Simplified REW Setup and Use (USB Mic & HDMI Connection) Including Measurement Techniques and How... - Page 70

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JChin 

Is it quiet in here or what? No post in more than 24 hours .

signmastr, if all setting are correct from the setup guide and you're able get sound from laptop (e.g. youtube video, Pandora, etc...), then try uninstall and reinstall REW.

We go through these quiet days...nothing new at the moment AFAIK other than troubleshooting, as we've had the same REW beta for well over a month, the calibrated USB mics are out, and the PEQ tangent is being explored by a few (or not). And our thought leader/thread starter is still MIA.

I'm taking a week-long break from measuring and just watching movies!  My sound quality is, I believe, better than 99% of anyone will ever hear at home and sometimes I wonder why I am spending so much time to squeeze out another 0.5%. In fact I wonder sometimes if I am now chasing a 'perfect' graph as opposed to chasing 'perfect' sound (neither of which is attainable of course). I have agonised over a 2dB dip or peak on a graph, spent hours trying to eliminate it, doing so, and then listening and, well, not really hearing anything different. HST, I will take up the PEQ experiment again next week as I am sure it can help my 50-95Hz region. ;) Jerry has been very quiet lately too.... 

I may be quiet, but I have been busy.  I am  generating ETC graphs and using the string technique to identify several early reflection points.  I have ordered a few additional GIK treatments and am waiting for them to ship.  I'm also kind of in the same position as Keith--I think I have achieved about as good a result as I can expect in my current listening room.  The sound is quite pleasing to me, so after this latest round of treatments, I think I may be done.

Several slightly disappointing results of my exercise to identify and correct reflections:

- When I run successive ETC measurements on different days, the results are not always the same, even though I try and keep the measurement technique the same.  Not sure why.  Perhaps my walls are moving...

- I am having trouble identifying the source of several reflections using the string technique, possibly because they are a result of several reflections (e.g. off the ceiling first, and then a back wall).  Not sure how to use a string in these situations.

- I have identified a ceiling reflection.  However, before I proceed with treatments on the ceiling, I would like to make sure that they can be fixed by installing some temporary treatments.  I purchased a roll of R-30 insulation, but haven't figured out how to temporarily hold it in place on the ceiling long enough to take measurements.  Tape doesn't adhere to the ceiling drywall very well, and R-30 is terrible stuff to work with.  And then there is the issue of what treatments would look good on the ceiling, and how to permanently install them up there.  I asked GIK, but they were not much help.

And then I dropped my UMM-6 mic the other day, and it broke apart at the slim part of the neck.  I have repaired it with tape and it still seems to be working OK, so I have no plans to replace it at this time.  I hate it what that happens!

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinJerry 

I may be quiet, but I have been busy.  I am  generating ETC graphs and using the string technique to identify several early reflection points.  I have ordered a few additional GIK treatments and am waiting for them to ship.  I'm also kind of in the same position as Keith--I think I have achieved about as good a result as I can expect in my current listening room.  The sound is quite pleasing to me, so after this latest round of treatments, I think I may be done.

 

Several slightly disappointing results of my exercise to identify and correct reflections:

 

- When I run successive ETC measurements on different days, the results are not always the same, even though I try and keep the measurement technique the same.  Not sure why.  Perhaps my walls are moving...

- I am having trouble identifying the source of several reflections using the string technique, possibly because they are a result of several reflections (e.g. off the ceiling first, and then a back wall).  Not sure how to use a string in these situations.

- I have identified a ceiling reflection.  However, before I proceed with treatments on the ceiling, I would like to make sure that they can be fixed by installing some temporary treatments.  I purchased a roll of R-30 insulation, but haven't figured out how to temporarily hold it in place on the ceiling long enough to take measurements.  Tape doesn't adhere to the ceiling drywall very well, and R-30 is terrible stuff to work with.  And then there is the issue of what treatments would look good on the ceiling, and how to permanently install them up there.  I asked GIK, but they were not much help.

 

And then I dropped my UMM-6 mic the other day, and it broke apart at the slim part of the neck.  I have repaired it with tape and it still seems to be working OK, so I have no plans to replace it at this time.  I hate it what that happens!

Yes, I think I am very close to having done all I can in my room. I just have the PEQ experiments to conduct.

Bummer about the mic, but take consolation from the fact that half the recording gear I've seen in my professional life (supervising the making and editing of Cinema and radio commercials) seems to have been held together with gaffer tape, so I'm sure it will give many more years of excellent service. Next to bacon sandwiches and milk, gaffer tape seems to keep the industry running ;)

@AJ:  I'm sure some of us would benefit from your trials and tribulations using the string technique so any documentation/photos you've taken would be appreciated.  The one picture I saw of the string technique looked like the OP was using a broomstick to hold the insulation in place against the ceiling?!  Not sure if this introduces other factors into the measurements or not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkasanic 

@AJ:  I'm sure some of us would benefit from your trials and tribulations using the string technique so any documentation/photos you've taken would be appreciated.  The one picture I saw of the string technique looked like the OP was using a broomstick to hold the insulation in place against the ceiling?!  Not sure if this introduces other factors into the measurements or not?

