"It was probably not measured properly and not really flat. Why else would it sound dreadful?" Actually, you are right! I was only measuring the on-axis response, and ignoring the off-axis response, because back then I didn’t know any better! But here is another critical piece of the puzzle: "Flat" sounds "thin and bright" to most people. And a gently downward-sloping curve sounds "flat" to most people. There’s an excellent discussion of the subject in this review of the Dutch & Dutch 8c loudspeaker, scroll down about 1/4 of the way: https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/reviews/dutch-dutch-8c-loudspeaker-review-r739/ The author draws on an extensive controlled blind study conducted by Sean Olive and Floyd Toole, and says, "Most participants in the study preferred a frequency response from 20 Hz with a straight line to -10 dB at 20 kHz. A measured “flat” in-room frequency response is not the preferred target, as it sounds too thin or lacking bass." If I was designing a studio monitor the goal posts would be in a different place, and "flat" measured response might very well make sense, depending on what type of monitor it was (tracking, mixing, or mastering). Duke |
Agreed, other aspects are also vital to good reproduction of music and sound. Seems there are questions about why frequency response accuracy is important. Very simple. The aim of loudspeakers is to accurately reproduce sound (as recorded with the best of modern technology). For that, accurate frequency response must be a goal. Or am I mistaken? |
