Yes. I’ve said that. Components should be designed to be as flat as possible to be faithful to the original recordings. From that point, all hell breaks loose with rooms, our ear/brain function, personal taste, probably sunspots for all I know. Without flat component response, we have no standard for comparison. What’s to keep products from varying from one to the next? What good would it do to audition something if the example you buy is different?
Who said “ flat freq response “ is the best?
I have a dumb question?
who determined that the “ flattest frequency response” is the BEST?
we are all looking over specs and note all the +\- dB deviations from flat and declare it bad?
are we cattle? Or did someone like J Gordon Holt declare it?
Or am I missing something
Anyway, I think about stuff to much...lol
jeff
who determined that the “ flattest frequency response” is the BEST?
we are all looking over specs and note all the +\- dB deviations from flat and declare it bad?
are we cattle? Or did someone like J Gordon Holt declare it?
Or am I missing something
Anyway, I think about stuff to much...lol
jeff
- ...
- 50 posts total
Recording engineers don't record anything flat first there are really no flat microphones Actually we use our ears to get the overall sound we prefer It is never flat. Our control rooms were rolled off top and bottom forcing the engineers to boost base and treble. A perfectly flat recording in a flat room sounds terrible. Forget about frequency response and listen to what you like Alan |
Who said “ flat freq response “ is the best? If you want to hear it the way it was recorded and intended to be listen to, then flat is best. If you don’t like it, buy a equaliser and do what you consider to be the best. http://www.schiit.com/products/loki Cheers George |
| Post removed |
- 50 posts total