Paul is so wrong that "they " don't make tone controls in high end equipments . All very high brands are still using them to the perfection : Luxman , McIntosh , Yamaha , Marantz , Parasound etc
Also I love my music in a low volume , especially late nights , I can really enjoy my phase button , and I don't want to make my nice neighbours get mad at me .
This is definitely an area where a delve from Paul. There are MANY reasons why you may need/want to control your EQ. Hearing loss (it effects differently at various freqs), room issues, poor recordings. Sure, have a good defeat so you can turn it off, but a good EQ is very often a very good idea.
That answer is only relevant in a perfect world. EQ is more important than ever now that people are rediscovering old vinyl recordings, some of which compromised bass response to allow longer playing time. Also the room you’re listening in could have a dreadful response that’s difficult to treat without major upset. Not everyone has the benefit of a great listening room and perfect recordings.
@@slyspy9819 That’s an excellent point. My new av receiver has a multiple frequency eq. I think that there are 12 frequencies from bass to treble. And, It has three user presets. I only wish that it also provided a preset for headphones.
Bingo, sometimes I want to add a little extra bass or treble or bring up the midrange, screw this whole “listen as intended” junk, it’s a philosophy not a rule.
I'm big on tone controls because, for example, there is one artist I listen to where bass was more absent from their early work and then later they made changes at about mid point of their career and now bass frequencies are very much a part of their sound. So I use the tone controls to mitigate that and make all their albums sound more similar.
"But, Paul..." he cried, "What about the Fletcher-Munson curve?" That was why the Loudness control was designed to gently boost the bass when listening at lower volume to compensate for human hearing's lowered sensitivity at those frequencies. But there are many brands that include tone controls (NAD, Vincent, Cambridge, etc.). Paul's advice is like Consumer Reports telling you to have a carrot instead of the occasional cookie. Moderation!
I am extremely happy with my NAD C-165BEE preamp. Two preamp outs (1 for R8 tube amp, 1 for NAD C 275BEE amp), sub out, AND tone controls with a defeat button on the remote. I love being able to turn the bass DOWN as needed. I do not know what magic this preamp has inside but it pushes my Linton 85s down to 22 Hz F3 in room at MLP with no subs. No lie. I have dozens of REW plots to prove it.
@@MS-pw8yu The Nad C-165BEE is about as good as a pre-amp gets. IMO the last best classic pre-amp, NAD needs to bring back an all analog pre-amp into their lineup, Nad is unnoticeable now. ..I love that pre-amp..,,The New Adcom is the closest thing to a classic pre-amp now.
@@MS-pw8yu I am curious if you rolled tubes in your R8. I outfitted mine with ALL JJ Electronics, and their EL-34s as well. I find the amp has a bit of a strong midrange through any number of speakers I have paired with it, all in the same room. From 1970ies pair of restored Superscope S-212 to my Martin Logan Classic 9 electrostats. Like to hear what you think. Thanks
@@garysmith8455 I have rolled the power tubes with PSVane Horizon KT-88s and Horizon EL-34s (currently my favorite), as well as JJ EL-34s. I preferred the JJs over the stock and PSVane KT-88s, but the Horizon EL34s have just a touch smoother of a sound. EL34s are a more mid-range rich tube for sure, which is what I find I like. The Horizon KT88s are brilliant up top and voices are amazingly holographic but it is a V shape sound, for sure...like NO midrange it seemed. Linton 85s are my primary hifi speakers, but my GR Research modded RP-8000s (my home theater speakers) demonstrate the tube characteristics more than the Lintons as they are significantly more resolving with the upgraded crossovers. I am going to buy a aet of Electro Harmonix EL34s to try them out as they are "only" 110€ used. I have also rolled Horizon 6SL7s in the front end. They opened the soundstage a bit and voices were more airy. They sounded a bit harsh at times at first but they have settled down a bit. I can still hear some scratchiness every now and then. Stephe from Skunkie Designs recommended me to try some Gold Lion 12AX7s with adapter bases instead and after my wife forgets how much I have spent on tubes in the last month, I will try them. *Legal Disclaimer* These subjective results are from MY amp, with MY speakers, in THAT spot, in MY room, with MY ears. Your milage may vary. Cheers!
No need today? Bullsh*t. If anything, today's typical recordings need a bass Reduction. And I Want tone controls, so I will Have tone controls, one way or another.
@@FelixtheMetalcat Do not tell this to Paul ,He will get so angry and might block you , his equipment has 0 tone controls . That is why he is promoting no tone controls . 🤣
Tone controls aren't needed as much as in the past, but from the perspective of a music lover who listens to less that great recordings at times, they can still be useful at times and I'm glad I have made sure I have equipment that gives me those options.
Sorry... I don't go along with that, especially as a 69 years old. My ears are not what they use to be sadly after playing live music most all my life in clubs & concerts & there's many others my age who worked factories (whatever) that are in the same boat. Just my 2 cents as a fellow old fart.
Amen to that. My ears' high frequency response has rolled off badly, to the extent that some high pitched sounds are no longer audible. I need all of the help that I can get.
Five buttons that should still be on every serious amp: loudness, bass, treble, mono/stereo, L/R speakers. Leaving these out is nothing more than a make-more-money move from the HiFi companies.
They absolutely are needed! Old cassette tapes regularly need 2-4 db more treble. Room needs -2 db for bass. Also balance is essential if you can't sit exactly between speakers.
Modern recordings are fine and no need any bass or treble control. But there are great musics with poor recording from the back days 60s 70s 80s which need tone control to make it audible and enjoy it.
@@nurulahad2576 No, not correct. Check how our hearing actually works depending on volume level, Google Fletcher Munson equal loudness curves. Loudness (and bass/treble) control is much about your hearing performance being optimized for vocals at lower volume.
All depends on the recording. Bands from the 60 and 70's didn't realize that they had bass players and drummers. Then there is pretty much anything made for an album also lacks about everything. Then there are the recordings made for CD that are so damn loud. Tone controls are needed today as much as they were 20 or 30 years ago.
@@handokosetiawan2803 It’s a shame the industry is so disconnected from reality on this matter. The argument that a bypass switch cannot be engineered without negatively affecting the sound is especially lame. Look at all the switches and controls in a studio involved in music production and a tone control bypass switch in a preamp or integrated amp is an issue? Gosh…it’s just showing lack of engineering competency if that is the excuse…
@@ThinkingBetter It's called Maximizing Profit! They tell you we don't need the bass and treble controls any more because speakers have improved so much - but the reality is, the manufacturer saves a bundle by not putting them in. Similar to not installing VU meters on the power amps any more - it saves the manufacturer a bundle of money which translates to more profit. It shouldn't be this way!
I so much love my ADCOM pre amp , it has bass and treble control and a button that allow you to engage/disengage the tone control. TBH I would not buy today a pre amp or integrated amp without a tone control !
Paul is a smart guy - but today's video is odd. We all know that human hearing attenuates low and high frequencies at lower volumes (Fletcher Munson curves). Without tone and loudness controls, how can we compensate for human hearing deficiencies when the volume is reduced?
I have lost the ability to hear higher frequencies..One should be able to adjust the sound to suit one's taste...This is why I have black faced Sansui AUs and CAs with my own speakers...my sound my way my speakers at my crossover points... Why spend 20k dollars to be told "it doesn't make any sense today"?....For the hearing impaired like me its perfect sense.
Every old person loose the ability to hear high frequenses. I am now 70 years old and have problem with one ear. As a result I do many many hearing tests each year and ”my curve” go ”down in the celler” above 3 500Hz. When I was around 5-10 years old I would guess I heard up to around 20 000Hz.
@@brahandit’s a tragedy a lot of people can never afford a good hifi system until they’re in their older age. I’m thankful to be able to relatively young.
I have been on both sides of this conversation. On one side of the table you have the "original recording?" crowd. The goal is to replicate only what was produced. And that same crowd argues that if you get the "x" amplifier its brighter with better base control. presumably to change the sound to something more pleasing. Doesn't that make the amp a really expensive tone control? When I go to a restaurant there is usually salt and pepper on the table for me to adjust the chefs "original intent" to my liking. On the other side you have someone like me that learned that when you finally get a system truly capable of replicating music when using the original recording it sounds better with out any EQ. In fact so much so I had no idea that that splitting the bass signal off through the LFE to the subwoofer it actually made the speakers sound worse. Ive learned to love the pure signal better. Although I do miss the loudness button for low level listening to help pressurize the room.
Audiophiles think that most bands and mastering engineers produce perfection, on purpose and are delighted with their recordings. Most artists listen to their own recordings and say things like “I wish the bass was turned up”. Or we should have re-recorded the drums on that song. Or man, we should have used a different studio. Recordings are not created by god, a lot of them are rubbish and the bands will happily admit that.
Exactly. The original quality of the recording can be nice, but because every recording does not have a perfectly palatable EQ curve, if a person wants to LOVE the music instead of just hearing it, then EQ controls or at least bass and treble are necessary.
Sub filters would be convenient in this “ vinyl comeback “ . And mono button. I gave a classic a Marantz receiver to a young family member a few years back, he took it to two repair shops for ( cone pump) before he asked me about it. I said “press the sub filter button” He called back saying “ your a genius “ No argument
If you listen to some music genres they have exagerated bass and others have almost no bass, so unless you only listen to one or two genres with similar bass you would be better with bass and treble controls
i would say never listen to badly recorded music, so then you do not have to fix it on your end. tune your system to have a perceivable flat response or use your reference. if a recording intentionally rolls of the bass i skip it, they can not get away with it, boycott them, they need to learn.