I plan on posting a report when the project is finished.  I took a couple of picture using the string.  Actually, using a broom handle to hold the string against the ceiling is exactly what I did.  I did not find the broom handle useful to hold the R-30 insulation in place, though.  

One of the other issues is that I have a ceiling fan, which is a necessity in a warm climate.  I taped a small mirror to the ceiling and used my laser pointer to find the exact first reflection points on the ceiling, and the points are actually behind the outermost point of the ceiling fan blades.  The fan is mounted down from the ceiling about 24" (I have 10' ceilings), but any treatment would still be partially behind the fan blades.  Who knows, the ceiling fan blades may be causing reflections as well.

So many compromises.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

I'm in the same boat. Other than possibly trying PEQ to see if it can hammer down a pre-Audyssey peak at 25 Hz better than Audyssey does (as per Wayne @ HTS), my remaining sub issues below 100 Hz are likely inaudible (as Keith and HTS guy pointed out when I posted my sub graphs).

This is a very informative site I found recently and this guy, who seems to know what he is talking about, and then some, says that the objective with bass decay is to get it to -20dB in short order. I have looked at my waterfalls again in light of this and it seems I am good to go. The guy also shows us how to use REW's 'Decay' tab to get more insight into the bass issues. I found the whole section incredibly interesting and useful, and he links to other equally useful pages too.

Quote:

Still, the rabbit hole is a dangerous place to dwell with your wallet . I'd had brief thoughts of picking up a 10x10 MiniDSP and using it to work with the two subs and my L/C/R powered DefTech mains (to 'improve' the crossover and midbass after Audyssey, with all three speakers run as Small). Since the MiniDSP has line level outputs rather than speaker/wired outs, to get the benefit of both Audyssey and post-cal PEQ would have meant converting my Denon 4311 into a pre-pro, and picking up an external amp --or maybe bringing my old SC-27 out of storage and do the experiment of an Audyssey system powered by a Class D ICE amp. Good thing sober secound thoughts prevailed. 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryht 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbarnes701 


This is a very informative site I found recently and this guy, who seems to know what he is talking about, and then some, says that the objective with bass decay is to get it to -20dB in short order. I have looked at my waterfalls again in light of this and it seems I am good to go. The guy also shows us how to use REW's 'Decay' tab to get more insight into the bass issues. I found the whole section incredibly interesting and useful, and he links to other equally useful pages too.

I agree with that! The performance targets seem especially helpful.

Yes - I think it's important to remember that once we can get our rooms to the point where problems become inaudible, then we are done. No matter what shows up on the graphs - if we can’t hear it, then there's no point worrying about it. I have spent more time than I care to remember trying to smooth graphs out even though they were already +/- 3dB.  For what?  A better looking graph?  Next time you are in your HT, put something on at a level that pleases you and then turn it up 3dB. How important is it spending time to eliminate that sort of difference in SPL?  The guy on that site mentions 2-4dB and says 'dont sweat it - you're close enough' and I have finally come to realise he is right!

As someone posted to me the other week, we can barely hear 20/30Hz at its original first impulse level - so why worry about some ringing that shows on a graph but is actually 30dB below that initial level! 

I think measuring and understanding the results is very important. But it is equally important to keep a sense of perspective. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

^^ Thanks for the link, Keith - at least I'll compare and see what learnings I can squeeze out of this.

As to my quasi-jest that you're now ducking from: it actually has some merit for a system like mine! Maybe if you're drinking or suffering but advanced AVS tweaker sickness, or have too much spare time on your hands while waiting for data on a project, but I've got some reasoning behind this. Read at your own peril....

Think of it if you're me: you have DefTech Mythos ST fronts with a powered 'woofer' section, and a CS-8080 center that also has a powered top-firing 'woofer', and even with Small and 80/100 Hz crossover, there's still the areas that Audyssey isn't equalizing below the -3db point. And crossover isn't a brick wall, as we know, but a slope. That's where the subtle tweaks of PEQ might come in handy for them. On top of that, if you could address the little areas that the Pro Curve Editor, as a kind of/sort of crude PEQ, may not address due to the limited +/- 3 db adjustment range and relatively broad octave bandwidth, you can better optimize the system.

However, I would want these three speakers EQ'd as 'full-range speakers', to avoid the weirdness of pretending that I've got third, fourth, and fifth subs that are placed differently, but not nearly as capable, as my standalone ULS-15 Dual Drive. Almost like virtual 'mid-bass' modules, placed concurrent with mid-range/tweeter bookshelves, in a way.

