# Any favorite full-range EQ recommendations?



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

I checked this sticky thread but apparently its all sub-eq's:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...1946-bfd-alternatives-fbq-sms-1-dcx-more.html

Looking for something to EQ full-range studio monitors for a recording studio. I'd prefer 1/4" in/outs but I could always get RCA adapters. Definitely looking for something with a low SNR and great audio quality. I got a BFD but apparently its not adequate for full range studio use. A DSP program would be cool too! Should I consider the MiniDSP??

Thanks!


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Yamaha makes some of the best EQs out there. Are you looking for 1/3 octave? For digital, the Yamaha YDP2006 and there is also the YDG2030 both are regarded to be probably one of the best available. There is also Ashley or the Audio Control C131s


----------



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

Yeah 1/3 octave would be good I guess. Im kinda just learning about this. Even though I wouldnt be using the filters above about 300hz anyways, I wanted something clean sounding since it'll be going into Yamaha HS80m studio minitors.

The YDG2030 is the only one I can find online for sale for less than $200. Can I expect good SNR and all that for around that price? I see a few of em are around $500.

Thanks!


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

The 2030 retailed for $2000 when they were new and you wont find anything cleaner. I highly recommend it.


----------



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

Awesome!! That looks like what I'm after!

What about this though, miniDSP 

http://www.minidsp.com/onlinestore/browse/15-minidsp-in-a-box?sef=hc

I guess it plugs in via USB and u cant make adjustments to it via software interface.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

As I have not used a miniDSP I cant really comment, I am sure that someone will chime in on this soon.


----------



## SAC (Dec 3, 2009)

Multiple problems in the basic assumption.

First, 1/3 octave EQ is NOT sufficiently precise for EQing 'environmentally related speaker-boundary issues.

Secondly, except in very limited cases where a minimum phase condition exists amidst a complex characteristic non-minimum phase soundfield, EQ is not appropriate nor effective for affecting correction of specular speaker-room interaction issues above ~200-300 Hz. Thus I am more than a bit concerned about your notion of a "full-range" application.

These issues are properly addressed via analysis and the subsequent surgical application of room treatment addressing high gain reflections.

Rather than get into what has become a seemingly perpetual debate in online forums, here is a short list that mentions limitations of EQ from Toole's The Acoustical Design of Home Theaters:

_"...there is no doubt that equalization has acquired a bad reputation over the years...

There are four principal reasons :

1.	The popular measuring instruments, 1/3-octave real-time analyzers, do not have enough resolution to describe the problems accurately.
2.	The popular equalizers, 1/3-octave “graphic” equalizers, do not have enough resolution to address the problem resonances specifically, without doing a lot of “collateral” damage.
3.	Attempting to fill deep frequency response dips caused by acoustic cancellations or nulls is an absolutely futile effort, because no matter how much sound energy one pumps into a room the cancellation persists. All that happens is that amplifiers clip, and woofers distort, or worse, destruct. The only solution to this kind of problem is to relocate the loudspeaker or the listener, whichever is sitting in the null.
4.	Equalization is attempted at too high a frequency. Low-frequency room resonances behave like minimum- phase phenomena, and addressing them specifically with parametric filters is a true solution. Above a few hundred Hz, the situation is very different, because we are using steady-state measurements to examine a complicated combination of direct and reflected sounds – time domain phenomena. The measurements may show “comb filtering” that is alarming to the eyes, but the ears hear only the natural sounds of a room – not necessarily a problem at all. If the reflections are perceived to be too energetic, the solution is not equalization, but rather the addition of some strategically placed sound absorbing or diffusing devices. As stated earlier, if there are obvious sound quality problems at middle and high frequencies, the only true solution is a properly designed, room friendly, loudspeaker."_


----------



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

SAC said:


> Multiple problems in the basic assumption.
> 
> First, 1/3 octave EQ is NOT sufficiently precise for EQing 'environmentally related speaker-boundary issues.


Ok yeah...actually as I've been reading more and more I realized that too. I'd like to avoid 1/3 octave graphic EQs due to the lack of control.



SAC said:


> Secondly, except in very limited cases where a minimum phase condition exists amidst a complex characteristic non-minimum phase soundfield, EQ is not appropriate nor effective for affecting correction of specular speaker-room interaction issues above ~200-300 Hz. Thus I am more than a bit concerned about your notion of a "full-range" application.


This is funny, bcz I wouldnt actually set any filters above say 200-300. The issue is that my studio monitors ARE full range. I dont have a crossover or a separate sub to isolate those lower freq. As I'm looking into a "full-range EQ" its more so that I have that control down low, but ALSO that it won't color or add noise to the upper end. 

I ran a calibration test last nite with the BFD inline. With all filters set to zero I got a really flat line with the usual dips at both ends. I posted it here and also that I was hearing A LOT of noise, but not after I switched it to -10 mode. Still doing more tests and critical listening though. 

http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...-does-1124dsp-introduce-some-white-noise.html


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

jlird808 said:


> This is funny, bcz I wouldnt actually set any filters above say 200-300. The issue is that my studio monitors ARE full range. I dont have a crossover or a separate sub to isolate those lower freq. As I'm looking into a "full-range EQ" its more so that I have that control down low, but ALSO that it won't color or add noise to the upper end.


Despite what the naysayers tell us, we’ve had quite a few people come through here that have equalized the upper frequencies and realized an audible improvement.  Here’s one of them.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Despite what the naysayers tell us, we’ve had quite a few people come through here that have equalized the upper frequencies and realized an audible improvement.  Here’s one of them.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne



What full range PEQ do you use with your Z9?


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Yamaha YDP2006.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Yamaha YDP2006.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne



It is discontinued, did they update 2006 and was it as good?

Someone told me that 31 Band Graphic EQ is as good as PEQ?


----------



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

I was looking at the ydg2030 pretty closely and just realized it doesnt intergrate with REW.....well, at least not the auto eq function :crying:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Im confused as to why you think it wont work with REW? I have both a YDG and the YDP units and they both worked well coupled with REW. You have to enter the adjustments manually but thats no big deal.


----------



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Im confused as to why you think it wont work with REW? I have both a YDG and the YDP units and they both worked well coupled with REW. You have to enter the adjustments manually but thats no big deal.


Haha maybe Im just spoiled by the automation. Obviously Ive never used the YDG before. So its pretty easy to manually input the filters? How many do u get? As the thread title, indicates Im looking for a full-range eq (though I wont throw filters on above 300hz) with better sound quality than the BFD. Im deciding between this and a miniDSP.

Thanks!


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

With the 2006 you get 12 adjustable bands and 6 other adjustable notch filters. The 2030 gives you 31 fixed bands and 6 adjustable notch filters if memory serves me.


----------



## jlird808 (Nov 2, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> With the 2006 you get 12 adjustable bands and 6 other adjustable notch filters. The 2030 gives you 31 fixed bands and 6 adjustable notch filters if memory serves me.


At a quick glance online it looks like 4 notches and HPF/LPF fir the 2030.

So when u set up the filters in the EQ tool in REW, would u select the "generic" eq?


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Phillips said:


> It is discontinued, did they update 2006 and was it as good?


Both the YDP and YDG equalizers are discontinued. There was no specific successor. There were quite a few manufacturers making stand-alone digital equalizers back then (some are mentioned in the “BFD Alternatives” sticky thread). They have pretty much all been discontinued, with equalizing functions rolled into digital speaker processors. Makes more sense and it’s more efficient in pro audio, having the EQ and crossovers all in a single chassis.



> Someone told me that 31 Band Graphic EQ is as good as PEQ?


If you’re talking about a comparison with the Yamaha YDG and YDP graphic/parametric EQs both are sonically excellent units. However, parametric offers more precise filter setting over graphic.




jlird808 said:


> At a quick glance online it looks like 4 notches and HPF/LPF fir the 2030.
> 
> So when u set up the filters in the EQ tool in REW, would u select the "generic" eq?


The notch filters have little use in home audio, but the high and low pass filters can be useful.

IMO, the ”generic” option isn’t a good idea, because no two equalizers have the same functional bandwidth for a given filter designation. For instance, the pictures below show the electronic response of three different equalizers for a 1/3-octave filter. The best way to use any equalizer not supported by REW is to simply use the RTA feature. That way you can tweak the filters and instantly see the results on-screen. 










*Behringer DSP 1124 
1/3-octave (20/60)










Behringer FBQ2496 
1/3-octave (.333)










Velodyne SMS-1 
1/3/octave (4.3Q)*​

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## StanDingwave (Feb 25, 2012)

While it's definitely the "low end" of electronic EQ (about $300), I am a longtime fan of the Behringer DEQ2496. Among the dozen or so things it does, most appropriate for "us" will probably be: two channels each of 31-band (1/3 octave) graphic EQ, ten bands of parametric EQ, a "feedback destroyer" that (as far as I know) can also be used as notch filters (such as for room modes). It does so many things it is like buying the biggest Swiss Army knife when all you needed was a cork screw. One of its few faults it does not directly interface to REW, but similar Behringer products do. You can manually put your settings in it, of couse. One thing I will say for this piece of gear: it has been on sale for many years, perhaps as long as ten (?) virtually unchanged. In a fast moving world of quickly changing product lines, I think that speaks well of its popularity. Here is a link exploring its use as EQ (starts with the "ancestor" the 8024, read thru to next part where he continues with the DEQ2496 review.)

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0705/behringerultracurve2496.htm

Yours truly, Stan Dingwave, unpaid Behringer shill


----------

