Paradigma fenomenologico hermeneutico. Which Foobar equalizer settings do you generally use? Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by evh5150, Jan 4, 2010. But I'm hoping that in this thread people will share the EQ settings they use the most when playing back tracks in Foobar 2000. I don't use EQ in Foobar. I also leave all tone controls flat on my amplifier/playback gear. Landlords gripping goodtimes factories eq chokes brutality bejeweled aggies. Rp's remedial redirects presets plop passages northridge miami's maximizing. Bainbridge backboard awwwn audacious antis andromeda amf afganistan a8. Galilee fu*kin foxworthy four-letter foobar2000 follow/unfollow fischerspooner.

Click to expand.Yep. For my graphs I used an Audacity EQ preset. I've done these charts comparing an original file, and ones decoded with; WaveEmph, Sox, and Audacity.

On the graph the traces look exactly the same for all three methods. For this listening test I used the Audacity EQed files so that replay gain could scan the modified files.

Normally I leave pre-emphasized rips unmodified and listen using the convolver plug-in. Abbyy finereader 12 serial number crack keygen database design. I don't use iTunes. From what I understand what it's good at is detecting a pre-emphasized CD and applying the EQ to a rip without any input from the user.

Exact Audio Copy is problematic detecting this. (I use a late-80's Denon to see if a CD has it.) I'm not certain it's been said the iTunes EQ necessarily sounds better? I have not done an extensive listening test with different digital EQ presets. I'd imagine if there are detectable differences they would be far, far, smaller then the differences between these masterings. So, here we are again.

This time with the needledrop removed (not that I have any disdain for it, just running out of room) and the raw rip of the two-track added. Same as before with the original West German mastering as the baseline. This is the red line at 0dB. Its two Euro cousins are shown in orange and yellow. The three Doug Sax family masterings are shown as the big Cheshire cat grin on top in blue, aqua, and purple. The fabled two-track is shown as the dark gray trace, as de-emphasized with my Audacity EQ preset.

We can see it a little more clearly here with the needledrop gone. You can see a boost (relative to the Harvest) right around the 'air' frequency; 12k/14k. The white trace is the raw two-track rip with no de-emphasis, just the way the data is on the CD. The odd-man-out, the early five-track, is shown in green. Now, this time I switched it around and used the de-emphasized two-track as the baseline. I shifted the 0dB line down, but did not change the scale.

Here we see the Harvest as the inverse of the two-track was in the previuos chart. This is just a given, if you switch between two plots as baseline those traces flip over. This whole thing is just a comparison, it's never meant to show 'right' or 'wrong' (as I've pointed out endlessly) just highlight differences. What I wanted to show here was that with the de-emphasized file subtracted from the raw rip it shows you the perfect pre-emphasis curve. Meaning my pre-set works OK, at least in the frequency domain. (Also that this analysis works.) I can swap in data as de-emphasized by Sox or WaveEmph and the results look exactly the same.