@@sudd3660 The problem is your perceivable flat frequency response is only at a certain volume level. Check the Fletcher Munson equal loudness curves and why loudness control is a real issue.
@@sudd3660 Some of the Best music, is from the 70s - 80s. While not every song may be perfectly EQ'd, or recorded flawlessly... they are still Fantastic Songs, that you always want to Hear. The snobbery, of saying that you wont listen to a song that isnt Flawless... is laughably Bad. It just shows that you dont really have good taste in music. Its also a sign of Mental Illness Issues, such as OCD, and or a Personality Disorder (extremism / black and white thinking / responses).
Even if there were no benefit due to better speakers, there still will always be a benefit to making marginal recordings more listenable by boosting or reducing certain frequency bands. Some great music just was recoded poorly, and bass/treble controls can help.
So many audiophile systems just lack bass. It makes sense, because most recordings sound nothing like live music. Even the best speakers need some bass boost, or a subwoofer, but not everyone has or like the sound of a subwoofer. Give me bass and eq controls.
Paul's not wrong, however there is one thing I think is missing from this equation - THE RECORDING. If you're listening to something older or a live recording or some indie band from the 1980s, chances are the recording is maybe lacking in some area. The problem here is it gives you no option offset that.
Hi, Paul. Longtime viewer, first time commenter. Love your videos and enjoy them immensely. I have to say, though, I disagree with your conclusion here, if not your rationale. Certainly the tech and materials have improved dramatically over the last 50 years, but as many other folks here have mentioned, not all recordings are created equal. I am a listener to classical and jazz recordings from many eras, and while many have nearly perfect frequency curves and recording quality that require no tone adjustment, many more, especially from the 1950s-early 1980s, have pretty variable tonal profiles. It's not just the reproduction equipment that affects the tone, but also the inherent recording quality and engineering. For an obvious example, in the Soviet era, the Russian label Melodiya produced thousands of recordings of Soviet orchestras that featured often excellent performances, but had sound that, as music critic Dave Hurwitz has pointed out, "could peel the paint off the ceiling at the back of the concert hall." The Russians would play with the gusto of musicians afraid of the gulags, and the engineers (for whatever reason) captured it all in sound that could from time to time make your skin crawl. The only way to make these otherwise fine performances listenable is to softly increase the base and variably temper the treble. It wasn't just the Soviets. EMI in England and Columbia in the USA could also brashly engineer their recordings or record them such that the base or treble were lacking. Take George Szell's classic Cleveland Orchestra recording of Wagner's Ring cycle excerpts on Columbia (now Sony). Absolutely top flight exciting performances without enough bass to give them the oomph that Szell put there. A few notches up on the bass and POW, Szell's genius with that music comes roaring forth. The equipment may be much better, but the record is cast in concrete, UNLESS we can adjust the frequency profile.
I disagree about tone controls. At low volume the midrange becomes prominent and there’s very little treble or bass. There’s a name for this effect but I’m too sleepy to remember it. Anyway, give me back my control!!!!
me too , no need to be a disco in my house , but its always nice to make a little adjustment when yo play a poor record , so if it need a little bass, you can give it
I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees this as ridiculous. Not to mention he doesn't back it up, I'm pretty sure the Sprout has a bass boost that is on by default.
Yes it’s about +7db if I remember correctly. I can’t believe people actually seriously write in to this guy expecting genuine credible answers to their questions.
@@michaelb9664 Most of Paul's answers are quite good over the years. I'm sure we could ask similar questions & get plenty of disagreement when we see answers from Paul Barton, Sandy Gross, Andrew Jones or any other audio "guru."
No, you could get excellent full range speakers also decades ago and especially in the late 70s things got much better. I always used bass and treble to help compensate for the natural Fletcher Munson loudness issue we have with our hearing when playing at low volume. In fact back in those days most often good audio gear would have a loudness control also and we used it when we wanted best perceived tonal balance when not playing at concert levels. That had nothing to do with speaker performance. Increasingly a trend started in the late 90s and early 2000s of making audiophile become anti anything EQ with the argument it does more harm than good. And yes, there are many examples of poor tone controls and EQ products from the past, but this opinion resulted in high-end audio frowning at even a loudness switch, which has a solid argument for being there for anyone serious about listening at lower volumes. And what we have now are high-end systems even costing 100s of 1000s of Dollars sounding like a 1980s system with loudness off when playing at low volumes not waking up the entire family. Especially the bass is a problem without loudness. And sorry, no most expensive speaker cables, subwoofer or best of amps does what a loudness function does. Whenever I go to audio shows with audiophile gear I notice the volume level and you will never see a demo at a lower volume level for this exact reason. This is entirely about our natural hearing performance optimized for more narrow band listening at lower volumes.
Right on 👌🎶 Alas, our hearing is probably the second biggest nonlinearity - after any sort of normal room that most of us, audiophile or not, place our speakers in - that audiophiles desperately insist on ignoring. It's funny how some claim to clearly hear e.g. if a cable is turned the wrong way around, but fail to observe changes in tonal balance that are many, many orders of magnitude larger than anything incurred by changing any halfway decent component in one's system for another 💁
I walked into my local high priced audio specialty shop and listened to a rotel amp and some fancy high end turntable. I was pleasantly surprised that my Onkyo TX -8211 amp, technics turntable and cerwin vega D-3 speakers at home sounded way better. These guys are dreaming. The modern stuff is definitely not better. Give me my treble and bass controls please.
My audiophile friends when they listen to my system: "Sure, bass, treble, loudness make a system sound better but it is an incorrect mode of listening." lol!
AHHH..well as much as I like the purist folks..I also like to have a little fun with some heavy rock now and then, so if no bass/treble controls are there I'll be sticking an EQ (yup I said it!) in the mix so i can have my fun when the mood strikes LoL .. Thanks Paul for the cool video series !
I agree...if the recording lacks bass or treble....put it back ! Some of those recordings were purposely rolled off at the ends si the midrange didn't suffer from the high energy especially bass.
I started off with Luxman gear from the late 70s. My preamps include the C120a, C1000, CL350 and CL35 MkIII. I don’t own new speakers. Mine are KEF 104/2s from 1984. I enjoy having/using tone controls in my small listening room. Hope to buy a new Luxman 507z integrated amp soon with tone controls. To each his own👍
Two reasons I can think of why treble, bass as well as balance controls are needed are for room correction if you don't have ideal speaker placement and to compensate for age related hearing loss at higher frequencies.
What about when someone has nice vintage speakers but wants a modern preamp and power amp? They would probably like to have the bass and treble controls. I know I would.
Interesting video Paul though I don't share your view. I find tone controls AND a loudness selector are very useful. Our ears haven't changed and we still need loudness compensation at low volumes. Most people don't play their systems loud all the time so a good loudness contour circuit is very welcome. Same with tone controls - I adjust my five-band tone controls quite often depending on what I'm listening to. In fact, I have their settings on a piece of paper with quite a few of my CDs and records reminding me where to set the controls. YES, most of the time they are bypassed but I'd guess that at least 30% of the time they are active. As an aside, it may be true that bargain "home stereo" amps back in the day could not reach the frequency extremes but good ones did. The 1963 McIntosh MC225 tube amp I'm using in one of my systems is totally stock except for replacement filter capacitors and it bench tested less than .1db (one tenth of a dB) variation at full rated power (actually a bit beyond rated power) from below 15Hz to beyond 30KHZ. It was down 1 (ONE) dB at 100kHZ. :) That's flat in anybody's book! ;)
I'm convinced it's just to maximize profit via less circuitry. Same with power. Many companies give you 70/ 80 watts and act like it's impressive and it'll drive anything on the market. They could give you much more but of course suggest the "bigger" model which has a measly 120wpc but costs 4 times as much
Three speakers that I remember from the 1970s Tannoy, Cerwin vega, and fairly tall Dynatron floor standers all produced epic amounts of deep bass, and the big werlitzer duke boxes that pubs would often have in their saloon bars certainly packed a punch
find better recordings, or wait for a remaster. i do not recommend forcing the solution on your end, that would only lead to every recording needing individual settings......
@@andrzejz6980 how can you "love" the music that sounds bad? do you mean the bands that makes the music instead? you can reach out the point to the mistake in recording process.
@@sudd3660 lol. Remasters?! lol. You are showing your Ignorance. Most all remasters, are totally compressed to SH*T. The original CDs have FAR greater dynamic range... and sound 1000x better than the BS remasters.
Ah, Paul, but we do need them, along with a loudness control. Not to compensate for an amp or speaker’s deficiencies but to subtly adjust inferior recordings. To tame an overly bright recording or to boost a recording with anemic bass. And a loudness contour to make low level listening more enjoyable. A lot of the time, I don’t use them, but for those subpar recordings or low level listening, they are invaluable.
Yamaha has models with a variable loudness control. You set the volume to the loudest you'd ever listen to, and then use the loudness control to turn down the volume. It would boost the treble and bass proportionately.
