Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. The biggest advantages for multiple subs arise when the different subs have overlapping frequency response. However, the full benefits can only be realized when the different subs have similar output capability. The advantages in this case are: increased output over one sub alone, and smoother in-room response. When the two subs are mismatched in output capability, then you can still achieve smoother in-room response but only by substantially wasting the capability of the stronger subs. That's because the smoother response requires the different subs to be run at approximately the same level, and the weaker sub will reach its limits at much lower level than the strong sub. There are some minor benefits to your usage of different subs for different ranges. For one, the different subs can be optimized to play their respective ranges. For example, the horn is very good above 40 Hz, and you can get away with building deep bass subs using drivers that don't do mid-bass well. You also will gain headroom and see less distortion when reproducing wide-band sub-bass signals. However, as with multiple subs handling an overlapping range of frequencies, the benefits are greatest when the output capability of the subs handling each range is approximately matched. Though how they should be matched depends a bit on the content you play and on room gain effects. For example a lot of music doesn't extend much below 40 Hz, so the horn may be able to handle that very well on its own and reach quite high levels. For home theater, however, a lot more bass extends into the 30s, 20s, or lower. It'll likely take a lot of output to keep up with the horn. Of course, that may not be a big deal if you don't ever push the levels that high. On another note, integrating subs of different types can be very tricky. You will want to do a lot of measurements and experiment a lot with different distance and possibly EQ settings to get the smoothest integrated response.
  3. Yeah, manual is best. IF you are going to EQ the LaScala by hand, that's still more reason to not use Audyssey because it will basically undo much of your work. And yes, there is quite a learning curve for doing it manually, but I'd argue it's well worth it. IMO, the performance of good equipment is held back considerably without good configuration. The speaker stand may be OK for sub measurement, provided it holds the mic well in an upright position. However, the tripod with boom arm is best because anything near the mic influences the measurement, especially with high frequencies. In the crossover region, you have two transducers in different locations producing sound. If the sound from each source arrives at different times, then there will be frequency-dependent phase shift between them. The phase shift will cause them to not combine coherently at all frequencies. You don't need to do a full-range sweep, but your sweep should cover at least 1 to 1.5 octaves above and below the crossover point. It's helpful to label each sweep with the distance and/or crossover point you used and view them all together to compare.
  4. Pushing a horn: how to measure (with an UMIK1).

    Will probably end up doing that for the moment, and get into some more precise methods after my exams. What do you recommend I do? reset everything and do it all manually? I'm definitely up for that, but might need some experience first with some more straight forward projects. EQing my Klipsch LaScala tomorrow (with help from a Klipsch forum member). I don't have a tripod, but I do have a speaker stand that is unused and can easily function as a tripod (it has adjustable height). Could you maybe explain why time delay will result in a flatter response? Are you talking about a full range sweep (where the delayed sub frequencies will arrive at the same time as the main speakers higher frequencies?)
  5. Today
  6. I have experience with Audyssey, and while one of its key features is automatic setup of delays, my experience is that this function performs very poorly. When using Audyssey, I almost always achieved better results by manually adjusting the distances from what Audyssey gave. I also do not like how Audyssey re-shapes frequency response. It aims for a flat in-room target, which leads to a poor tonal balance including thin sound and weak bass. Setting distance for the sub optimally can be a bit tricky, but measurements are your friend. Do you have a good tripod for the measurement mic? I strongly recommend investing in one. Setup the tripod and mic at ear-level at the MLP and then run a series of sweeps, varying the sub delay/distance around 1 ms with each sweep. Look for the delay that gives you the smoothest frequency response around the crossover frequency that you choose. Once you've found the best distance, you can also try to incrementally adjust the crossover for an even smoother response. Note that the optimal delay may also vary depending on the crossover.
  7. Sound card and measurement mic upgrade

    Reversed polarity is pretty common with a variety of electronic devices and is easy to fix in measurements. My Motu 16A reverses polarity. I don't think it's a big deal, and I'm not aware of any empirical evidence that polarity inversion is audible at all, as long the polarity is consistent for all output transducers. The exception would be for crossovers that are designed to be inverted. Though this does highlight a more general problem when using systems with speakers of different types, even if they are from the same product line. The issue is not really timbre matching but rather phase matching. When the crossovers are not identical, there will be phase mismatch over at least some of the range, and this definitely is audible. I have discovered that multiple speaker integration in a system with biquad EQ capability can be improved by using all-pass filters.
  8. Pushing a horn: how to measure (with an UMIK1).

    Good call! Did not think about that (I doubt they are the same so it's good you mention it).
  9. Pushing a horn: how to measure (with an UMIK1).

    Also of note, you must ensure that the settings in Windows ( I assume you are using Windows, not Mac or Linux ) match those set in REW ( 2 channel, 44.1 khz ) as these can be set differently, and your results can be wonky. Every time I use REW, I have to change the settings for Windows under the sound device.
  10. Pushing a horn: how to measure (with an UMIK1).

