Want to build resistor..

So not a resistor, but a filter, a notch or band stop filter to be precise. You will at least need resistors and capacitors, possibly one or two coils.

Making it a passive circuit will also attenuate the signal level, so you might need some active amplification in it to recover that.

a Graphic EQ.

Jamie

...which you can find on eBay, many under US$20 (and even cheaper at a ham swap).

Smoother than what?

Twin-T, RC filter.

Black Iccy wrote: "Smoother than what?"

Read up on it.

This resistor is very simple. It will have stereo RCA in and out, and 1/8" mini in and out.

All it will do is attenuate 2.5khz by 3 dB, with a Q wide enough to modestly affect frequencies from 1kHz up to 4kHz.

Essentially to mildly scoop out those audio frequencies humans most readily hear. One could plug a line source or phone into it, and RCA out, IE, to a stereo amp. One could use the built- in tone controls('Bass', 'Treble'), to tailor the ends of the bandwidth to taste.

Result? A smoother, less intrusive sound at background or concert- hall levels.

What materials do I need?

You want a parametric EQ you can build yourself.

Good luck with that.

Gareth.

No use pointing me at a set of Fletcher-Munson curves. I met those more than 60 years ago so if you think they're a point of enlightenment for me. Wrong. Particularly wrong because those curves are statistical averages for particular known levels. If you're trying to produce a response contour, those curves are not *it*. Turn up the volume a bit and your ears will respond differently.

If you're trying to attenuate the mid-range audible levels for yourself, then you're intensifying the effect. Possibly wrong.

If you think that a source has not had sufficient attention by the recording engineer at the time and that he/she did not endeavour to ensure a good result (one which you don't like) so you alter the response that's for you to decide. The easiest way is to build *nothing* and just raise the trevble and bass controls a fraction - same result.

________________

The point is, doing so sounds good to me. There are two audible "muddy zones" in the audio spectrum, to either side of 1kHZ: between 150-250Hz, and between

All I need is a filter for at least the higher "mud"(2-4khz) that can fit inline between my iPod and the receiver or amp it's connected to, or inline between the CD player and same amp. I have a

By modestly reducing those areas, I don't need to "raise the treble and bass". Plus I've already bought some gain by said reduction. And even though I looked at the graph, the area of upper mid-range I need to reduce that sounds good to me is slightly lower, between 1-3kHz. As you said, the published curves represent averages, so they may not work for everyone.

Oh I know exactly what you're trying to achieve. "In the old days" there were two main approaches. (1) Tone controls with variable 'knee' frequencies. (2) Variable 'effectiveness' loudness compensation. Twin-T passive filter would be best for your case, cheapest and easiest to build anyway.