Post by KeithL on Apr 24, 2019 11:07:44 GMT -5
Just for the record - I don't disagree with you at all.
However, as with anything else, it's a matter of how much you put into it, and how much you get back.... and where you can get the most benefit for the least effort.
I speak to a lot of people who seem to believe that room correction can cure virtually any problem.
And, if their current room correction software can't cure a particular problem, then the solution is to use better room correction, or an EQ with more bands.
As you say, you are always hearing the room more than anything else, and no amount of room correction is going to make the room entirely go away.
(Unfortunately, from my experience, many people believe the exact opposite... that, if only they could find the perfect room correction system, it could make the room no longer matter.)
I find that modern technology often tends to encourage people to focus on the details of the technology itself rather than on what it's actually doing.
For example, if you measure a room with a pink noise file, and a meter, you're getting a long-term average that includes the effects of room reverberance and the T60 at different frequencies.
And, if you use a system that uses a short time window to exclude all but direct sound, you're going to get a very different result.
And the difference between those two graphs will tell you a lot about how the room acts at different frequencies.
Yet I find that, instead of recognizing that both results are "correct", and the difference between them tells you a lot of valuable information about the room...
Many people instead obsess over "which measurement is right" - and then proceed to do their best to ignore the results of the other one.
In short, a lot of people see "room correction" as a way to avoid fixing problems with the room itself - rather than as a way to further perfect the situation AFTER making some basic corrections to the room itself.
I've also found that many people seem to feel a need to "use whatever they have"...
So, for example, if they had a single bump in the bass centered at 50 Hz, they could probably fix it by properly configuring a single PEQ band...
Yet, if they have an 11-band PEQ, they'll "find something to do with the other bands", and potentially spend hours trying to fix truly trivial fractional dB "issues", often doing more harm than good in the process....
I'm reminded of an article I read a long time ago - when CGI-based image editing and correction became "easy".
Previously, many scenes in many movies had trivial "errors", like an actor or actress quickly glancing in the wrong direction, or unimportant objects on a table disappearing between camera takes.
Apparently, Star Wars was one of the first movies filmed using technology that made it relatively simple to use direct editing to correct such errors.
(One example offered was that, in one scene, an actress glanced quickly in an odd direction, and they actually edited the movement of her eyeballs to correct the direction of her glance.)
However, and this was the point of my mentioning this, the author also commented that, once this ability to correct minor flaws became available....
They ended up making, literally, thousands of minor corrections to minor issues - many of which were truly trivial and would have previously been entirely ignored.
And, while the result may have been a technically more perfect product, they ended up expending a LOT of time and expense "fixing problems that really weren't worth fixing".
The article also cites a few rather comical examples where minor fixes ended up causing the need for other minor fixes...
(The author concluded that, once the technology became available, "there were very few of the thousands of short cut-scenes in the entire film where they couldn't find something to fix".)
As I said, I have nothing against getting things right, or technically more accurate.
But I fear we are approaching the point where a lot of people never get to listen to their system because they never finish setting it up to their satisfaction.
(This suggests that one of the "great undocumented benefits" of professional calibration is that the person you hire to do it eventually goes home... at which point there's nothing left for the consumer to do but enjoy the results.)