Zensō
Major Contributor
Make sure you’re using the AU (not the VST), then restart after the install.
SoundSource: Using third-party Audio Units with SoundSource
You can use third-party Audio Unit effects in SoundSource.
-
Welcome to ASR. 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!
Has anyone tried using this crossfeed setup?
- Thread starter curiouscat
- Start date
I received this e-mail from Rogue Amoeba Support regarding DearVR Monitor: However, keep in mind that SoundSource only supports stereo audio, so the full functionality of multi-channel plugins may not work.
When I tried multi-channels with DearVR Monitor, only Stereo worked. Needless to say, I'm disappointed. I e-mailed support and asked if future versions of SoundStage would have support for multi-channel plugins.
When I tried multi-channels with DearVR Monitor, only Stereo worked. Needless to say, I'm disappointed. I e-mailed support and asked if future versions of SoundStage would have support for multi-channel plugins.
dasdoing
Major Contributor
dasdoing
Major Contributor
have you tried this one? https://apl-hud.com/product/virtuoso/
it says it works standalone
it says it works standalone
SoundSource Amoeba support e-mailed me and said they only support stereo and don't support multi-channel set-ups. I like SoundSource because they have the Harman curve set-up for my headphones, but otherwise I feel hamstrung. Can anyone suggest an alternative that contains headphone EQ and also supports multi-channel set-ups for Mac users?
Zensō
Major Contributor
I don’t have a specific solution for you, but you’re probably going to have to route your audio through a DAW like Logic to do what you’re asking.
I think the next evolution will have more headphone dacs, dongles, etc, implementing these algorithms on a digital processor, to justify why we need to buy again.
This (crossfeed), and custom headphone EQ, I can imagine will become standard sometime in the future, so we can enjoy this across various devices, cos it's implemented in the same device, so as I switch my dongle from PC, to smartphone, I retain the same processing, cos it's implemented in the DAC/Dongle.
This (crossfeed), and custom headphone EQ, I can imagine will become standard sometime in the future, so we can enjoy this across various devices, cos it's implemented in the same device, so as I switch my dongle from PC, to smartphone, I retain the same processing, cos it's implemented in the DAC/Dongle.
For those on Mac, there is an option you may wish to try - AB Decoder Light. (google it)
It's free, but you'll need to place a stereo to Ambisonic plugin before it, and work in a DAW which supports multichannel. I think AB Decoder Light supports only 1st order Ambisonic so you need only 4 channels.
It sounds great for casual listening, the product is available for both Mac and Windows. The StereoEncoder from IEM, link below, is what I use on Windows, for the Stereo to Ambisonic conversion.
plugins.iem.at
For critical listening, I still prefer BS2R with the Resonic preset, but I think the AB Decoder Light provides a more valid representation of the spatial image, and distance. BS2R, puts the center image very close to my face - while AB Decoder Light is more relaxed.
I think for judging reverb, I would double check with AB Decoder Light.
In a way its like many studios, they use different speakers. So we have the good fortune to have all these options on computers and we can switch between them, in the same way that a studio mixing engineer can switch between different speakers to judge things better.
With StereoEncoder, you can alter the width.
It's free, but you'll need to place a stereo to Ambisonic plugin before it, and work in a DAW which supports multichannel. I think AB Decoder Light supports only 1st order Ambisonic so you need only 4 channels.
It sounds great for casual listening, the product is available for both Mac and Windows. The StereoEncoder from IEM, link below, is what I use on Windows, for the Stereo to Ambisonic conversion.
IEM Plug-in Suite
The IEM Plug-in Suite is a free and Open-Source audio plugin suite including Ambisonic plug-ins up to 7th order created by staff and students of the <br/> Institute of Electronic Music and Acoustics.
plugins.iem.at
For critical listening, I still prefer BS2R with the Resonic preset, but I think the AB Decoder Light provides a more valid representation of the spatial image, and distance. BS2R, puts the center image very close to my face - while AB Decoder Light is more relaxed.
I think for judging reverb, I would double check with AB Decoder Light.
In a way its like many studios, they use different speakers. So we have the good fortune to have all these options on computers and we can switch between them, in the same way that a studio mixing engineer can switch between different speakers to judge things better.
With StereoEncoder, you can alter the width.
Hitherto, most of what I have heard in reviews of crossfeed/ambisonic solutions focus on the stereo width and frequency response. I have also observed a change in the virtual speaker height, between different solutions.
Some make it appear the speakers are placed slightly below our ears, some far above our ears, and some just at ear level or a bit above. The latter two - psychoacoustic impact on me, of speakers at ear height or just above ear height is what I prefer.
Some make it appear the speakers are placed slightly below our ears, some far above our ears, and some just at ear level or a bit above. The latter two - psychoacoustic impact on me, of speakers at ear height or just above ear height is what I prefer.
So we have several criteria to judge the various implementations
1. Stereo Width
2. Clarity of Center Image
3. Clarity overall - i.e Resolution, how pinsharp the various elements in the mix are retained, in the psychoacoustic emulation
4. Distance from listener (Close up, in your face, in your head, or apparently from a point in the distance)
5. Accuracy or Acceptability of Frequency Response changes, either perceptual or actual measured change.
6. Ease of Use - How easy is it to dial in a pleasing acceptable end result.
7. Speaker height relative to ears.
8. Depth - i.e the front to back image, where things with less reverb are up close, and things with lots of reverb appear more distant, as they should., i.e how good is this aspect of the solution.
8. Bugs - yes let's be mindful of the bugs too., until they are fixed.
9. Subjective overall ranking, by the evaluator - e.g A+ to D.
Of course these impressions will be relative to the headphones, used for the evaluation, so it should be possible to provide impressions across different solutions, cross referenced across different headphones.
Hmmm would also be nice to have multiple people contribute to this, so viewers get a balanced view from other reviewers, rather than the opinion of 1 person.
When I have time, I'd love to build a review comparison in a spreadsheet on Google, with my impressions of different headphone listening solutions, based on the criteria above.
If there was a way to capture the exact settings used in each plugin/solution which were auditioned, that would be a bonus, cos that would help others replicate the settings, with ease. The challenge with any solutions where the user can change settings, makes it difficult to evaluate the product accurately without recourse to the settings used., cos in the same product, different settings leave different impressions. I recall using a solution called Realphones, and there were so many settings that it was really difficult to evaluate, it was like being given enough rope to do commit havoc.
It would also be interesting to devise the best approach where one can switch instantly between solutions, to compare them without delay, to get a more accurate comparison.
1. Stereo Width
2. Clarity of Center Image
3. Clarity overall - i.e Resolution, how pinsharp the various elements in the mix are retained, in the psychoacoustic emulation
4. Distance from listener (Close up, in your face, in your head, or apparently from a point in the distance)
5. Accuracy or Acceptability of Frequency Response changes, either perceptual or actual measured change.
6. Ease of Use - How easy is it to dial in a pleasing acceptable end result.
7. Speaker height relative to ears.
8. Depth - i.e the front to back image, where things with less reverb are up close, and things with lots of reverb appear more distant, as they should., i.e how good is this aspect of the solution.
8. Bugs - yes let's be mindful of the bugs too., until they are fixed.
9. Subjective overall ranking, by the evaluator - e.g A+ to D.
Of course these impressions will be relative to the headphones, used for the evaluation, so it should be possible to provide impressions across different solutions, cross referenced across different headphones.
Hmmm would also be nice to have multiple people contribute to this, so viewers get a balanced view from other reviewers, rather than the opinion of 1 person.
When I have time, I'd love to build a review comparison in a spreadsheet on Google, with my impressions of different headphone listening solutions, based on the criteria above.
If there was a way to capture the exact settings used in each plugin/solution which were auditioned, that would be a bonus, cos that would help others replicate the settings, with ease. The challenge with any solutions where the user can change settings, makes it difficult to evaluate the product accurately without recourse to the settings used., cos in the same product, different settings leave different impressions. I recall using a solution called Realphones, and there were so many settings that it was really difficult to evaluate, it was like being given enough rope to do commit havoc.
It would also be interesting to devise the best approach where one can switch instantly between solutions, to compare them without delay, to get a more accurate comparison.
