Should Speakers be Designed to Have a Flat SPL?

T

TheStalker

Banned
That's ridiculous. I've read this thread, and you are not persuasive. You are also quoting Linkwitz out of context. He tweaked the equalization of a dipole by a tiny amount, and you're using it as a general argument to justify a frequency response dip that was conceived to adjust a coloration in a non-dipolar design that isn't applicable to other speakers.

As for Audyssey, I don't think I'm being close-minded at all, I'm reading responses from one of their technical leaders.
You are quoting Linkwitz out of context in order to suit your narrow understanding that loudspeakers should be flat. Nowhere does he mention that this only works with dipoles, etc. As a matter of fact, his active crossover (kits, boards, finished products, etc.) has a permanent undefeatable 3kHz dip, universal for any system, situation, scenario, etc.

Regardless of how anyone would like to spin this, it all goes back to the equal loudness curve. For a speaker to sound flat, it has to be EQed. We've all been listening for way too long with this extra bite in the lower treble and have become accustomed to it. We blame the hardness and unnaturalness on bad recording, compressed audio, but we fail to see what the real issue(s) is.

BBC
Linkwitz
Audyssey
B&W

All wholeheartedly endorse this theory. That's a lot of sound engineers and pioneers.
 
T

TheStalker

Banned
Flat: The faithful reproduction of an audio signal

Colored: A "colored" sound characteristic adds something not in the original sound. The coloration may be euphonically pleasant, but it is not as accurate as the original signal

To different meanings
Absolutely. But because of the way we hear and because of the recording technology/techniques, flat is actually only obtainable with a 3kHz dip. So actual flat is colored. And frequency response with a dip is flat.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
You are quoting Linkwitz out of context in order to suit your narrow understanding that loudspeakers should be flat. Nowhere does he mention that this only works with dipoles, etc. As a matter of fact, his active crossover (kits, boards, finished products, etc.) has a permanent undefeatable 3kHz dip, universal for any system, situation, scenario, etc.
To quote SL on his midrange equalization:

...why is a flat free-field response not perceived as such in a reverberant environment? It might be related to the multitude of reflections that a speaker like the ORION+ generates with its rear tweeter and wider than dipole-like dispersion in the 1.4 kHz to 4 kHz range.
My understanding of speaker design is rather narrow, but I can read.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Absolutely. But because of the way we hear and because of the recording technology/techniques, flat is actually only obtainable with a 3kHz dip. So actual flat is colored. And frequency response with a dip is flat.
We hear you. We just don't agree with you. :D
 
D

Dennis Murphy

Audioholic General
Let's not kid ourselves here.

But seriously folks, I do go out of my way to avoid any peaks in that area, and I choose drivers and crossover frequencies that will minimize any off-axis flare from the tweeter at its lower end. If you look carefully at my response curves, there is a little contouring in the area we're discussion. But that's more to compensate for any irregularities in the off-axis response than to provide a genuine BBC dip.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
But seriously folks, I do go out of my way to avoid any peaks in that area, and I choose drivers and crossover frequencies that will minimize any off-axis flare from the tweeter at its lower end. If you look carefully at my response curves, there is a little contouring in the area we're discussion. But that's more to compensate for any irregularities in the off-axis response than to provide a genuine BBC dip.
And if you look at the Stereophile measurements of the Revel Salon2, both simulated anechoic and in-room, you see a very small dip, that is best described as lack of a peak too. I think you've said it well, Dennis, that's a frequency range in which you really don't want to have a peak.

Revel Ultima Salon2 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
 
J

jcl

Senior Audioholic
You are quoting Linkwitz out of context in order to suit your narrow understanding that loudspeakers should be flat. Nowhere does he mention that this only works with dipoles, etc. As a matter of fact, his active crossover (kits, boards, finished products, etc.) has a permanent undefeatable 3kHz dip, universal for any system, situation, scenario, etc.

Regardless of how anyone would like to spin this, it all goes back to the equal loudness curve. For a speaker to sound flat, it has to be EQed. We've all been listening for way too long with this extra bite in the lower treble and have become accustomed to it. We blame the hardness and unnaturalness on bad recording, compressed audio, but we fail to see what the real issue(s) is.

BBC
Linkwitz
Audyssey
B&W

All wholeheartedly endorse this theory. That's a lot of sound engineers and pioneers.
Repeating your opinion does not make it fact. You claim these entities endorse this theory.

BBC - I believe Dennis posted to the thread that the BBC dip was to address shortcomings in driver technology of the day, not to address a loudness curve.

Linkwitz - Places a caveat on his observations "This applies primarily to recordings of large orchestral pieces in concert halls where the microphones are much closer to the instruments than any listener. "
Further he suggests that one may not want to always apply a contour - "You may choose to make the notch filter selectable with a switch for different types of recordings."

Audyssey - The link posted earlier explains that Audyssey is applying this curve to address the variation in dispersion from midrange to tweeter, not to address differences in diffuse vs. direct sound recording. I'm afraid I fail to see how this supports your theory.

B&W - Where have you shown that they endorse your theory?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T

TheStalker

Banned
Repeating your opinion does not make it fact. You claim these entities endorse this theory.

BBC - I believe Dennis posted to the thread that the BBC dip was to address shortcomings in driver technology of the day, not to address a loudness curve.

Linkwitz - Places a caveat on his observations "This applies primarily to recordings of large orchestral pieces in concert halls where the microphones are much closer to the instruments than any listener. "
Further he suggests that one may not want to always apply a contour - "You may choose to make the notch filter selectable with a switch for different types of recordings."

Audyssey - The link posted earlier explains that Audyssey is applying this curve to address the variation in dispersion from midrange to tweeter, not to address differences in diffuse vs. direct sound recording. I'm afraid I fail to see how this supports your theory.

B&W - Where have you shown that they endorse your theory?
Lol, this is hilarious, I give up. If you enjoy your edgy and unnatural speakers, that's perfectly fine!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
zhimbo

zhimbo

Audioholic General
Because it can't be repeated enough, the opening post settles this: "This applies primarily to recordings of large orchestral pieces in concert halls where the microphones are much closer to the instruments than any listener...You may choose to make the notch filter selectable with a switch for different types of recordings."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JerryLove

JerryLove

Audioholic Samurai
Absolutely. But because of the way we hear and because of the recording technology/techniques, flat is actually only obtainable with a 3kHz dip. So actual flat is colored. And frequency response with a dip is flat.
Which would mean that listening live isn't flat since nothing is giving me a -3db dip.

Your Audessy quote seems to address the personal experiences of Chris Kyriakakis. I don't know who that is. I did have a discussion at one point with Sean Olive regarding he and Toole's direct study of listener preferences (and I highly recommend "The Acoustics and PsychoAcoustics of Speakers in Rooms" by Floyd Toole).

There's a plethora of data from HK as well (Harman - Scientific Publications)

The (level matched) preferences center towards flat or smooth-roll on and off-axis performance.

Your personal preferences may vary; though (as mentioned), if you don't like an accurate reproduction, then you won't like live either.
And, as I mentioned several pages ago, it's far simpler to EQ a flat speaker for whatever dip/interaction you would prefer than it is a chaotic one.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top