• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Advice for 2 channel TV/theatre/music system?

Neddy

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
754
Likes
1,019
Location
Wisconsin
Ditto.
Good call. I can't begin to calculate the time I've wasted trying to make 'save money' shortcuts work with technical gear.
Given the layout of your system, I suspect you'll find the improvements worthwhile (esp since you can apparently hear some deficiencies as is).
REW can be a bit of a challenge, but is not too bad to run simple measurements with.
The 'fiddle factor' can get pretty involved if you get into fine tuning/experimenting with your results, but that would be at your discretion anyway:)
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Ditto.
Good call. I can't begin to calculate the time I've wasted trying to make 'save money' shortcuts work with technical gear.
Given the layout of your system, I suspect you'll find the improvements worthwhile (esp since you can apparently hear some deficiencies as is).
REW can be a bit of a challenge, but is not too bad to run simple measurements with.
The 'fiddle factor' can get pretty involved if you get into fine tuning/experimenting with your results, but that would be at your discretion anyway:)
Yeah, I've got a scientific approach/background so messing about with measurements & graphs sounds like fun to me...and I love optimising stuff, that combined with the enjoyment from having the best music & movie experience I can with my system stand both on equal footing for me. I'm looking forward to messing about with it & finding out what works and what doesn't. My only disappointment will be if there is no improvement, but given what I've read and what other people have said, then I think there are some improvements to be had. Once the miniDSP and mic have arrived, and once I've worked out some good settings I'll let you guys know what I learned and what the results were like. (I may ask questions in the meantime if I get stuck or need to get some people's thoughts). The gear is currently in transit from abroad...it's making it's way to me as we speak...will probably be here before the end of the week.
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Hi, for those that haven't visited this thread in a long time, I'm the thread starter & I've got an update re the 2 channel system I bought based on you people's good advice in this thread. The miniDSP arrived along with UMIK-1 microphone, and I've spent a few sessions tweaking EQ and speaker placement and I've arrived at almost the best I can personally do without further advice.

First I'll show you my speakers without any EQ at my listening/viewing postion, then I'll show you my best EQ attempt using miniDSP 2x4:

no EQ:
no EQ.jpg


Best EQ to date using miniDSP:
best 27th march.jpg


As you can see I'm aiming for the Harman Curve, and after listening to the natural brightness of these speakers in my room vs a Harman EQ then the Harman EQ is loads better balanced. All of these graphs are also with the HF Trim (switch on back of speaker) at -3dB to further reduce brightness and allow it to naturally fit the Harman Curve better.

In terms of EQ filters with miniDSP 2x4 I have 12 total EQ bands at my disposal (x2 banks of 6). After numerous EQ session attempts I've opted for a low shelf filter at 200Hz to boost up the whole of the bass region to bring the troughs more in line with the tweeter, then used 5 EQ bands to let REW iron out 0-100Hz, then 5 bands to let REW iron out 100Hz-20000Hz, then I used the last EQ filter to boost 51Hz by 9dB on a very narrow (high Q) to remove that trough as much as possible without affecting any of the surrounding frequencies. I think I've arrived at the best sound I can achieve without further advice, any ideas people?

I've found that speaker positioning doesn't really affect the frequency sweeps that much unless I have the speakers in the middle of the room, which is not an option, so I don't think I've got anything to play with in terms of speaker positioning that I'm aware of. I don't know if there are any room treatments that can iron out the remaining dips. My last thought is that for music playing (rather than TV/movie watching) I could use Equaliser APO to increase the number of available EQ filters to try to iron out this frequency sweep even further, because my miniDSP is limited to 12 bands...but this would only be for music listening from my laptop and otherwise I would use the miniDSP for TV/movie watching.
 
Last edited:
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Update in relation to my previous post, I've explored using Equaliser APO with it's many many filter combinations in contrast to my miniDSP efforts in my previous post....the only reason I need the miniDSP is just for connection/EQ purposes of my TV/Movie experience, but music listening will come from my laptop so Equaliser APO lends itself well as the EQ tool of choice for that (at which point miniDSP is not part of the physical connection chain at all).

Here's my best result with Equaliser APO:
EqualiserAPO.jpg


EqualiserAPO settings.jpg


I gotta say that this Equaliser APO curve sounds loads better than my miniDSP curve that you can see in my previous post from yesterday. (I'd say it sounds about as good as my Oratory1990 EQ'd headphones (see my sig)). I applied the same two manual filters that I used in miniDSP plus one additional, but I also combined 2 passes of REW over the whole frequency range. Altogether, that's 26 filters from REW (20+6) and 3 manual filters. One thing I noticed is that Equaliser APO was telling me that 50Hz could clip by nearly 3dB, so I decreased the pre-amp from -9dB to -12.9dB....do you think that might be a possible explanation for the worse sound of the miniDSP curve I did yesterday....maybe I should decrease the preamp on my miniDSP too then? Or do you think maybe the miniDSP is degrading the sound quality itself somehow, or perhaps the cables are poor that I'm using with miniDSP? Or do you think my Equaliser APO curve is wildly better than my miniDSP curve to describe the better sound of the Equaliser APO curve? (miniDSP is not in the connection chain at all when I'm using Equaliser APO from my laptop).
 
Last edited:

Bear123

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 27, 2019
Messages
796
Likes
1,370
Update in relation to my previous post, I've explored using Equaliser APO with it's many many filter combinations in contrast to my miniDSP efforts in my previous post....the only reason I need the miniDSP is just for connection/EQ purposes of my TV/Movie experience, but music listening will come from my laptop so Equaliser APO lends itself well as the EQ tool of choice for that (at which point miniDSP is not part of the physical connection chain at all).

Here's my best result with Equaliser APO:
View attachment 56071

View attachment 56072

I gotta say that this Equaliser APO curve sounds loads better than my miniDSP curve that you can see in my previous post from yesterday. (I'd say it sounds about as good as my Oratory1990 EQ'd headphones (see my sig)). I applied the same two manual filters that I used in miniDSP plus one additional, but I also combined 2 passes of REW over the whole frequency range. Altogether, that's 26 filters from REW (20+6) and 3 manual filters. One thing I noticed is that Equaliser APO was telling me that 50Hz could clip by nearly 3dB, so I decreased the pre-amp from -9dB to -12.9dB....do you think that might be a possible explanation for the worse sound of the miniDSP curve I did yesterday....maybe I should decrease the preamp on my miniDSP too then? Or do you think maybe the miniDSP is degrading the sound quality itself somehow, or perhaps the cables are poor that I'm using with miniDSP? Or do you think my Equaliser APO curve is wildly better than my miniDSP curve to describe the better sound of the Equaliser APO curve? (miniDSP is not in the connection chain at all when I'm using Equaliser APO from my laptop).

This is a great example of why dual subs are almost mandatory for optimal sound quality. You are trying to boost large nulls in the bass frequencies that will result in *HUGE* power draws from your amp or AVR, and enormous excursion from your woofers. The result, drastically increased distortion and potential clipping and distortion from amp/avr, while still not achieve a completely smooth response. A pair of well placed subs will produce a response free of large dips and nulls, drastically reduce the number of eq filters needed, reduce power requirement from the amp, reduce speaker excursion and distortion, etc. If you are boosting 50 Hz by 9 db, for example, it is 8x power.

The other benefit is that properly placed subs will not only produce better sound quality at the MLP, but at multiple listening postings throughout the room as well.

2 channel is *very* suboptimal for sound quality. Even with lots of work, effort, and eq, it is still inferior to what can be achieved quite easily with a proper setup.

As a real world example, my room's low frequency response with light eq:
Dual subs Audyssey avg all seats.jpg
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
This is a great example of why dual subs are almost mandatory for optimal sound quality. You are trying to boost large nulls in the bass frequencies that will result in *HUGE* power draws from your amp or AVR, and enormous excursion from your woofers. The result, drastically increased distortion and potential clipping and distortion from amp/avr, while still not achieve a completely smooth response. A pair of well placed subs will produce a response free of large dips and nulls, drastically reduce the number of eq filters needed, reduce power requirement from the amp, reduce speaker excursion and distortion, etc. If you are boosting 50 Hz by 9 db, for example, it is 8x power.

The other benefit is that properly placed subs will not only produce better sound quality at the MLP, but at multiple listening postings throughout the room as well.

2 channel is *very* suboptimal for sound quality. Even with lots of work, effort, and eq, it is still inferior to what can be achieved quite easily with a proper setup.

