[Pneumonic]

Hi Pneumonic

Yes these MLS measuring devices will measure at about 500Hz and above and gate out the first room reflections and RTA's will measure overall frequency response (but only at one point in space). The point I am making is your ear/brain does not hear in the same way as these measuring devices.  In a real room with a real speaker you are hearing the direct sound from the speakers as well as all the reflected sound mixed in. This is called the Power Response or SOUND POWER of the speaker.

james

James, I understand that we can't use mics to measure speakers with 100% accuracy but what is the alternative? I'm not aware of any speaker manufacturer who doesn't measure their speakers performance without using a mic and appropriate testing protocols either in a room, an anechoic chamber or out doors. 

[James Tanner]

James, I understand that we can't use mics to measure speakers with 100% accuracy but what is the alternative? I'm not aware of any speaker manufacturer who doesn't measure their speakers performance without using a mic and appropriate testing protocols either in a room, an anechoic chamber or out doors.

Hi

Anechoic chambers and outdoor measurements and even limited gating systems --- these tools are certainly necessary and helpful in designing speakers. 

All I am pointing out is that the traditional simple on axis measurement does not tell you the whole story and these EQ systems that rely on these simple measurements do not in my opinion offer the solutions or solve the problems they purport to.  The research that has been done over the past 20 years about how real speakers perform in real rooms have indicated to me that the traditional approach to speaker design has serious flaws. There are others who will disagree and thats OK but in designing the Bryston speakers I saw this traditional approach to be too myopic in concept.

james

[95Dyna]

Hi

The research that has been done over the past 20 years about how real speakers perform in real rooms have indicated to me that the traditional approach to speaker design has serious flaws. There are others who will disagree and thats OK but in designing the Bryston speakers I saw this traditional approach to be too myopic in concept.

james

Myopia illustrated.

[Grit]

Hai

Anechoic chambers and outdoor measurements and even limited gating systems --- these tools are certainly necessary and helpful in designing speakers. 

All I am pointing out is that the traditional simple on axis measurement does not tell you the whole story and these EQ systems that rely on these simple measurements do not in my opinion offer the solutions or solve the problems they purport to.  The research that has been done over the past 20 years about how real speakers perform in real rooms have indicated to me that the traditional approach to speaker design has serious flaws. There are others who will disagree and thats OK but in designing the Bryston speakers I saw this traditional approach to be too myopic in concept.

james

It's not uncommon, unfortunately.  I don't work anywhere near the audio industry and my work place is frequently hampered by the "we've always done it this way" concept. Without fresh perspectives and evolutionary thinking, advancement will always be limited.

- Garrett

[grsimmon]

Sorry for waking the dead.....but I was doing some searching here on AC for comments I remember from James Tanner a couple years ago regarding digital room correction.  I'm hoping James will see this thread and give some further commentary.

So James, here's my questions:   what about not digital room correction, but analog room correction.  By that I mean,  good old fashioned, high quality tone controls,  graphic equalizers, and parametric equalizers?  I remember an article put out by Pete Thomas (?) at PMC speakers on their website about how tone controls had suffered a bad rap, and were in fact useful and justified.  That article stuck with me, and along with your stance on DSP, got me thinking recently about DSP.  I'm tempted to try DSP.  Or not. Could a parametric equalizer along with some room treatment help the average room,  while avoiding the DSP pitfalls as you mentioned?  Or do equalizers commit the same sins?

[James Tanner]

Sorry for waking the dead.....but I was doing some searching here on AC for comments I remember from James Tanner a couple years ago regarding digital room correction.  I'm hoping James will see this thread and give some further commentary.

So James, here's my questions:   what about not digital room correction, but analog room correction.  By that I mean,  good old fashioned, high quality tone controls,  graphic equalizers, and parametric equalizers?  I remember an article put out by Pete Thomas (?) at PMC speakers on their website about how tone controls had suffered a bad rap, and were in fact useful and justified.  That article stuck with me, and along with your stance on DSP, got me thinking recently about DSP.  I'm tempted to try DSP.  Or not. Could a parametric equalizer along with some room treatment help the average room,  while avoiding the DSP pitfalls as you mentioned?  Or do equalizers commit the same sins?

HI

Sir James - Gee's looks like my status has taken a giant leap 

Anyway the problem is still there with any product that changes the 'on and off polar response' of the speaker.  Tone controls have a place I guess with really poor sounding recordings but hopefully as we improve in those areas they become less necessary.

Frequencies below 200Hz are omni directional so you can generally play around with those using Room EQ but above that frequency I would not recommend it.

james

[grsimmon]

James;

I just sent a personal message to your inbox regarding this thread.

[James Tanner]

James;

I just sent a personal message to your inbox regarding this thread.

OK got it and sent response.

james