Help finding amazing room correction post

[Jas0_0]

Hi all,

A while ago, one of the really clued up contributors here posted a step-by-step guide to room correction with theoretical explanations for each step, e.g why no correction above 300Hz.

I read it because someone else here linked to it from another thread, but I now can’t find it again. If anyone knows of the post I’m talking about, would you mind posting the link?

Also, if deemed helpful enough by others, might it warrant a sticky?

Many thanks,

James

 

[OldHvyMec]

There is more than one person on ASR with the chops. Duke has a way of explaining that a novis can learn and not need a dictionary to figure out.
DBA informed, for starters and it goes from there. He can be a techy as the next guy, BUT has a very helpful approach without having to ask 10 more
questions for clarification.

Regards

 

[sweetchaos]

This?

Comparison of DRCs: Dirac Live for Studio, IK Multimedia ARC System 3 and Sonarworks Reference 4 Studio edition

[MOD EDIT: This is a member contribution] Hi all, Lately I was playing a bit with digital room correction (DRC) SW to see if I can tame the bass in our living room with a pair of Revel M16 (no subs) so I thought it could be useful to share my findings. Some of my in-room measurements are...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Chrispy]

Can't think of it but another article on the Schroeder frequency thing you might like https://www.soundandvision.com/content/schroeder-frequency-show-and-tell-part-1

 

[Snarfie]

I have issues regarding the idea/strategy only correcting low frequencies. I correct fully from 20 to 20khz with the desired result. Making use of Mathaudio Room EQ where it is advised to correct such that All deviations are corrected so not only low frequencies. From there on you can create your own target curve (white line) for personal max transparency by moving the slider up or down or draw your own target curve.

Other people (audiophiles, musicians) that listen in my room have the same experience regarding the horizontal target curve producing by far the best result. Sounding balanced with exceptional imaging.

An yes i did different measurments with 3 different measuring mic's because of the found frequency curve. All with the same result.
Do know i'm by far no audio profesional but can clearly hear if something sounds good/balanced or bad.

Qurious does other ASR members have the same experience

 

[Deleted member 48726]

I have issues regarding only correcting low frequencies. I correct fully from 20 to 20khz with the desired result. Making use of Mathaudio Room EQ where it is advised to correct such that All deviations are corrected so not only low frequencies. From there on you can create your own target curve (white line) for personal max transparency by moving the slider up or down or draw your own target curve.

Other people (audiophiles, musicians) that listen in my room have the same experience regarding the horizontal target curve producing by far the best result. Sounding balanced with exceptional imaging.

An yes i did different measurments with 3 different measuring mic's because of the found frequency curve. All with the same result.
Do know i'm by far no audio profesional but can clearly hear if something sounds good/balanced or bad.

Qurious does other ASR members have the same experience
View attachment 345135

It's the result that matters.

 

[-Matt-]

Sorry, can't help the OP in their search.

@Snarfie have you considered adding a sub (or more subs) it might help to fill in the low end and give the EQ an easier job?

I think whether or not to correct full range depends a lot on the quality of your speakers. If they are good enough that the top end is reasonably smooth and has well controlled directivity then there is a chance that EQ will do more harm than good. If their response is a bit all over the place then full range EQ will probably help.

 

[Snarfie]

Sorry, can't help the OP in their search.

@Snarfie have you considered adding a sub (or more subs) it might help to fill in the low end and give the EQ an easier job?

I think whether or not to correct full range depends a lot on the quality of your speakers. If they are good enough that the top end is reasonably smooth and has well controlled directivity then there is a chance that EQ will do more harm than good. If their response is a bit all over the place then full range EQ will probably help.

Hi Matt i don't have any problems when Mathaudio correct the found frequency curve with the white target curve. The vandersteen model 1 speakers produces full low frequencies so no need for subs, imaging is after correction second to none. So quite happy with the system. My point is do other ASR members have the same experience correction not only the low frequenciec but correcting the whole range from 20 to 20khz like me which is in contrast whith only correcting low frequencies. Regarding the measurment i did measure several colum speakers more or less same dimension with more or less same frequency response. So nothing wrong with those speakers.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

Was it this thread?

REW how to guide?

Here are a few tutorials - - - - -

www.audiosciencereview.com

Or were the explanations form Amir?

Room Measurement Tutorial for Dummies Part 1

There are few more things transformative in audio than learning how room acoustics works. You never look at any system the same again. Like moving from film photography to digital, measurements give you instant feedback on what your system is doing. Even if you choose to not make any changes...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Room Measurement Tutorial for Dummies Part 2

Room Measurement Tutorial for Dummies Part 2: Selecting a Measurement Microphone I hope everyone has read the first part of this tutorial on downloading and installing Room EQ Wizard. Here is the link to that if you missed it...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Jim

 

[Jas0_0]

Thanks to all who’ve made suggestions. Still not found it!

I have a sneaky feeling it was by someone like @Kal Rubinson

I also think it might have been a post in another thread, not a thread-starting post.

It went into the interplay of room, acoustic treatment, speakers, speaker placement and EQ. I remember it recommended using only broad band tone control-type filters for higher frequencies.

Sorry this isn’t very helpful. Any more suggestions gratefully received and I will post it here if I find by other means.

