The Miracle of EQ, or "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love my LCD2C Again"



i did send off his comments to kef, audeze and schiit for their ops/feedback.
i’d like to think these companies don’t put out crap products or solutions
that are gimmicky (not like they’re selling to the masses)

his final reply: _’'Equalization is NOT a new concept _

_It is the law of physics. Wake up buddy there is is no free room equalization. _

_This is just a gimmick _

Anytime you mess with one frequency it screws up another … it is for suckers’’


He’s wrong, though, anyway. In the digital domain you absolutely CAN affect a single frequency, without adjusting any others, if you wanted to. We don’t, in general, because it’s not very useful and what you almost always want is a graduated ranged of effect around a center frequency.

Regardless, essentially every studio album ever has massive amounts of EQ, and other processing, applied all over the place …

It’s the same with room treatments (bass-traps and so on) though. In most cases they’re actually quite a bit LESS precise than DSP (sometimes grossly so). They’re preferred by a lot of “purist” types simply a) because they’re not in the signal chain and b) sometimes they can address issues that are harder to do in DSP (i.e. would drive up the cost too much).

DSP can address a lot more than just equalization.

At the end of the day, the only way to avoid these issues entirely is to build an acoustically inert room and couple it with a (non-existent) perfect speaker.

Your friend reminds me of Don Quixote.

And this is a very common position/attitude among people that have “very expensive” audio systems. Which is a shame, because expensive is highly relative (his $70K speaker system is less expensive than my primary headphone rig).

At the end of the day, there isn’t much that’s more annoying than someone telling you how to spend your money or what you should, or shouldn’t like. The best way to piss away very large sums of money in audio is to spend any time at all worrying about what anyone else likes.

If you like your music run through a cheap 1980s graphic equalizer, with a massive U-shaped profile, more power to you! That’s no more wrong than it is correct as long as the person writing the check and listening to the music is happy.


I wish I could find the reference, and sadly I don’t have any to measure myself, but my recollection is that the Cipher DSP applies fairly radical adjustments to the iSine, much more extreme than what Reveal does for the LCD series.

I also think that combining DSP with headphones is the future and I’m happy to see Audeze take a leading role here.


The more that I mess with EQ, the more I realize that subtle can go a long way. The LCD2C is a pretty fine sounding headphone in stock form, so it’s not surprising that Audeze doesn’t feel the need to go crazy with Reveal. Push it too far and you end up creating a totally different sounding headphone, which becomes a tricky marketing proposition–hey, spend $800 bucks on these headphones that we don’t actually think sound great, but here’s some free DSP to fix them :slight_smile:


totally agree Torq…he believes stereophile is the holy grail of audio
(to him both resale value and stereophile grade A+ hugely influence his buying decisions)
so i just sent to him an article from one of their reviewers who liked one of the older DSP systems
(from 2014).

my retort to him:
‘’ It’s not just about dsp for EQ…it’s also about room correction.

_Yeah I know this might be hard for you to realize…. from your beloved Stereophile that is the be all and end all for you…feel free to have a read (bottom link)._even of their reviewers liked a DSP room correction system (god forbid!)

sure the article is a few yrs old…but probably even more refined systems are out there now, too, no doubt.

_Also Just because your buddy had a bad experience with and $$$ dsp 10k system doesn’t mean you should then use that as a reference for all DSP implementations

_imo The middle ground is in using both dsp and room treatments (bass traps, diffusers etc)
_ _
‘’ Dirac’s Live Room Correction Suite has hooked me. Yes, it’s limited to 24-bit/96kHz PCM resolution (24/192 is promised), but no matter. More experiments, comparisons, and independent measurements will follow—but for now, Dirac LRCS has made me confident that file-based multichannel playback can sound as good as any from physical discs—and maybe even better.


Do not engage with someone who is so firmly ideological. This person has turned a process into a goal. Continuing will only lead to stress and discord.

Audio is well understood by this point, with decades of research and development into what works and what doesn’t work. It’s easy to perform A/B tests and blind tests to evaluate whether a difference really matters. Similarly, research on biology and perception has considered what’s even possible for humans to detect. Finally, anyone with basic experience in music performance and production (Pro Audio) knows that small changes upstream can greatly affect the end product. So, seeking perfect reproduction [or improvement] with esoteric $$$$$$$ audiophile gear is as meaningful as collecting fairy dust and unicorn tears.

For a critical, honest evaluator there’s nothing more to do.


Do not engage with someone who is so firmly ideological. This person has turned a process into a goal. Continuing will only lead to stress and discord.

thanks, bud…i wholly agree…this is one of the reasons i don’t hang out much with this dude and often rebuff his requests to do so.
another article i’ll send to him if he bugs me again:
from his beloved stereophile, too:
‘’ I have heard the future, and the sound is wonderful.
Peter W. Mitchell


hey gang:
quello is having discounts for their concerts.
25% or 50% off.

i enjoy watching/listening with my big ass 65’’ oled tv:
use optical out to chord mojo then to my iems/or cans.


I have removed all the walls from my room. I raised the ceiling to infinity, and then took out the floor. It’s much better now.

 Help!  I'm f