If DSP doesn't have any real downsides, what is the reason the majority in this poll only uses it to the Schroder frequency?
I would like to gather opinions from ASR members as to whether we should apply room correction to the Schroder frequency, or whether we should do full range correction from 20Hz - 20kHz. There appear to be two schools of thought: - Correction to Schroder: aims to only correct bass peaks and...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Problems with room response are 3D and no two points in the room, above Schroder frequency, will have the same problems. EQ is 1-D, it changes all of the sound in the same way. So, if you do that, it only works for the single point in space where you measured the room response.
Everywhere else, the results are likely to be worse, or with some random improvement.
This isn't a downside of DSP in general so much as a limitation of EQ, which is just one type of DSP.
DSP that tries to go beyond this is starting to hit the market, for example Dirac ART uses multiple speakers, multiple EQs, and multiple delays to correct more than just one point in space. It's more than a 1-D solution, I think you could at least call it 2D or even 3D if you include time.