Quad Subs? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 62 Old 01-08-2013, 01:10 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
OK, so I'm getting my new XS15s from PSA tomorrow (YEAH) and was just thinking that I could sell my old subs (2 / Velodyne F1500s) OR I could re-purpose them.

I've got two options I'm considering:
  • Run all 4 subs from the one sub out on my AVR (Denon 2113ci)
  • Use the speaker level inputs on the F15s and run them between my AVR and FL/FR speakers (Klipschorns)

If I were to run them between the AVR and my K-Horns, would I then set the fronts to LARGE in the Denon? What should I set the F15s crossovers to (40-100hz)?

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 62 Old 01-08-2013, 08:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 4,574
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 348
Unless your room is huge you'd probably be better off selling the Velodyne's and just use the XS15's. Integrating disparate subs is not always the easiest thing to do, so why take a chance of compromising the sound provided by your new subs?

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is offline  
post #3 of 62 Old 01-08-2013, 08:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
Thanks Jim...sage advice indeed. That's what I'll do.

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
post #4 of 62 Old 01-09-2013, 02:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SaviorMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: I'm Jackie Treehorn
Posts: 1,391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Why not take advantage of your rare opportunity to experiment? Most people will never own a single capable subwoofer, much less four of them, at once.
jeremymak likes this.

Once again, I am sorry to take a sledgehammer to so small and fragile a nut. -- Richard Dawkins, The Greatest Show On Earth
SaviorMachine is offline  
post #5 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 08:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
coolcat4843's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 736
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Four subwoofers is the optimum number to utilize in your home theater.

Contrary to what you might think, it’s not about getting louder bass. By using multiple subwoofers, you can greatly increase the room’s modal density, largely filling in the peaks and dips, giving a smooth, articulate bass sound. This improves the overall consistency of bass response from seat to seat.

Dr. Floyd Toole has been an invaluable asset to the sound reproduction industry and has devoted a great amount of his life to understanding how sound propagates in a home environment*. Todd Welti did a lot of experimentation with subwoofer placement, numbers, and bass sound quality. The resulting whitepaper on the topic was a culmination of countless tests and acoustical models of playing with multiple subwoofers in different locations in a room to improve bass response over a much wider listening area. In the end, Dr. Toole and Todd Welti concluded that the most ideal scenario for bass reproduction is to have one subwoofer located at the midpoint of all four walls. This configuration displayed the least amount of variation in bass response from seat to seat. Alternately, four subwoofers can be used in each corner.


coolcat4843 is offline  
post #6 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 08:49 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
I am gonna experiment, but my two Velos are currently not working. A friend of mine at work is trying to fix them as we speak!

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
post #7 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 09:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Do you have a way to EQ and measure? With multiple subwoofers (especially when mixing and matching differerent subwoofers) in order to get the most from them you will want to measure them and you will want to implement EQ.
ack_bk is offline  
post #8 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 09:19 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey...probably not what you're talking about. biggrin.gif

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
post #9 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 09:28 AM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Digital Sound Meter......Mmmmmmmmmmm!

All different prices, models and quality levels are available. Simply put "digital sound meter" into your search engine and go from there.
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #10 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 09:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey...probably not what you're talking about. biggrin.gif

I would probably grab something like this mic:
http://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/umik-1

And then use REW (which is free). This is pretty much all plug and play with a Windows or Mac system. This will help you measure the response in your room and your system. But you will still need EQ smile.gif

Audyssey is not bad at all but if you need to EQ mutliple subs that are not of the same performance/make/model you are not going to get that with Audyssey. You would most likely want something like this:
http://www.minidsp.com/products/the-product-concept

With different performing subwoofers, you are going to have to tweak them so you are not overdriving one set to try to keep up with the other set which can have negative results. There are lots of ways of doing this but just plugging in two different sets of subwoofers that perform differently is probably not going to give you the best response. If you bought four identical subwoofers, it would be a lot easier I suspect smile.gif

So just buy two more XS15's and you are all set biggrin.gif
ack_bk is offline  
post #11 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 10:21 AM
Advanced Member
 
coolcat4843's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 736
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

Do you have a way to EQ and measure? With multiple subwoofers (especially when mixing and matching differerent subwoofers) in order to get the most from them you will want to measure them and you will want to implement EQ.