As a real world example, my room's low frequency response with light eq:
View attachment 56100
Well I'm not using past dial 5 on the volume knob on the back of the speakers so there's plenty of volume headroom...therefore I assume I'm not getting any distortion as a result because it's nowhere near max volume....and I'm not getting clipping because I lowered the "pre-amp" - but correct me if I'm wrong about the distortion, because I'm new to this. Can I measure distortion using my UMIK-1 microphone....that would be a useful thing to check?

From your graph that is an average of all listening positions rather than showing individual listening positions, so that graph itself doesn't support your statement that it is better across multiple listening positions....but I suspect that it is. It is a flat response though, which is good, no dips.

Where do you place subs (if you have TV and speakers in corner of room)? Why you need two subs, one not enough? I'm trying to stay away from from purchasing subs as part of my rationale was getting 308's rather than 305's due to the better bass response....and we can see the bass response of the 308's is good from my graph, in terms of extending into the low frequencies, just a few dips. The Equaliser APO result I'm quite happy with, I'm mainly asking why that is sounding a lot better than the my miniDSP effort....I was asking if the curve really was that much better or could it be something to do with the different cabling I'm using for the miniDSP or could it be the miniDSP itself somehow lowering the sound quality, or is it likely all down to the differences in curve I achieved with Equaliser APO vs miniDSP (the bold sections I highlighted in my previous post....but I am willing to explore other areas too, like your tack).
 

Bear123

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 27, 2019
Messages
796
Likes
1,370
A single sub in a room will suffer greatly from room modes and will have huge dips and variations in the response than can be improved, but not completely fixed, with eq. Dual subs setup properly will result in a frequency response with *no* large dips in the response, only peaks that can be safely cut down with eq without drastically reducing headroom or increasing distortion.

One of the key foundations for high fidelity is a smooth, even response without large variations. Dual subs accomplish this much better than a pair of speakers can ever hope to. It is simply one of the required fundamentals for optimal sound quality. The 2 channel world is still hopelessly in the dark ages in this regard for the most part, although this does not apply to everyone, but a large majority it would seem.

As far as my sub placement, I have one in the front left corner of the room, the other is near the right rear corner, although about 3 feet out from the corner along the right wall due to my entry door at that location. This setup gives me no dips in my response and allows a flat response with mainly cuts.

For my last eq, I chose to make the *average* response across all seats flat, vs perfect in one spot and less optimal in the rest. This is a real room used by myself and my whole family, so I like to have very good sound quality no matter where I or anyone else sits. If I wanted to sit locked in one position, I could certainly have a perfect response in that exact spot, but the response everywhere else wouldn't be quite as good.

Sub placement simply needs to be wherever gives the flattest response without nulls. Proximity to the rest of the speakers is completely irrelevant. Sitting here listening to multi channel music, it is impossible not to perceive that all the bass is coming from my center channel and L/R, even though I know my subs are in completely different locations.

Also, I recommend doing compression sweeps with REW, although use caution not to damage your speakers. Start at a sweep level of 75 dB or so. Check the distortion tab to see where distortion levels are.....they should be very low, down around or even under the noise floor of your room. Increase in 5 dB increments and run sweeps. Look to see that the response increases exactly 5 dB over the entire range...this indicates no compression due to speakers and/or amp running out of headroom. Continue increasing in 5 dB increments until you start to see compression...meaning somewhere in the response, you might only get 3 or 4 dB increase instead of 5. This means your system is out of clean output at this level. High distortion and/or clipping will occur here and above that level. You can check the distortion tab briefly for each sweep to see where distortion starts to skyrocket. You will likely see it first around crossover and anywhere positive eq was applied, and under 300 Hz in general.
 
Last edited:
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
For your last paragraph there you're referring to me working out what my max volume is without distortion given that I have heavily EQ'd, so that would put it into perspective how much headroom I have left above my normal listening levels given that heavy EQ. That's what you're getting at there yeah?

My problem areas in my frequency sweep are also 100-300Hz though - that's not the domain of a subwoofer, yes? Subwoofers are about sub 100Hz right? So it leaves me with how to tackle that area?
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
And one other question, I read about "ringing" associated with EQ filters. I don't really know what it is, but I was listening to Mettallica's Enter Sandman track and in the heavy riff sections of the power chords of the guitars I think I noticed some unusual reverb or sound artifacts that had a kind of rhythm of their own - was that "ringing"? How do you combat that?
 

Bear123

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 27, 2019
Messages
796
Likes
1,370
Generally, and take this with a grain of salt as I don't claim to be the definitive authority on eq, just sharing best case practices that I am aware of.

