Simplified REW Setup and Use (USB Mic & HDMI Connection) Including Measurement Techniques and How To Interpret Graphs - Page 91 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 11Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2701 of 10803 Old 04-27-2013, 02:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LastButNotLeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: 08077
Posts: 4,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Michael,

 

The HF roll-off seems a bit steep.  Is that the EQ, or is that your speakers?

Green line is no EQ, so that's probably the speakers.

At 57, my ears probably don't do much better, anyway.

biggrin.gif


Downloadable FREE demo discs:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1475769/de...ently-authored 

Did you really need to quote that entire post in your reply?
LastButNotLeast is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2702 of 10803 Old 04-27-2013, 04:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pres2play View Post

Jerry, I think I know why I am getting the hump in the bass region using Audyssey. As you know, I have a sub placed on a side wall for low extension. Audyssey is cancelling this boost, which lowers the actual test tone below the required 75 db. To make up for this low signal, Audyssey sets all the satellite trims high (+5 ~ +6) and brings up the bass frequencies. What I must do, is set the initially sub calibration to 85 dB (That's right, I must trick Audyssey and raise the level on the sub!) so that Audyssey does not try to do it with its filters. I just have to remember to set the sub back down after the calibration.

Edit: this explains the issue running Anti-Mode and Audyssey together. One is fighting the other.

 

I am not following this at all.  Regardless of where you place the sub, Audyssey will measure its output level and establish a trim setting that produces a 75dB level at the MLP.  It does the same for the other speakers.  So, if you raise the gain on the sub to 85dB, Audyssey will simply apply  -10dB to the trim level.  What do you expect to accomplish by doing this?

 

I also don't understand how you think Audyssey is cancelling what the Anti-Mode is doing.  Audyssey is not dynamic in nature.  If you run the Anti-Mode first, then Audyssey simply "sees" the corrected sub response for what it is, and attempts to smooth it out.  If you run Audyssey first, and then the Anti-Mode, the Audyssey filters and trim will not change because you are applying post-Audyssey correction.

 

Go ahead and try what you suggested and report back the results.  I am very interested in seeing what they are.

 

+1

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2703 of 10803 Old 04-27-2013, 04:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

What is this noise?
I'll use the Toole quote from my earlier reply to Roger:
Quote:
Noise, in this context, is everything other than the speech we want to hear. When several people talk at the same time, the noise is speech itself. In music, it is the sound of the band with which a vocalist is singing. In movies, it is everything else in a soundtrack occurring at the same time as the dialogue. For long passages in films and television programming, this is atmosphere-inducing music.
Raising the volume level raises the signal (speech) and the noise (soundtrack), when the idea is to hear the signal better than the noise.

 

I struggle to understand the description of the content of the soundtrack as 'noise'. Like I said before, it is the mixer's job to ensure that dialogue can be clearly hear over background effects, music etc. If he has done his job well, there is no difficulty in hearing all the dialogue clearly because he has balanced all of the disparate sounds in the soundtrack and favoured dialogue over the rest. If he has not done his job well, then no amount of 'allowed reflections' or tweaking of the channel trims is going to make any difference: it will still be the mess that is encoded into the disc.

 

I know it seems perverse and possibly even arrogant for a hobbyist like me to take an opposing stand to someone as revered as Toole, and it isn't my intention to do that. But the quote above doesn’t seem to fit well with my experience or my understanding. I agree with it in the sense of a live performance - the sound of the band vs the vocalist signing, as he mentions. In that live context we want to hear the vocalist and if the band drowns her out, then that is no good and we would want to take steps to change the 'balance' of the various sounds. But that is a live event - if the event is recorded it is the job of the recording engineer to ensure that the balance is good and that the vocalist can be heard over the band. As I am solely concerned with recorded sound, the quote seems to have no relevance to me. If I am wrong, I would welcome being corrected: I am mainly here to learn,

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2704 of 10803 Old 04-27-2013, 05:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastButNotLeast View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

The deep (literally) joy of dual Submersives. :)  I've had them for several months now and have only just stopped selecting movies on the basis of their bass content! Mesmerising.

Then how about just some new demo material?

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1469192/reference-2-blu-ray-demo-disc-bd9s-bd50#post_23227072

 

LOL. I have most of those discs! Truth is, I have been captivated and mesmerised by the bass performance since getting the dual Submersives and I have fallen into the old 'audiofool' trap of using the discs to play the equipment, rather than the other way around. But there is so much visceral pleasure to be derived from hearing really deep bass, really well-reproduced, that it is easy to fall into the trap. So for some time I have been selecting my daily movie on the basis of its bass content rather than any other criterion. Fortunately, I have now reached the point where I can take the bass for granted (to some extent) and so I have gone back to selecting my movies on a more catholic basis. HST, it is amazing how many movies thus selected surprise me with their bass content when played via the Submersives. Last night, for example, I watched Rocknrolla - the Guy Ritchie movie with Tom Hardy, Tom Wilkinson, Gerard Butler and Thandie Newton. This is a great black comedy/gangster style Brit thriller and while it has a good soundtrack I have never especially considered it as a movie to showcase the bass in any way. But last night when I played it (the first time since getting the Submersives) I was blown away by the use of bass in the movie - it is only occasionally I admit, but when it comes, it really makes an impression. Tonight I shall watch Layer Cake, a similar type of movie with Daniel Craig and I am looking forward to seeing if I experience the same thing. Betting is, I will.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2705 of 10803 Old 04-27-2013, 05:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 547 Post(s)
Liked: 630
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I struggle to understand the description of the content of the soundtrack as 'noise'.
In the context of speech intelligibility, it is anything that isn't speech. Nothing more complicated than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Like I said before, it is the mixer's job to ensure that dialogue can be clearly hear over background effects, music etc. If he has done his job well, there is no difficulty in hearing all the dialogue clearly because he has balanced all of the disparate sounds in the soundtrack and favoured dialogue over the rest. If he has not done his job well, then no amount of 'allowed reflections' or tweaking of the channel trims is going to make any difference: it will still be the mess that is encoded into the disc.
My experience has been otherwise, as I've found that overall volume and centre channel level and room acoustics can all have an influence on how well listeners hear dialogue, whether the soundtrack is well mixed or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I know it seems perverse and possibly even arrogant for a hobbyist like me to take an opposing stand to someone as revered as Toole, and it isn't my intention to do that. But the quote above doesn’t seem to fit well with my experience or my understanding.
Based on your experience and understanding, at least when it comes to reflections, why do you think a professional acoustician like Nyal would choose to leave his side walls bare? Is his hearing so bad that he can't pick up the damage to intelligibility you can easily hear? Is his experience so lacking that he's never heard the standard recommendation to treat early reflections? You don't need to answer, but I hope you understand that there is an alternate view on early reflections that is at odds with what you believe.

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #2706 of 10803 Old 04-28-2013, 03:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I struggle to understand the description of the content of the soundtrack as 'noise'.
In the context of speech intelligibility, it is anything that isn't speech. Nothing more complicated than that.
 

 

OK, I see that. But the rest of the content of the soundtrack isn't undesired 'noise' - it is part of the whole and the mixer's job is to prioritise it appropriately and, in the vast majority of discs that I own, they seem to do this effectively. There seems to be no need to use reflections to help them out with their job - they have already ensured that we can hear the dialogue before the mix leaves their studio, so to speak. In the editing suites I used to frequent, the sidewalls were not bare IIRC and speech intelligibility was our number one concern - on a radio or cinema commercial the dialogue matters more than any other element of the production as that is where the main sales pitch is contained (usually) so it was paramount to us that no other element of the track - music, effects etc - overwhelmed it. I was always entirely confident when I left the studio that we had done our job in that regard 100%. I never felt that it would be necessary for the playback to take place in a room where the reflections from the side walls (or absence of such) would be a main consideration in the intelligibility of the dialogue. 

 

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Like I said before, it is the mixer's job to ensure that dialogue can be clearly hear over background effects, music etc. If he has done his job well, there is no difficulty in hearing all the dialogue clearly because he has balanced all of the disparate sounds in the soundtrack and favoured dialogue over the rest. If he has not done his job well, then no amount of 'allowed reflections' or tweaking of the channel trims is going to make any difference: it will still be the mess that is encoded into the disc.
My experience has been otherwise, as I've found that overall volume and centre channel level and room acoustics can all have an influence on how well listeners hear dialogue, whether the soundtrack is well mixed or not.
 

I agree entirely that a) the overall volume and b) the centre channel level and c) the room acoustics can influence how well listeners hear dialogue.  Taking them in order - a) is obviously important. If the MV is turned down very low, then the listener will struggle to hear the soundtrack - but for movie reproduction that has been taken care of for us as we have Reference level. We can be sure that at Reference, if the mixer has done his job well, the dialogue will be fully intelligible. I accept that most people listen at levels below Reference, but not so far below that they cannot hear the dialogue - and if they do, then that is a problem of their own making. b) Again it is clear that the centre channel level is of great importance because that is where almost all the dialogue resides. Most of my comments wrt to a) apply here too. c) This is the big one IMO and IME. When people struggle to hear dialogue clearly (assuming they have a properly set up competent system) it has been my experience that it is because there are too many reflections in the room, not too few. The reflections cause the dialogue to be less intelligible. These may not be the same reflections Nyal etc are referencing but there seems to be no doubt at all in my mind that dialogue intelligibility is hugely enhanced when the room is treated. And one of the aims of treating the room is to tame reflections surely? Again, the editing suites I refer to earlier are all rather 'dead' sounding (or 'inert' might be a better way to describe it as 'dead' has negative connotations. Either way, they are certainly not 'lively' rooms.

 

 

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I know it seems perverse and possibly even arrogant for a hobbyist like me to take an opposing stand to someone as revered as Toole, and it isn't my intention to do that. But the quote above doesn’t seem to fit well with my experience or my understanding.
Based on your experience and understanding, at least when it comes to reflections, why do you think a professional acoustician like Nyal would choose to leave his side walls bare? Is his hearing so bad that he can't pick up the damage to intelligibility you can easily hear? Is his experience so lacking that he's never heard the standard recommendation to treat early reflections? You don't need to answer, but I hope you understand that there is an alternate view on early reflections that is at odds with what you believe.
 

 

IDK why Nyal would leave his side walls bare - this is what I am trying to understand. I could counter with 'why do you think the professional designers of all those editing suites do NOT leave the side walls bare?'.

 

I doubt if Nyal's hearing is any worse than my own. Let's assume we both have adequate hearing. I often find that commentators will refer to rooms for 2/ch stereo listening and sometimes it is not clear if they are applying the same strictures to m/ch 5/7.1 systems (which is all I am concerned with, which I think I made clear). Indeed, in Nyal's often-referenced paper, IIRC he is discussing two channel systems. Yes, I just checked - the one he wrote with Jeff Hedbeck, which has been quoted here recently, is headed specifically "... for two channel listening rooms". Now in my own two channel listening rooms, guess what - I have NO TREATMENTS at all - it is a normally furnished room with a couple of substantial sofas, reasonably heavy drapes, thick carpeting etc. And I love the sound of my stereo CDs in that room. But all of my questions and comments have (and always are on AVS unless specifically referenced otherwise) been concerned with m/ch HT systems. Is Nyal saying that in a m/ch room he struggles to hear dialogue if he removes the sidewall early reflections?  If he is, I respect that but will say that it is totally the opposite of my own experience here where, in a heavily treated room, I have zero issues with dialogue intelligibility on almost every one of the well over 1000 movies I own on disc. However, before treating the room, dialogue intelligibility was nowhere near as good as it since now and quite often I would strain to hear some words. That is almost never the case now. There has to be a connection. 

 

Of course, there is no way on earth I am saying that Nyal is wrong. I would never presume to say such a thing (which is the implication in your final paragraph above - please correct me if I have misconstrued your words). What I am trying to do is understand why he is saying that bare side walls aid speech intelligibility in a properly set up HT, when my experience has been the exact reverse?  And as I have said, I struggle to understand why people are having trouble hearing movie dialogue properly. If I can properly hear every word of dialogue in hundreds and hundreds of movies, why can’t other people?  I have always believed the answer is that they haven't treated their rooms and thus it is reflections which are causing their difficulty. But please, please enlighten me if this is wrong. 

 

One final point - you say there is "an alternative view that is at odds with what [I] believe". It's not an issue of belief. I am trying to tell you what I am hearing in my HT room. I hear dialogue with no problems at all. The last couple of movies I have watched have been dialogue-intensive and I heard 100% of the words, with no problems, no straining etc. Even when against loud background music or effects. Now I don't believe that I have the best HT in the world (far from it) and I know for a fact I don't have any special hearing ability. All I have is decent speakers, a properly calibrated system and a fair number of acoustic panels, installed after measuring 'trouble spots' with REW. That seems to be all I need to hear dialogue properly - why are others finding contrary situations?

 

 

EDIT: I just re-read Nyal's last post on this and he says:

 

"Personally - and it is a personal choice - I usually leave side walls reflective with speakers that have good off axis performance. Speakers that fall into this camp could have very wide dispersion like an omni or well designed cone/dome (Revel, YG) or narrow dispersion due to a waveguide or being dipoles."

 

So even for Nyal it is not cut and dried - a 'personal choice' as he emphasises, which sounds very similar to 'preference' to me. He also qualifies it by reference to the performance characteristics of the speakers in use - and qualifies it further still by saying he "usually", not always, does this.  I do not know (but could look it up I guess) if my M&K S150s fall in the camp he references, but again it doesn’t seem as cut and dried as "Nyal, a professional acoustician would choose to leave his side walls bare".

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2707 of 10803 Old 04-28-2013, 10:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LastButNotLeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: 08077
Posts: 4,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Michael,

 

The HF roll-off seems a bit steep.  Is that the EQ, or is that your speakers?

I don't know, and I've tried just about everything. It's all 5 speakers, and they're new, so I can't imagine it's them. I tried all three inputs through the HTPC and the input I've used before directly into the AVR. I tried different settings on the AVR, including "pure direct," which is supposed to bypass all processing. It's not likely the new EMM-6 mic. 

I'm thinking it's probably somewhere in the source chain, an old laptop feeding a B-stock MobilePre.

I found these nice frequency sweeps:

http://www.audiocheck.net/testtones_sinesweep20-20k.php

Listening to the linear version, I can definitely hear something until about 15 seconds, which would be about 15kHz, which is about what I would expect, so I think I'm ready to stop panicking now.

I feel better about my hearing, too.

wink.gif

Michael


Downloadable FREE demo discs:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1475769/de...ently-authored 

Did you really need to quote that entire post in your reply?
LastButNotLeast is offline  
post #2708 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 04:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271

Beta 16 is available here:

 

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/downloads-area/47460-v5-01-beta-downloads-asio-support.html#axzz2L1HAmERA

 

I wonder if someone could do me a favour?  I can’t download from HTS these days - the download starts OK but then slows to a crawl and never completes. It has been like this for some time for me - tried different browsers etc to no avail.

 

I'd be very grateful if someone with a Dropbox or Google Drive etc account could copy the files there for me to grab that way. The Windows file is essential but if you could also optionally upload the OS-X file that would be terrific.

 

Thanks to anyone who offers.

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2709 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 07:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650
AustinJerry is offline  
post #2710 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 07:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 6,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 326
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I struggle to understand why people are having trouble hearing movie dialogue properly. If I can properly hear every word of dialogue in hundreds and hundreds of movies, why can’t other people?  I have always believed the answer is that they haven't treated their rooms and thus it is reflections which are causing their difficulty. But please, please enlighten me if this is wrong. 

One problem in understanding dialog which is not directly related to room acoustics is regional dialect. Some people are much better than others at understanding accents from a variety of areas. When watching some UK productions, I've found that I've occasionally had to turn on subtitles. Even that doesn't always help, though. There are some British slang words which aren't interpretable from context. And some DVDs of older TV programs don't have subtitles at all.

Selden
Selden Ball is offline  
post #2711 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 08:11 AM
Member
 
ETFE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Apologies if this has already been asked - I've searched for some time and thought it was time to ask for help from the friendly folks on this thread.

I am setting up REW for the first time and am new to the program but not the techniques (I have written a number of programs for manipulating Fourier transforms so, relative to that, REW seems wonderfully plug-and-play to me...). My question concerns calibrating my UMM-6 mike for use in the program. I understand that, despite text in the help files that I interpret to mean USB mikes do not need calibration, I do need to set the SPL level for this mike separately.

There are a number of places where 'calibration' appears and several choices of frequency weighting and I want to be sure I have this straight. Here's what I think I should do:

Under 'Preferences':
* In the Mic/Meter tab, set the Input Type to "Mic or Z Weighted SPL Meter" and load the calibration file for the microphone from Cross-Spectrum.
* In the Soundcard tab, set the Input Device to my UMM-6 and dial the input volume up to 1.000.
* In the Soundcard tab, leave the Calibration File as 'None' since I am not calibrating the soundcard.

Under 'SPL Meter'
* Choose the SPL button
* Choose 'C' weighting and 'Slow' to match my Galaxy SPL meter (not my USB microphone).
* Hit the 'Calibrate' button and enter the reading from the SPL meter at the primary listening position.

Do I have this sorted out? My relative results have been making sense but I am pretty sure ears do not bleed at 60-70dB which suggests my absolute scale is in need of a bit of calibration.

Thanks!
Chris
ETFE is offline  
post #2712 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 08:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650

^ Have you read Step 5 under "Installing and Configuring REW" in the Guide (link in my sig).  The Guide is intended for new users like yourself.

 

HST, it looks like the steps you have followed are correct.  What do you mean by "...but I am pretty sure ears do not bleed at 60-70dB which suggests my absolute scale is in need of a bit of calibration"?

AustinJerry is offline  
post #2713 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 08:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650

The REW Guide has been updated to version 2.8

 

Changes in this version:

 

- Updated dot-point 1 in the Waterfall graph section (p. 57) to recommend using a measurement that includes LF+RF+Subs for Waterfall graphs.

 

Thanks to User LastButNotLeast for suggesting this change based on a recommendation by Jason in post #2 of this thread.

AustinJerry is offline  
post #2714 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 08:23 AM
Member
 
ETFE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

^ Have you read Step 5 under "Installing and Configuring REW" in the Guide (link in my sig).  The Guide is intended for new users like yourself.

Ah, well, as you no doubt guessed, I hadn't read that... smile.gif It took much less time to find my answer there than it did to compose my post.

Thanks a ton for the link, Jerry. This sorts out a lot of things I had been trying to infer from the documentation and I will go through the rest in detail.

Cheers
Chris
ETFE is offline  
post #2715 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 08:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFE View Post


Ah, well, as you no doubt guessed, I hadn't read that... smile.gif It took much less time to find my answer there than it did to compose my post.

Thanks a ton for the link, Jerry. This sorts out a lot of things I had been trying to infer from the documentation and I will go through the rest in detail.

Cheers
Chris

 

My pleasure, Chris.  We collectively created this document because we felt that the guidelines on the HomeTheaterShack site were a bit too vague/advanced.

AustinJerry is offline  
post #2716 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 09:08 AM
QuadMersed in bass!
 
giomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyal Mellor View Post

I prefer looking at octave smoothed ETCs as per this article: listening room reflections and the energy time curve as it gives more data.

I agree the answer is 'it depends'.

Thanks for the link, Nyal. A great article, and very understandable for this novice.

Mark
giomania is offline  
post #2717 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 10:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

For Keith and anyone else having difficulty with the download, try this link:

 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78476446/wizardinstallv5.01beta16.exe

 

Jerry to the rescue!!  Thanks Jerry. IDK what is wrong with the HTS link but I have tried for several days to download the latest. In fact there have been two updates since I first tried! It came down from your Dropbox at 20 meg speed.

 

Could someone do the same for the OS-X Mac version pretty please?

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2718 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 10:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pres2play's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 43
I decided to build stands to get the subs off the wood floor and reduce room resonance. I couldn't find them in stores and the ones online didn't interest me. I also have the Auralex Gramma pads but they don't do a thing and the subs wobble easily if you touch them.

I used a plank of 2x10 for construction. The cuts were made at Home Depot and they are crude and uneven, but I didn't want to spend time cutting. I'm only interested in function here.

I used 5/16" lag bolts and I countersunk the heads so they wouldn't scratch the sub.


I had these old riggers' spike for the feet which came in handy.


The finish makes a bit more presentable.



I wil begin testing my system again tomorrow. I think the stands will make a difference.

Edit: the stands weight a good 40 pounds and are very sturdy.
Pres2play is offline  
post #2719 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 10:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

The REW Guide has been updated to version 2.8

 

Changes in this version:

 

- Updated dot-point 1 in the Waterfall graph section (p. 57) to recommend using a measurement that includes LF+RF+Subs for Waterfall graphs.

 

Thanks to User LastButNotLeast for suggesting this change based on a recommendation by Jason in post #2 of this thread.

 

Great stuff Jerry - thanks!

