Flat frequency response

roxy54

Thanks !

erik_squires

Where did you take Speaker Design 101? Is there a particular author / engineer whose course or book on speaker design you are referring to?

You make a good point. I have not seen flat FR as a design goal in any text. I should have put "Speaker Design 101" in quotes. My bad.

My guess, based on your questions is that you have none of that background,

Very cool you have that skill but IMHO should not be a requirement to have an opinion or yours would be the only response here, haha. With your design experience, I would be interested what you think about "1) Why is it so hard to achieve?"

Yes I do but I would rather example JA saying things like "That midrange deviation from flat will give vocals a nasal quality." Disclaimer: this is from memory, not an exact quote. I just used quotes for clarity.

But enough about me, back to the topic on hand, I am guessing your answer to "2) Does it matter?" would be no?

Really excellent, thought provoking ideas.

audiokinesis

1. The in-room response at the listening position dominates perceived tonal balance, and the most natural-sounding in-room response has a gently downward-sloping trend as we go up in frequency.

Yes. I remember Thiel wanted to keep flat and while some people liked them, I thought too bright. I suppose room and components could come into play.

asctim

It really is difficult to get a speaker to simultaneously have a flat, smooth on-axis response while also having a smooth but downward tilted response off axis at all angles.

Hhmmm, that is a good point.

ditusa

They believe it should have uniform on and off axis frequency response both horizontally and vertically at all angles.

Hhmmm, that is a good point too.

newbee

when you refer to flat frequency response are you referring to the sound level at the listeners position, or say 3 ft from the speaker?

Haha, good observation. I have been measuring from 3 ft away and also 9 feet away listening. The 3 feet is an attempt a what the speaker really does. 9 feet is the speaker + room. My personal taste is the speakers measures flat through most of the treble so it will have the downward slope at the listening position since the HF rolls off fast.

I’ve had the opportunity to listen to some speakers lately and what I have taken away is the variety in how speakers are voiced. Maybe the designer will voice the speaker to 1) his taste or 2) what he thinks is most popular and will sell the most. It’s a tough balancing act. While the basic sound quality is often excellent, it’s frustrating to hear some frequency variations that don’t suit my taste.

What I see as obviously wrong, and maybe(?) we can all agree on, I made a speaker and was playing with EQ. Depending on EQ, I was shocked to find the singer didn’t even sound like the same person. They both can’t be right.

where would like. to measure the "flat" response?

I would like speaker to measure flat through the midrange for sure. i do not see anomalies there serving any worthwhile purpose - tastes notwithstanding.

I would like a speaker which could do that, within reason, in a room and do it with a combination of proper direct and off-axis response. Some designers do this with high order x-over, some with room placement. Maybe that is only a dream.

A dipole is the only radiator that is directional down to the lowest frequency.

I am convinced that a properly designed sound system can perform well in a great variety of rooms and requires only a minimum of room treatment if any at all.