How many of you run your systems flat?

[Robh3606]

I generally run flat on my active set-up except for the last octave 40Hz and down where the subs run. Those levels are up a bit mainly from room loading. If I run them flat they don't blend right with the E-145's and it sounds a bit lean.

My Dynaudio/2245H sub system is flat below 200 hz, and mostly sounds lean without a couple db of boost below 160hz...but it is in a fairly large L shaped space.

I think most people are used to some bass bloom and when you do run flat it can take a little getting used to. The advantages are the tonality and clarity are much improved with good source material.

The 4344's on my second system are run with no EQ what so ever. Between room placement and careful set-up on the individual driver balance I didn't think they really needed any.

Rob

[Ian Mackenzie]

Its a bit of a double edge sword.

If your loudspeaker system can reach down to say -30 hertz cut off (-3db) on the one hand you may perhaps have less of a need for enhanced bass because of the natural extension and room gain

On the other hand such system will show up recordings that are lacking natural bass balance. In this instance some ehancement may be helpful.

I dont bother with enhancement but I might down the track.

As recall there was an old article in US audio mag that described a 20,000 watt system (Dick Burwen?) where bass bosst was liberally applied because some recordings were bass shy.

[Thom]

I think loudness switches are particularly troublesome to owners of JBL speakers because unless you are running separates and turn the power amp down quite a bit you are listening quite a bit louder than the calibration of the loudness circuit. Because, you have the preamp in a range where the loudness circuit is set up for a lot lower level than the high efficiency speaker plays. It's like the first time you set up a pink noise generator and blindly follow the settings and you turn it on and it blows your wife over the fence.

I set one up and after I turned the power on it dawned on me that when who ever wrote the cheat sheet wrote it he might have figured on me having speakers with 1w 1m of 85 db or something. Got my wife back from the neighbors and never used that setting again. Parrots wouldn't speak to me for weeks.

[JBL 4645]

What about having matched (full-spectrum frequency analyzers) each one set with pink noise or spot frequencies so that you know each one as been calibrated. Now play the source material whether its vinyl tape CD laserdisc or DVD what ever.

With the full-spectrum frequency analyzers you’ll be able to see what’s happening and if its bass shy so be it that’s the way it was mixed, unless it’s a re-mix where it might show more or less of the original recording.

[SEAWOLF97]

As recall there was an old article in US audio mag that described a 20,000 watt system (Dick Burwen?) where bass bosst was liberally applied because some recordings were bass shy.

I think Ian has hit on a good point. If you are in a studio listening to just what you produce, well thats one thing , but if listening to music that spans 40+ years, well thats another. (be it canned or broadcast)

Some classic rock or LIVE recordings will just plain sound bad FLAT . Many recordings are lacking in THIS or THAT. I really wish that leaving settings FLAT and everything sounded perfect was an option , but not in the real world, especially on mixed sources.

My pre-amp is outside the cabinet , handy , because I'm constantly re-adjusting to suit the music.

[Steve Schell]

I have found over time that I prefer a system balance that downslopes across the full audio bandwidth at about 1dB per octave, or perhaps a bit less. This is measured with a 1/3 octave RTA at the listening chair, using pink noise as the source.

[Robh3606]

My pre-amp is outside the cabinet , handy , because I'm constantly re-adjusting to suit the music.

Great example of different strokes for different folks, we are the complete opposites on this. I am a set and forget. Once I get the speakers and room dialed in that's it. No other changes. The program material is what it is. If it's recorded bass shy or fat bottomed thats how it gets played back. I never use my tone controls in either set-up.

Rob

[boputnam]

...when you do run flat it can take a little getting used to.

Absolutely. If you've "trained" or conditioned your hearing to any particular EQ curve (boost here, cut there, etc.) flat can sound less complete. However, if done properly it will produce an even-handed, honest reproduction of what was recorded, and how it was recorded.

I have found over time that I prefer a system balance that downslopes across the full audio bandwidth at about 1dB per octave, or perhaps a bit less.

That is very interesting, Steve.

If you measure and adjust a system using Pink noise and the Fast Fourier Transform method, you adjust to achieve a flat matched response between the reference and measured signals. Switching to music, the RTA will show a subtle slope just as you describe.

I watch for this during SR. While I mostly watch the FFT trace (and FR vs time sweep, or "Spectrograph"), this is an interesting double-check.

[JSF13]

Great example of different strokes for different folks, we are the complete opposites on this. I am a set and forget. Once I get the speakers and room dialed in that's it. No other changes. The program material is what it is. If it's recorded bass shy or fat bottomed thats how it gets played back. I never use my tone controls in either set-up.

Rob

Ditto for me.

[X_X]

I have measured my room with an RTA and my system wasn't flat. I compensated with para EQ and it didn't sound quite right. I had a hearing test done and now I use an EQ setting that compensates for my hearing sensitivity. I hear some freq "louder" than others, probably due to a slight scar tissue build on one of my ear drums. I put a slight dip in that region and now it sounds right (enough). Still- everytime I change to another recording I feel the need to adjust the EQ to compensate for the recording technique. Such is the nature of audio playback. I have concluded that "flat" is a relative term.

[Mike Caldwell]

Great points, Bo.

All this does is point to the fact that you can't polish a turd.

A live sound engineer shouldn't have to struggle or be "creative" to make a live band sound "killer". The band should already sound "killer", and it's the sound engineer's job to present it to a bigger audience.

A great speaker system just simply uncover's great or not-so-great recordings...the same goes for live performers.

Very well said Edgewound!!

I'm sure Bo can relate to this.....festival type of show, multiple bands.
Some bands you never have touch a knob and they sound great other bands there's no amount of turd polish that can make them sound like a band who members are all playing the same song in the same key and you begin to think something is wrong with your system!!!! Funny thing it is usually the later type of band who is the worst complainer about getting "their sound" and that normally is a sound that no one wants to hear.

Getting too far off topic
Mike Caldwell

[soundboy]

Some bands you never have touch a knob and they sound great other bands there's no amount of turd polish that can make them sound like a band who members are all playing the same song in the same key and you begin to think something is wrong with your system!!!! Funny thing it is usually the later type of band who is the worst complainer about getting "their sound" and that normally is a sound that no one wants to hear.

Since were are off topic, my previous comment about boosting the kick , or tweeking a bright guitar now has some credibility, I guess. Not all the groups I have run sound for have Killer tone. Even some of the more talented have a dead sounding floor tom or kick to bring to life. That is where a good ear and knowledge of your toys comes in...even if the FOH system is flat, and sounds great with recorded tunes you are familiar with. Maybe Bo has been luckier than me, and all of his gigs are for tonally perfect players...reproduced perfectly, with hardly a tweek, through a flat system. I can only count on one out of four!

Ya know, J. Gordon Holt, of Stereophile fame, once stated back in the 80's, something to the effect of "I am finding that unless a speaker system has a slight rise between about 100hz and 300hz, it sounds too lean"...or close to that. And he was comparing untold hundreds of speaker comparisons, with unamplified acoustic recordings. Whether he was talking about combined response in room, or just the speaker, I don't recall. And the crusty Mr. Holt even had some nice things to say about a few JBL's.

That's kinda been my experience, somewhat, too. That's why I was curious what others thoughts are, and why I started the thread.

PS Instrument tonality and system response are not the same thing. Sorry if I was unclear bout that.

[boputnam]

I don't think one can be off topic on this topic...

soundboy - I'm glad you (again...) raised the topic. IIRC, we've done this about 6-times over the past +4 years, and it's always interesting and polarizing. I chimed-in, because each time it arises, I (should I say we...?) have more experience to bring to bear - it makes the discussion quite interesting.

I don't know where you live (or even what your name is...), but if you get a chance, invite someone running Smaart to a half-dozen of your shows. Measure and study your situation - the system, the room, the influence of waterbags, etc., and study/measure your system in a non-gig condition. It is profoundly informative. Investing in a Smaart platform was a big expense and commitment for me. That said, for what I do, I was foolish to have ever undervalued it's importance and ability to contribute to my understanding. I learn a great deal at every single show.

[4313B]

I have found over time that I prefer a system balance that downslopes across the full audio bandwidth <snip>.

I'd have to agree.

[Mike Caldwell]

Hello
I don't set up SMAART at every show and even if I do the final test is the the tried and true voicing/ring out with the vocal mic of choice for that event. I get the system large or small to sound as natural with a human voice as possible, generally the voice/singer is the most important content. I never rely on just playback music as a reference to set a system up with unless it is going to be used only for music playback. For overall system EQ I never boost, I will cut what frequencies sound bad leaving alone what is good. Over all system processing does apply the CD horn EQ boost. At the board I may add a little here or there on some channels if needed. Way too many times I hear a mix and or a system that is all low end with no clarity what so ever. What's unfortunate many times these are "professional systems" with a "professional" at the board!

Mike Caldwell