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2720 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 11:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 547 Post(s)
Liked: 630
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

But the rest of the content of the soundtrack isn't undesired 'noise'...
No one said it was undesired. In the context of discussing speech intelligibility, it is simply content that is not speech. But that is not a judgement of it's artistic merit, asthough anyone is saying that the only desired part of a soundtrack is the human voice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I never felt that it would be necessary for the playback to take place in a room where the reflections from the side walls (or absence of such) would be a main consideration in the intelligibility of the dialogue.
No one said that the side walls should be the "main consideration" for mixing dialogue in a soundtrack. Besides, it's not like the recording engineer knows whether the playback room is going to be reflective or dead, any more than he knows whether the dialogue will be played back through a dedicated centre speaker or through a dime-sized speaker in a tablet.

But soundtracks are played back in a variety of rooms and systems, so good soundtracks are designed to 'translate' as they say. But that doesn't mean that a good mix will be equally intelligible in every situation. Rooms aren't alike, so it isn't unreasonable to assume that the level of intelligibility will vary. If you know what improves intelligibility, then you can include that in your room design. This isn't a remedy for poor soundtracks, just good practice for all soundtracks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Now in my own two channel listening rooms, guess what - I have NO TREATMENTS at all - it is a normally furnished room with a couple of substantial sofas, reasonably heavy drapes, thick carpeting etc. And I love the sound of my stereo CDs in that room.
Based on your previous comment that you consider all reflections as bad, it would be remarkable if you could understand any of the words in those songs in a room with NO TREATMENTS at all. But playback in that room likely scores high marks when it comes to intelligibility of lyrics AND personal preference. Either one of those things would be nice, but how did both of them happen simultaneously in an untreated room?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I could counter with 'why do you think the professional designers of all those editing suites do NOT leave the side walls bare?'.
Several reasons: they want to hear more of the direct sound, mixers are much more sensitive to reflections than consumers, their studio monitors have poor off-axis response, etc. It's like asking why employees of the US Mint use magnifying glasses and bright lights to handle money while consumers barely glance at it when doing the same. A professional mixing studio serves a different purpose than a consumer/recreational listening space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Of course, there is no way on earth I am saying that Nyal is wrong. What I am trying to do is understand why he is saying that bare side walls aid speech intelligibility in a properly set up HT, when my experience has been the exact reverse?
Can't help there. Of the explanations I've posted in this thread, looks like we finally found one that either makes no sense to you or you simply don't agree with. Until you find an acceptable explanation, it is a contradiction where people (whose opinions you seem to trust) have a view on reflections and intelligibility that is not merely different from your's but the opposite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

One final point - you say there is "an alternative view that is at odds with what believe". It's not an issue of belief. I am trying to tell you what I am hearing in my HT room.
Then why don't you hear the opposite in your untreated room?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

So even for Nyal it is not cut and dried - a 'personal choice' as he emphasises, which sounds very similar to 'preference' to me.
Of course it's preference. What else would it be? If your listening room isn't designed to please you, then whose enjoyment is it desgined around?

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #2721 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 12:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LastButNotLeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: 08077
Posts: 4,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pres2play View Post

I decided to build stands to get the subs off the wood floor and reduce room resonance. I couldn't find them in stores and the ones online didn't interest me. I also have the Auralex Gramma pads but they don't do a thing and the subs wobble easily if you touch them.

I used a plank of 2x10 for construction. The cuts were made at Home Depot and they are crude and uneven, but I didn't want to spend time cutting. I'm only interested in function here.
 

They look very nice. Test results will be interesting.

I just used the foam packing material from the shipping carton to help isolate the sub from the floor. I was going to paint it, but it doesn't show anyway.


Downloadable FREE demo discs:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1475769/de...ently-authored 

Did you really need to quote that entire post in your reply?
LastButNotLeast is offline  
post #2722 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 01:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pres2play View Post

I decided to build stands to get the subs off the wood floor and reduce room resonance. I couldn't find them in stores and the ones online didn't interest me. I also have the Auralex Gramma pads but they don't do a thing and the subs wobble easily if you touch them.

I used a plank of 2x10 for construction. The cuts were made at Home Depot and they are crude and uneven, but I didn't want to spend time cutting. I'm only interested in function here.

I used 5/16" lag bolts and I countersunk the heads so they wouldn't scratch the sub.


