Frequency Response

[scott fitlin]

No, actually I agree with you, it really isnt! However, I am of the opinion, that audio manufacturers strive too much for what looks right on the scope, and extreme power handling, and unfortunately, this doesnt always = good sound, let alone better sound!

There are so many avenues of discussion opened up by this thread. Look at amplifiers! Same thing. The numbers just dont tell you what the amp sounds like, or how it performs! An example ( IMHO ) is many of todays very compact and lightweight switching amps, rated at 1500wpc, and beyond, damping factors in excess of 1000, some well over 2000, and yet, dont seem to produce the power and tight bass of some older, traditional amplifiers, despite their specs seemingly limited technical proficiency!

Many things audio today, they get it so technically correct, and so musically wrong!

You know, since I am in NY, and close to NYC itself, I have been to Radio City Music Hall, I saw Pink Floyd there, in 1978 or 79, what an incredible show. And that is my favorite sounding concert of all time. Of the ones I have seen!

Now, lets take Carnegie Hall, a great hall, known for its acoustics, and they just HAD to redo it, something wasnt right! And when they were done? They had succesfully RUINED Carnegie Halls famous acoustic sound! All through the 90,s they came in with their computers, and Gee Whiz technology, valiantly trying to restore the sound of that room. They blamed the contractors for using the wrong materials, doing the job wrong, etc! BUT, the one thing they have NOT been able to do? Restore the sound of the room that Carnegie Hall had! All the technology, and all the fantastic minds at work, but they couldnt put it back together again!

Measurements dont tell the whole story.

[hapy._.face]

I mentioned it earlier (in part), that I suspect FR curves are aimed more at strategic marketing campaigns. With the aforementioned 'parlor tricks'- a manufacturer can make anything look good on paper. Who knows what scientific variables were ignored or exploited for the sake of producing agreeable graph readouts? Giskard- thank you for posting the JBL disclaimer scan; I was looking for that- I knew I read it in my L212 manual.

This brings me to another important point- there are so many other variables we often overlook in our quest for the ultimate sound. I am amazed at how some people cannot appreciate a flat responding system even when it's playing in front of them. Perhaps anomalies in their own hearing can make a person feel as though they are hearing something lifeless and dull. What is the point of pursuing something to such financial strain- only to behold the irony that the pursuit was in vain? If I cannot see the 30% peripheral- why would I purchase my own IMAX screen? Know what I mean?

I'm also amazed at how a person can listen to a system at a friend's house (using components a, b, and c), then walk into a shop and listen to another system (using components d, e, and f), and have the audaciousness to make wholehearted statements about ANY of the components in question. The variables to which each performed are so numerous- I won't waste time to mention them here. You don't have to be an audio expert to understand the basics of scientific research and methodology.

In the end- people want to hear different things. We all process sound differently. Years ago, Range Rover posted a famous magazine ad in which many of the letters of the opening lines were missing. They must have done a great deal of research on what words to use because the reader (myself included) didn’t realize the letters were missing; It was read just as anything else was. The ad then stated that '...you'll never know what's missing' as an indication of the truck's fine suspension and how it can decouple you from the hazards of the road. That always stuck out in my mind as the perfect analogy to hifi. We often "fill in the blanks" when we hear things.

Ultimately- we don't all pursue the same game. Thank you for that! Otherwise all the stuff I want would be pursued by countless other millions and be WAY out of my (our) price range! I'm thankful that JBL has a bad rap in snobbish circles- keeps the older stuff somewhat affordable (for now). A person listening to an overly exitable system may find it sounds perfect when combined with hearing limitations. I wonder why there isn't a bigger industry to correct a person's hearing. We could all have perfect hearing for a few hundred bucks (say, for example) and level the playing field. Then what would our audio conversations be like? Hmmmm....?

[scott fitlin]

I do not agree that flat response is always the best. granted, there are varying degrees, of whats right and whats not, and gross frequency exaggerations or under accentuations can make bad sound, perfect, technically correct, flat response just guarantees that its flat! It doesnt tell you how the speaker sounds, or mean that you will automatically like it.

[Ducatista47]

"...(Speaker System) balance can be established by adjusting levels to achieve the flattest response as measured with a real-time analyser and a pink noise source... Alternately, subjective evaluation of familiar program material can provide a good means to balance levels. In fact, perfectly flat electro-acoustic response is seldom desirable for the listener, so subjective evaluation may be the preferable technique."

Quoted from the 5235 Manual. Emphasis mine. I do admit to a disdain for pure meter (only) men, so I am not impartial in these matters. I know this was written about balancing speaker bi-amping, not response of individual transducers, but I feel it has broader implications. In the case of a two way system, it applies a bit more directly, of course.


Clark in Peoria

[hapy._.face]

I do not agree that flat response is always the best. granted, there are varying degrees, of whats right and whats not, and gross frequency exaggerations or under accentuations can make bad sound, perfect, technically correct, flat response just guarantees that its flat! It doesnt tell you how the speaker sounds, or mean that you will automatically like it.

Understood. good point.

I prefer a flat system because I like to judge the music and recording techniques used other than the gear. I'd rather say 'Rick Rubin has an ear like the sandwich', rather than saying 'my cd player sounds jacked up'.
I know not everyone wants the same..

I quote myself here again with emphasis on the word appreciate:

...some people cannot appreciate a flat responding system even when it's playing in front of them. Perhaps anomalies in their own hearing can make a person feel as though they are hearing something lifeless and dull.

It does not always mean it sounds musical, agreed. I should have added that. Perhaps my words were not carefully chosen, but I hope you get the point.

[JBLnsince1959]

but having listened to some very fine speakers with seemingly terrible response curves and some absolutely crap speakers that measure virtually textbook perfectly... no the corollary is not true.
Widget

Hey Zilch

I have 3 systems I can set up to measure the same and they all sound different. Even set up for flatest on axis response. It's useful information but doesn't tell the whole story. Do you really think an L20T/4406 and a 4344 sound the same?? Above 60 Hz you can get them surprisingly close and the L20 has the smoothest response. The 4344 can eat them alive. So Widget I agree it's useful but not the whole story.

Rob

I would agree with these gentlemen....

Measurements are useful, but we have to make a distinction between measuring the PERFORMANCE of a speaker and the subjective listening experience... the two are not the same....

There's a saying in certain intellectual circles..."The Map is not the Territory"
I can read a map and know it backwards and forwards, but no matter how well I've studied the map...it ain't the same as walking ( or driving) the same route.

measurements can only tell us how a particular object performs within certain define paramaters..it's usually a graph of relationships between two or more ABSTRACT definitions used to convey certain agreed upon units of measure for some physical phenomenon....

so to put it simple....measurements of any kind can only tell us how it performs...it can not tell us if the sound ( in this case music) will be enjoyable

[hapy._.face]

We're doing it! Somehow- we are managing to stay ON TOPIC!!!

[JBLnsince1959]

We're doing it! Somehow- we are managing to stay ON TOPIC!!!

,

as soon as you posted that we strayed off topic....

[norealtalent]

Yes, I'd like eggs and toast for breakfast please. Thank you.

[hapy._.face]

Can the ambient temperature of a room affect a FR readout to any discernable degree (pun intended)?
What about the temperature of the driver itself?

[Titanium Dome]

A lot of folks, and I mean A LOT, who have never heard the K2 S9800 look at the response curves and judge it a monumental waste of money and a stupendous failure.

"Look at that graph! Is that the best that JBL can do? They want how much for a speaker that can't even handle 35Hz decently?"

The probelm is that the graph is the only thing accessible to them, so they use what they can see to determine what they will hear. If they ever heard the speaker, they'd know the graph was irrelevant.

In the "pre-dawn" phase of audio awareness, the average consumer looks not listens.

The consumer looks at
specs
finish (is that real maple?)
size
driver size
visual design appeal
brand name
price
power handling
how it goes with their furniture
how it goes with their color scheme
how it will fit in the spot they've visually chosen for it

There are probalby more. Feel free to add. The point is that all these "vision things" are settled for the "research based" ("I looked it up on the Internet.") consumer who trusts what he can see over what he will hear.

[JBLnsince1959]

so I guess another way to say this is.

that using a double blind study where no one in the test knows the measurements of two speakers and gets a person who values ruler-flat measurments( or other measurements)....it is possible to to find two speakers that measure close enough to not make a difference and for the subject to enjoy one speaker and not the other....

now let me say that I'm in no way saying that the measurment may not have an inpact on the subjective nature to a particular individual( as far as the listening experience - they don't know the measurments)....there will be that dynamic interchange between the listener and the speaker, and that get's a little complicated to quantify, however.......

That type of situation can best be understood using systems theory and using the particular aspect of - any change no matter how small to any one part of the system will change the entire system to something new. With the understanding that we define our system as the speaker, the total environment and the listener...however, I don't have the time aright now as this would take some time.... maybe I can work that out in my spare time and then we can prove this when we get a group together.

[JBLnsince1959]

Can the ambient temperature of a room affect a FR readout to any discernable degree (pun intended)?
What about the temperature of the driver itself?

dicernable degree,? I don't know...does it affect it at some level..yes.. notice what I said in discussing systems theory....

[JuniorJBL]

Can the ambient temperature of a room affect a FR readout to any discernable degree (pun intended)?
What about the temperature of the driver itself?

I would think so because it would have to do with air pressure as well.
Listening to a system up here in Denver is way different than in California.
I have noticed for quite sometime that many systems sound better with different temperatures as well.

This went back to my car audio install days when this made even a bigger difference because of the large temperature variation in a car. Mornings always sounded better!!

[JBLnsince1959]

Mornings always sounded better!!

are you sure it wasn't the coffee...