No; I made a single position measurement with these adjustments in REW + levels of 90 dB SPL, instead of standard 75 dB SPL. Furthermore, there was no reflecting surface in close proximity to the microphone, which includes myself [minimum distance to the next reflecting surface, sloped walls left and right, was ~5.3 feet = ~1.6 meters].Is that uncorrected measurement done with MMM RTA pink noise?
No; I made a single position measurement with these adjustments in REW + levels of 90 dB SPL, instead of standard 75 dB SPL. Furthermore, there was no reflecting surface in close proximity to the microphone, which includes myself [minimum distance to the next reflecting surface, sloped walls left and right, was ~5.3 feet = ~1.6 meters].
However, the result looks very similar to the 9 averaged position measurements in my Dirac Live Calibration Tool v1.x [miniDSP]; which I took over a listening area of 3 seats. Differences amongst those measurements are mainly due to room modes.
Coffee verse whisky can change how we really see ..If I'm seeing right in your simulation PIR's slope indeed increases with distance. Is that correct?
Or better zip it as I did with my f208 measurements hereRename extension to ".txt"
Or better zip it as I did with my f208 measurements here
Ouch, I thought that even my parasound hint is enough to drive thoseBy the way I thought that an Hypex NC500 dual mono amp was more than enough for them but it seems that they would appreciate a bit more juice
Overlaid PIR's plus on-axis:@BYRTT Can you plz post those 7 PIR's from your simulation on a separate graph so it is visibe how they relate to ecah other?
Ok, showing graph of Dirac EQ full range:
View attachment 63753
I attach the link to mdat with:
1) Baseline L+R
2) MMM L+R @1,5m
3) MMM L+R @2,3m (main LP)
4) MMM L+R @4,0m
5) Dirac EQ full range L+R
6) Dirac EQ below 400Hz L+R
Have fun!
That looks very good!
I would maybe think of correcting the Dirac's target curve in this region for 2-3dB:
View attachment 63761
Yes, that is the next step and also need to save a preset for listening at low volume, any suggestion on the shape? was thinking kind of a U curve with boosted bass and high
Looks very good, nice bass extension.my recent mmm and amateur correctionView attachment 63770View attachment 63771
How did the phase and the step looked like before correction?Dirac did a good job correcting time domain.
Phase:
Left speaker (green) position is not that optimal as right.
View attachment 63765
Step response:
View attachment 63768
How did the phase and the step looked like before correction?
thanks
You can't EQ LW without EQ-ing on-axis, ER and SP. You can only choose which one you want to linearize, but they will all be affected.
My take is you should always EQ for smooth PIR. If you listen nearfield PIR will be dominated by LW, if you listen farfield it will be dominated by ER and eventually even by SP. As you can see on Byrtt's spinorama above PIR is little lower than ER.