BBIBH,
In reply to:
It struck me that within this board we tell people to trust their own listening, deride them for doing this - especially if you feel something is better (ie. amps, cd players) tout NRC input (Axiom design), dismiss NRC data (this thread)......
What exactly did you expect from a large and varying array of personalities on a public chat board?
Unanimous thoughts?
I think many here do not promote using only one or the other (ears or science data) as the sole source for information. If that is the perception by some, then they need to work on their character judgement skills.
Data can be corroborated by human listening tests and vice versa. This is what Axiom tries to do in their in-house tests and it is a philosophy that many agree with because it makes sense. They have tried to match up these NRC response graphs with what their testers have found to be a more pleasing sound. In most cases, and Alan has said this before, listeners tend to prefer a flat response curve from loudspeakers so Axiom tries to design such a speaker accordingly.
Someone looking for a speaker with bass oomph may look for NRC graphs that have an exaggerated bass hump. Good for them. They are trying to match up what they like to hear with what the science measurements as starting points. As long as they understand the material, then their approach to finding good sound is just as valid as the next guy except they have extra information the "purely by ear" person does not.
Just listening to music is NOT always the only key to most people. Many like to extend their enjoyment with the audio hobby to a deeper level by learning about the technical side of things, probably more than you think.
Some ppl like to listen to music, some ppl like to watch movies, some like to build audio components, some just like to collect vintage equipment (without intentions of even using it) or all of the above, or combinations of some of the above.
To each his own.
