Have you tried matching a stereo to your hearing?

The natural sound of things is our reference. Our natural hearing curve is our reference also. If we "compensate" for our hearing curve we are actually throwing the balance of natural sound way, way off. We'd have pounding bass and excruciating treble.

The analogy to eyesight would only apply to people with significant hearing loss, but even then the correction should be made at the ear, not in the system.

i believe you are simply describing how each and allmost everyone puts together a stereo system, sans a visit to a doctor.

we use our own two ears and pick out the gear what we enjoy, hence matching the stereo to our hearing.

indeed, some people do like measurements, i.e for equipment, but these measurements might not dont matter too much or even help or explain the joy we experence when it comes down to playing back music.

There was a study a few years back in a Japanese journal of physiology that documented that although the accepted upper limit for human hearing is 20KHz (although most of us come no where near hearing that high up), the human brain actually responds to signals up to 45K. Although not 'heard' in the traditional sense, there was increased blood flow and cellular activity in the auditory lobe. When these ultra high frequencies were present in audible music the music was perceived and reported as more pleasurable/enjoyable.

Having been hearing impaired since birth, I have a lot of experience with hearing aids and audio. Needless to say, current SOTA hearing aids, some costing over $5K each, try to match a hearing curve to the device. The problem is that few aids, even costly ones, do it effectively. I do think it is a good idea for any serious audio person to get a comprehensive hearing test. Watch out, typical tests don't go over the 8K band. So, find a real professional audiologist and tell them you want a 'broadband' test. If they ask what is that, move on quickly.

I think that three different things are being talked about here, which are not being adequately distinguished:

1)Adjusting the system to compensate for the Fletcher-Munson Effect. This is what I interpreted the original question as referring to.

2)Adjusting the system to compensate for particular hearing deficiencies an individual may have.

3)Adjusting the system to compensate for deficiencies in the recording.

Regarding item (1), in general you don't want to do that. If the goal is for the system to recreate a live performance as closely as possible, and assuming that the listener has reasonably normal hearing, and assuming the system is playing at volume levels close to those of the live performance (as perceived at the listening position in both cases), any compensation for high or low frequency rolloff that our hearing will have at that volume level will cause the reproduced sound to be perceived differently than the live sound.

On the other hand, if circumstances force one to listen at much lower than real-life volumes, then perhaps some electronic compensation for the Fletcher-Munson Effect can be appropriate, if the particular circuit implementation is of sufficient quality to not do more harm than good.

Regarding (2), electronic compensation would certainly seem to be appropriate for some listeners, who may have significant hearing issues.

Regarding (3), there is no one right answer, and in previous threads lots of diverse opinions have been expressed about this. It comes down to individual preferences, and the kind of material that is listened to.

Best regards,
-- Al