bennybbbx
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Applying a high pass filter so that the roll-off in the bass is equal between the two (and disregarding the Eris's bass EQ completely) might make things more easy to visually compare.
View attachment 115657
Filtered Full step response view shows the Kali as slighty "slower"
View attachment 115658
Filtered Impulse response view indicates that the Kali has a somewhat inferior transient response
View attachment 115659
Filtered Wavelet spectrogram view is the clearest indicator of which woofer has the better transient response
View attachment 115660
1/3 resolution (favoring time resolution a bit more), 25dB scale
Can't say this is the absolute best (or even valid) way to do the transient response comparison, but additional HP pre-filtering (idea I got from Dave Gunness) does seem to make the process of visual analysis much easier.
intresting result but, i think change the measure wav result with EQ is wrong, when there need set EQ for speaker then only when measure. because when i measure the Eris with Eq or without EQ the step response is near same. need 1 ms to reach 0. here is the wav of the measure without EQ
So i think it is not a good idea to get correct values to modify with EQ the measured impulse. because the speaker membran reaction depend on input signal. if a slow wobbling membrane measure result is high pass filter the slow wobbling is reduce. you can see in my attached noeq wav that the eris need 1 ms with lower bass as kali or more bass as kali, and never reach the values you show in your diagram. here are all measure diagram eris with or without EQ
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...oes-it-really-matter.1999/page-11#post-686831
Edit: i have attach noeq and eq measure. this measures are with same microphone position
Attachments
Last edited: