I've never really understood why the following quote from the FAQs is true:
In a typical living room, the acoustical conditions require a flat curve up to a certain frequency, and then a roll-off. This roll-off allows the proper balancing of the direct and reverberant sound at high frequencies.
Shouldn't direct sound be a lot brighter at your ears?
Are movies mastered with too much treble? If that is done, why do they bother, since the x-curve in theaters rolls off the treble to a degree?
I agree that most of my movies sound better with Audyssey Reference's roll-off. A few do not
, and require Audyssey Flat.
Why wouldn't the roll-off be needed for ordinary music CDs, SACDs, etc. as well? Or is it? If so, wouldn't the imaginary perfectly flat speaker, in a room that magically contributes nothing to the sound, be too shrill unless a treble roll off (like Audyssey Reference) was applied?
For years (no, decades) before room treatments such as absorbers and diffusers were popular, purist "Golden Ears" audiophiles listened to pretty flat speakers in ordinary rooms with ordinary furniture, usually with a rug on the floor. I know of none (at least in my circle) who rolled off the treble. A few goosed up the bass, to compensate for bass roll-off in Lp records (so they said). Today, magazines like Stereophile
rarely mention applying treble roll-off, but Stereophile
's founder, J. Gordon Holt (?) did once (in the '90s ... '80s?) write an article called "Down with Flat."