I'm surprised anyone is still reading at this point.
I used it on streaming services like Pandora, that seem to have heavy dynamic compression. Like loud all the time. It restores some of the dynamic range of the original. Jazz, classical, some folk-rock seem to benefit the most. A lot of originals are not all that dynamic anyway.
Hard to find the perfect setting, takes some time a tweaking. Same if you try to use it on radio broadcasts. And of course there is regular, non-dynamic EQ on those streams too. Mostly bass-boost.
I never felt the need to use it on good recordings straight off CD.
I use it on all music, and it started out because I had done room EQ through the behringer with the mic, and then tried it based on REW analysis and its EQ. Then I removed EQ from phase minimum points. Then I started to manually adjust the EQ at the resonant modes of the room by ear.
Then I still wasn't happy and I started to just have fun with the dynamic EQ setting, and thats really what fixed everything.
For those interested , I had mentioned that music is recorded at volume, and unless you play it back at the same volume it may not sound right because of the dynamic relationships.
Here is a patent for a speaker with variable dynamic EQ with respect to play back volume.
Patent US5361381 - Dynamic equalizing of powered loudspeaker systems - Google Patents
Then I still wasn't happy and I started to just have fun with the dynamic EQ setting, and thats really what fixed everything.
For those interested , I had mentioned that music is recorded at volume, and unless you play it back at the same volume it may not sound right because of the dynamic relationships.
Here is a patent for a speaker with variable dynamic EQ with respect to play back volume.
Patent US5361381 - Dynamic equalizing of powered loudspeaker systems - Google Patents
Dynamic Compression
What "dynamic" behavior is he pointing to? The article discusses compression, but no solid state analog stages in audio gear from the past 3 decades, that I know of at least, compress enough to result in an audible difference. If they did, this non-linearity should be reflected in the measurements, no? Someone would have noticed this. Can someone comment on this portion of the article?article said:
I take it you value it as much as a piece of wood then? lol
it does have respected reviews.
Behringer's Ultimate Tone Control Ultra High-Precision Digital 24-Bit/96 kHz EQ/RTA Mastering Equalizer Review By A. Colin Flood
If you care about that sort of thing.
Some high end speaker companies sell their speakers with the DCX 2496 crossover which shares a lot in common with it.
I personally went from sonic frontiers line 3 and mark levinson to a behringer setup. The customization and ability to correct things outweighs the drawbacks. I have more engaging realistic sound now.
it does have respected reviews.
Behringer's Ultimate Tone Control Ultra High-Precision Digital 24-Bit/96 kHz EQ/RTA Mastering Equalizer Review By A. Colin Flood
If you care about that sort of thing.
Some high end speaker companies sell their speakers with the DCX 2496 crossover which shares a lot in common with it.
I personally went from sonic frontiers line 3 and mark levinson to a behringer setup. The customization and ability to correct things outweighs the drawbacks. I have more engaging realistic sound now.
Maybe this will make a point and lighten the mood? A short video by two guys who put this discussion in perspective.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7p3Nc0vl4Yg
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7p3Nc0vl4Yg
None of it pertains to solid state small signal amplification at audio frequencies. The wiki page also lacks references from credible sources, much like the article.
A piece of wire has attenuation for a signal through it. Think of attenuation due to power loss. What is happening during attenuation? Is the attenuation linear ? Or exponential and varying with frequency and current?
You tell me prove it or disprove it. Let's learn together .
Does this attenuation occur in the form of compression of the wave form?
Perhaps this is the basic idea and it's so subtle that when it's taught as a model it's assumed neglible?
You tell me prove it or disprove it. Let's learn together .
Does this attenuation occur in the form of compression of the wave form?
Perhaps this is the basic idea and it's so subtle that when it's taught as a model it's assumed neglible?
Last edited:
The original article makes a comparison for a tube and solid state amp. The Wikipedia explains the concept.
This is well known concept.
The math that describes the phenomena in tubes is the vander pols equation. It was developed to describe the action of tubes. I have posted a link that describes this. Google it for yourself.
This is well known concept.
The math that describes the phenomena in tubes is the vander pols equation. It was developed to describe the action of tubes. I have posted a link that describes this. Google it for yourself.
I would love to hear more, or read links. Please feel free to contribute
As far as an update, I have been experimenting with the dynamic eq on the individual drivers through the DCX. As I had thought, it does greatly improve the driver integration. The DCX doesn't seem to offer the degree of customization with dynamic eq as the DEQ2496, I don't see the ratio, thresh hold, and knee like with the DEQ. I am exploring it more to see if they are in another menu.
I really hope some people who have a DEQ or DCX experiment with this and follow up here.
It is pretty incredible how much more realistic it has made things sound, and all without spending more money or changing components.
I hope some other people can gain something out of this thread. I am very happy with how its sounding. The music just keeps flowing, its hard to turn it off sometimes.
It is readily apparent when you adjust dynamics in the high frequency range, vs the lower registers that the subtle changes are more noticeable in the lower register.
Its stunning how much impact on voices a dynamic eq below 190hz has. I would not have thought that before experimenting. Very natural sounding at this point.
As far as an update, I have been experimenting with the dynamic eq on the individual drivers through the DCX. As I had thought, it does greatly improve the driver integration. The DCX doesn't seem to offer the degree of customization with dynamic eq as the DEQ2496, I don't see the ratio, thresh hold, and knee like with the DEQ. I am exploring it more to see if they are in another menu.
I really hope some people who have a DEQ or DCX experiment with this and follow up here.
It is pretty incredible how much more realistic it has made things sound, and all without spending more money or changing components.
I hope some other people can gain something out of this thread. I am very happy with how its sounding. The music just keeps flowing, its hard to turn it off sometimes.
It is readily apparent when you adjust dynamics in the high frequency range, vs the lower registers that the subtle changes are more noticeable in the lower register.
Its stunning how much impact on voices a dynamic eq below 190hz has. I would not have thought that before experimenting. Very natural sounding at this point.
Last edited:
Here is a paper on modelling and correcting the non linearities of loudspeakers digitally. I really think this is the future of high end audio. Integrated active systems with intelligently implemented DSP which not only corrects frequency response but the non linearities of the drivers individually.
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/_m...ON_OF_NONLINEAR_LOUDSPEAKER_DISTORTION_02.pdf
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/_m...ON_OF_NONLINEAR_LOUDSPEAKER_DISTORTION_02.pdf
Please do not post copyrighted AES papers or anything with an extant copyright to the forum. Shorts excerpts are ok under fair use.Perhaps the term that needs to be defined is Timbre
I believe it is the Timbre that has been so drastically improved by experimenting with dynamic EQ.
Read this description about timbre
"3. Timbre. Timbre is the subjective tonality or "character" of sound. It has nothing to do with pitch or loudness per se. When hearing a flute and a violin each playing the note Middle A (440 Hz.), it is the differences in their unique attack, envelopment of harmonics (partials) and decays that distinguish them apart. This is due to not only the way an instrument is played whether: plucked, struck, blown, rubbed, etc., but also their harmonic make-up (most musical instruments posses up to twenty overtones above the fundamental), and their resonance make-up (the body of the instrument amplifies or dampens certain frequencies). Good timbre is synonymous with good fidelity, whether you are talking about a musical instrument or a hi-fi system. A cheap violin does not have the rich resonances found in a quality one, and a cheap stereo system probably won't distinguish between steel and nylon strings on a guitar, let alone the difference between Ernie Ball and D'Addario strings. It's the intensity of the overtones, during various points in time, that make these distinctions. Plomp (1970) summarized: a) Phase has maximum effect on timbre when alternate harmonics differ by 90 degrees. b) The effect of phase on timbre appears to be independent of the sound level and the spectrum. Timbre recognition occurs in about the first 20-50 ms of introduction. "
- http://avroomservice.blogspot.ca
I had stated earlier that changing dynamic EQ appears to change tonal balance. I was wondering how this could be.
This would explain why changing dynamic relationships can alter the perceived tonal balance, because the tones are distributed throughout different amplitudes. The tones are different frequencies. So adjusting dynamic EQ literally is adjusting tonal balance based on each harmonics amplitude. It is like Equalizing in a relative sense and in a subtle way. It is also equalizing which takes into consideration the point in time of its application.
By varying the attack setting , you can determine at which point during the transient that the dynamic EQ takes effect. You could theoretically, eq just the transient, or just the steady state portion.
This obviously wouldn't be perfectly scientific (see the video about art VS science before you get upset), but more an artistic subjective approach. You don't have to set a value, you can variably roll the knob and listen in increments.
Personally I have found most benefit, with 0 attack. I will experiment more and post results.
I believe it is the Timbre that has been so drastically improved by experimenting with dynamic EQ.
Read this description about timbre
"3. Timbre. Timbre is the subjective tonality or "character" of sound. It has nothing to do with pitch or loudness per se. When hearing a flute and a violin each playing the note Middle A (440 Hz.), it is the differences in their unique attack, envelopment of harmonics (partials) and decays that distinguish them apart. This is due to not only the way an instrument is played whether: plucked, struck, blown, rubbed, etc., but also their harmonic make-up (most musical instruments posses up to twenty overtones above the fundamental), and their resonance make-up (the body of the instrument amplifies or dampens certain frequencies). Good timbre is synonymous with good fidelity, whether you are talking about a musical instrument or a hi-fi system. A cheap violin does not have the rich resonances found in a quality one, and a cheap stereo system probably won't distinguish between steel and nylon strings on a guitar, let alone the difference between Ernie Ball and D'Addario strings. It's the intensity of the overtones, during various points in time, that make these distinctions. Plomp (1970) summarized: a) Phase has maximum effect on timbre when alternate harmonics differ by 90 degrees. b) The effect of phase on timbre appears to be independent of the sound level and the spectrum. Timbre recognition occurs in about the first 20-50 ms of introduction. "
- http://avroomservice.blogspot.ca
I had stated earlier that changing dynamic EQ appears to change tonal balance. I was wondering how this could be.
This would explain why changing dynamic relationships can alter the perceived tonal balance, because the tones are distributed throughout different amplitudes. The tones are different frequencies. So adjusting dynamic EQ literally is adjusting tonal balance based on each harmonics amplitude. It is like Equalizing in a relative sense and in a subtle way. It is also equalizing which takes into consideration the point in time of its application.
By varying the attack setting , you can determine at which point during the transient that the dynamic EQ takes effect. You could theoretically, eq just the transient, or just the steady state portion.
This obviously wouldn't be perfectly scientific (see the video about art VS science before you get upset), but more an artistic subjective approach. You don't have to set a value, you can variably roll the knob and listen in increments.
Personally I have found most benefit, with 0 attack. I will experiment more and post results.
Attachments
Last edited:
To illustrate why a speaker may act as an expander in a low excursion range, consider the graph of variable stiffness with displacement from the origin (speaker at rest).
Feel free to prove or disprove this.
graph taken from
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/_m...ON_OF_NONLINEAR_LOUDSPEAKER_DISTORTION_02.pdf
Feel free to prove or disprove this.
graph taken from
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/_m...ON_OF_NONLINEAR_LOUDSPEAKER_DISTORTION_02.pdf
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.