To EQ or not to EQ, that is the question


Welcome to ODJT
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Sign up today!
Sign Up

dbstudios

DJ I think
Aug 2, 2018
144
124
45
38
Walker Michigan
#1
I have been eyeballing a dbx dual channel 31 band eq to add to my gear. My thoughts are that it will help make the sound crisper, and a lot more balanced. I am just getting ideas for now, what are your thoughts?
 

rickryan.com

DJ Extraordinaire
Dec 9, 2009
15,090
11,156
115
54
Hendersonville, TN
www.RickRyan.com
#2
I have been eyeballing a dbx dual channel 31 band eq to add to my gear. My thoughts are that it will help make the sound crisper, and a lot more balanced. I am just getting ideas for now, what are your thoughts?
KISS. I'm pretty decent with an eq, but generally I just end up trashing tone. Most other audio engineers do the same thing as well. I say "no".
 
Likes: DJ Bobcat

dbstudios

DJ I think
Aug 2, 2018
144
124
45
38
Walker Michigan
#4
Currently my setup consists of a numark mixdeck express, and two Peavey DM112, which do have a small built in digital eq, but im used to gear that allows me to manage a wider band of frequencies, besides just high, mid, and low.
 
Likes: DJ Bobcat

Jeff Romard

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 4, 2006
16,897
11,189
115
48
Sydney, Nova Scotia
#7
It could also make things worse if you don't know what you're doing.
And a lot worse. The first rule of EQ's are they are there to take out far more often than they are to put in


Keep in mind, most speakers have dsp built in and this wouldn't be beneficial in many cases. I can personally say that ever since I switched to my qsc k12's in 2009, and with every system since, I've never used an eq.
DSP is for the speakers the EQ is for the room. There are very few rooms that are acoustically perfect enough that an EQ wouldn't make it better with proper use regardless of what speaker you are using. That being said you would be doing it more for you than anyone else because the average guest wouldn't know the difference anyway
 

Valerie Hicks

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 21, 2006
2,696
2,143
115
48
Eastern South Dakota
www.squareonesd.com
#8
And a lot worse. The first rule of EQ's are they are there to take out far more often than they are to put in




DSP is for the speakers the EQ is for the room. There are very few rooms that are acoustically perfect enough that an EQ wouldn't make it better with proper use regardless of what speaker you are using. That being said you would be doing it more for you than anyone else because the average guest wouldn't know the difference anyway
^^^yes, this
 

adj2ent

DJ Extraordinaire
Oct 20, 2006
527
857
95
58
Long Island NY
#9
I wouldn’t go past 15, who suggested 31? More doesn’t make it better & most powered speakers have DSP in them. If you want to improve your sound upgrading components in the signal path will improve the sound. Your sound will only sound as good as the worst component in the chain.
 

Valerie Hicks

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 21, 2006
2,696
2,143
115
48
Eastern South Dakota
www.squareonesd.com
#10
I wouldn’t go past 15, who suggested 31? More doesn’t make it better & most powered speakers have DSP in them. If you want to improve your sound upgrading components in the signal path will improve the sound. Your sound will only sound as good as the worst component in the chain.
31 band gives a lot tighter control. Which brings us back full circle to the operator's skills and the goals of adding the piece.
 

Valerie Hicks

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 21, 2006
2,696
2,143
115
48
Eastern South Dakota
www.squareonesd.com
#14
ya, it cost more, but it's much more effective, especially for eliminating feedback.
not sure i agree with that one. It's like saying an apple is a better fruit than an orange. Each has it's strengths and they aren't identical.

I'm also not sure I'd recommend a parametric to someone who doesn't have a good understanding of a basic 15 or 31 band to start with
 
Last edited:

Proformance

DJ Extraordinaire
Nov 6, 2006
5,733
3,119
115
#15
parametric eq makes a lot more sense.
If we are talking about a DJ system - then the notion of eliminating feedback might be moot. In order to do that with an external EQ the mic input requires a processing loop so that you can EQ the mic without also messing up the music program. A 31 band is better for this because the bands are narrower and you'll remove less of adjacent frequencies. You can also roll off a low cut and add a high shelf.

I would not do this without also adding a compressor/limiter. If you intend to ring out a room with your mic you need to compress/limit that signal or you'll soon be the most hated person in the room, and at risk of damaging your speakers.

If your intention is to sweeten the sound of your music program well, a 15 band is enough to do that. It's rare to find a DJ that actually EQ's a room to sound better. Most EQ's I've seen in this scenario are poised to smile at the DJ.
 
Likes: Jeff Romard

dbstudios

DJ I think
Aug 2, 2018
144
124
45
38
Walker Michigan
#16
My only main thought behind it is when I have multiple mics tied into my mix board, my Numark can only handle 2 mics, my mix can handle up to 4. I am planning on upgrading to a larger board eventually, which will allow me to do some live sound, which will require the EQ more than DJing will.
 

adj2ent

DJ Extraordinaire
Oct 20, 2006
527
857
95
58
Long Island NY
#17
I used to do some PA work and feedback was alway a issue at times. I used feedback elinates solved the problem automaticly. But when I updated to better a mixer, speakers & mics it no longer was a issue. I stopped using the eliminaters. Even on the karaoke upgrading killed the feedback issue & improved the sound. 31 channels for DJing can't see i. . Now if you're going to do a large live system yes but I'd work out the whole system plan in advance. I'm not a expert but I was lucky 25 years ago to run into the very knowledgeable person/company I purchase all my major sound equipment from. He planned out & selected all the equipment, cabling & etc. Even now the system sounds as good as when I first got it.
 
Last edited:
Likes: DJ Bobcat

DJ Bobcat

DJ Extraordinerror
Nov 8, 2014
6,524
9,762
115
Oklahoma City
#18
I HAD a 15 Band Equalizer in my Large System at one time... a few years ago. I did find it useful occasionally for eliminating feedback problems, but it was rare that I had those issues, and wasn’t worth the added component in my signal chain. I can pretty much do the same thing with my secondary mixers, to which my mics are connected individually. My mixers only have Hi and Low EQ knobs, but it seems it’s always the Hi’s, so I just turn it down a bit and problem solved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Likes: Jeff Romard

jaswrx

Well-Known DJ
Feb 15, 2015
234
139
45
32
#19
if we are talking EQ for feedback issues and overall vocal clarity, you cannot run a global EQ. You have to route a EQ through the mic channel only, and in this case, I still strongly believe it is much easier to do it with a Parametric. You can really easily sweep across frequencies to find out the troubled ones.
 

Jeff Romard

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 4, 2006
16,897
11,189
115
48
Sydney, Nova Scotia
#20
if we are talking EQ for feedback issues and overall vocal clarity, you cannot run a global EQ. You have to route a EQ through the mic channel only, and in this case, I still strongly believe it is much easier to do it with a Parametric. You can really easily sweep across frequencies to find out the troubled ones.
If you are running an EQ to solely tame a mic channel you are wasting a perfectly good EQ.
 
Likes: Valerie Hicks