Yes, and that brings up the whole issue of using RTA measurements as a
guideline for scoring in the first place. IASCA introduced the RTA as a
tool for scoring as a way to make these contests less subjective (like the
SPL contests).
But we all know a perfectly flat RTA reading would SOUND terrible (there
would be no bass and WAY too much treble).
Yes, I know, what they were looking for was dramatic differences between one
frequency band to the next (which DOES effect sound quality if you have
sever cancellation or standing wave effects). But I knew SOOOO many
competitors (hell, I did it) that had one EQ setting for the RTA portion and
one EQ setting for the subjective, in car listening portion because we all
knew what the RTA wanted to see.
HOW MUCH SENSE DOES THAT MAKE?!?!?!
It was those kind of things that hurt IASCA.
MOSFET
"I. Care" wrote in message
et...
In article ,
says...
People don't do opinion comps no more.
If you saw the judges I did you know why. I also saw 2 freshly
calibrated RTA's of the same brand give different readings in the same
vehicle. Must have been placement problems even though they measured
distance from windshield, since the same stand was used, and the mic and
RTA are calibrated together I believe. Or maybe since one of them was
used for SQ that mic was damaged before the unlimited SPL contest was
started?
I could tell you some stories about SQ judging!
--
I. Care
Address fake until the SPAM goes away ;-}