Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Full Range TC9 Line Array CNC Cabinet
Full Range TC9 Line Array CNC Cabinet
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Yesterday, 01:47 PM   #811
fluid is offline fluid  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Default Fab Filter Pro Q Mid Side Preset

Quote:
Originally Posted by perceval View Post
fluid,

you know you could zip the preset and attach it to a post?
Attached, the relative level is is set by the pan control between 0.5 to 1dB either way seems the best range. I imagine you will be like me and drop the sides a little due to being in a reflective environment. If you don't have volume levelling on you might want to lower the gain by a dB or so to avoid any possible clipping.

Quote:
Originally Posted by perceval View Post


Tomorrow then! Sounds exciting!
Let us know what you think
Attached Files
File Type: zip MidSideEQ.ffp.zip (738 Bytes, 2 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 05:38 PM   #812
Pano is online now Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SW Florida
Full Range TC9 Line Array CNC Cabinet
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluid View Post
Why would you apply the EQ to the sides? The idea is to clean up the centre a bit so it makes sense to me to apply it mainly to the mid signal.
Good you should ask. The reason I found the shuffler in the first place was because I heard the side channels as too bright compared to the phantom center. My original idea was M/S EQ, but I used the shuffler instead as it seemed easier.

For me, a well tuned system with a ratio of more direct sound than reverberant has the funny problem of the sounds in 1 speaker only being brighter than the sounds in 2 speakers. I learned that it is the phantom center "speaker" that is darker in tone because of head shadowing. But I didn't want to change the center EQ, that sounded good to me, I just wanted to make the sides less bright when they played alone. An overall change isn't wanted, just a darker sound on hard left or right sounds.

The EQ that I see on your middle channel is close to the mid dips that the phantom center already has. It's the sides that I'd want to pull some midrange out of, because they sound too bright compared to the center. But your EQ isn't exactly the same, so perhaps it's doing things to the middle that I'm not understanding by just looking at it.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 06:24 PM   #813
wesayso is offline wesayso  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
wesayso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
The list of EQ tweaks I send to fluid were the easiest way to implement them. If we setup a system where we have to "paint" the FR ourselves, the side actually is easier to setup. As it will be a more "straight line" like target.

It's the center that's more difficult, yet that's the one we most commonly hear above all else.

The dips in the EQ scheme posted line up where the energy of the left speaker in the right ear sums with the right speaker's direct output and vice versa. At least it does with my average head size .

That sum looks like this:
Click the image to open in full size.
In this graph there's the sum of both left and right channel at each ear,
compared to what one ear would hear from one speaker. It's happening at both ears though. No regards for things like head shading in this model.

Another view as a waterfall plot:
Click the image to open in full size.
This is the peaks and dips (comb pattern) that happen at each ear for phantom center material. That means double trouble.

As it would be impossible to EQ out the dips (without phase tricks). Introducing more energy at for example 1750 Hz would also create a bigger dip at the ear due to both arrivals, one directly from the speaker to the closest ear and the other part being the wrap around the head with a delay from the opposite side, subtract instead of sum at that frequency.
So the next best thing is to EQ down the peaks they create. Though we have to keep head shading in mind. That resulted in the list of EQ cuts fluid posted, after many hours of testing.

The end result did sound way more similar in the center to what an ideal side or a single mono speaker would sound like. The starting point here is a good FR curve for the side material. One could even play one speaker and adjust the FR curve to taste on that with mono material. As that would be very similar.

There's hardly anyone that will claim a straight frequency curve sounds just right (yes, I know, they do excist). The EQ cuts at the phantom center are my suggestions to that problem. However the sides will most probably sound way more right with that straight FR target(*). As they do not suffer from cross talk.

(*) = With a straight curve I do reserve to make that a downwards slope for a listening spot measurement, just want to mention this part.

These suggestions do what you'd want to achieve. Its just taking the side balance as a starting point as that's how we approached the preliminary target in fluid's case. Drawing a straight line that drops 1 dB per octave and go from there.

So anyone testing this might start with a more ideal curve, not yet set or EQ-ed to taste. After mid/side EQ is a part of the chain, one can fine tune the balance to find the best target curve. These settings are nothing more and nothing less than the difference in balance between the two (phantom center and sides).
__________________
Use Science to design your speakers and they will sound like a piece of Art...
  Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 06:43 PM   #814
wesayso is offline wesayso  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
wesayso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
A second part which would result in an improvement to the above tweaks is to add ambient channels as they can fill in the dip at ~1750 Hz. As the ears have a different comb pattern for sounds that come from a lateral angle (trying to find the reverence in the work of Griesinger for more information on that, he provided graphs for this in one of his papers) it can be used to make the perceived tonality even better.

