• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Is a totally flat speaker really what we want for home reproduction?

Digby

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,632
Likes
1,555
Just been doing some thinking, so thought I would try thinking out loud with the help of the forum, those of you in a helpful mood anyway ;).

A lot of music, older music in particular, is not mastered on speakers that are as flat in FR as we might want. If the engineer is mastering to what sounds good on his speakers - which I suspect, more often then not likely had some kind of dip in the mids (BBC dip) and perhaps a bit of bass boost - could it be that on reproduction of this music on a speaker with flat FR, it may be lacking in bass and too forward in the mids?

A flat FR is accurate to the recording, but is it accurate to the balance the mastering engineer was trying to achieve, if he was using speakers that are not completely flat. Perhaps accuracy shouldn't be to the recording as such, but to the intent of the engineer (much harder to quantify, I know) and does a ruler flat FR get us nearer to or further away from this. I hope this makes sense.

Thoughts?
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
It’s a fun idea and all but you don’t see me entering a restaurant’s kitchen telling them how i want my food cooked.

I don’t think i ever remixed a song because I disagree with the creative choices the producers decided on.

It’s a foreign concept to me. I just move on with my life.

I already spend my work hours fixing other people’s mistakes why do the same at my leisure time too you know?
 

TheBatsEar

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,084
Likes
4,962
Location
Germany
A lot of music, older music in particular, is not mastered on speakers that are as flat in FR as we might want. If the engineer is mastering to what sounds good on his speakers - which I suspect, more often then not likely had some kind of dip in the mids (BBC dip) and perhaps a bit of bass boost - could it be that on reproduction of this music on a speaker with flat FR, it may be lacking in bass and too forward in the mids?
If that is the case, you add EQ and fix it to taste.

The alternative is to have a speaker that is good for "wrong" mixes, but bad for "good" mixes.

A flat FR is accurate to the recording, but is it accurate to the balance the mastering engineer was trying to achieve,
We will never know what the mastering engineer was trying to achieve.
 
Last edited:

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,150
Location
Winnipeg Canada
If not, then what do you want? You want a speaker that adds a big bass boost to everything? You want a speaker that has a cut between say 800 and 2000hz? A nice big roll off above 6khz? What?

The point of looking for speakers that have good, balanced, linear (flat?) response is that it's the most sensible place to start from. Then, room EQ finishes the job. It doesn't matter what happened in the recording studio. We have a thing - the recording. It exists in whatever state it exists. Does it make sense to buy a set of speakers because they make a particular bad recording sound awesome? There's thousands and thousands of recordings out there and most of them sound pretty good.

"Is it accurate to the balance the mastering engineer was trying to achieve?" How could this question ever, in any meaningful way, be the basis for buying speakers for my living room intended to be used to play back more than one specific musical recording?
 
OP
D

Digby

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,632
Likes
1,555
The point of looking for speakers that have good, balanced, linear (flat?) response is that it's the most sensible place to start from.
Is it...what about a speaker that was an average of the response of speakers from many different, well known recording studios? That may well be closer to what the engineers heard.

OK, the rooms (recording or reproduction) cannot be removed from the equation, but it may still be a more accurate representation than flat?

Then, room EQ finishes the job. It doesn't matter what happened in the recording studio. We have a thing - the recording. It exists in whatever state it exists. Does it make sense to buy a set of speakers because they make a particular bad recording sound awesome? There's thousands and thousands of recordings out there and most of them sound pretty good.
Room EQ might not be enough if you have a speaker that will still have a different sound signature, post room EQ, than what is used in the typical studio.

I don't agree with the idea that the recording is the be all and end all. The recording comes to you through transducers (speakers). The engineer only hears the recording through transducers; he then added bass, treble and so on to suit.

The recording, sans consideration for the input from engineer, might be consider a steak, but a steak without seasoning. The intent (if not always the reality), is that the engineer "seasons" the music to their taste (through the speakers available) and we reproduce it in our homes. This is, of course, far easier than it sounds.

"Is it accurate to the balance the mastering engineer was trying to achieve?" How could this question ever, in any meaningful way, be the basis for buying speakers for my living room intended to be used to play back more than one specific musical recording?
It wouldn't be one specific recording. Many recordings of various different genres are made in one studio.

Studio speaker response could be averaged over many samples and reproduced that way.

You can start with a flat FR, but if starting with an average FR of various monitors allows for a quicker and more satisfying result then, why not?

I also think people (at least around here) maybe have a fear of EQ, as per personal taste. They will EQ for the room response happily enough, but EQing away from flat they might be less likely to do (or at least admit to), it might diminish their credentials as being a scientifically minded individual.
 

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,150
Location
Winnipeg Canada
No, we don't have a fear of EQ to taste. We have an understanding that once properly set up for balanced sound reproduction, the need for EQ to taste is greatly diminished. In my personal case...it's non-existent. I never feel the urge to twiddle the bass and treble knobs. I would suggest that subjectivists have most of the fear - fear of their passion disappearing because they no longer have myths and magic to believe in.

I don't know how you can suggest that aiming for some sort of "average" of studio setups is a rational target. It makes no sense really. And, since much of the research on speaker response is based upon listener preference, I'd be willing to bet if you were able to find some sort of average studio response it would end up being very close to neutral anyway - since engineers and producers are humans with ears just like the rest of us.
 
Last edited:

Mart68

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
2,606
Likes
4,854
Location
England
Most studios use more than one set of speakers for mixing anyway.

Avoid buying rubbish speakers and you'll probably be as close as you're ever going to get.
 

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,150
Location
Winnipeg Canada
Most studios use more than one set of speakers for mixing anyway.

Avoid buying rubbish speakers and you'll probably be as close as you're ever going to get.

not to mention headphones.

But yeah...the fact is there isn't all that terribly much separating most reasonably well-engineered speakers. They aren't worlds apart. They certainly don't need to be perfectly flat or neutral to sound great. Speaker neutrality is sort of a straw man along the lines of SINAD. the subjectivist crowd pretends us objectivists are slaves to neutrality and SINAD to an extreme degree that isn't reality.
 

Inner Space

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,285
Likes
2,938
If the engineer is mastering to what sounds good on his speakers ...
That's not really how they work. They use their speakers as forensic tools, in order to produce a result they hope will sound good on your speakers, and everyone else's. They use experience, insight, intuition, and broad knowledge of the devices they know their target demographic is using. The idea that they mix for a great result on their own gear alone is misguided, and leads to a lot of confused commentary.
 

DVDdoug

Major Contributor
Joined
May 27, 2021
Messages
2,916
Likes
3,831
I believe most (modern) mixing & mastering studios are shooting-for flat, in their treated-sound absorbing studio at the listening position.

Mastering engineers will also often have multiple "down-graded" setups to make sure most listeners are getting a good experience, not just those with high-end systems. They'll also use known-good reference tracks to "keep their ears calibrated".

Some listeners try to replicate the studio sound (a "dead" environment) and some (most?) people like a more natural-lively sounding room.
 

blueone

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
1,179
Likes
1,494
Location
USA
That's not really how they work. They use their speakers as forensic tools, in order to produce a result they hope will sound good on your speakers, and everyone else's. They use experience, insight, intuition, and broad knowledge of the devices they know their target demographic is using. The idea that they mix for a great result on their own gear alone is misguided, and leads to a lot of confused commentary.
If only it was the case that recordings (and masterings) are being produced in the hope of sounding good on our speakers. I think there's almost no chance of that, perhaps with the exceptions of classical music and some acoustic jazz. The listening environments that matter economically are ear pods/buds, headphones, Echo/Homepod, and car audio. Most home speaker listening consists of movies and television. Dedicated audio listening has become a niche market, and I'd be surprised if most recording producers don't treat it that way.
 

Katji

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
2,990
Likes
2,273
A lot of music, older music in particular, is not mastered on speakers that are as flat in FR as we might want. If the engineer is mastering to what sounds good on his speakers - which I suspect, more often then not likely had some kind of dip in the mids (BBC dip) and perhaps a bit of bass boost -
Maybe /maybe not. Check the speakers in major recording studios of 1970s>. If you can find any pictures. Flat FR, I dunno, not going to assume.

Perhaps accuracy shouldn't be to the recording as such, but to the intent of the engineer (much harder to quantify, I know)
Impossible - just what they thought suitable. And individual style /house sound/ and so on.
and does a ruler flat FR get us nearer to or further away from this.
Impossible. Better fidelity is all.

I also think people (at least around here) maybe have a fear of EQ, as per personal taste. They will EQ for the room response happily enough, but EQing away from flat they might be less likely to do (or at least admit to), it might diminish their credentials as being a scientifically minded individual.
That is countered by ASR reviews for a start. ...and then of course by thousands of replies / what people say.
 
Last edited:
OP
D

Digby

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,632
Likes
1,555
No, we don't have a fear of EQ to taste. We have an understanding that once properly set up for balanced sound reproduction, the need for EQ to taste is greatly diminished. In my personal case...it's non-existent. I never feel the urge to twiddle the bass and treble knobs.
You must be very lucky with your source material then, if it is consistent enough you never feel the need to give it a little tweak.