Feel free to eq below 3-400 Hz other than using caution to apply too much positive eq since we know +3 dB = double power, +6 dB = 4x, +10 dB = 10x. Above 3-400 Hz, or perhaps as high as 800ish Hz, I wouldn't apply extensive eq. Try to apply it based on anechoic measurements, and don't apply narrow filters. For example, a broad shelf filter that applies a gradual cut all the way out to 20 Khz in order to match a target curve, or a broad, mild filter to tame down a broad range from 3-6 KHz where there is perhaps some excess energy(just as an example, not in your specific case). Other than that, many advocate limiting eq above Schroeder as much as possible.

Eq boost will increase ringing, cuts will reduce it. Trying to boost a null will be detrimental.

Subs may help a little out as high as 150 Hz or so if you cross them a little higher, try experimenting as high as 120....the crossover is not a brick wall so you may affect things slightly above crossover. Above that, its probably floor and/or ceiling bounce and SBIR. I think the only way to improve that is to change speaker distance from the front wall, or move MLP. Maybe carpet on the floor with thick carpet pad. Make sure you don't have a solid surface coffee table. Things like this might be worth trying.
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I did some more EQ'ing of my system again today, but with a different philosophy...rather than trying to tailor sound to just one listening/viewing position I tailored it accross multiple positions in the room, and I also found that the average of all these curves is really quite a close fit to the Harman curve without any EQ (this was all with HF Trim Switch on the back of the speakers being at -3dB). I did one curve for TV/movie watching with listening viewing positions taken at all places on the couch - for which I used miniDSP to EQ the result. I then did one curve for music listening which took the whole room into account (because when I listen to music I'm unlikely to be just on the couch).

Here's the TV/movie watching curve before EQ:
miniDSP all positions couch.jpg

I then was able to get rid of all peaks above the target from 20-1000Hz, and I didn't apply any EQ above 1000Hz (no need really).


And here's the curve from the music listening positions:
average all positions and heights.jpg

I used Equaliser APO to EQ my music listening experience as all music comes from my laptop, no miniDSP needed for that:
Equaliser APO of all positions.jpg


So you can see that's following the Harman curve pretty naturally before EQ'ing, so these JBL 308Mkii are pretty much following the Harman Curve even without EQ when the HF Trim Switch on the back of the speakers is set to -3dB. No negative preamp here, just some subtle/gentle automated EQ to get rid of peaks. Gonna give this all a trial for a few days...I feel it's very possible to go round in circles with EQ! ;-)
 

Alice of Old Vincennes

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
1,418
Likes
903
I did some more EQ'ing of my system again today, but with a different philosophy...rather than trying to tailor sound to just one listening/viewing position I tailored it accross multiple positions in the room, and I also found that the average of all these curves is really quite a close fit to the Harman curve without any EQ (this was all with HF Trim Switch on the back of the speakers being at -3dB). I did one curve for TV/movie watching with listening viewing positions taken at all places on the couch - for which I used miniDSP to EQ the result. I then did one curve for music listening which took the whole room into account (because when I listen to music I'm unlikely to be just on the couch).

Here's the TV/movie watching curve before EQ:
View attachment 56212
I then was able to get rid of all peaks above the target from 20-1000Hz, and I didn't apply any EQ above 1000Hz (no need really).


And here's the curve from the music listening positions:
View attachment 56214
I used Equaliser APO to EQ my music listening experience as all music comes from my laptop, no miniDSP needed for that:
View attachment 56215

So you can see that's following the Harman curve pretty naturally before EQ'ing, so these JBL 308Mkii are pretty much following the Harman Curve even without EQ when the HF Trim Switch on the back of the speakers is set to -3dB. No negative preamp here, just some subtle/gentle automated EQ to get rid of peaks. Gonna give this all a trial for a few days...I feel it's very possible to go round in circles with EQ! ;-)
You need to measure from at least
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Think I might have had a revelation, but no time to confirm with UMIK measurements....I raised the speakers up by about 5 inches, putting the stands on shoeboxes filled with CD's - instantly the bass is fuller at my listening position, and also more overall volume to the sound across the whole range. I'll remeasure sometime within the next few days, and if it's spot on I'm gonna be buying some new speaker stands then!

@Alice of Old Vincennes , "3 positions close together", do you mean 3 positions close together for each listening position in the room, or just 3 positions close together for one listening position only and leave it at that?
 
