Calibrating more then 2 subs? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 44 Old 02-07-2013, 06:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
SOWK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wauwatosa, WI
Posts: 4,095
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 129
How are you guys / gals calibrating more then 2 subs? Or not... and just setting levels via a sound pressure meter?
SOWK is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 44 Old 02-07-2013, 07:03 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 SOWK View Post

How are you guys / gals calibrating more then 2 subs? Or not... and just setting levels via a sound pressure meter?

Before running any EQ programs, I calibrate each subwoofer to 67dB to 68dB at a measured 1m with sound meter using the sub's gain control and then after running any EQ programs, adjust the overall pink noise level at the main listening position, using the AVR's internal "Test Tone" generator and set all of the speaker's gain controls, at main listening position, to 72dB to 73dB.

FWIW, I've tried several sound meters and in the spirit of sharing, I found the least expensive of the three to be the best sound meter. And despite what the information sheet says, it has two reading ranges: 30dB to100dB and 60dB to 130dB.

It also has internal calibration. I checked the accuracy of this sound meter and it was 0.1dB off the calibration mark. For the inexpensive price, the trade off, it doesn't have recording capability. FYI, sound meters make terrible recording devices because most are limited to >31.5Hz so not having recording capability, is no real loss.

Hope the above helps with your question.

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #3 of 44 Old 02-07-2013, 07:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,238
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1690
There's no need to go to extreme measures to calibrate multiple subs. What matters is response at the LP. After placing the subs and adjusting their levels to get the flattest possible response do your normal calibration, be it with Audyssey or REW or whatever as if you only had one sub. The mic doesn't know or care how many subs there are. It, and you, hear a single source, no matter how many there may be.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #4 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 07:47 AM
Advanced Member
 
dstew100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 938
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOWK View Post

How are you guys / gals calibrating more then 2 subs? Or not... and just setting levels via a sound pressure meter?

I recommend gain matching over the level matching which has been described ITT and optimizing the transition range around the crossover. Search for a Gain Matching post by Craig John to find the procedure but I think the practice came from Mark Seaton. If you can't find it let me know.

It's nice to be able to do frequency response sweeps for optimizing the transition range but with an SPL meter alone you can improve upon Audyssey's results by running a sine wave at the crossover frequency and tweaking distance/phase/delay until you read the highest SPL (least speaker to speaker destructive interaction). With measurements you aim for the flattest transition range which is prolly a bit better. Get the distance right for the furthest sub so it is integrated properly with the mains (with audyssey then check with the sine wave at crossover freq), then add the next closest sub and add delay to that one, repeat again for the closest sub.

Hope this helps
dstew100 is offline  
post #5 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 09:08 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOWK View Post

How are you guys / gals calibrating more then 2 subs? Or not... and just setting levels via a sound pressure meter?

Level-matching multiple subs: Placing an SPL meter at the LP and setting the gains on the subs so the levels match at the LP.
Problem: What happens if one sub has more nulls than peaks in its transfer function, (interaction with room modes), and it therefore measures lower than the other subs at the LP? That sub would need to be turned up higher than the other subs. Consider that 3 dB of increase requires a doubling of amplifier power and driver excursion. 6 db of increase requires 4X the power and excursion. You'll be working the higher-set sub much harder than the others. It will also have less headroom, and it will start to compress/distort before the others.

Gain-matching multiple subs: Placing each sub in the middle of the room and independently measuring the nearfield output, then setting the gain on each sub so they all measure the same. Nearfield means within an inch or 2 of the driver, and the exact same distance from the mic to the driver must be maintained for each sub. (I put a tape silhouette on the floor around the first sub and then place the other subs inside the silhouette. The position of the mic must be unchanged also.)
Solution: All subs are set for the same gain-structure. They all drive the same power into the room. They all hit their limits at the same point. *System* output is optimized.

Once this is done, all subs are moved back to their optimal in-room positions, and the individual levels are never again measured at the LP. They are all treated as a single subwoofer.

Are you using Audyssey? If so, which version? If using Audyssey, do NOT use BeeMan's technique for adjusting the levels after running Audyssey. It is incorrect. Also, dstew100's suggestions for setting the Distance are spot on, (although I would set the Distance based off the combined output, (all subs playing at once), not each sub individually.)

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #6 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 09:30 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 craig john View Post

Level-matching multiple subs: Placing an SPL meter at the LP and setting the gains on the subs so the levels match at the LP.
Problem: What happens if one sub has more nulls than peaks in its transfer function, (interaction with room modes), and it therefore measures lower than the other subs at the LP?

To counter this phenomenon, turn the second sub off, set the sub's gain at a measured 1m (some like this step to be done at one foot to eliminate room interactions) and do the same with the second sub. Then, after each sub is individually calibrated, use the AVR's controls for final main listening position tweaking with all sub's power turned on. From here, use phase and time domain/distance settings to adjust for room modes.

The assumption is, the individual is using a room analyzing program to physically be able to see the changes in the room's acoustics being wrought by the small parametric changes being made after first trying to find the optimal available placement for the subwoofers. No room analyzing program, no cigar. tongue.gif

-
mailiang likes this.
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #7 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 09:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 837 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Level-matching multiple subs: Placing an SPL meter at the LP and setting the gains on the subs so the levels match at the LP.
Problem: What happens if one sub has more nulls than peaks in its transfer function, (interaction with room modes), and it therefore measures lower than the other subs at the LP? That sub would need to be turned up higher than the other subs. Consider that 3 dB of increase requires a doubling of amplifier power and driver excursion. 6 db of increase requires 4X the power and excursion. You'll be working the higher-set sub much harder than the others. It will also have less headroom, and it will start to compress/distort before the others.

Gain-matching multiple subs: Placing each sub in the middle of the room and independently measuring the nearfield output, then setting the gain on each sub so they all measure the same. Nearfield means within an inch or 2 of the driver, and the exact same distance from the mic to the driver must be maintained for each sub. (I put a tape silhouette on the floor around the first sub and then place the other subs inside the silhouette. The position of the mic must be unchanged also.)
Solution: All subs are set for the same gain-structure. They all drive the same power into the room. They all hit their limits at the same point. *System* output is optimized.

Once this is done, all subs are moved back to their optimal in-room positions, and the individual levels are never again measured at the LP. They are all treated as a single subwoofer.

Are you using Audyssey? If so, which version? If using Audyssey, do NOT use BeeMan's technique for adjusting the levels after running Audyssey. It is incorrect. Also, dstew100's suggestions for setting the Distance are spot on, (although I would set the Distance based off the combined output, (all subs playing at once), not each sub individually.)

Craig

Craig - after gain matching, what do you use so that the sub volume control doesn't accidentally get bumped and screws up all your hard work? Mine spin quite freely and any little touch will cause the knob to turn, albeit just slightly. Maybe remove the knob??

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4 (Soon to be replaced with dual T-18s!)
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is offline  
post #8 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 09:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flickhtguru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lebanon, PA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 105
^^^ How do you have your subs positioned? I have never had a gain knob move on my subs. I always face the amp to the direction most out of the way be it towards the nearest wall or towards a piece of furniture.

Shawn
flickhtguru is offline  
post #9 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 09:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 837 Post(s)
Liked: 435
When moving the subs around and determining optimum placement is when this might happen. Or when cleaning behind one. Or a cat. Or small child. Etc. etc. etc. smile.gif

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4 (Soon to be replaced with dual T-18s!)
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is offline  
post #10 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 10:12 AM
Advanced Member
 
04rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Level-matching multiple subs: Placing an SPL meter at the LP and setting the gains on the subs so the levels match at the LP.
Problem: What happens if one sub has more nulls than peaks in its transfer function, (interaction with room modes), and it therefore measures lower than the other subs at the LP? That sub would need to be turned up higher than the other subs. Consider that 3 dB of increase requires a doubling of amplifier power and driver excursion. 6 db of increase requires 4X the power and excursion. You'll be working the higher-set sub much harder than the others. It will also have less headroom, and it will start to compress/distort before the others.

Gain-matching multiple subs: Placing each sub in the middle of the room and independently measuring the nearfield output, then setting the gain on each sub so they all measure the same. Nearfield means within an inch or 2 of the driver, and the exact same distance from the mic to the driver must be maintained for each sub. (I put a tape silhouette on the floor around the first sub and then place the other subs inside the silhouette. The position of the mic must be unchanged also.)
Solution: All subs are set for the same gain-structure. They all drive the same power into the room. They all hit their limits at the same point. *System* output is optimized.

Once this is done, all subs are moved back to their optimal in-room positions, and the individual levels are never again measured at the LP. They are all treated as a single subwoofer.

Are you using Audyssey? If so, which version? If using Audyssey, do NOT use BeeMan's technique for adjusting the levels after running Audyssey. It is incorrect. Also, dstew100's suggestions for setting the Distance are spot on, (although I would set the Distance based off the combined output, (all subs playing at once), not each sub individually.)

Craig

Hey Craig, great read. I have a question. What if you are not planning on using the any receiver calibration and just doing the sub your self? After doing the Gain Matching, what do you do next? Also, what SPL reading should you aim for, for each sub when doing gain matching?

Thanks.
04rex is offline  
post #11 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 10:21 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

To counter this phenomenon, turn the second sub off, set the sub's gain at a measured 1m (some like this step to be done at one foot to eliminate room interactions) and do the same with the second sub.
Did you read the part about gain-matching? You essentially described it above, (although using a less rigorous method than mine of moving the subs to the middle of the room to reduce room interactions.) Your method could potentially still be polluted with room effects, especially if the subs are room-loaded differently. For example, if one sub is in a corner and the other sub is mid-wall, the corner loaded sub will read higher than the mid-wall sub. That's why moving them to the middle of the room and placing each in the exact same position relative to the mic is more rigorous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Then, after each sub is individually calibrated, use the AVR's controls for final main listening position tweaking with all sub's power turned on.
This is the part of your process that is incorrect, and I've explained to you why it is incorrect 3 times now. Here is the most recent:
Quote:
The receiver's internal test tones are a noise signal with content from 40 to 80 Hz. Therefore, when you set the subwoofer trim based on the noise signal from the AVR, you are setting it on this limited bandwidth, which may not be fully representative of the entire subwoofer bandwidth.

When Audyssey sets the levels, it uses sweeps. It looks at individual frequency levels across the entire subwoofer bandwidth, at up to 8 different points in the room, and sets the levels based on the spatial average of the levels it measures at all the frequencies, at all those different points. It is a far more sophisticated level setting procedure than setting the levels based on one octave of the subwoofer bandwidth, measured at one point in space.

More importantly, when you play the AVR's test tones, Audyssey's EQ is BYPASSED; it's not in the signal path, and the effects of Audyssey's EQ are not available to be measured! If you engage Audyssey after you set the levels with the test tones and the SPL meter, the levels will be WRONG. The fact that you need to change the subwoofer trim when using the test tones and SPL meter means that, by definition, you have set them wrong.

If your OCD requires you to check the level settings post-Audysey, you should use test signals that go THROUGH Audyssey's processing/EQ, something like Avia: http://www.amazon.com/Avia-Guide-to-Home-Theater/dp/B0041EQOFQ or The 5.1 Audio Toolkit: http://www.gold-line.com/51atdvd.htm They both have level-setting test signals but you can play them back THROUGH Audyssey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

From here, use phase and time domain/distance settings to adjust for room modes.
You should NOT change the phase settings on the sub after running Audyssey. Audyssey has set the EQ filters based on the measurements it took of the system. Changing the phase settings of the subs will change the baseline response and the Audyssey filters will no longer be correct. Changing the subwoofer Distance in the receiver after running Audyssey will not affect the EQ filters. It will impact the blend of the speakers and sub(s) at the crossover point and it should be adjusted to optimize this parameter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

The assumption is, the individual is using a room analyzing program to physically be able to see the changes in the room's acoustics being wrought by the small parametric changes being made. No room analyzing program, no cigar. tongue.gif
Correct!

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #12 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 10:23 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

Craig - after gain matching, what do you use so that the sub volume control doesn't accidentally get bumped and screws up all your hard work? Mine spin quite freely and any little touch will cause the knob to turn, albeit just slightly. Maybe remove the knob??
Mine are on the back of my subs, and are small and difficult to change, so I don't do anything. If yours are easily moved, then care must be taken to keep them from moving. Maybe some tape? or like you said, removing the knobs?

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #13 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 10:36 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

Hey Craig, great read. I have a question. What if you are not planning on using the any receiver calibration and just doing the sub your self? After doing the Gain Matching, what do you do next?
You said "...and just doing the sub your self?" If you only have one sub, there is no gain-matching, there is only calibration with your speakers.

If you do have multiple subs, it should be noted that gain-matching is only for *identical* subs. If you are using dissimilar subs, gain-matching is less useful because the subs won't have the same gain structure.

If you do have multiple subs, the next step is to place them back in their ideal in-room positions and then calibrate their combined outputs with the speakers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

Also, what SPL reading should you aim for, for each sub when doing gain matching?
The nearfield measurement will be much higher than the farfield measurement, (once the subs are back in their in-room positions.) Therefore, you'll want to use a higher SPL reading to compensate. Considering that one looses 3 to 6 dB for every doubling of distance, (the Inverse Square Law), I usually shoot for about 90 dB on the nearfield measurement. This will usually yield a setting that is within the receiver's calibration limits when the subs are replaced in their respective positions and the combined result is calibrated to the speakers.

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #14 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 10:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
04rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

You said "...and just doing the sub your self?" If you only have one sub, there is no gain-matching, there is only calibration with your speakers.

If you do have multiple subs, it should be noted that gain-matching is only for *identical* subs. If you are using dissimilar subs, gain-matching is less useful because the subs won't have the same gain structure.

If you do have multiple subs, the next step is to place them back in their ideal in-room positions and then calibrate their combined outputs with the speakers.
The nearfield measurement will be much higher than the farfield measurement, (once the subs are back in their in-room positions.) Therefore, you'll want to use a higher SPL reading to compensate. Considering that one looses 3 to 6 dB for every doubling of distance, (the Inverse Square Law), I usually shoot for about 90 dB on the nearfield measurement. This will usually yield a setting that is within the receiver's calibration limits when the subs are replaced in their respective positions and the combined result is calibrated to the speakers.

Hey Craig, sorry i didnt mention. I do have 2 identical subs (paradigm reference sub 12). So from what i understand, put the subs in the middle of the room and do the near field SPL reading (about 90). Put the subs back in their spots and run the test tones using the receiver and level match them with the rest of the speakers using a SPL meter, correct (about 75 )? And obivously level matching the entire system is done from your main listening seat i assume.

With my subs, I do have Paradigms PBK. With the PBK, should I still gain match, then run PBK on each sub then run the receivers test tones to level match them all?

Sorry for all the questions. I have researched this before but heard to do what Beeman original stated about level matching instead of gain matching. I just want to get it done right.

Thanks!
04rex is offline  
post #15 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 11:18 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 craig john View Post

You essentially described it above, (although using a less rigorous method than mine of moving the subs to the middle of the room to reduce room interactions.) Your method could potentially still be polluted with room effects, especially if the subs are room-loaded differently.

Hence why I included that some encourage this measurement be taken at one foot in an effort to reduce room interaction. I do try to cover all bases in my comments but I can't be held accountable for some people's propensity to go off at half-kock; a term, the genesis of, you're familiar with.

Quote:
For example, if one sub is in a corner and the other sub is mid-wall, the corner loaded sub will read higher than the mid-wall sub.

Correct, and by individually measuring each sub while the other subs are turned off, will take this thought into consideration and then each sub, individually will be calibrated according to their placed room position and if I recall correctly, when a synergistic reading is taken at the main listening position, the final reading will be read as a single source point and this consideration will automatically average any conflicts that individual sub positions, leave behind.

Quote:
If your OCD requires you to check the level settings post-Audysey, you should use test signals that go THROUGH Audyssey's processing/EQ,...

Setting the AVR gain does nothing to Audyssy recommended settings other than to raise of lower the final output. As to running tests post-Audyssey, this is what any rational individual would do and which room analyzing programs automatically do. Doing measurements, post-Audyssey run EG'q, would make absolutely zero sense but despite what some say, if measurements are made and evaluated, there's no harm in changing the final, at listening position, internal AVR menu provided, gain setting.

Quote:
You should NOT change the phase settings on the sub after running Audyssey.

I get to change anything I want, anytime I want, without reservation as in the end, it's all about improving the final measurement, not preserving what Audyssey has failed to offer. If Audyssey has failed to provide the perfect solution, then I get to augment Audyssey's efforts in any fashion of my choosing. Audyssey's recommended setting changes to the AVR is not the final arbiter in this process. There's theory and then there's practical application of theory and human's have the innate ability to know when to intervene. Public education does it's level headed best to beat this primal awareness, out of us; bias.

Quote:
Changing the phase settings of the subs will change the baseline response and the Audyssey filters will no longer be correct.

I'm changing the phase setting because Audyssey failed in it's purpose, recommending the perfect setting solution and because Audyssey's filters were set incorrectly, I'm changing the settings because Audyssey failed to do a bang up job and room analyzing programs reveal this fact.

Quote:
It will impact the blend of the speakers and sub(s) at the crossover point and it should be adjusted to optimize this parameter.

Agreeing with you when I post, I should hope so. Hence the need for the room analyzing program so the individual can see what the changes are that are taking place.

Quote:
Changing the subwoofer Distance in the receiver after running Audyssey will not affect the EQ filters.

No it won't but it sure will improve on the errors that Audyssey left behind and in my book, improving the final curve is what it's all about.

Quote:
Correct!

At lease we can agree on something. biggrin.gif

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #16 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 11:57 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

Hey Craig, sorry i didnt mention. I do have 2 identical subs (paradigm reference sub 12). So from what i understand, put the subs in the middle of the room and do the near field SPL reading (about 90). Put the subs back in their spots and run the test tones using the receiver and level match them with the rest of the speakers using a SPL meter, correct (about 75 )? And obivously level matching the entire system is done from your main listening seat i assume.
This is all correct. However.... see below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

With my subs, I do have Paradigms PBK. With the PBK, should I still gain match, then run PBK on each sub then run the receivers test tones to level match them all?
The on-line instruction manual for PBK tells you to set the level on the subwoofer to it's center detente position prior to running PBK. If you did that for both subs, they would be gain-matched from the outset. However, the manual isn't clear on how to run PBK on multiple subs. I have no experience with it myself. Do you run PBK on both subs at the same time, or each individually? Is the room correction applied to both subs simultaneously, or are separate curves plotted for each sub individually? If you have the option, run it on both subs simultaneously and apply the correction to both subs using the combined correction. If you do this, you should be gain-matched afterwards.

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #17 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 12:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Seaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 6,085
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

When moving the subs around and determining optimum placement is when this might happen. Or when cleaning behind one. Or a cat. Or small child. Etc. etc. etc. smile.gif

Exactly the reason I like having detented, low profile gain knobs on our subs. wink.gif

Do note if your subs are identical and of the same generation, you should be very close by simply matching the dial position. If purchased at different times, it's good to check that the overall gain of the amplifier is the same for both. I've run into this on different age Aerial SW-12s and a few others as well. Once matched and set, a piece of painter's tape over the dial can help keep things in place if needed.

Mark Seaton
Seaton Sound, Inc.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood..." Daniel H. Burnham
Mark Seaton is offline  
post #18 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 12:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
04rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

This is all correct. However.... see below.
The on-line instruction manual for PBK tells you to set the level on the subwoofer to it's center detente position prior to running PBK. If you did that for both subs, they would be gain-matched from the outset. However, the manual isn't clear on how to run PBK on multiple subs. I have no experience with it myself. Do you run PBK on both subs at the same time, or each individually? Is the room correction applied to both subs simultaneously, or are separate curves plotted for each sub individually? If you have the option, run it on both subs simultaneously and apply the correction to both subs using the combined correction. If you do this, you should be gain-matched afterwards.

Craig

PBK is meant for 1 sub. As far as I know. Essentially you run it on each sub at a time. There isn't a dual sub correction option, so they each have their own curves.

From what i think and my understanding, I should gain match each (as close to center as possible like the manual says), then run PBK on each sub, then level match them with the rest of the speakers since PBK does not listen to the other speakers, just the one sub at a time. I don't think setting each sub at the center level without using an SPL to make them the same will match them near field wise. This is what i think from what you have said and from what i already know (not much lol). Does this make sense to you then?

As i said, the PBK only really works on the subs, not the rest of the system. So it essentially works out and the dips and what not for the sub. One at a time of course. I could be absolutely wrong though. Lol. Wouldn't be the first time. Especially if you ask my wife. Lol.
04rex is offline  
post #19 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 12:29 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Hence why I included that some encourage this measurement be taken at one foot in an effort to reduce room interaction. I do try to cover all bases in my comments but I can't be held accountable for some people's propensity to go off at half-kock; a term, the genesis of, you're familiar with.
Correct, and by individually measuring each sub while the other subs are turned off, will take this thought into consideration and then each sub, individually will be calibrated according to their placed room position and if I recall correctly, when a synergistic reading is taken at the main listening position, the final reading will be read as a single source point and this consideration will automatically average any conflicts that individual sub positions, leave behind.
Setting the AVR gain does nothing to Audyssy recommended settings other than to raise of lower the final output. As to running tests post-Audyssey, this is what any rational individual would do and which room analyzing programs automatically do. Doing measurements, post-Audyssey run EG'q, would make absolutely zero sense but despite what some say, if measurements are made and evaluated, there's no harm in changing the final, at listening position, internal AVR menu provided, gain setting.
I get to change anything I want, anytime I want, without reservation as in the end, it's all about improving the final measurement, not preserving what Audyssey has failed to offer. If Audyssey has failed to provide the perfect solution, then I get to augment Audyssey's efforts in any fashion of my choosing. Audyssey's recommended setting changes to the AVR is not the final arbiter in this process. There's theory and then there's practical application of theory and human's have the innate ability to know when to intervene. Public education does it's level headed best to beat this primal awareness, out of us; bias.
I'm changing the phase setting because Audyssey failed in it's purpose, recommending the perfect setting solution and because Audyssey's filters were set incorrectly, I'm changing the settings because Audyssey failed to do a bang up job and room analyzing programs reveal this fact.
Agreeing with you when I post, I should hope so. Hence the need for the room analyzing program so the individual can see what the changes are that are taking place.
No it won't but it sure will improve on the errors that Audyssey left behind and in my book, improving the final curve is what it's all about.
At lease we can agree on something. biggrin.gif

-
Clearly, you and I are not speaking the same language. I have no idea what you said or what your logic is for your process. You obviously don't understand how to optimize an Audyssey result. There is a systematic way to go about this. There are some things you should optimize BEFORE running Audyssey, (subwoofer positions, subwoofer gain settings, listening position optimization, etc.) There are also some things you can consider changing after running Audyssey, (crossovers, (raise, never lower the crossovers), and subwoofer Distance.) Additionally, there are some things you should NOT change after running Audyssey, (level trims in the receiver for ALL speakers and sub(s), all settings on the subwoofer itself, etc.

Just F'n around with a bunch of different settings until you happen upon a flat FR graph is not the right way to do it.

Perhaps you'll benefit from reading these 2 posts:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/759877/seaton-sound-submersive1/4500#post_19446901
http://www.avsforum.com/t/759877/seaton-sound-submersive1/4500#post_19446903

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #20 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 12:41 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

PBK is meant for 1 sub. As far as I know. Essentially you run it on each sub at a time. There isn't a dual sub correction option, so they each have their own curves.

From what i think and my understanding, I should gain match each (as close to center as possible like the manual says), then run PBK on each sub, then level match them with the rest of the speakers since PBK does not listen to the other speakers, just the one sub at a time. I don't think setting each sub at the center level without using an SPL to make them the same will match them near field wise. This is what i think from what you have said and from what i already know (not much lol). Does this make sense to you then?

As i said, the PBK only really works on the subs, not the rest of the system. So it essentially works out and the dips and what not for the sub. One at a time of course. I could be absolutely wrong though. Lol. Wouldn't be the first time. Especially if you ask my wife. Lol.
According to the attached manual, PBK can be run on up to 4 subs, although it doesn't say whether that is simultaneous or individually. if they can only be run separately, then that's the best you can do.
IN-618.pdf 359k .pdf file
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

I don't think setting each sub at the center level without using an SPL to make them the same will match them near field wise.
Unless Paradigm uses different gain structures for each amp, (highly unlikely), setting them both to the center detente position should gain match them BEFORE running PBK. However, if PBK is run separately and different correction curves are applied to each sub, then their gains may be different after running PBK. The only way to know would be to measure their gains nearfield as I described previously. If they're different, I don't think I would suggest changing them, especially if you don't have some way to measure FR.

Disclaimer: This is pretty much all speculation on my part as I've never used PBK, and I am making some assumptions about how it works.

Craig
Attached Files
File Type: pdf IN-618.pdf (359.3 KB, 1 views)

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #21 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 12:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
04rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Thanks for the Info Craig. I think we are thinking along the same lines as Gain Matching before running PBK. I just wish they would do subs at the same time for those of us that have more than 1.

One more question, I have heard that you need to set up each subs phase. What are your takes on that and what do you think is the best procedure to do that?
04rex is offline  
post #22 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 02:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 837 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Clearly, you and I are not speaking the same language. I have no idea what you said or what your logic is for your process. You obviously don't understand how to optimize an Audyssey result. There is a systematic way to go about this. There are some things you should optimize BEFORE running Audyssey, (subwoofer positions, subwoofer gain settings, listening position optimization, etc.) There are also some things you can consider changing after running Audyssey, (crossovers, (raise, never lower the crossovers), and subwoofer Distance.) Additionally, there are some things you should NOT change after running Audyssey, (level trims in the receiver for ALL speakers and sub(s), all settings on the subwoofer itself, etc.

Just F'n around with a bunch of different settings until you happen upon a flat FR graph is not the right way to do it.

Perhaps you'll benefit from reading these 2 posts:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/759877/seaton-sound-submersive1/4500#post_19446901
http://www.avsforum.com/t/759877/seaton-sound-submersive1/4500#post_19446903

Craig

Craig - I think I've seen you mention this before, but it never clicked until now. I now see why you shouldn't change sub trim post-Audyssey, but what do you do after you've set everything up in the proper order and you still feel your bass is lacking? Up until now, I've been using the AVRs internal test tone and bumping up the sub trim about 2-3db more than where Audyssey set it (to get to ~75db). Is it OK to adjust sub trim if you're using an external test tone run through Audyssey?

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4 (Soon to be replaced with dual T-18s!)
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is offline  
post #23 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 02:30 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

Craig - I think I've seen you mention this before, but it never clicked until now. I now see why you shouldn't change sub trim post-Audyssey, but what do you do after you've set everything up in the proper order and you still feel your bass is lacking? Up until now, I've been using the AVRs internal test tone and bumping up the sub trim about 2-3db more than where Audyssey set it (to get to ~75db).
Well, certainly you can change the subwoofer trim for your own preference. However, before you do that, you should ensure that everything else is optimized, such a subwoofer Distance and crossover frequencies for the speakers. If your response is flat and you prefer it a little "hot", that's your decision. If your Audyssey enabled receiver has Dynamic EQ, you can also try that. It adds a gradually rising lift to the output below 120 Hz. It's only active at levels below full RL, but many people prefer it to running the subwoofer trim "hot."

The difference between that and what BeeMan is doing is that he's adjusting the subwoofer trim in an attempt to have an affect on the REW measured FR, (at least I think that's what he's doing; I can't really understand his odd way of expressing himself.) Adjusting the trim to impact the FR is the wrong tool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post

Is it OK to adjust sub trim if you're using an external test tone run through Audyssey?
I find that if I run an external test tone from the 5.1 Audio Toolkit through Audyssey, the levels are generally all the same, including the subwoofer level, (which means they are all "calibrated" to the same level), even if they might not be *exactly* at 75 dB. It's more important that they all be the same than that they all be exactly 75 dB.

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #24 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 02:49 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

There is a systematic way to go about this. There are some things you should optimize BEFORE running Audyssey, (subwoofer positions, subwoofer gain settings, listening position optimization, etc.) There are also some things you can consider changing after running Audyssey, (crossovers, (raise, never lower the crossovers), and subwoofer Distance.) Additionally, there are some things you should NOT change after running Audyssey, (level trims in the receiver for ALL speakers and sub(s), all settings on the subwoofer itself, etc.

What some are unable to grasp (or don't want to grasp), I've done all that you suggest in your above and now I'm currently moving in a direction that's measurably been shown to be working. This is not a permission thing. If Audyssey and Anti-Mode are failing to give me what I want, then my responsibility to myself is to move forward in a positive direction not flop around on the deck like a fish out of water lamenting, why I can't do better. Currently I'm exploring the acquisition of a MiniDSP product to see what their offering has to offer. Currently I'm in contact with the MiniDSP DevTeam to find out which of their product offerings do they think will best serve my purpose for our setup and I'll order that unit to see what's what with what. Time will tell what this facet of my sojourn is going show as my expectations of my intellectual efforts are high, not low.

I know you don't believe this but what I'm doing and the expected final outcome follows scientific principal; repeatability in different laboratory settings as long as lab conditions are replicated. Currently, despite the insistence of others, I find this cogent scientific principal is not being followed yet various solutions are being offered as if this principal is being followed.

I appreciate how you think what you're sharing is the right way but experience has shown me to take everything one reads or shares with a healthy dose of salt and as we all know, too much salt is well known for ruining the stew. Since you're unable to understand what I'm sharing then it shows I'm not the problem as I understand perfectly fine what I've tried to share. What you're not getting, there's nothing flawed with what I'm doing. Personally, correct or incorrect, my belief, you don't want to understand what I'm sharing due to bias against what I've shared. It's okay, I understand. In the meantime, I appreciate how you've been nothing but a stand up guy in your efforts, irrespective of the negative, acoustically measured outcome. OTOH, my expectations of Audyssey and Anti-Mode are not being met so I have to find out on my side of the web, what I can do, to get what I'm wanting and like other past quests, I have no doubt that I'll obtain what I have set out to find but I'm not going gain what I want by insisting on doing over and over and over again, what clearly isn't working. And to continue trying to obtain what I want, using flawed information that's personally been shown to not work, meets the definition of insanity. If anything, you should encourage me in my independent quest, not discourage me just as without insult, I would be expected to encourage anybody who's sincerely trying to obtain a certain goal, what ever that goal might be.

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #25 of 44 Old 02-08-2013, 02:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 837 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

I find that if I run an external test tone from the 5.1 Audio Toolkit through Audyssey, the levels are generally all the same, including the subwoofer level, (which means they are all "calibrated" to the same level), even if they might not be *exactly* at 75 dB. It's more important that they all be the same than that they all be exactly 75 dB.

Craig

Ahhh...I'm gonna have to try that. Post-Audyssey, when I check my levels with the internal test tone, they seem to be all out of whack - now I understand why. Thanks again Craig.

AVR: DENON 2113ci
FL/R: Klipschorn
CC: Klipsch RC64ii
SUR: Polk LS F/X x 4
SUB: PSA XS15 x 4 (Soon to be replaced with dual T-18s!)
DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740
Alan P is offline  
post #26 of 44 Old 02-09-2013, 01:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
derrickdj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 156
It should be pointed out that level matching subs will yield excellent results for many HT. This is true when the subs are identical or similar in preformance. The point of over-drving one sub and getting distortion and running out of headroom is not a problem with most decent subs of 12 in or greater. The advatage of level matching is a smoothe bass respone throughout the room. The final calibration with MCACC or Audyssey should blend the subs to the systems +/- some tweaks.

Klipsch RF 7 based HT 7.4, Pioneer SC 35, Acurus 200 Five, Dayton 18 Ultimxa Dual Sub Cab(2), Dayton 18 Ultimax Large Vented Sub Cab (2), on Berhinger I Nuke DPS amps, Samsung BDP F 7500, Asus/My Book Live HPC 4 TB

Yaquin VK 2100 amp, McIntosh XR 5 speakers, Samsung BDP F 7500
derrickdj1 is online now  
post #27 of 44 Old 02-09-2013, 04:58 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 derrickdj1 View Post

It should be pointed out that level matching subs will yield excellent results for many HT. This is true when the subs are identical or similar in preformance. The point of over-drving one sub and getting distortion and running out of headroom is not a problem with most decent subs of 12 in or greater. The advatage of level matching is a smoothe bass respone throughout the room. The final calibration with MCACC or Audyssey should blend the subs to the systems +/- some tweaks.

Yet without a room analyzing program, everybody is guessing this smoothing is taking place and other problems, nulls, dips, localized reinforcement issues, overall graph increases/decreases or additional reflections, aren't being created. confused.gif One can't appreciate what I'm writing until they've acquired measuring capability and watched real time changes in a room's frequency response graph taking place. And if one invokes scientific principal in their conversation, then they to must expect one to acquire room analyzing capability for without room analyzing capability, scientific principal in not being practiced.

Without room analyzing capability, everything else is based on sage advice and hopeful/wishful thinking. I have totally stopped our subwoofer sojourn for the singular purpose of understanding a room's acoustical interaction with placed subwoofers and the one consistency found, without a room analyzing program to actually see what's going on with a room's acoustics, there's no point.

The point, all subwoofer placement advice should come with the strong recommendation of acquiring room analyzing capabilities. If no room analyzing capability, then no soup. And without room analyzing capability, one will never be able to appreciate the brevity of my above.

I'm now of the opinion that if someone is going recommend the purchase of fifteen hundred or twenty-five hundred dollars worth of subwoofer, then in the same recommending breath, need to recommend the spending of an additional four hundred dollars on room analyzing capability (including a sound meter) and if the individual can't afford both room analyzing capability and subwoofer package, then the room analyzing capability should be recommended first. The individual should take time to learn about and master their old subwoofers by playing and learning how the newly acquired room analyzing program works. Then when they've put together the additional cost of the room analyzing capability which was subtracted from their original subwoofer budget, buy two subwoofers of their choosing. Now the individual is cooking with gas.

Irrespective, if buying two, three hundred dollar subs or four, twenty-five hundred dollar subs, I recommend the above. Without room analyzing capabilities, Audyssey or no Audyssey, Anti-Mode or no Anti-Mode, one will "NEVER" be able to get the best out of their subwoofers and we all want the best out of our subwoofer system.

Just saying.

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
post #28 of 44 Old 02-09-2013, 06:37 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,389
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

It should be pointed out that level matching subs will yield excellent results for many HT.
Yes, for systems that are never played loud enough to reach the limits of the higher set sub, that's possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

This is true when the subs are identical or similar in preformance.
It can also be true for non-identical subs. It depends entirely on which subs are used and how loud and low the user wants to go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

The point of over-drving one sub and getting distortion and running out of headroom is not a problem with most decent subs of 12 in or greater.
Again, that depends entirely on how loud and how low the user wants to go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

The advatage of level matching is a smoothe bass respone throughout the room.
I think you need to explain how that works. Level-matching, by definition, sets the levels for ONE position, the (arbitrary) listening position. Therefore, at any other position throughout the room, the levels will be different. Therefore, level-matching CAN"T guarantee "smooth bass response throughout the room." In some rooms, level-matching may improve the response, in others, it could make it worse. It entirely depends on the room, the subwoofer placements, the (arbitrary) listening position AND the levels used.
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

The final calibration with MCACC or Audyssey should blend the subs to the systems +/- some tweaks.
There is no version of Pioneer's MCACC that EQ's the bass. It will calibrate the subs and set Distance, but it doesn't EQ the subs. All versions of Audyssey from MultEQ up will EQ the subs, with higher versions having higher resolution in the filter taps. However, as you point out, it can often be improved on by tweaking the crossovers and the subwoofer Distance setting.

Craig

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

My System

craig john is offline  
post #29 of 44 Old 02-09-2013, 09:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
monomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: up north
Posts: 1,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Haven't been around here in over a year... level matching vs gain matching? some arguments never seem to change or evolve do they? Sweeping rationalizations to justify the superiority of one method over the other do not work because there will always be specific situations that will prove otherwise. For me it all boils down to the particulars of the situation and then applying some common sense... in my case, it just so happens to be level matching is the obvious choice (identical pairs of subs positioned to be equi-distant or nearly so at each listening position in a symmetrical room). The ability to analyze the room response proves that level matching does work well in this situation.

I have 4 subs (2 mid-bass units and 2 ULF units) and I'm getting ready to try using a miniDSP to set them up... wish me luck. Churning this stuff around in my head, this is the plan I've come up with so far... basically I will EQ each sub individually (using REW to determine the biquads for each parameteric EQ) then set the HPF for the mid-bass units and the LPF for the ULF units until they cross-over smoothly (I'm planning on a X-O for around 70Hz but that can easily be changed once I actually see what's happening in the room... since this part is based upon tweaking I may have to "play it by ear"... pun intended). I will also be able to adjust individual phase/delays and gains at this time... fortunately I will have REW to help guide my choices visually, which I find ironic since the goal is actually to achieve audio perfection. Finally I will run Audyssey on the whole system to EQ it as if it were all just one sub which it will then hopefully deal with any interactions that crop up between the unit pairs. Anyone see any pitfalls with my plan? Don't know if this is all going to work out the way I think it will but I guess I'm going to soon find out when my miniDSP gets here.

"For deep bass, the listener is not really listening to the speaker, but rather, is listening to the room as it is being played by the speaker."
Juicy
Doggie Jabber
monomer is offline  
post #30 of 44 Old 02-09-2013, 09:43 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 monomer View Post

... wish me luck.

Good luck. wink.gif

Quote:
Anyone see any pitfalls with my plan?

One recommendation, be sure when measuring the basic parametric subwoofer settings and then adding the MiniDSP, to have Audyssey set to factory specifications (zero Audyssey influence) so you're not layering the MiniDSP efforts on top of Audyssey's efforts. And of course, Audyssey to be run last, after the MiniDSP is dialed in.

Which MiniDSP did you go with? From their website information, I couldn't tell which of their product offerings would best serve our needs. confused.gif

-
BeeMan458 is offline  
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

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