[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
207.216.246.51
In Reply to: RE: Thanks for a thoughtful post posted by E-Stat on May 06, 2008 at 13:22:01
"that variables in the recordings themselves from one recording engineer, one studio to another makes acccurate equalization of all of them simultaneously impossible."
This is what I was going to reply about - the result that a flat *system* transfer function is going to faithfully reproduce the eq anomalies in the original recording. I guess this is where one either settles for "measured flat" or some audibly pleasing happy medium that gives the best results with the most recordings possible (which I happen to believe *is* very close to flat).
Where we really get into trouble is comparing what is PLEASING. If someone has lost some of their hearing at the higher end of the audible bandwidth (like the effects of aging for example), the it stands to reason that 'nice shimmer and sparkle' for a 55 year old man is a shrill ear-shredding mess for a 25 year old. Conversely, the 25 year olds system might sound like mud to our 55-year old 'sizzle-seeker'. Audiophiles also do not like to admit that their hearing gets WORSE with age. Some would offer that their experience as an audiophile would trumps what a 25 year old hears, even though the 25 year old is only one who can hear all of it!
I remember one guy that they always picked on in local audiophile circles - it was said he prefers his speakers with a wet blanket over the tweeters! (Aka, he did not prefer a high-end lift at all - if anything, a droop). Could this be because he had not lost as much of his high-end range as other guys his age and as a result their "shimmer, sparkle or shimmer" was his glare or fatigue? Maybe. Or maybe it was just personal preference. In either case, though, is he WRONG?
That's like saying a "feeling" is wrong I guess...
As long as we can't accurately "plot" the human hearing response, we really have to leave certains kinds of EQing up to the individual. Perhaps the problem with some recordings is not the technique used, but compensation for hearing loss by someone at the controls. And lets face it - hearing loss, especially high-end, is very commonplace for some people in "the biz", especially if they started out in live sound engineering roles.
For someone WITHOUT this loss, the resulting compensation is going to sound like razor blades...
This is where my objectivist side is forced to take a vacation. Sure measurements are a great benchmark and something to keep in mind. Looking for corollary between what is heard and what is measured and knowing when measurements are useful is very important - and just as important is knowing when they are not absolute! There is nothing wrong with turning a tone control knob in the direction of 'more pleasing music' either!
Cheers,
Presto
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]