Mr. McGowan: Your videos are invaluable, and I can’t thank you enough for all I’ve learned from them. However, I have to respectfully and strongly disagree with the view that tone controls aren’t needed simply because speaker quality has improved. Here’s why: A speaker designer, no matter how skilled, can’t anticipate the unique environment their speakers will end up in. They don’t know the listener’s preferences, potential hearing limitations, or the type and quality of music sources. These variables make tonal adjustments an essential part of enjoying an audio system. A well-designed system should be adaptable to its audience, not just in fidelity but in personal satisfaction. Consider this: an audio system, like a fine meal, serves diverse tastes. Most people wouldn’t eat at a restaurant that refuses to let them season their food, assuming the chef’s “perfect” seasoning will satisfy every palate. Similarly, why should listeners be locked into one sound profile? My preferences might lean toward a brighter high-end or a more pronounced bass. Others may prefer a different balance. Why shouldn’t they have the option to customize their experience? This lack of flexibility becomes especially burdensome for customers who, like myself, invest in audio gear as a tool to enjoy music, not as a static piece of art. For most of us, tonal adjustments are a vital feature, giving us that last 10% of satisfaction that might be missing in an otherwise great system. Without it, we’re left in a frustrating cycle of trial and error-returning components and experimenting with pairings-just to find what’s “close enough.” For the majority of audio enthusiasts who are working within a budget, adjustable tonal controls can be transformative. A system that’s adaptable to personal taste and the surrounding space is far more satisfying in the long run than one that forces the listener to fit into a “one size fits all” sound profile. Let’s bring tonal controls back-not as a crutch, but as a way for more people to love what they’re hearing. An enjoyable audio experience shouldn’t demand perfection but should offer the tools to get as close as possible.
I want equalizer with many many buttons. Dont care about how the recording is meant to sound, I care about how I want it to sound. Extreme treble AND extreme bass AND extreme middle range. Like a W with lots of dancing green lights
Hallo Paul- I really enjoy your chats, however, some of us have diminished hi frequency sensitivity due to , age, industrial noise and military service and need a few dB of boost now and again...
I agree, but only when it is a good full-range recording. A lot of 70s - 80s rock is awful without some bass boost. Some modern music is over-bloated in the bass, so often needs reduction to sound decent. Many interviews about "classic albums" often have the artist state they hated the sound of the original recording. So pleased I bought Accuphase amps, so I can adjust albums to what I enjoy. That's even with a 2.2 hugh end set-up.
Paul, I love your videos. That said I have a different point of view on this topic. I have a two channel listening room in which I have followed all the rules of speaker placement and invested in bass traps, diffusion and absorption acoustic treatments. I have 2 Monitor Audio speakers and 2 SVS subs. The system is powered by a Marantz high current analogue integrated amp that has tone controls. With all I have done thus far to achieve the "perfect" sound, there are still some tracks that require tone adjustment (mainly bass reduction) for the music to sound best. I would love to be able to play every track direct/flat without tone adjustment, but for now I am glad I have them. Thanks.
I had a APT Holman preamp back in the 80s. It had wonderful tone controls, The bass control was switchable for shelving or tilt up/down. There was a Hi filter. There had a variable L+R to L-R control. It also had a bunch of micro reed switches that developed high resistance contacts. I had them cleaned (???). It was never the same. Noise dead scratchy. Gave it away
Paul, I see your point but a lot of the early CD's were made directly from the tape masters that were originally mixed for vinyl record albums that will always have problems by nature with playing back high and low frequencies and so the early ones generally sound too bright on top and it sure is nice to have either an equalizer or treble control to pad those high frequencies down some.
That was a good answer for me because I was not thinking that way. I didn’t take deep enough to acknowledge base and even come up with an answer. I’ve been satisfied without tone controls
I have a few EQs, 2 from Schiit. So long as the quality is good, they are a huge help for all the poorly recorded stuff out there. But I also make sure I have a 'bypass' option
Bass and treble (or even equaliser) might not be as needed (probably due to the loudness war), but loudness function still is as our brains hasn't evolved in a few decades to where psychoacoustics doesn't matter. One reason why some brands are popular despite sounding horrible is that they have a really bad frequency response that sounds better at low volumes. I would say that it's another thing active speakers can help with, it's not too much trouble to have the DSP control this when you change volume.
Unless you listen at "reference level" (somewhere in the 75-85 dB range, depending on the type of mix), you need to adjust for the loss of perceived bass and treble as you lower the listening volume. Some modern AVRs have controls for this, and integrated amps should too.
It seems to be more necessary than ever now that DSP has become so popular. I’m not sure why good analog EQs haven’t come back yet for vinyl setups since I think most people wish they could use their DSP settings on a purely analog setup, or why it’s almost impossible to use DSP on a CD player (there’s so few options that exist to do this) it seems like we exist in a world right now where DSP is only really available for streaming and if you like other formats you’re SOL. Luckily we’re just now starting to see DACs with built in DSP and “audio processors” of which I only know of two, and things like MiniDSP that are standalone boxes.
Dear Paul, I highly appreciate your comments on hifi and high end audio, as this point about bass- treble-control. As many short answers, it is surely 99.9% true with some contextual shortcomings. The famous loudness button was actually planned for the compensation of the bass at low volume and not to make every mediocre recording sound good. The quality of recordings in the 80ies went down to below zero in bass and midbass terms during the walkman hype, which probably would have beennkilled by the next orderly music record according to nowadays terms or standards, because the walkman wouldn‘t do much thing below 2-300 Hz. So on acstereo it was urgently needed to fix what the mainstream studio engineers had spoiled, the bass and the top highs. I wish many brilliant regords of that time would be played and recorded as full sounding music and not as a byproduct of that times music listening devices which were less than acceptable in terms of a full sound image. I wonder what these guys were thinking at that time, but still, having a nice collection of great music poorly recorded, sound EQ via bass and make a lot of sense to me still nowadays. And for the 80ies, guess what, even bi-amping provides some pain-relief. I guess this completes both the question and your answer, Warm regards Olivier
i bought a USD 280 SMSL DAC + Headphone amp+ pre amp a month ago and connected it to my integrated amp bypassing the DAC in the amp. All my sources, TV, CD player, BT and PC are connected to the DAC. The amp is used purely to power the speakers. Ican tell you straight away that the music (particularly Bass) sounds lumpy and boomy if I use the pure direct function bypassing the tone controls. I have to use tone controls on the amp and the volume control on the sub to get the bass right, which has also improved the soundstage and instrument placement quite appreciably.
I almost always agree with Paul, but in this case no. You still need some kind of EQ to make the sound as you would like it to be. In the 80's and 90's, we have full range Speakers, 2 way, 3 way and every other kind, and they were all incredible sounding speakers, but the problem is that all recordings are not created equal, so you have to have a EQ to change the sound to your liking
I don't feel the need to tweak with either tone or loudness controls, I listen to what's on the recording as is. Keeping it real simple is my credo to Paul, thanks
For better or worse the only authentic EQ balance is how the recording sounds on THOSE monitors in THAT recording Studio.. Everyone elses HiFi balance is effectively wrong/different.. EQ your stereo if you are not happy how the EQ balance is on your rig.
Let me give another view on this subject, back in the later years of the Hi-Fi boom era, cost cutting was starting to have an effect on what features were included. What better way to save a few pence than to eliminate tone and loudness controls. Great if you only listen to well engineered recordings, but not all are perfect and then you want to adjust the controls that are no longer there. After over 50 years in Hi-Fi repairs, i no longer believe a fraction of the myths that come with it.
Two comments. 1. I do have a Denon integrated in my living room that has tone controls. I select the option to bypass that function because the sound is much better without that circuit in the path. 2. OTOH, a modern parametric equalizer in the digital section of my main system works wonders to touch up the response at the listening chair. I don't think anything is lost and the correction of some peaks and valleys does improve the sound.
I have what I can only guess to be a moderately revealing system by modern standards, based around a fully recapped and serviced Pioneer 1980, and believe it or not, 2 pairs of stacked JBL 4435's. While I put together this system in an effort to produce the kind of scale I've never been able to reproduce outside my car systems, it's shown me even more, the inconsistencies in all recordings, whether digital, vinyl, cd, recent or vintage. When I was a kid, I loved having an eq on my modest home systems, because yes, I was trying to squeeze every ounce out of incapable gear. When I started back down the rabbit whole in the mid '00's, I learned again, how important flexibility is. In quick order I started replacing my long gone BSR & beloved ADC's. An ADC SS-30 has been in my current system for probably ten years now. As time's passed, and I feel I've become a much more discerning listener, I've many times revisited the curve, which, with changes in the system, and room, has continued to become flatter, and flatter. It's been probably two years since I last made any major adjustments, coupled with probably a listening pallet of 30-50 items to solidify my choices. Even with seasonal and drastic changes in humidity, I have to hold myself away from the sliders, knowing my ears will adjust, or my room will re-balance naturally. But in the last year I've pick up two lps that make me abundant willing to reach for my easily zero'd four tone knobs on the 1980. Very poor vinyl versions of Adele's 21, and a similarly cut version of Candlebox's Happy Pills, which is actually split onto 2 lps. When you spend $30-50 on an lp, it should sound fantastic. Being extremely familiar with both of these recordings, it's very disappointing. I'm also blessed to have the flexibility to listen through two differently voiced turntables, with a handful of cartridge/styli offerings. It's not the gear. I count myself luck to be able to whittle these inconsistencies down with a foursome of knobs, which are usual set to flat. So to conclude, advances in technology guarantee nothing. And in my mind, flexibility is a must. While I understand that each addition to the chain can come with it's own sonic properties and problems, it pales in comparison to poor source material, regardless of the medium. While I appreciate your view in theory Paul, in the practical world, for a life long lover of music from a to z, I cannot give up the flexibility given with some level of frequency adjustment. With each version of this question posed here, today's left me unable to hold my tongue any longer. Thank you for everything you do Paul.
