running dual speakers per channel in stereo, WTF!?

[khaliss]

To me, VAR smoothing looks more like 1/3.
And that seems to me to be how we "see" music, unlike some reviewers who swear they hear drops of 0.2DB.
But all that aside, you probably picked up your speakers for their speed and clean performance, the transparency they're known for.
You don't want multiple sources playing together because that basically causes twice as much intermodulation as you can see.....
That's why three-way design is more appreciated than two and a half way.
Now, as far as it's heard, I'd bet it's definitely not, but now that you've seen it, I couldn't help but hear it, if that makes sense to you.
Maybe get a speaker switch so you can switch when you move around or working to just one pair, and Martin Logan for critical listening?

Yeah, I get it... and now kinda wish I should NOT have paid attention to the unsmooth graphs, now I can't unsee it. Sometimes, ignorance is bliss LOL

My ears are telling me the dual speakers are not having a detrimental effect to the sound... but instead it is adding some sort of enhancement (expanded soundstage, still providing good audio when I'm outside the sweetspot, etc), so I don't know... maybe I'll keep going with it LOL

I'll just program my brain to only visualize the sound in ERB smoothing :

 

[khaliss]

One of my guilty pleasures is open-back headphones with my nearfield monitors going, I don't think I'd daily drive like that but its certainly a unique effect. Huge yet detailed.

that's what I'm trying to say... this setup has that sort of effect to the sound for me. I don't think I can hear a difference in resolution or detail, they still sound the same to my ears (single vs dual), but the soundstage seem to have expanded

 

[khaliss]

ok guys, I consulted the all-knowing AI engine Gemini (by Google)... here's my question: "when perceiving sound, when I use REW to measure room response & SPL graphs... which smoothing should I apply that will closely represent how my brain interprets audio?"

Here's the answer:

So, I guess this will have to be where I'm going to stand on this matter (Psychoacoustic),

 

[khaliss]

Maybe get a speaker switch so you can switch when you move around or working to just one pair, and Martin Logan for critical listening?

I can do that, but I'm kinda lazy in a way where once I sit down to watch my shows/movies, or listen to music.. I don't wanna have to deal with getting up and push buttons etc... this is the reason why my Marantz AVR is feeding out the front channels to my Tube/EQ Preamp (T8pro) & then to my external amp (E406 clone) that powers my ESLs so I can use my main speakers and enjoy it for what is... at ALL times, doesn't matter what content I'm listening or watching. The only problem is the electrostats have a deficiency, and that's the limited sweetspot. That's what I'm trying to do here is "fix" that limitation... I know now that going with this "solution" creates new issues, as evident from the frequency response measurements (comb filtering)... BUT, as long as my ears are telling me the sound is still pretty much the same (when I'm in the sweetspot), then I'm willing to live with it as long as I'm getting more positives (than negatives)

 

[waynel]

here it is: Yellow (single) + Pink (Dual)

I do see now the peaks/dips are longer with the Dual speakers & are a bit worse than the Single speaker. The question is how much does it affect a listener on how the soundwaves are translated into our brains as music or audio in movies? The videos I watched to kinda learn how these things work (like taking REW room measurements) claim that 1/6 smoothing is probably the resolution that sound is translated into our brains(?) That's why I haven't paid close attention to unsmoothed graphs... but hey I'm trying to learn here =)

View attachment 449435

Thank you , really curious to see the 1/12 octave too.

 

[kemmler3D]

ok guys, I consulted the all-knowing AI engine Gemini (by Google)... here's my question: "when perceiving sound, when I use REW to measure room response & SPL graphs... which smoothing should I apply that will closely represent how my brain interprets audio?"

Here's the answer:
View attachment 449447

So, I guess this will have to be where I'm going to stand on this matter (Psychoacoustic),
View attachment 449448

AFAIK this is not wrong. Our ears tend to ignore comb filtering because it's not just speakers, but everything we hear in most rooms that's affected this way, to an extent.

I think if you added this comb filtering to the panel speakers without changing anything else, you would hear it.

