Do I "need" room correction

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Post Updated with the measurements with some 10 mins tuning of subs
View attachment 326112

That is a huge difference in the bass region. From 40-50, and at 85, those are some pretty big dips. Your bass is in a much narrower range post correction, and much more in line with the mids.

I would hear that, in the "where's my bass?" sense. If I went back and forth from corrected to direct/no correction, it would be pretty obvious. It's that big of a difference. If it is not to you, that's fine, we like what we like.

Do you need automatic room correction? No, you can do that yourself with measurements and adjustments as you see (hear) fit. But in this particular case I think the room correction has done a very good job (along with your sub tuning of course). I would take that as my starting point, and be happy to have it.

 

[Digital_Thor]

So, which speakers do you have? They can make a rather big difference in how you perceive the sound, especially with respect to how you eq them afterwards.

Greeting everyone.
Welcome to one more subjective discussion where I ask for your subjectivity.

Do I really need room correction? I have recently listened to the room correction (after callibration) of the entry level lyngdorf
(tda 1120 if I am not wrong). The calibration was done by a professional.

I could hear some differences but I have found those to be smallish. I also learned and I can confirm this that room correction does not improve staging. Staging is more affected by room and speaker placement and I have done indeed as much as I could for that regard.
My room measurements also show that I have kind of ok room and frequency responses is not all over the place.

Can I just survive with a more "normal" amplifier where room correction is not there or am I missing some important elements in my understanding.

Regards,
Alex

Post Updated with the measurements with some 10 mins tuning of subs
View attachment 326112

 

[ZolaIII]

In short yes, you should go back to placement optimisations and try to figure out what is happening at or between 400~450 Hz range. You should explain and include in initial post the crossover with sub settings and solo measurements would be nice (L, R mains only as full range and and sub alone, then crossed solo each and together). On the long run try to keep up. Goal is that you need as less correcting in the first place and those you need where it is possible to do it on DSP (PEQ's, room correction, normalisations, crossover, eventually some effects...). How much is enough can vary both subjectively and objectively (room). It seems you didn't done bad with room but I would like to see waterfall plots (standard plus RT60) and clarity.
For start try to determine what's happening in low mids.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Greeting everyone.
Welcome to one more subjective discussion where I ask for your subjectivity.

Do I really need room correction? I have recently listened to the room correction (after callibration) of the entry level lyngdorf
(tda 1120 if I am not wrong). The calibration was done by a professional.

I could hear some differences but I have found those to be smallish. I also learned and I can confirm this that room correction does not improve staging. Staging is more affected by room and speaker placement and I have done indeed as much as I could for that regard.
My room measurements also show that I have kind of ok room and frequency responses is not all over the place.

Can I just survive with a more "normal" amplifier where room correction is not there or am I missing some important elements in my understanding.

Regards,
Alex

Post Updated with the measurements with some 10 mins tuning of subs
View attachment 326112

I use 'room correction' which prefer to call 'room adaptation'.

You are not correcting a room.

Okay so I use it only below about 500hrz and often just 20-150ish hrz with limited manual tuning above. I am very selective about what gets adjusted between about 150-500hrz limiting it to a balance of changes and letting the room affect the sound to some degree. Changing the vocal range so it doesn't match the room can sound canned and very unrealistic. Very. The room acoustics are often part of the mastering plan to create a sense ambiance. Especially studio recording. They have no space of their own. You room becomes the space via its own idiosyncrasies.
You also have to be aware of SBIR from all walls and any very, very large items in the space. You prolly don't really want to adjust frequencies affected by that much.

Nothing comes close to properly adapted bass. 20-150hrz. I can't imagine at least a few key adjustments. Essentially no system has highfi bass without dealing with major room modes and to some degree SBIR(for which placement is very important)Also around 300 any big peaks or dips really affect vocals.

Above 300ish hrz I am focused on speaker corrections. Which are in fact corrections not adaptations. These are based solely on anechoic data and personal taste. Not in room data which is not generally helpful as above the bass you do not hear the in room steady state. That curve is not what you hear. If it was we would not need the anechoic chamber and the Kipple machine at all.
The curve is made up of everything all at once and not granular enough to be useful. It is a side effect.

The 400-500hrz zone might be SBIR/Comb filtering if anything is very close to a boundary @1foot or less(such as the speakers being close to the wall behind them or a side wall) It could be a character of the room or it could be issues in the speakers design. I would manually adjust anything there and take note any 'correction/adaptaion' might not sound better.

Just because you get a flat or smoothed line in a single in room steady state doesn't mean it sounds good.
I can put a tweeter in one corner, two woofers on the floor and a midrange hanging from a string in the center of a room and I might be able to tweak it so I get a nice curve at the listening possition. Will that sound good?

Speaker Placement 101: Is Speaker-Boundary Interference Killing Your Bass?

