Jump to content

The Flat Frequency Respone, Yes/No for Music


derrickdj1

Recommended Posts

I am having the same problem with my new tube amp and SS system has I had with the old tube amp and SS system.  Frankly, I can't make up my mind on which is better at music reproduction in my room: They both are just great but, in different ways.  The tube amp system runs the speakers as large and NO EQ.  The SS system runs the same speaker as small using subwoofers and a flat response.  The old saying  of a slight boost on the low is acceptable, is still a flat response for all purpose.  Then there is the old rule of a smiley face with the EQ which many people like

 

First, a bit about the room.  It is very asymmetrical, has some room Tx's and is fairly large.  This room has good absorption and due to size, the highs roll off naturally.  I listen to a wide variety of music and don't ever use the bass or treble boost or cut controls.  The EQ is never touched on the SS system after auto EQ.  There is no EQ on the tube system period.

 

Now, what do I like about the tube system, the dynamics, the Hi's and the well balanced bass.  Also, I like the glowing lights if that has an effect, lol.

Now, on to the SS system, less edge on the Hi, less dynamic compared to the tube system and a  bit more weight in the bass depth, not loudness.  I can listen to both systems for hours and not feel a listening fatigue.  I would give the edge to the SS system in this regard.  The average listening level is 75 to 82 db.  Things don't change much with increased or decreased listening levels.

 

So, are you a flat FR person for music or like to add your own flavor?  One other question, people talk about having an accurate system, then the flat response would be better.  On the other hand, I don't like to talk about accuracy in the home because, all I care about is what I like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to render my own... now that I am using a tube pre, I run flat as a pancake and love it!

 

That is 2 channel only... on 5.1 music, I still run an all class d set up including my integrated Pioneer which uses mcacc for timing and room correction... and of course a bit of Equalization.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Schu said:

I used to render my own... now that I am using a tube pre, I run flat as a pancake and love it!

 

That is 2 channel only... on 5.1 music, I still run an all class d set up including my integrated Pioneer which uses mcacc for timing and room correction... and of course a bit of Equalization.

 

It is nice to have both, SS and tube systems.  I've tried the EQ smiles and prefer a flat response.  At first an non-flat response sounds better but, over a bit of time the flat response just kinda sneaks up on to you and sounds great.  EQ'ed and non-EQ'ed speakers do sound different for 2 ch but, I can't say one is better than the other.:P:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because the EQ is flat does not mean the response in the room is.

 

I use measurements to make sure there are no gross issues with FR (basically flat but cut rather than boost, might sound better with no correction if close), but razor flat is definitely not required.  Once flat in the room no problem adding a little salt and pepper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that you're making the assumption that the music that you play is "flat".  It isn't. 

 

In fact, it's way off from flat FR...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Chris A said:

I believe that you're making the assumption that the music that you play is "flat".  It isn't. 

 

In fact, it's way off from flat FR...

No, mistake, the FR is flat for the most part, not the music.  The thing is there is no additional EQ outside of autocalibration.  This FR response is flatter than just level matching the speakers and also has DSP engaged.  A lot of pure 2 ch. people don't like the auto EQ or additiional DSP.  I actually like it both ways and am not saying one way is better that the other.  It is all about personal taste and what each person likes to hear.

 

I do think shoot for a flat FR is of value.  From a technical point, this would be the most accurate.  Having speakers and the amp/avr do a good job at producing a flat FR should delivery more of what the artist and mixing engineer intended.  I actually enjoy recorded music better that many live concerts.  Things just sound better.

 

I have also experienced a few Klipsch system that use exteranl EQ very well for 2 ch.  These systems also sound great.  There is more than one way that can sound good.  The thread is just asking, do people like employing a flat FR vs nothing for their 2 ch enjoyment.  It is not meant to slant you one way or the  other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I start with Audyssey room correction calibration with 3 of the 8 mic positions at ear level in the center seat, and the other 5 around the other seats of the couch.  After calibration,  I turn the subwoofer up about 7 dB, and turn the midbass for the LF and RF up about 6 dB, using the tone controls (using the true tone controls, not the virtual sliders -- which can't be used with Audyssey).  The tone control settings vary with the program material.   Audyssey improves clarity quite a bit, in my room.  The EQ Audyssey uses achieve flat with my Khorns in my room at 10K to 20 K Hz is about a 6 dB boost.  It also removes a peak centered at 8K, as well as other minor corrections up and down the spectrum.

