GSonic Reference – Free Stereo Room Correction Tool (Measurement + FIR Export)

[Plompudu]

Today I've tried using a Target with the driver variance included and I'm now running into a bug:

pink: before FL0
cyan: FL0 convolved with the resulting FIR filter
green: Target with HF correction

It applies the -1dB/oct Target even though I set the Target Curve. When the Fallback Target is used would a Warning in the Console be much appreciated.
I also think that it would be nice, if you added a short plot with the responses convolved with the filters, so that it's easier to see if it worked as intended.

The bug seems to be caused by the Target file parsing (it doesn't expect a "," between SPL and Freq). With it corrected is it working as intended:

 

[OCA]

Warning in the Console be much appreciated.

Added comma delimited format to accepted target curves.
Added fallback warning if the uploaded curve could not be parsed.
GSonic Reference v1.0.19

 

[OCA]

Minor stuff, a few Buttons could need fine tuning, idc myself.

Also fixed with v1.0.19

 

[john61ct]

Linux ARM (aarch64) is doable and should work on RPi 4/5

Not so critical for creating filters but YES for the convolving

 

[kkewaak]

Thanks for all the valuable feedback and suggestions. GSonic Reference v1.0.17 has been released:

Fixed
HiDPI scaling - fixed UI text/layout scaling on Windows 200%+ display scales and macOS with 4K/external displays.
New
Output Level slider - adjustable sweep attenuation from 0 to -30 dB in the Measure tab. Defaults to -12 dB (matching REW convention) to protect power amplifiers. Saved across sessions.

Thanks for adding the output gain option. First try is a success with excellent results. Soundstage is incredible, tonality is amazing.

 

[_giacomo_]

Welcome to ASR. I would not worry about the performance of one DAC over another. It's like worrying whether a chicken feather or a turkey feather makes more noise when dropped in a rock concert. Yes, the turkey feather will hit the ground with a louder thud, but it also does not matter.



Strongly recommend you do not do this. Look at what you are proposing: you want to sacrifice vastly improved DSP if you go the multichannel route, for an inaudible improvement in the noise floor. This does not make sense.

Get the multichannel version. And in fact, I wouldn't even bother with an OKTO DAC, just get a multichannel interface from RME or Motu.



High passing the main speakers CAN be counterproductive. If you have main speakers that can go down to 20Hz, you can use them as additional bass sources in the room and thus smooth out your bass response. The situation is worse if you only have one subwoofer, since you will end up with only one bass source in the room instead of 3. Of course this depends on whether your mains can go down to 20Hz or not, and whether you are running out of amplifier power.

As for "coherence and realism of the soundstage", you need to read this thread: does envelopment exist? and Bass and subwoofers. The quick answer is: you need stereo subwoofers if you want envelopment, but if you have stereo subs you will lose the benefits of the smoothing the room response if you use mono subs. With a mono sub approach, subs are used to fill in dips created by other subs. And if you want to maximize the envelopment effect, the stereo subs have very specific placement requirements: they MUST be to the left/right of the main speakers, preferably on either side of the listener. Many people have constraints which means stereo subs can not be used.

GSonic, as far as I can tell, is a mono sub DSP system.

Thanks for your suggestion @Keith_W.

As you can see from the attached room response, the situation is "tragical". The speakers go down to 20Hz, the subs shall fill the DIP (they potentially could, being placed against the wall). The speakers are at 180cm from the front wall, and the result you see is a combination of SBIR and room modes. Moving the speakers back by 60cm gives good results, filling the DIP quite well. That's why subs *against the wall* should work.
So, the subs would either fill the dip OR be crossed over after the dip, and the speakers *heavily high passed*. That would be a pity, in the case of the Nautilus 801, IMHO.
What do you think, @OCA ?

The multi channel DAC opens the way to high-passing the mains.
The stereo option aims at amplitude adjustment, potential imperfections in timing in the bass region, but keeps the speakers full range
@OCA: would the mixed phase filters generated with GSonic fill somehow the dip? (my opinion: impossible, naturally).

The 120cm measurement shows the improvement in the critical 40Hz region.

Both measurements were made with no correction, just to give you an idea.

 

[Keith_W]

@OCA: would the mixed phase filters generated with GSonic fill somehow the dip? (my opinion: impossible, naturally).

In my opinion it's quite possible. You would have 2 speakers capable of going down to 20Hz + 2 subs that you can place where you like. If you don't end up with a flat bass curve after careful positioning and DSP then I would be quite disappointed.

 

[OCA]

What do you think, @OCA ?

