Misconception of "neutral / accurate"
Jul 31, 2011 at 11:11 PM Post #61 of 292
Speakers don't measure flat. The techniques used to measure them make them flat. It's all a trick done for the sake of sales brochures. Two speakers - two manufacturers - same specs - totally different sound. Speaker specs are about as reliable as a crackhead's promise.


What do you mean? When a speaker is spec'ed +- 2 dB from 50 to 20000 Hz and the manufacturer provides the FR curves, it IS flat. Of course, that's in an anechoic chamber at 1 m and it won't be flat once in a normal living room, but that's another issue. The manufacturer is not cheating.

There are other factor that influence sound, dispersion patterns, group delay, THD, power handling ability, etc... but many serious manufacturers don't cheat on the FR curves, there's no trick to make them measure flat. If there are, what are they?
 
Jul 31, 2011 at 11:24 PM Post #62 of 292
 
Quote:
you don't need that acoustic foam they sell online. materials from home dept or home goods store like fiber glass,carpet or mineral wool works wonders and make the biggest difference in the world i personally think. eq is only necessary if your room is incapable of being treated i believe.i just never understood tho why would someone spend good money on speakers and disregard their room completely. i see it all the time.
 


You can see detailed plans, diagrams, mockups, and photos of how my studio was constructed and what materials I used here:
http://www.ethereality.info/ethereality_website/about_me/images/workspace/cloud_pagoda/cloud_pagoda-design_construction.htm
 
As you can see, my studio has ample acoustic treatment, but it still does not guarantee neutral sound reproduction. I consulted experts on the entire design from the first step to the last, including optimal listening position, monitor placement, furniture placement...etc, but I still had peaks and spikes, and that's why I bought the IK Multimedia ARC System, and it did a great job taking care of the issues the acoustic treatment couldn't. And even with ARC activated, I still wasn't getting the ideal response I wanted (I'm really picky that way. I need my frequency response to be flat within 1~2 dB across the audible spectrum, but in my case, down to only 30Hz since I don't use a sub in my monitoring system). So I created a custom EQ curve to be activated on top of the ARC system, and that got me the response I wanted.
 
I'd love for fellow head-fi members to come and visit me at my studio so you guys can hear what a system tweaked to be within 1~2 dB flat from 30Hz to 20KHz sounds like. Not only is the frequency response just smooth as butter, but the stereo imaging is astounding in dimensionality too due to the corrections ARC made. These additional tweaks working in conjunction with the acoustic treatment, and a pair of kickass reference monitors (Klein + Hummel O 300D's) creates the audio nirvana I've dreamed of for many years and finally achieved.
 
So my advice for those seeking that level of neutrality/accuracy in a speaker system, is to combine acoustic treatment with the ARC System, and then add a final EQ curve (if needed). You will be amazed at the difference. I would also say that if you can't do acoustic treatment (spouse approval, no space, no money, no idea how to DIY), then at the very least get the ARC System. For a few hundred dollars, it'll be the best money you ever spend on your audio system. It works wonders even for rooms that aren't acoustically treated, and can turn really bad sounding rooms into pretty decent ones, and good sounding rooms into excellent ones.
 
But if you can do acoustic treatment, definitely do it, because it'll take care of some of the more drastic problems that are outside of ARC's capabilities (or more precisely, ARC tries to not push things too much for fear of damaging your drivers or causing distortion). Also, ARC is not going to get rid of any severe echoes in your room--you need acoustic treatment for that. (If you want to see if you have an echoe problem, just clap your hand and listen. If you hear no flutter echo, then you're fine. A lot of you will hear flutter echo though, and the severity of it will tell you just how you're really hearing audio in your room--all those transients overlapping with echoes and smeared to hell....)
 
Aug 1, 2011 at 2:38 AM Post #64 of 292
Quote:
The M-50s are neutral??? The highs were piercing omg! I own the ES3x, which i think its relatively closer to neutral than the M-50s.
 


They're not bad.
 
The only things worth changing is the dip at 6kHz and the peak at 9kHz. The contrast between the two is probably what gave you your piercing highs. The midrange at 2kHz is maybe a little too high. Really can't expect much from a closed can at that price.
 
Aug 1, 2011 at 2:53 AM Post #65 of 292


Quote:
The M-50s are neutral??? The highs were piercing omg! I own the ES3x, which i think its relatively closer to neutral than the M-50s.
 


They are "relatively" neutral compared to many headphones out there--especially those in its price range, though they are not "ideally" neutral, otherwise, I wouldn't need to EQ it. And yes, it has a peak near the 9KHz area, which is what contributes to the "etched" treble that some have described as metallic, but it's not piercing or fatiguing since it's not in the sibilance region of 4KHz-8KHz.
 
BTW, this is the EQ curve I created for the M50 to make it as neutral as possible: 

 
 
 
Aug 1, 2011 at 2:56 AM Post #66 of 292


Quote:
They're not bad.
 
The only things worth changing is the dip at 6kHz and the peak at 9kHz. The contrast between the two is probably what gave you your piercing highs. The midrange at 2kHz is maybe a little too high. Really can't expect much from a closed can at that price.


Heh, we posted at the same time, and it funny how what you wrote corresponded to my EQ curve exactly in the upper regions of he frequency range.
 
I don't mind the slightly lush upper bass/lower mids--I think it's satisfying. But if I were to do critical audio work on it, I'd EQ it down just a little, with a broad band.
 
 
Aug 1, 2011 at 7:17 PM Post #67 of 292
What do you mean?


I take speaker manufacturer supplied frequency response curves with a huge grain of salt. They're difficult to verify, easy to fudge and are irrelevant to real world installations. Most good speakers can be made to perform extremely well with a little judicious EQ. How they perform in a room designed to sound like the surface of the moon really doesn't matter to me.

Spec sheets for speakers are a different animal than spec sheets for electronic components.
 
Aug 3, 2011 at 1:32 AM Post #68 of 292
what would you guys consider are some of the "best" neutral/accurate headphones out there? give a list if you can. lets say from $1 to $100000000000000000000. 
smile.gif

 
put the price range in so no one would leave any out 
smile.gif

 
if you have to add another 0 then thats fine.
 
very nice post even though 99% of it is over my head
 
Aug 3, 2011 at 1:51 AM Post #69 of 292


Quote:
what would you guys consider are some of the "best" neutral/accurate headphones out there? give a list if you can. lets say from $1 to $100000000000000000000. 
smile.gif

 
put the price range in so no one would leave any out 
smile.gif

 
if you have to add another 0 then thats fine.
 
very nice post even though 99% of it is over my head


This is a hard question to answer because most people haven't heard all the headphones out there and cannot compare them all. Someone might think a particular model is very neutral, but it's only because he's only heard the really colored headphones in the past, and that model when compared to the models he hasn't heard, it's actually more on the colored side than neutral. But he wouldn't know it because he hasn't been exposed to those more neutral headphones. Popular opinion also isn't very accurate either, because some less known headphones are in fact some of the best, but people just don't know about them, so they end up ranking low in polls (and that's always very annoying to those who know better). You also can't rely on retailer sites who post reviews, because their first and foremost goal is to sell products, not to tell the whole honest truth. I've seen reputable and popular headphone retail sites completely glossing over a hot selling headphones negative points in their reviews just so they can sell more units. Probably the only reliable sources are independent and non-profit sources that have reviewed a large number of different headphones, or individuals who have auditioned and owned a large number of headphones (large, meaning not just a dozen or so, but several dozens).
 
 
 
 
 
 
Aug 3, 2011 at 5:17 AM Post #70 of 292
Just search through the fora and try a few. Vintage headphones can seriously surprise you...
 
A decent set up is always handy though. 
 
Aug 3, 2011 at 8:42 AM Post #71 of 292
Just search through the fora and try a few. Vintage headphones can seriously surprise you...
 
A decent set up is always handy though. 


i agree. some of the of the popular ones are the studio headphones like pioneer monitor 10, Koss Pro 4AAA,Koss ESP6(or other koss electrostatics),Akg 240DF,AKG 240 sextetts(MP/LP),beyerdynamic dt48's and some of sony's. there were lot of gems and don't need to mention some of the vintage orthos as well that are highly praised. you can find all mentioned cheaper then the m50's and they will put them to shame in pure accuracy if that's your concern. only downside lot of vintage studio headphones were powered by large mixer boards or power amps and needed some power behind them cause back then 600ohms was a standard in studios,field recording and radio broadcasting. even lower impedance headphones of the day needed some decent amping to get them going. they also might or will need reconditioning too cause of rotted foam,worn pads,ect. but is totally worth the effort to restore them.

i wouldn't disregard some vintage audio equipment especially amps, speakers and headphones. i mean have anyone ever heard some of the famous klipsch speakers with the big heavy Altec 1803b horns? you'll be blown away and never expect them to be old at all based on performance. the dispersion pattern is so wide,deep,and high there'll be no need to ever invest into a surround sound system cause of it's massive soundstage.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Lunatique


that is really well constructed studio. it's awesome as well the workers get to nap. wish i could sometimes during work but not happening. i wish i could hear your system as well but i know i won't be able to ever take a trip out of the states(only road trips for me).
 
Aug 3, 2011 at 3:19 PM Post #72 of 292
Most modern consumer speaker systems suck. I remember back in the late 70s, it was hard to get speakers that didn't sound good. Now it's the opposite. But you can find plenty of mains that will fit in your pocket now.
 
Aug 6, 2011 at 11:30 AM Post #73 of 292
lot of speakers are consumer based for the digital era of today to sound good with ipods,modern music,ect. also they contain more of a roll-off compared to lot of vintage models. that's why there is a big difference between ''vintage'' highs and ''modern'' highs. in vintage speakers(especially with super tweeters/horns) the high frequency was design to be completely flat. so if it was not in a controlled environment they can sound very bright but they tend to have a big roll off after 50hz(unless of course you re-did the crossover network) so they weren't meant for big gangsta bass. i wouldn't say all modern speakers are bad. i really enjoy my pioneer sp-fs51-lr speakers i got from best buy about few months ago on sell. very natural response and does not have emphasized bass like lot of modern speakers. they do need some power behind them since they are 6ohms nominal but have no idea on the dips. lucky i have my amps which can handle 2ohm loads and higher just fine and have more then enough reserves of power to get any speaker moving to full potential(as long as it's not 1ohm loads.that'll probably kill my amps).
 
Aug 6, 2011 at 3:03 PM Post #74 of 292
I haven't found that the problem with modern speakers is in the highs. My problem is with the stripey frequency response. There are huge firebreaks in the sound because the overly miniaturized mains never connect with the sub.
 
Aug 6, 2011 at 5:46 PM Post #75 of 292
i never like using a sub. it's either a 2-way or 3-way is most i go and they must be floor speakers/towers or even bookshelf speakers. i never liked the idea of a sub besides HT use.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top