Beta Test: Multitone Loopback Analyzer software

[pkane]

v1.0.38 fix for the incorrect frequency sweep level:

Changes in 1.0.38​

• Fix: channel selector not always restored correctly on start-up
• Fix: frequency sweep shows wrong level on the status bar and sweep output level changes from the selected play gain during the sweep

 

[Rantapossu]

v1.0.38 fix for the incorrect frequency sweep level:

Changes in 1.0.38​

• Fix: channel selector not always restored correctly on start-up
• Fix: frequency sweep shows wrong level on the status bar and sweep output level changes from the selected play gain during the sweep

Thanks, both problems are fixed now! Remembers the channels and -3 dB gain, -3 dB on meter, -3 dB on the bottom bar.

 

[Sokel]

FRS is perfect...

but if you change to Spectrum measures the last FRS frequency.
If you change it is fine.

 

[Sokel]

See at the top,says 3Khz,I pressed it as is and the result is the above.
(I promise I didn't break it,must be one of the Microsoft things,you know)

 

[Blumlein 88]

FRS is perfect...

View attachment 224025


but if you change to Spectrum measures the last FRS frequency.
If you change it is fine.

View attachment 224026

I get the same result on a single frequency sweep. It measures the last frequency of the sweep. For instance I did a 20 hz to 19 khz sweep. Then I switched to spectrum and rather than do the 1000 hz selected it did 19 khz. Running the spectrum test again it still does 19 khz. Only once I change to another frequency than 1000 hz does it run the correct frequency.

Running a twin tone sweep it works as it should.

 

[pkane]

I get the same result on a single frequency sweep. It measures the last frequency of the sweep. For instance I did a 20 hz to 19 khz sweep. Then I switched to spectrum and rather than do the 1000 hz selected it did 19 khz. Running the spectrum test again it still does 19 khz. Only once I change to another frequency than 1000 hz does it run the correct frequency.

Running a twin tone sweep it works as it should.

That’s an easy fix, I need to clear the test signal cache after the sweep. Will be in the next version.

 

[Rantapossu]

Could you add a "Cool-down" option too? Just a selectable seconds counter like the "Warm-up", but after the test tone and without the sound?

It would be very usable when doing long sweeps with a lot of power to prevent smoking the dummy load with powerful amplifiers. It would also keep the temperature of the dummy load constant to make more comparable results during the run even not using the extreme power.


We talked about the crosstalk measurements before (About the possibility to add a dBr option for the frequency response graph too and using for example the left output and right input to measure multitone signals) and I PhotoShopped a settings page for it:

Could you implement it?

 

[Blumlein 88]

A feature request which maybe is worth some discussion from others using Multitone.

I was considering Sokel's post in this other thread.

Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

Making measurements doesn't guarantee data reliability outright, maybe that's where I'm getting at, also. That's true. Anyone can be in error by mistake or a bad understanding of the needed technical knowledge. The thing about the info posted here by Amir or anyone is that it can be double...

www.audiosciencereview.com

He was wondering if a 2000 tone test signal was closer to representing music. My first thought was it would be closer if the tones weren't all at the same level. Maybe they decreased in level vs frequency in a pattern similar to pink noise. So would this sort of thing be useful or a waste of Paul's time to set up? I could create my own multiple tone file with level dependent upon frequency to test it, but obviously I'll not be manually doing that with 2000 tones. I could of course save the created tone and filter it. Maybe that is good enough since this is probably a rarely needed feature if at all.

 

[Sokel]

A feature request which maybe is worth some discussion from others using Multitone.

I was considering Sokel's post in this other thread.

Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

Making measurements doesn't guarantee data reliability outright, maybe that's where I'm getting at, also. That's true. Anyone can be in error by mistake or a bad understanding of the needed technical knowledge. The thing about the info posted here by Amir or anyone is that it can be double...

www.audiosciencereview.com

He was wondering if a 2000 tone test signal was closer to representing music. My first thought was it would be closer if the tones weren't all at the same level. Maybe they decreased in level vs frequency in a pattern similar to pink noise. So would this sort of thing be useful or a waste of Paul's time to set up? I could create my own multiple tone file with level dependent upon frequency to test it, but obviously I'll not be manually doing that with 2000 tones. I could of course save the created tone and filter it. Maybe that is good enough since this is probably a rarely needed feature if at all.