I'm running four budget subs in my HT setup.
Two ported and two sealed.

Ran the full eight position Audyssey MultEQ XT32 with Sub EQ HT calibration.
I was amazed at the final results.
Audyssey seamlessly blended all four subs together so well.
I never knew my four cheap subs could sound and "feel" so good together.

coolcat4843 is offline  
post #12 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 10:57 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Digital Sound Meter......Mmmmmmmmmmm!

All different prices, models and quality levels are available. Simply put "digital sound meter" into your search engine and go from there.

And this is better than my analog SPL meter how?

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
post #13 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 11:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcat4843 View Post

I'm running four budget subs in my HT setup.
Two ported and two sealed.

Ran the full eight position Audyssey MultEQ XT32 with Sub EQ HT calibration.
I was amazed at the final results.
Audyssey seamlessly blended all four subs together so well.
I never knew my four cheap subs could sound and "feel" so good together.

XT32 and Sub EQ HT are pretty slick, you still need a way to measure so you can compare both before and after Audyssey results.

I wish more receivers under $1K had these features... Very few do..
ack_bk is offline  
post #14 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 11:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 190
I keep reading that it's difficult to integrate different subs as opposed to the same subs. Is there any data to back this up? Has anyone run tests to verify this?
KidHorn is offline  
post #15 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 11:54 AM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

And this is better than my analog SPL meter how?

It's digital. Mmmmmmmm! Digital.

(Your comment was; "The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey..")

A sound meter is a EQ tool as it helps equalize each of the sub's output at the main listening position. So I took your comment to mean, you didn't have a sound meter.

Personally, I've never been a fan of analogue as in my case, the needle is always hopping around and it makes it hard for me to get dependable readings but if you're comfortable with your meter, there's nothing wrong with it as again, based on your comment, I was left with the erroneous impression that you didn't have any "EQ" tools.

My mistake.

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #16 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 12:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

I keep reading that it's difficult to integrate different subs as opposed to the same subs. Is there any data to back this up? Has anyone run tests to verify this?

Think about it. Say you have one sub that can play clean (little distortion) to 25hz and another sub that can only play clean to 30hz before it starts distorting. Based on my own experiences with trying to integrate two different performing subs, you end up with distortion and ill effects from the lesser sub trying to keep up. Putting in something like a high pass filter on the lesser sub at 30hz via DSP/EQ would most likely help and result in clearner bass 25-30hz.
ack_bk is offline  
post #17 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 01:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

It's digital. Mmmmmmmm! Digital.

(Your comment was; "The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey..")

A sound meter is a EQ tool as it helps equalize each of the sub's output at the main listening position. So I took your comment to mean, you didn't have a sound meter.

Personally, I've never been a fan of analogue as in my case, the needle is always hopping around and it makes it hard for me to get dependable readings but if you're comfortable with your meter, there's nothing wrong with it as again, based on your comment, I was left with the erroneous impression that you didn't have any "EQ" tools.

My mistake.

-

OK, I get it now. smile.gif

Yeah, I've had my trusty Rat Shack analog meter for probably 20+ years, maybe it's time to go digital! biggrin.gif

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
post #18 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 02:53 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,287
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

It's digital. Mmmmmmmm! Digital.

(Your comment was; "The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey..")

A sound meter is a EQ tool as it helps equalize each of the sub's output at the main listening position. So I took your comment to mean, you didn't have a sound meter.
Let's be precise with the vocabulary. An "EQ Device" adjusts different frequencies to make all the frequencies equal. An SPL meter is a "Calibration Device" in that it helps set the overall level of all the speakers and subs to be the same. Calibration is different than EQ. In another thread previously I described why your technique of using an SPL meter to reset the levels after running Audyssey is flawed. You need to understand the difference between calibration and EQ to understand why your technique is flawed. Would you like me to explain it again?

