Topic: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips? (Read 1252 times)

rhythmdevils · « **on:** December 10, 2011, 02:26:48 AM »

A point Purrin made in reference to the HD650 fr he took. HERE

I don't hear a huge dip like that in the upper midrange. Though I do hear the HD650 as sounding dull, this problem doesn't sound FR related to me. This seems worthy of it's own discussion - why peaks would be easier to hear than dips in FR.

I'm guessing it's because a peak makes certain instruments/frequencies stand out louder than the whole rest of the spectrum, for example a certain range of the piano will be much louder than anything else. This is noticeable as a problem without comparing to a reference espeicially when it is so loud it hurts, or it is accompanied by resonance. However, with a dip, certain sounds will be quieter than they should which doesn't sound as bad, and so is much harder to notice without hearing a reference that shows you how it ought to sound.

Does it also matter where this dip is placed? I imagine certain locations are easier for the brain to adjust to (upper mids?) but what about in the heart of the vocal range? I imagine that wouldn't be as easy to overlook.

In reference to the LCD-3, Purrin called it an error of omission rather than an error of commission.

anetode · « **Reply #1 on:** December 10, 2011, 09:36:09 AM »

Quote from: rhythmdevils on December 10, 2011, 02:26:48 AM

I'm guessing it's because a peak makes certain instruments/frequencies stand out louder than the whole rest of the spectrum, for example a certain range of the piano will be much louder than anything else.

Exactly. A peak will make itself known at very specific times, like a bit of percussion in a familiar song or an unwelcome shrillness to a familiar vocal.

Dips are tougher to place, though there are specific bits of dullness that I've learned to recognize. In recordings where you hear the room/surrounding, the dip may minimize the atmosphere, sometimes almost making it seem like you're not directly facing the performance. At least that's what I ran across when trying out the V-Moda LP model.

Due to the differences in HRTF compensation curves it's improbable to stumble upon a perfectly even upper-mid lower-treble response. Contrary to its reputation, the Stax 404LE just about nails it for me.

LFF · « **Reply #2 on:** December 10, 2011, 05:45:08 PM »

Dips are much harder to hear due to a phenomenon known as masking.

This is the same way MP3's work. It is hard to hear a sound of lower intensity when it is surrounded by sounds of higher intensity. Much like trying to hear a bee near your ear while standing next to a jet engine at full power.

This is why small suck-outs on the FR are very hard to hear and place. Large suck-outs, like that on the LCD-3 are easier to hear. However, a small peak is much easier to hear because of the same reason and they are also easier to pin-point with a little practice.

RexAeterna · « **Reply #3 on:** December 26, 2011, 04:56:01 AM »

the question is though, is it the recording,room,headphone,amp,dac,speaker,ect? many variables to determine correct? so how do we break it down? only way to know if it's not the equipment is have measurements right? then that leaves the recording itself. it can be possible it went through like heavy eq'ing and compression right? how do we determine if it's the recording instead? i know lot more modern stuff likes to be trigger happy in the top and air response to make up for speakers having what they call ''modern highs''. i don't know if i'm wrong or not. possibly i am wrong. i do not know. i just notice it in electronic music mostly but i will say i can't hear everything or claim to have good hearing. i just listen to music and sometimes occasionally play it(i'm not very good to be honest).

reason i mention room being possibility if speakers are involved but that of course is canceled out if you already have the measurements for the speakers's frequency response that was originally measured in an anechoic chamber. i know peaking should be easier to determine, but don't we have to determine and break it down to where those peaks and dips are originating from? i only know very little to be honest, and possibility i can be full of it maybe. i don't know. that's why i ask. i just know audio is very complicated thing.

ABC · « **Reply #4 on:** June 04, 2012, 06:59:20 AM »

Quote from: LFF on December 10, 2011, 05:45:08 PM

Dips are much harder to hear due to a phenomenon known as masking.

The sound of lower frequencies mask higher frequencies
much more than higher frequencies mask lower frequencies
(the higher frequencies first have to travel in the hearing snail
through the region where the lower frequencies are detected,
this is called frequency->place transformation in the cochlea).
So, an emphased SPL (peak) masks the frequencies above,
and a reduced SPL (dip) demasks the frequencies above.
(SPL: Sound Pressure Level).

Anaxilus. · « **Reply #5 on:** June 04, 2012, 07:34:23 AM »

Please don't explain things like 'SPL' to anyone here, especially the audio engineer you quoted. Audio 101 is better served on other forums. Just sayin'.

Author Topic: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips? (Read 1252 times)

rhythmdevils

Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips?

anetode

Re: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips?

LFF

Re: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips?

RexAeterna

Re: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips?

ABC

Re: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips?

Anaxilus.

Re: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips?

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Author Topic: Are peaks in FR easier to hear than dips? (Read 1252 times)

ABC