2. speakers
  3. 136661-2948

Who said “ flat freq response “ is the best?

I have a dumb question?

who determined that the “ flattest frequency response” is the BEST?

we are all looking over specs and note all the +\- dB deviations from flat and declare it bad?

are we cattle? Or did someone like J Gordon Holt declare it?

 Or am I missing something 

Anyway, I think about stuff to much...lol

jeff

frozentundra
johnk's avatar
johnk
1,975 posts
 
In a room no system is measuring flat you have to go to heroic efforts to even get close. Aiming for flat from a design perspective is so end user has a known base to work from still many designs do not aim for flat response adding more variables to system synergy. Since massive variables exist every audio system sounds and would measure differently depending on these variations.
erik_squires
16,073 posts
 
So much to chime in on:

Loudness curves - Yes, this makes it important to listen to a speaker at your normal listening volumes, or get one that is flat and use a loudness compensation like Yamaha has or Dennon used to. A speaker tuned for 65 dB listening is going to have more bass and more treble than one designed for 90 dB. Some of the Dynaudio speakers are great examples of this.

Imaging - Wilson, among others, has taken advantage of using a dip at 2.4kHz or so which gives a perception of enhanced imaging, at the loss of some information. Not all wilsons, this seems to have fallen out of favor recently.

Detail - By using a ragged frequency response some speakers can appear to enhanced detail. B&W 802D and GE Triton 5 have done this, and bowled JA over. I can’t stand them, but I am not buying your speakers.

The GE Triton 1 offered a nasty sounding AMT with a very exaggerated upper octave. To me that was painful, but apparently older listeners love them.

My last point is, your hearing is unique and changes over time, so regardless of a technical ideal, or a particular reviewer's take, you need to buy speakers that are ideal for you. If you know you have hearing deficiencies in certain frequencies, maybe that is something you should look for when buying, speakers which naturally have more in that area. Nothing wrong with that. :) 
craigl59
307 posts
 

This IS a very complex and interesting topic. Have a studio that is tuned carefully to flat response and a listening room that is catered towards dense orchestral sources.

Find that the studio is crystal clear but in a direct way that many listeners would find unappealing -- especially over time.

In the listening room have tuned the entire system and room with REW and JRiver so that it is flat from 16 to 30k within +/- 5db. This is my listening preference and can easily hear each orchestral section (or soloist) in the soundstage.

However, if I boost the bass around 5db more I grant you that age and other considerations mentioned above makes the overall sound more exciting. And boosting the treble around 3db increases the presence and makes all sound closer to you (this works if, as Elizabeth noted above, your treble response is without noise and distortion).

Should you be doing correction, keep in mind that impulse response is just as important as frequency EQ in making the soundstage come alive.

An excellent topic for a thread and one that many will have different, but equally good, responses.

erik_squires
16,073 posts
 
Going back to something @elizabeth pointed out:

The quality of treble is often a function of room acoustics. Try throwing pillows and blankets on the floor between and behind the speakers as an experiment. You may be awesomely surprised at how much this enhances sound, despite the first reflection mantras dominating the topic of room acoustics. 

Best,

E
kalali's avatar
kalali
1,977 posts
 
This discussion begs this question: would two different speakers with identical frequency response curves sound the same in your room? I'm betting the answer is no.
More to discover