I had these old riggers' spike for the feet which came in handy.


The finish makes a bit more presentable.



I wil begin testing my system again tomorrow. I think the stands will make a difference.

Edit: the stands weight a good 40 pounds and are very sturdy.

I am very interested in seeing the response difference between subs on the floor vs. subs raised. Please measure subs in both positions Andorra the graphs. Make sure the only difference between the two measurements is raising the subs.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #2723 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 01:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LastButNotLeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: 08077
Posts: 4,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 215

Are those spikes on a ceramic tile floor? eek.gif


Downloadable FREE demo discs:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1475769/de...ently-authored 

Did you really need to quote that entire post in your reply?
LastButNotLeast is offline  
post #2724 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650

Even more interesting:  what are you doing to tame the reflective harshness of a tile floor in your listening room?  eek.gif

AustinJerry is offline  
post #2725 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 03:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,826
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

 

Jerry to the rescue!!  Thanks Jerry. IDK what is wrong with the HTS link but I have tried for several days to download the latest. In fact there have been two updates since I first tried! It came down from your Dropbox at 20 meg speed.

 

Could someone do the same for the OS-X Mac version pretty please?

 

For you, my good friend!

 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78476446/RoomEQWizardV5.01beta16-OSX.zip

AustinJerry is offline  
post #2726 of 10803 Old 04-29-2013, 06:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
localhost127's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,277
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Several reasons: they want to hear more of the direct sound, mixers are much more sensitive to reflections than consumers, their studio monitors have poor off-axis response, etc.

huh>?
localhost127 is offline  
post #2727 of 10803 Old 04-30-2013, 02:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

 

Jerry to the rescue!!  Thanks Jerry. IDK what is wrong with the HTS link but I have tried for several days to download the latest. In fact there have been two updates since I first tried! It came down from your Dropbox at 20 meg speed.

 

Could someone do the same for the OS-X Mac version pretty please?

 

For you, my good friend!

 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78476446/RoomEQWizardV5.01beta16-OSX.zip

 

Jerry - that is very kind of you - thanks so much!  I must have a good connection to your Dropbox because the Mac version came down at 20 megs too. Anyway, I have them both now, thanks, so if you want to delete them to save space, now is a good time.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2728 of 10803 Old 04-30-2013, 02:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,605
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 1271

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

But the rest of the content of the soundtrack isn't undesired 'noise'...

 

No one said it was undesired. In the context of discussing speech intelligibility, it is simply content that is not speech. But that is not a judgement of it's artistic merit, asthough anyone is saying that the only desired part of a soundtrack is the human voice. (Sorry - the quoting has got messed up - Sanjay's remarks are in blue)

 

I think we're getting to the 'going around in circles' stage so maybe we should consider drawing this to a close soon?  I was just trying to say that the dialogue and other 'noises' in the soundtrack are all considered as one by the mixer when he is producing a balanced mix (on a properly mixed track). If the dialogue cannot be clearly heard when reproduced through a capable system that is properly set up, then there is either a problem with the mix or a problem with the room. If we discount problems with the mix (but it makes no sense to optimise one's room for bad mixes) then there is just the room. In my room, treating it to remove reflections as far as possible improved dialogue intelligibility significantly. That's all I can say really.

 

 

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Now in my own two channel listening rooms, guess what - I have NO TREATMENTS at all - it is a normally furnished room with a couple of substantial sofas, reasonably heavy drapes, thick carpeting etc. And I love the sound of my stereo CDs in that room.
Based on your previous comment that you consider all reflections as bad, it would be remarkable if you could understand any of the words in those songs in a room with NO TREATMENTS at all. But playback in that room likely scores high marks when it comes to intelligibility of lyrics AND personal preference. Either one of those things would be nice, but how did both of them happen simultaneously in an untreated room? (Sorry - the quoting has got messed up - Sanjay's remarks are in blue)

 

My comments on all reflections being bad were, as all my comments are unless specifically mentioned otherwise, in connection with HT rooms not two channel listening spaces, which I believe are different and have different requirements (hence my keeping them as two separate rooms). Most of what I can find that has been posted by Nyal is in connection with 2 ch rooms so may well not be all that relevant to a m/ch HT room. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Of course, there is no way on earth I am saying that Nyal is wrong. What I am trying to do is understand why he is saying that bare side walls aid speech intelligibility in a properly set up HT, when my experience has been the exact reverse?
Can't help there. Of the explanations I've posted in this thread, looks like we finally found one that either makes no sense to you or you simply don't agree with. Until you find an acceptable explanation, it is a contradiction where people (whose opinions you seem to trust) have a view on reflections and intelligibility that is not merely different from your's but the opposite.

