CREMA
Member
Extremely low frequency. MORE, MORE!
I want to finish reading the rest of the thread, but for now it seems like the conclusion is to just "give up" on EQ of the higher frequencies, at least for EQ systems that can't separate the direct sound from reflected sound...
You'll find a lot of opinions on the subject, much of which gets based on person preference and that's fine too.I apply correction full band. Sounds better to me that way. I am in a near field situation though so reflections are less dominant.
I am at a point where I think that there is just something inherently wrong by looking at smoothed curves. our ears don't average like that. in the speach recognition world they rather look at envelope curves. In my testing flatish envelopes on the unsmoothed graph result in smoothed graphs reminding of house curves. Im am pretty sure that the true answer is in that direction. with that beeing said, a true neutral response is not always wanted, but when you arive at flatish envelope you can than add a bass bosst f.e.
How do you preview and analyse the envelope ideally in something like REW?
My process is quite complicated atm, and I am still experimenting, but here is a graph for a 1 position correction (the fall after 17k is an error in convolution of the meassurement; it's not real):
Not a Curve but a flat neutral White Line. Compared to the Grey found frequency Curve it creates a level playing field and sounds amazing.
I guess if you are uncertain whether an average of multiple measurements is better, then there's nothing wrong with taking more than one approach -- comparing between the two (or more) to find out whichever works best for you in that regard.
Because of realy bad room acoustics. If i switch to bypass mode it will hurt your ears that bad.Why is the measured FR SPL offset above 200Hz so huge?
Because of realy bad room acoustics. If i switch to bypass mode it will hurt your ears that bad.
Dirac Live will leave the late reflections untouched as appropriate and the algorithm can accomplish that by taking advantage of the multiple measurements... those late reflections are late because they are bounced multiple times by the walls so that the response is position dependantIf we measure direct+reflected sound but want to correct only the direct sound, then isn't that an effort doomed to fail no matter what target curve is used? Doesn't this just mean that the advice to limit the EQ to low frequencies where we hear the summed direct+reflection sounds which is what we can actually measure and try to compensate for? And even if we do hear the high frequency reflections as some kind of distortion, it seems like EQ can't really help in that department anyway.
I want to finish reading the rest of the thread, but for now it seems like the conclusion is to just "give up" on EQ of the higher frequencies, at least for EQ systems that can't separate the direct sound from reflected sound...
Am I missing anything?
Simple linear phase parametric EQs using FIR convolution in blue trace
Looking at your graphs, I still find this difficult to interpret where the actual audible benefits of such micro corrections are
It's hard enough to ascertain with absolute certainty whether something sounds truly better afterwards using listening tests alone -- program material variances and one's general personal mood at the time can also influence one's opinion of the amount of adjustment needed even when only some very simple shelving type correction filters used in the bass and treble.
if you are uncertain whether an average of multiple measurements is better
the envelope method is probably undoable over a whole couch. and I never understood why you would do this. out of the sweet spot the sound is crap anyways. all you do is sacrificing the sound in the sweet spot for a small improvement outside of it and is still crap.
but sure multiples are still necessary if correcting for sweet spot only, but they will be much closer to each other
you can't AB improvement in sound. you have to listen to it for hours.
Is that 1db per octave?8dB slope for me.
View attachment 159961