But with the second set of speakers you also have some additional energy in the affected range. Comb filtered sound usually sounds a bit hollow or dull. Boosting the mids and treble overall contravenes this effect, however much it is present. And the comb filtering itself is hard to hear.

If you WANT to hear the comb filtering, hold your head very still and do a manual sweep really slowly using this https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ and you will probably hear the volume going up and down.

But, since you like how it sounds, I don't recommend doing that, ignorance is bliss and if it sounds good it is good. If you actually listen to the comb filtering you may find it hard to forget about after that...

 

[khaliss]

Thank you , really curious to see the 1/12 octave too.

1/12 smoothing:

I can see 6K & up having the wavy pattern... is that comb filtering getting a bit more visually represented here, yes? (compared to single speaker)

 

[khaliss]

AFAIK this is not wrong. Our ears tend to ignore comb filtering because it's not just speakers, but everything we hear in most rooms that's affected this way, to an extent.

I think if you added this comb filtering to the panel speakers without changing anything else, you would hear it.

But with the second set of speakers you also have some additional energy in the affected range. Comb filtered sound usually sounds a bit hollow or dull. Boosting the mids and treble overall contravenes this effect, however much it is present. And the comb filtering itself is hard to hear.

If you WANT to hear the comb filtering, hold your head very still and do a manual sweep really slowly using this https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ and you will probably hear the volume going up and down.

But, since you like how it sounds, I don't recommend doing that, ignorance is bliss and if it sounds good it is good. If you actually listen to the comb filtering you may find it hard to forget about after that...

Yeah, I'm almost tempted to open the tone generator LOL... but I do know what audible comb filtering sounds like after watching multiple how-to videos from Youtube vloggers going over REW basics when I first started using the software a couple of months ago.

 

[khaliss]

How bad is my graph? I mean if anyone else can show theirs that has a similar setup to mine (electrostatics, small untreated room, laminate flooring, etc), I would love to see.

 

[Marin]

How bad is my graph? I mean if anyone else can show theirs that has a similar setup to mine (electrostatics, small untreated room, etc), I would love to see.

The graph is very good, one of the better ones I've seen without major room treatments.
Is this without a subwoofer?
And I'm surprised that the other speakers follow the first ones so nicely???I would like to see separate graphs, I don't get it...

 

[waynel]

The graph is very good, one of the better ones I've seen without major room treatments.
Is this without a subwoofer?
And I'm surprised that the other speakers follow the first ones so nicely???I would like to see separate graphs, I don't get it...

The scale on this graph is much more zoomed out than typical making it appear flatter.

Share your in-room measurements?

Would it be useful to have a forum thread where we can gather people's in-room frequency response measurements and discuss them? Those who did something to improve their sound based on measurements might also describe what they did and show the results. I think this could be quite interesting...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[khaliss]

The graph is very good, one of the better ones I've seen without major room treatments.
Is this without a subwoofer?
And I'm surprised that the other speakers follow the first ones so nicely???I would like to see separate graphs, I don't get it...

the 3 LFE subs you see in my setup diagram are in play with the latest graphs you are seeing on this thread today. They are reproducing sub-bass between 15-40hz (as set on the Marantz AVR speaker configuration), anything above 40Hz are being reproduced by the quad front speakers, and the supplemental Energy S10 sub you see on the setup diagram (which has a phase dial knob), I spent a couple of hours "tuning" that sub to work nicely and in sync with my electrostatic speakers a few weeks ago. REW really makes it somewhat easy to tune-up speakers & subs to align them with one another, though it's still a painstaking process of trial & error... I'm just glad I got this free resource. I remember back in the day when I only had to depend on Audyssey to do room correction, I have no idea how it's actually doing it... back then it already sounded good enough to my ears... but now with REW, everything is so much better!