Audiophiles set the volume when the room feels pressurised and the best way to achieve this is using a REL sub-woofer (for example ) which takes the same signal from the amplifier as the Left and Right speakers and gives a fat sound. At these volumes treble and bass controls are redundant .
Funny this gets brought up as I just got done reading about old Dynaco preamps, and how popular it is for folks to un-wire the tone controls altogether for quite a boost in clarity. The industry matured, consumers matured and realized they caused more harm than help. If your gear is up to snuff, flat is going to be the only way your gonna wanna hear it anyways.
What if I'm in a boomy room Or the music it self is recorded with to much mids to my taste And who are you to say that I don't need less or more bass or treble cause the sound will be "perfect" for me?
Luxman is a very good Japanese brand that makes integrated amplifiers with bass and treble controls. They have a bypass switch so if the recording is good you can deactivate the tone controls.
a good explanation but people still want them back, i find them to simple to be of use without drawbacks. loudness button or adaptive function built in somewhere would alleviate the need for tone controls, or full parametric equalization as long as the listener do not perceive any drawbacks that outweigh the benefits.
What's interesting, I saw a new $12k Luxman L-595A SE integrated amp that had bass and treble knobs. I wonder if that's just for show or maybe just to be retro since it was similar to an 80s model they used to make.
Never felt the need for a bass or treble control or even a loudness control. When I play an LP, CD, SACD or select the tuner I'm happy with the way it sounds. Uncompressed BBC Radio 3 sounds great, no need for adjustments. Most albums I generally happy with the mix, there are very few imo badly mastered but thats life.
INterestingly enough (to me anyway) on my Marchand Active crossover there are mid lo and hi knobs to adjust the level of each for each channel. When I first got the device I tweaked them thinking the mids needed lowering, and the highs needed boosted. Now as a year or more has gone past, guess where these contols ended up at. Yup---"0" or no adjustment. I do think the new McIntosh equlaizer would be of interest just as eye candy....lol.
I love my tone controls. My car still has them for obvious reasons, and my Rotel preamp also has them. It improves those older recordings and add zing to them. And of course as we get older we don't hear some frequencies so well. Bass, Middle and Treble are actually ideal. I think they are lazy and making cheaper products, just like the cars where you have to get through a screen to change the aircon settings.
I have a volume control for my subs. I have pots on my speakers’ midrange horns and super tweeters. My speakers are JBL 1970s drivers in my own cabinets. Plenty of eq control. I had to turn both pots down slightly to balance with bass driver.
Why would you do that: 1) To adjust for room absorptions / losses 2) To adjust to your Ears. Some have to crank the highs, to hear them better. Some ear shapes are too sensitive to highs, and may need to lower them 3) To adjust to Poor recordings. Bumping up the Bass in a recording thats bass was too Subtle, can get it the Punch it should have had 4) To MAXIMIZE your speakers potentials, tailored to that particular song, at Peak Volume levels (just below blowing them). Not every speaker, sounds their best... with a certain song... especially at Peak Volume levels. This is almost a Mirror to #3... except, that when a speaker it pushed to its Limits... you can often Squeeze out additional performance, per that particular recording. For example.. getting more bass THUMP... or Lowering the Treble a hair, to prevent Harshness or Over Bearing high frequencies.. at that peak volume level 5) Similar to 3 & 4... but at LOW VOLUME LEVELS. Certain speakers, such as Sealed speakers with Passive Radiators... they dont pump out enough bass, until you crank them to at least "Medium" volume levels. To solve this issue, you can bump up the Bass tone control... to get additional bass at lower volume levels
We need tone controls today. Not all recordings and genres are mixed the same, and listeners need a way to compensate for those variances in their rooms. It makes NO sense that a cheap SMSL integrated amp can have tone controls, but an expensive multi-thousand dollar pre and amp doesn't have it.
I think that the elimination of the tone controls is more about fitting a trend and trying to drive a market to other solutions like bi-amping, dedicated subwoofers, etc. - all more costly. While much can be done with the right equipment and speaker placement, there is still need for tone control, particularly if you're listening older recordings. Fortunately I think this trend of eliminating the controls will end with the proliferation of digital amps and pre-amps, where is makes it easy to integrated sonic correction curves (both bult-in and user-created).
Sorry, however there is most definitely a NEED. "Fluctuation in Source material" AND the "Loudness for which one is currently Listening at". My current preamp (Two channel & Surround sound Music listening system/setup) has Bass, Treble, Fletcher Munson loudness, and Tilt (at 1kHz). Not wanting to do without, I did find and purchase a 16 channel Home Theater preamp processor with all of the above, except for the Tilt. So YES, the need IS most definitely there 🎶
Well, my new Vincent SA-T7 diamond preamp has bass and treble controls. I bypass them 95% of the time. it´s good to be able to lower the bass. Many remastered albums have way too much bass and sounds horrible on my setup. Its nice to just have a bypass button and keep controls.
I'm not saying this is some kind of great conspiracy, but equipment sellers have an incentive to sell products without equalization. They have convinced the public that the way to get sound that pleases you is to get just the right combination of components with the right "synergy" and this usually requires a lot of trial and error. Equalization is still important because every room is different, every recording is different, every ear is different, and every person's taste is different.
It was interesting to watch going back to in the days when tone controls were common, to them having a center detent so you could know where flat was supposed to be. Then bypass switches to eliminate the tone circuits completely because every stage adds noise and distortion. So eventually the purist, those willing to drop some bucks, did not want the circuit there at all. And next came DSP which went far beyond what simple Bass/ Treble controls could do. I my opinion worse than tone control circuits, but another discussion. The market got Bass and Treble controls removed. Though interestingly they tend to be found more on low end equipment.
I would say that if the room was treated properly and the equipment was set up properly, tone controls might be unnecessary. However, my problem with tone controls is that you don’t really know what part of the bass and treble will be boosted or reduced. In my experience, most bass boost occurs in the mid-bass section leading to bloat and a treble boost is almost always focused on 8k and higher, which can give the music a strident quality. If one must boost those frequencies, an EQ unit (maybe DSP?) can be inserted into the chain to fine-tune the sounds to compensate for any room irregularities.
My fuzzy recollection is that, in the mid 1980s, a prominent reviewer at a prominent glossy mag (intentionally vague) scorched a very nice preamp for having tone controls by saying that having those controls indicated that the designers 'didn't know how they wanted their product to sound'. That really hurt them. Following that nobody wanted to tempt the same fate; the death knell of tone controls across our industry. I've always found it hilarious that the guys who take issue with the 'purity' RC circuits in tone controls are perfectly fine with them in their RIAA equalizaters. Go DSP!
Most of the older speakers would roll off at about 100hz. Today we have digital techniques that can easily get down to 10hz. Modern amplifiers have kept up, with most of the new gear being stable down to 3 or 4hz. So tone controls are far less needed now than even 20 years ago. Used in moderation EQ can cure a bunch of room and placement issues. But we do need to be aware of the problems with clipping at higher volumes when we exaggerate the frequency responses. In fact Bass controls have probably killed more tweeters than they're worth.
I still believe in Loudness and Tone controls as long as you can bypass them. They are tools and come in handy with less than perfect recordings :)
I want a mid tone control.
Most recordings are less than perfect.
@@djwolffe_OGmarantz pm8006 has it.
Compensates for some room conditions also
Paul is so wrong that "they " don't make tone controls in high end equipments .
All very high brands are still using them to the perfection : Luxman , McIntosh , Yamaha , Marantz , Parasound etc
because not all recordings are created equal
@@desbenjamin1603 You’re exactly right. They never were.
As the person who works at recording studio, I completely agree with you.
@ 👍You are the prime witness.
Truth
Also I love my music in a low volume , especially late nights , I can really enjoy my phase button , and I don't want to make my nice neighbours get mad at me .
This is definitely an area where a delve from Paul. There are MANY reasons why you may need/want to control your EQ. Hearing loss (it effects differently at various freqs), room issues, poor recordings. Sure, have a good defeat so you can turn it off, but a good EQ is very often a very good idea.
That answer is only relevant in a perfect world. EQ is more important than ever now that people are rediscovering old vinyl recordings, some of which compromised bass response to allow longer playing time. Also the room you’re listening in could have a dreadful response that’s difficult to treat without major upset. Not everyone has the benefit of a great listening room and perfect recordings.
Well said and so true , I swear by an EQ. on every system for the fact as you pointed out ..."Listening Room" and of course poor recordings .
@@slyspy9819 That’s an excellent point. My new av receiver has a multiple frequency eq. I think that there are 12 frequencies from bass to treble. And, It has three user presets. I only wish that it also provided a preset for headphones.
I miss the part where you just listen to music the way you want to. Nothing has changed in that respect since 1950.
Bingo, sometimes I want to add a little extra bass or treble or bring up the midrange, screw this whole “listen as intended” junk, it’s a philosophy not a rule.
Yes
I'm big on tone controls because, for example, there is one artist I listen to where bass was more absent from their early work and then later they made changes at about mid point of their career and now bass frequencies are very much a part of their sound. So I use the tone controls to mitigate that and make all their albums sound more similar.
"But, Paul..." he cried, "What about the Fletcher-Munson curve?" That was why the Loudness control was designed to gently boost the bass when listening at lower volume to compensate for human hearing's lowered sensitivity at those frequencies. But there are many brands that include tone controls (NAD, Vincent, Cambridge, etc.). Paul's advice is like Consumer Reports telling you to have a carrot instead of the occasional cookie. Moderation!
Tone knobs are still essential in helping with bad speaker placement and poor room acoustics.
and new masters, many have way too much bass, so its good to be able to lower it.
