Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
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 |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
"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. 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 It's difficult to replicate the F-M curves as they differ according to loudness. This means that you will need a different contour for each setting of the volume control, and for quiet as opposed to loud recordings. Also, your ears will follow the F-M contours only approximately as they are a statistical result based on averaging many tests on many different people, consequently your own frequency response will be different, more so if you are older than perhaps late teens-mid 20s as hearing, especially higher frequencies will start dropping off thereafter. However, as a tone control contour, it's pretty extreme for normal listening, but if it sounds good to you....... S. -- http://audiopages.googlepages.com |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
On Feb 1, 10:07*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? No 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? Yes, it's not only a waste of time but you're misunderstanding the principles behind the curve. When you listen to music at a certain level, your ear exhibits frequency response errors that the curves reflect. Fine, but ... When you listen to music LIVE, your ears have these responses, AND when you listen to playback of that music, you're (presumably) using the same ears and thus the behave the same way. If you're now adding correction on playback using the Flecther-Munson curves, you're OVERcompensating: you're ears have already done what they are supposed to do. The only time applyin a curve has any real validity is if you're listebing to music at substantially DIFFERENT levels than originally played or intended. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
On Feb 1, 10:39*am, "Serge Auckland"
wrote: However, as a tone control contour, it's pretty extreme for normal listening, but if it sounds good to you....... S. *--http://audiopages.googlepages.com- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - ____________________ I'm with you there, pal! Kinda hard to find a tone control or EQ with +-40 dB correction anywhere. I guess these curves(whether the original Fletchers or more up to date curves as documented in the Wiki article) are more useful for listening at lower than average volume levels in a car or at home. -CC |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
wrote in message ... When you listen to music LIVE, your ears have these responses, AND when you listen to playback of that music, you're (presumably) using the same ears and thus the behave the same way. Given the same SPL at the persons ears. The only time applyin a curve has any real validity is if you're listebing to music at substantially DIFFERENT levels than originally played or intended. Which is of course the whole point, isn't it. Many times people do listen to music at substantially different levels to what was originally intended. Whether any tone adjustment will sound better is entirely up the listener. Invoking a specific curve like F-M just because it has some scientific basis, doesn't make it any more or less correct however. (especially given the difficulty in matching the proper F-M curve to actual SPL in any case) IMO, as long as it sounds good to *you*, enjoy the music, however you achieve it. MrT. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
In article
, ChrisCoaster wrote: On Feb 1, 10:39*am, "Serge Auckland" wrote: However, as a tone control contour, it's pretty extreme for normal listening, but if it sounds good to you....... S. *--http://audiopages.googlepages.com- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - ____________________ I'm with you there, pal! Kinda hard to find a tone control or EQ with +-40 dB correction anywhere. I guess these curves(whether the original Fletchers or more up to date curves as documented in the Wiki article) are more useful for listening at lower than average volume levels in a car or at home. Any way you do the eq, unless you take the efficiency of your specific speakers (and their environment) into account, you can't get it right by "following the curves" -- for equal loudness in the room, the volume knob will be in very different positions, depending on whether you have 1% or 10% efficient speakers. If you reproduce at substantially lower volume than what was present at the recording venue, just crank up the bass until you like it. Isaac |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message u... wrote in message ... When you listen to music LIVE, your ears have these responses, AND when you listen to playback of that music, you're (presumably) using the same ears and thus the behave the same way. Given the same SPL at the persons ears. The only time applyin a curve has any real validity is if you're listebing to music at substantially DIFFERENT levels than originally played or intended. Which is of course the whole point, isn't it. Many times people do listen to music at substantially different levels to what was originally intended. Whether any tone adjustment will sound better is entirely up the listener. Invoking a specific curve like F-M just because it has some scientific basis, doesn't make it any more or less correct however. (especially given the difficulty in matching the proper F-M curve to actual SPL in any case) IMO, as long as it sounds good to *you*, enjoy the music, however you achieve it. MrT. Once all monitoring was flat but increasingly found to be irksome. That is why they added a Loudness control or bass enhancer to volume controls, to account for lack of bass at *lower* listening levels or if used with 'middy' loudspeakers. It's ideally tweakable to suit your taste [or lack of]. Not so vital with intimate headphones listening. There is no point in creating a silly equaliser with millions of curves if the starting reference SPL is altering! Now, don't get me going on equalisation.... it is so abused all the way from the recording desk channel to the HiFi. And we will never know what setting it should be, at whatever band. A general rule of thumb... if it sounds right, it *is* right. Jim |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
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. It is not a "response curve", it is a threshold curve. 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? No. The frequency response alteration comes with a loss of perspective. 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! Media player - and indeed windows "loudspeaker settings" are poorly documented "knows better than you" contraptions. For a starter DO tell windows that you listen via headphones, then you at least get rid of their bloat version of what they think is the proper frequency response compensation for you loudspeakers. Some day when very bored I'll try and document what all those settings do. 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? The loudness compensation is in my opinion nonsense based on understanding a treshold curve as a frequency response curve, it is no such thing. Loudness was successful back when ordinary household loudspeakers benefitted from the added bass and treble because they had neither. -ChrisCoaster Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
Jim Gregory wrote:
There is no point in creating a silly equaliser with millions of curves if the starting reference SPL is altering! Generally so is the case with music .... it is not at a constant spl. Now, don't get me going on equalisation.... it is so abused all the way from the recording desk channel to the HiFi. And we will never know what setting it should be, at whatever band. A general rule of thumb... if it sounds right, it *is* right. Occasionally an amplifier model comes up with gradually adjustable loudness, but the spatial mess that is caused by the frequency response error still in my assessment is a good reason for just using ordinary tone controls and finding the setting that works in the room in question with the audio and the loudspeakers it is about. Jim Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
"Jim Gregory" wrote in message ... "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message IMO, as long as it sounds good to *you*, enjoy the music, however you achieve it. A general rule of thumb... if it sounds right, it *is* right. No, I'll stick with what I said. You can measure the spectral response of an acoustic gig for example, and show that on playback it may NOT actually be "right". BUT if you think it sounds good, you can still enjoy the music. To put it another way, when you say something "*is* right" then it shouldn't just mean you "think" it is right. And IF you think it sounds right, why worry if it's not? Of course recording/mastering engineers should worry a little more than the average listener, but even they don't seem to care too much. MrT. |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
"Peter Larsen" wrote in message ... ChrisCoaster wrote: Media player - and indeed windows "loudspeaker settings" are poorly documented "knows better than you" contraptions. For a starter DO tell windows that you listen via headphones, then you at least get rid of their bloat version of what they think is the proper frequency response compensation for you loudspeakers. Some day when very bored I'll try and document what all those settings do. I never noticed any difference regardless of the setting. It's always flat. But perhaps my sound card doesn't support that feature. The loudness compensation is in my opinion nonsense based on understanding a treshold curve as a frequency response curve, it is no such thing. Loudness was successful back when ordinary household loudspeakers benefitted from the added bass and treble because they had neither. The receivers from the 1970s used to have a ubiquitous "loudness" button that always seemed to boost the bass and treble. The effect was supposed to subside as you turned the volume up past the 12:00 position. A single on/off switch doesn't calibrate the F-M compensation to the source or the listening environment. What they got wrong was a "proper" loudness control has a volume _and_ a loudness control. You're supposed to turn the loudness control all the way up (flat position) and then increase the volume to "realistic" levels. After that, you use the loudness control to determine the, well ... loudness. It would apply the F-M threshold appropriately (more or less) as you reduced the loudness. The trouble was, it was only "calibrated" for the source you calibrated it for. If you're going to do all that for each source, you might as well just tweak the bass and treble manually to taste. |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 00:14:06 +0100, "Peter Larsen"
wrote: It is not a "response curve", it is a threshold curve. Bingo! Much thanks, as always, Chris Hornbeck |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
"Karl Uppiano" wrote in message ... What they got wrong was a "proper" loudness control has a volume _and_ a loudness control. You're supposed to turn the loudness control all the way up (flat position) and then increase the volume to "realistic" levels. After that, you use the loudness control to determine the, well ... loudness. It would apply the F-M threshold appropriately (more or less) as you reduced the loudness. The trouble was, it was only "calibrated" for the source you calibrated it for. If you're going to do all that for each source, you might as well just tweak the bass and treble manually to taste. Doesn't have to be, would be easy to add gain trims on each input to fix that. The real problem would still remain, the average user just has no idea how all that is supposed to work, has little chance of getting it calibrated, and is probably better off simply adjusting the bass and treble controls to taste in any case. The same problem existed with graphic equalisers. They sold big numbers for a short while, but the average listener had no idea how to use them. The pro audio market still uses them because they usually know how, why and when. MrT. |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 00:14:06 +0100, "Peter Larsen"
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. It is not a "response curve", it is a threshold curve. No - only the zero dB curve is a threshold curve. All the remainder are response curves. Or rather they are the inverse of response curves. d |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 00:14:06 +0100, "Peter Larsen" 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. It is not a "response curve", it is a threshold curve. No - only the zero dB curve is a threshold curve. All the remainder are response curves. Or rather they are the inverse of response curves. Mea culpa, I have erred, they are sone to db conversion curves. Praetereo censeo however that it still always sounds wrong and ruins the sonic perspective no matter the sone level listened at. d Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:08:39 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 00:14:06 +0100, "Peter Larsen" wrote: It is not a "response curve", it is a threshold curve. No - only the zero dB curve is a threshold curve. All the remainder are response curves. Or rather they are the inverse of response curves. All human responses are threshold events and they all involve cascading triggers. The idea that a "reverse curve" can be associated with "loudness" (spoken as if anyone understood the subject) is the unspoken subtext of so much of this thread that I've just gotta balk. The "Fletcher-Munson" curves are an antique, interesting but fundamentally fatally flawed description. The proof of this statement is easily made by listening to *anybody's* example of a linear curve purported to make "A" listening volume sound like "B" listening volume. It's never convincing. We're a species of primate with an ability to distinguish between a huge variety of stuff, but our current description of that ability is still a work in progress. It's a great time to be alive. Much thanks, as always, Chris Hornbeck |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
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? Why would you want to ? Media Player is **** btw. The ear and brain naturally adapt to listening level and the effects thereof. Graham |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
Peter Larsen wrote: 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. It is not a "response curve", it is a threshold curve. You're talking to the dumb Peter. They realise not that they walk around every day with this 'defect' built into their listening systems. The guy might as well ask "should I always wear rose / purple / green / ultra-violet tinted glasses". A fundamental misconception is at play. Graham |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Contours
On Feb 10, 3:54*pm, Eeyore
flatulated: You're talking to the dumb Peter. They realise not that they walk around every day with this 'defect' built into their listening systems. The guy might as well ask "should I always wear rose / purple / green / ultra-violet tinted glasses". A fundamental misconception is at play. Graham _____________________ Typical American - calling anyone who asks an intelligent question "dumb". Why don't you look in the mirror? If you want dumb why don't you stroll the halls of Congress?! -CC |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Fletcher-Munson and Equal-Loudness Curves For casual listening | Pro Audio | |||
Lynx Two A plus what equal what... | Pro Audio | |||
Floor Contours | Car Audio | |||
ALL amps are equal?? | Car Audio |