Wow! BOTH our posts were posted in like the same second imagioX1… :sunglasses:
So in sound reproduction (my area of some expertise as a former recording studio owner), the sought after “glory” of any source is “flat response”— which at face value, means what you record sounds like the source you recorded. Flat response (of a particular instrument/voice/thing recorded) for a multi-track recording is the goal of many engineers. NOT THAT MANY don’t use a bias source (or intentional effects) on a track- MOST do! But the baseline for MOST tracks (instruments) in more classical recordings (for example) is to get a “flat response”.
Your definition of CRI makes a LOT of sense to me, because it seems to be a measurement of BALANCE across the light spectrum- as in the sound spectrum I am describing here. It’s called “flat response” because there is no rise or drop at ANY frequency— thus the recording is tracking the source perfectly— so not up or down, but FLAT (meaning dead on at the exact frequency- in time with the source).
Again… a random correlation here after reading the last few posts.
Balance is in a way, an appreciation for the “whole view” (or whole sound-field in the studio) and it’s not always so easy to identify WHAT is missing exactly; as much as it is to “feel” that (that) “something” IS missing… OR alternatively, too bright (or loud) at a certain frequency.