 

The above provides fairly flat room/speaker response, with a bit of bass boost..  But as Chris has pointed out, CDs are not mastered to be flat.  So, even with room correction, response will not be flat.  A purist pre-amp and power amp, approaching a "wire with gain," with tone controls (if any) set for flat will not be flat with common music sources.  Flat may not be achievable without the "remastering"  that Chris does.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, mark1101 said:

Just because the EQ is flat does not mean the response in the room is.

 

I use measurements to make sure there are no gross issues with FR (basically flat but cut rather than boost, might sound better with no correction if close), but razor flat is definitely not required.  Once flat in the room no problem adding a little salt and pepper.

Exactly!!! You have to measure your room to determine if it is flat or not, and without any room treatment there is no way it is flat!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably with room treatment, it isn't flat either.

 

The focus should be on in room response and not anechoic chamber response.  The reason for chamber response is to give a base line for all rooms, but rarely translates to good response in normal rooms, particularly in the bass area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, room treatments were always the most difficult to apply.  I over damped my rooms at times.  Now I use very little room treatment (early reflections only) and diffusion and I have been happier this way.

 

Sometimes I see pictures of rooms with beautiful room treatments artistically and symmetrically placed.  They look fantastic and professional.  However, I say to myself "Oh really"  that's where they needed to be?  Same amount on each side of room?  No issues in other areas?

 

My perception of room treatments would not be symmetrical at all.  It would be where the issues were as determined by measurements.  And what are the appropriate measurements?  It's subjective.

 

So I try to stay away from too much room treatments in an effort to not make things worse.  :)

 

One benefit I feel I have is that my room is in the basement and the ceiling is insulated.  Exposed.  That's about all the room treatment I need along with early reflections.  I have stuff (equipment) all long the walls to diffuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for treatment bass traps are a must in just about any room!!! In so far as over damping yes you can do it but, if you measure your room before during and after treatments are added you will avoid over doing it... As for symmetrical if the room is that way then that's good way to start. My room is symmetrical with the exception of the rear, because it opens up instead of having a wall. So as I applied treatments I measured and moved and measured again until I got it right, I ended up pretty much symmetrical....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, pzannucci said:

The focus should be on in room response and not anechoic chamber response.  The reason for chamber response is to give a base line for all rooms, but rarely translates to good response in normal rooms, particularly in the bass area.

Just a couple of remarks on this:

 

1) If you're familiar with the Schroeder frequency for small rooms (...as opposed to large auditoriums...):

 

     fs = 2000 ( T60 / V )1/2     [Hz]

 

where T60 is the reverberation time of your room (measured by applications like REW and TrueRTA) and V is the volume of your room in cubic metres.  This is the point of separation from the "dense mode region" (reverberant region) to the "sparse mode region" of room modes.

 

Below this frequency, you will always have to EQ your loudspeakers to achieve flat FR.  Most listening rooms that I've been in have a Schroeder frequency below 200 Hz, but some very small rooms are closer to 300 Hz.

 

2) Above the Schroeder frequency, the predominant effects that would cause you to EQ your loudspeakers are near-field reflections (i.e., where you place you loudspeakers in the room relative to other acoustically reflective objects), and most importantly, the off-axis energy of your loudspeakers' polars, particularly just below 2 kHz for Klipsch Heritage models.  If you are using K-402 horns, you won't have to change the anechoic settings above the cross over frequency to the bass bin, since the K-402 holds its polars down to well below the crossover frequency. 

 

If you're using Klipsch Heritage, you will experience a spilling of energy in the vertical axis on your floor and ceiling.  If you simply absorb this energy with carpet and ceiling absorption material, you won't have nearly the amount of "stridency" reported by novice users. But you will need to EQ your midrange frequencies from 400-1800 Hz to minimize the effects of near-field reflections and having this extra off-axis polar energy reflecting off the nearfield objects and room walls/ceiling/floor.

 

The most common compliant that I see from those new to Klipsch Heritage is that they don't know to put down carpet and do something about ceiling bounce (if you have a ceiling height less than ~9 ft or 2.75 metres).  They also don't know to keep all acoustically reflective objects away from the loudspeakers within about 3-4 feet (1-1.3 metres). This is due to the collapsing polars of the midrange horn--which is controlled by the height of the mouth of the horn.  If you use a horn with a taller mouth, this transition to "collapsing polars" frequency moves to a lower frequency.  For the K-402, it completely controls its polars. 

 

If you're using a K-510 horn, you will need to "voice" your high frequencies with "salt-and-pepper EQ" to balance against the room acoustics, due entirely to the steadily increasing amount of off-axis spilling of energy occurring below ~1 kHz. 

 

If you're using something like a Bose 901, you will need to adjust the spacing of the loudspeaker from the wall, since 80% of the acoustic energy is being bounced off the walls behind the loudspeaker (...thus leading to the phrase, "Bose 901s sound bad, but they sound equally bad wherever you listen to them in-room").

 

Chris

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has generated some nice comments.  No quit what I was expecting and maybe I worded the title wrong.  Maybe it should have been an un- EQ'ed system vs a EQ'ed system for 2 ch listening.  I know a lot pure 2 ch people don't like to use EQ/DSP and depend on setup to customize the listening area.

 

I definitly hear hear 2 different systems with the speakers using the different amps.  One system(SS) is EQ'ed, speakers ran set to small and subs.  The other system with the same speakers is not EQ'ed, speakers ran as large without subs.  I like both systems and love the contrast between them.  Each does certain things better but, both systems still do things very well and it would be easy to live with one or the other. 

 

I guess a better question is how many of you are running a 2 ch system without EQ vs EQ'ed with auto EQ and additional DSP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, derrickdj1 said:

I guess a better question is how many of you are running a 2 ch system without EQ vs EQ'ed with auto EQ and additional DSP?

I don't do "auto-EQ", but I do use REW and a calibration microphone to set each channel's EQ and delay manually using active digital crossover connected to each driver--as I've discussed elsewhere. 

 

I found that I really don't like listening to systems that aren't EQed pretty much flat.  Once you get there--especially with the K-402s and good compression drivers--I found it will definitely take your breath away. 

 

I ran my system for several years without checking the EQ in each channel using other people's settings, and was never quite satisfied that I was getting all that I could get: I was always aware of the loudspeakers being there.  Once I measured and corrected the EQ and delays, the loudspeakers disappeared and I was just enjoying music...for a change. 

 

Recommend it highly.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Chris for the most part, I use REW and a calibrated mic also and I eq manually according to the frequency response I get from the measurement... I use pro audio parametric eq's to do this, one for the subs and one for the mains... Also my floor and ceiling are both treated...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Derrick I think there are a couple of variables that make your question "EQ or no EQ" hard to answer.

 

The first goes to how good your system is to start with.  If you have very good stuff I think "no EQ" is probably preferable.  If you start with a system that has a noticeable deficit like a lack of bass, then EQ can help make the sound more pleasing to your ears.

 

The second variable is, what are YOUR deficits as a listener?  As many of us are older the HF tends to go, so an EQ in the upper registers is helpful.

+++

The direct answer to your question is that for music I do NOT use EQ.  For TV and Cinema use I can go either way, but usually not.  I am using a larger system these days anchored by the L/R Khorns and I like them left flat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2016 at 3:07 PM, derrickdj1 said:

....................................................

So, are you a flat FR person for music or like to add your own flavor?  One other question, people talk about having an accurate system, then the flat response would be better.  On the other hand, I don't like to talk about accuracy in the home because, all I care about is what I like.

 

I'm a little of both.  My system sounds better after Audyssey gets done.  I like and will use EQ to correct for the room and speakers when doing a live performance, but as little as possible.   I rarely use tone controls and then sparingly.  Right now, I have my subs set a little too high (3 or 4 dB?), because it just sounds too dang good that way.  The idea is to have the in-room response as flat as practical (that being the goal) without using too much "salt", thinking that might add other unwanted distortions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chris A said:

Just a couple of remarks on this:

 

1) If you're familiar with the Schroeder frequency for small rooms (...as opposed to large auditoriums...):

 

     fs = 2000 ( T60 / V )1/2     [Hz]

 

where T60 is the reverberation time of your room (measured by applications like REW and TrueRTA) and V is the volume of your room in cubic metres.  This is the point of separation from the "dense mode region" (reverberant region) to the "sparse mode region" of room modes.

 

Below this frequency, you will always have to EQ your loudspeakers to achieve flat FR.  Most listening rooms that I've been in have a Schroeder frequency below 200 Hz, but some very small rooms are closer to 300 Hz.

 

2) Above the Schroeder frequency, the predominant effects that would cause you to EQ your loudspeakers are near-field reflections (i.e., where you place you loudspeakers in the room relative to other acoustically reflective objects), and most importantly, the off-axis energy of your loudspeakers' polars, particularly just below 2 kHz for Klipsch Heritage models.  If you are using K-402 horns, you won't have to change the anechoic settings above the cross over frequency to the bass bin, since the K-402 holds its polars down to well below the crossover frequency. 

 

If you're using Klipsch Heritage, you will experience a spilling of energy in the vertical axis on your floor and ceiling.  If you simply absorb this energy with carpet and ceiling absorption material, you won't have nearly the amount of "stridency" reported by novice users. But you will need to EQ your midrange frequencies from 400-1800 Hz to minimize the effects of near-field reflections and having this extra off-axis polar energy reflecting off the nearfield objects and room walls/ceiling/floor.

 

The most common compliant that I see from those new to Klipsch Heritage is that they don't know to put down carpet and do something about ceiling bounce (if you have a ceiling height less than ~9 ft or 2.75 metres).  They also don't know to keep all acoustically reflective objects away from the loudspeakers within about 3-4 feet (1-1.3 metres). This is due to the collapsing polars of the midrange horn--which is controlled by the height of the mouth of the horn.  If you use a horn with a taller mouth, this transition to "collapsing polars" frequency moves to a lower frequency.  For the K-402, it completely controls its polars. 

 

If you're using a K-510 horn, you will need to "voice" your high frequencies with "salt-and-pepper EQ" to balance against the room acoustics, due entirely to the steadily increasing amount of off-axis spilling of energy occurring below ~1 kHz. 

 

If you're using something like a Bose 901, you will need to adjust the spacing of the loudspeaker from the wall, since 80% of the acoustic energy is being bounced off the walls behind the loudspeaker (...thus leading to the phrase, "Bose 901s sound bad, but they sound equally bad wherever you listen to them in-room").

 

Chris

 

 

1) My Schroeder is about 144 Hz.  Switching back and forth between Audyssey ON and Audyssey OFF, REW showed about 6 dB smaller peak/trough with Audyssey below Schroeder.  Above Schroeder, centered at about 350 Hz, Audyssey removed a dip of about 5dB.

 

2) Between about 900 and 3K, Audyssey flattens out the response by a few dB beyond what my modest room treatments did. 

 

3) Contrary to my expectations, Audyssey also smoothly raised the overall response between 1K and 16K, from the main listening position, by an average of about 4/5 dB.  The main listening/ measuring position is slightly off axis, in that the lines from the Khorns cross slightly in front of the central listener.

 

4) Clarity is much improved by the room treatments and Audyssey.  This is supplemented, with most CDs, SACDs, and Blu-rays, by seasoning to taste, usually by raising the bass response a bit.

 

5) My room treatments are modest.  There are diffusing book shelves, and 7 diffusers, plus a thick rug on the floor and absorbtion.  On your advice, we put absorbers to ether side of our Klipschorns, where the midrange would hit the nearby walls.  There is no furniture or equipment between the Khorns, also on your advice.  The modified Belle center channel is buried in the wall (flush mounted) to get it out of the way; on its rear side, it sticks out into a bump-out (not into the audio room).  Thanks for this and all of your other advice over the last few years.  We also have diffusion/absorbtion at the (mirror test) first reflection points.  The ceiling slopes from 8.5 feet on the front wall. up to 11.83 feet in the rear.

 

With Blu-rays there is never stridency, so far (2 movies a week for about two years).

With SACDs there has been something like stridency, but probably just a lack of mid and low bass (for balance) on a few disks.

With CDs, there is stridency every once in a while, but ..... "          "         "        "        "       "       "       "       ".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...