Jump to content
IGNORED

REW-Good Looking Freq Response Graph Doesn't Tell The Whole Story - Random Thoughts/Findings & Lessions Learned


Recommended Posts

On 4/29/2021 at 10:24 AM, Bill Brown said:

Re. your subs, I would encourage you to look at the work of Geddes and Welti re. the multiple sub approach.  I now have four and saw stepwise improvement while adding (3 was great, the 4th didn't add a huge amount).  Many of the longstanding audiophile beliefs are turned on their heads by this research/approach.  Acoustics and measurements below the room's Schroeder frequency are very different from those above.  Some of the reasons I haven't delved deeply into DRC is that I would like to do as much acoustically first and that it isn't clear to me how to incorporate measurements --> filters with all the subs playing.  It doesn't matter what each one is doing individually, but what they are all doing together.

 

https://www.harman.com/documents/multsubs_0.pdf

 

https://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/

 

https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/134568-multiple-subs-geddes-approach.html

 

Bill

Hello,

 

I have read those docs a few times during this journey and they are indeed very interesting. In terms of the Harman paper unfortunately the Sub placement options they show as being ideal do not work exactly in my case. I guess my placement might be considered a bit of a Hybrid of some of theirs. My placement limitations are fully dictated by available AC outlet locations in the room, the length of the power cord that comes with the subs and the fact that my Breaker Box is basically maxed out so adding additional dedicated lines would get quite expensive requiring a new larger box or a Sub box branched off of the current one.

 

During this latest reconfiguration I pretty much tried every spot in the room for the subs even going so far as breaking down my main equipment rack and placing subs in between both main tower speakers. The results in that location weren't bad but aesthetically speaking it just wasn't going to work for me having Subs there.

 

The only thing I didn't try and do was give up my couch location sitting at the Mid point on the left side of the room but there isn't a plug to accommodate a sub there anyway. It would probably be a very good place to put one though if I could.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cjf said:

For the settings being used in the Correction Procedure Designer for my current setup (ie..Config #2) I dont think I've tried to set the 96K Window to "1" yet. I did on the other hand play quite a bit with the 10hz Window but,at least according to the Simulation results, when I did that the graph started to look like a mess and at least one of the Subs would go out of Phase with all the others while viewing the Step Response Simulation results.  I'll give a few more combinations a shot though including some of your suggestions to see how it goes.

 

The TTD per Driver setting in CPD would also make a mess of things in terms of the Simulations in AL. I hear this setting though can go either way and is very system dependent. The Simulations are showing it to not be a good choice for me for whatever reason.

 

There have been several times though that the AL Simulations would look like a mess but the REW results would look better by a decent margin. Perhaps I'm putting too much weight into the AL Simulation and need to try a few more CPD combinations that look not great anyway just to see what the outcome is.

 

Thanks for your thoughts on this post

 

Okay. Sounds like your crossover is perfectly setup.

And I don’t think you need to turn on TTD per driver. All speakers + subs can probably use the same TTD settings

 

The issue is that with TTD settings that go wonky, this is what actually happens:

You can set to 6 cycles at 10Hz and 3 at 96kHz and things go wonky

Or you can set to 5 cycles at 10Hz and 4 at 96kHz and things can equally go wonky

Because ultimately, all the frequencies in between 10Hz and 96kHz is somewhere between 6 & 3 or 5 & 4. And when things go wonky, it’s usually because at a particular frequency in between 10-96kHz, the cycles is set too high.

 

So in fact, you can go up to 6 cycles at 10Hz and may even get better sound but then you would have to compensate by setting to 2 at 96kHz to make sure the frequency in between doesn’t go wonky on you. But to me, if you’re getting pre-ringing even with pre-ringing compensation on, usually, it means your 96kHz cycles for TTD is set too high.

 

In fact, when I first started, I didn’t like setting to 4-6 cycles at 10Hz. So my initial settings were something like 1.4 at 10Hz and 3.4 cycles at 48kHz. It actually gives a completely different sound. But after reading a lot and looking at what other people say, I ended up realizing that indeed by setting to 4-6 cycles at 10Hz, you get a much more coherent and corrected bass response. But to avoid pre-ringing and other phase-related artifacts, I had to lower the cycles at 48kHz accordingly. In fact, I don’t like the cycles at 48kHz to be too much below 2 because I also find that the sound loses a little bit of macro and microdynamics. I don’t know what the equivalent cycles would be at 96kHz.

 

Anyway, like I said, try 5 & 2.5 or 5 & 2. Or if you really don’t care about the pre-ringing, then sure, try 6 & 2.5 or 6 & 2 and see if you like the sound better. Getting the TTD cycles set optimally can significantly improve the sound. There are specific ways to verify the settings looking at the graphs but the graphs Audiolense shows are different than Acourate so it’s harder for me to tell you what to look for as I’m not familiar with Audiolense.

Roon (convolution filter using Acourate) > ultraRendu > Peachtree X1 (Toslink) > Chord Hugo M-Scaler > Chord DAVE > Chord Etude > Dynaudio Confidence C1 Signature + Sunfire TS-EQ10 subwoofers

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, cjf said:

Simulation results, when I did that the graph started to look like a mess and at least one of the Subs would go out of Phase with all the others while viewing the Step Response Simulation results. 

 

The TTD per Driver setting in CPD would also make a mess of things in terms of the Simulations in AL. I hear this setting though can go either way and is very system dependent. The Simulations are showing it to not be a good choice for me for whatever reason.

After thinking about this some more, I realized you can do this instead:

1. Turn on TTD per driver

2. Keep the subwoofer that goes out of phase at 5 & 3 for TTD cycles correction

3. Push the other subwoofers’ correction higher to 6 & 3 if the simulation doesn’t go wonky (or change it to 6 & 2.5 or 2)

4. Try lowering your speakers TTD correction to 5 & 2.5 or 2, or if you really can’t hear or mind the pre-ringing go to 6 & 2.5 or 2

 

That way, at least that single subwoofer won’t go out of phase. And you can get even more aggressive phase correction for the rest of the system in the bass.

 

Personally, for simplicity sake, I would try not turning on TTD per driver first.

Roon (convolution filter using Acourate) > ultraRendu > Peachtree X1 (Toslink) > Chord Hugo M-Scaler > Chord DAVE > Chord Etude > Dynaudio Confidence C1 Signature + Sunfire TS-EQ10 subwoofers

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ecwl said:

After thinking about this some more, I realized you can do this instead:

1. Turn on TTD per driver

2. Keep the subwoofer that goes out of phase at 5 & 3 for TTD cycles correction

3. Push the other subwoofers’ correction higher to 6 & 3 if the simulation doesn’t go wonky (or change it to 6 & 2.5 or 2)

4. Try lowering your speakers TTD correction to 5 & 2.5 or 2, or if you really can’t hear or mind the pre-ringing go to 6 & 2.5 or 2

 

That way, at least that single subwoofer won’t go out of phase. And you can get even more aggressive phase correction for the rest of the system in the bass.

 

Personally, for simplicity sake, I would try not turning on TTD per driver first.

Hello,

 

I may just not be seeing how this is done in AL but it doesn't appear that you can adjust those settings on a per driver/speaker/channel basis. Again, it may be there but I have yet to discover how. This could be because I am dong an "All in One" type measurement but I'm not sure. The settings I am seeing appear "Global" in nature only.

 

I did a very quick and dirty target and correction procedure using Minimum Phase settings last night just to see how it would behave and saw a few improvements in certain areas (like below 14hz where a dip there leveled off nicely) but I need to dive into it more. Interestingly enough, with Minimum Phase targets procedures in the picture I could then enable TTD Per Driver without the previously mentioned Phase issue on the one Sub. I also tried your suggestion of setting 96K TTD Window to "1". I didn't notice anything positive or negative in doing so but will need to play around this some more.

 

One side note, in the previously posted graphs showing Impulse Resp zoomed in real close comparing Config #1 to Config #2 as far as I could tell the Pre-Ringing was no longer happening with my current Config #2. The Saw-tooth graphs seen are from the original setup that I am no longer using (Config #1 w/ 2 Subs). This of course assumes I'm interpreting them correctly :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@cjf I was probably looking at some of your old measurements on your flickr page then. If changing TTD sounds the same to you and you don’t see pre-ringing in your current config, then everything is probably optimally setup. Sorry to send you on a wild goose chase. 

Roon (convolution filter using Acourate) > ultraRendu > Peachtree X1 (Toslink) > Chord Hugo M-Scaler > Chord DAVE > Chord Etude > Dynaudio Confidence C1 Signature + Sunfire TS-EQ10 subwoofers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh no problem at all. I appreciate your thoughts on all this.

 

Yeah Flickr made a mess of the first splash page during my last batch of uploads. I need to go in there and move some of those measurement charts around a bit. The latest charts of Config #2 are closest to the bottom after the system diagram/equipment list stuff.

 

I'll play around this weekend some more and report back on findings..Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

@cjf Certainly the difficulties you describe are real.  I was limited with outlets for the rear subs.  Thankfully I could use some old power boxes with captive cords to reach and they are hidden by the couch.

 

One of the notions that I had to overcome and that then provided a real jump was re. crossovers on mains/ sub XO frequency.  Based on my experiments, I think the traditional thinking re. localization isn't completely true.  Raising the XO to the subs adjacent to the fronts and trying to match the phase of the frequencies coming from the mains' ports and woofers was fruitful.  The subs ended up 180 degrees out of phase to the mains with the XO at 150 Hz.  Sounds crazy, I know.  My thinking now is that the sub is in phase with the port with its 24db per octave roll-off and also with the woofer at higher frequencies (low frequencies now more extended and 80-200 Hz or so "filling in" the traditional floor bounce of mains).

 

I then did a gazillion measurements with the rears and they ended up at reversed phase as well.  There XO is at 150 Hz as well.......I don't hear abnormal localization at bass frequencies.

 

Finally, I have read a fair amount re. minimum v linear phase EQ in the low frequencies and think that if the pre-ringing of LP EQ/XOs is ever audible it is in low frequencies.

 

Bil

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a generic rule I'd advise to not do high boost EQ's, since those will increase distortion without usually helping much. Also gentler EQ adjustments based in 1/9th octave smoothing usually sounds better, very steep narrow EQs tend to cover very narrow listening position and make the sound just weird.

 

So using EQ to force flat frequency response usually sounds bad...

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Miska:  

 

Does your recommendation against narrower bandwidth dips apply to the bass?

 

What room correction software are you using?

Mac Mini (2012 i7) > HQPlayer > RME ADI-2 v2 > Benchmark AHB-2 > Thiel 3.7

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Miska said:

As a generic rule I'd advise to not do high boost EQ's, since those will increase distortion without usually helping much. Also gentler EQ adjustments based in 1/9th octave smoothing usually sounds better, very steep narrow EQs tend to cover very narrow listening position and make the sound just weird.

 

So using EQ to force flat frequency response usually sounds bad...

 

@Miska

 

Hello can you provide an example of what you mean above when you mention using steep narrow eq at 1/9th octave in the context of an Audiolense user like myself? I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

@cjf Certainly the difficulties you describe are real.  I was limited with outlets for the rear subs.  Thankfully I could use some old power boxes with captive cords to reach and they are hidden by the couch.

 

One of the notions that I had to overcome and that then provided a real jump was re. crossovers on mains/ sub XO frequency.  Based on my experiments, I think the traditional thinking re. localization isn't completely true.  Raising the XO to the subs adjacent to the fronts and trying to match the phase of the frequencies coming from the mains' ports and woofers was fruitful.  The subs ended up 180 degrees out of phase to the mains with the XO at 150 Hz.  Sounds crazy, I know.  My thinking now is that the sub is in phase with the port with its 24db per octave roll-off and also with the woofer at higher frequencies (low frequencies now more extended and 80-200 Hz or so "filling in" the traditional floor bounce of mains).

 

I then did a gazillion measurements with the rears and they ended up at reversed phase as well.  There XO is at 150 Hz as well.......I don't hear abnormal localization at bass frequencies.

 

Finally, I have read a fair amount re. minimum v linear phase EQ in the low frequencies and think that if the pre-ringing of LP EQ/XOs is ever audible it is in low frequencies.

 

Bil

With the current 60hz x-over I'm using there are times and certain Freqs where the big 18" Sub sitting right next to my listening chair makes its location a bit noticeable but that is one downfall of having it sit right next to me I suppose. The benefit of having it there is that it seems to help fix other MLP related Nulls that were present before putting it there. Its a Damned if I do and Damned if I don't situation 😀

 

If I move it further away along the same rear wall it ends up being very close to a corner resulting in a -10-12db Null at 19hz due to a half wall I have on the right side of the room. I've thought about ripping the wall out  😈 but then the Sub would be sitting out in the open and look less than desirable.

 

I do have one additional location along that half wall I can try if I get bored which isn't a corner and may eliminate the localization but at the moment its still livable. I think if I were to move up the x-over it would be problematic in my case though.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm currently in the process of evaluating digital convolution, coming from analog parametric eQ that I will keep anyway for my vinyl rig. The thing is that with my Meyer CP10 parametric eQ there are only 3 useful bands (that is with frequencies below 400) : teaches to not go narrow

 

In the attached pictures (1/12 th resolution but the smooth one, "Psy" smoothed presenting the end result with boosts) there's an intended 1.5 dB elevation, bandwidth 1 octave anchored @59 Hz.No eQ at all is applied above 350 Hz. There are 5 additional cuts not shown here. This is the Right channel. The Left (not shown) has only 7 eQ points, 2 only being boosts, and no eQ is applied above 196 Hz.

 

Now, my question : what are your regarded opinions about my boosts ? In the following pictures, I reverse engineer and each checked filter nullifies a boost. I don't believe they do harm, and it sure does not look (and sound) as good as soon as any of them but I'll be happy to take any suggestion yielding to better results. 

PSY.jpg

231.jpg

111.jpg

89.jpg

59.jpg

TODO.jpg

Capture d’écran 2021-05-02 à 06.37.48.png

HQ Player 4 Mac Mini M1

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, cjf said:

@Miska

 

Hello can you provide an example of what you mean above when you mention using steep narrow eq at 1/9th octave in the context of an Audiolense user like myself? I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

 

With REW or other tools it is good to perform 1/9th octave smoothing to the measured response before starting to generate correction filters for it, to avoid filters that have steep (high Q) changes in the correction response. Narrow dips and bumps in the measured response are usually applicable only to a very small area in listening space and overall trying to correct such will make sound weird and dull.

 

You can check the correction filter response for example in HQPlayer to see how smooth the correction filter response is. For linear-phase convolution filters, keeping the correction response smooth also keeps the amount of correction filter pre-ringing at minimum. Steeper the variations in the filter, longer the filter gets with more pre-ringing too.

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cjf said:

Hello can you provide an example of what you mean above when you mention using steep narrow eq at 1/9th octave in the context of an Audiolense user like myself? I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

In Audiolense, you "control" how aggressive you EQ/DSP by controlling the frequency dependent windowing (FDW) which is called cycles before and after the peak in the frequency domain and in the time domain (TTD). Your frequency domain setting is 8 cycles at 10Hz and 5 cycles at 96kHz. I highly doubt that you'll have any steep narrow dips or peaks with that setting. So I wouldn't worry about it. You'll have to set the FDW to much higher numbers where it'll pick up the narrow dips or peaks. In reality, it's a bit more complicated than that but I think my simplification still holds.

Roon (convolution filter using Acourate) > ultraRendu > Peachtree X1 (Toslink) > Chord Hugo M-Scaler > Chord DAVE > Chord Etude > Dynaudio Confidence C1 Signature + Sunfire TS-EQ10 subwoofers

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cjf said:

With the current 60hz x-over I'm using there are times and certain Freqs where the big 18" Sub sitting right next to my listening chair makes its location a bit noticeable but that is one downfall of having it sit right next to me I suppose.

It is hard to know whether you're hearing the 18" subs because you're localizing 20-60Hz from the Sub or more likely, whether you're hearing the 60-200Hz from the Sub even with the crossover. I believe the solutions are either a steeper crossover which can create other problems, or a lower crossover frequency, e.g. 50Hz or 40Hz to see if you run into the same problem.

Roon (convolution filter using Acourate) > ultraRendu > Peachtree X1 (Toslink) > Chord Hugo M-Scaler > Chord DAVE > Chord Etude > Dynaudio Confidence C1 Signature + Sunfire TS-EQ10 subwoofers

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Miska said:

 

With REW or other tools it is good to perform 1/9th octave smoothing to the measured response before starting to generate correction filters for it, to avoid filters that have steep (high Q) changes in the correction response. Narrow dips and bumps in the measured response are usually applicable only to a very small area in listening space and overall trying to correct such will make sound weird and dull.

 

You can check the correction filter response for example in HQPlayer to see how smooth the correction filter response is. For linear-phase convolution filters, keeping the correction response smooth also keeps the amount of correction filter pre-ringing at minimum. Steeper the variations in the filter, longer the filter gets with more pre-ringing too.

 

Ok thanks for the info @Miska

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ecwl said:

In Audiolense, you "control" how aggressive you EQ/DSP by controlling the frequency dependent windowing (FDW) which is called cycles before and after the peak in the frequency domain and in the time domain (TTD). Your frequency domain setting is 8 cycles at 10Hz and 5 cycles at 96kHz. I highly doubt that you'll have any steep narrow dips or peaks with that setting. So I wouldn't worry about it. You'll have to set the FDW to much higher numbers where it'll pick up the narrow dips or peaks. In reality, it's a bit more complicated than that but I think my simplification still holds.

Ok makes sense now. Sounds like the larger the numbers are the more granular the corrections attempt to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ecwl said:

It is hard to know whether you're hearing the 18" subs because you're localizing 20-60Hz from the Sub or more likely, whether you're hearing the 60-200Hz from the Sub even with the crossover. I believe the solutions are either a steeper crossover which can create other problems, or a lower crossover frequency, e.g. 50Hz or 40Hz to see if you run into the same problem.

Yes I suspect its the later as well, meaning the higher Freqs after the x-over point before it falls off into oblivion.

 

I ended up going down another rabbit hole this weekend and moved the F18 to another location and then moved one of the E15's to a spot I've had in mind for quite awhile but never tried. Turns out I should have done this sooner. The spot I've been eyeballing for a few months now ended up being better by a noticeable margin when compared to the spot next to the MLP. My slight localization complaint has now been rectified fully.

 

I'll be doing some more shuffling around this week trying out one or two more remaining combinations before I throw in the towel and call it "good enough".

 

A few things I did notice while playing with Minimum Phase x-overs and targets with AL this weekend is that they "Simulate" quite nicely compared to the Linear Phase x-overs and targets within the AL interface but despite this my ears prefer the Linear Phase flavors instead. Plus it appears the Min Phase stuff doesn't do Time Alignment based on what I am seeing when looking at the Impulse Response measurements in REW. I can clearly see that the L/R Channels no longer converge at the same point just before the initial main spike. It also appears that the Min Phase settings do not control the curve of the top end of the Freq Resp measurement as nicely once the REW measurements are done. I'll see my initial -9db roll off at around 22,050 Khz but then the line will start to roll back up north again for a bit until 32Khz or so resulting in an Upward graph at the high Freq extreme. The Linear Phase settings don't do that even with High Freq boost enabled.

 

One final observation which is that it seems like I'm at a point where no matter where I put these Subs I the room short of being negligent the Freq Resp graph really hasn't changed all that much from Config #2. Overlays are basically mirror images of each other short of a few wiggles and dips here and there. At this point I'm in a battle of recovering a few DB's here and there but mostly these changes are to try and dial in the other stuff like Step, Impulse response, Group Delay and a as smooth as possible Spectrogram with  as few discontinuities as possible.

 

Once I get done shuffling things around again I'll add a new series of graphs and comparisons here. One things for sure, this is beginning to feel allot like work. Moving and dialing in Subs a hundred times or so can begin to wear a man down both physically and mentally 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

@cjf Happy you are getting good results, and yes, it can certainly be tedious...

 

I wonder if there is the possibility of using minimum phase EQ below the Schroeder frequency and linear phase above.  Applying min phase EQ to a minimum phase system corrects frequency response and maintains the overall phase curve (someone may correct me if I am wrong).

 

Bill

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bill Brown

 

Hello,

 

I've not seen the ability to combine both in AL but I'll admit to not knowing how several features and capabilities work in there. I wish there was a deep dive available on all features available but most explanations of how to use the application are extremely high level in nature within the help file.

 

I've been in a listening phase of my new configuration (will call it Config #3) and the results have been very positive thus far and noticeably better than previously reported for Config #2.

 

It will take me a few days to gather all the graphs and comparison charts to post here but will certainly do probably over the coming weekend.

 

I've managed to smooth out the Freq graphs below the 60hz x-over point with the new Sub placement locations and will be focusing on trying to do the same for the upper Freq range next in terms of Group Delay..etc while attempting to keep Distortion figures as low as possible across the board.

 

At one point I considered adding a 4th Sub but honestly I don't think there is anywhere I could place it in the room that would add value based on all the measurements that have been taken thus far and seeing the new results compared to the previous ones posted.

 

One thing is for sure, the Rythmik E15HP2-SE Subs are far more easy to find spots for than the F18 is and the measured differences between them is pretty much unnoticeable; at least at the lower Freq limit I've been measuring to (10hz). If I try and sweep lower the protection circuit on the Sub kicks in due to a power sag in the electrical system in the house. Guess I'll need to address that next. There is no end to the rabbit hole it seems 🙂

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cjf said:

...the protection circuit on the Sub kicks in due to a power sag in the electrical system in the house. Guess I'll need to address that next.

@cjfEarlier in the thread you had mentioned your panel-box was full. I intended to mention then that there are tandem breakers available that might help, FYI.
 

I have used them in scenarios where I can identify that circuits have mainly lighting load, or little used bedrooms, etc. to put on a tandem breaker, freeing up a spot on the buss for a new line.

 

If possible, you may be able to rearrange breakers, or select a spot that is on a more favorable phase, re: fridges, pumps, etc.

 

That said, if you're finding your aggregate load is nearing your service max, it wouldn't help you there. And as always: be safe and follow NEC (National Electrical Code, for non-US readers) guidance or use an electrician! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, cjf said:

There is no end to the rabbit hole it seems

 

Definitely....

 

Happy for you that you are making gains and looking forward to your graphs.

 

Bill

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2021 at 11:16 AM, Bill Brown said:

@cjf Happy you are getting good results, and yes, it can certainly be tedious...

 

I wonder if there is the possibility of using minimum phase EQ below the Schroeder frequency and linear phase above.  Applying min phase EQ to a minimum phase system corrects frequency response and maintains the overall phase curve (someone may correct me if I am wrong).

 

Bill

JRiver has both PEQ and Convolution for playback, I suppose other players too.

Maybe you can measure with REW and create the EQ the first frequency range, add it to Equalizer APO, then measure again and create the second filter, add it to Equalizer APO as well, measure a 3rd time to check, if satisfied, than load both in the player?

1. Sonore ultraRendu - UpTone ISO Regen - Mola Mola Makua - Apollon NC800 SL PRO - Thiel CS3.7
2. LG 65UM7470PSA - Marantz SR7005 - Apollon NCore MP mch - Monitor Audio Platinum PL100+PLC150
3. RME ADI-2 DAC FS - Neumann KH 80 DSP
4. Hidizs S8 - Audeze LCDi3
5. Meizu HiFi DAC - Moondrop Aria

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting concept....

 

Thank you, will keep it in mind.

 

Bill

Labels assigned by CA members: "Cogley's ML sock-puppet," "weaponizer of psychology," "ethically-challenged," "professionally dubious," "machismo," "lover of old westerns," "shill," "expert on ducks and imposters," "Janitor in Chief," "expert in Karate," "ML fanboi or employee," "Alabama Trump supporter with an NRA decal on the windshield of his car," sycophant

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2021 at 8:29 AM, MarkusBarkus said:

@cjfEarlier in the thread you had mentioned your panel-box was full. I intended to mention then that there are tandem breakers available that might help, FYI.
 

I have used them in scenarios where I can identify that circuits have mainly lighting load, or little used bedrooms, etc. to put on a tandem breaker, freeing up a spot on the buss for a new line.

 

If possible, you may be able to rearrange breakers, or select a spot that is on a more favorable phase, re: fridges, pumps, etc.

 

That said, if you're finding your aggregate load is nearing your service max, it wouldn't help you there. And as always: be safe and follow NEC (National Electrical Code, for non-US readers) guidance or use an electrician! 

@MarkusBarkus

 

Thanks for the tip on the breakers. I have two slots I believe I could steal if I decide to start messing with the power. They are currently doing nothing and are used as a 240v feed for an old hot tub which is now gone. I was thinking of taking that and putting a single width 50v breaker in is place which would then feed this Sub panel I mentioned. From there I would add several 15a receptacle's for the audio components but this is just theory on my end at this point as I've not brought an electrician in to validate if it feasible, safe or legal from a code standpoint.

 

I'm hesitant to go down path even though I'm sure it would bring about noticeable sonic benefits. I went a bit wild in my old house with this stuff and lost quite a bit of cash when I sold the house because most people don't care about such things or what it cost to install it thus will low ball you anyway.

 

I haven't ruled it out yet by any means though so thanks again for the alternative option to consider

Link to post
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...