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
A few days ago (my last post) I thought I had a revelation with raising the speakers 6 inches in height, I had some time to check with with UMIK, and it's not as revelatory as I had thought, but I think it has moved the sweet spot (no major bass holes) closer to my listening position. Previously some way off left of centre there were no bass holes, but raising the speakers has brought this closer to my ideal viewing position...no bass holes 1 foot to the left of me. So I did an average curve of measurements from 1 foot to left of me, then at my ideal viewing position, then on a position simulating me lying on the sofa rather than sitting - all those positions are within about 1 foot of each other. I then determined that I could still benefit from adding a 5dB low shelf boost, but this time I did from 110Hz down rather than from my previous 200Hz, and is only 5dB vs the 9dB I had before. I then remeasured at all those 3 "very" close positions that I previously described, did an average curve and then EQ'd that curve using both miniDSP (for movie viewing) and Equaliser APO (for music listening)...so the first 3 graphs are all curves targeted at TV & music listening whilst I'm on my couch. MiniDSP I only needed to EQ up to 600Hz (1 bank of 6 filters for 20-100, and then another bank of 6 filters for 100-600Hz). This is the miniDSP EQ showing the actual measured data after my EQ (an average of those 3 'very' close listening positions):

index.php



I used the same initial measurements to put through Equaliser APO for music listening from my laptop, and the following is the actual result measured after EQ as an average of those previously described 3 positions:

index.php



And if we compare both the final results of miniDSP vs Equaliser APO there's not much difference...it's a merge of the above 2 graphs overlayed on each other:

index.php



Yeah, so the extra filters of Equaliser APO weren't that much more helpful than the twelve available filters in miniDSP.

I'm pretty happy with those curves at my listening position...they're not absolutely perfect though, but they're not bad right?

I didn't do any massive manual gain EQ'ing with sharp manual filters this time...and I tested with that Metallica Enter Sandman track, and there was none of that weird ringing artifact in the power chords of the guitars using these EQ. These are the best curves I've achieved at my listening position...it's aided by raising the speakers which brought the sweet spot closer to my listening position combined with me taking an average of 3 'very close readings' - within 1 foot from each other.

I also did an EQ that takes my whole room into account for generalised music listening throughout the whole room, basically did measurements on couch but also in an arc as far as the USB cable of the UMIK-1 would extend at different listening heights (standing/sitting), and these are the results of that one:
average music listening.jpg

Equaliser APO whole room.jpg



So in conclusion I've got different EQ's for different purposes, either implemented through Equaliser APO for everything coming from my laptop or miniDSP for stuff coming from my TV:
  1. Movie & TV watching: miniDSP, 3 measurements taken close to listening position on couch. (see first graph in this post).
  2. Music Listening at couch: Equaliser APO, 3 measurements taken close to listening position on couch. (see second graph in this post).
  3. Generalised music listening throughout the whole room...useful for entertaining or workout music: Equaliser APO, variety of measurements throughout room at different heights. (see fourth graph).
I think I'm about done, I may put the readings that I used for graph #2 through REW/Equaliser APO again but with the same increased "Individual Max Boost" and "Overall Max Boost" that I did for graph #4 (7dB), which might do a better job of ironing out the peaks and troughs in contrast to my Low Shelf Boost (5dB) at 110Hz and lower settings for the aforementioned two Boost variables.

What are some good adjustable speaker stands, I could probably do with some now? (At the moment my speaker stand aren't high enough and I've put my existing stands on some "ugly 6inch blocks".)
 
Last edited:
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Ok, this is very cool, I'm kinda blown away by this result, and it's all just fallen into place both in terms of EQ result and backed up with listening tests...there is absolutely nothing missing in the music, no gaps and sounds perfectly balanced at my listening position, and it's really brought all my tracks to life....just like it sounds in my EQ'd headphones, except better on some tracks where you can actually feel the power of the bass (like Massive Attack and their track Inertia Creeps) which is something that you can't quite attain with headphones no matter how good they are! Here's the EQ result (green line) at my listening position (from 3 positions within a foot of each other):
Amalgamation Couch.jpg

Couch Equaliser.jpg

You might be able to tell that I used 'photoshop' (well Paint in fact) to join up two graphs at the 100Hz point, I did this because I'm using "2 Banks" in Equaliser APO to EQ the curve, with the first one being from 0-100Hz, and the second one from 100-2000Hz, and that's about the only way to show you the full effect of combining the 2 EQ banks. I've checked the detail of the filters and there's not any significant (less than 1dB) of overlap influence between filters at the 100Hz boundary, so nothing to worry about there. And following are the 2 original graphs that I used to create the above the graph (like I've described):
Couch 0-100Hz.jpgCouch 100-2000Hz.jpg

I can't say how happy I am with this result and how the speakers sound in my room now, absolutely end game for me with these speakers in this room! I find it amazing that it just clicked with the sound, and that can be seen by the EQ result I achieved.

