Optimizing subwoofers and integration with mains: multi sub optimizer - Page 60 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 566Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1771 of 1800 Old 01-23-2020, 02:49 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
giomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,098
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post
Gave you done any measuring with REW?


Since REW measurements are required for MSO data input , I am assuming you are asking if I measured the results of these errant Audyssey calibrations?

No, I did not, but if the mic is not the culprit, that would be a good data gathering exercise.

Thanks Jeff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Lumagen Radiance Pro HDR Tone Mapping Guide: Click Here

Lumagen Radiance Pro Setup & Calibration Tips: Click Here

UHD-BD Backup & Playback Guidance Link
giomania is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1772 of 1800 Old 01-23-2020, 03:00 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Hi. First of all, thanks for taking the time to develop MSO. It's an awesome bit of kit.

I've decided that I'm going to give it another go. I've tried it before but without a MiniDSP and I didn't get great results. Applying the result of the processing didn't give predicted results. My set-up has changed so I'm going to try again, but I need some help.

I'm looking to get the best integration between the combined subs and my mains through the crossover region. I can measure, adjust and re-measure with REW to get the subs in time alignment (so that they positively sum and give the smoothest response) but as soon as I bring in my mains things go to pot. I have big dips from 70-100Hz. I'm going to try a higher crossover this weekend as well, to see if that helps, but I'd like to feed some info into MSO and have it give me some settings to try.

I'm running a 7.4 set up (7.3 at the moment, new sub arrives on Friday).
My source is a PC and I use Jriver as my player - this gives me unlimited PEQ on each channel in the player (but only one sub channel, and it's pre bass management)
My processor has 5 band PEQ per channel and obviously level controls and distance per channel (2" increments).
My processor has three sub outputs, but I'm only using one, that goes in to the minidsp 2x4HD and then on to the subs.
I don't have any auto-EQ.
I only have a single listening position. It's a two seater dedicated room and there's very little difference between the two seats. Not enough for my wife to care!
Subs are all set to max crossover, zero delay, matched gain and the room size control on two is set as large.
Sub crossovers max out at 150Hz and have a 24dB/Octave filter.
Processor crossover goes up to 140Hz, but even at 140Hz with a 12dB/Octave slope, the sub crossover kicks in

Does MSO make sense for me? My room is only 8 feet wide so I don't have much room to take lots of measurements.
I'm comfortable with applying EQ in the mDSP for the subs, it's really the integration with the mains I'm struggling with.

I tried creating three measurement group, one with all subs and left, one with all subs and right, and one with all subs and center. I thought it might give me advice on how best to integrate, but I don't think that's a valid approach.

Here are some measurements and the MSO files.
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aux8jloQk5bZhcN0...nRKaQ?e=JdlYly
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aux8jloQk5bZhcQP...PuAWw?e=43iw2O
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aux8jloQk5bZhcQJ...pCsyg?e=0GxER9

Apologies for the open ended question, I'm just looking for a bit of guidance.

Thanks again!

Last edited by Conrad Nash; 01-23-2020 at 03:05 PM.
Conrad Nash is offline  
post #1773 of 1800 Old 01-23-2020, 03:20 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
giomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,098
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
Alternatives include the Antimode units, Behringer DEQ2496, dbx DriveRack systems, DEQx, etc. Not sure any of those will work directly with MSO though you should be able to manually enter the filter coefficients.


Another benefit of the miniDSP is the automatic loading compatibility with BassEQ via the BEQ Designer app. Not sure if the other devices have that ability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Lumagen Radiance Pro HDR Tone Mapping Guide: Click Here

Lumagen Radiance Pro Setup & Calibration Tips: Click Here

UHD-BD Backup & Playback Guidance Link
giomania is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1774 of 1800 Old 01-24-2020, 03:29 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 423 Post(s)
Liked: 212
Hi All,

I'm trying to figure out how MSO works. I followed a couple of tutorial like the one by MiniDSP. After optimization I get nice results, bit better than REW, but when I upload the .txt file to my MiniDSP 2x4 i get a weird curve and the SUB is so low in volume that I can't hear it. Optimization has been run for 75db. What am I missing??

UPDATE:
OK, sorted it out. OMG what a difference in bass definition!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Schermata 2020-01-24 alle 11.28.14.png
Views:	57
Size:	70.9 KB
ID:	2675058   Click image for larger version

Name:	Schermata 2020-01-24 alle 11.27.38.png
Views:	58
Size:	174.6 KB
ID:	2675060  

Video: LG OLED 55 B7v | Calibration: i1D3 OEM, Calman Enthusiast.
Audio: Yamaha RX-V585, Polk s15e, Polk s10e, Polk s35ce, Atmos Dynavoice Magix FX-4, Sub DIY Dayton RSS210HF Ported | Calibration: MiniDSP, UMIK-1, REW

Last edited by MrRobotoPlus; 01-24-2020 at 04:30 AM.
MrRobotoPlus is offline  
post #1775 of 1800 Old 01-24-2020, 05:12 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On the beach in Quintana Roo
Posts: 27,060
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1547 Post(s)
Liked: 971
What sorting out did you do?
richardsim7 likes this.

"The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed." W. Gibson

"I like the future, I'm in it." F. Theater
pepar is offline  
post #1776 of 1800 Old 01-24-2020, 05:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 423 Post(s)
Liked: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post
What sorting out did you do?
Since I'm flatting only one subwoofer I did set Gain Filter to zero from -7.26. Saved again txt file and uploaded. Then curve in MiniDSP was ok but volume too high to about 7db. Lowered the MiniDSP output gain to -7,26 which was what calculated by MSO. SPL is now back to 75dB.

Video: LG OLED 55 B7v | Calibration: i1D3 OEM, Calman Enthusiast.
Audio: Yamaha RX-V585, Polk s15e, Polk s10e, Polk s35ce, Atmos Dynavoice Magix FX-4, Sub DIY Dayton RSS210HF Ported | Calibration: MiniDSP, UMIK-1, REW
MrRobotoPlus is offline  
post #1777 of 1800 Old 01-24-2020, 11:21 AM
Advanced Member
 
philipbtz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 524
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 342 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Maybe this is not the thread or maybe it's already been covered but here is my question. Has anyone compare MSO by itself to Dirac or with MSO + Dirac? It would be pretty cool to not be dependent upon Dirac.

Room| Treated | Sound| Front: Ino Audio i32s, Center: Ino Audio i16s, Surrounds: 6 x Ino a2, 6 x Ino a1, Subs: 6 x Ino Infra-Y|
Picture | Epson TW9300, Seymour Center Stage UF 130.4" retractable 2.35:1 |
Electronics | Arcam AVR390(Dirac Live), 3x Ncore nc400 monoblocks, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen2, EP4000, Panasonic UB700, Allo Katana + Isolator 1.2(Roon bridge/DAC), ATV 4K |
philipbtz is offline  
post #1778 of 1800 Old 01-26-2020, 12:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
AV_mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipbtz View Post
Maybe this is not the thread or maybe it's already been covered but here is my question. Has anyone compare MSO by itself to Dirac or with MSO + Dirac? It would be pretty cool to not be dependent upon Dirac.
MSO only deals with multiple sub-woofer integration, or with blending sub-woofer(s) with mains around the crossover region. Its superposition calculations only work at lower frequencies, anything above approx. 200Hz can not be optimised by MSO.
Dirac is a full frequency range room compensation / correction tool.
When I had a suitable system, I used MSO to combine three subs into a single channel, then Dirac to process the whole system, followed by MSO to ensure that the sub to main splice was perfectly tuned (this later step became redundant, as Dirac was already nailing it).
Regards, Mike.
giomania and richardsim7 like this.

Just an LG OLED65E9 - might add more in future.................
AV_mike is offline  
post #1779 of 1800 Old 01-26-2020, 12:25 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On the beach in Quintana Roo
Posts: 27,060
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1547 Post(s)
Liked: 971
@philipbtz , yep. What he said.

"The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed." W. Gibson

"I like the future, I'm in it." F. Theater
pepar is offline  
post #1780 of 1800 Old 01-26-2020, 02:08 PM
Newbie
 
Mr_Incredible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
@andyc56

A quick question if I may about the approach to dealing with AVRs with Audyssey MultiEQ XT32.

The implementation of this in my Denon X7200WA means that once 'calibrated' it provides an opportunity to have separate Xovers for each of the speakers (now running an 11.3 setup through a MiniDSP 2x4HD and trying to balance it all up).