Additionally, many listeners have damaged hearing. Tone control helps!
Completely agree.
Tone controls are necessary. Not everyone lives in a treated room....no tone controls is audiophile elitesm
I am extremely happy with my NAD C-165BEE preamp. Two preamp outs (1 for R8 tube amp, 1 for NAD C 275BEE amp), sub out, AND tone controls with a defeat button on the remote. I love being able to turn the bass DOWN as needed. I do not know what magic this preamp has inside but it pushes my Linton 85s down to 22 Hz F3 in room at MLP with no subs. No lie. I have dozens of REW plots to prove it.
@@MS-pw8yu The Nad C-165BEE is about as good as a pre-amp gets. IMO the last best classic pre-amp, NAD needs to bring back an all analog pre-amp into their lineup, Nad is unnoticeable now. ..I love that pre-amp..,,The New Adcom is the closest thing to a classic pre-amp now.
@@MS-pw8yu I am curious if you rolled tubes in your R8. I outfitted mine with ALL JJ Electronics, and their EL-34s as well. I find the amp has a bit of a strong midrange through any number of speakers I have paired with it, all in the same room. From 1970ies pair of restored Superscope S-212 to my Martin Logan Classic 9 electrostats. Like to hear what you think. Thanks
@@garysmith8455 I have rolled the power tubes with PSVane Horizon KT-88s and Horizon EL-34s (currently my favorite), as well as JJ EL-34s. I preferred the JJs over the stock and PSVane KT-88s, but the Horizon EL34s have just a touch smoother of a sound. EL34s are a more mid-range rich tube for sure, which is what I find I like. The Horizon KT88s are brilliant up top and voices are amazingly holographic but it is a V shape sound, for sure...like NO midrange it seemed. Linton 85s are my primary hifi speakers, but my GR Research modded RP-8000s (my home theater speakers) demonstrate the tube characteristics more than the Lintons as they are significantly more resolving with the upgraded crossovers. I am going to buy a aet of Electro Harmonix EL34s to try them out as they are "only" 110€ used.
I have also rolled Horizon 6SL7s in the front end. They opened the soundstage a bit and voices were more airy. They sounded a bit harsh at times at first but they have settled down a bit. I can still hear some scratchiness every now and then. Stephe from Skunkie Designs recommended me to try some Gold Lion 12AX7s with adapter bases instead and after my wife forgets how much I have spent on tubes in the last month, I will try them.
*Legal Disclaimer* These subjective results are from MY amp, with MY speakers, in THAT spot, in MY room, with MY ears. Your milage may vary. Cheers!
@@garysmith8455 I wrote a 3 paragraph response that got deleted(?).
No need today? Bullsh*t.
If anything, today's typical recordings need a bass Reduction.
And I Want tone controls, so I will Have tone controls, one way or another.
Depends on speakers. My focal got too much bass. Even my tone controls don’t work 😂
No tone controls no sale...
In my room I have 3 way amplification. Separate amp for highs, trebles and bass.
@@FelixtheMetalcat
Do not tell this to Paul ,He will get so angry and might block you , his equipment has 0 tone controls . That is why he is promoting no tone controls . 🤣
Tone controls aren't needed as much as in the past, but from the perspective of a music lover who listens to less that great recordings at times, they can still be useful at times and I'm glad I have made sure I have equipment that gives me those options.
Sorry... I don't go along with that, especially as a 69 years old. My ears are not what they use to be sadly after playing live music most all my life in clubs & concerts & there's many others my age who worked factories (whatever) that are in the same boat. Just my 2 cents as a fellow old fart.
Amen to that. My ears' high frequency response has rolled off badly, to the extent that some high pitched sounds are no longer audible. I need all of the help that I can get.
Of cause you're right. I would have placed my comment here, if i knew before.
Five buttons that should still be on every serious amp: loudness, bass, treble, mono/stereo, L/R speakers. Leaving these out is nothing more than a make-more-money move from the HiFi companies.
Agreed all the way. If a preamp or integrated amp doesn’t have these, I won’t buy it.
I don't need a L/R because I will position my speakers to get a proper stereo balance.
"Stereo Reverse" is nice to have also...
@ 😀I remember seeing those on some 1970s Realistic (Radio Shack) receivers.
@@bikdav my Fisher Studio Standard pre amp the CC 3000 from 1980 has that feature. A very nice pre amp and complete system as well.
They absolutely are needed! Old cassette tapes regularly need 2-4 db more treble. Room needs -2 db for bass. Also balance is essential if you can't sit exactly between speakers.
Modern recordings are fine and no need any bass or treble control. But there are great musics with poor recording from the back days 60s 70s 80s which need tone control to make it audible and enjoy it.
@@nurulahad2576 No, not correct. Check how our hearing actually works depending on volume level, Google Fletcher Munson equal loudness curves. Loudness (and bass/treble) control is much about your hearing performance being optimized for vocals at lower volume.
I have many CDs with music from the 40s, 50s and 60s that sound like they were recorded thru a closed door. EQ helps.
@@martinfox2244 Perfect for old tracks system is perfect also for modern tracks. But satisfactory for modern music systen fails to play old tacks
That is exactly. In latest music systems, do not really feel the old tracks.
Modern recordings SHOULD be fine. Unfortunately in the pop world they are often so manipulated
All depends on the recording. Bands from the 60 and 70's didn't realize that they had bass players and drummers. Then there is pretty much anything made for an album also lacks about everything. Then there are the recordings made for CD that are so damn loud. Tone controls are needed today as much as they were 20 or 30 years ago.
It seems like you really know what audio is all about. I can respect that.
Marketing has successfully replaced tone controls with cryo treated power cords.
I missed loudness button on today's amps 😢
@@handokosetiawan2803 It’s a shame the industry is so disconnected from reality on this matter. The argument that a bypass switch cannot be engineered without negatively affecting the sound is especially lame. Look at all the switches and controls in a studio involved in music production and a tone control bypass switch in a preamp or integrated amp is an issue? Gosh…it’s just showing lack of engineering competency if that is the excuse…
@@ThinkingBetter It's called Maximizing Profit! They tell you we don't need the bass and treble controls any more because speakers have improved so much - but the reality is, the manufacturer saves a bundle by not putting them in. Similar to not installing VU meters on the power amps any more - it saves the manufacturer a bundle of money which translates to more profit. It shouldn't be this way!
The loudness button was great for late night low level listening.
I so much love my ADCOM pre amp , it has bass and treble control and a button that allow you to engage/disengage the tone control. TBH I would not buy today a pre amp or integrated amp without a tone control !
You mean pre amps or Integrated Amps.
Paul is a smart guy - but today's video is odd. We all know that human hearing attenuates low and high frequencies at lower volumes (Fletcher Munson curves). Without tone and loudness controls, how can we compensate for human hearing deficiencies when the volume is reduced?
I do not know what paul was thinking with his statement,he should know better being in the high end audio business!
Always listen at high volumes 🤭
w the loudness button! ha i think all his videos are.. odd basically. but are spot on for how boomers think who are selling things
Best control that ever was is Yamaha variable Loudness
I even have variable loudness on an 80ies Sanyo BOOM BOX !
quad 34 pre amp tilt tone controls
I have lost the ability to hear higher frequencies..One should be able to adjust the sound to suit one's taste...This is why I have black faced Sansui AUs and CAs with my own speakers...my sound my way my speakers at my crossover points... Why spend 20k dollars to be told "it doesn't make any sense today"?....For the hearing impaired like me its perfect sense.
Every old person loose the ability to hear high frequenses. I am now 70 years old and have problem with one ear. As a result I do many many hearing tests each year and ”my curve” go ”down in the celler” above 3 500Hz.
When I was around 5-10 years old I would guess I heard up to around 20 000Hz.
@@brahandit’s a tragedy a lot of people can never afford a good hifi system until they’re in their older age. I’m thankful to be able to relatively young.
I have been on both sides of this conversation. On one side of the table you have the "original recording?" crowd. The goal is to replicate only what was produced. And that same crowd argues that if you get the "x" amplifier its brighter with better base control. presumably to change the sound to something more pleasing. Doesn't that make the amp a really expensive tone control? When I go to a restaurant there is usually salt and pepper on the table for me to adjust the chefs "original intent" to my liking.
On the other side you have someone like me that learned that when you finally get a system truly capable of replicating music when using the original recording it sounds better with out any EQ. In fact so much so I had no idea that that splitting the bass signal off through the LFE to the subwoofer it actually made the speakers sound worse. Ive learned to love the pure signal better. Although I do miss the loudness button for low level listening to help pressurize the room.
Audiophiles think that most bands and mastering engineers produce perfection, on purpose and are delighted with their recordings. Most artists listen to their own recordings and say things like “I wish the bass was turned up”. Or we should have re-recorded the drums on that song. Or man, we should have used a different studio. Recordings are not created by god, a lot of them are rubbish and the bands will happily admit that.
Exactly. The original quality of the recording can be nice, but because every recording does not have a perfectly palatable EQ curve, if a person wants to LOVE the music instead of just hearing it, then EQ controls or at least bass and treble are necessary.
Sub filters would be convenient in this “ vinyl comeback “ . And mono button.
I gave a classic a Marantz receiver to a young family member a few years back, he took it to two repair shops for ( cone pump) before he asked me about it. I said “press the sub filter button”
He called back saying “ your a genius “
No argument
If you listen to some music genres they have exagerated bass and others have almost no bass, so unless you only listen to one or two genres with similar bass you would be better with bass and treble controls
i would say never listen to badly recorded music, so then you do not have to fix it on your end.
tune your system to have a perceivable flat response or use your reference.
if a recording intentionally rolls of the bass i skip it, they can not get away with it, boycott them, they need to learn.