I think with this whole audiophile & audio thing...I think the most important thing is choosing speakers that will respond to EQ, then you gotta EQ them to your room (it's ridiculous how much the room affects the speakers) after optimising the speaker placement as best you can,.....then things like DAC quality become 2nd fiddle and really not half as important - I'd say music enjoyment is pretty much Speaker Selection & Room EQ! No way I could have done any of this without this site and the people here - it's influenced my speaker purchases as well as room eq abilities/approach, thanks folks, fantastic result, fantastic site, you're awesome! :p
 
Last edited:
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I'm exploring improving my system by adding a DAC that can accept both an optical Toslink input as well as a USB input....the idea being that I would connect my TV to the DAC via Optical, and I would connect my laptop to the DAC via USB which would result in best possible sound quality of the initial signal whether from laptop or TV. I know the Topping D50 would be an option but it's too expensive really. I've seen the Topping D10 that is in my ballpark but that could only be used for connection to my laptop as it doesn't have Toslink IN. (That might be an option to improve audio from my laptop though). I've scoured the reviews here in AudioScienceReview, but I can't really find anything in my price bracket with the functionality that I describe, that has over 100 Sinad. You guys know of a suitable reasonably priced DAC, Topping D50 is too expensive?

P.S. As an experiment I hooked up my SoundBlasterX G6 DAC to my laptop and then ran the Line Out to the JBL speakers and there was loads of static, but it was OK through the headphone amp of the G6 DAC. I'm wondering if my laptop USB is very very noisy, the noise ceased whilst on battery power rather than AC power though - however it outputted sound in mono rather than stereo. If I did get say the Topping D10 I wonder if I would encounter the same issues? Hmm, don't really need to buy the D10 if I can get the G6 to work, don't really need to buy anything anway to be honest as happy with the sound through my laptops inbuilt headphone amp, praps I shouldn't buy anything else and make it more complicated, ha!

EDIT: think I worked out why the G6 DAC had static on it on the Line Out. If I connect it via miniDSP which by definition uses different cables to a direct connection to the speakers, then the sound is fine with no static & hums...so G6 DAC playback from my laptop works perfectly in that case. I think the 3.5mm jack on the other cable that I use to connect my laptop directly to the speakers, I think that 3.5mm jack is a tad smaller in width than normal 3.5mm jacks, which I noticed by it having less resistance when plugging in...so I think that it's a cable issue in as much as the 3.5mm jack is not making proper contacts in the Line Out of the G6 DAC. Given what I've learned here I think I'm going to buy another cable and use my G6 DAC between my laptop and the JBL speakers for when I want to listen to music rather than buying any more DACs. For movies & TV it will be going the existing route which is TV -> miniDSP -> JBL speakers, so I'm just talking about dedicated music listening from my laptop here.
 
Last edited:
OP
Robbo99999

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Generally, and take this with a grain of salt as I don't claim to be the definitive authority on eq, just sharing best case practices that I am aware of.

Feel free to eq below 3-400 Hz other than using caution to apply too much positive eq since we know +3 dB = double power, +6 dB = 4x, +10 dB = 10x. Above 3-400 Hz, or perhaps as high as 800ish Hz, I wouldn't apply extensive eq. Try to apply it based on anechoic measurements, and don't apply narrow filters. For example, a broad shelf filter that applies a gradual cut all the way out to 20 Khz in order to match a target curve, or a broad, mild filter to tame down a broad range from 3-6 KHz where there is perhaps some excess energy(just as an example, not in your specific case). Other than that, many advocate limiting eq above Schroeder as much as possible.

Eq boost will increase ringing, cuts will reduce it. Trying to boost a null will be detrimental.

