Do we really need to EQ the room?

[pasi123567]

No. Someone laid down that track intending it to sound like it does at his studio.

You can not fake the studio with EQ.

 

[fpitas]

You can not fake the studio with EQ.

It's interesting you need our approval.

 

[pasi123567]

I am just trying to understand why people want to unnaturally change their rooms response to fake a different room which isn't possible. Every room is different and will always be. A perfect recording in an anechoic chamber will sound realistic in your room and not in your room EQd to simulate an anechoic chamber..

 

[fpitas]

I am just trying to understand why people want to unnaturally change their rooms response to fake a different room which isn't possible. Every room is different and will always be. A perfect recording in an anechoic chamber will sound realistic in your room and not in your room EQd to simulate an anechoic chamber..

It seems like you're simply ignoring our arguments and repeating your own.

 

[pasi123567]

It seems like you're simply ignoring our arguments and repeating your own.

What argument? I am trying to asnwer everything I can here. It's not like my argument is wrong is it?

 

[Zensō]

What argument? I am trying to asnwer everything I can here. It's not like my argument is wrong is it?

Sorry, but you just keep repeating the same specious argument. I’d suggest doing some reading on the topic (not on the internet). Maybe start here:

 

[unpluggged]

A perfect recording in an anechoic chamber

Nobody records music in anechoic chambers (except for some research purposes).

 

[pasi123567]

Sorry, but you just keep repeating the same specious argument. I’d suggest doing some reading on the topic (not on the internet). Maybe start here:

Then disprove it.
If I record my voice without room influence and play it back on a flat anechoic speaker it will sound the same in the room as my voice sounds in the room. Just say is this true or not? And tell me why not if it is.

 

[FrankW]

Lets say we have a speaker that measures perfectly flat in an anechoic chamber. This means that the speaker can produce sounds naturally, as all frequencies and therefore instruments will have an even volume output.

Speakers radiate multi dimensionally, not just on one axis. However, the gist of what you say is demonstrably correct. Above the transition, only the anechoic response of the speaker should be EQ'd, not the "room" response. Toole teaches this, but to no avail on audio forums where beliefs/lack of critical thinking skills are rampant. Below transition where the room indeed dominates, yes EQ down the peaks.

The studio control room is a different room. You can not make your room ever sound like the studio control room except if it is identical.

Agree, but as noted, the delusion of "accurate" stereo reproduction is persistent online. But part of Circle of Confusion.
https://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/audios-circle-of-confusion.html

Oh and in anticipation
https://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/11/subjective-and-objective-evaluation-of.html

Dr. Sean OliveNovember 4, 2009 at 9:21 AM
Room correction will improve poor loudspeakers like the ones you have indicated, but why put an expensive bandaid on a scab if you can easily avoid getting the scab in the first place?

Dr. Sean OliveNovember 7, 2009 at 12:23 PM
In this case, we did spatial-averages over 6 microphone positions to avoid equalizing spectral artifacts that are very localized to the position of the microphone. These artifacts can be from room resonances or acoustical interference effects from the direct/reflected sound. We used steady-state measurements in this study.

Dr. Sean OliveNovember 2, 2009 at 10:33 AM
In truth, the optimal in-room target curve may depend on the loudspeaker directivity and reflectivity of the listening room. If the room is acoustically dead with few reflections and/or the directivity of the loudspeaker is quite high, the in-room response will represent a higher proportion of the direct sound, which should be flat.
Dr. Sean OliveApril 20, 2010 at 5:41 PM
If you don't know the on/off-axis behavior of the loudspeaker, you risk improving the reflected sounds at the expense of the direct sound.

 

[FrankW]

It’s not a question of preference, but of accuracy.

To what perceptual reference?

 

[FrankW]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...t-vs-rcf-arya-pro5.43343/page-18#post-1561110

 

[Cote Dazur]

If I record my voice without room influence and play it back on a flat anechoic speaker it will sound the same in the room as my voice sounds in the room. Just say is this true or not?

