Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by 3ll3d00d

  1. 26 minutes ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    I may be the only one trying to run beqdesigner on linux, so it's like you did this for me, and I feel obliged to test it. I will see if I get the motivation to give it another try, requires some effort to upgrade to the right version of everything, including the right python version.

    I will report back when I have tried it, and thanks.

    this is built with pyinstaller so it should just mean download it and run it, nothing else required at all (except for the only known external dependency, i.e. libsndfile)

    all my linux boxes are configured the same way though so hard for me to tell if it works in other situations, could spin up a VM I guess...

  2. 52 minutes ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    There is no dsp available on the computer. But that is possible to fix, this is a linux machine running ubuntu and kodi, it would be difficult to implement at the time it was built, but there may be options available now.

    I haven't tried it myself but https://github.com/bmc0/dsp/wiki/System-Wide-DSP-Guide gives an example of how to use LADSPA for system wide dsp. It looks like there is a script for converting REW filters into a format LADSPA can use too so that might make it quite easy. Another (not free) option would be jriver as their linux build now has video support.

  3. There seems to be some confusion about what the app actually is at this point in time so let me clarify.

    It's an interactive *per channel* minimum phase filter designer with the tools required to quickly and easily work with either mono bass managed tracks or multichannel tracks, i.e. designing pre or post BM BEQ filters.

    Interactive means it must be quick hence the filter view is based on the transfer functions. Obviously this wouldn't work if we were trying to combine channels but we're not (except when extracting the source track which is pre filter) so this is fine. 

    A post filter clipping check is something I am aware of and had logged it at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/issues/19 a while ago. This isn't hard to implement (both sox and ffmpeg can apply biquads) so it's just a question of time and desire to implement the feature. One could also implement this in python using scipy or there are other python libs (with an underlying C impl, e.g. http://ajaxsoundstudio.com/pyodoc/) that could also be used if scipy is too slow. Having said that I would have thought that would be something that happens relatively infrequently as a final check so working with existing cli tools seems fine to me and would be quick and easy to implement.

    @Kvalsvoll the bit I don't get is why you want to remux that back into the original track. If you're playing an mkv then you're already on a computer that can do the filtering in real time so why would you want to alter the source itself? 

    • Like 1
  4. 6 hours ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    Still unable to Add signal, but that is not really necessary now.

    I don't know what this could be, you can go to Help > Show Logs (or press Ctrl+L), put it in debug and then repeat the activity to see if that tells you anything else


    6 hours ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    Some cosmetics - graph display gets corrupted by legend, too few colors on graph signals.

    I'm not sure what to do about the colour scheme, I've used the speclab style so far simply because it is what people are familiar with but this doesn't work for many signals (not enough shades and they're too close together). 

    Note the controls in the bottom right of the main window let you turn the legend off if you prefer and choose which signals and/or filters are actually displayed.


    6 hours ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    Functionality - nest step could be to implement signal processing to apply the filters to the sound track. Then re-mux the beq filtered back into the .mkv.

    Interesting idea, noted in https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/issues/38

  5. 4 hours ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    Seems to work now, but I do not see the individual 8 signals

    if you uncheck the "mix to mono" checkbox and click extract then once it finishes, the button should change to "Create Signals" and the field at the bottom will be enabled. Put something in here and click "create signals".


    It should then automatically close the dialog and add each channel as a separate signal using the channel names (taken from https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/AudioChannelManipulation#Layouts)


    If this doesn't happen then feel free to log something with appropriate steps to reproduce/pics/supporting files over at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/issues

    similarly if you think of any interesting features then do also feel free to suggest them, I'll probably work on this for a little while longer at least.

    • Like 1
  6. There's a new release up at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/releases/tag/0.0.2-beta.3 which should be sufficient for BEQ pre BM in that it can extract multichannel wavs and link multiple signals together against the same filter. This means you can do something like 

    * extract an 8 channel wav from a 7.1 film

    * load all 8 signals in BEQ (they will be named xyz_FL xyz_FR and so on after the channel layout)

    * link FL, FR, FC together under 1 filter, LFE on another and the surrounds on another

    * tweak each filter independently

    * save the result to a shareable (gzipped json) format that anyone else can load

    * save pngs and/or graph the difference between signals

    This should work on linux without the hack above as I removed the offending library. I haven't had a chance to test this yet though.

    • Like 1
  7. 40 minutes ago, Kvalsvoll said:

    Does not run on linux - on my system, for now. Which means there is some work to get it up and running, perhaps I will look into it later. Because the idea of this app is great, it can actually end up as a completely automated bass-eq for any movie at click of a button.

    git clone git@github.com:3ll3d00d/beqdesigner.git
    cd beqdesigner
    git checkout 0.0.2-beta.2
    python3 -m venv beq
    . beq/bin/activate
    pip install numpy colorcet scipy qtpy qtawesome pyqt5 matplotlib ffmpeg-python soundfile resampy
    cd src/main/python
    # you also need ffmpeg and libsndfile1 installed, e.g.
    sudo apt install ffmpeg libsndfile1 

    then open mpl.py in a text editor and change the following

    for k, v in cc.cm_n.items():
    for k, v in cc.cm.items():

    (this is due to some lib having an older version in pypi vs conda, it is fixed in next release)


    python3 app.py

    and you should find it fires up

    I'll get round to packaging it properly for linux soon enough

    next release will properly support pre BM BEQ btw, will publish that tomorrow hopefully

    I run Debian Testing here and it seems ok, haven't tested it extensively though so let me know if problems, will get round to testing it properly on linux at some point. The same approach has also been used on the mac too btw.