    Good question, with my duplex sound card, I use a loopback cable, in essence, returning the output of the sound card to the input. The software calculates the round trip latency and deducts that from the signal arriving from the microphone input, thus giving you your delay measurement. On one channel, the microphone is connected, on the other, the loopback cable. Alternately, REW can use a high frequency device to calculate delay. This requires the sweep to be set full range, and it will listen for the high frequency chirp before the measurement. ( Typically only used for full range loudspeakers ) Yes your Marantz has time delay functionality. I am not familiar with Audessey products, and if utilizing it will give you an appropriate delay. Someone more familiar may be able to help you out in this regard. Since the UMIK-1 is a USB device with no other input, you could add a second sound card with just a loop back cable in order to have REW calculate the time delay. In the drop down menus in REW, you have the option of telling the software what inputs and outputs you would like to use. Hope that helps you.
  11. Pushing a horn: how to measure (with an UMIK1).

    Yeah, I do plan on using it in bigger situations (festival etc), but not with this kind of EQ. This is only for moderate levels, and a temporary situation too till I get my sub 35hz subs. Ok, will try that ! Doesnt the marantz have time delay functions? Also, more importantly. How do I measure the time delay in REW?
  12. Sound card and measurement mic upgrade

    I have done some more research on sound cards, and came up with some interesting information. The Behringer UCA-202 has reversed polarity on both the input and outputs, the only one in the test to exhibit this phenomenon, according to this website: http://www.daqarta.com/dw_gguu.htm Polarity: The Polarity tests were done using a separate scope. The Generator was set to produce a biphasic Pulse waveform, such that the positive phase preceded the negative phase, and there was a dwell time at zero before the next pulse. The output had normal polarity if the positive phase appeared first on the scope. A loopback cable was then used to feed the output back to the input, and if the Input waveform seen by Daqarta also showed the positive phase first, the input likewise had normal polarity. This was the case with all devices except the Behringer UCA202, which inverted both the output and input (which means that it could not have been detected with a loopback alone). Read this thread on DIY audio, might have second thoughts on the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 sound card. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/equipment-and-tools/301166-focusrite-scarlett-2i2-2nd-gen-measurements-whats.html This thread has me looking at another Behringer: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/equipment-and-tools/312454-usb-audio-interface-measurement.html
  13. Pushing a horn: how to measure (with an UMIK1).

    Typically, horns with short path lengths are used in multiples, to extend the low frequency capability, when tightly packed. This appears to be a front loaded horn, which below the corner where the horn is effective, is still an 18" woofer in a small sealed box, so you can apply a modest bit of eq to boost the bottom end, but will have to keep in mind the short throw of the driver. I would only recommend doing so in a domestic environment like yours, not in a dance club or other pro use. With REW, you can play a sweep through the subwoofer from say 25 hz to 200 hz, and look at the response. I am not familiar with the UMIK-1 mic and interface, other than having read of the possibility of clipping the signal with high sound pressure level. This is dependent on the dip switch settings inside the mic on the preamp board. http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/1797489-massively-clipped-umik-1-a.html People have received the UMIK-1 with different dip switch settings, both 12 db and 18 db. If you do not have a sound pressure level meter, you could likely use an application with a smartphone to set the level to calibrate the level with pink noise in REW before making a sweep. Start by measuring the time delay of the subwoofer, you will need that to tell the Marantz to delay all other channels with respect to the bass horn.
  14. Hey I'm planning on using different types of subs together: the horn loaded sub I already have (from 35-80hz) and a different sub for below. When people say there is a mayor advantage in using 2 subs, does this also counts when doing it like I do? Or would I need 2 of each to get the true advantage? Or could I place 2 of them in the front, and 2 to the sides? Or would you need better pics to know that? I can also use measuring gear to test if this is possible.
  15. I recently finished building my horn-loaded cab (see pics below, dont mention all the dust and the weird positioning for now). I also got my UMIK-1 in the mail (what a great day). The builder of the horn tells me it only goes down to 30hz when pushed with EQ, and a decent mic to test. But how do I do this? I have a DCX2496 to do the equalising (or my Audyssey software in my Marantz SR7011 if that suffices). How do I know, beyond what I can hear, if I'm pushing it too low? I'm only listening at very moderate levels (for now) so 80-90db goal for now. I'm using REW for measuring, and I see it has a "subwoofer" EQ option. Is there maybe something better? And if not, how do I use this to get best results? Also, what tests could I do with this kind of gear to get the best sound from this sub? Can I use it to measure best positioning etc?
  16. I can agree with a lot of this. I enjoyed the movie a lot, despite it being a narrative train-wreck. I really appreciate the story they were trying to tell, but they did a very poor telling of it. I think there was 30-40 minutes (or maybe even more) of footage closer to the beginning that should have hit the editing floor. In its place, they should have devoted a lot more time to developing the characters. Instead, the plot felt very forced with key character developments being implied "after the fact". The scripting was also sub-par with many lines and much of the comic relief being awkward and out-of-character. I'm really surprised now to see critics liking it so much. My opinions on movies usually side with the critics but not this time. Still, it was definitely worth watching, and I will watch it and enjoy it again, but I cannot call this a good movie for the reasons stated above. It is a shame because it could have been so much more. I hope this director does not come back to the franchise As for the sound, I agree that it seemed to have a lot in common with the previous movies. I didn't get the impression that 30 Hz was emphasized, but it's hard to say for sure without a good reference. The subs in the cinema I went to were decent and delivered balanced LFE with a fair bit of chest sensation and even some signs of extension into the 20s. Other than that, the tonal balance of the presentation was definitely mediocre. The speakers themselves seemed to be nice and smooth. I think they were fairly new model JBLs. The surrounds, which were visible, had nicely contoured waveguides matched to what looked like 10" woofers. The sound was quite thin overall, especially in the 250-500 Hz octave, and it seemed to emphasize 1.5-2kHz a bit too much while also sounding too rolled off at the top. That's completely consistent with what I'd expect in an X-curve calibrated cinema, and I reckon the re-recording mixers applied EQ quite sparingly on the dub-stage. Toward the end of the movie where things got a tad louder, the ~1.5-2k emphasis was slightly fatiguing. Oddly enough, the surrounds sounded significantly better, which made me glad that they got used a lot. I think they may have mixed the score a lot more into the surrounds this time than in TFA. The funny thing is that my wife and my sister and her husband could easily tell the inferior tonal balance as well. We all watched TFA on my system last Sunday. I'm real stoked to get this one home and hear it with some BEQ. I'm sure the sound will really come alive then. I have a feeling that it will have better bass than TFA did. I dunno if it will compete with Rogue One + BEQ though. That one was really awesome with the stupid 30 Hz hump fixed.
  17. Yesterday
  18. Good "bass tester" for Xbox-360

