What do you think of tone controls on speakers?

[Setiawan]

It seems like lots of speakers these days, and even amplifiers for that matter, no longer have tone controls on them, whereas in the "golden age" of hifi, they were more or less ubiquitous. 

 

What happened? My understanding is that speaker manufacturers knew that they were dealing with consumers that were going to be using their speakers in suboptimal rooms, where one side of the room may be attenuating certain frequencies more than the other. Therefore these controls were included so that the perceptive customer could balance out the sound, specifically for their system. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

If this is the case, then why has this stopped? Surely rooms haven't been getting more 'perfect' over the years? It can't be cost cutting because even most modern high end or esoteric speakers don't include them as far as I can tell. Do people maybe not care about balanced sound as much as they used to?

 

How about you, do you use the tone controls on your vintage speakers? Let me know what you guys think.

[Al.M]

I use the mid set at 10am and hi set at 11am controls on my Yamaha NS1000 which balances the sound significantly. 

 

On other vintage speakers I have like Accoustat ESL speakers the treble control is used as well and all other vintage speaker controls have been useful.

[Citroen]

I think that in the 80's it became very unpopular to have tone controls, especially in amps/pre-amps due to the less is more philosophy. Less in the circuit the purer the sound.

 

Now-a-days a small but growing number of digital sound processors are being used, not just in AV or car audio but in high end audio systems. With advanced computer technology/room correction software these can be much more effective than a few tone control knobs at the speaker.

 

 

[sir sanders zingmore]

1 hour ago, Citroen said:

With advanced computer technology/room correction software these can be much more effective than a few tone control knobs at the speaker.

Agree. Something like Acourate or Dirac can do a far better job of room correction than any (typically analog) tone control 

[Nigel]

I don't think tone controls have ever solved room problems. As for particular settings.. the q is do you vary the knobs with different music/sources? If not then perhaps the crossover/ Lpad  should have been set hard, not with a potentiometer which will get dirty eventually.

[Satanica]

15 hours ago, Setiawan said:

If this is the case, then why has this stopped?

Better technology (digital EQ) has replaced the very basic and often useless tone controls of speakers and amplifiers.

[LogicprObe]

 

Like all controls............can be dangerous in the wrong hands!

[davewantsmoore]

Quote

 

Useful and most systems some recordings can benefit from them

 

 

Pedantic... but yeah, I'm like that.

[davewantsmoore]

2 hours ago, Satanica said:

Better technology (digital EQ) has replaced the very basic and often useless tone controls of speakers and amplifiers.

I consider any type of EQ, that is accessible to the users in an easy  "give me more bass", "give me more treble" kinda way, to qualify as "tone control".    Whether is be from the 60s, or be using the latest DSP.

[rantan]

 

nm

 

Edited June 19, 2018 by rantan

[Satanica]

16 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

I consider any type of EQ, that is accessible to the users in an easy  "give me more bass", "give me more treble" kinda way, to qualify as "tone control".    Whether is be from the 60s, or be using the latest DSP.

Nah, the street term "tone control" is not applicable to parametric EQ because you never specify if it's "bass" or "treble"; one only specifies frequency and other parameters as you know.

[frankn]

I agree DSP is another form of tone control - it’s just more sophisticated than what came before. 

[Tweaky]

The only reason tone controls ever became the 'Norm' at one stage during the late 70's early 80's was that some studio monitors had them [Still do]

 

The reason the studio monitors had them is because of a unique situation of listening to the speakers and having the sound rebound off the mixing desk, this scewers the sound, still does, the tone controls on the speakers can be dialed in to sort that to some degree.

 

So, tone controls on speakers [unless designed to be used as the equivalent as a foam plug in a reflex speakers port to adjust for room boundary effect] in general, are pointless for the average HiFi person.....that's unless they listen behind a huge table/desk

Edited June 20, 2018 by Tweaky

[tubularbells]

Lets not forget the room is the biggest tone control in your system. Ive tried the fancy DSP route (DEQX HDP5) and was left underwhelmed and although I do have mid & high level controls on my speakers I think my entire system (room included) sounds best using a combination speaker, toe-in and listening position placement. Best bit is it its free!

