Too bad things usually don't turn out as good in practice.
A couple 31 band HW EQs (dbx 231/1231) popped up on CL for $20 each. If I were into EQ I'd probably grab them.
Too bad things usually don't turn out as good in practice.
A couple 31 band HW EQs (dbx 231/1231) popped up on CL for $20 each. If I were into EQ I'd probably grab them.
There is a pre on most digital EQs that can add or subtract to every band. So you can raise the filters that you want, leave the ones that you don't want, and then subtract from the preamp to prevent the clipping. So as an example, the net gain of something that you add +1 to would be 0 if you set -1 on the preamp since it normally is going to calculate before actually applying the filters.
It seems destructive but there isn't really any way around it, and it's typically the best approach to removing harsh frequencies and improving others. I have a few bands on my speakers that really need correction so the safest way to avoid clipping is to pad several other filters by 1-2db to prevent clipping. I don't like using the preamp though just because I'm obsessive about it, but I've shifted back and forth through presets and there is no difference.
I thought about putting in a HW EQ, but ultimately it would be another piece of gear in the analog chain and would just take up too much space. Someone offered me a nice one for free.
Thoughts on balanced/unbalanced, R2R DACs, and active vs. passive preamps?
Balanced is only needed for long distances. We use it a lot for pro audio applications, but not needed for consumer.
I used to build R-2R DACs on breadboards when I was in school. I can't say that I've ever used one for normal audio applications outside of my own test circuits. Typically everything is Delta-Sigma. I think that Yggdrasil uses one. I've really not researched it in much detail. I can't see that there would be any discernible difference in audio to make it worth 10x the price, as the DACs normally aren't intended for audio application but are normally intended for high speed measurements.
I'm not an "audiophile" so that preamp debate is of no concern to me. I simply like decent and economical sound that is not fatiguing at long listening sessions. I do not like lossy audio formats and simply am fine with hearing my music on a reasonable quality set of headphones and speaker / amp in lossless format with a properly configured PC and DAC.
It is more important to know how to use / adjust the gear that you have than it is to buy really expensive gear.
Last edited by zborgerd; 01-22-2018 at 04:04 AM.
I've never done any long runs for RCAs so I don't know if interference would be an issue or not. I was considering balanced to avoid any potential issues there.
I wouldn't be spending more on one; just curious as to your thoughts.
No harm going one way or the other then?
No harm either way. I like balanced audio but the only devices that I have at home that use it are my pro RGBHV matrixes. I wire them unbalanced though since all of the gear is unbalanced. You can use a balun if you need balanced to unbalanced conversion.
Consider that no headphones or speakers are balanced if that gives you an idea of how critical it is, though that's post amp so that makes the biggest difference. Balanced is only needed pre-amp. When it comes to listening to music, everything I have is in the digital realm before it hits the DAC to be amplified.
When it comes to game systems, it's all digital or unbalanced analog.
Thanks. I snagged a DAC with balanced outs so I'll likely go that route whenever I get another preamp.
Bad media connoisseur and frequent avatar changer.
I don't believe the design itself is balanced though? Like I mentioned earlier I'm only wanting balanced so the run length can be a non-issue (or close enough).
Last edited by Lord of Pirates; 01-23-2018 at 01:59 AM.