Trooth [message #1011 is a reply to message #1009] |
Mon, 25 October 2004 01:54 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/down.png) |
Mike.e
Messages: 471 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
No truth involved in subjective experience-just one persons enjoyment of a system more than anothers enjoyment. My system,with cheap speakers in a room of regular acoustics wil exhibit such frequency response errors-i wont even bother adding active EQ such as this until i have a decent system making it worthwhile Stepping stones.. . . . Cheers! Mike.e
|
|
|
What I can't get my head around is... [message #1012 is a reply to message #1010] |
Mon, 25 October 2004 05:08 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/down.png) |
wunhuanglo
Messages: 912 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (2nd Degree) |
|
|
doing anything other than making the power response as flat as possible. My instinct is that, in terms of reproduction, it's appropriate to present what's on the recording (high fidelity with respect to the input). Otherwise it's just tone control - if implemented in hardware (e.g. crossover design) then it's applied across the board to recordings good and bad, making both (again, with respect to fidelity to the source material) inaccurate. My assumption is that the recording already incorporates the tonal bias of the producer and engineer - am I way off base here?
|
|
|
|
|
Re: What I can't get my head around is... [message #1015 is a reply to message #1014] |
Mon, 25 October 2004 07:19 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/down.png) |
![](http://audioroundtable.com/forum/images/custom_avatars/5.gif) |
Wayne Parham
Messages: 18752 Registered: January 2001
|
Illuminati (33rd Degree) |
|
|
As a speaker designer, I strive to make my loudspeakers as flat as possible. No response tailoring, only conjugate filters. And for amplifiers, preamps, whatever, the same rules apply. On a personal level, I also usually disable tone controls. I don't like to use them. But then again, I agree that our ears are more sensitive to midrange, especially at low levels. The Fletcher-Munson curves are equal loudness contours, and they essentially represent a response curve of our ears. It's a representation of what our hearing does at different frequencies and different volume levels. So preferences in voicing, EQ, etc. may be related to the frequency-energy distribution of whatever is being played and the volume level it is being played at.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Single driver/single ended/George Brienes/Martin King [message #1019 is a reply to message #999] |
Mon, 25 October 2004 12:45 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/down.png) |
akhilesh
Messages: 1275 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (3rd Degree) |
|
|
HI John, Great point! My experience is that single driver speakers offer a large midrange bump, and this exaggerates the "presence" of the vocalist who sings in that range as well as instruments that play in that range. I try to tone this down in the interests of fidelity with a Baffle step correction circuit, but i do prefer a little bit of exaggeration. It's all a matter of taste. Bottom line: if we want total fidelity, then flat freq curve, lowest distortion. IF we don't care abou tfidelity as measured, (and obviously neither you nor I do, since we both like SETs!) then just go with whatever sounds good to you, and have fun with it. my 2 cents -akhilesh
|
|
|
|