 

[CtheArgie]

the 3 LFE subs you see in my setup diagram are in play with the latest graphs you are seeing on this thread today. They are reproducing sub-bass between 15-40hz (as set on the Marantz AVR speaker configuration), anything above 40Hz are being reproduced by the quad front speakers, and the supplemental Energy S10 sub you see on the setup diagram (which has a phase dial knob), I spent a couple of hours "tuning" that sub to work nicely and in sync with my electrostatic speakers a few weeks ago. REW really makes it somewhat easy to tune-up speakers & subs to align them with one another, though it's still a painstaking process of trial & error... I'm just glad I got this free resource. I remember back in the day when I only had to depend on Audyssey to do room correction, I have no idea how it's actually doing it... back then it already sounded good enough to my ears... but now with REW, everything is so much better!

The important thing, the one issue that matters, is that you have a nice bike.

 

[khaliss]

here are the response graphs for my 3 LFE subs (15-250hz), without the front speakers:

VAR:

PsychoAcoustic:

 

[khaliss]

The important thing, the one issue that matters, is that you have a nice bike.

haha we can talk about bikes on another forum! But yeah, that is my other hobby (aside from PC/gaming, SimRacing, & HiFi)

 

[Chrispy]

haha we can talk about bikes on another forum! But yeah, that is my other hobby (aside from PC/gaming, SimRacing, & HiFi)

LOL yeah bikes! N+1! There is a bike thread here on ASR if you're not already in it https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/show-us-your-bicycles.28199/

gotcha... alright, I'm really just someone who likes to listen to music, watch movies, and enjoy a good audio system (at least to my ears). So, I'm just posting my setup here with some measurements, share my experience, try to get feedback from the community, & hope to learn something new

That's all there is to it, if you or anyone else got something constructive to say (or critic), that's welcome of course. My point is measurements don't lie, correct? So the question here is with the graphs... if you were to choose, which one would it be?

Yeah that describes a lot of us I think. Audiophile as a term I think has just been abused by the high-end crowd. I wouldn't try and judge just on the graph, don't know enough about how you measured to start let alone a single graph. Looks okay either way, but I'd rather see more low spl at the low end, and probably a bit less at the upper end. Electrostatics do have challenges out of the sweet spot, tho.

 

[khaliss]

LOL yeah bikes! N+1! There is a bike thread here on ASR if you're not already in it https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/show-us-your-bicycles.28199/


Yeah that describes a lot of us I think. Audiophile as a term I think has just been abused by the high-end crowd. I wouldn't try and judge just on the graph, don't know enough about how you measured to start let alone a single graph. Looks okay either way, but I'd rather see more low spl at the low end, and probably a bit less at the upper end. Electrostatics do have challenges out of the sweet spot, tho.

haha here's a couple more bikes on the left side of the room... and a virtual bike trainer setup (for Zwift). This pic was taken 2 months ago when I just started setting it up as a "listening room" (aside from being an exercise room, sim racing room, storage room, bike room)... it looks a little less cluttered now, but yeah, it's my little "man cave" LOL. The desktop PC you see there doubles as my virtual bike trainer PC and also used for REW/Tidal Streaming/YoutubeMusic, etc). The SimRig has also its own dedicated PC that can power the 4K display & 3 side monitors. Yep, I'm a "hobbyist" LMAO

 

[khaliss]

updated setup diagram with the Topping E70 Velvet I just got last night, it sounded pretty darn good, definitely an upgrade over the DS600! =D

 

[khaliss]

The scale on this graph is much more zoomed out than typical making it appear flatter.

Share your in-room measurements?

Would it be useful to have a forum thread where we can gather people's in-room frequency response measurements and discuss them? Those who did something to improve their sound based on measurements might also describe what they did and show the results. I think this could be quite interesting...

www.audiosciencereview.com

thanks, I'm seeing a whole lot of graphs from the thread. Think my REW just defaults to that view and I didn't bother with the zoom function for the graph screen capture. But as a viewer, can't you just use your own image zoom function to get a closer look of the graph?

 

[Chrispy]

thanks, I'm seeing a whole lot of graphs from the thread. Think my REW just defaults to that view and I didn't bother with the zoom function for the graph screen capture. But as a viewer, can't you just use your own image zoom function to get a closer look of the graph?

There are some general guidelines for the graph parameters many expect....don't know 'em by heart tho.