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.