    • Like 3
  8. 28 minutes ago, maxmercy said:

    That looks like a terrific tool, can potentially save many steps in my BEQ process.  I will have to check it out.  Individual channels can have individual corrections?


    atm there is one filter which is applied to all loaded signals, extending this so you can map different filters to different signals (channels) is high on the list of things to do. It needs to come after being able to load/save filter sets & some tweaking to the way graphs are created though.

    • Like 1
  9. FWIW I decided to knock up an little ui to make experimenting with BEQ easier (so it can extract audio using ffmpeg & show the results of adding assorted filters, comparing tracks) hence it removes the need to faff around with speclab). An early release (windows only atm as I'm away from my linux boxes) is available at https://github.com/3ll3d00d/beqdesigner/releases/tag/0.0.1-alpha.2

    Here's a pick to illustrate https://imgur.com/a/KgfaxOJ

    This is still a fairly early build (and the exe is a bit massive) but it seems to be usable so thought I'd share it. The readme at github has some of the things left to do and some bugs. One thing not mentioned there is being able to apply different filter sets to different signals. 

    EDIT: I replaced the exe with something that should display errors if you start it from a console (as someone on avs reported it didn't work for them)

    EDIT2: possible workaround in https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2995212-bass-eq-fil-turd-movies.html#post56692822

    • Like 3
  10. 4 hours ago, maxmercy said:

    Can anyone contact the JRiver developers to ensure that the Q=Slope?  Using slope values for Q would result in a VERY different correction.  If there is a difference, I'll edit the BEQ post above to include both Q and Slope values.


    I have raised this on a few occasions. There was some interest shown at the start of the current release cycle in doing some work on their DSP studio but no sign of action so far (and they usually add features tbh rather than fix things like this)

  11. Yes that is part of the audiophile style marketing they use. You will also find not many measurements are available to verify what it is actually doing and how well it performs. FWIW I think https://patents.google.com/patent/US8094826?oq=8094826 is their patent, it seems pretty generic to me though.

    To be fair I have listened to their high end kit and it is good so there some substance there, it isn't just audiophile blather.



  12. finally received the amp so should be able to fire this up properly soon


    I did test the initial XO and I think the woofer filter hasn't come out quite right, some details in http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/292379-syns-post5471697.html

    need to get time to investigate that but frankly it's been too hot in London recently to consider doing anything except idly watching the World Cup while drinking cold beer :)

  13. I did give it a sweep through dats and used the rub and buzz test, seems ok. Will hook it up to an amp soon to make sure.

    There are two different uses here. I have built one to try out the smallsyns so I can decide whether to build 3 more to use in my cinema setup. This one will be used by a local choir for their rehearsals so will have much more limited output requirements. I could probably have got away without the woofer for this one  but I thought it would be handy for trialling the speaker as I intend to use it. This means a woofer happy in a pretty small box (~1ft3), the fp looks good for that.

    The AE will replace the woofers in my current 3 way LCR regardless of whether I build the smallsyns. These will be in bigger boxes (maybe 2.5ft3) and need markedly more output capability. The AE were the best ones I modelled for this job.

  14. FWIW I ended up ordering 3 TD12X on the 9th May and they were shipped on the 25th, they landed in the UK just now apparently so should be with me in the next day or two.

    I also have a faitalpro 12rs1066 to go in the initial (smaller) woofer, seems like a fairly beefy little thing


    surround seems rather enormous

    I chose this on the grounds it is comfortable in a pretty tiny box and aimed for a tune that in the high 30s, result was a 37Hz tune 



    it's going in this box (NB: the pole was just to check the fit, not actually going to deploy like this)


    powered by a hypex fusion plate amp crossing to the small syns at ~150Hz

    • Like 2
  15. That was the weight it took to reduce Fs by about 25% which is (as far as I recall) approximately what you are aiming for. I don't believe 10-20÷ of mms is a target I have ever seen mentioned either, that seems much lower than I recall being used. (Edit: the "testing loudspeakers" book advises to start with 60% of cone mass which is about 100g, not much less than the actual weight used)

    I am aware of the assorted issues around applying the delta mass method though, as commented in that thread, the resulting basic params are not wildly out of spec.

  16. IIRC some people have used https://dbxpro.com/en/products/driverack-venu360 with high sensitivity (horn) based designs without noise issues so that might be one choice. If you intend to use a PC for the DSP then interfaces from the likes of motu, RME, lynx should do the job.

    re headroom, it depends what you take as the baseline so it's hard to say. Clean output at 20dB peaks above average level is probably a not unreasonable figure. I would be inclined to say that the ability to integrate the subs with the mains will be more important than headroom though obviously you really want both. 

  • Create New...