BiggerHead
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Posts
- 204
- Likes
- 21
You keep focusing on this whole "HTRC has nothing to do with brain perception" thing, and you are wrong. HTRC was developed to create what our brains have perceived to be the best and most satisfying sound, modeled after the best sounding speakers in the best room. It isn't just measurements--it includes psychoacoustic considerations. They actually tested many people and recorded their preferences for what sounds the most satisfying, and the final result is NOT equivalent to microphone measurement of a flat sounding pair of speakers--thi
I realize that the HTRC isn't designed to actually give a traget reponse based on a flat speaker. I said this with about 20 astereisks in my original post. It is though the target response, based on whatever reasoning they use, FOR, TO BE COMPARED TO, what the microphone reading for the headphone is. My most recent simplified argument with flat spectra was to make a point, but anyway, we are talking about relatively flat spectra anyway. I don't have time now. I'll go back one more time and read what Joe said (you certainly didn't clarify). It sound to me like basically this is
a) start by programming the inverse of a tyll's response curve measured realative to the HTRC.
b) Fix the remaing sharp peaks.
You certainly did not make any of this clear in the OP. You keep saying try it. What I'm saying is I can't try what is clear as mud.
As for the target resxponse not being flat. I disagree with that anyway. I don't need a listening room bass boost in my headphones. I'm not in a listening room when I listen to headphones. this notion that the headphones should sound liek a good room was an ASUMPTION of the HTRC, not a conclusion of it. The conclusions was that people think a good room (not headphones) should have a bass boost.