EarSpace!!!!

[Ralf11]

Frank, I have a dummy head you can tune...

[mansr]

9 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Frank, I have a dummy head you can tune...

He already has one, firmly attached.

[esldude]

Maybe a good topic for another thread, or one to continue in this one. 

 

What is the optimum method to record your stereo at your house so others could listen to the recording and know what your stereo sounds like?

[pkane2001]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

Maybe a good topic for another thread, or one to continue in this one. 

 

What is the optimum method to record your stereo at your house so others could listen to the recording and know what your stereo sounds like?

 

As I suggested earlier, record IR at the listening position, then use it to convolve with any piece of music while playing through reasonably flat headphones.

[esldude]

1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

As I suggested earlier, record IR at the listening position, then use it to convolve with any piece of music while playing through reasonably flat headphones.

Yes, but is the IR at the listening position going to give someone the correct sound elsewhere?  I know it will give the sound as it was at the listening position, but doesn't that primarily mean we believe FR is the main issue for sound?  I mostly agree with that idea fwiw.  

 

I've not done exactly what you describe, but maybe I should. 

[fas42]

26 minutes ago, mansr said:

He already has one, firmly attached.

 

Yes, it's only dummies who believe that if you record music coming from an audio system that it should sound something like the actual recording. Sharp headed individuals know that all sorts of special measures have to be taken to realise this, because audio sound is such a weird thing ...

[Ralf11]

One of you might want to let Jana Dagdagan know about this.

 

I don't know if she has any technical background or not (just that she is nice, female and young - so different from most audiophiles...)

[pkane2001]

18 minutes ago, esldude said:

Yes, but is the IR at the listening position going to give someone the correct sound elsewhere?  I know it will give the sound as it was at the listening position, but doesn't that primarily mean we believe FR is the main issue for sound?  I mostly agree with that idea fwiw.  

 

I've not done exactly what you describe, but maybe I should. 

 

The problem with applying some other room/system IR to your own speaker system is that you'll overlay it with your own room/system IR. It will produce a combination of the two -- a double convolution or a combination of the two rooms and systems

 

That's why headphones are probably the best bet to use this method to listen to someone else's system. Or an anechoic chamber with very flat-response speakers.

 

Of course, this will not reproduce the sound at any position other than where the IR was recorded. You can always record multiple IRs from different locations, row C left, right, middle, row F, and row ZZ, etc.

 

IR contains much more than FR -- it contains reflections, timing, and frequency variations, so it really is the fingerprint of the whole playback chain, including the room.

 

It would be interesting to try a deconvolution using IR. This should, in a perfect world, result in the removal of all the system-induced errors, including the room, reflections, etc., leaving the pure 'original' signal.

[STC]

7 hours ago, Blake said:

I still need to listen on headphones (which is what Jana suggested in her intro).

 

A binaural recording must be listened to with headphones. When you listened to them over loudspeakers you introduced many errors that it destroys the natural cues of ILD and ITD. Furthermore, the frequency response inside your ears is modified extensively that it will never sound correct over the speakers. You also introduce crosstalk with speakers.

 

[STC]

On 10/10/2018 at 5:23 PM, esldude said:

I've also read, and wish I kept the paper, where it was said in an anechoic chamber listening to a pair of loudspeakers, the room is dead of course, and you just hear sound from speakers at the speaker mainly.  But if you had the listener place their head on a chin rest and against a forehead rest to arrest small head movements the sound for at least many people suddenly imaged mostly inside their heads similar to what most recordings do over headphones.  

 

Now I remember. I think you are referring to cone of confusion where without head movement you could not tell the location accurately because of identical ILD and ITD. This is an unique situation and hardly possible in normal listening as we also could distinguish the sound location from the spectral content learnt from prior knowledge. 

[pkane2001]

On 10/11/2018 at 7:48 PM, esldude said:

Yes, but is the IR at the listening position going to give someone the correct sound elsewhere?  I know it will give the sound as it was at the listening position, but doesn't that primarily mean we believe FR is the main issue for sound?  I mostly agree with that idea fwiw.  

 

I've not done exactly what you describe, but maybe I should. 

 

It would be an interesting experiment to try IR's from different systems to hear how they all sound. Anyone who has done measurements of their speaker system at the listening position using REW sine sweeps should be able to create an IR wave file that captures their room and system characteristics. If everyone could then upload their IR file to share with others, we'd have a very interesting collection to play with! All that's required is a player/renderer software that supports convolution (for example HQPlayer) and a set of quality headphones. If there's interest, we could start a separate thread for this discussion.

 

Heck, I might actually finally learn what Frank's sorted system sounds like ?

 

[STC]

28 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

It would be an interesting experiment to try IR's from different systems to hear how they all sound. Anyone who has done measurements of their speaker system at the listening position using REW sine sweeps should be able to create an IR wave file that captures their room and system characteristics. If everyone could then upload their IR file to share with others, we'd have a very interesting collection to play with! All that's required is a player/renderer software that supports convolution (for example HQPlayer) and a set of quality headphones. If there's interest, we could start a separate thread for this discussion.

 

Heck, I might actually finally learn what Frank's sorted system sounds like ?

 

 

Why looking for the imperfect IR of listening rooms? Google for free IRs of real concert halls, churches and many others. 

[fas42]

Well, there's a poor imitation of such at

 

 

This is via cheap Sharp boombox speakers, through the only partially optimised NAD rig - strangely, it sounds somewhat like the source ... .

 

Also, other clips at my YouTube channel, to give a bit more of a flavour, .

[esldude]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

It would be an interesting experiment to try IR's from different systems to hear how they all sound. Anyone who has done measurements of their speaker system at the listening position using REW sine sweeps should be able to create an IR wave file that captures their room and system characteristics. If everyone could then upload their IR file to share with others, we'd have a very interesting collection to play with! All that's required is a player/renderer software that supports convolution (for example HQPlayer) and a set of quality headphones. If there's interest, we could start a separate thread for this discussion.

 

Heck, I might actually finally learn what Frank's sorted system sounds like ?

 

Yes, let us start a thread about that.  I'm interested.  Sounds like fun.  

 

I'm aware of the concept, but have never bothered to actually do such things.  

 

Should we start a thread in the general forum or in DSP, Room Correction???

[esldude]

49 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Why looking for the imperfect IR of listening rooms? Google for free IRs of real concert halls, churches and many others. 

The idea is for me to take the impulse response and let others use it with convolution so they can listen over headphones and get a good idea (we hope) of what listening at my house sounds like.  Ditto for other people. 

 

I've not done this so don't know how well it works.  I know recording at the listening position does not work.  I know recording very close to the speakers does a pretty good job of letting someone hear the FR of my speakers remotely.  Binaural works according to some people though not for me.  So if convolving the IR of my listening position lets someone hear my speakers/room good.  Even better you can choose your own music and know what it might sound like over my system at my house once you have my impulse response to use during playback.  

[STC]

42 minutes ago, esldude said:

The idea is for me to take the impulse response and let others use it with convolution so they can listen over headphones and get a good idea (we hope) of what listening at my house sounds like.  Ditto for other people. 

 

Maybe I am still stuck with the OP intention.

 

What will you be using for convolution? Dirac?

[esldude]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

Maybe I am still stuck with the OP intention.

 

What will you be using for convolution? Dirac?

I don't know yet.   I don't have Dirac though a friend does.  So I was hoping for some open source solution.  Maybe the Foobar Impulse Response Convolver plug in?  Maybe a convolver plug in for a DAW?  Have any suggestions?  Oh and we weren't trying to steer away from the OP intentions.  Which is why the talk of a new thread. 

 

Getting back to the OP, if we get this figured out to work better than binaural I see no reason to attempt to get Jana's interest in it. It might be more useful for the same purpose than what she has done in the first video. 

[STC]

23 minutes ago, esldude said:

if we get this figured out to work better than binaural

 

It will never be better than binaural. 

 

BTW, i think there is some confusion about the terminology used here. Maybe, convolution is using real IR to create reverbs. Another way is using artificial reverbs. It is possible, to use IR of the room and inverse the frequency response and use them for room correction. I thought that's what the OP intended but then some of the other replies caused a bit of confusion.

[esldude]

12 minutes ago, STC said:

 

It will never be better than binaural. 

 

BTW, i think there is some confusion about the terminology used here. Maybe, convolution is using real IR to create reverbs. Another way is using artificial reverbs. It is possible, to use IR of the room and inverse the frequency response and use them for room correction. I thought that's what the OP intended but then some of the other replies caused a bit of confusion.

Well to be very clear, binaural is piss poor for me.  If you wished to let people use headphones to hear what the sound was on another system at another location what would you suggest?

 

My complaint was with binaural being so poor.  With a stereo pair at the listening position being so poor.  It was suggested using IR and convolvers would let you hear over headphones a better result to accurately let one hear what another location sounded like. 

[STC]

3 minutes ago, esldude said:

Well to be very clear, binaural is piss poor for me.  If you wished to let people use headphones to hear what the sound was on another system at another location what would you suggest?

 

My complaint was with binaural being so poor.  With a stereo pair at the listening position being so poor.  It was suggested using IR and convolvers would let you hear over headphones a better result to accurately let one hear what another location sounded like. 

 

Why not burn about $75 and get the Roland binaural microphone and make few recordings. Use the same earphones and listen to the recordings. Theoretically,  you should hear the same ( a little compromise is required). 

 

Quote

 

It was suggested using IR and convolvers would let you hear over headphones a better result to accurately let one hear what another location sounded like.

 

 

Unless the IR was recorded with a binaural microphones, the room signature will never be the same.

[esldude]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Why not burn about $75 and get the Roland binaural microphone and make few recordings. Use the same earphones and listen to the recordings. Theoretically,  you should hear the same ( a little compromise is required). 

 

 

Unless the IR was recorded with a binaural microphones, the room signature will never be the same.

That has been on my list of things to do. 

 

But it doesn't solve the problem here.  Those will hopefully work for me.  But not for someone else.  That is the idea presently under discussion.  How do I record something, so that others can play it back and hear what I heard?

[STC]

Only a binaural recording will do but still it is still someone’s pinnae. Hearing is like thumb print. It is unique to each individual.  

 

The mpre practical iS to capture the direct sound reaching your ears and the 360 degrees IRs of the room. The other person should able to replicate the sound provide his own room acoustics is eliminated. 

[pkane2001]

7 hours ago, STC said:

 

Why looking for the imperfect IR of listening rooms? Google for free IRs of real concert halls, churches and many others. 

 

I'm all for trying concert halls and church IRs in my listening, but being part of this audiophile hobby, I'm also interested in hearing how different speakers sound when placed in a listening room optimized by other audiophiles. But, if you can point me to available IRs for these other venues, I'd be very happy to give them a try, also.

 

I found an interesting product that didn't quite do it for me called Out of Your Head (OOYH). Let's you apply an IR for various speakers and listening rooms to your headphone output. All the effects it gives me sound a bit muddled and some unbalanced to me, a bit 'in the barrel' sound. Don't know if that's an issue with how these were produced or my headphones

[pkane2001]

3 hours ago, STC said:

Unless the IR was recorded with a binaural microphones, the room signature will never be the same.

 

The same as what? I think you're still missing the point of an IR convolution. It is to reproduce the effects of the room and the characteristic sound of the playback system, including the speakers for another listener, with a different system at a different location.

 

Capturing IR doesn't require binaural microphones, and in fact, IR is probably better to be captured through one of the channels rather than through a stereo mic.

[STC]

7 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

The same as what? I think you're still missing the point of an IR convolution. It is to reproduce the effects of the room and the characteristic sound of the playback system, including the speakers for another listener, with a different system at a different location.

 

Capturing IR doesn't require binaural microphones, and in fact, IR is probably better to be captured through one of the channels rather than through a stereo mic.

 

I know what It is. I use over 100 of them for each channels. That’s the reason this topic about Dirac room correction using IR and listening to another room with the IT is confusing. 

 

Could you please ease list down all the software and impulse response you use to “to reproduce the effects of the room and the characteristic sound of the playback system, including the speakers for another listener, with a different system at a different location.”  

 

That at will be helpful for me to understand how you are dealing with the convolution because I am doing it very different understanding. At times, you are on same page but at times you are saying something else what IRs not supposed to do. That’s where the confusion is.