In that particular scenario, and if that is what you want to listen to on your sound system, then yes, it is true.
But if you want to listen to a musician, recorded somewhere else, not in your room, then what you want to hear is that sound, not that sound plus the sound of your room. If your HiFi goal is to hear the original "event" or what the studio/mastering intended you to hear. The less you hear your room and any sound associated to it, the closer you will be to what was originally recorded.

 

[thecheapseats]

IMO, the goal is to come as close as possible to the recording, not to a hypothetical live performance of the song in your room. Because your room sucks and that would be an awful experience.

If room effects distort the recording, and EQ helps correct the distortion, helps to remove your listening environment from the end-to-end audio chain (musicians->your ears), then why wouldn't you?

+5000 for "Because your room sucks and that would be an awful experience."...

 

[simbloke]

I'm guessing the OP doesn't have 30,40,50hz ish room modes.
Or is deaf to them.
Or plays music in a field.
For everyone else, there is EQ.

 

[NTK]

Then disprove it.
If I record my voice without room influence and play it back on a flat anechoic speaker it will sound the same in the room as my voice sounds in the room. Just say is this true or not? And tell me why not if it is.

If it is reproduced by a single loudspeaker, and the loudspeaker must not only reproduce the direct sound accurately, but also reproduce the full 360 degrees sound radiation accurately, then yes. (The recording must therefore contain the full 360 degrees information too.)

To reproduce sound with multiple sources, you'll need a loudspeaker (with the above requirements) for each source.

Also, to "have the band in your room" is usually not the goal. Most domestic rooms will sound too claustrophobic. Many music halls are renowned for their acoustics, and listeners will want to reproduce that hall sound in their own listening rooms.

 

[thecheapseats]

What argument? I am trying to asnwer everything I can here. It's not like my argument is wrong is it?

if music playing back on your speakers in your room makes you happy - you've already won... congrats!...
if it doesn't make you happy - tear the room down to the studs and rebuild it...

 

[fpitas]

Also, to "have the band in your room" is usually not the goal.

Right? I have no idea where the groupies will go!

 

[Purité Audio]

I am just trying to understand why people want to unnaturally change their rooms response to fake a different room which isn't possible. Every room is different and will always be. A perfect recording in an anechoic chamber will sound realistic in your room and not in your room EQd to simulate an anechoic chamber..

They aren’t or shouldn’t be , ‘EQ’ just reduces the amount of bass added by the room, bringing the bass levels back to where they should be.
Keith

 

[pasi123567]

In that particular scenario, and if that is what you want to listen to on your sound system, then yes, it is true.
But if you want to listen to a musician, recorded somewhere else, not in your room, then what you want to hear is that sound, not that sound plus the sound of your room. If your HiFi goal is to hear the original "event" or what the studio/mastering intended you to hear. The less you hear your room and any sound associated to it, the closer you will be to what was originally recorded.

But you can't reduce the amount of your room by EQ right? The reflections and everything will still be those of your room. Unless you can find a way to cancel reflections I don't see why this would be the better result. It will alter the sound in a way your room doesn't work, making the endresult unnatural.

Also, to "have the band in your room" is usually not the goal. Most domestic rooms will sound too claustrophobic. Many music halls are renowned for their acoustics, and listeners will want to reproduce that hall sound in their own listening rooms.

Music halls have more reflections and a bigger space. As explained before even with EQ you can not simulate this effect of a big hall. It will sound claustrophobic anyways. So the result of having the band in your room seems the only option that can lead to accurate results and well also get you much closer to how a live music playback would sound like.

They aren’t or shouldn’t be , ‘EQ’ just reduces the amount of bass added by the room, bringing the bass levels back to where they should be.
Keith

I think I forgot to mention that EQing bass is fine (als bass is preference anyways), since there is a big influence in those frequencies and I would think most bands would fix bass levels of their instruments in those scenarios but I am mainly arguing about anything that happens outside of bass, which actually has a very noticeable effect on audio quality.

 

[AdamG]

Trolling thread closed. Go elsewhere for your trolling entertainment. Your question was answered in the first dozen reply’s yet you continue to repeat the same argument. That’s trolling behavior. Count this as your first free pass Warning.