Subs may help a little out as high as 150 Hz or so if you cross them a little higher, try experimenting as high as 120....the crossover is not a brick wall so you may affect things slightly above crossover. Above that, its probably floor and/or ceiling bounce and SBIR. I think the only way to improve that is to change speaker distance from the front wall, or move MLP. Maybe carpet on the floor with thick carpet pad. Make sure you don't have a solid surface coffee table. Things like this might be worth trying.
Recently reorganised my room and changed speaker positions, so re-did the EQ on them. I've done all the measurements but been experimenting with different approaches to smoothing in REW combined with allowing or not allowing REW to create sharp filters below 200Hz (that's a selectable tick box option). I haven't done extensive listening tests between the different EQ filters created, but I wanted to get a feel from people here as to how sharp it's wise to make filters below 200Hz, here are some Equaliser APO graphs showing some different approaches to sharpness of filters, obviously the sharper filters make it fit the curve more accurately, but is there a trade-off to be had here in terms of sound quality when using sharp filters? (so this discussion is all in relation to below 200Hz)

Option A: 1/6th Smoothing and no narrow filters:
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 50.10 Hz Gain -7.00 dB Q 4.989
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 68.20 Hz Gain -4.80 dB Q 5.000
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 74.30 Hz Gain 3.00 dB Q 4.955
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 84.30 Hz Gain -2.90 dB Q 4.997
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 157.5 Hz Gain -5.70 dB Q 4.996
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 178.5 Hz Gain 3.00 dB Q 4.804
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 220.0 Hz Gain -5.20 dB Q 4.596
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 481.0 Hz Gain -2.20 dB Q 4.999
x2 Low Shelfs 200Hz 100Hz equaliser apo couch 20-600Hz 1sixth smoothing no narrow filters.jpg


Option B: 1/6th Smoothing and narrow filters:
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 50.30 Hz Gain -7.30 dB Q 4.757
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 66.80 Hz Gain -5.10 dB Q 13.956
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 85.30 Hz Gain -2.70 dB Q 7.582
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 155.5 Hz Gain -5.60 dB Q 7.829
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 185.5 Hz Gain 3.00 dB Q 5.438
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 217.0 Hz Gain -5.50 dB Q 3.457
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 386.0 Hz Gain 1.10 dB Q 2.524
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 471.0 Hz Gain -2.90 dB Q 4.652
x2 Low Shelfs 200Hz 100Hz equaliser apo couch 20-600Hz 1sixth smoothing and narrow filters.jpg


Option C: Var Smoothing and no narrow filters:
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 50.60 Hz Gain -7.20 dB Q 5.000
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 66.40 Hz Gain -1.90 dB Q 5.000
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 84.10 Hz Gain -1.40 dB Q 4.999
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 155.5 Hz Gain -3.00 dB Q 5.000
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 222.0 Hz Gain -4.70 dB Q 5.000
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 474.0 Hz Gain -2.00 dB Q 5.000
x2 Low Shelfs 200Hz 100Hz equaliser apo couch 20-600Hz Var Smooth no narrow filters.jpg


Option D: Var Smoothing and narrow filters:
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 46.60 Hz Gain -3.80 dB Q 6.807
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 51.90 Hz Gain -7.80 dB Q 10.225
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 66.30 Hz Gain -9.20 dB Q 21.176
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 81.70 Hz Gain -3.70 dB Q 20.085
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 88.50 Hz Gain -4.60 dB Q 33.277
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 155.0 Hz Gain -9.10 dB Q 10.389
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 184.5 Hz Gain 3.00 dB Q 2.056
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 218.0 Hz Gain -7.30 dB Q 4.341
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 475.0 Hz Gain -2.70 dB Q 7.189
x2 Low Shelfs 200Hz 100Hz equaliser apo couch 20-600Hz Var Smooth and narrow filters.jpg



You can see that the graphs all follow the same trend, but some with more detail than others, I'm thinking the following order of preference from best to worst when taking in "Graph Detail" and associated Q-values:
Option B > Option D > Option A > Option C

What do you guys reckon, and how large a Q value is sensible to use under 200Hz (for cutting peaks)?


EDIT: did some more subjective listening tests and Option D is definitely the best with the bass being tighter and less woolly which also seems to translate indirectly into better clarity of mids, so it seems that Var Smoothing combined with sharp filters (large Q) is the best option. Seems that below 200Hz a high Q value for cutting peaks is not detrimental, and the Var Smoothing option in REW means that you see maximum detail in the graphs during the sub 200Hz part......so sharp scalpel treatment for both viewing & cutting peaks below 200Hz seems like the best combination option.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom