Do YOU have a flat frequency response in your room?

@esarhaddon 

No, I was talking about recorded music for which the mixes were tailored for the intended audience and how they might play it back. Alot of music was compromised because they made certain that it was optimized for AM or FM rebroadcast.

You are correct, I was born after the middle of the last century so I haven't had time yet to become snarky or bitter. Just pointing out that EVERYONE is likely aware that production values of many recordings has been compromised as a result of distribution/playback decision making.

Flat on-axis frequency response is clearly the engineering objective for most of these systems. Those that deviate significantly earn lower ratings in double-blind subjective evaluations. Although there is more to be considered, a flat direct sound delivered to listeners is the basis for most reproduced soun

The important takeaway here is 'flat direct sound',  in other words flat when reverberating sound is not combining with the direct sound, as in an anechoic state or a free field, meaning no reflected signal or measured in room with gating employed during capture.

I personally strive for a smooth response, which is to say I avoid peaks and nulls by careful driver choice, crossover design and room treatment. Using 2 or more subs will also reduce the lumpy response.

@lordrootman, the nice thing about ’online’ is that no one can twist your arm to buy. ;) I’ll read/listen, but that doesn’t mean a sale or commitment to do so. *S*

Never heard of or have heard Audyssey, but no reason to ignore either...*shrug* See which way the tech is drifting...

@lemonhaze , you articulated that very well, the key is a "smooth" in room response which combines with both direct sound and reflected sound. This was the strategy I used in treating my room, I pretty much followed the panel distribution laid out in this diagram: