Originally Posted by ironhead1230
In many cases this might be true, but it is not universal
It's totally universal. It don't matter the room, the subwoofer or the placement.....totally universal.
I agree, a calibrated mic is always the best way to get the most out of your sub, but it is not the best bang for the buck for every situation.
My comment does not address best "bang-for-buck" issues as the magic of a properly placed, dialed in and calibrated system doesn't care about issues surrounding "bang-for-buck." Yes, you're right, if one is about three hundred dollars and doesn't care about the magic of a properly placed and dialed in system, go for the low level quality a sound meter and guessing provides. In real life, it's called the lowest common denominator.
Cost effective is a very subjective phrase,...
Only to the point of; you're ruining the potential of your subwoofer system. After that, it's all quantitative.
...but IMO, the performance difference between a $300 and $600 sub is much more substantial than spending $300 vs $40 or less on measuring equipment.
No it's not. This is not a subjective issue as this is a quantifiable issue that can be measured and compared for. This is something you can both see in the form of an on screen graph and yes, your ears will hear the difference in spacial reverberation and quality. This is not magic mushroom type stuff. As to shootouts, in order for every thing to work, I have to make the assumption that all the manufacturers have "LIED" about their specifications and that's a reach in anybody's book. Unless, I personally have run the tests, I'm calling BS on the results as the results don't mirror the manufacture's published specifications. And yes, this should cause one to question the accuracy of the results.
Not sure what homework you've done besides looking at manufacturer specs, but you may want to go back to school. Many of us have been reading about and researching measuring equipment and actually measuring much longer than you have, so I would be careful calling out others. Take a look at this thread.
You really don't expect me to take this type of troll bait do you?
It shows the digital RS SPL meters that were tested are relatively close to a calibrated EMM6 down to about 10hz. Of course not all RS SPL meters will be that accurate, but for the majority of people, they will be sufficient for measuring the sub above about 20hz. IMO, for someone spending multi thousands of dollars who wants to get every last bit of performance out of their system or someone that is looking to measure below ~20hz, I would definitely recommend a calibrated mic. But for someone that is spending <$1000, will not be upgrading or changing their equipment / room anytime soon or will not spend a lot of time tweaking, a cheap SPL meter is more than enough.
Just to be clear, I am not saying the Omnimic or USB mics are not excellent products, I just don't think they are the best purchase for every person.
Since you are not using a mic calibrated by a third party, I guess you don't care about measurement accuracy either.
As to calibration and specifications, repeatedly I have commented as to having a Radio Shack, digital sound meter and two other sound meters as well as a calibration device to empirically verify the accuracy of each of the sound measuring devices being used. And the EMM-6 microphone being used, comes with it's very own, downloadable calibration graph. Is that good enough or do I need to buy a fourth, Type I sound meter? Personally, I'm happy to but if I have to, so do you and everybody else here. The point, be careful what you demand of others as yo'll be expected to exact the same on yourself.
The point, my advice is sound advice and meets the scientific definition of repeatability as without a standard, you're whistling in the wind and without measuring capability, nobody can rationally be expected to get the best out of their system and recommendations should include advice regarding the best...recommendations.
-Edited by BeeMan458 - 2/15/13 at 3:07pm