Thanks,

James

 

[thewas]

I remember it recommended using only broad band tone control-type filters for higher frequencies.

Here are is also a thread with Floyd Tooles comments on that confirming above:

Some comments from Floyd Toole about room curve targets, room EQ and more

Room curve targets Every so often it is good to review what we know about room curves, targets, etc. Almost 50 years of double-blind listening tests have shown persuasively that listeners like loudspeakers with flat, smooth, anechoic on-axis and listening-window frequency responses. Those with...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Jas0_0]

Here are is also a thread with Floyd Tooles comments on that confirming above:

Some comments from Floyd Toole about room curve targets, room EQ and more

Room curve targets Every so often it is good to review what we know about room curves, targets, etc. Almost 50 years of double-blind listening tests have shown persuasively that listeners like loudspeakers with flat, smooth, anechoic on-axis and listening-window frequency responses. Those with...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This is the one! Thanks so much, really appreciated.

Now bookmarked.

James

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I have a sneaky feeling it was by someone like @Kal Rubinson

I also think it might have been a post in another thread, not a thread-starting post.

It went into the interplay of room, acoustic treatment, speakers, speaker placement and EQ. I remember it recommended using only broad band tone control-type filters for higher frequencies.

Not guilty.

 

[Flaesh]

In very short - because

(from Toole's book or article)

 

[Jas0_0]

Here are is also a thread with Floyd Tooles comments on that confirming above:

Some comments from Floyd Toole about room curve targets, room EQ and more

Room curve targets Every so often it is good to review what we know about room curves, targets, etc. Almost 50 years of double-blind listening tests have shown persuasively that listeners like loudspeakers with flat, smooth, anechoic on-axis and listening-window frequency responses. Those with...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Have read this, moved my speakers, measured using moving mic method, set the room curve in REW to approx what measurements of my speakers show it should be, used this to generate mono correction filters 20-80Hz, stereo correction filters 80-500Hz and nothing above that.

Now sitting back and enjoying (subjectively of course and fully aware of the dangers of expectation bias) the best sound I’ve achieved in this room.

Ahhhh.

Many thanks.

 

[thewas]

Am glad you adapted this valuable freely available knowledge and it worked also fine for you, enjoy the music now!

 

[ozzy9832001]

I have issues regarding the idea/strategy only correcting low frequencies. I correct fully from 20 to 20khz with the desired result. Making use of Mathaudio Room EQ where it is advised to correct such that All deviations are corrected so not only low frequencies. From there on you can create your own target curve (white line) for personal max transparency by moving the slider up or down or draw your own target curve.

Other people (audiophiles, musicians) that listen in my room have the same experience regarding the horizontal target curve producing by far the best result. Sounding balanced with exceptional imaging.

An yes i did different measurments with 3 different measuring mic's because of the found frequency curve. All with the same result.
Do know i'm by far no audio profesional but can clearly hear if something sounds good/balanced or bad.

Qurious does other ASR members have the same experience

It would be highly dependent on the situation, how the measurements were taken and what either is or isn't present in the room while they were taken.

As a general rule, I would be cautious about making corrections above maybe 1khz or so.

 

[Snarfie]

It would be highly dependent on the situation, how the measurements were taken and what either is or isn't present in the room while they were taken.

As a general rule, I would be cautious about making corrections above maybe 1khz or so.

Why being cautious if anybody could hear that 20-20khz produced the best result specific in this room. Your welcome to listen What would be a reason to be cautious.? Only reason to be cautious if frequencies are corrected such that excursion could harm the speakers. In Mathaudio that is impossible. It would be interesting people that correct specific with Mathaudio room EQ if they correct 20 to 20 khz or different.

 

[Jas0_0]

Someone more clued up might set me right, but as I now understand it there’s a solid scientific reason not correct above 500Hz or so.

From what I’ve read in the posts quoting Toole, linked above, the sound heard at higher frequencies (above 500Hz or so) is a mixture of direct and reflected sound, but your brain filters out reflections as just reflections. However, a measurement mic can’t do that.

If you have speakers that measure flat under anechoic conditions, then measure those speakers in your room, your measurement mic will combine the direct and reflected sounds to show a response that is anything but flat.

It’s fine to correct lower frequencies as you’re removing the gain added by the room, which your brain can’t discern as anything else.

But if you correct the deviations from flat at higher frequencies, you’re adding filters to a response that your brain has already filtered, so you’re actually adding deviations from flat to the signal from your nice flat speakers.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

Someone more clued up might set me right, but as I now understand it there’s a solid scientific reason not correct above 500Hz or so.

From what I’ve read in the posts quoting Toole, linked above, the sound heard at higher frequencies (above 500Hz or so) is a mixture of direct and reflected sound, but your brain filters out reflections as just reflections. However, a measurement mic can’t do that.

You know, that's like saying room treatment and acoustical diffusers, rugs. etc. don't matter.
Do not take everything from one person as the only truth. Like with most things it is not black or white.

If that statement was true, you could just place your speakers in a bare naked room with concrete walls and hard-wood floor and it would be no different sounding to your ears than if you treated the room.. Because your brain filters out the reflections!?

Sorry, I'm not believing it. And I correct full range by the way.