 

Well, if we are meaning Nyal, he doesn't say what you seem to be saying he says. He says that it is a matter of personal preference whether to treat or not treat side walls and he says that he doesn't always follow one credo in that regard anyway (but he usually does).  I can categorically state that, in my room, with my gear, dialogue intelligibility is a) no problem whatsoever - something I don't even think about at all normally and b) has improved to this status since treating the room with a view to eliminating reflections. AFAIC it is all in the mix and I don't need any help from sidewall reflections to make dialogue intelligibile. Others may have a different experience. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

One final point - you say there is "an alternative view that is at odds with what believe". It's not an issue of belief. I am trying to tell you what I am hearing in my HT room.
Then why don't you hear the opposite in your untreated room?
 
The other room is 2ch stereo and is a normal living room. I have possibly learned to hear through the room over the years or maybe I am less critical in that room. Also, most of my musical tastes mean that I only very rarely listen to tracks that have dialogue in them (vocals) so discussing dialogue intelligibility in that context is probably not relevant. But I doubt if it side wall reflections that contribute to the intelligibility of the vocals I do occasionally listen to. These would mainly be Ella Fitzgerald, Sarah Vaughan, Nat Cole, Sinatra etc and they all have very clear diction and are very well mic'd by their producers, so probably not a very good test.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

So even for Nyal it is not cut and dried - a 'personal choice' as he emphasises, which sounds very similar to 'preference' to me.
Of course it's preference. What else would it be? If your listening room isn't designed to please you, then whose enjoyment is it desgined around?
 
I'm not really after 'preference' in the HT (but yes for the 2ch room). In the HT I am after accuracy. I guess you could say that my preference is for accuracy :)  You said somewhere (it seems to have got lost in my editing of the quotes) that the mixer has different priorities, but in my case he doesn't. I want to hear what he hears if that is at all possible (who knows!) so perhaps I have designed my room to that end, using speakers that mixers apparently also use frequently for example. IOW, I don't want my room to influence the sound at all - I just want to hear the speakers. I will admit it is unlikely I have totally achieved that, but it is my goal. Others seem to want to hear the speakers and also some of the room, but I don't. 
 
What I was trying to get across above wrt to Nyal's comment is that even he doesn't have a cut and dried approach to this and apparently sometimes will, and sometimes will not, treat the side walls. He says his decision is speaker-dependent - but he certainly doesn’t give the impression that he is making the clear-cut statements that I seem to be reading in your posts to me.
 
I suspect we are boring the other members now, as none have joined in, so if you want to leave it here, that's fine by me. It is always good to exchange views with you, Sanjay, and I am sure I will continue to learn much from your posts, as I have done so often in the past.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2729 of 10803 Old 04-30-2013, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pres2play's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastButNotLeast View Post

They look very nice. Test results will be interesting.
I just used the foam packing material from the shipping carton to help isolate the sub from the floor. I was going to paint it, but it doesn't show anyway.

Thanks, I really like the simple design. If it works out well, I'll take the stand to a wood shop and have it re-built by a real craftsman.

The foam packing is a good idea, but I wanted to remove as much of the cross section of the sub (and the stand) from the floor as possible. The spikes definitely accomplish this, in addition to stabilizing the stand. I realize speaker vibration can still travel to the floor this way, but listening to a soundtrack, I notice bass resonance is greatly reduced and that I can turn up the sub, finally. Once all is quiet, I will test it out with REW.
Pres2play is offline  
post #2730 of 10803 Old 04-30-2013, 08:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pres2play's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastButNotLeast View Post

Are those spikes on a ceramic tile floor? eek.gif




Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Even more interesting:  what are you doing to tame the reflective harshness of a tile floor in your listening room?  eek.gif



It's a wood floor with plain linoleum tiles. The spikes actually rest on hard rubber pads for more isolation.
Pres2play is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

Tags
Dayton , Dayton Audio , Room Equilizer Wizard Rew

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