There's something you missed here about the chain. I have sat in studios with numerous bands now. The end product (post mastering) sounds nothing like what i heard in the studio. All that a flat response in a well treated room may give me is a true representation of the abomination of a recording i bought. Why would i even give a ratsass about flat at this point? I'll color it up to how it sounds best to my ears.

Thankfully we have technology to remaster them.

@@Clobercow1 mastering cant do much compared to recording/mixing

And when compared to the modern, compressed production, it sounds wonderful.

@@lextr3110 When a record company says something is "remastered" they typically mean it has been "remixed" as well. Unfortunately, "remixed" started to mean something different (rap and electronica) right around the time these companies started remixing recordings. I believe they just call it all remastering now to avoid confusion.

I always appreciated the similarities between photography and mixing

Early bird. DIRAC has a downward tilt to it's default target curve, but you can customize the target or your liking.

Regarding adding subs, that's what I like so much about DIRAC. It does a great job doing what you said about blending them with the mains. Better than what I can do manually imo.

Yeah, you can liken it to RAW vs JPEG photo editing. If you have a non-neutral speaker (JPEG), you may like the default adjustments, but it’s very difficult to make changes after that look good. If you have a neutral speaker (RAW), you have a ton of range if you want to apply DSP in the bass or adjust the treble tilt.

That's exactly what people do when color correcting. They get it right first, then they add their flavor after.

You're very welcome!

A lot of people like a bump in the bass and a roll-off in the high frequencies. What's interesting is this the typical response you would get with a good speaker in a typical room. You might not want to just set this as the target response because it really depends on what's happening on speaker level also. The sound at your listening position is a combination of direct and reflected sound. With bad speakers, they will have a very dissimilar off-axis response meaning that fixing one will make the other worse. To me, fixing the nearfield on-axis response while being conscious of the off-axis response is the way I think it should be done. At your listening position, that will likely sound good also.

Bro same!!! It is very interesting. I wish other of my peers shared the same interest😭

Typically the better measuring speakers I prefer to worse measuring speakers. The Larsens I liked but because of the way they were designed to interact with the room. Their frequency response is a bit odd, but they take well to DSP correction. The other bias that I have is I really like speakers that can produce good bass so I have a preference towards those on my leaderboard.

@@Jtzkb let’s not forget that “original” and “artist intent” are also illusions and are words used by audio manufacturers to sell us their products. Seldom do artist have a final say about how their product is produced. Producers have an “intent”, audio engineers have their own “intent”, mastering engineers also have their own “intent”. So by the end of the final product many artist don’t have a say in the finished product. But alas, it’s just music…let’s enjoy they way we reproduce music if that’s in your car, headphones, 2-channel stereo or home theater. There’s no right or wrong…it’s amazing!

I think you're confusing on flat on-axis response of a speaker in an anechoic measurement (what I'm saying should be flat) and a flat target curve with the target being flat in your listening position. I said numerous times in the video that I do NOT recommend that. The Harman target curve for rooms, not headphones, is a downward slope, with bass boost and a high frequency roll-off. Guess how a speaker that measures flat on-axis anechoically will behave in a room? Probably a lot that Harman target you're talking about. You can also check out the NAD target curve made by Paul Barton. Same school of thought.

Agreed we must consider that some people are more sensitive to certain frequencies than others

I look at it like a stack: - Accurate speaker frequency response - Adjustments in bass based on room interactions - Adjustments based on listener's hearing capabilities - Global adjustments based on listener preference - Basic adjustments made on the fly based on source material (think turning the volume down when ads play)

Yes, you caught the downard slope on the image. 😂 Yes, let's not confuse the two. The downard tilt is for in-room response in your listening position. The amount of tilt will be dependent on how far you are. The further, the more tilt.

@@joentell Thanks for the explanation. 👍🎵🎶❤️ Yes that is something I have reacted on when i do my own measurements at sweet spot there is always a slope. I have never grasped why.. 😍

💯

You're always coming with the proper info! 🙏

The first two are definitely factors in determining the sound at your listening position. Still a well behaved, neutral speaker has a better chance of sounding good in your listening position. Speaker tonality is pretty much the same as frequency response.

What's up Mike from PI! Sorry, I haven't tried the BIC

Audyssey by default lowers bass (makes it flat in-room), so if you go with Audyssey you need the $20 app to adjust it.

If you have a good speaker that has a good in-room response, tone controls will do what they should. I think what you might be looking for to do specific tuning is parametric EQ. Dsp is usually recommended for that. I actually think you need a calibrated mic if you want to do it properly. Do you get into measurments?

@@joentell yes I use audyssey and ypao. I own elac ub5, klipsch rp280f, jbl studio 580 and infinity beta 50 (my 1st set of speakers). I try to understand why so many audiophile reviewers buy high end 2 channel integrated amplifiers that have no room correction and generally only tone controls? I've wondered if speakers typically work better leaving them as they come factory (without equalization) because that seems to be how audio file reviewers review them (without any equalization aka using speakers with high priced integrated amps that have no room correction)? For example, The purpose of my curiosity besides simply being inquisitive is I look at the Yamaha such as the as2200 but it seems like a downgrade from my Yamaha aventage 880 which has 7 channels and ypao. Why pay more for seemingly less? (Yes, I understand the amplifier is probably built with better parts but it lacks in technology and the ability to do surround sound.). What's the real payoff? Is music so much better sounding over a high priced 2 channel integrated like Yamaha as2200 over a techy receiver?

Sometimes I wonder if some folks are just anti-technology.

Ad far as I know, the only way to get a perfectly balanced speaker is if one either spends a lot of money or uses DSP correction. I've noticed, to my ears anyway, that speakers that are DSP corrected sound kind clinical or lifeless, that are forced to sound like they are alive.

@@arena_rock_man9030 personally I find DSP only works well for bass

Neither. Custom curve made for your speakers and your room.

After around £5k in treatment my room measurements are +/- 8db (16db peak to peak) a studio would be +/- 4db and would require the entire room treating. I’m willing to bet 99% of your audience has no, or very little room treatment. But all of them will swop out a pair of perfectly good speakers chasing better sound (less distortion).

The human brain is amazing in it's ability to hear through the room after getting acclimated. Afterwards, all they hear is the speakers. Up to a certain extent of course. Too much early reflection energy will screw up out perception. They've done a lot of research on this and the tests are discussed in more detail in the book I linked to. Interesting stuff.

Toole & Olive found an average in-room tilt for highly rated speakers. However, they also noted that based on how wide the dispersion of the speaker is, that really influences the desired tilt. Basically, don’t adjust tilt unless you feel the need to; what you should do though is EQ any bumps/dips in the response.

@@homeboi808 I used Audyssey XT32 and have a decently treated room, so Peaks and Dips do exist, but are manageable. I have currently created my own custom curve via the Audyssey app, but am always curious to heat what other consider to be "good". At the moment I use the Audyssey Reference curve as basis and create a steeo slope from 200-100 and then a more shallow slope from 100 to the Crossover that is 60Hz on my Mains and Center.

@@rolandrohde I would look at what Audyssey says the “Before” is, and follow that slope for say 1000Hz and above.

My main issue with Audyssey is it rolls off the highs too much for my taste.

@@joentell I actually like the HF rolloff...but with the app even that is easy to configure.

Well I've known plenty of people who hear something that makes sense to them and still be totally wrong too...😁

Bose Acoustimass AM5's are some of the best selling speakers of all time. That says it all.

Filipino

@@joentell Hell yeah man. I’m Korean. I’m from a small town in New England where I am the Asian population and I’ve always found it annoying and comical when people will say to me “Oh you’re Korean? Do you know (insert name) he’s my cousins roommate he’s Korean too” I’ve gotten that so much in my life my response now is “No, but I’ll be sure to check him out at our next convention”

Take a closer look at GR-research youtube Channel… He got some ATC monitors he Think theres wrong with the frequency response, but no… That’s the harman curve for monitors…

If you put a "perfectly accurate speaker" in a room and move back to a normal listening distance, you expect to get an in-room response similar to the Harman curve.

@@joentell you Got it, but a true Harman target curve you’ll find it on axis... But yes a flat response got it 45deg. Off axis.

@@joentell where do you find harman curve...? Well, jbl is incorporated with harman and you’ll therefore find the harman curve on every jbl monitors. And also on every atc monitors...

Yessir

Hmmm....maybe after a while that may be partially true. We do get used to sound the same way our eyes adapt to dark/light and white balance. There is a limit to that. You can only turn your screen more blue to a certain degree before your visual abilities will stop compensating. After that, your brain just say, "that screen has too much blue!"

Flat nearfield maybe. Idk

Are you a marketing/advertising/sales guy? You're absolutely right. From now on, we're going to look at frequency response as percentage on the "accuracy scale." The closer a speaker is to 100%, the closer it is to Perfect Accuracy. Any deviations will be called out as such (I.e. boosted +3dB from 300-400hz, dip -3dB at 3khz.) 🤣 I'm joking of course, but it almost makes more sense to say it in that manner. The traditional way of looking at frequency response almost makes it look like an accurate response is optional instead of ideal.

Regarding your last comment about bass extension, flat frequency response has no bearing on bass extension. Bass extension, the size of the enclosure, and sensitivity are interrelated according to Hoffman's Iron Law, but not how flat a speaker is. I think it's an interesting time because we now have the data available to us that wasn't always available or consistent. Right now is the time people are interested in knowing what makes a flat frequency response good? How do I interpret the data on a graph? Regarding your car analogy, I'm into sports cars. Of course horsepower, torque, power/weight ratio, 0-60 and 1/4-mile times, top speed all play a factor in someone's purchasing decision. Sure, it's fun to watch a video of someone driving a car explaining what the experience is like. That's the subjective part. And of course, you should test drive the car. But that doesn't make the specs less relevant in any way. This video is like talking to someone about how horsepower and torque are related and how that might translate to driving experience. And sure there are always compromises to be made one way or the other, which makes understanding specs even more important. Yes, the experience is what matters in the end. But a truly great experience whether it's cars or audio, is because of great engineering and not just a happy accident. When a product is great, you don't have to think of the how, you just enjoy the experience. But someone had to take the time to figure out the how. That's what we're getting to. What makes a great system sound great? It's just about sharing knowledge, not about creating drama.

I can get with that statement. The issues is people think flat = boring, where it really just means neutral or accurate.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean that high-end stereo speakers take care of the problem with the human hearing. Those speakers also have to follow the laws of acoustics.

Yes, if the sound going in is flat. If the sound going in is dynamic, then the sound coming out will be equally dynamic.