Last edited:
Back to the OP, it appears that a portable solution (Android) is doable with RootlessJamesDSP.
I installed RootlessJamesDSP & Shizuku app (both available on Google Play store) on my HiBy M300 Android DAP. Enabling "USB debugging" and "Wireless debugging" in the developer options allow Shizuku service to register as a wireless device, 'intercepting' the Android audio stream for RootlessJamesDSP. Kinda of a hack, but it works, if somewhat finicky...
From Shanon GitHub repository, I downloaded the BRIR impulse response (wav file) and the HpCF GEQ correction (txt file... that's the trick!). I then open the HpCF file (Chrome for example) and copy the whole text response into the clipboard.
In RootlessJamesDSP, I imported the BRIR into the Convolver, and pasted the HpCF text into the Arbitrary Response Equalizer ("edit as a string" option) ........and voila !!!
Now, I am not completely sure whether the BRIRs work as intended: in my case, the M300 resamples system-wide to 192kHz. I thought that IR's were normalized, and independent of the sampling rate, but this comment from Shanon confuses me: BRIRs are provided as 2 channel WAV files with a sampling rate of 44100Hz. Does it matter?
EDIT: From what I could read, I don’t think it matters. The convolver output will be 44.1kHZ that may or may not be re-sampled by Android, but the result should be correct.
Disclaimer: the above process actuallly came from Joe Bloggs at HiBy: Joe has developed a room response and IEM correction for their own XOE IEM to be used with RootlessJamesDSP on the M300 DAP.
On a side note, I am also playing with Joe's DRX10K plugin, an interesting "zone range compressor/expander"-like. The plugin is available as an EEL2 script, so you can install it into the LiveProg section of RootlessJamesDSP, in addition to the above Convolver and Arbitrary Response Equalizer. It gives some dynamics fine-tuning options if you are not completely satisfied with your HP/IEM response. For example (per Joe Bloggs), if you have muddy bass, you can decrease the bass in EQ, and increase the bass dynamics in DRX10K. If you have sibilance, you can decrease the treble dynamic in DRX10K, and increase the treble in EQ, etc.
I installed RootlessJamesDSP & Shizuku app (both available on Google Play store) on my HiBy M300 Android DAP. Enabling "USB debugging" and "Wireless debugging" in the developer options allow Shizuku service to register as a wireless device, 'intercepting' the Android audio stream for RootlessJamesDSP. Kinda of a hack, but it works, if somewhat finicky...
From Shanon GitHub repository, I downloaded the BRIR impulse response (wav file) and the HpCF GEQ correction (txt file... that's the trick!). I then open the HpCF file (Chrome for example) and copy the whole text response into the clipboard.
In RootlessJamesDSP, I imported the BRIR into the Convolver, and pasted the HpCF text into the Arbitrary Response Equalizer ("edit as a string" option) ........and voila !!!
Now, I am not completely sure whether the BRIRs work as intended: in my case, the M300 resamples system-wide to 192kHz. I thought that IR's were normalized, and independent of the sampling rate, but this comment from Shanon confuses me: BRIRs are provided as 2 channel WAV files with a sampling rate of 44100Hz. Does it matter?
EDIT: From what I could read, I don’t think it matters. The convolver output will be 44.1kHZ that may or may not be re-sampled by Android, but the result should be correct.
Disclaimer: the above process actuallly came from Joe Bloggs at HiBy: Joe has developed a room response and IEM correction for their own XOE IEM to be used with RootlessJamesDSP on the M300 DAP.
On a side note, I am also playing with Joe's DRX10K plugin, an interesting "zone range compressor/expander"-like. The plugin is available as an EEL2 script, so you can install it into the LiveProg section of RootlessJamesDSP, in addition to the above Convolver and Arbitrary Response Equalizer. It gives some dynamics fine-tuning options if you are not completely satisfied with your HP/IEM response. For example (per Joe Bloggs), if you have muddy bass, you can decrease the bass in EQ, and increase the bass dynamics in DRX10K. If you have sibilance, you can decrease the treble dynamic in DRX10K, and increase the treble in EQ, etc.
Last edited:
Similar threads
