Simplified REW Setup and Use (USB Mic & HDMI Connection) Including Measurement Techniques and How To Interpret Graphs - Page 370 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 401Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11071 of 14290 Old 08-22-2014, 06:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
@hdgaming : The treatments seem to be making a small difference, but IIUC, you only have two bass traps, correct? Based on the waterfalls, which are showing severe bass ringing, you will need quite a few more traps to make a measurable difference. Remember, traps are most effective when they straddle a corner, not when they are placed flat on the wall. If you look at the pictures of my room (My Setup link in my sig), you will see that I use the intersection of the wall and the ceiling as spots for bass traps, as well as every available intersection of two walls, and even a ceiling cloud. It takes a ton of traps to fix a bad ringing problem--don't know if WAF is a factor, but a ton of traps is not always that visually attractive.

The frequency response is not terrible, but could be better. I have been using REW for years, and have NEVER used the room sim tool. Shows you what I think about that feature. IMO, additional subs are your best bet to improve frequency response, as well as "real" sub placement experiments (not the room sim).

I don't know what to say about the door. Personally, I would leave it alone. You have other options--more subs, better placement, more traps, room EQ, etc.
AustinJerry is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #11072 of 14290 Old 08-22-2014, 08:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Alan P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 4,480
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1717 Post(s)
Liked: 853
Jerry,

HDs waterfalls aren't scaled right, his lower limit is set to 25db. Should be more like 45 or 50....they'd look much better if they were scaled right.

AVR: Denon 4520ci, FL/R: Klipschorn, CC: Klipsch RC-64ii, SUR: Polk LS/FX x4, FH: Klipsch RB-51ii x2, SUB: PSA T-18 x2, DISP: Mitsubishi WD-73740, BluRay: PS3 & BDP-S5100, Remote: URC MX-700
--------------------------------------------------
Getting Started with REW
Audyssey 101
Audyssey FAQ
Alan P is online now  
post #11073 of 14290 Old 08-22-2014, 08:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Good catch, you are correct. HDGaming, how about some updated waterfalls? To be consistent with what we normally see, set the lower limit to 50Hz, and the time scale to 450 (not 500).
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11074 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 09:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
HDgaming42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 673
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post
Bumping this for HD...hoping someone smarter than me has some good advice!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
@hdgaming : The treatments seem to be making a small difference, but IIUC, you only have two bass traps, correct? Based on the waterfalls, which are showing severe bass ringing, you will need quite a few more traps to make a measurable difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan P View Post
Jerry,

HDs waterfalls aren't scaled right, his lower limit is set to 25db. Should be more like 45 or 50....they'd look much better if they were scaled right.
Thanks guys. Here are corrected waterfalls:

Before Treatment



After Treatment



Truthfully that looks MUCH better! I'm actually surprised the ringing isn't worse in a room with nothing in it but a subwoofer and two (four 1/2 height) bass traps.

It seems 50Hz is the lowest my traps are having a meaningful effect. That null in the 40s will have to be tackled with another sub I suppose? I could probably do ceiling/wall traps or a cloud trap...the rest of the room will be difficult. Hell, I'll take some pictures to show you guys what I'm working with--I appreciate the pics you've posted of your rooms. Let's me get an idea of what it takes!

Have a pretty packed weekend, so pics might not be right away. I'll be checking back for feedback regularly though.

Not sure this is of any use, but here's an after treatment Spectrogram, which I'm equally sure isn't scaled correctly.



EDIT: I just noticed that ringing got WORSE at 17Hz and 20Hz with treatment. Or maybe that's because of the open door...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	spectrogram.png
Views:	28
Size:	450.8 KB
ID:	225618   Click image for larger version

Name:	treated and doors open - waterfall.png
Views:	28
Size:	157.8 KB
ID:	225634   Click image for larger version

Name:	baseline no treatment - waterfall.png
Views:	29
Size:	259.9 KB
ID:	225674  

Last edited by HDgaming42; 08-23-2014 at 09:28 AM.
HDgaming42 is offline  
post #11075 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 09:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
I would focus on frequency response smoothness for now. The revised waterfalls don't look too bad. A suggestion on your measuring technique for the waterfalls. Ideally, you should aim for a measurement level that is approximately 40dB above your measured noise floor, which of most of us is around 50dB. If you look at the scale on the right of the spectrogram, you see a range of 39-79dB, which is the level of your measurements. I would aim for a peak of 90dB, and then use 50-100dB as the vertical scale on the Waterfall. As it is now, with such a low measurement level, the lower limit on the waterfall should be 40dB, which will alter how the graph looks significantly. Waterfalls are tricky to display, as well as to interpret.