I noticed that in the Audyssey setup the measuring of the subwoofers can be skipped altogether. I assume the calibration will still calculate the Mains only response and still provide an option to set a crossover and set them to Large or small. Would it be advisable to skip the sub measuring altogether and use REW and MSO to calculate the optimum filters for the Sub? Or should the calibration be run with subs on, and then MSO provide additive filters atop the 'as-measured' response from the EQ'd subs and mains?

Thanks
=====================
UPDATE: My assumption was wrong! If I make Subwoofers=None and run Audyssey, the calibration runs and EQ's the speakers 'large' and as soon as I alter the speaker from Large to Small in the setup, it automatically sets the subwoofer from none to 1. And because there is no EQ for the Sub, the EQ is totally removed from the Mains speakers altogether - i.e. a Xover filter is not applied to the mains to give a roll off to the mains which would allow MSO to do its stuff with the 3 x subs and Mains. Pity. Back to the drawing board.

Last edited by Mr_Incredible; 01-27-2020 at 08:25 AM.
Mr_Incredible is offline  
post #1781 of 1800 Old 01-27-2020, 08:51 AM
Newbie
 
Mr_Incredible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Follow on Question however.....

I levelled the 3 x sub gains as best I could and aimed for a high output to allow greater flexibility when EQ'ing for multi-subs. According to the MSO tutorial, it is expected the mains and the subs will each be measured at the listening points and using the AVR's calculated crossover and applied EQ which it calculated around the Xover. In my case the resulting output wasn't too bad at all for the MLP and adjacent seat. But was awful elsewhere. Hence the need to look at MSO.

This is the response from the Denon through the MiniDSp with a manual adjustment of 3 sub delays by using the RTA on REW, but no filters at all in the MiniDSP 2x4HD. Not too shabby.



However, when I then ran through the MSO procedure I must have got some settings wrong even though I revisited them several times. The problem was that with the filters loaded into the MinDSP, the output on my subs had disappeared from the initial 85db (nothing applied other than delay), to 75 db through Denon EQ, then with the MSO filters went to 65db. And to get the output back to 75db I had to add about 7db to each of the gains in the Minidsp for the 3 subs (the Input was already at +10db as well, and the Denon output at 0db. Not good. Any initial suggestions as to the schoolboy error. I've attached the MSO project in case that helps. Or not!

Now here's a conundrum and I'll be interested to hear of any comments, but when I tested my assumptions in my previous post, when the Denon had EQ'd without any subwoofers defined in the config, I ran REW over my two B&W CM9 speakers (Left and Right) which had been EQ'd by my Denon. I run my LCR via an Emotiva XPA-DR3






No wonder my Denon had been setting the Xover at 40Hz for my LCR!

I'm beginning to wonder why I am bothering with subs at all! (Just kidding!)
Attached Files
File Type: zip 3subsMSO.zip (468.1 KB, 3 views)

Last edited by Mr_Incredible; 01-27-2020 at 08:55 AM.
Mr_Incredible is offline  
post #1782 of 1800 Old 01-28-2020, 01:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
philipbtz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 524
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 342 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV_mike View Post
MSO only deals with multiple sub-woofer integration, or with blending sub-woofer(s) with mains around the crossover region. Its superposition calculations only work at lower frequencies, anything above approx. 200Hz can not be optimised by MSO.
Dirac is a full frequency range room compensation / correction tool.
When I had a suitable system, I used MSO to combine three subs into a single channel, then Dirac to process the whole system, followed by MSO to ensure that the sub to main splice was perfectly tuned (this later step became redundant, as Dirac was already nailing it).
Regards, Mike.
I realize now that I was not clear. I know perfectly well what the differences are. I only use Dirac below my room transition frequency.

Room| Treated | Sound| Front: Ino Audio i32s, Center: Ino Audio i16s, Surrounds: 6 x Ino a2, 6 x Ino a1, Subs: 6 x Ino Infra-Y|
Picture | Epson TW9300, Seymour Center Stage UF 130.4" retractable 2.35:1 |
Electronics | Arcam AVR390(Dirac Live), 3x Ncore nc400 monoblocks, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen2, EP4000, Panasonic UB700, Allo Katana + Isolator 1.2(Roon bridge/DAC), ATV 4K |
philipbtz is offline  
post #1783 of 1800 Old 01-28-2020, 09:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Well, I had to fix a bug introduced by my last bug fix . Deleting a target curve was being done immediately, rather than after clicking OK in the Optimization Options dialog. This meant that it couldn't be cancelled. So version 1.40 is up now with that minor fix.
giomania, dwaleke, magicj1 and 2 others like this.
andyc56 is online now  
post #1784 of 1800 Old 01-28-2020, 10:53 AM
Advanced Member
 
AV_mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipbtz View Post
I realize now that I was not clear. I know perfectly well what the differences are. I only use Dirac below my room transition frequency.
Sorry, hope the post did come across as condescending, not my intention.

I would still use Dirac (if I had the sort of system that used it) full range. It was able to "perfectly" time align my mains, surrounds, and combined sub-woofer channel - confirmed with REW. I preferred to create a custom target based on the responses of my front three main channel speakers - not over-compensating. I then applied this target to the surrounds to attempt to tonally match all channels - it appeared to work as intended - test pans were "the same sound" just coming from different locations.
MSO can not do any of the above - it was not designed to.
Your intended use below the transition frequency may work well - but I would stick with Dirac, instead of multiple PEQ filters attempting to perform the same function. Dirac's mixed phase approach should be better.

Regards, Mike.
philipbtz likes this.

Just an LG OLED65E9 - might add more in future.................
AV_mike is offline  
post #1785 of 1800 Old 02-05-2020, 03:22 PM
Newbie
 
kd5kuu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi all - just getting started with dialing in my new dual subs. I am adding a MiniDSP 2x4HD to my Audyssey XT32 and dual SVS subs configuration, as what XT32 was able to do on it's own left something to be desired.

For MSO I've collected 3 listening position measurements for each of the 2 subs. 3 measurement groups since there are 3 listening positions. Using MiniDSP's walk-through everything seems to be going well, except when I look at the graph for the three measurement positions, one of them looks very dissimilar from what was collected in REW. The red line should be much smoother, like the other two. There is no smoothing applied in REW. I have tried retaking the measurements as well as re-importing to MSO.

Any ideas on what could be going on here?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0320.jpg
Views:	68
Size:	1.71 MB
ID:	2680898  
kd5kuu is offline  
post #1786 of 1800 Old 02-05-2020, 03:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
richardsim7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,308
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1505 Post(s)
Liked: 1989
richardsim7 is offline  
post #1787 of 1800 Old 02-06-2020, 09:26 AM
Newbie
 
kd5kuu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by richardsim7 View Post
Yes, I deserve that! The computer running MSO is not the same machine that I was signed into to post in the forum, so it was easiest just to take a photo. Next time I'll do it right, richardsim7.
richardsim7 likes this.
kd5kuu is offline  
post #1788 of 1800 Old 02-07-2020, 06:02 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
giomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,098
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 809 Post(s)
Liked: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by kd5kuu View Post
Hi all - just getting started with dialing in my new dual subs. I am adding a MiniDSP 2x4HD to my Audyssey XT32 and dual SVS subs configuration, as what XT32 was able to do on it's own left something to be desired.



For MSO I've collected 3 listening position measurements for each of the 2 subs. 3 measurement groups since there are 3 listening positions. Using MiniDSP's walk-through everything seems to be going well, except when I look at the graph for the three measurement positions, one of them looks very dissimilar from what was collected in REW. The red line should be much smoother, like the other two. There is no smoothing applied in REW. I have tried retaking the measurements as well as re-importing to MSO.



Any ideas on what could be going on here?


On my first MSO run I also used the mini DSP walk-through which was easy but I didn’t have good results. Probably something in the process I did wrong but in any event on the next round I use the MSO manual / reference guide.

I i’ve gone through and pasted all the text into a word document and put it in a binder so I can easily flip back-and-forth and reference pages and highlight etc. but that’s just me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Lumagen Radiance Pro HDR Tone Mapping Guide: Click Here

Lumagen Radiance Pro Setup & Calibration Tips: Click Here

UHD-BD Backup & Playback Guidance Link
giomania is online now  
post #1789 of 1800 Old 02-07-2020, 04:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
Jsin_N's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 789
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 462 Post(s)
Liked: 202
There's an issue with Biquads. The shape is okay, but when I import them the center frequencies shift from 50 to 100 as shown in the blue trace compared to the PEQ in miniDSP
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Untitled.png
Views:	46
Size:	187.5 KB
ID:	2681890  
Jsin_N is online now  
post #1790 of 1800 Old 02-07-2020, 09:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsin_N View Post
There's an issue with Biquads. The shape is okay, but when I import them the center frequencies shift from 50 to 100 as shown in the blue trace compared to the PEQ in miniDSP
There is no such issue. Try specifying the sampling frequency of your DSP correctly.
richardsim7 likes this.
andyc56 is online now  
post #1791 of 1800 Old 02-08-2020, 08:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jsin_N's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 789
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 462 Post(s)
Liked: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc56 View Post
There is no such issue. Try specifying the sampling frequency of your DSP correctly.
Thanks for the tip
Jsin_N is online now  
post #1792 of 1800 Old 02-13-2020, 09:31 AM
Senior Member
 