IME, best sounding bass results are when speakers are crossed over at their spec roll off frequencies with typical 4th order min phase crossover filters but a lot of tricks are possible if you delay the speakers beyond IR start times.

GSonic fill somehow the dip?

It will try to boost minimum phase like dips but those room mode dips (around 4m room length?) are highly unlikely to benefit from that. MIMO filtering is the only robust solution for cases like this.

 

[_giacomo_]

IME, best sounding bass results are when speakers are crossed over at their spec roll off frequencies with typical 4th order min phase crossover filters but a lot of tricks are possible if you delay the speakers beyond IR start times.

that means in my case roll off starts at 20Hz

It will try to boost minimum phase like dips but those room mode dips (around 4m room length?) are highly unlikely to benefit from that. MIMO filtering is the only robust solution for cases like this.

so will multi channel correction allow a flat response even if speaker rolls off below 20Hz and the subs range *overlaps* speakers' up to where the subs contribution is needed to fill the dip (45Hz) ? Flat in response and good in phase?

 

[OCA]

Flat in response and good in phase?

It is actually particularly good in that. This is my FR before/after (FL + 1 sub as support)

 

[_giacomo_]

It is actually particularly good in that. This is my FR before/after (FL + 1 sub as support)
View attachment 523398View attachment 523399

are you using multi channel correction? sorry, what do you mean by FL ?

 

[_giacomo_]

are you using multi channel correction? sorry, what do you mean by FL ?

It is actually particularly good in that. This is my FR before/after (FL + 1 sub as support)
View attachment 523398View attachment 523399

Probably your speakers here roll off early and well integrate with the sub operational range. What I don't understand (and need to, before making game changing decisions) is if this smooth response can be obtained when speakers and subs ranges overlap, without rolling off the mains.

 

[john61ct]

better than any automatic tool I had tried in the past as DRC, Acourate, Dirac and Sonarworks

Wow what an endorsement for a new tool!

By Acourate do you mean their Macro System or did you spring for AcourateDRC?

 

[john61ct]

>> Why would you need filters as .txt files?

To export to devices like Topping E50 ii etc.

I'm confused. I see that text files containing frequency, gain, and Q factor data can create a custom target curve in the PEQ.

But how does that relate to actually processing convolution filters?

Someone please ELI5...

 

[OCA]

are you using multi channel correction? sorry, what do you mean by FL ?

Yes, that's a mimo filter result. FL - Front Left speaker.

 

[OCA]

if this smooth response can be obtained when speakers and subs ranges overlap

Yes, the whole idea behind active room mode cancellation is based on overlapping frequency bands.

 

[cobby]

Just wanted to give a bit of feedback after spending more time with this.

I now have it integrated into my audio mini PC web GUI together with Easy Effects, and it works surprisingly well in practice. I can import the GSonic filters directly through the web interface, and the whole workflow has become very convenient, including automatic conversion into the format Easy Effects expects.

The filters themselves sound excellent here, honestly the best ones I’ve had so far in this setup. The bypass filter is especially useful too, because it makes comparisons really easy and consistent. And the fact that GSonic also generates the stereo files automatically is a really nice touch.

So from my side: GSonic + Easy Effects is actually a very comfortable and effective combination. Easy Effects handles these filters very well, and once integrated, the whole thing feels much more practical than I expected.

 

[thewas]

Wow what an endorsement for a new tool!

By Acourate do you mean their Macro System or did you spring for AcourateDRC?

Their classic Macro Toolbox https://www.audiovero.de/en/acourate.php

 

[forart.it]

Just wanted to give a bit of feedback after spending more time with this.

I now have it integrated into my audio mini PC web GUI together with Easy Effects, and it works surprisingly well in practice. I can import the GSonic filters directly through the web interface, and the whole workflow has become very convenient, including automatic conversion into the format Easy Effects expects.

The filters themselves sound excellent here, honestly the best ones I’ve had so far in this setup. The bypass filter is especially useful too, because it makes comparisons really easy and consistent. And the fact that GSonic also generates the stereo files automatically is a really nice touch.

So from my side: GSonic + Easy Effects is actually a very comfortable and effective combination. Easy Effects handles these filters very well, and once integrated, the whole thing feels much more practical than I expected.

...what about GSonic + @VilhoValittu 's CamillaFIR ? (= full open source solution)

 

[ciprian pop]

This morning I did the 3 measurements and generated the filters, what I can say is that the bass sounds better than with my filters generated with rew, but I don't like the mids and highs. I think GSonic corrects the speakers (Martin Logan esl 11a+2x Kef KC 62) too much and I don't know how to limit the correction to 300 HZ. OCA please look over the measurements and maybe you can help me. Thanks