I would suggest that subjectivists have most of the fear - fear of their passion disappearing because they no longer have myths and magic to believe in.
Come on, let's not turn it into all that nonsense about subjectivists vs objectivists. The people who are most fervent about "the science" as it currently stands often aren't those that are at the forefront of it. They tend to take a more nuanced view, with the understanding that the science is not complete.

To my mind the whole thing is something of a false dichotomy.
I don't know how you can suggest that aiming for some sort of "average" of studio setups is a rational target. It makes no sense really. And, since much of the research on speaker response is based upon listener preference, I'd be willing to bet if you were able to find some sort of average studio response it would end up being very close to neutral anyway - since engineers and producers are humans with ears just like the rest of us.
I agree, it probably wouldn't be miles away from flat. I doubt we're talking wild differences here.

That's not really how they work. They use their speakers as forensic tools, in order to produce a result they hope will sound good on your speakers, and everyone else's. They use experience, insight, intuition, and broad knowledge of the devices they know their target demographic is using. The idea that they mix for a great result on their own gear alone is misguided, and leads to a lot of confused commentary.
So they are real life Golden Ears then? I understand the intention is that they mix for everyone's speakers, but is that really possible. That would need a great deal of imagination and supposition on their part. I wonder how far that is really possible, given how flimsy memory regarding audio is.

Has it been shown that engineers are much better than the layman in this regard?
 
Last edited:

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,150
Location
Winnipeg Canada
You must be very lucky with your source material then, if it is consistent enough you never feel the need to give it a little tweak.
Not really. Most of the source material is reasonably well-recorded. Which is why the idea of worrying about the engineer's "intentions" is a fool's errand. Furthermore, I haven't ever really found that giving things a little tweak does much to resolve issues with poor recordings. They are what they are. Poor recordings. You can't really fix it by tweaking the EQ a bit.
 

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,150
Location
Winnipeg Canada
So they are real life Golden Ears then? I understand the intention is that they mix for everyone's speakers, but is that really possible. That would need a great deal of imagination and supposition on their part. I wonder how far that is really possible, given how flimsy memory regarding audio is.

Has it been shown that engineers are much better than the layman in this regard?

Presumably, engineers get where they are by being pretty good at what they do. Engineers that make recordings that a lot of people don't like probably gradually find themselves getting fewer and fewer opportunities to work. One doesn't have to be a "golden ear" (someone who thinks he can hear the difference between rca cables and dacs for instance) to make a decent recording.
 

Zensō

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
2,740
Likes
6,740
Location
California
So they are real life Golden Ears then? I understand the intention is that they mix for everyone's speakers, but is that really possible. That would need a great deal of imagination and supposition on their part. I wonder how far that is really possible, given how flimsy memory regarding audio is.
Engineers most certainly do consider their audience, hence the loudness wars. There are, in fact, many software tools that allow one to simulate how a mix will sound in various scenarios.

9D085A32-C2D1-46D7-9441-1CC0A1AD0A97.jpeg


Has it been shown that engineers are much better than the layman in this regard?
Generally, yes.
 

polmuaddib

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2020
Messages
479
Likes
852
A lot of music, older music in particular, is not mastered on speakers that are as flat in FR as we might want.
And you might love it for content or retro sound, but modern recordings sound better, pop music excluded (not that all pop music is mixed loud and bad, but most).

Dr. Floyd Toole talks about Circle of confusion in his book which includes the music production as well as reproduction.

And it sucks that not all music is mixed perfectly, I understand, but there is that part also of finding a good recording and enjoying it.

But all science that is published and available for public is saying that we prefer flat FR when blind tested. If you are aware of a study that says otherwise I would be interested to read. I was always wondering if there is anything in that 10KHz bump that some brands push, like B&W and others, other then showroom effect.
 

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,074
Likes
8,908
It’s a fun idea and all but you don’t see me entering a restaurant’s kitchen telling them how i want my food cooked.
Lots of people have no problem with asking for special orders. They always ask "how would like your steak cooked?"
 

dc655321

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2018
Messages
1,597
Likes
2,235
Generally, yes.

Where has this been evidenced?

Have you perused Gear Sluts, or whatever it’s now called? Pros seem to be as susceptible to woo as the average audiodork…
 

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,150
Location
Winnipeg Canada
Where has this been evidenced?

Have you perused Gear Sluts, or whatever it’s now called? Pros seem to be as susceptible to woo as the average audiodork…

yep for sure. Again it comes down to the fact that humans have a fundamental preference that exists within a fairly narrow range when it comes to tonality. Even in spite of all the woo and all the nonsense, we generally end up at a relatively similar place. In the end it's the quality of the recording that is the measure of success - however the engineer gets there, if it sounds good to most people he's a successful engineer.
 
Top Bottom