And the tiny blip on the after waterfall at 20Hz should not cause any concern at all. It is probably not audible.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11076 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 10:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,563
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 252 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
I would focus on frequency response smoothness for now. The revised waterfalls don't look too bad. A suggestion on your measuring technique for the waterfalls. Ideally, you should aim for a measurement level that is approximately 40dB above your measured noise floor, which of most of us is around 50dB. If you look at the scale on the right of the spectrogram, you see a range of 39-79dB, which is the level of your measurements. I would aim for a peak of 90dB, and then use 50-100dB as the vertical scale on the Waterfall. As it is now, with such a low measurement level, the lower limit on the waterfall should be 40dB, which will alter how the graph looks significantly. Waterfalls are tricky to display, as well as to interpret.

And the tiny blip on the after waterfall at 20Hz should not cause any concern at all. It is probably not audible.
Agree on all accounts

My Room
My Music
Rega - Apollo, Rega - DAC, Goldpoint Passive, (2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next
jim19611961 is online now  
post #11077 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 01:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
HDgaming42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 673
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
I would focus on frequency response smoothness for now. The revised waterfalls don't look too bad. A suggestion on your measuring technique for the waterfalls. Ideally, you should aim for a measurement level that is approximately 40dB above your measured noise floor, which of most of us is around 50dB. If you look at the scale on the right of the spectrogram, you see a range of 39-79dB, which is the level of your measurements. I would aim for a peak of 90dB, and then use 50-100dB as the vertical scale on the Waterfall. As it is now, with such a low measurement level, the lower limit on the waterfall should be 40dB, which will alter how the graph looks significantly. Waterfalls are tricky to display, as well as to interpret.

And the tiny blip on the after waterfall at 20Hz should not cause any concern at all. It is probably not audible.
Would I best go about enhancing my waterfalls by bumping my test tone to 90dB from the 75dB I have it at now?

Found a second to snap some pics of the room. WAF isn't too much of a factor here--the room is essentially my domain. I don't want things to look terrible, but finished traps look fine to me--the more the merrier. (I have yet to wrap my traps in cloth).

The walls are sealed, double drywall with green glue. I'm very reluctant to anchor anything to the walls and break that seal. Hence why I built my corner traps as free-standing (well, I tried just placing them in the corner but they collapsed as predicted).

The ceiling is double drywall, and suspended via clips and hat channel on de-coupled stringers. I'm not really sure how I would hang a cloud trap without throwing all that work away...

That said, I'm open to all suggestions. I also took a pic of the casing between the double doors. Found the reference:
Quote:
  1. Increased distance between doors will increase air pressure considerably when both doors are closed. To alleviate this pressure we recommend leaving a 1/4″-1/2″ space between the two door jambs. This 1/2″ space should be open entirely to the inside of the wall for the air pressure to enter the wall cavity when the doors are closed. All of our communicating door tests were completed with this gap in place.
http://www.soundisolationdoors.com/p...solation-door/


Seems like drilling holes shouldn't hurt if they're calling for a gap all the way around...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	stacked_traps.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	62.0 KB
ID:	225969   Click image for larger version

Name:	room_rear.jpg
Views:	39
Size:	159.0 KB
ID:	225977   Click image for larger version

Name:	room_front.jpg
Views:	41
Size:	150.5 KB
ID:	225985   Click image for larger version

Name:	door_jamb.jpg
Views:	38
Size:	108.6 KB
ID:	225993  
HDgaming42 is offline  
post #11078 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 01:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Okay, stupid question time...Any reason I should continue using my RS SPL meter for level setting, or can I switch over to REW's SPL meter? I have a CSL calibrated Umik-1, and I've added the factory sensitivity data.

I just got a new processor, and I have a friend who's willing to help me build some room treatment panels. it's finally time for me to get serious about measuring.
Bluescale is offline  
post #11079 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale View Post
Okay, stupid question time...Any reason I should continue using my RS SPL meter for level setting, or can I switch over to REW's SPL meter? I have a CSL calibrated Umik-1, and I've added the factory sensitivity data.

I just got a new processor, and I have a friend who's willing to help me build some room treatment panels. it's finally time for me to get serious about measuring.
Just load the calibration file with the sensitivity parameter, play a test tone (the REW SPL calibration tone is a good one), adjust the AVR master volume until the REW SPL is showing 90dB on the mic at the MLP, then take the RS SPL and measure the tone by placing it next to the mic. If the RS SPL measures 90dB as well, then the sensitivity parameter in the mic's calibration file is working the way it should be. Going forward, there should be no need to use the RS SPL to calibrate the mic.

Also, note the AVR MV setting that produces the 90dB level. For future REW settings, simply choose the same MV setting and you should be good to go. For example, a MV setting of -11 produces 90dB at the MLP, with a 103dB headroom, every time.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11080 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 02:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDgaming42 View Post
Would I best go about enhancing my waterfalls by bumping my test tone to 90dB from the 75dB I have it at now?

Found a second to snap some pics of the room. WAF isn't too much of a factor here--the room is essentially my domain. I don't want things to look terrible, but finished traps look fine to me--the more the merrier. (I have yet to wrap my traps in cloth).

The walls are sealed, double drywall with green glue. I'm very reluctant to anchor anything to the walls and break that seal. Hence why I built my corner traps as free-standing (well, I tried just placing them in the corner but they collapsed as predicted).

You can re-post the waterfalls with the vertical axis of 40dB-90dB if you like. This will show a more accurate picture, given the relatively lower levels with which the measurements were taken. In the future, try and measure at 90dB, and use a 50-95dB vertical scale for the waterfall.

Thanks for the pictures. The room is rather small, but there is no reason you can't get excellent sound in a small room. What are the room measurements, by the way?

I'll repeat it again--in my opinion, the best way to smooth the frequency response would be a second sub, not additional treatments.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11081 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 02:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Just load the calibration file with the sensitivity parameter, play a test tone (the REW SPL calibration tone is a good one), adjust the AVR master volume until the REW SPL is showing 90dB on the mic at the MLP, then take the RS SPL and measure the tone by placing it next to the mic. If the RS SPL measures 90dB as well, then the sensitivity parameter in the mic's calibration file is working the way it should be. Going forward, there should be no need to use the RS SPL to calibrate the mic.

Also, note the AVR MV setting that produces the 90dB level. For future REW settings, simply choose the same MV setting and you should be good to go. For example, a MV setting of -11 produces 90dB at the MLP, with a 103dB headroom, every time.
I don't think I asked my question clearly enough. I'm actually talking about setting speaker trim levels. I find that my RS meter and mic match pretty well for the main channels, but have about a 5db spread on the sub. My assumption (and we know how dangerous those can be) is that the mic is more accurate, as I know it's been calibrated, and I have the sensitivity data. I just want to put the SPL meter away and start from scratch using just REW.

This is also important because I need to use SPL at the crossover point to set distance for my sub. I don't have any auto eq on my processor right now (it's coming, but I want to play now, not later ), and it would simplify everything if the RS meter can stay tucked away in it's drawer.

Does that make sense?
Bluescale is offline  
post #11082 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 02:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Once the mic is properly calibrated, it should be more accurate to set speaker trim levels than the RS SPL, especially at lower frequencies, if that is what you are asking.

But I am a bit confused. You start by talking about trims, and then you switch to talking about setting the sub delay. How are the sub trim and delay related?
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11083 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 03:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
But I am a bit confused. You start by talking about trims, and then you switch to talking about setting the sub delay. How are the sub trim and delay related?
Sorry, I'm talking about multiple, barely related things in 1 post. The only way they are related is that I used SPL to set distance. I played a tone at the xover frequency through the center and sub, and set sub distance based on the highest SPL.
Bluescale is offline  
post #11084 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 04:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale View Post
Sorry, I'm talking about multiple, barely related things in 1 post. The only way they are related is that I used SPL to set distance. I played a tone at the xover frequency through the center and sub, and set sub distance based on the highest SPL.
Not familiar with this procedure. The sub distance (really should be called delay) determines how well the sub integrates with the main speakers. In other words, it's a phase adjustment. Many of us play a frequency sweep 15-300Hz played through the center+sub(s), and observe the smoothness of the splice at the crossover point. The sub distance is adjusted gradually upwards or downwards, then re- measure, and continue adjusting until the splice at the crossover is flattest. If adjusting the distance for more than one sub, adjust the distance of both subs by the same amount, thus keeping the phase relationship between the subs unaltered.

Have you measured the flatness at the crossover frequency? Does it look good? If yes, then you have the delay set properly.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11085 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 04:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Not familiar with this procedure. The sub distance (really should be called delay) determines how well the sub integrates with the main speakers.
I'm using this procedure:

Subwoofer Distance Setting

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Have you measured the flatness at the crossover frequency? Does it look good? If yes, then you have the delay set properly.
Hopefully, if I can get things to behave, I'll be posting some graphs today. I have a pretty terrible room (concrete floors, a world shape, and a huge window on the left hand side), and trying to find information on what to address, and how to address is a bit overwhelming. I'm hoping the experts in this thread can help me decide where to start, and what will be most impactful.

Last edited by Bluescale; 08-23-2014 at 05:55 PM. Reason: formatting of quotes
Bluescale is offline  
post #11086 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 04:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale View Post
I'm using this procedure:

Subwoofer Distance Setting

Have you measured the flatness at the crossover frequency? Does it look good? If yes, then you have the delay set properly.
Hopefully, if I can get things to behave, I'll be posting some graphs today. I have a pretty terrible room (concrete floors, a world shape, and a huge window on the left hand side), and trying to find information on what to address, and how to address is a bit overwhelming. I'm hoping the experts in this thread can help me decide where to start, and what will be most impactful.[/QUOTE]

It is quite possible that both procedures will yield the same results. It is interesting, because Craig John, who is in the link you provided, is the author of the procedure that I described, which is often referred to as the "Sub distance tweak". If you go to the Audyssey thread and search sub distance tweak, you will find the detailed write-up on the procedure.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11087 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 05:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
I'm running into strange behavior. When I run a sweep of my sub alone, the SPL about 15db hotter than when I run a sweep using my main speaker + sub crossed over at 90hz. Is there any logical reason for that?
Bluescale is offline  
post #11088 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 06:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
How are you isolating the sub? Are you turning off the mains, or are you selecting the LFE channel in HDMI?
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11089 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 06:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
How are you isolating the sub? Are you turning off the mains, or are you selecting the LFE channel in HDMI?
I'm selecting the LFE channel in REW. Should I do it the other way?
Bluescale is offline  
post #11090 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 06:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
No. That's fine. My HDMI only supports two channels, so I can't do it that way. It's possible that the level difference has to do with the way you are measuring. Since I can't test it out, I can't be sure. The level discrepancy shouldn't affect your ability to analyze the frequency response. You are looking for flatness of the curve, not the overall level of the measurement.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11091 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 07:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
In general, is it common for LFE to be 15dB hot?

I hope so, because this is driving me nuts. Level setting when I selected the sub channel from REW are so different than the level when I used my processor test tone. The other channels are similar between my processor and REW
Bluescale is offline  
post #11092 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 08:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale View Post
In general, is it common for LFE to be 15dB hot?

I hope so, because this is driving me nuts. Level setting when I selected the sub channel from REW are so different than the level when I used my processor test tone. The other channels are similar between my processor and REW
I am a little slow tonight for some reason. Check out this discussion:
Simplified REW Setup and Use (USB Mic & HDMI Connection) Including Measurement Techniques and How To Interpret Graphs

As I said before, I don't use the HDMI4 setting to measure LFE, so I don't always remember that this channel has a 10dB boost applied to it. If you want to avoid this boost, then output to the left and right channels, and turn off the left and right speakers. Bass management routes the low frequencies to the subs, without the boost (assuming you are using an AVR with bass management, of course).

Sorry for the confusion.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11093 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 08:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
^

To answer my own question, redirected bass from the mains is generally 10dB to 15dB quieter than a pure LEF signal:

LFE, subwoofers and interconnects explained
Bluescale is offline  
post #11094 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 08:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,195
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2154 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Or more accurately, the LFE channel has a 10dB boost. I think it is exactly 10dB, not 10-15dB.
Bluescale likes this.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #11095 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 09:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Or more accurately, the LFE channel has a 10dB boost. I think it is exactly 10dB, not 10-15dB.
From the post I linked to (and I'm taking it on faith the OP know what he's talking about):

Quote:
Okay, what level should the subwoofer output be? If it were just the LFE track, then you'd expect it, as discussed above, to be 10dB lower than the other channels to fit the 10dB higher maximum LFE output.

But if the player is performing bass management, then the subwoofer output also has to contain redirected bass; this extra signal could push the signal back above its nominal limit. To prevent overloading their output, or the receiver's input, players with bass management conventionally lower the SW output by a further 5dB. (This 5dB value is specified by Dolby, see references). Sometimes this 5dB drop switches in and out depending on whether bass management is being performed (ie if any speakers are set to SMALL).

The final SW output will typically be:
SW = LFE
or:
SW = Lower5dB(LFE + Lower10dB(Redirected bass)) = Lower5dB(LFE) + Lower15dB(Redirected bass)
So, in those two cases the SW output from the player will be respectively 10dB or 15dB lower than the other channels. A receiver should offer the ability to specifically boost the SW input on its multichannel analogue interface to compensate.
Bluescale is offline  
post #11096 of 14290 Old 08-23-2014, 09:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Although going back and reading that, it seems to say the opposite of what I'm experiencing. I'm starting to feel kind of dense here, and I don't know if it's me or if my processor is doing something weird .
Bluescale is offline  
post #11097 of 14290 Old 08-24-2014, 12:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,305
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1507 Post(s)
Liked: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDgaming42 View Post
I just noticed that ringing got WORSE at 17Hz and 20Hz with treatment. Or maybe that's because of the open door...
Most likely just a measuring artefact (probably noise). The important information in the graph is that the overall shape of the ridges became steeper (less ringing) and more rounded (lower Q).
IgorZep likes this.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is offline  
post #11098 of 14290 Old 08-24-2014, 12:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,068
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 529 Post(s)
Liked: 146
To clarify.... If you select channel 4 as the output then bass management is not relevant as REW is effectively the LFE channel in this case. If you sent output to channel 1 and channel 4 then the sub will see the LFE channel (+10dB) and the redirected bass from channel 1.
Bluescale likes this.
3ll3d00d is online now  
post #11099 of 14290 Old 08-24-2014, 03:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 8,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1253 Post(s)
Liked: 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale View Post
Although going back and reading that, it seems to say the opposite of what I'm experiencing. I'm starting to feel kind of dense here, and I don't know if it's me or if my processor is doing something weird .
My understanding is that the LFE channel in movie soundtracks on DVDs and BDs is recorded on the disc at a level 10dB below what one might expect it to be. This is because the peak LFE output is designed to be 125dbA, while the peak audio in all of the other channels is designed to be 115 dbA. By recording the LFE channel 10dB lower, it is given 10dB of headroom in the recorded audio channel. The amplifying electornics is designed to compensate by amplifying the LFE channel by those missing 10dB. (Historical note: some early DVD DTS soundtracks were accidentally mixed without that 10dB LFE decrease, causing lots of confusion.)

When you provide an audio signal over HDMI from a computer using REW, though, all of the channels are sent audio signals with the same digital amplitude, including the LFE channel. The LFE channel's signal hasn't been decreased by the expected 10dB. As a result, it comes out of the speakers 10dB louder than it should. I.e. it's the same "mistake" that was made in early DTS recording mixes.
Bluescale likes this.

Selden

Marantz SR7009+MM9000/Atmos 7.1.4 (FH+TM:DefTech PM1000)/LCR+TM amped
Selden Ball is offline  
post #11100 of 14290 Old 08-24-2014, 04:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 942
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 127
Thanks to everyone who answered my beginner questions.
Bluescale is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Audio Theory, Setup, and Chat

Tags
Dayton , Dayton Audio , Room Equilizer Wizard Rew



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