Topic: other forms of room correction

[Digities]

it may help some systems, but i really think it's not that useful. i've heard feedback from some guys that their systems sound better without it. heck, 2 channel sure sounds better without it.

i tried a much better room correction thingamajig that really works. this works for 2 channel and multi channel. lots of tweaking options like how much of the reflections to cancel out, how you want your frequency response to be.. even how many seconds to measure. i get even better results going from 10 to 15 to 20 seconds. i'll try 30 or 60 seconds per speaker to measure.

audyssey only does what, half a second ? i don't remember.. it''s been a long since i had a receiver.

btw, how many points of correction can audyssey do ? my little toy goes up to 130k plus per channel.

btw, this is not to offend anyone.. and God knows that i can't carry a decent conversation nor put up an argument re the merits of audyssey or blah blah blah. but it's a mixed rant and rave .

God bless.

[barrister]

.. and God knows that i can't carry a decent conversation nor put up an argument re the merits of audyssey or blah blah blah.

That part I can believe.

[Digities]

why, what's so hard to believe about the rest of my post ?

[rthirtyfourgtr]

btw, how many points of correction can audyssey do ? my little toy goes up to 130k plus per channel.

what are you exactly referring? listening positions? frequency filter points?

130,000 plus points of correction per channel, that seems to be an awful big number. quite curious with that little toy of yours and what it can do...

[Digities]

what are you exactly referring? listening positions? frequency filter points?

130,000 plus points of correction per channel, that seems to be an awful big number. quite curious with that little toy of yours and what it can do...

filter points. i haven't explored the multi-seat correction yet. i only measure from the sweet spot.

it turned my system from something quite unlistenable to a complete sounding system. it got me much closer to the recording. i noticed that bocelli's live in tuscany sounded more like an outdoor event than it did before. before it sounded just like another concert. changes in my system are very apparent. a small change (tubes or cables or dac) and the gain in sq is bigger than without. imaging is well layered and pin point.  soundstage is bigger and depending on the song it can change from a semi flat plane between speakers to almost 360 around the speakers. i can go on and on about the changes in my system but mishka adams is really begging my attention.

there are problems. digital clipping.. set the max correction boost too high (15db or higher) and you might get distortion off of a "hot" signal. you have to tweak the default settings. it took me 3 whole days to get the settings right and there's still some fine tuning to be done (correction window settings).

i moved my system to the bedroom because of a few niceties that i get in my room na wala sa den (cable tv, a colder and quieter ac). since it's my bedroom, i get only half of 25 sq.m. but it sounds better far far from when i had a dedicated room.

cd's almost over and that was a long type.

[Stagea]

i tried a much better room correction thingamajig that really works. this works for 2 channel and multi channel. lots of tweaking options like how much of the reflections to cancel out, how you want your frequency response to be.. even how many seconds to measure. i get even better results going from 10 to 15 to 20 seconds. i'll try 30 or 60 seconds per speaker to measure.

Nice! What are you using, Acourate?

I've always liked TacT's hardware-based solutions (goes the same for Lyngdorf), but the high end ones are too darn expensive.

[rthirtyfourgtr]

filter points. i haven't explored the multi-seat correction yet. i only measure from the sweet spot.

it turned my system from something quite unlistenable to a complete sounding system. it got me much closer to the recording. i noticed that bocelli's live in tuscany sounded more like an outdoor event than it did before. before it sounded just like another concert. changes in my system are very apparent. a small change (tubes or cables or dac) and the gain in sq is bigger than without. imaging is well layered and pin point.  soundstage is bigger and depending on the song it can change from a semi flat plane between speakers to almost 360 around the speakers. i can go on and on about the changes in my system but mishka adams is really begging my attention.

nice...

is it a PC-based software as guessed by Stagea above? how much does it cost? is a calibrated mic included in the package?

[Digities]

stagea, it's audiolense. i like it cause more tweakability with the target curve. each his own. this works for me and the results are quite, short of a word, amazing.

i do want those asc sound panels though. they should work well with audiolense.

400 Euro.

no mic. i use audyssey mic but they suggest a real measurement mic like behringer's ecm8000 or db-x rta-m.

[rthirtyfourgtr]

that's a really nice tool. and speaking of tools, the comparison with audyssey is rather unfair in my opinion. it's like comparing the usefulness of a $50 pocket multi-tool vs. a $1000 500pc. mechanic's tool set


btw, how did you compensate for the audyssey mic's frequency response, is that utility included with the software?

[Digities]

that's a really nice tool. and speaking of tools, the comparison with audyssey is rather unfair in my opinion. it like comparing the usefulness of a $50 pocket multi-tool vs. a $1000 500pc. mechanic's tool set


btw, how did you compensate for the audyssey mic's frequency response, is that utility included with the software?

haha. it allows you to use a mic calibration file but i don't know how to use it...

[fattyacid]

Question mga maesters. How does this work? You install the software to a PC/laptop, connect a mic, and run measurements? How will it filter the audio output? Is there a digital loopback from the source to PC and receiver?

[Stagea]

stagea, it's audiolense. i like it cause more tweakability with the target curve. each his own. this works for me and the results are quite, short of a word, amazing.

Thanks Les. The XO version looks like a powerful tool.

I've always thought about trying Acourate, but I've never really found time to do so.

[Tempter]

No offense meant, I'm not also really a fan of Audyssey... 

It's like take what I give you, you have no other choice.. 

Only 1 thing I like about it, Dynamic Volume, coz it works hehe!!!

[Digities]

Thanks Les. The XO version looks like a powerful tool.

I've always thought about trying Acourate, but I've never really found time to do so.

ok lang acourate.. cheaper but less stuff to play around with .

tempter, that dynamic volume i've never really wanted to use that.. hence my tinnitus from always watching at loud volumes .

[Stagea]

How does this work? You install the software to a PC/laptop, connect a mic, and run measurements? How will it filter the audio output? Is there a digital loopback from the source to PC and receiver?

Yes, you run measurements with a calibrated mic. The software can create a correction file to remedy your room/system issues within the parameters that you set. It will try to approximate your target curve within your set adjustment boundaries. You can export your correction file to a supported processor, or do the correction by software in your computer.

After this, you can remeasure and see if you still have other issues that you'd want to address (or if you want to manually adjust or add filters).

A huge advantage of this kind of software is that you can graphically see your system's biggest faults, so you can go about correcting those (whether electronically, with room adjustments, acoustic treatment, etc.). This makes it a great detection tool, instead of being just a correction tool. Ideally, you should be able to work those problems out before you do electronic corrections. Getting close to the target curve before electronic corrections minimizes the negative effects of the extra layer of processing. The processing in effect would just be the final touch (if you still decide to do so).

[ninjababez®]

bro les, why dont you change the title?  this thread is not about audyssey anyway 

[Digities]

alright ninjababez. you got it.

ivan, that would work.. the problem is it would be very expensive to get the same result and a lot of trial and error. you know how many speakers i've gone through in the early part of this year. that, and moving my system twice.

room treatment though - the 16 inch bass traps i had brought my system closer to a flat frequency response. the icing on the cake would still be DRC. even without room treatment i would still have my drc and it still brings me closer to how i want my system to sound. i would also still want to upgrade my system as DRC really brings out how good your system is. it can work as a band aid or gravy. once you go drc you are not going to go back. i tried a lot of players. cplay, jplay, hqplayer, xx highend.. while my system sounded good and great with some of these players in incremental levels i prefer the use of DRC. once you "master" the art of getting the curve to your desired sound you're set. upgrading and upgrading and upgrading the setup will only bring you more and more of the music but with it still tailored to the character you want. for me it eliminates the need to go out and audition. just choose a good speaker with a decent frequency response (floorstanders would be nice.. you can make them image like mofos too), the character you want from the reviews, more or less you're gonna get the sound you want and then some. also eliminates the sawa factor. i have several presets and if i wanted to change the sound, i would just load a filter in the convolver and i have a different character. of course just make sure the speakers are up to the task and you like their character already. you'd be surprised how changing the target curve and a small .1 db increase in a given frequency will change  the sound.

cables, probably influence the sound by .1 - .5 db. amps.. no idea. but speakers difference is 5 db or thereabouts.. well maybe as much as 10db in certain places. with floorstanders - i noticed that in my 20sq.m. rooms get a much flatter response in the bass area from 100 and below which make for the solid bass. bookshelves will have large dips depending on the size of the room and roll off as high as 150hz without treatment .

treatment - tony's bass traps are amazing. i had the 16s in my room for a while, and compared with or without with the measurement it really brought it closer to flat. this is good cause the speakers or the signal doesn't need to be boosted as much.

anyways. ivan go try it na. they both offer demos. just make sure you turn off the automatic polarity correction in audiolense or everything will be out of phase. pleasant but out of phase .

[Digities]

ivan, one thing i don't get, is how a simple 500kb file can influence the sound completely. i looked it up in audacity and it's completely flat.

[rthirtyfourgtr]

haha. it allows you to use a mic calibration file but i don't know how to use it...

if you get something like the Dayton Audio EMM-6, you can download a file (specific to the one on hand) and plug-in the calibration values into the software. that way the resulting values you see on screen will be more accurate (specially how you are able to perceive spl differences as small as .1dB)

the audyssey mic is good for the receiver model that it was originally packaged with, because the anomalies in performance were accounted for when they programmed the room correction software into it. for your intended use though, the resulting graph on-screen will not be representative of the actual sound reproduction.

now go get yourself a professional grade calibrated mic

[Digities]

if you get something like the Dayton Audio EMM-6, you can download a file (specific to the one on hand) and plug-in the calibration values into the software. that way the resulting values you see on screen will be more accurate (specially how you are able to perceive spl differences as small as .1dB)

the audyssey mic is good for the receiver model that it was originally packaged with, because the anomalies in performance were accounted for when they programmed the room correction software into it. for your intended use though, the resulting graph on-screen will not be representative of the actual sound reproduction.

now go get yourself a professional grade calibrated mic

the dayton audio is tempting. that was suggested to me before and quite affordable. i just have to figure out how to use it as i am using an x-fi xtreme audio for measurement. the guys who use the software use pro audio gear for measurement and play it on their expensive dacs. b00h00.

anyways. it works for now and that is an upgrade for the future. i don't always have to have it right now as i'm satisfied na with what i get. when i want to upgrade that part of my system, that's what i'll do.

[fattyacid]

Yes, you run measurements with a calibrated mic. The software can create a correction file to remedy your room/system issues within the parameters that you set. It will try to approximate your target curve within your set adjustment boundaries. You can export your correction file to a supported processor, or do the correction by software in your computer.

After this, you can remeasure and see if you still have other issues that you'd want to address (or if you want to manually adjust or add filters).

A huge advantage of this kind of software is that you can graphically see your system's biggest faults, so you can go about correcting those (whether electronically, with room adjustments, acoustic treatment, etc.). This makes it a great detection tool, instead of being just a correction tool. Ideally, you should be able to work those problems out before you do electronic corrections. Getting close to the target curve before electronic corrections minimizes the negative effects of the extra layer of processing. The processing in effect would just be the final touch (if you still decide to do so).

Great. Thanks. But can the "correction file" affect the sound characteristics of speaker or puro dB levelling lang siya?

Another one, is this the setup?
HT PC (with calibration SW and correction) -to- HDMI cable or digital RCA -to- AVR (non-audysssey)

[Digities]

Great. Thanks. But can the "correction file" affect the sound characteristics of speaker or puro dB levelling lang siya?

Another one, is this the setup?
HT PC (with calibration SW and correction) -to- HDMI cable or digital RCA -to- AVR (non-audysssey)

db leveling does affect the characteristics of the sound you hear.

pc (room correction + dac) > 2 channel stereo amp > speakers.

for ht and i have been planning this:

pc (room correction + soundcard) > power amp (or if you like, pre amp and power amp > speakers.

[fattyacid]

Tried the demo version of audiolense. I dont have a calbrated mic though, just used the mic from Marantz. So its PC -to- analog stereo out  -to- AVR in -to- speakers. The output was a 90 second "corrected" music. It sounded leveled but very dark and murky. I compared it to the uncorrected music and I can notice how the software raised the vocals to "correct" music. Maganda siguro kung meron akong calibrated mic.

..Sana may mga gurus na mag pa renta ng mga calibrated mics nila. 

[odyopayl]

I'm not a Guru but can Behringer ECM8000 can do justice as calibrated test mic? I'm using this on my Arta Software.

[rthirtyfourgtr]

calibrated mics, prices seem reasonable...

http://www.cross-spectrum.com/measurement/calibrated_behringer.html
http://www.cross-spectrum.com/measurement/calibrated_dayton.html

[Digities]

Tried the demo version of audiolense. I dont have a calbrated mic though, just used the mic from Marantz. So its PC -to- analog stereo out  -to- AVR in -to- speakers. The output was a 90 second "corrected" music. It sounded leveled but very dark and murky. I compared it to the uncorrected music and I can notice how the software raised the vocals to "correct" music. Maganda siguro kung meron akong calibrated mic.

..Sana may mga gurus na mag pa renta ng mga calibrated mics nila. 

fattyacid, try mo ayusin yung target response. also try the xo version. also you might be used to a bright sound. i just use an audyssey mic and it sounds pretty nice. can't do without it .

[fattyacid]

fattyacid, try mo ayusin yung target response. also try the xo version. also you might be used to a bright sound. i just use an audyssey mic and it sounds pretty nice. can't do without it .

Isa nga yun sir sa gusto kong itanong..

Last night I set it up again, this time using HDMI and added a sub via LR preouts ng AVR. So its PC-hdmi-AVR-sub/BS. NAPAKAGANDA ng result. There are some rock songs that my setup cannot deliver well, but after calibration became listenable. Slept around 2AM listening and comparing the corrected songs vs the original. May pros and cons din. I finally noticed the vocals on the corrected songs became bright and tiring. The S is too SSS on vocals. Meron kayang tweak sa target response sir lesley to repress this? I drew a slightly straight/horizontal target but followed the measurement line at both ends.

[Digities]

Isa nga yun sir sa gusto kong itanong..

Last night I set it up again, this time using HDMI and added a sub via LR preouts ng AVR. So its PC-hdmi-AVR-sub/BS. NAPAKAGANDA ng result. There are some rock songs that my setup cannot deliver well, but after calibration became listenable. Slept around 2AM listening and comparing the corrected songs vs the original. May pros and cons din. I finally noticed the vocals on the corrected songs became bright and tiring. The S is too SSS on vocals. Meron kayang tweak sa target response sir lesley to repress this? I drew a slightly straight/horizontal target but followed the measurement line at both ends.

dan, they suggest a downward slope for the target response. not to steep a decline...

[mak_mak]

my AVR is using ARC...(anthem room correction) ...
will try to post my assessment later...