I am looking for the target frequency response that it is often used by TVs or Soundbars as a sound mode usually under the title News or Dialogues.
This offers more clarity/ integibility when the broadcasted program is News or Sports.
Can anyone help? Is there a recommendation or a paper about this?
This offers more clarity/ integibility when the broadcasted program is News or Sports.
Can anyone help? Is there a recommendation or a paper about this?
No clue, but the pioneer's analog telephone's 250-2500 Hz or a mobile audio/cheap AM radio's typical ~100 - 5 kHz is what I've used/using for adding a center channel for dialog 'fill' and/or increased hearing intelligibility.
I don't think you're going to find a single set of target curves. Each manufacturer tends to develop their own methods to improve speech, and it's often not just equalization. Most of them don't seem interested in providing specifics about what they are doing, but newer models often include compressors, signal analyzers, room noise measurement, adaptive filters, etc. to improve intelligibility further. It's kind of like hearing aids - modern ones are rarely just EQ/gain devices.
But, here are a couple pages that talk about EQ and intelligibility specifically. Their suggestions are a decent place to start to see what EQ alone will get you.
https://www.dpamicrophones.com/mic-university/facts-about-speech-intelligibility
https://www.sageaudio.com/blog/mastering/how-to-make-voice-over-sound-better
But, here are a couple pages that talk about EQ and intelligibility specifically. Their suggestions are a decent place to start to see what EQ alone will get you.
https://www.dpamicrophones.com/mic-university/facts-about-speech-intelligibility
https://www.sageaudio.com/blog/mastering/how-to-make-voice-over-sound-better
I've been working from home for over fifteen years. One of the reasons I'm so obsessed with Unity horns is that their intelligibility is about as good as it gets. Although I use my stereo for movies and music, most of what I listen to is podcasts, while I'm working.
In a nutshell-
A conventional two-way speaker with a 2nd or 3rd order crossover in the midrange, it has anywhere from 180 to 270 degrees of phase shift at the crossover point. 270 degrees of phase shift at 1khz is the equivalent of having your midranges 25cm (about 10") away from your tweeter.
This time discrepancy screws up the intelligibility of a two way speaker in a big way.
It's not that Unity horns are immune to this problem, but by placing the midranges a few inches ahead of the tweeter, it offsets the phase shift in the crossover.
The net effect is that you get a phase curve that's pretty darn flat through the midrange, which improves intelligibility.
I've never found EQ to help all that much, because the issue isn't frequency response related, it's time related.
If Unity horns aren't your thing, another solution is a full-range single driver speaker, or a three way speaker where the midrange covers a minimum of 500Hz to to 3khz.
In a nutshell-
A conventional two-way speaker with a 2nd or 3rd order crossover in the midrange, it has anywhere from 180 to 270 degrees of phase shift at the crossover point. 270 degrees of phase shift at 1khz is the equivalent of having your midranges 25cm (about 10") away from your tweeter.
This time discrepancy screws up the intelligibility of a two way speaker in a big way.
It's not that Unity horns are immune to this problem, but by placing the midranges a few inches ahead of the tweeter, it offsets the phase shift in the crossover.
The net effect is that you get a phase curve that's pretty darn flat through the midrange, which improves intelligibility.
I've never found EQ to help all that much, because the issue isn't frequency response related, it's time related.
If Unity horns aren't your thing, another solution is a full-range single driver speaker, or a three way speaker where the midrange covers a minimum of 500Hz to to 3khz.