# use house curve or not?



## PoorSignal (Jul 23, 2009)

I am redoing my system and I would like to know if I should be running house curve or not.
There are 2 PEQs for LFE in my yamaha receiver
and there would be 2 more PEQ in the sub amp also.

I believe if I don't tune for a house curve and rather only use PEQs eliminate room modes, there is enough PEQ bands and I won't have to use the beringer FBD anymore.. I always like to simplify the equipment if possible.

Is it OK to combine 2 sources of 2-band PEQs, signal is signal, right?

A house curve sounds like there is a movie theater feel to it.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

IMO, as badly as people want their subwoofer to be the center of attention during a film, I find house curves (IE Bass boost centered around 40-70hz) to be incorrect. The bass instead just becomes a distraction, and the blend from mains to sub also becomes noticible.

I think people need to learn to accept flat, accurate, dry bass rather than make bass what their feelings tell them is most exhibition worthy. Get your system flat down to 5hz if you want to exhibit your system - it'll be tonally accurate and have other aspects that impress people. JMO, YMMV.

An X-curve on the other hand, seems like it is a mess. I've never used on, and I don't feel i've ever missed anything during a film.


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

GranteedEV said:


> IMO, as badly as people want their subwoofer to be the center of attention during a film, I find house curves (IE Bass boost centered around 40-70hz) to be incorrect. The bass instead just becomes a distraction, and the blend from mains to sub also becomes noticible.
> 
> I think people need to learn to accept flat, accurate, dry bass rather than make bass what their feelings tell them is most exhibition worthy. Get your system flat down to 5hz if you want to exhibit your system - it'll be tonally accurate and have other aspects that impress people. JMO, YMMV.
> 
> An X-curve on the other hand, seems like it is a mess. I've never used on, and I don't feel i've ever missed anything during a film.


I am of the same view, I always eq flat. Get the right sub and I dont see why anyone would need to boost the sub channel or add in curves personally.


----------



## test4echo101 (Jul 27, 2011)

Moonfly said:


> I am of the same view, I always eq flat. Get the right sub and I dont see why anyone would need to boost the sub channel or add in curves personally.


I admit right off the bat, I may be talking about something different here but.....

I guess I am of a different view concerning house curves. 
For me, house curves almost always sound more pleasing to the ear than a flat response across the whole Frq, range.
I suppose a flat response for LF only is a good thing. However for mains/center/surrounds a flat eq sounds "dry" and lifeless. 

As an example, I've tried to accept my HK 254's EZSET/EQ parameters in many different mic calibration locations but every result I get pales in comparison to shutting the EQ off completely. This particular receivers sounds pretty good with manual delay/crossover/ settings with NO eq whatsoever. Its like the default eq is a typical small room house curve setting. Which works perfect in my space.

A house curve may not be "accurate" but for me it usually sounds better.


Test,


----------



## btinindy (Feb 15, 2011)

test4echo101 said:


> I admit right off the bat, I may be talking about something different here but.....
> 
> I guess I am of a different view concerning house curves.
> For me, house curves almost always sound more pleasing to the ear than a flat response across the whole Frq, range.
> ...


+1. I am certainly no expert, but after calibrating to a house curve with the LF elevated it sounds much better to me. It makes sense as my ears do not "Hear" LF with the same volume as the higher frequencies, i.e. Munson curves. I believe this is preference rather than reference, which for me in my room sounds better at the volumes that I listen.


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

You like what you like and thats that really. No body can tell you what is best for you, and if you dont like flat then nobody can tell you any different. I could argue with you all day about what is accurate, or what the director intended, even making assumptions like LFE is coded to account for LF roll of ears, or making statements like you should listen at reference level then, but its all moot. If you dont like any other way than how you have it, then how you have it is right for you :T


----------



## test4echo101 (Jul 27, 2011)

btinindy said:


> +1. I am certainly no expert, but after calibrating to a house curve with the LF elevated it sounds much better to me. It makes sense as my ears do not "Hear" LF with the same volume as the higher frequencies, i.e. Munson curves. I believe this is preference rather than reference, which for me in my room sounds better at the volumes that I listen.


For me, as strange as it seems a Flat LF response is good for me and my room. I DO boost the gain on my subs to compensate. 

What I am talking about is what a flat EQ does to your 50-20Khz fq response that are the responsibility of your mains/center/surrounds. For me and my low end equipment, a house curve saves the day. My equipment sounds like a cheap all in one system when eq'd flat. I blame the HK 254's awful EZSET/EQ calibration for that in my particular circumstance.
While the variables are enormous as to what a "Flat response" would actually sound like on a given setup, I've always preferred a house curve.

I guess the point is this:
The way a flat curve sounds depends entirely on whats making your room flat and what equipment you have 
producing the goods. Then your own ears are indeed the final judge.

My ears always prefer the "inaccurate" house curve as long as its done properly (on a room by room basis) and NOT based on some generic geometry of EQ sliders or digital knobs.

Let me stress, for me the real detrimental aspect of a flat eq is NOT in the LF range.. Its in the higher fq that ruins it for me.
Could be that years and years of touring in a band has degraded my hearing to a point that a flat eq just sounds dead and cheap to me.


Test


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

Its certainly interesting to hear what people do and dont like. The thing with speakers is, if you augment its response, your essentially altering the intended sound of the speaker you bought, some what fighting the crossover design I suppose. That could lead to the question of did you buy the right speaker for you in the first place.

I dont know the answer to that one, but for me its an interesting quandary.


----------



## test4echo101 (Jul 27, 2011)

Moonfly said:


> Its certainly interesting to hear what people do and dont like. The thing with speakers is, if you augment its response, your essentially altering the intended sound of the speaker you bought, some what fighting the crossover design I suppose. *That could lead to the question of did you buy the right speaker for you in the first place.*
> 
> I dont know the answer to that one, but for me its an interesting quandary.


Exactly my point, bolded.

A flat, full range freq Eq on top of the line speakers and avr's with Audyssey will (if done correctly) sound great as well as accurate.
No need most likely for a house curve.

But, when you have equipment and room treatment limitations I find a flat eq almost always sounds to my ear terrible.

I have old Paradigm 7SEMKIII's a CC-300, HK 254, 2 Klipsch sub 12's and Paradigm Titans for surrounds.
No BFD. Just the default curve that the 254 uses when all EQ is off.

Running EZset/EQ a ton of times with different locations has never EVER given me a better more pleasing sound than no Eq at all.
Accurate? No probably not. But it brings this HK254 to life.

One thing though. The OP seems to be suggesting a house curve for eq'ing room modes.
I don't believe EQ'ing to eliminate room modes has anything to do at all with House Curves.

They are 2 different things.

You could eq for modes, (if you have no room treatments or better locations for speakers) and only after that try a house curve to improve the "perceptible" audio fidelity.

We all know though that "perceptible" is biased twords an individuals personal taste in SQ. 
So is a house curve. 

A flat EQ is not concerned with personal taste. It is what it is. If you have a great setup, then a flat Eq may sound fantastic to you. If not, a house curve can help.

Test,


----------



## atledreier (Mar 2, 2007)

I have a capable system, and don't use a house curve. I DO use DynamicEQ however. Which is essentially the same thing, only properly implemented. 

The thing is, our ears are terribly non-linear in so many ways. With a fixed curve there's only really one volume setting that will be 'right' if you apply a house curve. Without a house curve that is reference level. Anything below reference and you are in no-man's land.


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

atledreier said:


> I have a capable system, and don't use a house curve. I DO use DynamicEQ however. Which is essentially the same thing, only properly implemented.
> 
> The thing is, our ears are terribly non-linear in so many ways. With a fixed curve there's only really one volume setting that will be 'right' if you apply a house curve. Without a house curve that is reference level. Anything below reference and you are in no-man's land.


Ditto


----------



## test4echo101 (Jul 27, 2011)

atledreier said:


> I have a capable system, and don't use a house curve. I DO use DynamicEQ however. Which is essentially the same thing, only properly implemented.
> 
> The thing is, our ears are terribly non-linear in so many ways. With a fixed curve there's only really one volume setting that will be 'right' if you apply a house curve. Without a house curve that is reference level. Anything below reference and you are in no-man's land.


A DynamicEq is basically a variable house curve.

Of course if you don't have D-EQ then your faced with one curve regardless.
Either a flat EQ or a fixed house curve at a given volume.
Yes, depending on volume one house curve may not be optimum.
However, for me, I tend to have a sweet spot in volume that I use every time I watch a movie or listen to music. That particular volume is the basis of my house curve. 
I admit, at lower volumes it may not be optimum, but i realize that my prime listening volume is more important
than any other.

Test,


----------



## Chad B (Oct 7, 2011)

I prefer to EQ to a house curve (1.5-2 dB/oct roll off above 1.5-2KHz, 3-4 dB bass lift).
A while ago, I decided to do some research on the subject. Stereophile magazine has had excellent measurements of loudspeakers they test for a very long time. I believe they were publishing in room 1/3 octave responses as far back as the 80's, and they started adding more precise 1 meter responses in the 90's. Well, I just happened to have a very thorough collection of Stereophile dating back to the 80's. I decided to look at all their reviews of loudspeakers in which they a) liked the sound, and b) published both in room and 1 meter responses. I noticed a general trend: even speakers that measured flat at 1 meter on axis had a gently sloping response throughout the treble, and some room reinforcement in the bass. The average seemed to be about 1.5 dB/octave roll off above 1.5-2 KHz, and the bass lift varied quite a bit but was generally at least a few dB.
So, if we EQ to be perfectly flat in room at the listening position, we are bucking the trend of nearly all well respected high end speakers. In my opinion, we're basically over compensating. It doesn't sound good to me, either. Nothing like reality.
I've read explanations on why this is. Seems to be a combination of a few things: treble declines more rapidly with distance and usually has more limited dispersion, room reinforcement of low frequencies, etc.
Also, I do Audyssey Pro calibrations where it interfaces with a computer and lets you see the response. Audyssey Pro does incorporate a HF roll off, though it gives 3 different options (mainly differing in starting frequency and slope of HF roll off).
Also, I've verified that McIntosh's MX150 and Anthem's ARC both EQ to a similar house curve.


----------



## Moonfly (Aug 1, 2008)

But can you compare speakers to a proper subwoofer? It makes sense to me to try improve the bass response on speakers that generally cant shift a large amount of air in the same way proper subs can. The more air you can move, the more effortless the bass becomes and a speaker with a house curve applied still doesnt shift air like even average subs. Once you get to dual 18" territory, I fins even a moderate boosting of the sub channel totally unnecessary and detrimental to trying to achieve seamless integration.

Thats just me though, if you like a house curve I wont tell you any different, because at the end of the day what you like and what I like may well differ and nothing will change that. You like what you like and should set your system up accordingly. I think the fact I like a system Q sound or around .6-.65 compared to the .5 many in the US seem to prefer probably has a part to play in that though. One reason I aim for a flat response is that at my proffered system Q, increasing the sub channel or adding house curves makes the sub channel to heavy.


----------



## charlesp210 (Jan 20, 2010)

Where can I find the reference material on House Curves. It seems like Wayne has written something like this, but I can't find it.

I tend to believe a house curve is a good idea, though you can easily overdo it (as I was doing in previous years), and it has to be understood also in terms of the listening position. If you are listening in a highly room mode cancelling center-room position, you need tons of EQ boost merely to get to flat, and adding a house curve on top of that can cause more trouble than it's worth. If you are listening next to the rear wall (I know this is not recommended, but it's what I do by necessity in my bedroom) you naturally get bass augmentation from the boundary, and equalizing to flat means a huge bass cut which sounds very unnatural. In a better mid room (but not room center) position, I'm thinking I will go with very mild house curve.

I'm thinking a good rationale for house curves is that rooms by their nature have overall bass gain, even at the most optimal location. If I try to cut back this overall gain too much, it sounds unnatural. Hearing is somehow compensating for the room bass gain, so pushing a speaker response to flat makes it sound unnatural. That being said, I don't necessarily want all the irregularities, just a nice overall gain comparable to what the room does on average.

This year I've dropped all equalization and have been experimenting with listening position instead. I'm finding I get best results as far as I can get from room center and as close as possible to the speakers. However not too close to speakers either, that makes it too obvious I am listening to speakers.

But now that I'm finding some good listening positions, I think I want to add in equalization again and have been thinking about this very question: house curve or not, and would like to see some house curve references.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

charlesp210 said:


> Where can I find the reference material on House Curves. It seems like Wayne has written something like this, but I can't find it.


Here:
http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/96-house-curve-what-why-you-need-how-do.html


----------



## Chad B (Oct 7, 2011)

KalaniP said:


> Here:
> http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/96-house-curve-what-why-you-need-how-do.html


Good reading, thanks for the link!

For the last year or so I've been playing with my car EQ house curve. I've felt that my car audio system needed a much stronger curve than any home audio system, and I just attributed it to having to compensate for road noise. Lately I've been liking about 2 dB/octave roll off above 200 Hz, with an increased bass lift below 200 Hz or so. So the roll off occurs throughout the entire midrange instead of just the treble, and the bass lift is much stronger. In my car, that sounds much better balanced to me than how I do most HTs and home audio systems. Looks like the small space of the cabin and close listening position have a lot to do with it, also.


----------

