# how to use the parametric eq in Alpine HU



## Steak (Mar 16, 2006)

its supposed to be a 5 band eq.
I've tried searching, I've read the alpine manual several times, and I have actually been playing with it for the last week, but still I'm not sure if I understand what it does, and how to tune my system with it.
Does anyone have experience with it? Can you help me out pls?


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

A parametric eq really isn't that much different for any other eq. The advantage of the parametric eq is that within each of the 5 bands, you can select the center frequency you want to boost or cut, in other words you aren't limited to say 1khz, you might be able to select anywhere from 500hz-2hz on one band. The Q is usually adjustable too.

A typical 5 band eq might look like this, fixed bands and fixed Q:

1. 50hz 2. 250hz 3. 1000hz 4. 2500hz 5. 10000hz

Whereas a parametric would be something like:

1. 20hz-100hz 2. 200-500hz 3. 750-2000hz 4. 3000-5500hz 5. 7500-15000hz

So with the parametric, you could choose say 40hz on band 1, 350hz on band 2 etc. 

The Q adjusts how much above and below the center frequency is affected. Either real tight around 80hz or real broad around 80hz effecting all the way down to 20hz up to 160 hz. Almost like a slope of an eq, 36db is real sharp, 6db is not.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

interactive tutorial  

http://mobile.jlaudio.com/support_pages.php?page_id=144


----------



## nauc (Sep 12, 2006)

i had the 9833, nice deck!!

that peq will let you select 5 different frequencies out of say 20 and boost or cut them. a graphic eq will only have say 5 different frequencies you can boost or cut (wont have the 20 and let you choose which 5)

but you cant select 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90hz. depending on which frequency you pick for band 1, that will regulate what you can pick for band 2 etc etc


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Hic said:


> interactive tutorial
> 
> http://mobile.jlaudio.com/support_pages.php?page_id=144


I link this all the time in other forums.


----------



## Steak (Mar 16, 2006)

OMG Thanks! That was exactly the explanation I needed

now it all makes sense...


----------



## MadMaxSE-L (Oct 19, 2006)

Hic said:


> interactive tutorial
> 
> http://mobile.jlaudio.com/support_pages.php?page_id=144


That tutorial should really help someone new to understand what the "Q" adjustment does. But there is one confusing thing; when adjusting the Q on there, going to a numerically higher number on the dial correlates to a narrower adjustment; isn't this backwards from most other Q adjustments, where a numerically higher reading would usually make for a wider adjustment?


----------



## Steak (Mar 16, 2006)

ok great help so far.... so let's say, for instance, that if I have a sibilance problem, but other than than I am overall pretty satisfied with my highs, would it be ok if I:

Cut around 8000Hz (testing how much is enough), with a Q as high as possible (real narrow around this area, not to affect too much the other freqs)

What do you think?


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

Well parametric eq's are cool, because you have so many choices, but they can take quite a bit of time to dial in for that very reason. My suggestion is to try 8khz, and changing the Q and see what results you get. If you don't get the results you want, move the center frequency up or down a little, again playing with the Q.

I know that may not be the answer you're looking for, but no one knows exactly what frequency or Q will solve the problem except the one tuning and listening to the system.


----------



## Soundsaround (Apr 22, 2006)

Steak said:


> ok great help so far.... so let's say, for instance, that if I have a sibilance problem, but other than than I am overall pretty satisfied with my highs, would it be ok if I:
> 
> Cut around 8000Hz (testing how much is enough), with a Q as high as possible (real narrow around this area, not to affect too much the other freqs)
> 
> What do you think?


If your fighting sibilance, make sure that you don't have too much overlap between your mid + tweet first, sometimes a steeper crossover slope can be the fix without the need for eq.
A narrow cut somewhere between 2-4k, and sometimes around 12k can help, but totally install dependent as said earlier.


----------



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

89grand said:


> Well parametric eq's are cool, because you have so many choices, but they can take quite a bit of time to dial in for that very reason. My suggestion is to try 8khz, and changing the Q and see what results you get. If you don't get the results you want, move the center frequency up or down a little, again playing with the Q.
> 
> I know that may not be the answer you're looking for, but no one knows exactly what frequency or Q will solve the problem except the one tuning and listening to the system.


Not to thread jack but:
I think that's the problem I'm having with eq...So many choices it's hard to say how it will change the sound or where to start making changesI know I need an RTA though...


----------



## nauc (Sep 12, 2006)

i used to boost 12k to get detail from cymbals, crowd noises, etc and use band 3 and 4, set to 2-4k and cut to help make it sound warmer/easier on the ears

all bands, Q of 3


----------



## Soundsaround (Apr 22, 2006)

goodstuff said:


> Not to thread jack but:
> I think that's the problem I'm having with eq...So many choices it's hard to say how it will change the sound or where to start making changesI know I need an RTA though...


You just have to train your ears a bit.
Use this method to help find your problem frequencies:
-Identify what your trying to fix, ie sibilance 
-Listen to 1 track with the problem, don't switch songs/artists yet. Try to ignore everything but the problem you hear. Try not to use a track with a lot of distortion(Nine Inch Nails/Pantera/Beastie Boys etc), unless that's all you listen to.
- Set the Q(bandwidth) to it's most narrow setting
- raise the gain of the eq band a lot, like 6 or 8db. it should sound terrible
- now slowly sweep the frequency control up and down the general range of the problem. With sibilance, you know it's a higher frequency, so start at like 750hz and slowly sweep up to 15k, then back down. Do this 2 or 3 times.
- As you sweep, listen for which frequency makes your problem the worst. With sibilance it'll be the frequency that most sounds like an ice pick being jammed into your brain 
- Leave it on that frequency and lower the gain back to 0db boost. Wait a minute for your ears to adjust to the flat setting. At first it'll sound a little dull after hearing that awful boost.
-Once your ears adjust, cut that freq. by 3db. Listen to see if the sibilance is tamed at all. 
- If it's close, try a small sweep around that freq. If you chose 3.25k, sweep between 2 - 4k.
- Now just fine tune it using the gain and q settings. You often will trade off a wider Q with a lower db cut, and vice versa. Try to use the least drastic cut amount that works.
Sibilance is often in a very narrow range, so a very tight/narrow q setting can work. Trying to reduce mud on the other hand will often require a wider q setting.
- Throw in another cd and see if your settings still work. Fine tune with as many well recorded discs as possible.
* Make sure your tuning your system, not remastering the CD!!!
* If you can, always cut instead of boost.
Hope that helps!


----------



## Foglght (Aug 2, 2007)

Hic said:


> interactive tutorial
> 
> http://mobile.jlaudio.com/support_pages.php?page_id=144


Perfect, wish I had seen this a long time ago.


----------



## Steak (Mar 16, 2006)

nauc said:


> i used to boost 12k to get detail from cymbals, crowd noises, etc and use band 3 and 4, set to 2-4k and cut to help make it sound warmer/easier on the ears
> 
> all bands, Q of 3



Q of 3 huh.... that is the narrowest setting right, with Q = 1 being the broadest?
==> At least thats what I understood from the JL Audio tutorial....


----------



## Steak (Mar 16, 2006)

weird thing, I just tried it in my HU, and it seems that Q = 3 is the broadest and Q = 1 is the narrowest.... oh well, at least I know how it works now, thanks all


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

edit]
With the development of the parametric equalizer by George Massenburg in 1969, sound technicians were able to make much more precise modifications to a sound signal. The parametric equalizer allows to control the amplitude (e.g., the volume) of each band, and shift the center frequency and widen or narrow the width of the center frequency that is affected. This enabled sound technicians to precisely remove unwanted sound frequencies such as a squeaking piano damper pedal or a feedback sound, while having a minimal impact on the music or other recorded matter.

Bandwidth of a signal is a measure of how rapidly its parameters (e.g. amplitude and phase) fluctuate with respect to time. Hence, the greater the bandwidth, the faster the variation in the signal parameters may be. The word bandwidth applies to signals as described above, but it could also apply to systems. In the latter case, to say that a system has a certain bandwidth means that the system can process signals of that bandwidth.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

Steak said:


> weird thing, I just tried it in my HU, and it seems that Q = 3 is the broadest and Q = 1 is the narrowest.... oh well, at least I know how it works now, thanks all


On both my Alpine PXA-H700 and my CDA-9855 a Q of 1 will give the broadest EQ effect while a Q of 3 will have less of an effect.


Not sure why yours is backwards.


----------

