That's the catch. You want the speakers flat in-room at the listening chair. So, while 1m and .5m measurements are interesting, what needs to be don is place the mic at the listening position. Now you are measuring the speakers and the room. This where EQ comes in. I have given up with passive filters for my personal setup. All my filters and XO's are digital.
Bob
Bob
Hi Guys,
We're at risk of forgetting that very audio listener's hearing and musical perception is unique. One person's "clean highs" are another's "too sharp". One person's "natural vocals" is another's "mucky mids". A flat response will appeal to some while others will find it acoustically boring. It all depends on each individual's characteristics, on their particular equipment, box design, source(s) room influences etc.
Dogma(s), theory(s) and measurement will only get us so far. These types of thread usually develop allot of heat but less in the way of light. Use your ears in the final setup, include experimenting with on-off axis box placement, position etc etc. If still not happy, consider passive or active filter to final taste.
Thanks
Mark.
We're at risk of forgetting that very audio listener's hearing and musical perception is unique. One person's "clean highs" are another's "too sharp". One person's "natural vocals" is another's "mucky mids". A flat response will appeal to some while others will find it acoustically boring. It all depends on each individual's characteristics, on their particular equipment, box design, source(s) room influences etc.
Dogma(s), theory(s) and measurement will only get us so far. These types of thread usually develop allot of heat but less in the way of light. Use your ears in the final setup, include experimenting with on-off axis box placement, position etc etc. If still not happy, consider passive or active filter to final taste.
Thanks
Mark.
Last edited:
Mark - No problem. There are a couple of relevant studies. See: S.E. Olive, “Differences in Performance and Preference of Trained versus Untrained Listeners in Loudspeaker Tests: A Case Study”, J. Audio Eng. Soc., Vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 806-825, (2003 Sept.). There's a second one that compared a “well-balanced, neutral” loudspeaker with three others, including one with “hyped bass and treble”: S. E. Olive, “Some New Evidence that Teenagers and College Students May Prefer Accurate Sound Reproduction”, 132nd Convention, Audio Eng. Soc., preprint no. 8683, (2012, April). According to the study, across every listener group in the latter the most preferred loudspeaker on average was the ‘well balanced, neutral’ model. (The ‘hyped bass and treble’ model was rated second out of the four.) This was all done with double blind testing. Anyone can find the summary of these on Sean Olive’s blog.
Stephen
Stephen
Hi Stephen,
Interesting quotes and worth raising. However, I'd be more interested to see independent blind trialling of single-point-source Full-Range drivers with a male sample group age 40 plus. This age group constitutes the bulk of Full-Range Diy related raw driver purchases. Given the mean hearing range in this age group is likely to be <16kHz, I suspect votes for a flat response won't be clear-cut.
As with all research.........applicable relevance is key. Also bear in mind Sean Olive isn't an independent researcher (Harmon International - audio products manufacturing group).
The essential point is at risk of being drowned by continuing dogmatisation. Markaudio drivers are easily tuned to suit most all listening tastes, either by on-off axis placement, or by means of filtering for those who need it. Flat response or rising response, pick your poison and enjoy the music.
Thanks
Mark.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.