There are several pro audio digital plugins for Fletcher Munson compensation from someones who feel that loudness compensation is needed.
Ian Shepherd's Perception
Perception: eliminate "loudness deception" (AAX, AU and VST)
Fletchy-Muncher
Fletchy-Muncher |
Ian Shepherd's Perception
Perception: eliminate "loudness deception" (AAX, AU and VST)
Fletchy-Muncher
Fletchy-Muncher |
I saw the first plugin video, and I found it actually does no do Fletcher Munson compensation. It only matches the levels so that the mastering engineers can compare before and after without changing the monitor level (= loudness compensation). Truly a good plugin, but it does not do Fletcher Munson compensation by itself.
I wound consider second one as more like a toy, sorry.
I wound consider second one as more like a toy, sorry.
Last edited:
I'm not necessarily a fan of built in room eq. But the Audyssey in my Denon amp has one feature I really like. It's 'dynamic eq' which is a volume dependant loudness curve. Since I listen at low volumes it really helps even out the bass. I REALLY like it.
Unfortunately it means that I can only use one channel per speaker.
Unfortunately it means that I can only use one channel per speaker.
May be this would be more comfortable:
NEUMANN
Only €8000!
PS: Lewitt gives A weighted numbers while Neumann give unweighted and A weighted which is 10dB better.
So while the Lewitt still beats the Neumann I linked to it is not as bad as it seems.
Last edited:
I did a casual short test this morning about Fletcher Munson curve compensation just applying a little EQ to the low frequency, and I found that the most comfortable listing level is surely affected by the EQ setting.
All the commercial speaker’s bass response should be determined by their reference listening level, so the LOUDNESS control is actually needed for who listen to the music at the level other than what is predetermined. Why only very few high end audio preamps have loudness control these days? I would say it’s a myth.
All the commercial speaker’s bass response should be determined by their reference listening level, so the LOUDNESS control is actually needed for who listen to the music at the level other than what is predetermined. Why only very few high end audio preamps have loudness control these days? I would say it’s a myth.
There are standards for mixing and mastering SPL's to set the final balance between, bass, mids and treble. A couple are:
EBU Tech 3276, “Listening conditions for the assessment of sound programme material: monophonic and two–channel stereophonic."
ITU-R BS.1116-3, “Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems”
When I was mixing sound in studio control rooms, I used the above standards and always had a calibrated SPL meter to set the final tonal balance before releasing the mix.
The most popular approach is from Bob Katz, K-System, which follows on the above standards:
Level Practices (Part 2) - Digido.com
I also use JRiver's loudness control which you can calibrate using Bob's approach above or from JRiver's site: NEW: Loudness
Works pretty well.
From there one can figure out power amp requirements for a speakers given sensitivity, listening distance, and peak level, referencing 77 to 83 dB SPL C weighting, slow integration on a SPL meter as "reference" level. 77 dB SPL is for highly compressed material, whereas 83 dB SPL is for material with wide dynamic range.
Having a calibrated SPL meter also puts into context how loud you are listening. 83 dB SPL C weighted "reference level" is indeed fairly loud. 95 dB SPL average is often referred to as "concert level" and to our ears sounds twice as loud as reference. And 105 dB SPL is considered peak reference level (not average) which is really loud, enough to make you wince as it is 4 times louder than reference. Ear plugs are mandatory at those levels.
Frequency response measurements at different power levels
JBL Technical Notes Volume 1 Number 9
Rob 🙂
JBL Technical Notes Volume 1 Number 9
Rob 🙂
Yep. The industry standard SPL should be useful for movie theaters, but the problem is SPL in home environment is so diverse in reality...
Not just for movies, this is indeed for music production, literally. This is what is taught in audio engineering, mixing and mastering schools and SOP to virtually anyone mixing and mastering music in the industry. When I listen to my mixes from the studio at home, whether in front of computer desk monitors or on my main system, the bass to mid to treble balance translates virtually perfectly. This issue has been solved for decades.
In my experience, every mixing and mastering engineers I know work at very different SPL level. For example, at Sterling Sound, Ted Jensen plays music rather quiet, while Greg Calbi plays music much louder.
The only occasion I heard about industry standard SPL is, my friend working at Hollywood (sound effect production) called me and asking how to measure standard SPL at his home 5 channel working space, and I had zero idea about what he was talking about honestly...
I'm retired now, so things might have changed these days.
The only occasion I heard about industry standard SPL is, my friend working at Hollywood (sound effect production) called me and asking how to measure standard SPL at his home 5 channel working space, and I had zero idea about what he was talking about honestly...
I'm retired now, so things might have changed these days.