anothermib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Hi, I am new to MSO. Recently i realized that over time I have accumulated all the required components, so I thought I give it a try. During my initial experiments a few questions came up that I wanted to raise here, to avoid going down too many wrong paths.

Filter limits: Are filter limits generally understood as being after AVR adjustments or does setting filter limits (e.g. 7ms delay for the MiniDSP 2x4) prevent results that would actually be feasible after applying AVR adjustments. Is it generally a good idea to take the measurements with AVR delays set to the Audyssey values? Or is the better approach e.g. to start with common delay and gain blocks e.g. with the Audyssey numbers as initial values?

House curve: In Audyssey I usually dial in a house curve that is +4dB below 60Hz and drops to 0dB at 120Hz. In my first experiments I measured with that curve enabled and set the same as target curve in MSO. However, I am wondering if it isn‘t better to measure and optimize against a flat target and to add the house curve (via filter, Audyssey or addl optimization step) later. Is there a best practice on this? My first results measured ok, but sounded a bit anemic. Is it a general experience that the target curve needs to be raised, when the RMS deviation is reduced by a few dB?

Any help and advise is much appreciated.
anothermib is offline  
post #1793 of 1800 Old 02-14-2020, 04:37 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 1
Question Anyone try FIR filters instead of MSO biquads

I’ve been using MSO for the last year and love the results when they’re good and learn a lot when they’re not ! Great piece of software for advancing the Audiophile hobby.

Lately I’ve been studying FIR filters and would like to try implementing the MSO biquads as FIR filters in my miniDSP. My question to the group is .. does MSO, when optimizing calculate the phase shifts from each individual IIR/biquad filters and use this Somehow in the result. Or are the ‘delay’ calculations simply a phase shift of the entire subwoofer in question.

The reason I ask is that I think I have an phase integration problem with my mains that would be easier to fix if I could use linear phase FIR filters instead of the biquads. But, this would be counterproductive if the phase of individual filters is part of the optimization calculation.

Any thoughts?
Mike Wittman is offline  
post #1794 of 1800 Old 02-14-2020, 07:19 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by anothermib View Post
Filter limits: Are filter limits generally understood as being after AVR adjustments or does setting filter limits (e.g. 7ms delay for the MiniDSP 2x4) prevent results that would actually be feasible after applying AVR adjustments. Is it generally a good idea to take the measurements with AVR delays set to the Audyssey values? Or is the better approach e.g. to start with common delay and gain blocks e.g. with the Audyssey numbers as initial values?
Delay and gain block values in MSO are best understood to represent the change in delay and the change in gain respectively, relative to their values when the measurements were performed. Therefore you should zero out gains and delays in the miniDSP before measuring to avoid confusion later. You can either use MSO for only integration of the subs with one another (called "sub-only configurations"), or integration of subs both with one another and with the chosen main speakers (L+R or center, called "subs+mains configurations"). In the former case, the sub distance in the AVR is irrelevant, as adjusting it is only needed to optimize integration of mains and subs. When using subs+mains configurations, a shared delay block should be used, with both positive and negative delays allowed and a fairly wide adjustment range allowed. A positive delay means decrease the AVR sub distance, while a negative one means to increase the distance. You'll need to keep track of what the distance was when the measurement was taken, as MSO will tell you in the filter report only how much to change it, not what its absolute value should be. Your AVR should be set up for a single sub, with the miniDSP providing the sole multi-sub function. The finer points of sub delay specification are covered in the tips and tricks section.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anothermib View Post
House curve: In Audyssey I usually dial in a house curve that is +4dB below 60Hz and drops to 0dB at 120Hz. In my first experiments I measured with that curve enabled and set the same as target curve in MSO.
I'd say that's the way to go. That way, Audyssey can do EQ of the main speakers, which can only be done in MSO if the main preamp outs go into a miniDSP with a high channel count - which is not usually done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anothermib View Post
However, I am wondering if it isn‘t better to measure and optimize against a flat target and to add the house curve (via filter, Audyssey or addl optimization step) later. Is there a best practice on this? My first results measured ok, but sounded a bit anemic. Is it a general experience that the target curve needs to be raised, when the RMS deviation is reduced by a few dB?
I'd argue that you should set the target curve in Audyssey, do the measurements with that target curve, then use the same target curve in MSO with a subs+mains configuration to make sure the integrated result of mains and subs matches the target.
Mike Wittman likes this.
andyc56 is online now  
post #1795 of 1800 Old 02-14-2020, 07:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Wittman View Post
Lately I’ve been studying FIR filters and would like to try implementing the MSO biquads as FIR filters in my miniDSP. My question to the group is .. does MSO, when optimizing calculate the phase shifts from each individual IIR/biquad filters and use this Somehow in the result.
Yes. When doing individual sub EQ such as with MSO, the final results of the frequency response magnitude in dB of the combined subs at each listening position depend on all of the following factors.
  1. The frequency response magnitude of each sub to each listening position
  2. The frequency response phase of each sub to each listening position
  3. The filter channel frequency response magnitude for each sub channel
  4. The filter channel frequency response phase for each sub channel

MSO takes into account all of these factors. The second factor above is why a timing reference is required for the measurements. Factors 3 and 4 are taken into account by using the complex-valued filter transfer functions in the MSO calculations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Wittman View Post
The reason I ask is that I think I have an phase integration problem with my mains that would be easier to fix if I could use linear phase FIR filters instead of the biquads. But, this would be counterproductive if the phase of individual filters is part of the optimization calculation.
What you're suggesting wouldn't work, because the FIR filters wouldn't have the same phase response as those computed by MSO, so the fourth condition above would be violated.
dgage and Mike Wittman like this.
andyc56 is online now  
post #1796 of 1800 Old 02-15-2020, 06:31 AM
Senior Member
 
anothermib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Thanks for the response. My wording was probably not entirely precise. I was mostly referring to the AVR delay settings being reported in the filter report, when enabling AVR settings in the MSO configuration options.

However, with this approach ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc56 View Post
When using subs+mains configurations, a shared delay block should be used, with both positive and negative delays allowed and a fairly wide adjustment range allowed.

I assume it doesn’t really matter. I would then probably set limits in the common block according to the AVR max delay and gain and disable the AVR setting in the configuration options. At least that seems to be the most straight forward approach. Or is there any benefit in keeping the AVR option and/or playing with the rearrange delays in this context? I guess I am still a bit confused about the multitude of approaches that seem to get to the same result.
anothermib is offline  
post #1797 of 1800 Old 02-15-2020, 08:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by anothermib View Post
I assume it doesn’t really matter. I would then probably set limits in the common block according to the AVR max delay and gain and disable the AVR setting in the configuration options. At least that seems to be the most straight forward approach. Or is there any benefit in keeping the AVR option and/or playing with the rearrange delays in this context? I guess I am still a bit confused about the multitude of approaches that seem to get to the same result.
Keeping the AVR option enabled in Tools, Application Options, Hardware is what causes MSO to translate the delay value of the shared delay block into a change in AVR distance, so you'll want to keep it enabled. The idea is that the limited delay range of the non-HD miniDSP 2x4 devices should not be used for coarse adjustment of the subs-mains integration. The AVR distance does the "heavy lifting" there, with only fine-tuning done in the miniDSP.
dgage likes this.
andyc56 is online now  
post #1798 of 1800 Old 02-15-2020, 10:36 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 3
What is MOS ? Color my stupid. Lol



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
hessc50 is offline  
post #1799 of 1800 Old 02-16-2020, 05:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
AV_mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by hessc50 View Post
What is MOS ? Color my stupid. Lol



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not MOS - it's MSO (Multiple Sub-Woofer Optimiser) - the subject of the thread..................................
richardsim7 likes this.

Just an LG OLED65E9 - might add more in future.................
AV_mike is offline  
post #1800 of 1800 Old 02-16-2020, 06:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
richardsim7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,308
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1505 Post(s)
Liked: 1989
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV_mike View Post
Not MOS - it's MSO (Multiple Sub-Woofer Optimiser) - the subject of the thread..................................
MOS is Ministry of Sound
magicj1 likes this.
richardsim7 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off