    Battlefield Bad Company 2 was pretty good. The first Dead Space had great sound.
  19. Good "bass tester" for Xbox-360

    Thanks for the suggestions! I definetely have a copy of the original Battlefront laying around somewhere. Was one of my favorites! Probably have a friend with halo too. Awesome
  20. Good "bass tester" for Xbox-360

    The original HALO had some great punch, especially for the plasma grenades. But for rumble, the original Star Wars: Battlefront (Xbox version) has a significant amount of LFE, especially if you are able to trip up a walker on Hoth. The XBox360 startup screen also has some ~20Hz content JSS
  21. Does anyone have a recommendation to try out the bass of my system with a Xbox360 game? I already have a few COD games I will try out, but as those games are pretty cheap (to find second hand) I was maybe wondering if there are games that really excel in the low end. A simple enjoyable shooter is preferred, but I'm not a fanboy with specific tastes, so open to all suggestions.
  22. Just got home from a screening of The Last Jedi. A favorite reviewer of mine says this is a movie of incredible 'moments' tied together by underwhelming material, and I agree. The sound mix was certainly aggressive though. It's been a while since I've heard such active use of the surround speakers. Shit was flying everywhere. The bass was very, very similar to TFA and R1 but not quite as one dimensional as the latter. I'm guessing we'll eventually see the same 30Hz bump with some content below that. A handful of effects seemed to have a little extra depth to them but they were few and far between. I will say this movie has a very high ratio of stuff that blows up real good, including a couple of near apocalyptic infernos.
  23. You know, I have a 1000 projects going through my mind that I want to do. I just build my first flat pack, which gives me a good idea of how to get into building one myself. It was not a particularly complex one, but it was a horn loaded sub though. Which mean lots of corners, which had to be airtight. Made some mistakes, but it was a good experience as I now know how to fix them Pretty confident I can build any riser I want. Have also found a seller for my pair of Chorus II (Klipsch) for a crazy sum, which gives me the budget to upgrade the active crossover of my LaScalas (to a Xilica). More importantly, it might lift up the need to go for a cheaper sub than the UM18-22 (which is a great sub for the sealed riser, but also seems immensely good in a ported enclosure. By my calculations it could be tuned to 12hz in a 1000L enclosure which is ofcourse to big, but it could still go down to 15hz in a "reasonable" 494L). That way I could build both the ported and sealed and see how I like them, if I like both I can order another one. Or maybe another 3 Just took some measurements of my couch, and sad to say.. my main couch exists out of several different parts and doesn't really invite baffles that protrude into the couch. I could manage a 12" into the main seating place (which has a feet/leg extension thingy, not sure how to call it in English which makes it extremly dificult to fit something in), and a 15" into the "second" place. Those 2 places are the only ones that matter). I do however have found out that one of the side couches, which I could easily move into the sweet spot, could be what I need. I could stuff a box under it without having to rise it by more than 6cm. I would get a 125L enclosure, which is not very big though. It might just work.. It raises a question however: is it possible to let the sub protrude into the couch, with almost no place on each side? Like stuffing a 50cmx50cm enclosure into a 51cm x 58cm opening into my couch. The air moved by the sub would have almost nowhere to go, which kinda seems like a bad idea (although it can leave through the small 7 and 1cm cracks on the side + through the seating which is just a cushion). I'm only asking because it would be the only way to have an 18" sub build into one of my couches. EDIT: @Infrasonic , I think I overexplained myself a bit. I'm known to go one ramblings about everything, but when done in English about this kind of stuff I'm not beginning to guess how hard it is to understand what I'm actually trying to say. I'm over complicating things haha! Things are also changing all the time, so my mind is all over the place, trying things out and looking for ways to improve. Buuuut, maybe something to add to my big chunk text above here?