@@sudd3660 The problem is your perceivable flat frequency response is only at a certain volume level. Check the Fletcher Munson equal loudness curves and why loudness control is a real issue.
@@sudd3660 Some of the Best music, is from the 70s - 80s. While not every song may be perfectly EQ'd, or recorded flawlessly... they are still Fantastic Songs, that you always want to Hear. The snobbery, of saying that you wont listen to a song that isnt Flawless... is laughably Bad. It just shows that you dont really have good taste in music. Its also a sign of Mental Illness Issues, such as OCD, and or a Personality Disorder (extremism / black and white thinking / responses).
Even if there were no benefit due to better speakers, there still will always be a benefit to making marginal recordings more listenable by boosting or reducing certain frequency bands. Some great music just was recoded poorly, and bass/treble controls can help.
So many audiophile systems just lack bass. It makes sense, because most recordings sound nothing like live music. Even the best speakers need some bass boost, or a subwoofer, but not everyone has or like the sound of a subwoofer. Give me bass and eq controls.
Exactly. A sub woofer is no different to a bass control.
Paul's not wrong, however there is one thing I think is missing from this equation - THE RECORDING.
If you're listening to something older or a live recording or some indie band from the 1980s, chances are the recording is maybe lacking in some area. The problem here is it gives you no option offset that.
Hi, Paul. Longtime viewer, first time commenter. Love your videos and enjoy them immensely. I have to say, though, I disagree with your conclusion here, if not your rationale. Certainly the tech and materials have improved dramatically over the last 50 years, but as many other folks here have mentioned, not all recordings are created equal. I am a listener to classical and jazz recordings from many eras, and while many have nearly perfect frequency curves and recording quality that require no tone adjustment, many more, especially from the 1950s-early 1980s, have pretty variable tonal profiles. It's not just the reproduction equipment that affects the tone, but also the inherent recording quality and engineering. For an obvious example, in the Soviet era, the Russian label Melodiya produced thousands of recordings of Soviet orchestras that featured often excellent performances, but had sound that, as music critic Dave Hurwitz has pointed out, "could peel the paint off the ceiling at the back of the concert hall." The Russians would play with the gusto of musicians afraid of the gulags, and the engineers (for whatever reason) captured it all in sound that could from time to time make your skin crawl. The only way to make these otherwise fine performances listenable is to softly increase the base and variably temper the treble.
It wasn't just the Soviets. EMI in England and Columbia in the USA could also brashly engineer their recordings or record them such that the base or treble were lacking. Take George Szell's classic Cleveland Orchestra recording of Wagner's Ring cycle excerpts on Columbia (now Sony). Absolutely top flight exciting performances without enough bass to give them the oomph that Szell put there. A few notches up on the bass and POW, Szell's genius with that music comes roaring forth.
The equipment may be much better, but the record is cast in concrete, UNLESS we can adjust the frequency profile.
I disagree about tone controls. At low volume the midrange becomes prominent and there’s very little treble or bass. There’s a name for this effect but I’m too sleepy to remember it. Anyway, give me back my control!!!!
Yes 100% agree!!! Check Fletcher Munson equal loudness curves in Google.
me too , no need to be a disco in my house , but its always nice to make a little adjustment when yo play a poor record , so if it need a little bass, you can give it
so that why i 'm so into a yamaha as3200, the sound ,and old school vintage look,
The effect you hear is called the Fletcher Munson curve
@@ryanford495
That’s right! Thank you.
I want control of the music!!!
I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees this as ridiculous. Not to mention he doesn't back it up, I'm pretty sure the Sprout has a bass boost that is on by default.
Yes it’s about +7db if I remember correctly. I can’t believe people actually seriously write in to this guy expecting genuine credible answers to their questions.
@@michaelb9664 Most of Paul's answers are quite good over the years. I'm sure we could ask similar questions & get plenty of disagreement when we see answers from Paul Barton, Sandy Gross, Andrew Jones or any other audio "guru."
No, you could get excellent full range speakers also decades ago and especially in the late 70s things got much better. I always used bass and treble to help compensate for the natural Fletcher Munson loudness issue we have with our hearing when playing at low volume. In fact back in those days most often good audio gear would have a loudness control also and we used it when we wanted best perceived tonal balance when not playing at concert levels. That had nothing to do with speaker performance. Increasingly a trend started in the late 90s and early 2000s of making audiophile become anti anything EQ with the argument it does more harm than good. And yes, there are many examples of poor tone controls and EQ products from the past, but this opinion resulted in high-end audio frowning at even a loudness switch, which has a solid argument for being there for anyone serious about listening at lower volumes. And what we have now are high-end systems even costing 100s of 1000s of Dollars sounding like a 1980s system with loudness off when playing at low volumes not waking up the entire family. Especially the bass is a problem without loudness. And sorry, no most expensive speaker cables, subwoofer or best of amps does what a loudness function does. Whenever I go to audio shows with audiophile gear I notice the volume level and you will never see a demo at a lower volume level for this exact reason. This is entirely about our natural hearing performance optimized for more narrow band listening at lower volumes.
You are correct!
Very well said!
Right on 👌🎶
Alas, our hearing is probably the second biggest nonlinearity - after any sort of normal room that most of us, audiophile or not, place our speakers in - that audiophiles desperately insist on ignoring.
It's funny how some claim to clearly hear e.g. if a cable is turned the wrong way around, but fail to observe changes in tonal balance that are many, many orders of magnitude larger than anything incurred by changing any halfway decent component in one's system for another 💁
I walked into my local high priced audio specialty shop and listened to a rotel amp and some fancy high end turntable. I was pleasantly surprised that my Onkyo TX -8211 amp, technics turntable and cerwin vega D-3 speakers at home sounded way better. These guys are dreaming. The modern stuff is definitely not better. Give me my treble and bass controls please.
My audiophile friends when they listen to my system: "Sure, bass, treble, loudness make a system sound better but it is an incorrect mode of listening." lol!
the correct mode of listening is the listener's mode; and if that includes an adjustment to bass or treble, so be it.
AHHH..well as much as I like the purist folks..I also like to have a little fun with some heavy rock now and then, so if no bass/treble controls are there I'll be sticking an EQ (yup I said it!) in the mix so i can have my fun when the mood strikes LoL .. Thanks Paul for the cool video series !
I agree...if the recording lacks bass or treble....put it back ! Some of those recordings were purposely rolled off at the ends si the midrange didn't suffer from the high energy especially bass.
I started off with Luxman gear from the late 70s. My preamps include the C120a, C1000, CL350 and CL35 MkIII. I don’t own new speakers. Mine are KEF 104/2s from 1984.
I enjoy having/using tone controls in my small listening room. Hope to buy a new Luxman 507z integrated amp soon with tone controls.
To each his own👍
Two reasons I can think of why treble, bass as well as balance controls are needed are for room correction if you don't have ideal speaker placement and to compensate for age related hearing loss at higher frequencies.
What about when someone has nice vintage speakers but wants a modern preamp and power amp? They would probably like to have the bass and treble controls. I know I would.
I have a new McIntosh. Fantastic integrated amp. Has bass/treble controls. I keep them at the “flat” level.
Happy to say, PARASOUND Halo preamps have bass and treble adjustments right on the front panel, and yeah, they are current products! 👍
Yamaha as well.
My Marantz Model 50 has bass and treble controls. Good. It also has a bypass, source direct option. Even Better.
Interesting video Paul though I don't share your view. I find tone controls AND a loudness selector are very useful. Our ears haven't changed and we still need loudness compensation at low volumes. Most people don't play their systems loud all the time so a good loudness contour circuit is very welcome. Same with tone controls - I adjust my five-band tone controls quite often depending on what I'm listening to. In fact, I have their settings on a piece of paper with quite a few of my CDs and records reminding me where to set the controls. YES, most of the time they are bypassed but I'd guess that at least 30% of the time they are active.
As an aside, it may be true that bargain "home stereo" amps back in the day could not reach the frequency extremes but good ones did. The 1963 McIntosh MC225 tube amp I'm using in one of my systems is totally stock except for replacement filter capacitors and it bench tested less than .1db (one tenth of a dB) variation at full rated power (actually a bit beyond rated power) from below 15Hz to beyond 30KHZ. It was down 1 (ONE) dB at 100kHZ. :) That's flat in anybody's book! ;)
Yesss..you are learning, Paul. Bose and blows does indeed rhyme!
I'm convinced it's just to maximize profit via less circuitry. Same with power. Many companies give you 70/ 80 watts and act like it's impressive and it'll drive anything on the market.
They could give you much more but of course suggest the "bigger" model which has a measly 120wpc but costs 4 times as much
don't agree one bit, eq is extremely important, no amp or speaker is perfect even today,alot depends on your room
Three speakers that I remember from the 1970s Tannoy, Cerwin vega, and fairly tall Dynatron floor standers all produced epic amounts of deep bass, and the big werlitzer duke boxes that pubs would often have in their saloon bars certainly packed a punch
What about using tone controls to compensate for deficiencies in recordings?
find better recordings, or wait for a remaster. i do not recommend forcing the solution on your end, that would only lead to every recording needing individual settings......
@ but that would limit listening to the music that is well recorded and not to the one that I love
@@andrzejz6980 how can you "love" the music that sounds bad?
do you mean the bands that makes the music instead? you can reach out the point to the mistake in recording process.