Last edited:
Thanks for the info Mitch and the standards. Kinda surprising as I read so much on the pro forums about the problem of music being mastered all over the place in SPL. But since I don't listen to many recent recordings (too wall of sound loud for me) I really don't have a handle on modern tracks.
Pano, re: SPL all over the place, yes and it still is! Just because there are standards doesn’t mean everyone follows them 🙂
Pano, I am sure you know this but to explain generally, here is a high level explanation with some audio samples to show our ears frequency response is not only non-linear, but also changes with SPL: The non-linearities of the Human Ear
Part of the reason that some music has more bass response than others is directly related to what level it was mixed/mastered at. Too low of a monitoring level (e.g. 65 dB SPL) and in the mix, you inherently boost the bass/treble to compensate for our ears falling response at both frequency extremes. Mixing at too loud of a level (e.g. 95 dB SPL i.e. “concert level”) and you instinctively turn down the bass and treble in the mix, as at that SPL our ears sensitivity to bass and treble has increased considerably in relation to other frequencies.
The irony is some rock records I listened to in the 80’s had no bass and treble as they were mixed/mastered at concert level and sounded wimpy at normal (i.e. reference) listening level. I am guilty of this myself until I got educated.
The reason why you don’t see loudness controls too much as they actually need to be calibrated with Pink Noise and a sound pressure level (SPL) meter, as linked in my previous post, for it to mean anything. If you do calibrate for playback, then you also need to enable volume levelling (i.e. EBU R128) so that each song you are playing back is at the calibrated level, or you will be manually adjusting the volume with the SPL meter for each song.
I found an old copy of the Dolby 5.1 Channel Music Production Guidelines on my HD. Also includes discussion on ears non-linearity and specification for mix levels, amongst the other specs. Like the other specs I linked to, this is for music production for consumer home environments. Not for movie theatres.
Cheers!
Pano, I am sure you know this but to explain generally, here is a high level explanation with some audio samples to show our ears frequency response is not only non-linear, but also changes with SPL: The non-linearities of the Human Ear
Part of the reason that some music has more bass response than others is directly related to what level it was mixed/mastered at. Too low of a monitoring level (e.g. 65 dB SPL) and in the mix, you inherently boost the bass/treble to compensate for our ears falling response at both frequency extremes. Mixing at too loud of a level (e.g. 95 dB SPL i.e. “concert level”) and you instinctively turn down the bass and treble in the mix, as at that SPL our ears sensitivity to bass and treble has increased considerably in relation to other frequencies.
The irony is some rock records I listened to in the 80’s had no bass and treble as they were mixed/mastered at concert level and sounded wimpy at normal (i.e. reference) listening level. I am guilty of this myself until I got educated.
The reason why you don’t see loudness controls too much as they actually need to be calibrated with Pink Noise and a sound pressure level (SPL) meter, as linked in my previous post, for it to mean anything. If you do calibrate for playback, then you also need to enable volume levelling (i.e. EBU R128) so that each song you are playing back is at the calibrated level, or you will be manually adjusting the volume with the SPL meter for each song.
I found an old copy of the Dolby 5.1 Channel Music Production Guidelines on my HD. Also includes discussion on ears non-linearity and specification for mix levels, amongst the other specs. Like the other specs I linked to, this is for music production for consumer home environments. Not for movie theatres.
Cheers!
well thanks again gents, my apologies for attempting to open a discussion on non linear behavior of loudspeakers i've been fooling myself all along (it's all F/M) and the things i've seen in past measurements are all incorrect. i stand corrected loudspeakers are linear!
mitchba where can i find some of your recording works? you are after involved in recording aren't you?
turk 182, thanks for asking and maybe 🙂 Yes, I recorded/mixed a lot of independents, orchestras, location recordings, etc., but out of print. Perhaps being a Canadian you might recognize The Northern Pikes and The Pursuit of Happiness. Two Canadian bands I worked with to assist in getting US label deals. While I did a lot of recording/mixing for the Pikes, the best one I had my hand in is Snow in June.
What was cool for me was seeing them be successful as both bands put everything they had in to it. And being from Canada, it was hard to break into the US market at the time. Also seeing top Producers/Mixers strut their stuff. Hugh Padgham and Bob Clearmountain for the Pikes and Todd Rundgren for T.P.O.H. So many years ago, but it was a lot of fun.
What was cool for me was seeing them be successful as both bands put everything they had in to it. And being from Canada, it was hard to break into the US market at the time. Also seeing top Producers/Mixers strut their stuff. Hugh Padgham and Bob Clearmountain for the Pikes and Todd Rundgren for T.P.O.H. So many years ago, but it was a lot of fun.