Yep,that sounds right,especially when the majority of music tracks not only varies in freq amplitude but they also tend to have a declining tendency as freqs rise towards > 5-7Khz region and upwards.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Never mind my previous post. I can sort of get the same effect with a triangle wave. Harmonics taper off with frequency. Like this. Triangles are all the odd harmonics, but unlike a square wave they go down in level with each harmonic.

 

[Sokel]

A real world test rising???

Never mind my previous post. I can sort of get the same effect with a triangle wave. Harmonics taper off with frequency. Like this. Triangles are all the odd harmonics, but unlike a square wave they go down in level with each harmonic.

View attachment 224129

So,is that closer to real word?

 

[Blumlein 88]

A real world test rising???

So,is that closer to real word?

It is closer to the distribution of energy like music. Pink noise is similar, but you cannot measure a Sinad number for it.

 

[Sokel]

It is closer to the distribution of energy like music. Pink noise is similar, but you cannot measure a Sinad number for it.

So,a multitone consisting of 2000 triangles?

 

[pma]

Triangles are all the odd harmonics,

If you wanted both odd and even harmonics, then please use sawtooth signal.

--------------

So,a multitone consisting of 2000 triangles?

That would be a nonsense.

 

[Blumlein 88]

So,a multitone consisting of 2000 triangles?

No you only have to select one frequency. So my example used 100 hz and you have odd harmonics added every 200 hz from there to 20,000 hz. So like 98 tones or so.

I did try it and my numbers were about the same with a triangle and a 1 khz sine. So a few db better than a regular multitone of 1000 or 2000 tones.

 

[Blumlein 88]

If you wanted both odd and even harmonics, then please use sawtooth signal.

--------------



That would be a nonsense.

Yes, I thought of that, but a sawtooth isn't one of the stock choices in MT. Maybe that is a worthy feature request that it have a sawtooth test option. Probably easier to add than filtered multi-tones.

 

[Sokel]

No you only have to select one frequency. So my example used 100 hz and you have odd harmonics added every 200 hz from there to 20,000 hz. So like 98 tones or so.

I did try it and my numbers were about the same with a triangle and a 1 khz sine. So a few db better than a regular multitone of 1000 or 2000 tones.

So we are close.
(sawtooth,we don't have,neither REW,may we please???)

 

[Sokel]

For one thing multittone is much harder,I did one with triangle at 20Hz so it will go down all the way and the result is this:

 

[pkane]

A feature request which maybe is worth some discussion from others using Multitone.

I was considering Sokel's post in this other thread.

Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

Making measurements doesn't guarantee data reliability outright, maybe that's where I'm getting at, also. That's true. Anyone can be in error by mistake or a bad understanding of the needed technical knowledge. The thing about the info posted here by Amir or anyone is that it can be double...

www.audiosciencereview.com

He was wondering if a 2000 tone test signal was closer to representing music. My first thought was it would be closer if the tones weren't all at the same level. Maybe they decreased in level vs frequency in a pattern similar to pink noise. So would this sort of thing be useful or a waste of Paul's time to set up? I could create my own multiple tone file with level dependent upon frequency to test it, but obviously I'll not be manually doing that with 2000 tones. I could of course save the created tone and filter it. Maybe that is good enough since this is probably a rarely needed feature if at all.

How about just a randomized level multitone? You can do this one already:

 

[Sokel]

Lets follow a thought.
We take a music sample from a song of a band consisting of 3 instruments and a singer.
At any given time this song will have 4 tones along with their harmonics,their anharmonics (I don't know if that's included in electronics,I know it from music),etc.
So we get an 1 sec sample and sim it,can't we?
Will that be representative?