I signed up for the free book (why not?) which comes in weekly emails. So far, it has not gotten past the equal-loudness-contour talk. The author is actually discussing it as if the goal is to have an inverse of the equal-loudness curves, effectively changing the ear's response to flat. I hope the error in logic there is obvious to most people?
Of course, there is often good reason to drop response a little in the sensitive areas, whether in regard to power response / reflected sound balance, the expected volume level of the speaker in use, or simply a bit of general "voicing" to the on-axis response. I am told these articles eventually reach a specific speaker design. I have some guesses on why it might sound relatively normal in practice, and they don't involve any "beating", but I'll just wait and see what it is .
Of course, there is often good reason to drop response a little in the sensitive areas, whether in regard to power response / reflected sound balance, the expected volume level of the speaker in use, or simply a bit of general "voicing" to the on-axis response. I am told these articles eventually reach a specific speaker design. I have some guesses on why it might sound relatively normal in practice, and they don't involve any "beating", but I'll just wait and see what it is .
I signed up as well and have, today, been emailed the second free book.
The equal loudness contour is indeed inverted to provide a target speaker freq response to obtain a "flat" response after ear processing.
I have no problem with the theory that a big mid-range dip will help to mask a whole heap of nasties and to the average punter is what they are after - it has no place in high-end audio IMHO.
The author seems to have a taken a nugget of information and based a whole heap of research and marketing on a miss-understanding from what I can see. Maybe there is a hidden nugget of information he has yet to impart that makes it all have an element of sense but so far it is going down the route I expected :-(
To be fair when you look at the variance in equal loudness contours of a number of individuals a few dB here and there is of little consequence IMHO.
The equal loudness contour is indeed inverted to provide a target speaker freq response to obtain a "flat" response after ear processing.
I have no problem with the theory that a big mid-range dip will help to mask a whole heap of nasties and to the average punter is what they are after - it has no place in high-end audio IMHO.
The author seems to have a taken a nugget of information and based a whole heap of research and marketing on a miss-understanding from what I can see. Maybe there is a hidden nugget of information he has yet to impart that makes it all have an element of sense but so far it is going down the route I expected :-(
To be fair when you look at the variance in equal loudness contours of a number of individuals a few dB here and there is of little consequence IMHO.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.