[davewantsmoore]

7 hours ago, Satanica said:

Nah, the street term "tone control" is not applicable to parametric EQ because you never specify if it's "bass" or "treble"; one only specifies frequency and other parameters as you know.

That's what I mean....  If  a device has "bass and treble controls" ... then I call that "tone controls".   Doesn't matter if they are analogue, digital, linear phase, good bad, whatever.... it's not important.

 

Twiddling the level and phase of the response isn't a superb idea .... but some recordings just need it, either cos the recording is wack, or your preferences are important (or both).

 

 

People say "tone controls are bad".... sure, but out of the ordinary recordings, and my preferences are more important.

[davewantsmoore]

33 minutes ago, Tubularbells said:

Lets not forget the room is the biggest tone control in your system.

Indeed. positioning of sources and listener is the most important.

[Citroen]

There's only so much you can do with some rooms, regardless of speaker positioning, placement, so a bit of tone control, or frequency level tweaking is often quite handy. 

 

So I totally disagree with anyone who thinks "Only there to make up for deficiencies in poorly set up or put together systems"

 

Sometimes in the real world it makes up for the deficiencies in the source material, or  maybe the frequency shifting is just the tweak to set it up to the next nth level of perfect sound  . 

[Tweaky]

37 minutes ago, Tubularbells said:

Lets not forget the room is the biggest tone control in your system. Ive tried the fancy DSP route (DEQX HDP5) and was left underwhelmed and although I do have mid & high level controls on my speakers I think my entire system (room included) sounds best using a combination speaker, toe-in and listening position placement. Best bit is it its free!

Seeing the speakers you are using, I'm not surprised with the disparity of sound when trying DEQX......for some reason, as soon as you put a horn speaker into the equation, it doesn't matter how close you can get DSP wise, it's just the sheer difference in sensitivity compared to the rest of the drivers in the speaker system.......it's like having a choir with one member singing louder than the other.

You can get it close, but the EAR's say NO

[rantan]

1 minute ago, Citroen said:

There's only so much you can do with some rooms, regardless of speaker positioning, placement, so a bit of tone control, or frequency level tweaking is often quite handy. 

 

So I totally disagree with anyone who thinks "Only there to make up for deficiencies in poorly set up or put together systems"

 

Sometimes in the real world it makes up for the deficiencies in the source material, or  maybe the frequency shifting is just the tweak to set it up to the next nth level of perfect sound  . 

I could not agree more.

 

There seems to be a collective disapproval by many about tone controls but they do come in very handy at times. It is almost a guilty pleasure so why not enjoy?

[Citroen]

Oi @rantan how come you voted for the  "Only there to make up for deficiencies in poorly set up or put together systems" then?

Or did I miss the sarcasm?

 

[rantan]

Just now, Citroen said:

Oi @rantan how come you voted for the  "Only there to make up for deficiencies in poorly set up or put together systems" then?

Or did I miss the sarcasm?

 

Yikes, I think it's a case of me ticking the wrong box

 

I love tone controls, even though I don't need to use them very often. Can one change one's vote?

[LogicprObe]

43 minutes ago, rantan said:

Yikes, I think it's a case of me ticking the wrong box

 

I love tone controls, even though I don't need to use them very often. Can one change one's vote?

 

Yeah...............go to the top and select 'Poll Options' at the bottom left.

[rantan]

9 minutes ago, LogicprObe said:

 

Yeah...............go to the top and select 'Poll Options' at the bottom left.

Thanks for that

 

Vote now changed to what I intended.

[Guest Hensa]

I’ve never used speakers with tone controls on them but do use some integrated amps that have them. I occasionally use them to good effect. Not sure why the poll is limited to speaker tone controls but if it was meant to include amplifiers, then I’d probably vote for them being possibly useful for many systems for some source material which has been poorly mastered or is lacking somewhere along the frequency spectrum. 

[A J]

My speakers (Atohms) have them - I’ve never used them actually - but in the other room I do use the magic Sansui loudness button. Witchcraft I say