Hi guys!

In your opinion, which speaker or headphone comes closest to the Fletcher & Munson curve?

The famous NS10 is rumored, but the AirPods also come close. I haven't found any other alternatives to my ears. Do you know any gems?

 

There are no speakers that follow the Fletcher-Munson (or rather the Robinson-Dadson) curve. The perceptive curve changes depending on the loudness/dBSPL of the music. The concept would be cool if there was such a technique implemented (different curve at what loudness you play at), but it would also be impractical because everyone's frequency perception differs. As well as you would have to sit at the exact calibrated distance from the speakers all the time. Take into account that all rooms are different, acoustically treated (and not acoustically treated), etc.

The NS10 are horribly nasal(1k)/telephonic(2k) and have bass roll-off. They have a design flaw that offsets the woofer and the tweeter. They suck.

 

Hmm... Didn't know Fletcher & Munson were making speakers now... Wonder if they are any better than my 4411's?

 

Well, if want to mix mid range/fletcher munson, i'm 100% of time using Auratones. I talk about em time to time, but it's an unreplaceble tool for my arsenal. When it comes to monitoring, i need all kind of lens. The Auratones are my mids lens.

 

The Fletcher–Munson curvatures arent’t a simple frequency response curve; they describe how perceived loudness changes with frequency and sound pressure level. It’s more complex than a basic response graph, I don't think that would even be possible in a reliable and practical way with current tech.

 

Last edited: Oct 24, 2025 at 5:42 AM

One gold tip that i got once: mixing in different volume levels may help you to nail it.

 

Now imagine having to constantly adjust the speaker’s SPL based on the frequencies being reproduced, while also taking your room into account, so that it continually matches the target curve... now yall notice how deep this rabbit hole goes and how insanely impractical that would be, even in a 'surround audio' setup.

Anyways, this was never a need as much as there is no perfectly flat room or audio setup on this earth.

 

Do we really need a fancy treated room tho? yall would be shocked seeing my room and hearing my music. Theres no treatment at all.

 

you would simply add it as digital filter and then this system had the benefit that it is ltready known how loud it will be a certain voltage.

but the whole concept which is asked for is still nonsense, of course. no idea for what such a speaker could be good for.

 

that’s how a weighting filter works, the equal-loudness (Fletcher–Munson) contours aren’t a weighting filter but a family of level-dependent, non-linear curves that describe human loudness perception. A single fixed curve can’t adapt to SPL, so it can’t match all contours

 

Yes maybe I explained it not well, I was intending the curve of F&M at 80spl, just similarity. Like if you see the curve of the airpods are similar to the f&m curve, ns10 too. I read an article that cites "

 

Yes, but that's the 'problem' here: we will hear your music differently than you hear it in your space. You know your room, you make your mix decisions in it, but your audience will hear them differently. That's why we treat rooms, to listen and make adjustments in a neutral room, so that our audience hears what our intentions are.

 

Fletcher Munson curves are outdated. They have been superseded by ISO 226:2003, an updated standard.

It is better to acoustically treat your room and invest in decent speakers, than to arbitrarily chase curves.

 

not sure what you mean. that´s what i said, that the speaker already knows how loud it is. that would be a minor benefit compared to a software, which would require the user to measure the level in his room himself.

but it doesnt matter. you do not need such speakers for mixing.

to be exact, you also hardly need it in othe situations. i have created a composition which consists of pure tones (aka resynthesis), where you can apply equal loudness curves to. it turned out to be almost useless because of the room characteristics the system stood in.

 

the treatment is not exactly what makes the mixing room match a bit better to the average listener situation - that is rather the level you listen when mixing.

 

Playback level is also an important factor - that a mixer doesn't have influence of. And agree, the average listener doesn't have a treated room, same size, loudspeakers or even the same ears.
But treating is a good way to insure all decisions during mixing aren't influenced by the room (..too much). A low end that's 'off' can have serious implications on how a mix sounds in different places. A mixer in an untreated room wouldn't know, because to his ears, it sounds ok.

 

Just my 2p: you would have to play such speakers at the same specified level, if they were F&M calibrated, since it's impossible to make speakers that change their frequency and dynamic curves the way F&M curve does. Or is it? Maybe one day. Speaker manufacturers do try and some even state in the specs how their speaker's frequencies change with loudness. An unwritten rule for mastering and mixing is to play the speakers at a volume in the upper 80dB level range when mixing, and always use the same volume, or even better a few different volume levels. When mixing or listening, actually, so your ears can remember how it sounds at different levels.

I use 3 different levels to play music at. Low, mid, and high. Call them like 3, 7, and 11. That's how I've been listening and checking tracks for a couple of decades.

 

Last edited: Oct 26, 2025 at 11:54 AM

Sure if you're working in a 'real' studio with mid-field monitors. Bedroom studio mixing at 80db?? Are you aware of how ungodly loud that is on near-field monitors 3 feet in front of you in your average 12' x 12' space? Have fun going deaf really early and still making everything sound like shit. My Focals don't have a volume/gain control on them. When calibrating with the Blue Sky or even Digido's wav files, they hit about 83db at 0dbFS, that's max volume. Pretty sure Focal didnt design these to run full bore 24/7.. My little Baby RAM controller sits at -24 to -18, any higher than that and I might as well just get out the ear plugs and go to an actual rave or concert.

 

Etymotic ER4SR
- Ultra-flat raw response with minimal bass/treble deviation, but deep insertion makes it perceive closer to contours at 70-80 dB—bass feels extended without boom, treble natural. It's the "NS-10 of IEMs" for detail retrieval.

Sennheiser HD 560S
- Open-back with a near-linear response that tilts just enough (~2 dB bass rise) to counter low-volume dips, sounding "effortlessly neutral" across the curve without hype. ASR scores it high for distortion-free perception.

Focal Clear MG
- Planar magnetic with a Harman-esque curve baked in—bass shelf matches FM boost needs, mid/treble stays even. Feels "alive" at low volumes where others thin out; pros use it for contour-aware mixing.

 

Fletcher and Munson is related to human hearing.
Not the source.

Original NS10 are well regarded for their MID frequencies, because mids are the main mix pivot.
So yes, if you raise or lower speakers VOLUME with mid speakers, it will give you the main pivot.
BUT on the other side, everything else is messed out on NS10 : no bass and crappy tweeter.
So much that some ppl simply UNPLUG the tweeter : better balance with the "NO BASS"

ppl here already gave you infos.

I will add my grain of salt : instead of searching for over priced sh*t like NS10, simply use a SINGLE mono speaker with good mids / single driver, in the middle of you desk.

Like Fostex 6301 or Auratone clones (not over priced / busted original).
There are countless infos on the net.

Mono mid oriented single driver
And complement with another full range stereo system.