2. misc-audio
  3. 170320-147550

Whether to do anything about the limitations of our ears

In the thread 'How do you listen?' appears the following:

"We do not hear all frequencies equally well at all volume levels. Low bass and high treble in particular need to be at a fairly high level to be heard at all."

This asks a big question:

Should we listen as our ears hear, with their inability to apprehend all audio band frequencies at the same intensity? As we are of course compelled to do when listening to live music.

Or when listening to recorded music should we adjust the intensity of particular frequencies we don't hear so well?  This will of course give a different presentation from what we hear live.

Or, to put it a different way, should audio manufacturers design equipment to present the frequency range as flat as a microphone perceives it, or as our ears perceive it?

But a microphone is just another flawed ear, with its own imperfections as regards intensity across the audio frequency range (and others of course).

Or, again: a flat response can be flat only as the means of listening presents it.



128x128clearthinker

Showing 2 responses by clearthinker

clearthinker's avatar
clearthinker OP
1,582 posts
 
Thanks for your reply onhwy61

But I am not sure you are correct.

For example, I looked at the Telefunken U47, perhaps the greatest music recording mike ever designed and I find it is +-3dB from 20Hz to 20kHz.  Pretty flat and flatter than nearly all loudspeakers and phone cartridges, certainly at 20Hz.

As to generated noise by the way, my point was should we listen to music sources flat in electrical terms or flat as our ears send it to our brains.  I believe it must be the latter, as that's what we live with in real life and are adjusted to, for better or worse.
clearthinker's avatar
clearthinker OP
1,582 posts
 
Thanks to all who have posted.

onhwy61
I was remarking the U47 (as an example) is very flat compared to speakers and phono carts.  So I don't need to know that other mikes are even flatter!!  You just help make my point.

Miller, rude as usual, and you are off-point.  I've got plenty between the ears thanks.  I was not replying to your post, I was picking up a point from it.  That's why it's in a new thread.

Tomic601
You are off-point.


Other posters demonstrate a strong preference for adjusting the the presentation to cope with human ear limitations at the ends of the audible range, they say to make the programme more to their personal liking.

This is interesting since the experience will be unlike listening to live music.  So many audiophiles don't want 'the closest approach to the original sound' after all.  Does this change everything?  This issue is the reason for my OP.
More to discover