But...the Behringer 1124 is designed for only two inputs/outputs, and the FBQ1000 and FBQ2496 are similar, plus you'd have three ugly grey boxes to handle all the channels (two subs, two fronts, a center)! That's where MiniDSP comes in, specifically their 10 in/10 out box (which actually is eight analog in/out) and 8x8 plug-in that supports REW EQ filter transfers. Unfortunately, while they can equallize the channels, they don't have speaker-level outputs, just level output AFAIK. Which means pre-out from my Audyssey calibrated AVR to the MiniDSP, and then out to an amp, because I can't really do a 'feedback' loop with my AVR. That's leaving aside the follies of what voltage to use for each input, which may or may not require adjusting individual channel jumpers .

If I were truly interested in R&D and had unlimited time, I'd look into this route and compare to what I get from my more conventional hookup, do listening tests for the 4311 as the amp vs. the SC-27, etc. Or dig up a Pioneer mic, run MCACC with the MiniDSP (call it a separate balanced 2 x 4 and Advanced plug-in for simplicity's sake), and do full-blown A/B comparison between Audyssey and an MCACC system with bass EQ.

The other choice would be to spring for a real Class AB amp. I could even get strange and get a second 4311, and effectively have iterative EQ (Audyssey XT32->MiniDSP->second system with XT32), which would either be uniquely valuable or introduce other problems (or just be plain redundant, aside from having a common sonic signature from the same amps). Pity I got rid of my old Denon 5803....

Good thing I thought twice about this....

:)  I was serious when I said it was a good idea!  I think it is. A lot of work (and expense) though, but it could be rewarding. It depends on the ultimate aim. Mine, really, is to enjoy movies and to get a 'movie theatre' experience at home. That's it. If I was more interested in acoustics or audio, I might have different priorities. If what you really want to do is to enjoy your favourite music or movies, then the question is: how much more enjoyment will I get if I buy a miniDSP, learn how to configure it, buy some new amps to use with it etc etc etc?  

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbarnes701 

Yes - I think it's important to remember that once we can get our rooms to the point where problems become inaudible, then we are done. No matter what shows up on the graphs - if we can’t hear it, then there's no point worrying about it. I have spent more time than I care to remember trying to smooth graphs out even though they were already +/- 3dB.  For what?  A better looking graph?  Next time you are in your HT, put something on at a level that pleases you and then turn it up 3dB. How important is it spending time to eliminate that sort of difference in SPL?  The guy on that site mentions 2-4dB and says 'dont sweat it - you're close enough' and I have finally come to realise he is right!

As someone posted to me the other week, we can barely hear 20/30Hz at its original first impulse level - so why worry about some ringing that shows on a graph but is actually 30dB below that initial level! 

I think measuring and understanding the results is very important. But it is equally important to keep a sense of perspective. 

^^ Then my post right above yours will be even scarier

(I'm within that +/- 2 to 4 db from target for my L/R, main and center @ 1/6 smoothing, from 20 Hz on, using frequency response as a basis)

Then, if your waterfalls and ETCs are good, you are done!

Did I read that article correctly?  +/- 3dB with 1/3 smoothing means you are "done" with respect to FR?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkasanic 

Did I read that article correctly?  +/- 3dB with 1/3 smoothing means you are "done" with respect to FR?

There's some contention as to whether 1/3rd smoothing or 1/6th smoothing most accurately represents what we hear. IDK which is right, personally. But that guy seems to know his stuff and, if he lived near me and I could get him to come and calibrate my entire system, I’d have a lot of confidence in his work, judging by his website and blog.

3dB of course is generally agreed to be the smallest change in SPL that we can readily or easily hear isn't it?  Hence his +/-3dB. I have always aimed for +/3dB at 1/6th smoothing FWIW (until I became obsessed with trying to get it flatter and flatter - something I fortunately seem to have cured myself of.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

My priority is really music (particularly concert MC) ahead of movies; I'm a big fan of live sound, with the surround and LFE to bring out the subtle characteristics of the mix as if you're sitting in the first few rows of a concert. Say what you will, but last year we saw Mark Knopfler open for Bob Dylan, and sitting three rows up from the front, the engineering that went into the clear interplay between two acoustic guitars, his guitar, fiddle, and acoustic bass was something to behold. I ideally want to capture that in my system.

Or the three guitars, two KB, sax, and violin on Bruce Springsteen's BluRay Live in Hyde Park; I want to be able to hear each of them as if they were in front of us at about the same distance. I want to capture that live bottom which makes a soundstage come alive. And don't even start me on Pink Floyd in the studio.....to me, recapturing the music front of us, with all the instrumentation and vocals the artist intended, is worth far more than how boomy explosions are, or how much rumble I get < 20 Hz, or if a helicopter rises higher due to FH or not.
 

I can dig the washing machine sounds. I bet it emulates womb noises fairly well. 

I will resume the PEQ experiment soon. Seems to me that it will be easier to adjust the EQ with the 1124P than it would be using the Pro Curve Editor. I have played with that but found it too limiting for what I was trying to achieve at the time - mainly, I suppose, due to the total lack of bandwidth adjustment.

I will report on the PEQ thing at some stage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

I almost "got there" once on my test music, but then I had to move my center channel to put it on the new TV mount/stand (top shelf, open on top) from a standalone CC stand due to space, and the feeling disappeared. Maybe it was an illusion, but at least I "know" what I want based on the way that the sub worked in that configuration with my speakers, and IMO it completely changed the listening experience from a copy of a studio to being there. I'll see how the current plan does...but that would be the vision to tweak it further if the FR or maybe limited room treatments don't get me there per se. Or move on to video cal with the Lumagen, Calman, and the C6 colorimeter I bought off of a certain AVS member that's abandoned us for the delights of restoring 70's pinball games....who knows.

It sounds as if you are tantalisingly close...  (to getting it the way you want it I mean, not to me here in England LOL).

The problem was he didn't sing any songs as I remember them, or indeed as he might interpret them today. He played all the songs off his new album and some that I had never heard of before. It was no big deal to me (although it was to my pals who went with me, because they are/were big Dylan fans). I have always admired him as a poet but I hate his whiny, nasal voice. I think the stance that his voice is meant to be a barrier to break through is another way of saying he is a crap singer. I'd agree :) I get more pleasure reading his lyrics than hearing him singing down his nose.  I really went to the gig to "see" him, which I didn't because he played in the dark!  If he looks like a homeless person, maybe it was a good idea to keep the lights off the stage :) I couldn't say because I literally didn't see him for the entire gig. At the end there was no bow and no curtain call. He just shuffled off in the dark. It might not even have been him for all I know. I thought it was weird and funny at the same time, but my pals were really pi$$ed. BTW, they didn't get a refund but they did get a free pass to another gig at the same venue. Me, I was on my third pint by the time they made the pub :)

Arthritis eh?  Well, it didn't stop Les Paul playing into his 80s...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ggsantafe 

^^^^^^ Les Paul - I believe he was in an automobile crash and broke his arm, and the docs told him he would never have full motion of his arm, he chose to have it set in a position that allowed him to play his guitar. Here's the Wikipedia version: "In January 1948, Paul shattered his right arm and elbow in a near-fatal automobile accident on an icy Route 66 just west of Davenport, Oklahoma. Mary Ford was driving the Buick convertible, which rolled several times down a creek bed; they were on their way back from Wisconsin to Los Angeles after performing at the opening of a restaurant owned by Paul's father. Doctors at Oklahoma City's Wesley Presbyterian Hospital told him that they could not rebuild his elbow so that he would regain movement; his arm would remain permanently in whatever position they placed it in. Their other option was amputation. Paul instructed surgeons, brought in from Los Angeles, to set his arm at an angle—just under 90 degrees—that would allow him to cradle and pick the guitar. It took him nearly a year and a half to recover"

That's commitment to your craft - now back to your regularly scheduled program.

Most interesting. Somebody told me it was arthritis and I guess I just believed him. Amazing guy. Les paul not the guy who told me it was arthritis ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdrucker 

 

At the show we went to in November, he was off to the side of the stage on the piano, and played probably 75% songs that were from the 60's and 70's. A few American classics, and I want to say maybe two songs off of his latest CD. IIRC he didn't say anything to the audience until he introduced the band members (I want to say when he played Ballad of a Thin Man). That was about it. However, at a show he did the day before Election Day, he supposedly made comments about voting and his version of a political endorsement, so he's not completely disengaged.

Yes, he's a crap singer . The only thing is that I'd seen him about five years before, so I knew what to expect. This was actually an improvement. I didn't expect to go to 'enjoy' his singing, but to hear the music played the way he played it as a rollicking blues-rock band (and also for the challenge of "guess that tune"--my wife went because it was my B-Day and we both wanted to hear Knopfler). Listener beware/YMMV, of course. Hope you enjoyed your three pints...

I will say that FWIW, it makes me admire a guy like Ian Anderson or Ray Davies from your side of the pond (we've seen both in the past few years). They may have lost range, but their musical chops and the sense of who they are is more or less still there. You can keep Mick on a string; he doesn't do anything for me anymore. But as I think we discussed awhile back, Keef has aged into his true age well.

Obligatory REW content: do NOT use Bob's voice as a test of your tweeters! But you might get some mileage out of the restored bass in the Steve Wilson-mixed Aqualung in 5.1 sound.

Back to REW....

All concurred :)  Especially Keef - the world's most gloriously wasted person. How is he even still alive!