Frequency Response of Speakers

[MacManNM]

Mac,


This poll is almost useless. If the speaker is perfect in everyway, but one has a flat FR, and the other doesn't, what would I choose? I wonder what.


you have to have more variables in the question. For my personal opinion, No, flat FR isn't everything for me.

Sheep

You know what they say: Opinions are like @#$%!^@#, everyones got one! The 2 graphs I posted are measured actual speakers, one is much flatter than the other.

 

[Francious70]

You forgot one thing about opinions/excuses: Everyone's got one, and they all STINK!!!

 

[Sheep]

You know what they say: Opinions are like @#$%!^@#, everyones got one! The 2 graphs I posted are measured actual speakers, one is much flatter than the other.

SO!!!!!!?!?! Bah!

One could be 6 times the price. One could be like 70dB efficiency. One could blah blah blah. Theres not enough information to base your poll on. THEN, when everyone answers, you attack them and say, they are the same speakers, and are perfect in everyway except Ones not flat, one is. DUH everyone would take the flat one. Thats why I said this poll is useless.

Usually people buy what they like, and the best they can get for the price. This poll belongs in some Snake oil filled forum.

Sheep

 

[mtrycrafts]

Flat response does not guarantee it will sound good to everyone.

You should talk to the experts who research this, what sounds good to most or the vast majority. You cannot please 'everyone' at all, silly question.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Again all other things being equal speaker 1:

Or speaker 2:

Speaker 2 in a DBT any day of the week.

 

[Sheep]

Speaker 2 in a DBT any day of the week.

what about the weekend?

 

[Waveform]

As mentioned before on this thread, I think by definition a flat response implies that the speaker faithfully reproduces the signal as fed to it. I don't see why that can be a bad thing, although I can see that certain colorations imparted to the sound may actually sound very good. Personally, I would rather my speaker did not impart colorations. This is why I would really like to hear these and these and these. This was the design philosophy of Dunlavy speakers, (which were never in my price range ). However this discussion may be relevant (see especially, page 2). Another relevant factor is how much flatness digital correction (MCACC, YPAO, Audessey) can achieve, and whether such programs have become sophisticated enough to make corrections without introducing audible artefacts, as discussed here.

 

[MacManNM]

SO!!!!!!?!?! Bah!

One could be 6 times the price. One could be like 70dB efficiency. One could blah blah blah. Theres not enough information to base your poll on. THEN, when everyone answers, you attack them and say, they are the same speakers, and are perfect in everyway except Ones not flat, one is. DUH everyone would take the flat one. Thats why I said this poll is useless.

Usually people buy what they like, and the best they can get for the price. This poll belongs in some Snake oil filled forum.

Sheep

I guess that would be everyone except the 8 that voted for the ones with the more variable response!

You know, the purpose of this forum is to be informative AND entertaining. If you think it is a useless thread then don't post in it. Loosen up, go have a shot of whiskey or something dude!

 

[mulester7]

You know, the purpose of this forum is to be informative AND entertaining

.....Mac, you're sly....I believe with this thread you are trying to convey the conception that a speaker should be as flat as possible for balance, but each speaker manufacturer goes for a little + db at certain points for their speaker to hopefully stand out, and appeal to a certain grouping of listeners.....

 

[MDS]

Has anybody read the Floyd Toole paper at the link posted by Mtrycrafts? I would highly recommend it.

 

[mulester7]

Has anybody read the Floyd Toole paper at the link posted by Mtrycrafts? I would highly recommend it.

.....Mtrycraft's link to Floyd Toole, again.....

http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/AudioScience.pdf

 

[MacManNM]

.....Mac, you're sly....I believe with this thread you are trying to convey the conception that a speaker should be as flat as possible for balance, but each speaker manufacturer goes for a little + db at certain points for their speaker to hopefully stand out, and appeal to a certain grouping of listeners.....

Give that man a cigar! I do believe this to be true.

 

[j_garcia]

Already sort of knew that was what you were getting at It became painfully apparent to me with Paradigm when upgrade time and some disposable cash came around. After doing a lot of auditioning, I found that the Studio's highs actually seemed to be notched up a tad, making them sound the way they do. Some people like that, but I don't, so I removed them from my upgrade path. In the cars, I've always had soft dome tweeters, and I've always been fond of the way they sound, and that's what I was looking for when I started my search, but I ended up looking for the smoothest, most detailed midrange in the end, because those seemed to be the types of speakers that captured my attention most.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I guess that would be everyone except the 8 that voted for the ones with the more variable response!

You know, the purpose of this forum is to be informative AND entertaining. If you think it is a useless thread then don't post in it. Loosen up, go have a shot of whiskey or something dude!

I am sure bias had nothing to do with the statistics, 8 people?
Or, did you hide the speakers behind acoustic curtains and rotated the speakers to the exact same place?
Or, just a plain, sighted, biased appraisal?
Lots of reason why you got 8 people voting for one.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Has anybody read the Floyd Toole paper at the link posted by Mtrycrafts? I would highly recommend it.

What? Facts getting in the way of beliefs? LOL

He has a few others there as well.

 

[mulester7]

What? Facts getting in the way of beliefs? LOL

He has a few others there as well.

.....and sound quality can be measured?.....

 

[MacManNM]

I am sure bias had nothing to do with the statistics, 8 people?
Or, did you hide the speakers behind acoustic curtains and rotated the speakers to the exact same place?
Or, just a plain, sighted, biased appraisal?
Lots of reason why you got 8 people voting for one.

Ok, you got me, I conned everyones votes. .............Sike, what do you think? like, I got those people to vote in my favor?

 

[mtrycrafts]

Ok, you got me, I conned everyones votes. .............Sike, what do you think? like, I got those people to vote in my favor?

Yes, I got you indeed as it seems from your lack of further explanation of the protocols, you had a biased, unreliable listening evaluation. You got unreliable results, period.
No, you don't have to con anyone, bias is there on its own and works just great on its own without your help.
But then, what would Toole know about conducting meaningful evaluations???

Next time, if you want better data, do a better protocol, involve DBt listening for a change.

 

[mtrycrafts]

what about the weekend?

Originally Posted by mtrycrafts
Speaker 2 in a DBT any day of the week.]/b]

Well, I don't know. Maybe the weekends are not any day of the week
Maybe that is when the alcohol takes over and blurs the vision?

 

[mtrycrafts]

As mentioned before on this thread, I think by definition a flat response implies that the speaker faithfully reproduces the signal as fed to it. I don't see why that can be a bad thing, although I can see that certain colorations imparted to the sound may actually sound very good. Personally, I would rather my speaker did not impart colorations. This is why I would really like to hear these and these and these. This was the design philosophy of Dunlavy speakers, (which were never in my price range ). However this discussion may be relevant (see especially, page 2). Another relevant factor is how much flatness digital correction (MCACC, YPAO, Audessey) can achieve, and whether such programs have become sophisticated enough to make corrections without introducing audible artefacts, as discussed here.

Thanks for that Dunlavy interview.