Does anyone have any suggestions for audio packages for tinkering with audio? Something that would be good for music and allows you to change equalization for multiple channels? I use headphones, earbuds mostly.
3 Likes
Have you had a look at jack? It is often recommended for high end audio set ups.
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/jack/
Website:
5 Likes
If you are looking for an audio player with those features you could try Quod Libet (quodlibet in the official repository)
There are a lot of plugins available, one is a nice Equalizer
6 Likes
With yay →
pulseaudio-equalizer
mixxx
3 Likes
I didn’t choose this, but it did lead me to PulseEffects via AlternativeTo. PulseEffects appears a little more robust for the amount of control I want.
Hopefully, I’ll get to install it tonight. I post back my findings.
Thank you for taking the time to offer a suggestion.
4 Likes
Pulseaudio Equalizer had some issues with vlc for me . Audacious works great which also has an Eq . The two Eqs together gives a superb sound 
Well… there’s a huge problem for an audiophile trying to use an equalizer - you need a good quality microphone to measure and adjust the EQ to suit a given room for a given listening position - it generally doesn’t have much of an effect with good speakers, but can tune out some bad resonances in poorer ones. It’s almost impossible without expensive equipment to beat the simple automatic EQ built in to many receivers - but that won’t work for earbuds or headphones.
As for playback - then there are a few decent players. I’d say Deadbeef is, hands down, the most obvious option which can play back many kinds of hi-res audio. It’s also good (if you have an ISO image, or single file DSD file and cue sheet) for exporting (simply right click a track and save).
Actually you need to disable all resampling and EQ and output sound data stream directly to a DAC. If that’s no good, then it’s time to upgrade those earbuds.
5 Likes
It’s very hard to get really good sound out of earbuds, unless you have budget around 8000$ 
.
But if we speaking about headphones in general (which is a good idea if you want to completely exclude room), here’s my recommendation as a professional - best thing i have ever heard hands down (must be used with velour cushion sets for best sound, leather ones sounds way worse):
There are many much more expensive headphones, but none of them have beat this ones to me so far, stereo-field, frequency response…Highly recommend! 
You won’t need equalizer at all (unless there’s a goal to colorize and over-blow), your only judgement and problem would then be - how good source material is. 
P.S. Definitely JACK in realtime for best audio quality!
Ouch - they’re still $600 plus! Are the 770’s OK for aging ears?
They may be a better match for aging sources, too…?
2 Likes
So…We talking audiophile or not?! 
770 were very good, but not even close (DT 1770 pro sounds like they are 3700$ ), if you get chance to listen both somewhere and compare check that out 
If you mean ears it depends on how old your ears are, i guess 
Usually in most cases aging means cutting high frequencies, but speakers / headphones are not at all only about highs, it’s also: middle and bass, tonal characteristics, dynamics, stereo field etc…
A lot of stuff to account 
But if you mean audio source, then it doesn’t matter i think, best speakers / headphones should always sound better, regardless of source material…
Because they won’t affect / colorize source as much as cheaper alternatives, and it’s impossible to universally “fix” every source by EQ or particular acoustic modeling, i’m afraid.
Although it’s possible to fix room imperfection, or even headphones construction, but in doing so you will always affect source material is well…Which is not desirable i’d say, but it’s debatable
1 Like
I have a pretty good system - for its time! Denon w/SME 3009 tone arm, KEF 105 speakers etc. However - some of the equipment is aging as much as I am, that was the ‘source’ I was referring to 
- the destination has its own limitations!
The $600 was not referring to its worth (I expect it is easily worth it) but to the ouch per hour rating - in other words I am not sure how much time I would spend on them - err - in them. Glad to hear of them - the old Stantons I 've kept are past it, and heavy as well - not to mention the kludged cables (coming from separate amps for L/R required some ‘mods’ at the time).
3 Likes
Wow! I’ve heard those once they’re really good, Miles Davis sounded phenomenal 
Oh i see, yeah personally i prefer speakers too, but if you travel frequently or have imperfect room - headphones are still best option
1 Like
The ‘on the move’ days are past now (I used to cover 10 provinces, 2 territories, and 21 western states (truck was too big for the East)) - and even then I mostly stuck to speakers. The 105’s were final point of a succession of KEF’s (101’s, 104ab etc) - and I still appreciate them - but I am thinking they may need renewing soon (sigh) - but I doubt it will happen. They are definitely better than I can hear now!
3 Likes
Dear mdoverl,
I would also suggest Audacious. It too can play high resolution (DSF, etc.) files as well as almost anything else you can throw at it and there are quite a number of options which allow one to tailor the sound, including, of course, an equalizer (though I myself never use an equalizer).
It’s not as fancy-looking as some of the others but it certainly does get the job done.
I have several audio systems which I use with a computer, among other sources. My main audio system consists of a Yamaha A-S701 integrated amplifier, a Cambridge Audio DacMagic 100, a pair of Klipschorns, and an Audio-Technica ATH-M40fs headphone as well as a number of other devices (SACD, CD, Cassette Tape, HD Radio, a Bluetooth module, and, of course, two turntables).
I have tried quite a number of computer audio players and I have found that, for me, the best one is Audacious.
I hope that this is of some help and interest to you.
Lawrence
P.S. Here are a couple of quick pictures of my main system.
6 Likes
Sweet. Klipschorns were my first serious speaker, back in the 1970s when I was teenager addicted to the old Stereo Review magazine. Then I fell in love with the imaging capabilities of the Dahlquist DQ10, and then…well, it’s been a long and very enjoyable journey.
I’ve used tube gear since my teenage years, although often times it was a tube preamp coupled to a solid state power amp. I fell in love with Single-Ended Triode tube amps in the 90s, and I still swear by SETs.
4 Likes
Dahlquist DQ10
Are those 5-way Saul Marantz designed ones?
That’s pretty interesting…
1 Like
Designed by Jon Dahlquist, in collaboration with Saul Marantz.
The bass was a bit flabby, but very, very careful positioning helped. The soundstage and imaging were spectacular for its day; I’d like to hear a set again.
4 Likes
There’s a guide to DIY replica online, not all links are alive, but…
3 Likes
Dear tardy,
SETs would work perfectly with Klipschorns too but, frankly, I’ve had my fill of tube gear. Most audiophiles will probably disagree with me but I can’t stand the vagaries of tubes (some days they sound fantastic, other days not so much - at least that’s been my experience over the 30+ years I used tube equipment).
But that’s why they make chocolate and vanilla!
By the way, regarding imaging, Audacious lets you adjust the imaging, not that Klipschorns don’t image well - they do.
And getting back to the original subject, Audacious plays music files “gapless,” something important to those of us who listen to classical music.
Lawrence
2 Likes
I get that with all audio equipment, not just tubes .
Years ago, I noticed that high frequencies got “smeared” when the humidity was high. It started driving me nutty for a while.
Eventually, I just came to accept that it’s actually my ears that don’t hear things the same way on different days, for a variety of reasons. It still drives me nutty, but somewhat less so.
3 Likes