I have 2 weapons i bought them in Italy CLIO 11 with calibrated mike
Ps whatever one thinks about AD speakers is his / her business ,but numbers dont lie .
Yeah, but I don't want a flat response. Flat typically sounds too bright. I don't even want a Harman response. It sounds a bit boring.
I have the ability to design my own target curve and do what I like with the frequency response. I love the sound of ProAc speakers, and I can make my speakers sound like those just by dialling in a different target curve.
Here are mine from a slightly different mike position.( 1/6 oct smooth factor )
Where and at what distance you measure matters a lot , iow where you place your speakers and listening chair also matters a lot
I agree with this. To my ears flat sounds way bright. (On this I agree very strongly with Karen Sumner's point that the music lives in the 100 Hz to 1000 Hz range, and it is a puzzle why manufacturers celebrate extended high frequency response.)
What I don't understand is why this downward-sloping curve subjectively sounds pretty neutral to me and to many visitors, and not rolled off:
There are many corners to WBF, in which you'll find a mish-mash of posts. I think trying to pigeonhole anyone one person as an "objectivist" or "subjectivist" is not useful.
To the original point: frequency response is inadequate to describe any system. Any system that emits sound interacts with its environment, and the directivity of the sound is as important as the frequency and the energy.
Most FR measurements are incomplete - transducers change as one demands more or less of them. For example, measuring a speaker from 1m at (an alleged) 1W does not tell us how said speaker will work when given much less power or much more.
Thanks Amir, but no need to post more about non-linear systems. It's a bit off topic for this thread. Also my old man brain has a tough time slogging through that kind of info. I'm quite certain that amirm is well acquainted with performing a variety of non-linear system measurements. I know from your posts on that forum & here that you disagree however.
What make this discussion more difficult is even if your simplified measurements show any difference between A and B then ASR members say our hearing system does not hear it because it's level is under X db.
For example if you simplify cable as a linear system and measure C and R and L of some cables then you see cables are different but ASR members will say we can not hear it.
I am not against science and I believe subjective listening experience could be describe by science but What I think is little knowledge does not help us to describe all things.
Lets go out of high end word,
Most ASR members does not believe Stradivary violins are better and no instrument player could convince them Violins are different.
let imagine ASR members are right , how they describe why all audiophiles think silver cable is brighter than copper cable?
If subjective experience is not valid then 50% should say copper is brighter.
There are many corners to WBF, in which you'll find a mish-mash of posts. I think trying to pigeonhole anyone one person as an "objectivist" or "subjectivist" is not useful.
To the original point: frequency response is inadequate to describe any system. Any system that emits sound interacts with its environment, and the directivity of the sound is as important as the frequency and the energy.
Most FR measurements are incomplete - transducers change as one demands more or less of them. For example, measuring a speaker from 1m at (an alleged) 1W does not tell us how said speaker will work when given much less power or much more.
I agree with most of that. While a frequency response measurement doesn't tell the whole story, it is very useful. If you have significant peaks or dips/nulls in the FR at your listening position, then those are issues that should be dealt with if you don't want certain frequencies to be exaggerated or weak.
If you measure your system's FR at around the same volume that you do your listening, that should be sufficient IMO. If you have good quality speakers, their frequency response shouldn't be dramatically different at different volume levels.
Our hearing changes more at different volumes, than do speakers, but there are some speakers which are notable for their changes at different volumes. See Magnepan for example.
What make this discussion more difficult is even if your simplified measurements show any difference between A and B then ASR members say our hearing system does not hear it because it's level is under X db.
For example if you simplify cable as a linear system and measure C and R and L of some cables then you see cables are different but ASR members will say we can not hear it.
I am not against science and I believe subjective listening experience could be describe by science but What I think is little knowledge does not help us to describe all things.
Lets go out of high end word,
Most ASR members does not believe Stradivary violins are better and no instrument player could convince them Violins are different.
let imagine ASR members are right , how they describe why all audiophiles think silver cable is brighter than copper cable?
If subjective experience is not valid then 50% should say copper is brighter.
As to your last points, neither silver or copper speaker wire should sound brighter than the other. Silver has slightly less resistance (is more conductive) than copper (~5%), but all that means is that you can use a slightly smaller gauge of silver wire to achieve the same resistance as a copper one. All competently designed speaker wires of sufficient gauge (resistance less than 5% of your speaker's impedance) should sound the same. While there are slight differences, those differences should be below audibility. Speaker wires aren't tone controls. (My comments aren't applicable to "exotic" speaker wires designed to have inductance or capacitance values that are dramatically different than standard wires.)
As to your last points, neither silver or copper speaker wire should sound brighter than the other. Silver has slightly less resistance (is more conductive) than copper (~5%), but all that means is that you can use a slightly smaller gauge of silver wire to achieve the same resistance as a copper one. All competently designed speaker wires of sufficient gauge (resistance less than 5% of your speaker's impedance) should sound the same. While there are slight differences, those differences should be below audibility. Speaker wires aren't tone controls. (My comments aren't applicable to "exotic" speaker wires designed to have impedance or capacitance values that are dramatically different than standard wires.)
Our hearing changes more at different volumes, than do speakers, but there are some speakers which are notable for their changes at different volumes. See Magnepan for example.
As to your last points, neither silver or copper speaker wire should sound brighter than the other. Silver has slightly less resistance (is more conductive) than copper (~5%), but all that means is that you can use a slightly smaller gauge of silver wire to achieve the same resistance as a copper one. All competently designed speaker wires of sufficient gauge (resistance less than 5% of your speaker's impedance) should sound the same. While there are slight differences, those differences should be below audibility. Speaker wires aren't tone controls. (My comments aren't applicable to "exotic" speaker wires designed to have inductance or capacitance values that are dramatically different than standard wires.)
I think You did not get my point, Please read my post again.
What I think is "little knowledge" is not good enough for convincing opposite opinions and it does not help.
If you want to have a scientific approach Please ask objectivist to introduce us an accurate mathematic model of all the chain : audio system and Ear hearing system and Brain processing system. We have no problem with any complex mathematic models because super computers and numeric methods are ready to give us accurate answers. We just need accurate mathematic model of brain/ear/audio system.
without that complete model you can not describe it with little knowledge.
I agree with this. To my ears flat sounds way bright. (On this I agree very strongly with Karen Sumner's point that the music lives in the 100 Hz to 1000 Hz range, and it is a puzzle why manufacturers celebrate extended high frequency response.)
What I don't understand is why this downward-sloping curve subjectively sounds pretty neutral to me and to many visitors, and not rolled off:
You answered your own question: most significant musical content lies in the midrange.
Would your system sound better with a flatter response above 10kHz ? There is no way of knowing! You could introduce DSP to attempt to fix the higher frequency response, but that will come with some tradeoffs. All other things being equal, we can assume that a flatter response would probably sound better, but you have to keep in mind that what your speakers do well, and the reason why you like the sound of your speakers, is not captured by a SPL graph. What SPL graphs do is introduce a lot of anxiety and stress!
Another thing to keep in mind is that high frequency response is extremely dependent on the listening point. We don't listen to speakers at 1 meter, directly facing the tweeters at ear level. Moving your head by even a few centimeters will change the response.
www.sonarworks.com
