For those who listen to a lot a Acoustic music what are your equalizer settings?

[holden j caufield]

if it varies too much which "default" setting is best for acoustic?

 

[darkswordsman17]

What equipment or software or what? Not all equalizers (especially presets) are created equal.

 

[Pepsi90919]

flat, flat, flat, flat, flat.

 

[RollWave]

^^^^^^ What he said. I like it flat.

 

[DaveSimmons]

flat, but my Polk speakers have a natural sound so I don't need to correct anything.

 

[silverpig]

Flat. The guys who mastered the recording probably knew a thing or two about equalization when they finalized the album.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

EQs (as a standard audio component) disappeared in the 80's

The only reason to use one now is to correct room defects and that requires an RTA.

 

[yhelothar]

flat
Just like the sound signature of my sound equipment(swan M200/Velodyne VX10 sub and Etymotic ER4S + LittleDotMicro+ amp).
On good recordings, the music will wound like the band is performing live in front of me.
I hear exactly what the mic heard.

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: holden j caufield
if it varies too much which "default" setting is best for acoustic?

Why are you having to use an equalizer? Equipment problems? Room issues?

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: silverpig
Flat. The guys who mastered the recording probably knew a thing or two about equalization when they finalized the album.

Unfortunately it doesn't always mean they used it as audio lovers like. Seems like more than a few audio engineers have been pretty much forced to do things they don't agree with. I don't think EQ has been really messed with its more dynamic range.

EQing in its original use isn't much of an issue today. However, I personally do not think its really such a bad thing. It gets villified too much in my opinion. I don't see anything wrong with making some minor adjustments to get a more pleasing sound. I think thats the key as most people make significant EQ changes that introduces noticable distortion (such as cranking the low frequencies).

That being said, I don't use it myself because I don't have a hardware EQ and most software ones really change the sound more than if you just changed them to those settings yourself. I also do think its better to boost the faults of any piece of your equipment with another piece that supplements it with good synergy as the end result (so for instance pair your speakers/headphones with an amp that offers what they lack).

Now, what I'm talking about is way different than how EQ changes really get used. I can understand why it is not well liked by audio people as it can be used to manipulate the sound so that poor quality equipment isn't exposed for its flaws.

But I don't think there's really anything wrong with adding a pinch of sugar to sweeten things up a bit, provided you understand it is not as it was intended to sound. Of course that raises the point that you shouldn't need to sweeten the sound and to stop listening to crappy music and/or with crappy equipment, which is a fair and valid point.