BillFitzmaurice.info

When researching FM curves in google, different graphs come up. Which one is most relevant?
Fletcher-Munson 1933

Robinson-Dadson 1956

Who knows what..

The most recent, due to advances in measuring gear and techniques.

ISO 226:1987vs.2003

I'm still trying to understand these charts. Am I right if I presume that equal loudness of 31.5hz is about 78db as compared to 1000hz at 20db?...and about 125db (31.5hz) seem as loud as compared to 1000hz at 100db?

tammojsmit wrote:I'm still trying to understand these charts. Am I right if I presume that equal loudness of 31.5hz is about 78db as compared to 1000hz at 20db?...and about 125db (31.5hz) seem as loud as compared to 1000hz at 100db?

You got it.

Ah! Thank you very much, sir!

tammojsmit wrote:I'm still trying to understand these charts. Am I right if I presume that equal loudness of 31.5hz is about 78db as compared to 1000hz at 20db?...and about 125db (31.5hz) seem as loud as compared to 1000hz at 100db?

Yes - that's exactly the reason I have a gain dial for my AutoTuba amp mounted under the dash in my car. When I'm listening at low levels I like to have the gain cranked, but as I turn the overall volume up I turn the bass down so that it continues to sound evenly balanced.

Hence the "bass boost" function on stereos originally intended for low listening levels.

So from a practical perspective would it be fair to say that for useage of cabinets in a room where between 110 and 140dB are expected the most common EQ adjustment should be to cut by 6-10dB with a fairly wide Q at 3.5kHz?

Stu

Strapping Young Stu wrote:So from a practical perspective would it be fair to say that for useage of cabinets in a room where between 110 and 140dB are expected the most common EQ adjustment should be to cut by 6-10dB with a fairly wide Q at 3.5kHz?

Stu

[edit]
But bear in mind that depending on the music, it most likely is already EQ'd to be pleasing to the ear.

[edit again]

I'm a moron and shouldn't post when after three or four shots of Jameson - at least not on the technical stuff.

You're right, Stu.

jcmbowman wrote:

Strapping Young Stu wrote:So from a practical perspective would it be fair to say that for useage of cabinets in a room where between 110 and 140dB are expected the most common EQ adjustment should be to cut by 6-10dB with a fairly wide Q at 3.5kHz?

Stu

Actually, you'd want a boost of around that much at 3.5kHz, and then you'd want a cut about half that size at 1.3kHz, if you're going strictly off the F-M Curve.

[edit]
But bear in mind that depending on the music, it most likely is already EQ'd to be pleasing to the ear.

Not when it's live music. That's the sole reason I set my rigs final curve to match something close to Fletchur-Munson.This way I can create a mix that will stay consistent to the way most people hear music.Then when I play recorded stuff I simply EQ on the strips what I dont like.Recorded and live are so different both in dynamics and final mastering of the mix for live it's better to mix into a solid FM curve and get used to making things sound good under those settings.Simply EQ any recorded stuff down. The recorded stuff in a live setting is mostly background noise and something to fill the empty space. You dont make it sound like crap but you dont go out of your way to fix every song that plays either.

I also like to use a 3-5min quiet period prior to restarting the bands next set.To give the ears a break and decontaminate from any recorded dynamics squashing that you had been listening to.