQ for processing. Then you would feed them back into the analogue L+R channels of an unused analogue source and then use power amp assignment to drive the front speakers through the surround B speaker terminals. Zones 2 and 3 on the Denon will only accept analogue signals. So I'd lose my 7.1 amp capability in favor of a 5.1 plus power amps for the EQing.

(2) Take all the pre-outs and loop all back into the EXT-IN sockets with the L+R going via the DEQ and the sub to the sub of course. The DEQ would then sit in the middle of of the L+R "loop". However, EXT-IN bypasses all digital processing, including crossovers and bass management.

Bob

[terry j]

thanks Bob, obviously being only a 2ch kinda guy these things are way over my head! Perhaps other processors don't have those sort of problems??

Would not those type of problems also apply if for example you were to use a DEQX or TACT type of arrangement??

[Peter De Smidt]

Ideally, if your source material is in the digital format, then you want all of the processing done in the digital domain, with only one digital to analoque conversion. The more conversions that you do, the more grundge you will hear. That said, Anthony Cordesman recently reviewed a TacT product in The Absolute Sound, and he thought the gains from the TacT system easily outweighed the negatives, through both analoque and digital inputs. I've read Mr. Cordesman for over twenty years, and I've listen to a number of his recommended components. I find that I usually agree with his judgments.

While these types of systems sound great, they are completely out of my budget. I'd be interested in trying the Behringer, but even it is a little pricey for a casual look-see of something I may not end up using at all.