Share your in-room measurements?

[IamJF]

I’ve done this before with my sub which looks really good but for the first time I tried my speakers.
Red=left
Green=right
Blue=center

What in the world is going on after 8K?
Sub off but speakers going to 20hz?
Did I do something wrong?
View attachment 353582

Could be the mic - what microphone did you use?

 

[IamJF]

This is my measurements with ports plugged and unplugged , still no major difference. Im a little suprised that port only adds 2,5 db below 100 hz. By the way do you think that discrepancies in 500-1000 hz may be caused by port already resonating ?
View attachment 353209

This is not what a proper working port design should do. Can you share more details about your speaker, maybe a picture of the ports?
There can be (and most of the time is) disturbance at higher frequencies through the ports - even when this looks like a lot.

 

[Ghost2231]

Could be the mic - what microphone did you use?

UMIK-1 but I’ve found something interesting, several other speakers have the exact same thing I do including the Goldenear triton one R (shown below in a commercial speaker review)
It’s something to do with the metal tweeters. Still researching what if anything to do about it

 

[GaryY]

UMIK-1 but I’ve found something interesting, several other speakers have the exact same thing I do including the Goldenear triton one R (shown below in a commercial speaker review)
It’s something to do with the metal tweeters. Still researching what if anything to do about it
View attachment 354046

There are 2 calibration files for UMIK. ??????.txt is when pointing speakers and ????????_90deg.txt is when pointing ceiling. When I tested using these cal files the other way around, response from 10k became abnormal. (Just in case you are not using the correct cal file.)

 

[Ghost2231]

There are 2 calibration files for UMIK. ??????.txt is when pointing speakers and ????????_90deg.txt is when pointing ceiling. When I tested using these cal files the other way around, response from 10k became abnormal. (Just in case you are not using the correct cal file.)

I will double check on the next measurements, tomorrow if I have time, I wanted to try a couple more things

 

[GaryY]

I will double check on the next measurements, tomorrow if I have time, I wanted to try a couple more things

Yes....something like this.

 

[er|κzvio1in]

An older measurement. Don't mind the values at the y axis, the dB values were offset after reconnecting the UMIK-1 while working in REW. 1/12th smoothing for readability.

Blue is front tower speakers without anything. Orange is with a subwoofer. Red is an RTA/MMM measurement after time alignment and PEQ. The room is the ground floor of a modern European "concrete bunker" style house with massive resonances 11 X 5.5 X 3.6. The listening position is too close to the center of the width of the room which causes the drop of below 30 hz.

 

[er|κzvio1in]

In room response comparing two speakers with var smoothing applied. The Quadrals are floorstanders, and the Triangles are bookshelves. For the measurement, the triangle was placed on top of the Quadral in order to keep the room influence similar. The Quadral has more boundary gain from the floor and sounds a little bit brighter. But I don't have golden ears so both speakers sound pretty similar and good to me. Bass will be covered by sub woofers in a 2.2 configuration.

 

[IamJF]

UMIK-1 but I’ve found something interesting, several other speakers have the exact same thing I do including the Goldenear triton one R (shown below in a commercial speaker review)
It’s something to do with the metal tweeters. Still researching what if anything to do about it
View attachment 354046

Metal tweeters have a strong membrane resonance - but at 16kHz ... I already dislike the ones with 22/23kHz resonance ...

 

[Ghost2231]

Metal tweeters have a strong membrane resonance - but at 16kHz ... I already dislike the ones with 22/23kHz resonance ...

I will say the speakers sound incredible, with the high end being the highlight. I wonder if it’s the mic that pics it up differently than the ear.

 

[IamJF]

I would say it's very likely there is an error with the measurement ;-)
Otherwise ... all speakers I know with a peak up there sound interesting - for 10 minutes.

 

[extrachange]

Just measured my 2.1 setup, consists of two Kali IN-8 v2 and one cheap sub, measured on a Sonarworks mic.
I did the measurement late night so sorry for the low SPL, but you get the idea....
The blue graph is the corrected one, also standing waves are strong here, not as pretty as shown in FR .

 

[ZolaIII]

@extrachange slope the highs down and use equal loudness compensation. It appears you did lows good for reference calibration point (86 dB).

 

[Deleted member 58670]

Some suggestions - I would have done something with the peak below 500 and 600 Hz. And as mentioned by @ZolaIII, slope down the highs and up the lows, like shown below.

 

[ZolaIII]

Some suggestions - I would have done something with the peak below 500 and 600 Hz. And as mentioned by @ZolaIII, slope down the highs and up the lows, like shown below.

View attachment 356077

I don't know what he uses from equipment and dose it have ISO 226 2003 implemented if he does he just need to adjust max SPL to 86 dB stereo in 550~1000 Hz range and enable it and of course slope highs down. If he doesn't he needs to do cuple pressets to equal loudness compensation to desired typical listening levels (low background, late night, focused loud and full [which this already is]).

 

[feitaishi]

Just measured my 2.1 setup, consists of two Kali IN-8 v2 and one cheap sub, measured on a Sonarworks mic.
I did the measurement late night so sorry for the low SPL, but you get the idea....
The blue graph is the corrected one, also standing waves are strong here, not as pretty as shown in FR .
View attachment 356062View attachment 356063

Is that a comb filter in the 3k+ range?

 

[extrachange]

Some suggestions - I would have done something with the peak below 500 and 600 Hz. And as mentioned by @ZolaIII, slope down the highs and up the lows, like shown below.

View attachment 356077

Thanks! I think I might better learn some measurement standards and do another one later.

 

[extrachange]

d dose it have ISO 226 2003

Is that a comb filter in the 3k+ range?

I think it's caused by reflections from desk, not very audible. Those dips and peaks would go away if I move my mic closer, so I'm not much concerned.

 

[ZolaIII]

I think it's caused by reflections from desk, not very audible. Those dips and peaks would go away if I move my mic closer, so I'm not much concerned.

Like this:

 

[er|κzvio1in]

Measurements done last weekend during setting up my 2.2 system, 1/12th smoothing for readability. Pink is an RTA around the LP. Blue and green are two sweeps pretty close together at the LP.

After these measurements I added 2 additional PEQs to bring down the bass peak at 40 hz and the elevation between 50-70. Speakers are high passed at 80 hz 24 dB/oct, rear ports are not plugged. Subwoofers are low passed at 100 hz 24 dB/oct. Time alignment was done based on OCR's method using REW's alignment tool.

There's some serious SBIR going on between 120-400. The speakers are located partially inside a wall shelf cabinet so there's a lot going on acoustically.

After these measurements, I've added 5.5" absorbers behind the speakers to try to reduce SBIR. According to Amir's measurement of the Titus' bigger brother there's rearward sound pressure up to 400 hz -6dB and the panels should be effective to below 200 hz.

There's also a quite steep 1.5 dB/downward slope, but that might be because they're 90 degree measurements at the LP so I am going to check that with the mic pointed at each speaker. The sound is definitely warm, partly because I applied a Harman curve for moderate listening volumes as standard and because the Titus are designed like that. The sharp drop off to 20 hz is because of the listening position that's too much at the center of the room, but there's not much to do about that for aesthetic reasons.

SBIR calculation of the right speaker which is closer to the side wall and same other distances as the left speaker:

Calculated performance of the panel behind the speaker:

Picture of the right speaker:

Anechoic measurement of the speaker: