Audio nonsense

I have never understood why having a flat frequency response for speakers is a desirable attribute when the human ear hears almost every frequency differently, as described in the Fletcher Munson curves.

My ideal frequency response is equivalent of when the old but now shunned 'loudness' feature is turned on....

Exactly....

But most people dont understand that they NEVER hear speakers alone but they listen with EARS/speakers/room specific TRIPLE interaction with each one his own specific unique characteristic...

Tuning a speakers/room relation ask for a specific brain/ears history to do the work and trained listening experiments in specific condition...

It is why their ears are for acoustician their main tool...

Exhibiting a graph is not a proof of understanding .... Concept matter more than measuring tools...Because nobody can understand a tool result without the right concepts...

Ideological objectivist or entrenched subjectivist position make people DEAF...

By definition acoustic and psycho acoustic sciences are the art of correlating objective measure and a subjective interpretation...These two different correlated perspectives are separated ONLY by consumers marketing idolatry of the gear or marketing engineering idolatry of the tool, not by acousticians....

«Music is like God, nobody understand it but everybody can listen to it»-Anonymus Maestro

I have never understood why having a flat frequency response for speakers is a desirable attribute when the human ear hears almost every frequency differently, as described in the Fletcher Munson curves.

My ideal frequency response is equivalent of when the old but now shunned ’loudness’ feature is turned on....

I have never understood why having a flat frequency response for speakers is a desirable attribute when the human ear hears almost every frequency differently, as described in the Fletcher Munson curves.

Flat frequency response is desirable if one cares at all about how their system measures. It establishes a correct objective baseline to work from. One can tweak subjectively from there as desired. Fletcher Munson is an important thing to take into consideration there after you got things set right to start with. Some speakers will attempt to cover that for you. If it sounds good that way to you, great. Does not mean it is done correctly though.

Cows don’t moo louder just because we don’t hear them as well as some other critters.

Unfortunately, if you want to hear ultrasonic frequencies like a dog, you are totally out of luck. No amount of frequency boost is going to do the trick.

Yes it is desirable to have an engineering STANDARD...

but you cannot tune a room without hearing listening experiments...

And you cannot say all is perfect because my measuring tool said so instead of my ears/brain ....We must CORRELATE ears and tool and the master at the end is our ears not a tool graph...

I speak here about complex very small room acoustic not big theater...

Flat frequency response is desirable.

And hearing a natural TIMBRE experience is not hearing DIRECTLY ultasonic frequencies impact on audible one for sure...

Second the time envelope and the spectral envelope of a timbre phenomenon is very complex and not reducible to a linear audible frequency scale...

Metaphor about "golden ear bat power" in audiophiles are only that : a bad joke...

Unfortunately, if you want to hear ultrasonic frequencies like a dog, you are totally out of luck. No amount of frequency boost is going to do the trick.

«We are all bats but our eyes make us deaf »-Groucho Marx playing a blind 🤓

Yes it is desirable to have an engineering  STANDARD...

Correct.  At least to start with.  Otherwise, all bets are off.  What happens from there will vary widely case by case.