Blasphemy to use "Tone Controls" on Mc Pre-Amp?

[Grasshopper]

I love my tone controls on both McIntosh setups.

Never understood this being controversial, to each his own.

[Mac6]

I use them rarely now but at one point I kept the treble at -2 for quite a while. It sounded better with that particular setup. I sometimes still use them when playing a harsh CD/LP.

The anti tone control people may be among the ones who contribute to giving audiophiles the reputation for snobbery, etc. It's great that McIntosh does not subscribe to that theory. If it sounds good to you, use them!

[GeAllan70]

Originally Posted by Mac6

It's great that McIntosh does not subscribe to that theory. If it sounds good to you, use them!

[Route 66]

I've lived without tone on my vintage Counterpoint SA 3.1 preamp for 30 years. I recently bought a McIntosh MA252 integrated amp that has tone controls. What I like about the design is that they can be switched out completely. So far I've toyed with the them but generally I leave them in the bypassed setting.

[sgbroimp]

You can use room equalization to tune equipment to your room and it is pretty great in my experience (Room Perfect as example), but few people have flat perfect hearing and so the "tone controls" as you call them can indeed play a role. In the end its like the question "Which wine is best?" Easy. It's the one that you like.........

[NZ421291]

Originally Posted by GaryProtein

YOU are the only one that matters.

If you like the effects of tone controls, room correction or other equalization to adjust the sound to your liking, use them.

I agree & I do!

Having financed a recording studio (an ultra-rare Neve Mixing Desk). The owners told me that they don't like the Artists getting too involved in mixing the soundtracks- I asked why, their reply- most of them have hearing damage or are almost deaf! The 'artists' always want to crank up the treble to almost painful levels & make the song unlistenable to people with 'normal hearing'. Many times, they have 'fixed' the treble issue late at night when the 'artists' have gone, but sometimes, they don't get the chance, hence, bright recordings etc.

A

[Charles]

Mac does a superb job with their tone controls which is really nothing more than an equalizer. They have been making these "tuned circuits" for years and really know how to do it.

[FreddieFerric]

My Mc MA8000 has eight lovely tone controls. I use them whenever I feel it helps things and leave it set to bypass when I don't think it helps things. Mostly I tend to turn them on when listening to lower volumes.

My view is; if you like what they do for you then use them.

Back in the day my old Akai system had a loudness switch. I used to keep it on nearly all the time.

[Evitzee]

In 45 years of listening to good systems I never thought it unacceptable to use the tone controls if needed. Some recordings are overly bright and I find rolling off the 10k and 1500 Hz levels on my MA7000 will bring things back in balance, and once in awhile I'll boost the bass a tick if the recording is bass shy. Ears change over the years as we age so you need to do what you need to do to balance things up. The theoretical amount of distortion put into a tone control circuit would be infinitesmal and I believe it would not be detectable by a listener. Distortion is really a non issue.

[Thedo]

Originally Posted by MORTIS

rodH: Depending on your age, you may be experiencing something similar to what happened to me. As I've entered my senior years I have become uncomfortably sensitive to upper frequencies in the range or around 2K to 10K hz.


I agree that listening position, speaker placement, and room acoustics should first be done to allow the system to perform as designed, however, with all due respect to individual tastes and opinions, I'll never understand folks who refuse to have or use tone/EQ controls in their system, especially those insisting on hearing the music as it was 'intended'. I doubt any of us could ever know unless we were present during final mastering.
After all, every system and room sounds different, and we all know speakers sound significantly different, even within the same brand, so which system, room, or speakers are successfully projecting the music as intended?
Although a strong advocate for tone/EQ adjustments when beneficial, I have my system and room dialed in well enough so that any EQ adjustments are rarely needed, but this can never correct those occasional recordings that are either poor or not EQ'd during final engineering to suite my personal preference. I mean without EQ controls what do you do for a particularly bright recording, or one with an overly dominant bottom end? I have a few such albums, and some which are otherwise excellent recordings.

Engaging the tone/EQ controls will of course lengthen the signal path, and although almost imperceptible, will add a degree of distortion; but the potential benefits can outweigh any suspected reduction in signal quality if applied judiciously where and when appropriate.
My only complaint of McIntosh tone and multi-band EQ's are their range of +/- 12 db. I seriously doubt anyone should ever need such extreme range. If Mc made them to be no more than +/- 6 db within the same rotational arc of 7 to 5 O'clock, it would be much easier to make minute adjustments. It's especially difficult since most of my adjustments are no more than the smallest amount off center detent, which risks the knob snapping back to detent after I sit down.
In my humble opinion, an adjustment of no more than +/- 1 minute on the rotational clock is all that is needed to improve a suspect recording; any more and you risk damaging the natural presentation of the performance.

Ok I'm done

Very well said Mortis.