I've used EQ to compensate for some inadequate recordings and inadequate remasters.
@@sudd3660 lol. Remasters?! lol. You are showing your Ignorance. Most all remasters, are totally compressed to SH*T. The original CDs have FAR greater dynamic range... and sound 1000x better than the BS remasters.
Ah, Paul, but we do need them, along with a loudness control. Not to compensate for an amp or speaker’s deficiencies but to subtly adjust inferior recordings. To tame an overly bright recording or to boost a recording with anemic bass. And a loudness contour to make low level listening more enjoyable. A lot of the time, I don’t use them, but for those subpar recordings or low level listening, they are invaluable.
Yamaha has models with a variable loudness control. You set the volume to the loudest you'd ever listen to, and then use the loudness control to turn down the volume. It would boost the treble and bass proportionately.
Mr. McGowan: Your videos are invaluable, and I can’t thank you enough for all I’ve learned from them. However, I have to respectfully and strongly disagree with the view that tone controls aren’t needed simply because speaker quality has improved. Here’s why:
A speaker designer, no matter how skilled, can’t anticipate the unique environment their speakers will end up in. They don’t know the listener’s preferences, potential hearing limitations, or the type and quality of music sources. These variables make tonal adjustments an essential part of enjoying an audio system. A well-designed system should be adaptable to its audience, not just in fidelity but in personal satisfaction.
Consider this: an audio system, like a fine meal, serves diverse tastes. Most people wouldn’t eat at a restaurant that refuses to let them season their food, assuming the chef’s “perfect” seasoning will satisfy every palate. Similarly, why should listeners be locked into one sound profile? My preferences might lean toward a brighter high-end or a more pronounced bass. Others may prefer a different balance. Why shouldn’t they have the option to customize their experience?
This lack of flexibility becomes especially burdensome for customers who, like myself, invest in audio gear as a tool to enjoy music, not as a static piece of art. For most of us, tonal adjustments are a vital feature, giving us that last 10% of satisfaction that might be missing in an otherwise great system. Without it, we’re left in a frustrating cycle of trial and error-returning components and experimenting with pairings-just to find what’s “close enough.”
For the majority of audio enthusiasts who are working within a budget, adjustable tonal controls can be transformative. A system that’s adaptable to personal taste and the surrounding space is far more satisfying in the long run than one that forces the listener to fit into a “one size fits all” sound profile.
Let’s bring tonal controls back-not as a crutch, but as a way for more people to love what they’re hearing. An enjoyable audio experience shouldn’t demand perfection but should offer the tools to get as close as possible.
I agree with Paul. I only make EQ adjustments at the source, and very rarely at that. My listening spaces are acoustically sound.
I want equalizer with many many buttons. Dont care about how the recording is meant to sound, I care about how I want it to sound. Extreme treble AND extreme bass AND extreme middle range. Like a W with lots of dancing green lights
Hallo Paul- I really enjoy your chats, however, some of us have diminished hi frequency sensitivity due to , age, industrial noise and military service and need a few dB of boost now and again...
I agree, but only when it is a good full-range recording. A lot of 70s - 80s rock is awful without some bass boost. Some modern music is over-bloated in the bass, so often needs reduction to sound decent. Many interviews about "classic albums" often have the artist state they hated the sound of the original recording. So pleased I bought Accuphase amps, so I can adjust albums to what I enjoy. That's even with a 2.2 hugh end set-up.
My 70s B&W DM2A have excellent bass and treble, it even has a super tweeter.
Paul, I love your videos. That said I have a different point of view on this topic. I have a two channel listening room in which I have followed all the rules of speaker placement and invested in bass traps, diffusion and absorption acoustic treatments. I have 2 Monitor Audio speakers and 2 SVS subs. The system is powered by a Marantz high current analogue integrated amp that has tone controls. With all I have done thus far to achieve the "perfect" sound, there are still some tracks that require tone adjustment (mainly bass reduction) for the music to sound best. I would love to be able to play every track direct/flat without tone adjustment, but for now I am glad I have them. Thanks.
I had a APT Holman preamp back in the 80s. It had wonderful tone controls, The bass control was switchable for shelving or tilt up/down. There was a Hi filter. There had a variable L+R to L-R control. It also had a bunch of micro reed switches that developed high resistance contacts. I had them cleaned (???). It was never the same. Noise dead scratchy. Gave it away
Except when trying not to disturb others esp at night & then it’d real useful to be able to dial down the bass sometimes.
Paul, I see your point but a lot of the early CD's were made directly from the tape masters that were originally mixed for vinyl record albums that will always have problems by nature with playing back high and low frequencies and so the early ones generally sound too bright on top and it sure is nice to have either an equalizer or treble control to pad those high frequencies down some.
That was a good answer for me because I was not thinking that way. I didn’t take deep enough to acknowledge base and even come up with an answer. I’ve been satisfied without tone controls
I have a few EQs, 2 from Schiit. So long as the quality is good, they are a huge help for all the poorly recorded stuff out there. But I also make sure I have a 'bypass' option
I'm a senior who needs a treble boost just to break even.
Bass and treble (or even equaliser) might not be as needed (probably due to the loudness war), but loudness function still is as our brains hasn't evolved in a few decades to where psychoacoustics doesn't matter.
One reason why some brands are popular despite sounding horrible is that they have a really bad frequency response that sounds better at low volumes.
I would say that it's another thing active speakers can help with, it's not too much trouble to have the DSP control this when you change volume.
Unless you listen at "reference level" (somewhere in the 75-85 dB range, depending on the type of mix), you need to adjust for the loss of perceived bass and treble as you lower the listening volume. Some modern AVRs have controls for this, and integrated amps should too.
It seems to be more necessary than ever now that DSP has become so popular. I’m not sure why good analog EQs haven’t come back yet for vinyl setups since I think most people wish they could use their DSP settings on a purely analog setup, or why it’s almost impossible to use DSP on a CD player (there’s so few options that exist to do this) it seems like we exist in a world right now where DSP is only really available for streaming and if you like other formats you’re SOL. Luckily we’re just now starting to see DACs with built in DSP and “audio processors” of which I only know of two, and things like MiniDSP that are standalone boxes.
Dear Paul,
I highly appreciate your comments on hifi and high end audio, as this point about bass- treble-control. As many short answers, it is surely 99.9% true with some contextual shortcomings. The famous loudness button was actually planned for the compensation of the bass at low volume and not to make every mediocre recording sound
good.
The quality of recordings in the 80ies went down to below zero in bass and midbass terms during the walkman hype, which probably would have beennkilled by the next orderly music record according to nowadays terms or standards, because the walkman wouldn‘t do much thing below 2-300 Hz. So on acstereo it was urgently needed to fix what the mainstream studio engineers had spoiled, the bass and the top highs. I wish many brilliant regords of that time would be played and recorded as full sounding music and not as a byproduct of that times music listening devices which were less than acceptable in terms of a full sound image. I wonder what these guys were thinking at that time, but still, having a nice collection of great music poorly recorded, sound EQ via bass and make a lot of sense to me still nowadays. And for the 80ies, guess what, even bi-amping provides some pain-relief.
I guess this completes both the question and your answer,
Warm regards
Olivier
i bought a USD 280 SMSL DAC + Headphone amp+ pre amp a month ago and connected it to my integrated amp bypassing the DAC in the amp. All my sources, TV, CD player, BT and PC are connected to the DAC. The amp is used purely to power the speakers.
Ican tell you straight away that the music (particularly Bass) sounds lumpy and boomy if I use the pure direct function bypassing the tone controls.
I have to use tone controls on the amp and the volume control on the sub to get the bass right, which has also improved the soundstage and instrument placement quite appreciably.
I almost always agree with Paul, but in this case no. You still need some kind of EQ to make the sound as you would like it to be. In the 80's and 90's, we have full range Speakers, 2 way, 3 way and every other kind, and they were all incredible sounding speakers, but the problem is that all recordings are not created equal, so you have to have a EQ to change the sound to your liking
I don't feel the need to tweak with either tone or loudness controls, I listen to what's on the recording as is. Keeping it real simple is my credo to Paul, thanks
For better or worse the only authentic EQ balance is how the recording sounds on THOSE monitors in THAT recording Studio.. Everyone elses HiFi balance is effectively wrong/different.. EQ your stereo if you are not happy how the EQ balance is on your rig.
I have eq controls on my car system and on my avr. The car eq really helps me tone down the awful tweeters and bright recordings.
Wrong...tone controls are to fix the room..and variations of the source..
Let me give another view on this subject, back in the later years of the Hi-Fi boom
era, cost cutting was starting to have an effect on what features were included.
What better way to save a few pence than to eliminate tone and loudness controls.
Great if you only listen to well engineered recordings, but not all are perfect and then
you want to adjust the controls that are no longer there.
After over 50 years in Hi-Fi repairs, i no longer believe a fraction of the myths that come
with it.
Two comments.
1. I do have a Denon integrated in my living room that has tone controls. I select the option to bypass that function because the sound is much better without that circuit in the path.
2. OTOH, a modern parametric equalizer in the digital section of my main system works wonders to touch up the response at the listening chair. I don't think anything is lost and the correction of some peaks and valleys does improve the sound.
I have what I can only guess to be a moderately revealing system by modern standards, based around a fully recapped and serviced Pioneer 1980, and believe it or not, 2 pairs of stacked JBL 4435's. While I put together this system in an effort to produce the kind of scale I've never been able to reproduce outside my car systems, it's shown me even more, the inconsistencies in all recordings, whether digital, vinyl, cd, recent or vintage. When I was a kid, I loved having an eq on my modest home systems, because yes, I was trying to squeeze every ounce out of incapable gear. When I started back down the rabbit whole in the mid '00's, I learned again, how important flexibility is. In quick order I started replacing my long gone BSR & beloved ADC's. An ADC SS-30 has been in my current system for probably ten years now. As time's passed, and I feel I've become a much more discerning listener, I've many times revisited the curve, which, with changes in the system, and room, has continued to become flatter, and flatter. It's been probably two years since I last made any major adjustments, coupled with probably a listening pallet of 30-50 items to solidify my choices. Even with seasonal and drastic changes in humidity, I have to hold myself away from the sliders, knowing my ears will adjust, or my room will re-balance naturally. But in the last year I've pick up two lps that make me abundant willing to reach for my easily zero'd four tone knobs on the 1980. Very poor vinyl versions of Adele's 21, and a similarly cut version of Candlebox's Happy Pills, which is actually split onto 2 lps. When you spend $30-50 on an lp, it should sound fantastic. Being extremely familiar with both of these recordings, it's very disappointing. I'm also blessed to have the flexibility to listen through two differently voiced turntables, with a handful of cartridge/styli offerings. It's not the gear. I count myself luck to be able to whittle these inconsistencies down with a foursome of knobs, which are usual set to flat. So to conclude, advances in technology guarantee nothing. And in my mind, flexibility is a must. While I understand that each addition to the chain can come with it's own sonic properties and problems, it pales in comparison to poor source material, regardless of the medium. While I appreciate your view in theory Paul, in the practical world, for a life long lover of music from a to z, I cannot give up the flexibility given with some level of frequency adjustment. With each version of this question posed here, today's left me unable to hold my tongue any longer. Thank you for everything you do Paul.
Audiophiles set the volume when the room feels pressurised and the best way to achieve this is using a REL sub-woofer (for example ) which takes the same signal from the amplifier as the Left and Right speakers and gives a fat sound. At these volumes treble and bass controls are redundant .
bass and treble are definitely needed in some rooms. At least add them and a direct source button, give the user the choice at least.
Funny this gets brought up as I just got done reading about old Dynaco preamps, and how popular it is for folks to un-wire the tone controls altogether for quite a boost in clarity.
The industry matured, consumers matured and realized they caused more harm than help. If your gear is up to snuff, flat is going to be the only way your gonna wanna hear it anyways.
What if I'm in a boomy room
Or the music it self is recorded with to much mids to my taste
And who are you to say that I don't need less or more bass or treble cause the sound will be "perfect" for me?
Luxman is a very good Japanese brand that makes integrated amplifiers with bass and treble controls. They have a bypass switch so if the recording is good you can deactivate the tone controls.
a good explanation but people still want them back, i find them to simple to be of use without drawbacks.
loudness button or adaptive function built in somewhere would alleviate the need for tone controls, or full parametric equalization as long as the listener do not perceive any drawbacks that outweigh the benefits.
What's interesting, I saw a new $12k Luxman L-595A SE integrated amp that had bass and treble knobs. I wonder if that's just for show or maybe just to be retro since it was similar to an 80s model they used to make.
Never felt the need for a bass or treble control or even a loudness control. When I play an LP, CD, SACD or select the tuner I'm happy with the way it sounds. Uncompressed BBC Radio 3 sounds great, no need for adjustments.
Most albums I generally happy with the mix, there are very few imo badly mastered but thats life.
INterestingly enough (to me anyway) on my Marchand Active crossover there are mid lo and hi knobs to adjust the level of each for each channel. When I first got the device I tweaked them thinking the mids needed lowering, and the highs needed boosted. Now as a year or more has gone past, guess where these contols ended up at. Yup---"0" or no adjustment. I do think the new McIntosh equlaizer would be of interest just as eye candy....lol.
I love my tone controls. My car still has them for obvious reasons, and my Rotel preamp also has them. It improves those older recordings and add zing to them. And of course as we get older we don't hear some frequencies so well. Bass, Middle and Treble are actually ideal. I think they are lazy and making cheaper products, just like the cars where you have to get through a screen to change the aircon settings.
I have a volume control for my subs. I have pots on my speakers’ midrange horns and super tweeters. My speakers are JBL 1970s drivers in my own cabinets. Plenty of eq control. I had to turn both pots down slightly to balance with bass driver.
No VU meters, no tone controls, what next?
A black box without a ON/OFF switch...
Next ? You will own nothing and you will be very happy ! Like people who live in Cuba , Venezuela , North Korea 🤣😂
Why would you do that:
1) To adjust for room absorptions / losses
2) To adjust to your Ears. Some have to crank the highs, to hear them better. Some ear shapes are too sensitive to highs, and may need to lower them
3) To adjust to Poor recordings. Bumping up the Bass in a recording thats bass was too Subtle, can get it the Punch it should have had
4) To MAXIMIZE your speakers potentials, tailored to that particular song, at Peak Volume levels (just below blowing them). Not every speaker, sounds their best... with a certain song... especially at Peak Volume levels. This is almost a Mirror to #3... except, that when a speaker it pushed to its Limits... you can often Squeeze out additional performance, per that particular recording. For example.. getting more bass THUMP... or Lowering the Treble a hair, to prevent Harshness or Over Bearing high frequencies.. at that peak volume level
5) Similar to 3 & 4... but at LOW VOLUME LEVELS. Certain speakers, such as Sealed speakers with Passive Radiators... they dont pump out enough bass, until you crank them to at least "Medium" volume levels. To solve this issue, you can bump up the Bass tone control... to get additional bass at lower volume levels
It speaks volumes hearing this nonsense from yet another source like this. It'll never end, will it?
I had a Soundcraftsman equalizer back in the day.I would spend countless hours playing w/ all those sliders!
I still want to crank up the bass and treble to make the sound that I want
We need tone controls today. Not all recordings and genres are mixed the same, and listeners need a way to compensate for those variances in their rooms. It makes NO sense that a cheap SMSL integrated amp can have tone controls, but an expensive multi-thousand dollar pre and amp doesn't have it.
I think that the elimination of the tone controls is more about fitting a trend and trying to drive a market to other solutions like bi-amping, dedicated subwoofers, etc. - all more costly. While much can be done with the right equipment and speaker placement, there is still need for tone control, particularly if you're listening older recordings. Fortunately I think this trend of eliminating the controls will end with the proliferation of digital amps and pre-amps, where is makes it easy to integrated sonic correction curves (both bult-in and user-created).
My Yamaha RN2000A has bass, treble AND loudness. Best overall, new receiver!
Sorry, however there is most definitely a NEED. "Fluctuation in Source material" AND the "Loudness for which one is currently Listening at". My current preamp (Two channel & Surround sound Music listening system/setup) has Bass, Treble, Fletcher Munson loudness, and Tilt (at 1kHz). Not wanting to do without, I did find and purchase a 16 channel Home Theater preamp processor with all of the above, except for the Tilt. So YES, the need IS most definitely there 🎶
Well, my new Vincent SA-T7 diamond preamp has bass and treble controls. I bypass them 95% of the time. it´s good to be able to lower the bass. Many remastered albums have way too much bass and sounds horrible on my setup. Its nice to just have a bypass button and keep controls.
I'm not saying this is some kind of great conspiracy, but equipment sellers have an incentive to sell products without equalization. They have convinced the public that the way to get sound that pleases you is to get just the right combination of components with the right "synergy" and this usually requires a lot of trial and error. Equalization is still important because every room is different, every recording is different, every ear is different, and every person's taste is different.
Equalizers suck, you need $10,000 speaker-"Cables"..
It was interesting to watch going back to in the days when tone controls were common, to them having a center detent so you could know where flat was supposed to be. Then bypass switches to eliminate the tone circuits completely because every stage adds noise and distortion. So eventually the purist, those willing to drop some bucks, did not want the circuit there at all. And next came DSP which went far beyond what simple Bass/ Treble controls could do. I my opinion worse than tone control circuits, but another discussion.
The market got Bass and Treble controls removed. Though interestingly they tend to be found more on low end equipment.
I would say that if the room was treated properly and the equipment was set up properly, tone controls might be unnecessary. However, my problem with tone controls is that you don’t really know what part of the bass and treble will be boosted or reduced. In my experience, most bass boost occurs in the mid-bass section leading to bloat and a treble boost is almost always focused on 8k and higher, which can give the music a strident quality.
If one must boost those frequencies, an EQ unit (maybe DSP?) can be inserted into the chain to fine-tune the sounds to compensate for any room irregularities.
My fuzzy recollection is that, in the mid 1980s, a prominent reviewer at a prominent glossy mag (intentionally vague) scorched a very nice preamp for having tone controls by saying that having those controls indicated that the designers 'didn't know how they wanted their product to sound'. That really hurt them. Following that nobody wanted to tempt the same fate; the death knell of tone controls across our industry.
I've always found it hilarious that the guys who take issue with the 'purity' RC circuits in tone controls are perfectly fine with them in their RIAA equalizaters.
Go DSP!
Most of the older speakers would roll off at about 100hz. Today we have digital techniques that can easily get down to 10hz. Modern amplifiers have kept up, with most of the new gear being stable down to 3 or 4hz. So tone controls are far less needed now than even 20 years ago.
Used in moderation EQ can cure a bunch of room and placement issues. But we do need to be aware of the problems with clipping at higher volumes when we exaggerate the frequency responses. In fact Bass controls have probably killed more tweeters than they're worth.