Craig

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #19 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 03:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TornadoTJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

OK, I get it now. smile.gif

Yeah, I've had my trusty Rat Shack analog meter for probably 20+ years, maybe it's time to go digital! biggrin.gif

The analog one is better.
TornadoTJ is offline  
post #20 of 62 Old 01-10-2013, 11:46 PM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Let's be precise with the vocabulary. An "EQ Device" adjusts different frequencies to make all the frequencies equal. An SPL meter is a "Calibration Device" in that it helps set the overall level of all the speakers and subs to be the same. Calibration is different than EQ. In another thread previously I described why your technique of using an SPL meter to reset the levels after running Audyssey is flawed. You need to understand the difference between calibration and EQ to understand why your technique is flawed. Would you like me to explain it again?

Craig

The use of the English dictionary requires me to ignore your above and my technique is flawless in my efforts to balance the subwoofer's output at the main listening position.

The only flaw, if you want to call it that is, I don't have the ability to adjust for the ms/ft differences in distance that the balancing or EQ'g of the SPL and phase adjustments allows for. Audyssey, thoughtfully picks up this difference. A RTA is cool like that in that it allows one to see in realtime how the adjustments or EQ'g (equalizing/calibrating) benefits the overall sound quality.....much of which we can't even hear.

FWIW, I read up further on cabinet sizes [conclusion; it don't matter as the results caused by the volume differences, will fall where they may and everything will automatically shift accordingly] and based on what I read, ordered up two sets of active/passive driver/radiator sets. They'll be here sometime next week to be plugged into the existing, measured 2^3' cabinets for before and after REW measurement and graphing.

Again, the flaw here is, in fact, the new drivers will need about fifty plus hours of break-in time to loosen the drivers up from the stiffness of their newness. Just for giggles, I'll take new vs broken in measurements.

Frank Sinatra: "My Way"

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #21 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 03:09 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Let's be precise with the vocabulary. An "EQ Device" adjusts different frequencies to make all the frequencies equal. An SPL meter is a "Calibration Device" in that it helps set the overall level of all the speakers and subs to be the same. Calibration is different than EQ. In another thread previously I described why your technique of using an SPL meter to reset the levels after running Audyssey is flawed. You need to understand the difference between calibration and EQ to understand why your technique is flawed. Would you like me to explain it again?

Craig

The use of the English dictionary requires me to ignore your above and my technique is flawless in my efforts to balance the subwoofer's output at the main listening position.

 

 

You must have a strange dictionary if it confirms to you that a SPL meter is some form of EQ device. SPL stands for Sound Pressure Level METER. The full Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive guide to the use of the English language and it defines a meter as:

 

"Any apparatus for automatically measuring the quantity of something passing through it. In extended use: a device for automatically measuring the amount or intensity of something (as distance travelled, speed, brightness, or sound intensity), or the amount or cost of a commodity or service used."

 

The same resource defines an EQUALIZER as a device which is:

 

"Designed to modify the frequency response of a circuit (as a transmission line or an amplifier), esp. in order to compensate for frequency-dependent attenuation or phase shifts."

 

So the SPL meter measures something and the Equalizer modifies something.  Two entirely different things. I suspect you do realise this but can't now back down because your argument would be entirely destroyed ;)

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #22 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 04:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bfreedma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 9 iron from Philly
Posts: 1,952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

The use of the English dictionary requires me to ignore your above and my technique is flawless in my efforts to balance the subwoofer's output at the main listening position.

The only flaw, if you want to call it that is, I don't have the ability to adjust for the ms/ft differences in distance that the balancing or EQ'g of the SPL and phase adjustments allows for. Audyssey, thoughtfully picks up this difference. A RTA is cool like that in that it allows one to see in realtime how the adjustments or EQ'g (equalizing/calibrating) benefits the overall sound quality.....much of which we can't even hear.

