Tone Controls

It can be done in the digital domain - e.g. signal from a CD player before it is converted to analogue. Tact do this with their RCS and TDA2200 amps - but you need to plug in a PC to use it.

 

Or maybe some of use have musical systems which put across the music whatever you stick on so you don't have to worry about messing with tone controls every time you change record and other such nonsense.

I've never seen a decent clean analogue filter I'd want near my amps personally and besides, I'd have to find two more matching knobs for that.
If I can hear the change of single resistor in the amp signal chain (and its very easy to) then I can certainly hear a tone control.

 

Quad tilt, same thing as used in x-tone basically i believe, very useful. I can quite happily still hear stuff at 18khz (and beyond) but its around 9-12khz that annoys me sometimes. First thing to remember is not everyone can hear as well as the next person, the other is that everyones hearing profile is different. ie different people are senstive at different frequencies.

 

While on this topic is there anyway to reduce the gain of transistors without actually putting a pot in the signal path?

 

Tony got it a bit wrong, only does bass and treble, with adjustable frequency ranges, here is the pdf from MF site

http://www.musicalfidelity.com/mf/DownloadResource?resId=3292

Was pretty well received, given the market at the time, which would have reviewers fingers chopped off for suggesing such blaphemey.

 

:banghead:


Why not just buy graphic equilizer...

 

Well your right that its a theory. And most people fall for it hook line and sinker.

Hifi used to have all sorts of controls that were useful. Anything that requires manual labour, making holes in boxes, labelling and off board connections adds to the cost and increases the failure rate. There was no way that british cottage industry hifi could compete with the 60s and 70s US and Jap makers in that sort of equipment. When it became uneconomic for the Japanese to make that stuff on hi quality gear, and they stopped - there was no one else who could afford to either. Even NAD, who are about the last, have gradually simplified things. Since the public doesnt ask for them, [and if you do need them there is still Quad], no company is going to suggest you are missing something. No, tone controls dont have to degrade signals.

 

Everything you stick in the signal path has its own frequency response, thus affecting the overall frequency response you get out. Perhaps certain things have a small effect but as a whole everything unnecessary you stick in the amp chain is degrading the overall sound.
The best circuits I have heard had 2 valves (per side) about 1 cap and very few resistors. I'd wager my whole system on it sounding better than anything with tone controls in, and you would ruin the sound of those amps by putting anything else in, the designer worked very hard to keep extra components out in the first place.

 

Have a look at studio equalisers that work in the digital domain. As example the Alesis DEQ230 at around £200.

 

Well, active systems such as by Linn have a trim control on each active crossover board in each power amp. On balance, active is a lot better even if there is a trim, so such owners have their cake and eat it by having a hair shirt preamp if they want, with the tone controls hidden unmarked on the back of each amp

 

I'll take that bet! Of course we do need to define "better" but in hifi terms, I'm pretty sure of inheriting your system ;-)

 

But would you want it?

 

On epossible way round it and Alanbeeb, suggested similar. Ok for CD but have to wonder whether taking that lovely analogue signal from my record deck and digitising it would be better or worse than having tone controls in the signal path.

At this point I have to reiterate, it isn't so much that I personally want tone controls. I was more interested in the question of whether they are unnecessary in the first place (some peoples view) or whether it was more a case that they can be useful but maybe any potential harm they can do outweighs their usefulness if we assume that they can't be implemented transparently (debatable in itself).

Active is attractive for a lot of reasons - also not so attractive for two good reasons - too much cable for my taste plus the expense. That said - if we don't go active and aren't convinced by full range drivers, then we need to have passive crossovers - if we have to have these filters in place, wouldn't the crossover be a sensible place to have our controls? Would having adjustable filters at the crossover be worse than having fixed ones?

Personally though I think there's a lot in what Graham C had to say. Besides even if tone controls did affect the signal path to some extent, why should that be such an issue if there is a bypass switch. Leave them bypassed for the 90 odd per cent of the time you don't need them and only kick the controls in if you must.

 

That sounds like someone that never heard a big SET amp to me.

 

Anex,

I have. Lovely midrange. But I guess I simply prefer my music served up without the added harmonics. All a matter of taste as you will no doubt learn. Still up for the challenge?

 

It doesn't have to just be midrange, depends how you tweak the circuit and what quality of component you use (obviously very important when you have so few).
Course I'd never put my system up, especially not to someone who wouldn't appreciate it but would still love to hear something with tone controls beat a big 211 amp or something. I've not heard anything more enguaging or with the ability to track transients except live music of course.
A matter of taste or music? I guess added harmonics just doesn't matter to me if it makes me want to listen all day.

 

Oh I'd apreciate it no doubt. I would also be aware of it's failings no doubt. Shame you're not prepared to go through with your offer - I guess that's what the internet is for though.

 

Anex,

Dont take the bet, those Macintosh amps are pretty hard to beat and the Merlin speakers are pretty much unbeatable in the mid and top end. Couple that with some JBL subs and you are on a hiding to nothing I am afraid.

 

My point was I think the SETs can beat them, on my terms atleast, pure musicality. I've heard some Macs, very nice but I still prefer the sets. And the speakers and subs don't count.

Merlin: Yeah I guess. What does the failings of my system have to do with anything?

 

Anex, Glad you like your system, but here you are arguing again, similar argument to the one with bottleneck on phono stages, we are all after different things mate, one mans meat and all that, your unwavering stance reminds me so much of someone else who reckons they have it all and the rest of us don't know what we are on about, remember we all like different things, I for one am not keen on valves, and have yet to hear a valve amp give me the presentation that I like.