Neautrality

[MajorFubar]

...as in tonal balance, not political or otherwise

It's only a week or two ago that Vlad shared a graph which showed that the tonal balance we generally prefer is actually a bit see-saw shaped with an upward lift at the bass end and a slight dip at the top. Yet everyone raves about neutrality, especially WHF reviews.

Certainly with speakers, WHF can rate a particular pair of speakers as neutral and accurate in a magazine review, then sure as night follows day, you get new purchasers posting up threads asking how come these speakers they bought unheard on the strength of a five star review are so shrill and bass-light that their ears bleed whenever they play anything more raucous than Nana Mouskouri.

 

[insider9]

Is there a definition? Fletcher Munson curve describes how we perceive sound based on frequency and volume.

So is neutrality based on this curve or an artificial concept that can be illustrated as a straight flat horizontal line?

And if it's the latter, why is that?

 

[CnoEvil]

I suppose it's the Neutral vs Natural debate.....True to the Recording, or true to how real instruments sound.......The pursuit of enjoyment vs persuit of accuracy.

It's the age old Hifi conundrum, as they are not always the same thing...and requires an understanding of the difference and which you prefer. IME. One is much more likely to lead to enjoyment; the other, often less so.

 

[insider9]

In the context of how you use it, Major I'd take familiarity over neutrality. That's the big selling points of actives in pro market after all. Guaranteed familiarity. Sure neutrality to some extent too but familiarity first and foremost.

 

[Native_bon]

I suppose it's the Neutral vs Natural debate.....True to the Recording, or true to how real instruments sound.......The pursuit of enjoyment vs persuit of accuracy.

It's the age old Hifi conundrum, as they are not always the same thing...and requires an understanding of the difference and which you prefer. IME. One is much more likely to lead to enjoyment; the other, often less so.

I always seem to agree with your opinions. What I have come to realise, Hi-fi should be about enjoyment. Why the hell would I buy something that measures well but sounds bad or told how and what sounds good with it. Sound should be a very personal thing, hence the reason for so different opinions on the very same product.

The problem with reviews, it can be a hit or miss or environment and other things could affect sound. So it's only a guide. Not all good measurements equal good sound.

 

[plastic penguin]

Never take any notice of graphs or the phrase 'flat across the frequencies'. That is all well and good in a laboratory but in the real world of varying room acoustics, background noises (children, grass cutters, washing machines etc etc), it rarely chimes.

Showing graphs is one thing but those graphs IME rarely macth the reality, therefore is a complete cop out.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Very true hifi is a very personal thing

 

[plastic penguin]

Too true, BS. It's only relevent to your environment

 

[Gray]

Imagine the perfect recording, well balanced tonally.

We want the playback chain to add or detract nothing from that don't we?

What would that frequency response be if not flat as a pancake?

Surely, if listening on headphones, you'd want the flattest response possible wouldn't you?

The frequency response of a person's hearing or the rooms effect on speakers might dictate a different shape response but otherwise flat must be best.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

It would probably sound boring a perfect flat response and we all now that the music you feed your hifi is not perfect too as you could spend ££££ on a top hifi but it will only sound as good as the music quality you play on it

 

[insider9]

I've corrected my speakers in room response to get +/-1dB 20Hz-20kHz completely flat. It was dreadful. Never again.

 

[MajorFubar]

Is there a definition? Fletcher Munson curve describes how we perceive sound based on frequency and volume.

So is neutrality based on this curve or an artificial concept that can be illustrated as a straight flat horizontal line?

And if it's the latter, why is that?

Technically I guess it's measurable, where a pair of speakers in a controlled environment exhibit minimal diversion from a flat response across their usable frequency range. But I doubt WHF goes to the trouble and considerable expensive of measuring those perameters, so their definition of neutral is always going to be a subjective impression of a speaker's tonal balance

The frequency response of a person's hearing or the rooms effect on speakers might dictate a different shape response but otherwise flat must be best.

But must it though? Time and time again we hear that the kind of speakers the magazines rave about in terms of neutrality seem to be the ones which leave new listeners a bit cold. Posts along the lines of where has all the fun gone? Amazing detail but sterile and uninvolving. Like insider said, with room treatment and DSP you can make a decent pair of speakers sound flat througout their usable frequency range. You wouldn't believe how boring that can sound at the kind of levels we listen at in an average home. Though no doubt it looks great on the oscilloscopes

 

[lpv]

Surely, if listening on headphones, you'd want the flattest response possible wouldn't you?

not at all

here's why:

" A “natural sounding” headphone should be slightly higher in the bass (about 3 or 4 dB) between 40Hz and 500Hz. This compensates for the fact that headphones don't give you the physical punch or 'impact' that the sound waves from a room speaker have; so a slight compensation for increased bass response is needed for natural sound.

Headphones also need to be rolled-off in the highs to compensate for the drivers being so close to the ear; a gently sloping flat line from 1kHz to about 8-10dB down at 20kHz is about right. You'll notice all headphone measurements have a lot of jagged ups & downs (peaks & valleys) in the high frequencies; this is normal and mostly due to reflection cancellations in the folds and ridges in the outer part of the ear. Ideally however, the ups and downs of the frequency response should be fairly small and average out to a flat line. Large peaks or valleys over 3kHz in width usually indicate poor headphone response, and should be viewed as a coloring of the sound. Some small dips in the highs may actually be desirable and should exist in the 2kHz to 8kHz region."

source: https://www.headphone.com/pages/evaluating-headphones

 

[insider9]

You need to know the lingo And slap 5 stars on it it will sell. Neutrality is great but if you get transparency.... omg...
Stunning levels of clarity and detail / Huge scale of sound / Good timing / Even balance / Transparent / Good build and elegant design
All of these wonderful phrases from just one review. The very same speakers discussed in another thread that sound too dark *fool*

 

[davidf]

Never take any notice of graphs or the phrase 'flat across the frequencies'. That is all well and good in a laboratory but in the real world of varying room acoustics, background noises (children, grass cutters, washing machines etc etc), it rarely chimes.

Showing graphs is one thing but those graphs IME rarely macth the reality, therefore is a complete cop out.

I agree. When Ken Kreisel released his DXD subwoofers about 5/6 years ago, all the sub nuts were demanding outdoor ground plane test results, presumably so they could assume what they sounded like. But his subs don’t measure well in these sorts of tests, basically because they tell you nothing about what a subwoofer will actually do in a real world situation. He’s always designed his subs to work well “in room” rather than in a car park or in the middle of a field.

 

[Gray]

Surely, if listening on headphones, you'd want the flattest response possible wouldn't you?

not at all

here's why:

" A “natural sounding” headphone should be slightly higher in the bass (about 3 or 4 dB) between 40Hz and 500Hz. This compensates for the fact that headphones don't give you the physical punch or 'impact' that the sound waves from a room speaker have; so a slight compensation for increased bass response is needed for natural sound.

Headphones also need to be rolled-off in the highs to compensate for the drivers being so close to the ear; a gently sloping flat line from 1kHz to about 8-10dB down at 20kHz is about right. You'll notice all headphone measurements have a lot of jagged ups & downs (peaks & valleys) in the high frequencies; this is normal and mostly due to reflection cancellations in the folds and ridges in the outer part of the ear. Ideally however, the ups and downs of the frequency response should be fairly small and average out to a flat line. Large peaks or valleys over 3kHz in width usually indicate poor headphone response, and should be viewed as a coloring of the sound. Some small dips in the highs may actually be desirable and should exist in the 2kHz to 8kHz region."

source: https://www.headphone.com/pages/evaluating-headphones

Flat is the intended result then, if certainly not the response necessary for headphones!

 

[davidf]

Certainly with speakers, WHF can rate a particular pair of speakers as neutral and accurate in a magazine review, then sure as night follows day, you get new purchasers posting up threads asking how come these speakers they bought unheard on the strength of a five star review are so shrill and bass-light that their ears bleed whenever they play anything more raucous than Nana Mouskouri.

Because of the electronics they’re paired with? Being paired with insufficient amplification? Varying room acoustics?

The reviewer is giving their opinion of a product based on their own perception of its sound, using their ability to accurately convey what they hear. And then of course, it’s down to our own interpretation of their description...

 

[Gray]

I should have qualified 'flat is best' by saying that I think I probably prefer it - but then I'm probably not listening flat!

One thing's for sure - flat certainly doesn't mean right. Both Insider and DougK (and no doubt others) have found flattest be worse.

The overall preference may be for a response that's tilted down toward the HF (just look at the amount of posters asking for recommendations to get a warm sound), but one thing I don't like is what's described as a 'rolled off' treble. Clean, open but not over emphasised is all I'm after.

 

[Vladimir]

It's what most people prefered in their tests. More talk on the matter.

People seem to prefer it even in headphones.

 

[MajorFubar]

Yeah that's the one Vlad.

 

[stereoman]

Have a listen to Leema Acoustics and you'll know what neutrality is about...