Preferred frequency response with classical music vs rock/pop music ?

[Tangband]

With my Genelec 8340 monitors , theres is a possibility to use GLM to get the preferred sound you want, using eq and peq.

With most classical music, I only prefer some slight GLM correction below 200 Hz . I dont prefer any deviations from flat from 200-20000 Hz. Every instrument sounds more real with a flat frequency response in this area.

However - pop/rock music is another question - using the tunemethod when installing the speakers for best perceived bass pitch in the room, on most recordings I prefer + 1,5 dB ( Q=2 ) between 1-2 kHz and + 1,5 dB ( Q=2 ) at 8 kHz , with the usual GLM correction below 200 Hz .

This brings the clearest bass-pitch to me, with most of this kind of music, when using a ”flat” speaker like 8340.

Do you prefer a different equalisation with classical or rock/pop music , or is it the same on all music ?

 

[thewas]

Flat direct sound works best for me above room transition frequency with good recordings of any genre I usually listen to, which is also logical if the assumption, that they were mixed and mastered in similar studios by similarly experienced sound engineers, holds true.

 

[fpitas]

On some overblown pop I like a gentle roll off above 6kHz, if I listen loud.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Harman: with ca 3dB boosted bass (within the Harman preference „range“) and „natural“ room HF roll off (ca -0.8dB/Oct for my room).

 

[thewas]

Harman: with ca 3dB boosted bass (within the Harman preference „range“) and „natural“ room HF roll off (ca -0.8dB/Oct for my room).

I currently usually also use 3dB bass boost (which corresponds approximately to the Harman Trained listeners preference) and above that flat direct sound which corresponds approximately to between -0.5 and -1.0 dB roll off at my LP for my various setups and listening distances.

 

[MAB]

With my Genelec 8340 monitors , theres is a possibility to use GLM to get the preferred sound you want, using eq and peq.

With most classical music, I only prefer some slight GLM correction below 200 Hz . I dont prefer any deviations from flat from 200-20000 Hz. Every instrument sounds more real with a flat frequency response in this area.

I'm trying to follow your description.
Are you saying you don't like DSP above 200Hz? If so, it implies you don't mind the FR variations caused by room/speaker in these frequencies... Are you saying "Every instrument sounds more real" without DSP, even if the in-room FR is uneven? If so, are you saying that despite the utility of flattening the FR in these critical frequencies, DSP/EQ is somehow reducing the realism? If so, what is the mechanism for reduction in realism? Is Classical the only music where realism suffers and FR variations are more acceptable?

It's particularly odd since EQ can help a few issues below 200 Hz but is totally helpless for many room/speaker interactions (you need multiple subs, significant treatment, etc...). EQ is of great utility for many of a room's issues above 200Hz though... Kind of seems like you have chosen a hammer to pound in screws and a screwdriver to twist nails here.

 

[Tangband]

I'm trying to follow your description.
Are you saying you don't like DSP above 200Hz? If so, it implies you don't mind the FR variations caused by room/speaker in these frequencies... Are you saying "Every instrument sounds more real" without DSP, even if the in-room FR is uneven? If so, are you saying that despite the utility of flattening the FR in these critical frequencies, DSP/EQ is somehow reducing the realism? If so, what is the mechanism for reduction in realism? Is Classical the only music where realism suffers and FR variations are more acceptable?

It's particularly odd since EQ can help a few issues below 200 Hz but is totally helpless for many room/speaker interactions (you need multiple subs, significant treatment, etc...). EQ is of great utility for many of a room's issues above 200Hz though... Kind of seems like you have chosen a hammer to pound in screws and a screwdriver to twist nails here.

I also prefer + 3 dB shelving below 100 Hz with all music, not only classical with real instruments.
My experience with GLM is that correcting reflections above 200 Hz from listeningposition is a mixed bag. Some gets better and some get worse, in my opinion.
Why a stereo pair of loudspeakers plays bass-tunes slightly better with + 1.5 dB between 1-2 KHz and + 1.5 dB at 8 kHz with popular music I have no clue why.

Maybe its the stereo set of speakers that causes a perceived dip at 1,7 kHz because of the distance between the ears that makes me prefer a slightly higher level between 1-2 kHz ? But this is not the case with acoustical recordings , I prefer a flat response from 200 - 20000 Hz in this case.
Maybe my prefered + 1,5 dB at 8 kHz is because of possible slight hearing damage, or age.

 

[MAB]

I also prefer + 3 dB shelving below 100 Hz with all music, not only classical with real instruments.
My experience with GLM is that correcting reflections above 200 Hz from listeningposition is a mixed bag. Some gets better and some get worse, in my opinion.
Why a stereo pair of loudspeakers plays bass-tunes slightly better with + 1.5 dB between 1-2 KHz and + 1.5 dB at 8 kHz with popular music I have no clue why.

Maybe its the stereo set of speakers that causes a perceived dip at 1,7 kHz because of the distance between the ears that makes me prefer a slightly higher level between 1-2 kHz ? But this is not the case with acoustical recordings , I prefer a flat response from 200 - 20000 Hz in this case.
Maybe my prefered + 1,5 dB at 8 kHz is because of possible slight hearing damage, or age.

Back to your earlier post, I don't get the part where you let GLM generate corrections but don't let it EQ the frequencies above 200 Hz. Especially, you have Genelec speakers with all sorts of built-in EQ for their crossover, driver resonances, and their target curve (mine are shipped anechoic-flat, don't know about your model...) Are you are saying you are against using EQ to correct for your room above 200 Hz under any circumstances? Or are you saying you are struggling with GLM?

I find GLM informative, but I don't let it auto-correct. I measure and generate my own correction, implement that correction, I get really consistent results. I certainly wouldn't trust GLM (or DIRAC, or anything) to auto-EQ the bass, especially since they make a mess out of the dominant 40 Hz mode my room has; that needs to be addressed with multi-subs, sub-placement, mains placement, and treatment.

 

[gnarly]

I think track-by-track tonal variances dominate music type.
And that there is simply no substitute for easy to use, real time, tonal correction.
So for me, no set it and leave curve (or curves), will ever satisfy.

 

[Tangband]

Back to your earlier post, I don't get the part where you let GLM generate corrections but don't let it EQ the frequencies above 200 Hz. Especially, you have Genelec speakers with all sorts of built-in EQ for their crossover, driver resonances, and their target curve (mine are shipped anechoic-flat, don't know about your model...) Are you are saying you are against using EQ to correct for your room above 200 Hz under any circumstances? Or are you saying you are struggling with GLM?

I find GLM informative, but I don't let it auto-correct. I measure and generate my own correction, implement that correction, I get really consistent results. I certainly wouldn't trust GLM (or DIRAC, or anything) to auto-EQ the bass, especially since they make a mess out of the dominant 40 Hz mode my room has; that needs to be addressed with multi-subs, sub-placement, mains placement, and treatment.

I always put all corrections thats clearly a reflection AND coming from only one speaker/wall, to zero. To me, the sound of auto-eq with GLM where there is such compensations sounds very unnatural in the stereo image.
As you know, we have the precedence* effect and also the fact that we also listen with our eyes - we see the room and expect it to sound in a certain way . Toole is very sceptical to room correction programes and so am I, If used in the wrong way.

*