  24. Last week
  25. Thats a fact, after those are done I have a few weeks/months I can focus 100% on the platform. I'm having a few pairs (2 or maybe even 3) of LaScalas build, should give me that awesome midbass! Depends on how the future goes, but might even use a stack of those/ speaker. First my K-402 h If I use an inch, instead of 2, and place the woofers on top + maybe even get another couch/modify the one I have now (so I would have space between the ground/riser floor and the actual seatings) I might get away with a riser that only rises the couch by 2/3 foot(or less) when using an 18". Should be a lot more easy to place/convince the roommate off. It would also be ideal to use as a riser for a second couch when I want to convert the living into a full blown home-theatre for mass viewings.
  26. You will. Exams end eventually. Aww. Yep. Lots of surface area. Proper midbass reproduction. First-most, they are there for front/rear sub blending. Used for smoothing the response of the whole. At the time, there was no intention of a sub riser so in a way I thought they would be "nearfield" but I chose to take that road after every one else started putting their subs AT their seat. Like, 1" away. So I can't really call them nearfield these days cuz they are about 3-4ft away. The subriser is the nearfield sub.... now. It's not. Just a step up. Idk... about an inch or so behind the motor. Plenty of room around the drivers though. No. Not necessarily. You have the opportunity to actually choose your drivers. I had two on hand and made it work. My riser both fits into the room and is ideally sized.
  27. I didn't really calculate the amount of power /sub, as I read your AVS thread after posting this! But still lot of (absolute) power, maybe not relatively, but hey with a +db sensitivity you're good to go just put the finishing touches on my PA sub, so gonna be testing it tomorrow! It doesn't dig deep, but it does have a 105db sensitivity รถ It's a shame my exams are getting closer and I literally don't have any time to listen to it You might not believe me, but I've read your build few times now, and Ive never noticed those 18"'ers in the front lol, they are so black! Are those all 15"ers for your LCR? So 12x 15" and 8x 18"s, in the front? I think I love you. What was the purpose of the 2 rear subs? Just extra output? Or also a kind of NF experience? How much place did you leave behind the drivers? Or, how high is the riser from the floor up to the baffle? Doesn't seem to high! I'm guessing, if I want to pull this of I'll have to take the actual in room size of the riser as a priority, and the "ideal" enclosure as a second.
  28. Actually, the whole system is quite underpowered but that's okay because I make up a lot with the very high sensitivity. Having a subbass system that is >100dB sensitive means cool running amps too. There are seven subbass enclosures in my HT room. Six identical dual-opposed sealed enclosures. Four up front, two in rear. Each approx. 8cuft each. Four up front house the eight Stereo Integrity HT18's. The two in the rear house four Sound Splinter RLp18's. Then the riser with the last two SS RLp18's. The riser is very simple. Top and bottom are just some 5/8" or 3/4" plywood. I don't remember exactly. *laughs* Not even really high end stuff either but solid. The walls are made from 2x8's cut to the length I wanted for this size. There is a single 2x4 in the middle (running between the two drivers). The extra baffle pieces were added to accommodate the depth of the RLp driver. The riser is the only enclosure I've ever built that I didn't really "design". Just thought it up in my head and then simulated to "make sure". Certainly couldn't simulate how it was going to feel. Had to build it to really know for sure.
  29. Just went through your build on the AVS forum (again). Awesome stuff man! Those dual opposed subs are the ones in the front? Are those firing away from the listening position? It seems like you have a loooooot of power (and subs). And even you need to turn your riser subs down? Damnnn. PS on an architectural note, it looks your riser is shallower than I remembered.. how much depth do you have? Or to be more precise, how much place is there free behind your sub, and the floor? I was counting in 2 inches, but could that number be reduced?
  1. Load more activity
×