Not hearing enough bass through your monitors? The distance between your room boundaries and speakers has a huge impact on your bass performance. This tutorial will show you specific strategies for placing your speakers to get a balanced bass response.

arqen.com

 

[ROOSKIE]

I'll make the obvious comment that up until fairly recently most people just put up with room modes. Maybe they pushed the speakers around a bit to improve matters.

Yes, room modes have been around longer than DSP/PEQ. Plus it still isn't mainstream to deal with them.

However once the bass adjusted for both objective and subjective excellence, it is very hard to go back.

People used to think the Super Nintendo was SOTA. Many still enjoy it, for various reasons and yet it has been surpassed 100fold.
Who knows.
Some folks drop a $100k on an old classic car that is not even close to as refined as my $20k 2020 CR-V.

Shrugs.

 

[ROOSKIE]

You don't "need" room correction in the same way you don't "need" 20Hz bass or a 40" TV or two pillows or a water filter. There is even a school of thought that if the instruments and singers are performing live in the room they also wouldn't be using room correction and the room FR is part of the thing.

However the feeling when you play this test sound and all the notes come back at equal loudness makes me feels better than spending $3000 on cables

I get the $3k cable joke, that said I think I would only want this played with equal loudness in an anechoic chamber or with the KNFS. Maybe not even there.
Not in the room, at least not to my taste.
I think it is important to point that out especially as the OP is newer to all of this.
Equal loudness of individual frequency, whether by what is perceived or measured is not necessarily the goal.

? I don't see how the Quads being 'clean' (whatever that means) affects their interplay with room modes. If they really don't output much below the room's transition frequency , then sure, they aren't going to much exacerbate room mode issues. But if they do, they will interact with problematic modes, regardless of how 'clean' they are.

@Willem 's Quads are dipole. They do not excite room modes the same way nor do they pressurize the room the same way say a sealed or ported box would. I think you can imagine why.
There are a wide variety of ways that dipole designs variate from more conventional ones. Check out Linkwitz's site. He has passed but the site is still strong.

Frontiers

 

[alaios]

Great!

Looks like that should have been a substantial improvement overall. But it also leaves a bit of room for improvement. It basically just added some bass, without really addressing the major peaks.


Well, you definitely need a pre. I’d just get something that has room correction baked in. The cheaper limited Dirac license may already be enough, your mid and high frequency seems quite smooth already. Something like NAD C386 or C3050 may work?

Is my room based on the measurements given above an average room? If yes I do not want to fund the law of diminishing returns

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Greeting everyone.
Welcome to one more subjective discussion where I ask for your subjectivity.

Do I really need room correction? I have recently listened to the room correction (after callibration) of the entry level lyngdorf
(tda 1120 if I am not wrong). The calibration was done by a professional.

I heard the Lyngdorfs at a show, with and without room correction.
The room was a hotel room style, very lively! the demo guy, stopped the music, and said this is how live this room is: then he clapped his hands. There was clear echoes and all sorts to be heard!
Then he started playing music, and the sound was great. So I asked him to turn off the room correction. Yes, the sound suffered, bass was not the same, and stereo image got flattened out.
So although the room correction was working well, but to be honest, I could easily have lived without it.
I have done for the past fifty years, anyways.

 

[Willem]

I would not use room eq to tame the higher frequencies, but bass, yes, always.

 

[Digital_Thor]

I would not use room eq to tame the higher frequencies, but bass, yes, always.

Agreed.... you might correct one point in space - but unavoidably make all other points in space (the room) worse.

And Earl Geddes:

Remember this: If you have a bad speaker or a speaker that simply does not fit your preference or room. Then you can't correct it with EQ above around 500Hz - unless you measure it in fine detail and the speaker is designed to have a very smooth and flat DI - because then it will not "receive" EQ very well.
Look at this speaker:
https://www.spinorama.org/speakers/Buchardt Audio S400 MKII/ErinsAudioCorner/index_eac.html
At just below 2kHz, it has a bump in the DI(lower curve) which shows that the frequency response is changing quite a bit depending on the listening angle in front of the speaker. And remember - if you correct with EQ at one angle - all other angles will change too.
Above around 6kHz, the response is even and smooth at all angles, and EQ now works just fine. But again - only if you have really good data/measurements, to be sure, that what you change, is valid. Or else, you are just going to create your own personal version of "the circle of confusion".

This is why I asked the OP which speakers he uses, because that will make a huge difference in the sound, when using EQ - especially the automated ones.

 

[Sparkles]

DSP can lift an average speaker's linearity, integrate subs, and tame many room effects esp. at lower frequencies.

My audio priorities at the moment are
1. Dynamics at variable volumes esp. TV UT at natural voice levels
2. Authenticity of tone
3. Resolution

IME DSP is effective only for 2. authentic tone reproduction. Good efficient speakers will do 1., and electronics 3..

 

[OldTimer]

I need it but hard to find.

 

[computer-audiophile]

Not really.