FWIW, I read up further on cabinet sizes [conclusion; it don't matter as the results caused by the volume differences, will fall where they may and everything will automatically shift accordingly] and based on what I read, ordered up two sets of active/passive driver/radiator sets. They'll be here sometime next week to be plugged into the existing, measured 2^3' cabinets for before and after REW measurement and graphing.

Again, the flaw here is, in fact, the new drivers will need about fifty plus hours of break-in time to loosen the drivers up from the stiffness of their newness. Just for giggles, I'll take new vs broken in measurements.

Frank Sinatra: "My Way"

-

The Beeman Audio Dictionary gets another entry rolleyes.gif How many times does this have to occur before you take a step back, realize you are incorrect and that audio science isn't going to alter it's terminology to fit your "beliefs".

Same thought for your utterly flawed "flawless" sub balancing technique - Craig John explained the issues in detail and yet you press on.

And to complete the trifecta, also wrong about 50 hours of break in time for sub drivers. I'd ask to see the measurements you refer to, but given your history with REW, doubt they are viable.
bfreedma is offline  
post #23 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 06:04 AM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

SPL stands for Sound Pressure Level METER.

The letters stand for "Sound Pressure Level" which a "Sound Meter" measures and displays that is a tool used in the EQ'g process as sound pressures are changed to create a flat frequency graph. And when working in the same room with four subs intended to be used simultaneously, one uses a sound meter to equalize the output of the four subs so one has equal sound pressure at the main listening position.

Without a meter, or a program that uses a meter to gain SPL readings to work with, everybody is just guessing what the final outcome is going be. Yes, despite how vociferous one might choose to be, a sound meter continues to be a necessary part of the audio equalization process.

You're welcome to understand anything of your choosing, to your way of thinking because it doesn't matter what anybody thinks "SPL" means.

If you wish to continue with this forum disruption, by all means, please do but please, do so without dragging me into your need to be disruptive.

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #24 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 06:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:

Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

 

The letters stand for "Sound Pressure Level" which a "Sound Meter" 

measures

 

 

Oh FFS. It is a METER and a meter MEASURES. An Equalizer ADJUSTS or MODIFIES. Give up - you're making yourself look silly.

 

Quote:

And when working in the same room with four subs intended to be used simultaneously, one uses a sound meter to equalize the output of the four subs so one has equal sound pressure at the main listening position.

 

 

You are giving your own meaning to "equalize". An Equalizer to everyone else is something that modifies a set of frequencies. A meter measures, an equalizer modifies. End of. You said "your use of the English dictionary" requires you to disagree - but you didn't actually use a dictionary to look up 'meter' and 'equalizer' did you?  If you had, then you would have seen the results I posted above, from the OED, for you.

 

 

Quote:
Yes, a sound meter is part and parcel to the audio equalization process.
 

 

Changing the relative levels of subs is NOT equalizing! Equalizing is changing the frequency response. Look, you made a mistake in terminology - it isn’t the end of the world. Recognise the mistake, learn from it and move on. 

 

 

 

Quote:
You're welcome to understand anything of your choosing, to your way of thinking because it doesn't matter what you think "SPL" means.

 

It's not a question of what I think an SPL meter is - it is defined by the most authoritative reference on the use of English language that exists in the world today - the full version of the OED. I have given you those definitions of a meter and an equalizer and they are not in line with your own interpretation, opinion or belief. 

 

You edited out the part where you said I was disrupting the thread - but I don't see it that way. I am trying to help you understand what the difference is between a sound meter and an equalizer - until you do, you cannot make any meaningful contribution and you are also using flawed methods to set your system up, which others are trying to help you with so you get it right and thus improve your SQ.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #25 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 07:05 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,287
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

The use of the English dictionary requires me to ignore your above...
OK, let's reset the discussion and start over. I can understand your logic that an SPL meter helps you to "equalize" the levels of the speakers. However, to then call it an "equalizer" is an unconventional usage of the term. The conventional use of the term "equalizer" is a device used to equalize the frequency response. These are "equalizers":





These types of devices adjust the levels of different frequencies so they are all equal. There are several types of equalizers: graphic, parametric time-domain, and they use different types of filters: "Finite Impulse Response filters, (FIR), and "Infinite Impulse Response" filters, (IIR.) These filters can be fixed frequency, (graphic), or they can be adjustable frequency, (parametric.) The width of the filter, (the "Q"), can be fixed or adjustable. In the world of audio, these devices a commonly known as "EQ's" or "equalizers." An SPL meter is a totally different animal.

