[ChrisCoaster]

I researched and read up on these on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
and pretty much understand what the aim is with these frequency-
response curves.

My question is: Should I attempt to duplicate these curves roughly
with a graphic equalizer of minimum 10-bands, or the one in the
currnent Media Player 10& up?

I was able to duplicate the curve(roughly!) in Media Player since that
is where I play most of my music - hooked up to a decent 80W per Ch
amp and medium-sized Kenwood speakers.
Of course, the tone settings on the JVC receiver are flat, and
loudness disabled!

It's a very listenable response curve, but I know that just
arbitrarily setting the eq in media player to resemble "Fletcher
Munson" or the equal loudness contour doesn't account for room
acoustics.

Any comments? Suggestions?

-ChrisCoaster

[[email protected]]

On Feb 1, 10:13 am, ChrisCoaster wrote:
I researched and read up on these onhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
and pretty much understand what the aim is with these frequency-
response curves.

My question is: Should I attempt to duplicate these curves roughly
with a graphic equalizer of minimum 10-bands, or the one in the
currnent Media Player 10& up?

I was able to duplicate the curve(roughly!) in Media Player since that
is where I play most of my music - hooked up to a decent 80W per Ch
amp and medium-sized Kenwood speakers.
Of course, the tone settings on the JVC receiver are flat, and
loudness disabled!

It's a very listenable response curve, but I know that just
arbitrarily setting the eq in media player to resemble "Fletcher
Munson" or the equal loudness contour doesn't account for room
acoustics.

Any comments? Suggestions?

-ChrisCoaster

the loudness button that you have disabled is based on the curve you
are seeking to emulate.
that is why most receivers have them!

[William Sommerwerck]

Do you understand what the F-M curves mean, and the purpose of correction?

[Sean Conolly]

"ChrisCoaster" wrote in message
...
I researched and read up on these on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
and pretty much understand what the aim is with these frequency-
response curves.

The article explains the testing process is some detail, but leaves the
reader to draw their own conclusions of the results. Do a little more
research and you'll find there's a fundamental point you missed. The answers
to your questions are all derived from this.

Sean

[Scott Dorsey]

ChrisCoaster wrote:

My question is: Should I attempt to duplicate these curves roughly
with a graphic equalizer of minimum 10-bands, or the one in the
currnent Media Player 10& up?

Use a parametric. That's what it's for.

I was able to duplicate the curve(roughly!) in Media Player since that
is where I play most of my music - hooked up to a decent 80W per Ch
amp and medium-sized Kenwood speakers.
Of course, the tone settings on the JVC receiver are flat, and
loudness disabled!

The "loudness contour" control should precisely match the Fletcher-Munson
curve. That's what it's for. If you have a loudness knob, it should
have some rough calibration for different listening levels at each
position. If you have only a button, it offers compensation only at one
listening level (which should be marked in the receiver manual... if it
does not, measure the response at 100 Hz vs. 1 KHz and look on the
F-M chart for the appropriate level curve).

It's a very listenable response curve, but I know that just
arbitrarily setting the eq in media player to resemble "Fletcher
Munson" or the equal loudness contour doesn't account for room
acoustics.

Right, you can't account for room acoustics with equalization.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

The "loudness contour" control should precisely match
the Fletcher-Munson curve.

No, not the F-M curves, but the _differences_ in the curves. Most loudness
controls have a completely unnecessary treble boost as a result of trying to
match the curves.

Regardless, few come even close to subjectively correct correction, because
there is no necessary connection between the volume control's setting and
the absolute SPL.

Knight, Yamaha, and Crown made products with separate volume and loudness
controls. You turned up the volume to the level that gave (roughtly) 100dB,
then turned the loudness down to the level you wanted to listen at. I can't
speak for the Knight or Yamah products, but it worked perfectly on the Crown
DL-2.

The easiest approach is to simply adjust the equalizer to correct for the
perceived "thinness" at low listening levels.

[Don Pearce[_2_]]

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 09:22:29 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The "loudness contour" control should precisely match
the Fletcher-Munson curve.

No, not the F-M curves, but the _differences_ in the curves. Most loudness
controls have a completely unnecessary treble boost as a result of trying to
match the curves.

Regardless, few come even close to subjectively correct correction, because
there is no necessary connection between the volume control's setting and
the absolute SPL.

Knight, Yamaha, and Crown made products with separate volume and loudness
controls. You turned up the volume to the level that gave (roughtly) 100dB,
then turned the loudness down to the level you wanted to listen at. I can't
speak for the Knight or Yamah products, but it worked perfectly on the Crown
DL-2.

The easiest approach is to simply adjust the equalizer to correct for the
perceived "thinness" at low listening levels.


The problem with all of this is that the "thinness" is what our
hearing sense is programmed to hear at low levels, so loudness
compensation always sounds wrong. Just leave it flat, would be my
choice.

d

[Paul P[_3_]]

ChrisCoaster wrote:

I researched and read up on these on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
and pretty much understand what the aim is with these frequency-
response curves.

My question is: Should I attempt to duplicate these curves roughly
with a graphic equalizer of minimum 10-bands, or the one in the
currnent Media Player 10& up?

The EQ you need is dependent on the volume you're listening at, so
you'd have to change your EQ every time you adjusted the volume.

Paul P

[Arny Krueger]

"ChrisCoaster" wrote in message

I researched and read up on these on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour and
pretty much understand what the aim is with these
frequency- response curves.

Really? Your report of what you used them for may tell a different story.
More details below.

My question is: Should I attempt to duplicate these
curves roughly

No, if you are going to compensate for playing music at a lower SPL than it
was recorded at, you should calculate the difference between the curve for
the SPL the music is played at from the curve for the SPL that the music was
recorded at.

with a graphic equalizer of minimum 10-bands, or the one in the
current Media Player 10& up?

Graphic equalizers generally can't produce a target frequency response curve
as well as a parametric with the same number of adjustments.

[William Sommerwerck]

The easiest approach is to simply adjust the equalizer to correct
for the perceived "thinness" at low listening levels.

The problem with all of this is that the "thinness" is what our
hearing sense is programmed to hear at low levels, so loudness
compensation always sounds wrong. Just leave it flat, would be
my choice.

What I should have said was "adjust the equalizer to correct for the
perceived "thinness" at listening levels that are lower than live
performance levels".

When it is done correctly, loudness compensation does not sound "wrong".
With the Crown DL-2, you can move the Loudness all over the place, and the
subjective bass balance does not change.

[Don Pearce[_2_]]

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 09:55:43 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The easiest approach is to simply adjust the equalizer to correct
for the perceived "thinness" at low listening levels.

The problem with all of this is that the "thinness" is what our
hearing sense is programmed to hear at low levels, so loudness
compensation always sounds wrong. Just leave it flat, would be
my choice.

What I should have said was "adjust the equalizer to correct for the
perceived "thinness" at listening levels that are lower than live
performance levels".

When it is done correctly, loudness compensation does not sound "wrong".
With the Crown DL-2, you can move the Loudness all over the place, and the
subjective bass balance does not change.


I'm surprised - does it use the old tapped volume control method? I
never found that to be even slightly satisfactory.

d

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 10:28:53 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

What I should have said was "adjust the equalizer to correct for the
perceived "thinness" at listening levels that are lower than live
performance levels".

When it is done correctly, loudness compensation does not sound "wrong".
With the Crown DL-2, you can move the Loudness all over the place, and
the
subjective bass balance does not change.

I'm surprised - does it use the old tapped volume control method? I
never found that to be even slightly satisfactory.

Not as far as I know. I don't know the details of the design, and would
prefer not to speculate. But the "trick" (as with the Knight and Yamaha
designs) was the use of separate, un-contoured Volume control to set the
maximum listening level, with the Loudness control set all the way up. The
Loudness knob then both lowered the overall level and applied the
appropriate amount of bass boost.

Note that the Volume control has to be set at around 100dB in the listening
room, regardless of the sort of program material.

Scratch that. As I've been thinking about this, I have some questions that
didn't occur to me 30+ years ago. The idea of separate Volume and Loudness
controls makes sense, but where to set them is suddenly not so clear.

The reason is this... If I set a string quartet to 100dB with the Volume
control, then turn down the Loudness control so that the quartet is playing
at the same level I would hear it live, then there will be added bass
compensation that isn't needed (because the sound is at its correct original
level). On the other hand, if I set the Volume control to the correct "live"
level, then using the Loudness control to reduce it might not produce the
correct bass boost, if the required boost between (say) 100dB SPL and 90dB
SPL is not the same as that needed between 70dB SPL and 60dB SPL.


Very tricky - the nominally flat level is going to be totally
dependent on the material. You probably can't even reach it if you are
trying to play a "Who" concert from the early seventies. Follow that
by a baroque duet, and it is all change. No idea how you would deal
with this.

d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[ChrisCoaster]

On Feb 1, 11:45*am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


Right, you can't account for room acoustics with equalization.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. *C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
________________________
I said nothing of the sort, Scott. I simply stated that imposing F-M
or similar equal-loudness contour, either with an equalizer(graphic or
para) or by pressing a loudness button or turning the loudness knob
famous on the Yamahas, while compensating for our unequal hearing
sensitivity across the audible spectrum, by ITSELF does not account
for individual listening room acoustics(live vs dead surfaces,
standing waves, and the dimensions/shape of the room itself). Those
need to be rung out with a good 1/3rd octave EQ and a pink noise
generator.

Like the last occupant of the White House, I am often quite
misunderstood and have a hard time articulating relatively simple
thoughts and concepts. My apologations for misleading or confusing
you.

-CC

[ChrisCoaster]

On Feb 1, 11:00*am, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:
Do you understand what the F-M curves mean, and the purpose of correction?

If I didn't understand what they meant, I would have asked that
question instead of asking whether or not it was necessary to
duplicate the curves with equalizers.

The curves represent a mirror of the average sensitivity of numerous
(perhaps thousands) of test subjects' hearing as determined in
controlled testing conditions. In otherwords, flip it upside down and
you'd approximate, basically, how the "average" person hears - that
is, their sensitivity to LF sounds in relation to their sensitivity to
MF and HF sounds. The curves attempt to compensate for that at
different listening levels.

-CC

[William Sommerwerck]

"ChrisCoaster" wrote in message
...
On Feb 1, 11:00 am, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:
Do you understand what the F-M curves mean, and the purpose of correction?

If I didn't understand what they meant, I would have asked that
question instead of asking whether or not it was necessary to
duplicate the curves with equalizers.

The curves represent a mirror of the average sensitivity of numerous
(perhaps thousands) of test subjects' hearing as determined in
controlled testing conditions. In otherwords, flip it upside down and
you'd approximate, basically, how the "average" person hears - that
is, their sensitivity to LF sounds in relation to their sensitivity to
MF and HF sounds. The curves attempt to compensate for that at
different listening levels.

More precisely -- F-M correction attempts to compensate for the /difference/
in response when a musical program is played other than at its original
("live") level.

[Scott Dorsey]

ChrisCoaster wrote:
On Feb 1, 11:45=A0am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


Right, you can't account for room acoustics with equalization.

I said nothing of the sort, Scott. I simply stated that imposing F-M
or similar equal-loudness contour, either with an equalizer(graphic or
para) or by pressing a loudness button or turning the loudness knob
famous on the Yamahas, while compensating for our unequal hearing
sensitivity across the audible spectrum, by ITSELF does not account
for individual listening room acoustics(live vs dead surfaces,
standing waves, and the dimensions/shape of the room itself). Those
need to be rung out with a good 1/3rd octave EQ and a pink noise
generator.

No, they don't need to be. Third octave room equalization does more
harm than good. It seemed like a good idea to a lot of people back in
the 1970s, but it's not.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

On Feb 1, 3:37*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
ChrisCoaster wrote:
On Feb 1, 11:45=A0am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Right, you can't account for room acoustics with equalization.

I said nothing of the sort, Scott. *I simply stated that imposing F-M
or similar equal-loudness contour, either with an equalizer(graphic or
para) or by pressing a loudness button or turning the loudness knob
famous on the Yamahas, while compensating for our unequal hearing
sensitivity across the audible spectrum, by ITSELF does not account
for individual listening room acoustics(live vs dead surfaces,
standing waves, and the dimensions/shape of the room itself). *Those
need to be rung out with a good 1/3rd octave EQ and a pink noise
generator.

No, they don't need to be. *Third octave room equalization does more
harm than good. *It seemed like a good idea to a lot of people back in
the 1970s, but it's not.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. *C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

to the OP.

adjust your EQ so the the sound sounds the way you like it.

That is the purpose of casual listening. If you like the way it
sounds, then it is the right setting. It doesn't need to be any more
complicarted then that for casual listening. That is the purpose of
listening to music after all, to enjoy it. If you enjoy more bass,
turn up the bass and don't worry about it.



Mark

[Eric B]

On Feb 1, 10:13*am, ChrisCoaster wrote:
I researched and read up on these onhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour
and pretty much understand what the aim is with these frequency-
response curves.

My question is: Should I attempt to duplicate these curves roughly
with a graphic equalizer of minimum 10-bands, or the one in the
currnent Media Player 10& up?

I was able to duplicate the curve(roughly!) in Media Player since that
is where I play most of my music - hooked up to a decent 80W per Ch
amp and medium-sized Kenwood speakers.
Of course, the tone settings on the JVC receiver are flat, and
loudness disabled!

It's a very listenable response curve, but I know that just
arbitrarily setting the eq in media player to resemble "Fletcher
Munson" or the equal loudness contour doesn't account for room
acoustics.

Any comments? Suggestions?

-ChrisCoaster

The short answer is no. The F-M loudness contours are useful to be
aware of but there are so many variables- source material, speakers,
placement, room acoustics, where you are listening from- that trying
to impose these (F-M) shapes with a 10 band graphic would probably do
more harm than good. Besides, the result of graphic eqs is almost
never what the 'picture' looks like. Most 10 band graphics are no good
for anything other than giving people the illusion of control.
Just be aware that at low volumes you will want more bass added to
the signal. It's also true of high frequencies but less significant
for casual listening because upper mids and highs are what most people
experience as loudness. What speakers do you use? What kind of music?
How loud? Do you sit in one spot or do you move around the room. What
do you think of the sound with the graphic set flat, or bypassed?
The most reasonable response I read in this thread was to adjust the
tone controls until you like the balance. Just be aware that at lower
volumes you will want more bass, and at higher volumes the bass will
not need to be turned up- unless that is what you like.
Eric B

[Randy Yates]

ChrisCoaster writes:
[...]
Any comments? Suggestions?

If it's that important to you, don't turn the volume down where you'd
need loudness compensation in the first place! Keep it NICE AND LOUD.

My sweet spot is 100 to 105 dB SPL, C-weighted.
--
% Randy Yates % "Ticket to the moon, flight leaves here today
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % from Satellite 2"
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon'
%%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com