A collection of tracks spectrum

[Le Concombre]

Now that I have achieved a quiver of 3 sets of DRC filters that satisfies me both emotionally and intellectually#, I listen to music but plugged mu Umik in REW, checking for SPL and eventual anomalies.

I think interesting to share the RTA measurements obtained with "Average forever" settings thus recording the spectrum of music tracks as played in my room with DRC

#electing Dr Toole as the one guru, I don t correct above 500 Hz, yet my speakers that measure very well in anechoic conditions yield an in room response between JBL Synthesis and Toole's idealized steady state ; I correct to Toole's up to 500 Hz with 3 bass extensions : extending Toole flat to bottom, Trained Listeners, and SDEC JBL target -- see https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...es-in-csv-txt-format.16401/page-5#post-818794 for details.

The Quiver is presented here and targets used will be referenced to later, top to bottom, as Harman, Trained, Toole

 

[Le Concombre]

Horowitz in Carnegie Hall in 1965 24/96
Trained
peak SPL # 85 dB C Slow

Bill Evans Montreux
Trained
88

Tracy Chapman
Harman
88

The Bad Plus Never Stop II
Toole
93

Ascenseur pour l échafaud
Toole
89

 

[RayDunzl]

Compare the spectrum of the source with what hits your listening position.

 

[RayDunzl]

Example 1:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-ears-by-tom-nousaine.1669/page-33#post-54888

Example 2:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s-your-audio-philosophy.381/page-2#post-11545

 

[Le Concombre]

Example 1:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-ears-by-tom-nousaine.1669/page-33#post-54888

Example 2:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s-your-audio-philosophy.381/page-2#post-11545

I probably miss your point for Pink Noise is the thing for what I understand that you suggest.

From what I publish, I can see that Toole (least bass) is a logical choice for Bad Plus and Miles that are mastered with huge peaks around 65/70 while the reputed bass heavy Fast Car by Tracy Chapman works very well with the heaviest bass lift (Harman), the in room response being very smooth

 

[RayDunzl]

Maybe I miss your point, but isn't Pink Noise the thing for what you suggest?

Maybe I equally miss your point since there seems to be no reference supplied with which to compare.

Pink will reveal faults, but may suffer from resonances (nulls/peaks) that are not excited by the more impulsive nature of much music.

My point is to compare what hits the listening position (at least the peak SPL) vs what is demanded by the source.

Carry on.

 

[Le Concombre]

Maybe I equally miss your point since there seems to be no reference supplied with which to compare.

Pink will reveal faults, but may suffer from resonances (nulls/peaks) that are not excited by the more impulsive nature of much music.

My point is to compare what hits the listening position (at least the peak SPL) vs what is demanded by the source.

Carry on.

"Pink will reveal faults, but may suffer from resonances (nulls/peaks) that are not excited by the more impulsive nature of much music." Ok we're in tune : that's what I 'm looking at : have I been right to ignore nulls and peaks I ignored or do they mess with actual music (so far I'm very happy)

Other point is to demonstrate that several corrections are necessary, see # 5 (guess I wrote it while you wrote your post)

But I'm not sure I dig your "vs what is demanded by the source" : let say the mastering engineer has a monitoring system eQed to Trained and that my system is too : I'll get the in room response demanded by the source because my room will apply the room gain that prevailed when Art was created ; but that room gain is not embedded in the source itself

 

[RayDunzl]

Upon re-reading:

It seems you are looking to the Toole Curve to be something that the Music should match.

I find that an incorrect assumption.

Other point is to demonstrate that several corrections are necessary, see # 5

#5 is the Miles.jpg?

It has "too much bass"?

Now more confused.

This source has a deficiency in the Bass below 200Hz when compared to the Toole curve.

Should I adjust the EQ to add bass to this disc?

Here's one that may not droop enough in the highs. Should I make a new EQ for that?

 

[Le Concombre]

Upon re-reading:

It seems you are looking to the Toole Curve to be something that the Music should match.

I find that an incorrect assumption.


GOOD LOUDSPEAKERS FED PINK NOISE MATCH TOOLE. NOTHING LESS OR MORE DID I IMPLY

#5 is the Miles.jpg?

IN POST 5 I WROTE :From what I publish, I can see that Toole (least bass) is a logical choice for Bad Plus and Miles that are mastered with huge peaks around 65/70 while the reputed bass heavy Fast Car by Tracy Chapman works very well with the heaviest bass lift (Harman), the in room response being very smooth

I could add that while it ;might seem vulgar to use Harman with Horowitz or Bill Evans it probably would not hurt their shy bass



It has "too much bass"?

Now more confused.

This source has a deficiency in the Bass below 200Hz when compared to the Toole curve.

View attachment 136203

Should I adjust the EQ to add bass to this disc?

Here's one that may not droop enough in the highs. Should I make a new EQ for that?

View attachment 136208

YOU RE FaR OUT IF you understood that I suggest that actual music should match any of the targets

I just pick one of the 3 sets of convolution filters I designed after said targets, depending on the music.

In the case of Miles and Bad Plus lifting the bass below 64 Hz would go against the embedded peaks around 70, hence the choice of the least bass convo set in my quiver, Toole, but, no, I never wrote or suggested in anyway that those records should yield averaged in room responses matching what Pink Noise through good speakers yields

do you dig "But I'm not sure I dig your "vs what is demanded by the source" : let say the mastering engineer has a monitoring system eQed to Trained and that my system is too : I'll get the in room response demanded by the source because my room will apply the room gain that prevailed when Art was created ; but that room gain is not embedded in the source itself"???

others answers in bold amidst your post

 

[Le Concombre]

Territorial Pssings
Harman
96+ dB C peak all the way
good night

 

[RayDunzl]

Sorry, I completely miss your point.

Have a nice day!

 

[Le Concombre]

Thank you Ray, 3 points actually:

1) Proofing of my convolution filters with actual music, as you very well wrote : "Pink will reveal faults, but may suffer from resonances (nulls/peaks) that are not excited by the more impulsive nature of much music." In exemple, the notch round 5500 show several times with actual music while there's no confirmation of a peak at 4500 preceded by a notch at 3600, as per Pink. I thus found a peak in that depressed region that I boosted , see my patched quiver

2) Show there's objective ground in using 3 levels of bass extension. Guess I could display graphs of the same tracks played with the 3 convolution sets but to me it's obvious yet that i.e. lifting the bass below 64 would be, for the Miles, messing with the artist/engineers' intention (and timbre !) with the shaped peaks @ 74 and 111, and you would probably object that Fast Car with flat bass convo would look good too with a bass roll off but to me it's comforting to see that with the heaviest lifting convo set I just put the lowest note of the bass guitar level on a plateau, same with Nirvana : I simply like how it looks with the heaviest lifting bass convo, looks very consistent. And sounds great.

3) a reminder of which are the important regions with actual music and that harshness in the treble region is a myth when it's 40 to 60 dB below 500 Hz ; to my ears harshness is between 400 and 900 ; yet I let the 830 peak showing with Pink that does not show with actual music (nor does harshness here btw). With the Toole "target" 100 & 1000 are within 1.5 dB and popular targets variations of 1dB/octave slope that falls of 3.5 dB are to be avoided for the mess they introduce in the critical 80 to 800 region, see attached illustration.Yeah they might be perceived as taming harshness but they do it a wrong way

IMO YMMV of course

Have a nice day too !

 

[Le Concombre]

I eQ my vinyl rig with an analog Meyer CP 10 parametric equalizer, only 5 bands per channel, of which only 3 allow to correct below 500 Hz : much less potential control options than with RePhase, and yes, gap between 100 and 150 show as well as the 2 peaks between 300 and 400 that I had to leave for I had more crucial usage of the available controls but measuring spectrum with actual music show that

apart from below 50 Hz where my analog rig has a bit more energy and above 5K where digital has quite a bit more of energy, responses are essentially the same.

So, with actual music :

eQs are much closer than what PN suggests

with only 5 PEQ per channel, most of the job can be done : beware not to use too many PEQ

the 700 to 900 peak revealed by Pink at steady state does not appear with actual music, analog or digital : think twice before correcting above 500 Hz

Monk compares an original Columbia to a 24/96 reissue

The Michel Portal is an original 1987 digital recording issued with great care on a classical music label as both LP and CD that I both acquired back then

 

[Le Concombre]

Maybe someone can help : is it pure mastering option taking for granted the presence of a subwoofer at the end user's place? is encoding more channels a much better use of Gb than 384 FR ? Folded down 5.1 DVDA have much more exciting drums & bass
Red trace is folded down 5.1, green is 24/48/2 from the Cheap Xmas compilation