Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Using a graphic and parametric together

  1. #1
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    824

    Using a graphic and parametric together

    Hello,

    Is this a viable idea a la
    Crown eq 2

  2. #2
    Senior Member grumpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,326
    It will "work", but it will add noise (perhaps noticeably) and therefore reduce detail.

    Also, there is much more opportunity for signal abuse (e.g., line level clipping and distortion,
    particularly with boost involved).

    Therefore, I would not generally recommend such a configuration, as most are not prepared
    to setup and maintain it properly... and DSP solutions have mostly made such decisions moot.

    Used properly and intelligently, it -could- be useful for setting independently used corrections,
    such as room vs recording or "tone" control use, but with the aforementioned caveats.

    What are your thoughts on thinking such a series EQ setup would be required?

  3. #3
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    824
    Thanks for your guidance, Really the noise created by daisy chaining both parameters, could be diffused someWith a line level noise reducer, out of a home configuration, although present day examples may Generate less noise, vs older components. The only viable solution I gather is to included a noise reducer between the chain, maybe this is a component that should be incorporated into a vintage system already... this or a recap, maybe in the recap I could combine the two component's into a single unit and do away with the daisy chain to save someof the discussed feedback issues, Your thoughts.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  4. #4
    Senior Member grumpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,326
    Since I have no idea what you are talking about or are intending to show in the photo,
    I'm afraid I'll have to sit this one out and see if someone else can help you
    unravel your questions. Sorry.

  5. #5
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    824
    Just in case you decided to return,

    Im also thinking down the line of adding a electronic crossover, for biamping,
    I guess the parametric equalizer will be obsolete if this is done?
    Thanks for the help.

  6. #6
    Senior Member ivica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    serbia
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by bldozier View Post
    Hello,

    Is this a viable idea a la
    Crown eq 2
    Hi bldozier,

    I have no idea why to use PEQ and GEQ together, if we are talking about say 30-taps GEQ, and say about 6~10-filter PEQ per driver.
    Today most of the DSP driver networks can do either of the mentioned. I can only imagine to use GEQ in order to "fast-prototyping" the
    necessary PEQ to be realized, if a kind of DSP driven network is 'in mind'.
    Using GEQ with just a few taps I will call it GEQ at all.
    If only 'analog realized' network is considered, then large number GEQ is highly available at the reasonable price, while PEQ is , I can guess , would be much
    more expensive, so I would suggest You, DSP driven equipment.

    You can start from Behringer less expensive models analog (GEQ) then DSP driven GEQ or PEQ, but may be DCX2496 would satisfy the needs as it has network ( 2x2) capability, and DSP loading factor call give You some PEQ capabilities. DBX (second-hand) can be possible solution too (an example DriveRack_PA or similar).
    May be miniDSP product can be used too. A fiend of mine has used Xilica XD/XP 2080...

    regards
    ivica


    regards
    ivica

  7. #7
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    824
    The au here has an n.r. adapter connection.
    Name:  AU9500_00114.JPG
Views: 469
Size:  63.9 KB

    O whats up ivica.

  8. #8
    Senior Member grumpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,326
    I'd assume that was for an outboard Dolby encoder/decoder (or similar), which
    largely worked with tape or encoded FM transmissions (with the in/out
    jack grouping essentially functioning as another "tape monitor" type circuit).

    That really has nothing to do with what I was referring to.

    I have not seen any discussion of why one might want to
    use both EQ types together, other than what I've already suggested
    (and do not recommend).

  9. #9
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    824
    Greater control over frequency. The center bands & range. I assuemed nr reduction was for line noise not hiss and pop noise.
    But ive seen line noise reducers as well. I was just watching one on ebay.
    I saw one from archer, maybe thats for a stage and not the line, anyhow thanks for the help

  10. #10
    Senior Member Hoerninger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by bldozier View Post
    I assuemed nr reduction was for line noise ...
    Standard for analog telephone lines, there are ICs for encoding /decoding.
    But NEVER for connecting HiFi equipment on line level.
    ___________
    Peter

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Ca
    Posts
    476
    Hi,I use both. The parametric slightly.It works for me...C
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  12. #12
    Senior Member grumpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,326
    In series? or for a separate channel... at any rate, I didn't say
    it couldn't be done or that there was no reason. It's easier to
    over do (to the point of -creating- problems) and not for a novice.

    If the rationale is to satisfy a self-identified equipment whore jones
    (I've been called worse ), then I -almost- understand... having
    had Meyer PEQ and virtual electronic crossover in-line at the same
    time... for similar reasons, but it wasn't for more frequencies
    it was for separate "problems" (room and tone control).


    Name:  Screen Shot 2015-11-17 at 7.40.07 AM.png
Views: 453
Size:  75.7 KB
    In this case, a loudness control would likely suffice
    but not look nearly as cool

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Ca
    Posts
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by grumpy View Post
    In series? or for a separate channel... at any rate, I didn't say
    it couldn't be done or that there was no reason. It's easier to
    over do (to the point of -creating- problems) and not for a novice.

    If the rationale is to satisfy a self-identified equipment whore jones
    (I've been called worse ), then I -almost- understand... having
    had Meyer PEQ and virtual electronic crossover in-line at the same
    time... for similar reasons, but it wasn't for more frequencies
    it was for separate "problems" (room and tone control).


    Name:  Screen Shot 2015-11-17 at 7.40.07 AM.png
Views: 453
Size:  75.7 KB
    In this case, a loudness control would likely suffice
    but not look nearly as cool
    Hi Grumpy,

    It's in series going into the Pq first. I have that set up for awhile and checked if it would generate any problemes but here, it doesn't. I had plugged the same Pq Eq on my home theater system and didn't work there. For some reason, the surround was canceled.

    The Sabine is digital and when you bring one side all the way down, the remaining control both channel.

    Oh no, it's feasible but as you say, you have to be careful to do not saturate the input...
    C

  14. #14
    Senior Seņor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,007
    Quote Originally Posted by bldozier View Post
    Im also thinking ... of adding a electronic crossover, for biamping,
    I guess the parametric equalizer will be obsolete if this is done?
    Uh, no...
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  15. #15
    Senior Member bldozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    mount kisco
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by boputnam View Post
    Uh, no...
    The electronic crossover having presidence.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. JBL SG 520 Graphic Controller
    By textor101 in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-02-2013, 09:17 AM
  2. Parametric EQ's
    By RacerXtreme in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-05-2005, 06:06 PM
  3. Parametric EQ's
    By RacerXtreme in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-05-2005, 09:58 AM
  4. 1/3 vs. Parametric EQ
    By Robh3606 in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-26-2005, 10:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •