Jump to content
  • mitchco
    mitchco

    Acourate Digital Room and Loudspeaker Correction Software Walkthrough

    thumb.pngIn this article, I walk through the steps using Acourate to produce a default or baseline correction that is repeatable. By following the same steps, one should be able to achieve a similar baseline correction. This baseline correction is designed to provide the listener with a perceptually flat frequency response from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. Making the measurement and correction process predictable and repeatable is important to achieving a successful sonic result that one would be happy with.

     

    Dr. Uli Brueggemann’s Acourate ( approx. $400 USD) is a high end audio toolbox with many functions. The Acourate web site provides a good description of the software solution:

     

    The sound arriving at the listening position is measured and analyzed. The quality of the direct sound is analyzed preferentially within an adjustable time window. In combination with a target function (adjustable by the user according to listening habits and preferences) a correction filter is calculated. The music signal will be corrected by the filter during playback. Thus an optimized sound will arrive at the listening position.

     

    Low frequencies cause standing waves in any room, also described as room modes. Some frequencies will be boosted, others will be attenuated. The room correction avoids too loud playback levels by attenuating the corresponding frequency range. Weak levels will be boosted carefully to a higher level.

     

    Acourate applies a psychoacoustic analysis to ensure correction filters fitting to the human ears.

    Furthermore Acourate corrects timing errors of the room and the speakers by a phase correction. The target is to get as close as possible to an ideal step response, the best possible coherence, and similarity of response between the loudspeakers.

    As a result the music reproduction is improved regarding tonality, sound stage, focusing, transparency, clarity, resolution and attention to detail.

     

    Mastering engineers, Bob Katz and Dominique Bassal provide testimonials for Acourate. Here is an excerpt from Bob Katz:

     

    Acourate is the first DRC that I can thoroughly recommend. The resulting sound is unquestionably equal or superior to the uncorrected loudspeaker in all respects: Transparency is equal, there is no perceived loss with Acourate. It is truly an audiophile-quality system that even die-hard audiophiles and analogphiles need not be afraid of. Everything else about Acourate makes the corrected loudspeaker sound superior: Stereo imaging and soundstage are more exact and the sweet spot in the center is effectively widened. Tonality is greatly improved and the frequency response extends perceptually flat from 20 to 20 kHz. Transient impact is superior and there is no loss of headroom and no perceived noise, when the gain staging is done correctly. Some of the technical reasons for Acourate's superiority: 64-bit calculation throughout, properly dithered to 24-bits at the end of the chain; no degrading ASRC circuit, the sample rate that goes out is the same as what comes in. No overcorrection, a unique breakthrough in psychoacoustic analysis beats any previous third- or sixth- octave techniques for estimation of the audible effect of the room and loudspeaker combination, and a variable calculation window ensures accurate frequency response. For the first time with any correction system, I felt no need to change or tweak any filters or add any filters to the circuit. Superior target design, this is the most ergonomic part of the program and allowed me to zero in on the ideal high frequency rolloff for my system in a very short time. I haven't found need to change the target since the first day I designed it. Superior impulse response and phase response. Superior crossover implementation, linear phase and with the most accurate curve. Basically, they do everything right and I've only scratched the surface in this description of its superior abilities. Superior to any other DRC I have used or tested.

     

    I have been using Acourate for several weeks and can verify that it works as described in Uli’s solution description. I also agree with Bob Katz and Dominique Bassal testimonials. To my ears, Acourate’s psychoacoustic designed FIR filter is absolutely transparent. Just as transparent as my Lynx Hilo. The Acourate designed filter sounds perceptually correct to my ears. Meaning that the tonal balance is neutral with a solid 3D image. I will say more in the conclusion. Let’s get started with the walkthrough.

     

    open.png

     

     

     

    Hardware requirements:

     

    A calibrated measurement microphone, microphone preamplifier, mic stand, cables, and an Analog to Digital Converter (ADC) are required. I use MP-1r-KIT Acoustical measurement kit (approx. $230 USD). The kit comes with a calibrated mic and preamp:

    MP-1r-KIT.jpg

     

    The kit is spec’d from 20 Hz to 20 kHz ±0.2 dB. Wolfgang, the owner of iSEMCon, has indicated to me that the mic has useable response to 30 kHz. Wolfgang also offers measurement mics with calibrated responses past 30 kHz as does other manufactures, like the Earthworks M50 (3 Hz to 50 kHz ±1/-3 dB). Coupled with a Rane MS1S Mic Stage (flat from 3 Hz to 100 kHz), one could have accurate and precision measurement of infrasonic and ultrasonic responses. Another approach is to purchase a calibrated mic from a company like Cross Spectrum Labs or order one from Uli. These are but a few suggestions.

     

    A calibrated mic is required to tailor the system’s frequency and phase response to a specific “target” response with a tight tolerance. This level of precision is critical to achieve accurate tonal balance (i.e. perceptually flat from 20 Hz to 20 kHz). Being off by 1 dB or so is not only audible, but can tilt the overall tonal balance (i.e. timbre) from being a bit too dull to a bit too bright or vice versa. More on target response later.

    Side note, Acourate requires using a sound card or outboard A/D D/A converter with an ASIO driver. ASIO bypasses the normal audio path from a user application through layers of intermediary Windows operating system software so that an application connects directly to the sound card hardware. ASIO provide the lowest latency interface, and avoids common issues of the Windows OS resampling and/or applying DSP effects unbeknownst to the operator.

     

     

    Set up to take measurements:

     

    The measurement microphone is set up in the listening position. I have been using DRC software for 2 ½ years and measuring speaker systems/acoustic spaces spanning 30 years. Including studio control rooms, audio dealer critical listening rooms, live sound venues, iMAX theaters, etc. My point being is that there are many ways to take acoustic measurements. Based on my experience, I have tried to make this as simple as possible, yet cover off the most important aspects:

     

    1. Establish a Reflection Free Zone (RFZ) in the listening area as best as possible. For acoustic measurements, move any chairs, tables, sofas, etc. out of the way between the speakers and the listening position. The Calibrated Acoustic String is a great method for determining a RFZ. More on RFZ and acoustic treatments. From a technical measurement perspective, the rule of thumb is, with an ETC window from 0 to 50 milliseconds, all reflections (amplitude spikes) are -20 dB or lower from the peak. My room meets this spec.
    2. Set the height of the measurement mic to be the same height as ones ears (while sitting in the listening position) and ideally that would be the same height as the speaker’s tweeters.
    3. If measuring a stereo system, point the microphone towards the speakers, down the centerline. If measuring a surround system, point the measurement mic straight up. Whichever position is chosen, be sure to use the corresponding calibration file. There should be a calibration file for on axis response and one for 90 degree diffuse response.
    4. Whether using a tape measure or laser distant measurer, it pays sonic dividends to line everything up to be as symmetrical in the room as possible and to as tight of a tolerance one can achieve. Hint: a 20 kHz frequency has a wavelength of 0.678 inches. I recommend marking the mic position once set up so it is easy to place the mic in the same spot the next time around.

     

    Almost ready to measure, but the first step is to import the microphone calibration file into Acourate.

    As an aside, Uli offers a free service where one can download a standalone version of AcourateLSR2 Logsweep Recorder, take a measurement, send the resultant pulse files to Uli, along with a couple of songs. Uli then prepares the correction and convolves the music with the correction and sends the convolved songs back in which one can listen and compare to the original tracks.

     

     

    Import the microphone calibration file:

     

    A directory structure is required to store Acourate projects. I created a directory structure called, “AcourateProjects” at the root of my C drive, and in this folder, created a number of subfolders to hold various Acourate projects. I also copied my microphone calibration file into the subfolder I am using for this article. Note that the mic calibration file may have a “.cal” file extension. To make it easy to import into Acourate, change the file extension to “.txt”.

     

    Once the folder structure is created, the next step is to launch Acourate:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image0-s.png

     

     

     

    In the Sample rate drop down box, select the sample rate for the project. If interested in ultrasonic response, 48, 88, or 96 kHz would be good choices. I selected 96 kHz.

     

    The next step is to set the project workspace to one of the subfolders previously created. Under the File menu, select, “Project Workspace Definition”. This will bring up the following dialog:

    image1.png

     

     

     

    Here I clicked into the directory path field which opens a file navigation dialog, and navigated to one of the subfolders I created under AcourateProjects directory.

     

     

    Now that I have an active workspace, from the File menu, select: “Import Amplitude (Mic Calibration or Target Curve)” which opens up a file dialog to the just set workspace path and now import the mic cal file. A dialog box will appear:

     

    image2.png

     

     

     

    Click on yes. Another file dialog appears:

     

    image3.png

     

     

    Click on yes.

     

     

    Acourate should now display the mic calibration:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image4-s.png

     

     

     

    To get a better view of the amplitude response, in the toolbar, click the radio button Ampl:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image5-s.png

     

     

     

    This is displaying the amplitude over frequency of the microphone calibration file. Remember, we don’t want the frequency response of the microphone to influence the measured response of the speakers and room.

    Under the menu FD-Functions, select, “Amplitude Inversion”. A dialog box will appear:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image6-s.png

     

     

    Leave Minimum Phase selected. Click the Series2 radio button as that is where the result (inverse) curve will be placed once calculated.

     

    As a side note, notice in the toolbar the Active Curve 6 radio buttons. Whenever saving or opening files, click the appropriate Active Curve button first for the file to be saved or an empty radio button when opening a file. For example, when first launching Acourate, the 1st button will be selected, so when opening a pulse response, like for the left speaker/room measurement, it will be in active curve 1. When opening the right pulse, ensure that the active curve 2 radio button is selected first, otherwise active curve 1 will be overwritten, in the display, but not the saved file on disk.

     

    Click on Calculate Inversion. Acourate now should be showing the mic cal and the inverse of the mic cal, similar to this:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image7-s.png

     

     

     

    Under the File menu, select, “Save Mono Wav” which opens a File Save dialog box. I named mine: “mic cal.wav”. A Save Option dialog will appear:

     

    image8.png

     

     

    I chose 64 bit.

     

    Once the dialog closes, under the Edit menu, click on “Clear Curve”. Now that the mic cal is cleared from the main Ampl window, on the toolbar, click on the radio button: “A/T” which now shows both the amplitude and time graph displays.

     

    From the LogSweep menu, select: “LogSweep Recorder”:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image9-s.png

     

     

     

     

    If using the free LogSweep Recorder (LSR2) to try Uli’s free service, it will look like this:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image10-s.png

     

     

    In the LSR2 above, click on Filter and select the mic cal. In the Acourate version of the LogSweep Recorder, click into the mic calibration field and an open file dialog box will appear. Select the mic cal file. All done. Keep the LogSweep Recorder open.

     

     

     

    Taking the first measurement:

     

    With the LogSweep Recorder still open, I adjusted a few parameters. I know my floor standing speakers have a frequency range of about 30 Hz to 30 kHz. In the “sweep start” field, I left the default value of 10 Hz. In the “sweep end” field, I entered 33 kHz. If the project sampling rate is 48 kHz, then the maximum sweep end is 24 kHz. With 96 kHz project sample rate, the maximum sweep end is 48 kHz. If required, select sound card driver and input/output channels:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image11-s.png

     

     

    Note the warning in red. If one has a SPL meter, each speaker should be outputting 83 dB SPL (slow averaging, C weighting). If no meter, the monitor level (i.e. volume) should be set so that the speakers are playing at a comfortable listening level. Note the sweep takes 60 seconds, so if it is too loud, that affords an opportunity to turn the monitor level down.

     

    Click Start Recording:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image12-s.png

     

     

    Recording complete.

     

    Click to enlarge

    image13-s.png

     

     

     

     

    Calculating the filters:

     

    Let’s have a look at the amplitude over frequency response of the system. In Acourate toolbar, select the radio button Ampl:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image14-s.png

     

     

    On the left hand side, above and below the auto checkboxes, I enter in values (30, -50) to show more of the amplitude. This is a full resolution (i.e. unsmoothed) view of the frequency response of the system.

     

     

    In order to “see” how our ears “hear”, Acourate calculates a psychoacoustic frequency response which also takes into account the transient behavior of music signals. In Acourate, under Room, select Room Macro 1 Amplitude Preparation:

     

    image15.png

     

     

     

    I am not going to explain each field in every screen shot. Uli provides answers to those in this introduction to Acourate (PDF Link). However, I will mention which fields I have changed from default values. Best practice is to enter a “High Frequency Treatment” value that is 1 kHz or so less than the “sweep end” value used in the measurement. This prevents any issues due to the sharp cutoff. The psychoacoustic treatment applies a gentle filter to prevent discontinuities. Otherwise I left the defaults. Acourate now displays a visual representation of how I perceive the spectral response of my speakers/room at the listening position:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image16-s.png

     

     

     

    Now I can apply a target curve. In Acourate, under the Room menu, select Macro 2 -Target Room Designer:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image17-s.png

     

     

    This is like starting out with a blank canvas as one can design any target curve, within reason. The purpose of the target curve is to design the in-room tonal response. One is playing with tonality and every dB counts. I could start out with a straight line target that is “flat”. However, a flat in-room frequency response is not the desired target.

     

     

    I have found that the following target provides a “perceptually” flat frequency response (thanks to Bob Katz):

     

    Click to enlarge

    image18-s.png

     

     

    Note I have zoomed in on the amplitude scale so each vertical division is 2 dB. Some folks may be surprised at the frequency response unevenness, especially below 400 Hz. This is typical for most speakers in real rooms, even in (moderately) acoustically treated rooms, like mine for example. More on this in the conclusion.

     

     

    The design of the target specification is flat to 1 kHz, and using 1 kHz as the hinge point, a straight line to -6 dB at 20 kHz. Target design requires accuracy with precision. Even a 0.1 dB change in tilt at 20 kHz makes a meaningful audible difference because the target is a broadband adjustment from 1 kHz on up. Each one of the green dots on the target designer is an anchor point that can be clicked on and moved around. Target points can be added by grabbing the point on the far right and dragging it on the target. Also note, a variety of filters on the right can be engaged. Take care that the target is below the measurement. Only parts of the measurement curve above the target will be corrected. Save the target and exit.

     

    Click to enlarge

    image19-s.png

     

     

     

     

    With the perceptually flat target designed, the next step is to apply inversion (i.e. target curve – measurement = correction). From the Room menu, select Room Macro 3 Inversion:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image20-s.png

     

     

     

     

    Run Macro 3:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image21-s.png

     

     

     

     

    From the Room menu, select Macro 4 – Filter Generation and excessive phase correction:

     

    image22.png

     

     

     

    Similar to the frequency dependent windowing in the amplitude preparation, frequency dependent windowing parameters have to be defined for the excess phase correction. The windows define the time span for phase calculation. Start values are 1.5/3. For left and right channels one can define different values, but they should not be too different. A bigger value will result in a bigger phase correction. But it is necessary to watch out for instable results with big values. In my case, I entered in values 6/6 for left channel and same for right channel.

     

    Note that there is no correction gain being applied. By default the correction will be normalized in a way that no frequency will be boosted above 0 dB.

     

    Check all filter sample rates that will be used. Finally, set pre-ringing compensation, in my case, I set 2/2. More about pre-ringing compensation.

     

    Run Macro 4:

     

    image23.png

     

     

     

    The FIR filters have been generated and stored as wav files in the workspace project directory.

     

     

     

    Filter Verification Step – Test Convolution

    Here I inspect the frequency and step response of the filter to ensure no anomalies.

    From the Room menu, select Macro 5 – Test Convolution:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image24-s.png

     

     

     

    Click yes:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image25-s.png

     

     

     

    Click Ok.

     

     

    From the toolbar menu, select the Time radio button:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image26-s.png

     

     

    Pretty good step response. Again, a few iterations may be required and details can be found in Uli’s pre-ringing compensation document.

     

     

    One can also inspect the frequency and phase response of the correction. Here is the frequency response, in which I have run Macro 1 amplitude preparation, (in the TestConvolution directory) so that we can see the psychoacoustic response at the listening position:

     

    Click to enlarge

    image27-s.png

     

     

    Note the vertical division is in 2 dB increments. Other than one or two ±2 dB peaks/dips, the response is ±1 dB from 32 Hz to 28 kHz within the perceptually flat target response.

     

     

     

    Installing the filter for use:

     

    What is required is a Convolution engine. Acourate has a separate Convolution Engine, along with other complimentary software products such as AcourateNAS. For this report, I used JRiver’s Convolution engine:

     

    image28-2.png

     

     

    The correction filters will automatically switch based on input sample rate.

     

     

    Ready to listen to music!

     

     

     

    Conclusion:

     

    For folks that have never measured their speakers/room before and/or designed a custom finite impulse response (FIR) filter, it can be a bit of a challenging task. However, following the steps here, and after a couple of trial runs, and maybe some assistance from Uli’s knowledgeable and friendly support forum, I can set up, measure, tear down, design and implement the correction filter in under 60 minutes. The results presented here are from my 3rd run.

     

    The reward is a finely tuned musical playback instrument that will bring one closer to the music. Short of a professionally designed and built acoustic listening space, I know of no other way to achieve this level of playback accuracy from speakers in a room.

     

    For me, I am trying to replicate as accurately as possible the music that is stored in the digital media file on disk. For me, transparency is important as I want to hear the music and not the deficiencies in my speakers (not time-aligned or phase coherent) and room (poor room ratio, stereo offset on centerline, firing across short wall).

     

    To my ears, the Acourate correction filters are completely transparent, I cannot hear any pre-ringing or any other digital artifacts like I have heard with other DRC software. There is no compressing of dynamics or any other anomaly that I could detect while listening for several hours.

     

    To my ears, the filters sound correct from a psychoacoustic listening perspective. The spectral balance from top to bottom sounds perceptually flat to my ears. The tone quality or timbre is completely neutral.

     

    With the left and right speaker within ±1 dB tolerance over the frequency range ensures a rock solid image. With the phase corrected, the “right” 3D image is presented at the “right” time (i.e. step response). This phase correction combined with a RFZ provides a level of listening clarity I have not heard before on my system. Almost like wearing headphones, but does not sound “in the head”.

     

    To my ears, the bass response of the speakers in my room has never sounded tighter. The low bass is there, but does not suffer the “single note” bass sound of my badly proportioned room. Nor does it sound boomy or muddy. It sounds similar to the headphone experience of tight, clearly defined bass. Every room will have a resonant frequency (with peaks and dips) that is largely determined by the room’s physical dimensions. To find a rooms Schroeder frequency, and other important acoustic SQ parameters, enter in the rooms dimensions.

     

    Acourate excels in smoothing out the “boxy” sound present in virtually every listening room. Just hearing the “coke bottle” effect or “one note” bass resonance gone is worth the price of Acourate alone.

     

    This article just scratches the surface of Uli’s high end audio toolbox. On my to-do list is to tri-amp my speakers using Acourate’s high quality linear phase digital crossovers.

     

    I am very impressed with Acourate. Bottom line, I hear more music and less room. For the money, I can’t think of a single upgrade to any music playback system that has this level of audible and measurable sound quality improvement.

     

    Highly recommended.

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

    image29-300px.pngNext Steps:

    As I mentioned in my previous article, I plan on using these binaural microphones to record the before and after correction, so folks can hear the improvement made on my system.

     

    Further, I am going to use difference testing to see how close the sound arriving at my ears is compared to the music stored in the digital media file on disk.

    Until then, enjoy the music!

     

    Link to Part II - > Advanced Acourate Digital XO Time Alignment Driver Linearization Walkthrough

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

    About the author

     

     

    Mitch-200.jpgMitch “Mitchco” Barnett

    I love music and audio. I grew up with music around me as my Mom was a piano player (swing) and my Dad was an audiophile (jazz). At that time Heathkit was big and my Dad and I built several of their audio kits. Electronics was my first career and my hobby was building speakers, amps, preamps, etc., and I still DIY today ex.png. I also mixed live sound for a variety of bands, which led to an opportunity to work full-time in a 24 track recording studio. Over 10 years, I recorded, mixed, and sometimes produced ex.png over 30 albums, 100 jingles, and several audio for video post productions in a number of recording studios in Western Canada. This was during a time when analog was going digital and I worked in the first 48 track all digital studio in Canada. Along the way, I partnered with some like-minded audiophile friends, and opened up an acoustic consulting and manufacturing company. I purchased a TEF acoustics analysis computer ex.png which was a revolution in acoustic measuring as it was the first time sound could be measured in 3 dimensions. My interest in software development drove me back to University and I have been designing and developing software ex.png ever since.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Thanks Mitchco for grabbing hold of the third rail of audiophilia! This is the topic that most audiophile don't want to touch, but everyone needs to address; no matter how great the room. I will be adding a couple of subs on my front and back walls crossed over around 50 hz. I don't like the idea of correcting high frequencies. My past experience (albeit limited) with audiolense tells me correcting HF is usually detrimental to good sound.

     

    Would I be able to set a partial (low frequency) target curve along with the crossover/delay in acourate? My NOS ladder dac already produces something similar to Bob's house "perceptually flat" response. :-O Does acourate work with all sample rates up to 192k? I know DIRAC is up to 96k and I believe audiolense can handle up to 192k.

    Thanks again,

    Michael.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Okay, but how are you doing it? If Acourate can't do it, some of us would be interested in what you are using as a substitute.

     

    My (admittedly limited) knowledge of DRC programs is that they all work with PCM, and most will downsample 4X files to 24/96 in order to do the RC.

     

    You can use DRC filters created by number of applications, like Acourate, with HQPlayer and it performs the necessary processing. IOW, it has convolution engine for DSD.

     

    Any sampling rate used for creating the filter is fine, although I recommend using maximum supported sampling rate.

     

    There are two separate things, 1) creating DRC filters, 2) applyingthe filter.

     

    I've been using for example RoomEq Wizard for creating filters for use in HQPlayer to deal wit some room modes in bass region.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I spoken to EMM Labs about this at length some time ago and they were emphatic that this is simply not possible. DSD is a differencing playback format.

     

    I've always loved the especially when someone says something I want being impossible. It makes the challenge especially interesting.

     

    Of course I know exactly how my software algorithms perform this operation.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't like the idea of correcting high frequencies. My past experience (albeit limited) with audiolense tells me correcting HF is usually detrimental to good sound.

     

    Would I be able to set a partial (low frequency) target curve along with the crossover/delay in acourate?

    I truly believe that 99.9% of Acourate users do not have a problem with high frequency correction. Personally I would not run without it.

    But it is also possible to limit the correction, see the picture.

     

    LFCorrectionOnlyTweaked.PNG

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've always loved the especially when someone says something I want being impossible. It makes the challenge especially interesting.

     

    Of course I know exactly how my software algorithms perform this operation.

     

    Miska - can you elaborate on how you are doing this. No one believes you.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I spoken to EMM Labs about this at length some time ago and they were emphatic that this is simply not possible. DSD is a differencing playback format. That is, the "sound wave" is either increasing or decreasing with each sample (e.g. 1 = increase, 0 = decrease--or the other way around, I cannot remember).

     

    Unlike PCM, it does not, cannot, "describe" the wave within the sample because it does not decimate the data. This is likely the great benefit of DSD: it eliminates quantization error. HOWEVER it also means that the signal cannot be shaped via DSP (of course, the signal is "shaped" via a filter to remove hypersonic noise, but that's not the same thing).

     

    That doesn't make entirely sense. What then was the basis of the Genex Mix + engine based on Sony Oxford native DSD processing?

     

    http://www.oxford-digital.com/pdf/GenexSmartODL_06_10_09.pdf

     

    As far as I know this is still licensable technology from Oxford Digital

     

    Technology Licensees - Licensing Audio Technology & Effects

     

    Patents continue to be filed in the area of native DSD signal processing

     

    Patent US7302303 - Mixing system for mixing oversampled digital audio signals - Google Patents

     

    And there is prior research

     

    AES E-Library » Research on Cascadable Filtering, Equalization, Gain Control, and Mixing of 1-Bit Signals for Professional Audio Applications (Research on Cascadable Filtering, Equalization, Gain Control, and Mixing of 1-Bit Signals for Professional Audio Applications, AES convention 102, 1997)

     

    http://www.eecs.qmul.ac.uk/~josh/documents/ReissSandler-DAFX2004.pdf (DIGITAL AUDIO EFFECTS APPLIED DIRECTLY ON A DSD BITSTREAM, Proc. of the 7th Int. Conference on Digital Audio Effects (DAFX-04), Naples, Italy, October 5-8, 2004)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Miska - can you elaborate on how you are doing this. No one believes you.

     

    Just like any other hardware or software manufacturer, I don't want to tell how my things exactly work. I've spent quite a lot of R&D effort getting where I am and I'm all the time working on new things and improving existing ones. So it would be just plain stupid. Most of the time I'm telling and talking much more than many other manufacturers who are dead silent apart from press releases produced by their respective marketing departments.

     

    You can try it out yourself if you don't believe. I'm happy with it myself, especially compared to what else is available out there. If nobody believes me, oh well, too bad...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Is it possible to use this on a Windows computer to generate the correction and then use the results with a plug-in on a suitable Mac OS X player (like Audirvana)?

     

    JRiver Media Center on Mac uses the same 64-bit floating point SSE accelerated convolution engine as the Windows version described in this article.

     

    It should also supports automatic filter bank switching, just like the Windows side.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm running digital room correction just fine for DSD at native rate...

     

    That's astounding! To be "pure DSD" from source to DAC you would either have to implement a volume control in the DSD domain or use a pure analog volume control post DAC. Miska, please tell us about your DSD drc solution. (So many abbreviations, so little time to learn them. :-)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Okay, but how are you doing it? If Acourate can't do it, some of us would be interested in what you are using as a substitute.

     

    My (admittedly limited) knowledge of DRC programs is that they all work with PCM, and most will downsample 4X files to 24/96 in order to do the RC.

     

    That's one distinguishing feature of Acourate. There is no up or downsampling and Acourate works at the incoming sample rate. This requires automatic filter switching but the reward is increased sonic transparency.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Dallas, speaking of third rail, NOS dacs are the third rail of audioqphilia! Without getting into why I would never use a NOS DAC isn't it true that all current NOS Dacs are limited to 16 bit input? Well, Acourate Convolver (as well as the Convolver in JRiver) calculates at 64 bit floating point and dithers to 24 bit to feed the DAC. If you want to do drc, Dallas, properly you should use a DAC that will not truncate the high resolution information being sent to it. The issue with target roll off is the least of your worries, but yes, you can design any target. .

    Thanks Mitchco for grabbing hold of the third rail of audioqphilia! This is the topic that most audiophile don't want to touch, but everyone needs to address; no matter how great the room. I will be adding a couple of subs on my front and back walls crossed over around 50 hz. I don't like the idea of correcting high frequencies. My past experience (albeit limited) with audiolense tells me correcting HF is usually detrimental to good sound.

     

    Would I be able to set a partial (low frequency) target curve along with the crossover/delay in acourate? My NOS ladder dac already produces something similar to Bob's house "perceptually flat" response. :-O Does acourate work with all sample rates up to 192k? I know DIRAC is up to 96k and I believe audiolense can handle up to 192k.

    Thanks again,

    Michael.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I previously PM'd you the details about my setup so you should know that my DAC fully resolves all bits and doesn't lack a reconstruction filter. I appreciate your contribution to DRC elsewhere. I don't appreciate your other rhetoric.

     

    Dallas, speaking of third rail, NOS dacs are the third rail of audioqphilia! Without getting into why I would never use a NOS DAC isn't it true that all current NOS Dacs are limited to 16 bit input? Well, Acourate Convolver (as well as the Convolver in JRiver) calculates at 64 bit floating point and dithers to 24 bit to feed the DAC. If you want to do drc, Dallas, properly you should use a DAC that will not truncate the high resolution information being sent to it. The issue with target roll off is the least of your worries, but yes, you can design any target. .

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Mitch,

    My mic calibration files are .frd, .csv and .xls. I got my mic from Herb and csacoustics. I am trying to use the logsweep and I can't figure out how to import my calibration files into it. It's looking for a .wav file.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That's astounding! To be "pure DSD" from source to DAC you would either have to implement a volume control in the DSD domain or use a pure analog volume control post DAC. Miska, please tell us about your DSD drc solution. (So many abbreviations, so little time to learn them. :-)

     

     

    This is what I was told as a potential customer, as I am very interested in doing this, if it works, by purchasing HQPlayer. Hats off to Miska for working on this:

     

    "If Acourate can export filters in WAV format you can use those. WAV needs to be mono per channel, but stereo WAVs are easy to split to mono ones.

     

    Since PCM filter WAV is by necessity bandwidth limited, I have implemented "HF-expand" option for expanding the filter as flat above it's Nyquist frequency. However I recommend using as high as possible sampling rate for the filter WAV. If 352.8/384k is possible, then things would work pretty nicely without "HF-expand" too. And it's not bad with 176.4/192k either.

     

    To enable DSD processing HQPlayer you need to un-check the "Direct SDM" box in "DSDIFF/DSF Settings" -dialog. Then you can perform DRC and also multichannel speaker distance and level adjustments plus main digital volume control. For any processing I recommend using max -3 dBFS main volume setting to avoid overloads. Overloads in DSD are more nasty than in PCM.

     

    When source is DSD and output mode is DSD, DRC processing is performed at native source rate. You can combine it with per channel level and speaker distance adjustments plus global digital volume control, performed at native target rate. IOW, you can decide to resample. So usually when I play DSD64 content, I perform DRC and some level adjustments and output at DSD128 rate. DACs like exaSound E20 allow performing DSD64 -> DSD256 upsampling combined with processing. But you can also play DSD128 -> DSD64 if necessary.

     

    If source is DSD and output mode is PCM, then DRC processing is performed in PCM at 1/16 rate after conversion."

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My mic calibration files are .frd, .csv and .xls. I got my mic from Herb and csacoustics. I am trying to use the logsweep and I can't figure out how to import my calibration files into it. It's looking for a .wav file.

     

    Mitch has written in his article:

    I also copied my microphone calibration file into the subfolder I am using for this article. Note that the mic calibration file may have a “.cal” file extension. To make it easy to import into Acourate, change the file extension to “.txt”.

    Your .frd file is also a text file with ascending pairs of frequency and amplitude in each line. Thus simply rename the file extension to .txt and follow the article.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I previously PM'd you the details about my setup so you should know that my DAC fully resolves all bits and doesn't lack a reconstruction filter. I appreciate your contribution to DRC elsewhere. I don't appreciate your other rhetoric.

     

    Dear Dallas: Sorry to rile you. We got out of sync. I read your PM after writing my reply in this thread! You have supplied some important information about your NOS DAC. I'm still suspicious because anything that doesn't measure flat has to be colored. Many if not most loudspeakers measure a high frequency rolloff and so target design is often to mirror the slope of the loudspeaker's native response but get rid of the major up and down shifts. So I think even with a flat target and your rolled-off DAC you're going to have some issues unless your loudspeakers are flat on axis and possibly flat in the power response. Which ordinarily (without an NOS DAC) would be EXTREMELY bright!

     

    Anyway, let's please agree to agree that there are a number of controversial (third rail) subjects in the audiophile world, among them:

     

    1) NOS DACs vs. Oversampling DACs

     

    2) Linear phase versus minimum phase and Apodizing anti-image filters

     

    3) and now, "To DRC or not to DRC". As a card-carrying audiophile up until about a year ago I was thoroughly in the "analog domain crossovers and analog domain EQ" camp. I built my own analog crossovers and even some filtering to deal with remnant low frequency artifacts. Out of necessity, because every DRC I had ever tried had some form of compromise or veiling. It was (and still is) the rule that DRC is not an audiophile-acceptable product. It's going to be very hard to convince most audiophiles that there is now even a system (Acourate, for example) that is the sonic exception that breaks the rule.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I noticed the thread is acting weird for some reason. It's like the posts appear and then disappear. I don't know what's going on.

     

    Yes, you are correct there are some incendiary topics in this world and you are correct that I managed to hit a couple of them right off the bat. I wanted to use some language to get this thread going since I find that there's too much discussion on things that don't really matter in the grand scheme of things and too little discussion concerning the things that DO matter. I believe this topic is of utmost importance and I look forward to learning as much as possible from folks like you, Uli and Mitch. I only hope that my ridicule inducing remarks can draw more attention to room acoustics. I am a criminal defense lawyer, so I am used to taking a beating for someone else's mistakes. :-)

     

    Dear Dallas: Sorry to rile you. We got out of sync. I read your PM after writing my reply in this thread! You have supplied some important information about your NOS DAC. I'm still suspicious because anything that doesn't measure flat has to be colored. Many if not most loudspeakers measure a high frequency rolloff and so target design is often to mirror the slope of the loudspeaker's native response but get rid of the major up and down shifts. So I think even with a flat target and your rolled-off DAC you're going to have some issues unless your loudspeakers are flat on axis and possibly flat in the power response. Which ordinarily (without an NOS DAC) would be EXTREMELY bright!

     

    Anyway, let's please agree to agree that there are a number of controversial (third rail) subjects in the audiophile world, among them:

     

    1) NOS DACs vs. Oversampling DACs

     

    2) Linear phase versus minimum phase and Apodizing anti-image filters

     

    3) and now, "To DRC or not to DRC". As a card-carrying audiophile up until about a year ago I was thoroughly in the "analog domain crossovers and analog domain EQ" camp. I built my own analog crossovers and even some filtering to deal with remnant low frequency artifacts. Out of necessity, because every DRC I had ever tried had some form of compromise or veiling. It was (and still is) the rule that DRC is not an audiophile-acceptable product. It's going to be very hard to convince most audiophiles that there is now even a system (Acourate, for example) that is the sonic exception that breaks the rule.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Audirvana and Pure Music can host Mac OS X AU plugins.

     

    Two convolvers in AU plugin format are:

     

    Lernvall LAConvolver - free:

    Lernvall Audio

     

    One issue is that you need a different filter impulse response for each sample rate of music you will play. Lernvall performs SRC on the impulse response in real time to match the sample rate of the music. Alternatively, you can configure Audirvana or Pure Music to upsample the music to a fixed sample rate, such as 192 Kbs, and then use a 192 Kbs impulse response from Acourate.

     

    Hi Bob: I downloaded and looked at LAConvolver's settings from within Audirvana. I don't yet have a filter file to run (will reboot into windows tonight to try Acourate--oh, that's right, their trial does not generate filters!), but I do have a question:

     

    At the top of LAConvlover's window, it says "Plug-in Sample Rate: 44,100," and the User Guide page says "If the sample rate of the file doesn't match that of the plug-in the impulse is sample rate converted as it is loaded."

    That would seem to imply that even if I generate a filter file at say 176.4kHz (which is what I like Audirvana/iZotope to real-time upsample all my Redbook tunes to), LAConvolver is going to downsample my filter file. Is that the case? And what does that mean for the accuracy of the filter and for my actual music files which I want upsampled?

     

    Perhaps LAConvolver wont be the best choice for those of us who use A+ to upsample? Please educate me further if you will be so kind.

    Thanks,

    ALEX

     

    P.S. I also just remembered that the Edirol UA-5 which I can use as a mic-pre/USB ADC captures only to 96kHz, and that's with their drivers which may not be ASIO-compliant. Darn, I wish Mr. Brüggemann would allow for an actual trial product so I could see if I could sort all this out.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Lernvall LAConvolver

     

    Alex/Superdad: Sorry for the terrible lead. I find the same thing: LAConvolver seems to permit only 44.1 sample rate.

     

    Bob Katz's recommendation for Reverberate seems a good prospect because the product is updated frequently and is supposed to be compatible with Mountain Lion. The cheaper "Core" version, which is what you want to run an impulse response generated by another program, is about $50.

    LiquidSonics - Reverberate Core | Convolution Reverb for VST, RTAS and AU

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Lernvall LAConvolver

     

    Alex/Superdad: Sorry for the terrible lead. I find the same thing: LAConvolver seems to permit only 44.1 sample rate.

     

    Bob Katz's recommendation for Reverberate seems a good prospect because the product is updated frequently and is supposed to be compatible with Mountain Lion. The cheaper "Core" version, which is what you want to run an impulse response generated by another program, is about $50.

    LiquidSonics - Reverberate Core | Convolution Reverb for VST, RTAS and AU

     

    No problem. Thanks Bob. Any thoughts about the LiquidSonics plug-in versus the other one from your first recommendation, the MellowMuse? I am too tired tonight (and just finished a long heart-to-heart with our A+ senior student daughter about colleges--while having having had a bit to much to drink--me not her!) to figure out the difference between them. Both are $50 bucks. I just want whichever will take various resolution Acourate filter files and apply them as an AU within the wonderful Audirvana Plus while I upsample Redbook to 176.4kHz. (Wow, thank the OS X speller for keeping this whole paragraph from being unintelligible!)

     

    Good night,

    ALEX

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I also just remembered that the Edirol UA-5 which I can use as a mic-pre/USB ADC captures only to 96kHz, and that's with their drivers which may not be ASIO-compliant. Darn, I wish Mr. Brüggemann would allow for an actual trial product so I could see if I could sort all this out.

    1) According to the website of Roland there is an ASIO driver for the UA-5 soundcard. Even if a soundcard is without ASIO driver it can be used by the Asio4All driver, which simulates an ASIO interface.

     

    2) In most cases I use 48 kHz for recording. A samplerate of 96 kHz allows to record up to 48 kHz = fs/2. But most users do not have a microphone and a speaker good for this frequency range. How to correct something that you cannot measure very well?

     

    3) there is a free logsweep recorder AcourateLSR2 on the Acourate website. You can also download the Acourate trial, it allows a recording too.

     

    4) an efficient test of different plugins can be carried out by using test filters. I prefer a test filter that simply creates an echo. Thus you can test the filter data format and also the function. I can create such filters for you. Just tell me what format you need.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Lernvall LAConvolver

     

    Alex/Superdad: Sorry for the terrible lead. I find the same thing: LAConvolver seems to permit only 44.1 sample rate.

     

    Bob Katz's recommendation for Reverberate seems a good prospect because the product is updated frequently and is supposed to be compatible with Mountain Lion. The cheaper "Core" version, which is what you want to run an impulse response generated by another program, is about $50.

    LiquidSonics - Reverberate Core | Convolution Reverb for VST, RTAS and AU

     

     

    That wasn't my recommendation, actually. I haven't used any Mac convolvers yet. Let me tell you a bit about the Sourceforge Convolver config format, which you can also read about at the Sourceforge Convolver website.

     

    1) The measuring program has to create a filter file for each sample rate. These are usually in WAV format.

     

    2) Some measuring programs also will attempt to create a file in .cfg format to conform with the Sourceforge spec. The .cfg files essentially tell the convolver which wav file to use for which sample rate. And there needs to be a separate .cfg file for each sample rate as well. cfg files can be edited with a text editor and it may take you a few hours to get one done. If your convolver conforms to the Sourceforge format, I have some example .cfg files that you can use to start with.

     

    3) The convolver you use should include a log or a status file to show you that it is using the correct filter file and that it is switching properly with the sample rate. it's always good to check this file until you are comfortable your convolver is working properly. Never turn your back on computers :-). If not, yes, the upsampling option is a good choice and it may even be the better sounding choice, depending on which DAC you are using and how it performs at different sample rates. My newest Avocet DAC module internally upsamples to close to 8x 192 and has a very nice (chip-based ASRC) filter and is very well designed so I'm not sure I hear much of an advantage upsampling in front of the DAC or not. There was a time when upsampling in front of the DAC was definitely advantageous in my system.

     

    The differences you hear could be caused by:

     

    a) the quality of the filtering in the DAC's digital filter

    b) The quality of the filtering in the analog filter if there are different analog filters for each rate

    c) jitter

    or just d) Your imagination !!!!!!

     

    Hope this helps!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Any thoughts about the LiquidSonics plug-in versus the other one from your first recommendation, the MellowMuse?

     

    Congrats on your daughter's academic achievement!

     

    I backtracked and discovered that the recommendation for LiquidSonics Reverberate Core came from both Uli and *progear in the following thread. However, I think they tried only the Windows versions.

    http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/drc-arc-vs-acourate-vs-xx-10324/

     

    I haven't implemented convolution filters at all. I only jumped in because I'm a long-time Mac user and it looked like no one had any suggestions for a convolver for Mac.

     

    Alan Jordan tried several convolvers for Mac 3 years ago and had success only with Mellowmuse IR1A. But he did not try LiquidSonics Reverberate Core.

    RE: Feedback in case you convolve on a Mac - aljordan - Computer Audio Asylum

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I backtracked and discovered that the recommendation for LiquidSonics Reverberate Core came from both Uli and *progear in the following thread. However, I think they tried only the Windows versions.

    I have even never used Reverberate :-). So I have just brought Reverberate on the list because I got a report by another Acourate user with a Mac:

    On the front of the convolution players, I have two final contenders:

    - Liquid Sonic's Reverberate, that fills the bill and creates a nearly identical reproduction of your convoluted file;

    - SIR2, that seems a little brighter and "tighter" (nothing like ARC, which now sounds really brittle and thin in comparison)

     

    Reverberate is my final choice, not only for economic reasons, but also to "save" my ears, in view of long days of work...

    He also gave a hint to pay some attention on the setting:

    I found out that Reverberate had a tiny switch hidden in a corner, that was doing normalization of the convolution files, "on" by default!

    JRiver Mediacenter also has a normalization checkbox (on by default). By normalization bit accuracy may get lost.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Astonishingly little conversation about the design of the target curve... And SPL response is just one dimension to room acoustics...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...