Graphic EQ vs. Parametric EQ
If we are comparing the same amount of bands, then peremetric is the superior one.
The problem is ususualy graphic has more bands, so which one I would choose would depend on the amount of bands the units I am comparing have.
The problem is ususualy graphic has more bands, so which one I would choose would depend on the amount of bands the units I am comparing have.
Parametric EQ's are more complex, and as a result, unless you have the proper equipment to accurately read your results and map your changes, can be more damaging to good quality audio than helpful. Add more bands, it gets more complex. In that sense, I would say that generally a graphic eq is a more favourable option due to it's simplicity. Get the equipment to do the job, parametric all the way.
Most of the head units I have used only had mid/trebble/bass. This is my first time owning a deck with a parametric EQ, with 7 bands.
The 7 bands were intimidating at first because I have never used one before and thought it would be a big hassle. But after altering it only a little, the SQ is much better. It seems as though a parametric EQ can make a badly recorded song sound much better.
The 7 bands were intimidating at first because I have never used one before and thought it would be a big hassle. But after altering it only a little, the SQ is much better. It seems as though a parametric EQ can make a badly recorded song sound much better.
I wouldn't go that far, as you have three things to adjust for in each frequency band you have available to adjust. So you'd be doing alot of flipping back and forth between settings just for that one bad song. For that, graphic EQ's are far simpler and faster to set. A badly recorded song is just that. Overall, parametric EQ's are a more accurate way to adjust for losses caused by the listening area, it just takes alot of work to get it "right".
Last edited by RomanticMoments; Dec 22, 2009 at 06:36 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post