Your use of an SPL meter to "balance" the levels of the speakers is known conventionally as "level calibration." This is the process of setting the broadband SPLof all the speakers and subwoofers so they are the same at the listening position or listening area. Also involved in "calibration is setting the individual delays so the siganls all arrive at the listening position at the same time. This entire process is known as "calibration." In addition, there is one more process involved in audio system setup... setting the Bass management settings, i.e., deciding which speakers need crossovers, and what the optimal crossover frequency should be. All three of these processes are performed by Audyssey during it Room Correction and Setup. It may be confusing to you, and you may be lumping them all together as "EQ", but they are, in fact, 3 separate and distinct processes.

You are welcome to define these terms any way you want. However, if you want to be *understood*, and, more importantly, if you don't want to cause others confusion, you would be better served using the terms conventionally. Here is an example of the confusion caused by your unconventional use of the term:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

(Your comment was; "The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey..")

A sound meter is a EQ tool as it helps equalize each of the sub's output at the main listening position. So I took your comment to mean, you didn't have a sound meter.
-

You misunderstood him and we all misunderstood you. If you had use the terms conventionally, everyone would have understood each other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

...and my technique is flawless in my efforts to balance the subwoofer's output at the main listening position.
Using the receiver's test tones to set levels bypasses Audyssey's EQ. The Audyssey EQ adjustments are out of the circuit when the receiver's internal tst tones are played. Therefore, the impact of the frequency response adjustments are not accounted for when you use the internal test tones and your SPL meter to adjust the levels post-Audyssey. Here is an example of what can happen when you do this:

Audyssey:


No Audyssey:


The receiver's test tones are limited to 40 to 80 Hz. Look at the levels of the response from 40 to 80 Hz in the first graph and the levels from 40 to 80 Hz in the second graph. I've drawn red lines to show the average response. Note that the average response without Audyssey is about 3 dB lower than the average response with Audyssey. If you used the 40 to 80 Hz test tones and the "without Audyssey" response to set the levels, you would need to raise the response 3 dB to equal the response with Audyssey. However, when you re-engage Audyssey, it will add 3 dB on top of that, and now you'll be 3 dB too high.

This is just an example, and the results in your system will depend on what Audyssey does to the frequency response. Nonetheless, it is incorrect to use the receiver's test internal tones and an SPL meter to reset the levels post-Audyssey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

The only flaw, if you want to call it that is, I don't have the ability to adjust for the ms/ft differences in distance that the balancing or EQ'g of the SPL and phase adjustments allows for. Audyssey, thoughtfully picks up this difference.
Actually, you do have the ability to adjust the delays for each channel, including the subwoofer output. In fact, this is the one parameter than can often be improved upon post-Audyssey. However, it takes measurement capability and the knowledge to interpret the graphs to know how to make the adjustments. I'm not going to go into that here, but you can find some info in this thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/759877/seaton-sound-submersive1/4500#post_19450333
Of course, that's only if your "intellectual travels" take you to a place where you want to actually learn something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

A RTA is cool like that in that it allows one to see in realtime how the adjustments or EQ'g (equalizing/calibrating) benefits the overall sound quality.....much of which we can't even hear.
A frequency response graph and a waterfall graph of the time domain response are much better for visualizing the in-room acoustics than an RTA.

Here is an RTA of my system:



And here is a frequency response and time-domain waterfall.:


There is a lot more information in the second graph than the first.

Craig

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #26 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 07:14 AM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

And to complete the trifecta, also wrong about 50 hours of break in time for sub drivers. I'd ask to see the measurements you refer to, but given your history with REW, doubt they are viable.

I didn't refer to any measurements as I don't even have the drivers in my possession in which to measure. When they arrive, I'll cobble the system together and take initial readings which, for comparison purposes, will be compared to recently taken old readings, based on the eighteen year old drivers. AVR provided pink noise will be used during the break in period along with any movie sound tracks we choose to watch. REW provided frequency sweeps, will be used for frequency/dB recording/graphing purposes. As the break in period progresses, I'll take additional readings so I can see any changes that expectedly will take place. Not being a full time lab junkie, this process may take a month or so to complete.

What a better time to test the statement regarding driver break in period then when a new set of drivers arrive. Good, bad or neutral, if any changes take place, it will easily be seen; empirical vs anecdotal. Be patient. One has to at least wait for the drivers to arrive before picking up and throwing intellectual stones. Anything less and they're not being intellectually honest.
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #27 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 07:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Craig, just curious how you would recommend going about EQ'ing quad subs that are not identical and offer different performance characteristics?
ack_bk is offline  
post #28 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 07:20 AM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Wow! Somebody's been in the caffeine this morning. tongue.gif

No disrespect towards your elucidation efforts but I stopped reading your post after what I quoted of yours below as your below clearly shows where the fail took place, the misreading of "equalize" to be "equalizer."

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

OK, let's reset the discussion and start over. I can understand your logic that an SPL meter helps you to "equalize" the levels of the speakers. However, to then call it an "equalizer" is an unconventional usage of the term.

I see the rub. Back up, reread what I posted. Equalizing is a process and a sound meter is a tool used in the equalization process and nothing more. None of anything happens without use of a sound level measuring device. No sound meter, then nobody knows what their frequency SPL's are. All pointers point to Rome.

My original comment below:

Quote:
(Your comment was; "The only "EQ" tool I have is Audyssey..")

A sound meter is a EQ tool as it helps equalize each of the sub's output at the main listening position. So I took your comment to mean, you didn't have a sound meter.

If you will allow me to edit my above for clarity purposes:

A sound meter is a EQ tool which helps with the "equalization" process of balancing multiple sub output at the main listening position.

Sometimes explanations get lost in the world of prose vs technical as not everybody is on your level of understanding nor does everybody want to be on your level of understanding nor do they wish to have everything explained at your level of understanding. And yes, despite your opinion, I'm quite comfortable (confident) with my current sound measuring and balancing skills which doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

As you can see in the original comment, I referred to the sound meter as an aid tool used in the process and nothing more. And as you can see, I never called it an "equalizer" as that would patently be a wrong use of terms. If you will, any person using a sound meter can be the equalizer as they manually work the sliders on a sound board to change levels based upon SPL readings they get using a sound meter.

I'm a firm believer in my quote: "Remember, online, the first thing to go is context." tongue.gif

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #29 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 07:50 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 208
OP here -

OK, last night I integrated my one working Velodyne back into the system using my SPL meter and the AVRs internal test tones (I realize this may be a flawed method), but to me it sounds pretty damn good. Still got some tweaking to do, but for now I'm a happy camper!

Maybe someday I'll get me a mic and REW to see what's really happening, but it really sounds good to my ears.

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is online now  
post #30 of 62 Old 01-11-2013, 07:56 AM
 
BeeMan458's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Magalia, CA
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

OP here -

OK, last night I integrated my one working Velodyne back into the system using my SPL meter and the AVRs internal test tones (I realize this may be a flawed method), but to me it sounds pretty damn good. Still got some tweaking to do, but for now I'm a happy camper!

Maybe someday I'll get me a mic and REW to see what's really happening, but it really sounds good to my ears.

Warning, once you have a RTA program like REW, you'll be permanently contaminated and you'll never be able to go back. Just saying. biggrin.gif
BeeMan458 is offline  
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off