I'm not terribly interested in this topic, but there are some misunderstandings that could use cleaning up in the banter. The following is how I see this topic and debate, obviously all ''imho':
1) 'rrv', per the OP, does not rely on any constancy between various songs average or peak recorded levels. This means a target spl figure at the listening seat is not a part of the OP topic. There will always be range. Listing tracks is then irrelevant, because the premise is the rrv works for all music, hence 'all typical spl ranges found therein'.
2) 'rrv', as an acronym, includes the word room, so it could be surmised that room interaction is a part of the OP topic, albeit within a range that one finds in the large catalog of recorded music. This' right room volume' ( average or extreme ) will vary between recordings by something like 5 to 20 db ( as a rough example ) depending on how diverse ones recordings are, but without the additional variance of variable attenuation at the preamp.
3) 'rrv' requires using a fixed level of attenuation at the preamp. Some people find their preamp ( and system as a whole ) sound best at a certain setting, or small range of, attenuation settings. The OP has not, to my awareness, included this gain &/or attenuation discovery, for the gears optimization, in the description of 'rrv' benefit, but it is a common practice.
These two topics ( 'rrv' and optimum system gain ) may indeed be interrelated but this has not been made clear by the OP ).
4) 'rrv' is not the same as 'studio monitor calibration' ( k- sys ) because the goals are different.
Hope these points help the productive debate.
Off to enjoy tue weekend
1) 'rrv', per the OP, does not rely on any constancy between various songs average or peak recorded levels. This means a target spl figure at the listening seat is not a part of the OP topic. There will always be range. Listing tracks is then irrelevant, because the premise is the rrv works for all music, hence 'all typical spl ranges found therein'.
2) 'rrv', as an acronym, includes the word room, so it could be surmised that room interaction is a part of the OP topic, albeit within a range that one finds in the large catalog of recorded music. This' right room volume' ( average or extreme ) will vary between recordings by something like 5 to 20 db ( as a rough example ) depending on how diverse ones recordings are, but without the additional variance of variable attenuation at the preamp.
3) 'rrv' requires using a fixed level of attenuation at the preamp. Some people find their preamp ( and system as a whole ) sound best at a certain setting, or small range of, attenuation settings. The OP has not, to my awareness, included this gain &/or attenuation discovery, for the gears optimization, in the description of 'rrv' benefit, but it is a common practice.
These two topics ( 'rrv' and optimum system gain ) may indeed be interrelated but this has not been made clear by the OP ).
4) 'rrv' is not the same as 'studio monitor calibration' ( k- sys ) because the goals are different.
Hope these points help the productive debate.
Off to enjoy tue weekend