This trick alone is pretty good though, more than "just" pretty good for me. It gives balance between center and sides and more "balls" to the sides than I've ever had before, as we tend to always focus on that phantom center to tune it to our wishes.

More than highly recommended by me!
__________________
Use Science to design your speakers and they will sound like a piece of Art...
  Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:53 AM   #815
fluid is offline fluid  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pano View Post
Good you should ask. The reason I found the shuffler in the first place was because I heard the side channels as too bright compared to the phantom center. My original idea was M/S EQ, but I used the shuffler instead as it seemed easier.

For me, a well tuned system with a ratio of more direct sound than reverberant has the funny problem of the sounds in 1 speaker only being brighter than the sounds in 2 speakers.
For me I was still playing with overall EQ targets when I introduced it at wesayso's suggestion. I noticed a fairly obvious change for the better. I wasn't looking to fix a problem like in your case but applying the EQ did make almost everything sound better and I couldn't find anything that sounded worse.

The difference between this EQ on and off has mellowed a little over time for me as I have been tweaking the EQ balance overall. It really did make the biggest difference with a 1dB/oct overall fall to the FR.

Wesayso has been along to give his reasoning, the pattern is certainly similar to your shuffler but I think the frequencies are different, I'm not an expert on either so I could be wrong

I drop the level of the sides slightly as I find them to be too prominent with the EQ in place so perhaps it could work for you, and it is easy to change to taste based on the relative mid side levels.

It would be great if you could try it and see what you think, whether it helps with your brighter sides issue or if it just sounds better, or not.
  Reply With Quote
Old Today, 01:12 AM   #816
BYRTT is online now BYRTT  Denmark
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Full Range TC9 Line Array CNC Cabinet
Default Mid Side EQ

For fluids curiosity even my system is stereo signal feeded mono speaker tried Mid Side EQ onboard player computer

From my listening position in front this player computer enable/disable filters was not success sound wise but please check below if there is any mistakes to point out in setup chain, also myself had no high hope in it would work good because this speaker by itself has enorm high intelligibility and also its sound signature can remind one of sound in wesayso's living room, not that i had special tweaked it to copy wesayso's performance it just did it by itself as correction tweaks over time got acoustics performance more and more in line with same pass-band executed as synthetic impulse response.

To do it for free without having to invest in various hardcore VST plugins tried use JRivers build in Mid-side Encoding in first PEQ container then Rephase created linear phase EQ loaded in JRivers convolution container and in second PEQ container loaded Mid-side Decoding. Chain can be seen in first picture below and hope i did it right in expect that after encoding filter Mid-CH is now right-CH revealed by "Analyzer" show right-CH to be the loudest, so Side must be left-CH.

Second picture below is linear phase filter for Side-EQ loaded via config-file in convolution container to left-CH -0,5dB as fluid use, and third picture is second choise to hear how +0,5dB sounds as wesayso use.

Fourth picture below is linear phase filter for Mid-EQ loaded via config-file in convolution container to Right-CH. Have a feeling looking at fluids visual fabfilter in post 790 that there could be a little mistake in printed numbers for first filter which says "100Hz Q 0.5 Gain 0.5", shouldn't it had been a low shelve instead of PEQ ???

Down the road when i get stereo speaker setup again will run into HRTF trouble and then will try this guide and filters again
Attached Images
File Type: png 3000.PNG (40.9 KB, 12 views)
File Type: png 3001.png (41.5 KB, 12 views)
File Type: png 3002.png (41.5 KB, 12 views)
File Type: png 3003.png (45.7 KB, 7 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old Today, 02:05 AM   #817
fluid is offline fluid  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Hi Byrtt,

Thanks for trying, it is hard to say from that whether you have it right, the graphs scales are so different and there is the question of the mid side process.

And no it was not a mistake it is 100Hz Q0.5 Gain 0.5 PEQ in my settings.

There are only two shelving filters, the low one in the side channel and the High one in the Mid.

Coud you run a Dirac Pulse through Jriver with the processing in place and nothing else and use Disk Writer as the output to compare if I do the same?

Whilst I don't think it will make a difference as your setup is not really designed for it, it would be good to know we are using the same settings when comparing.

I am sending you an email with something to try which will make sure we have the same
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Full Range TC9 Line Array CNC CabinetHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full range line array in a tube carpenter Full Range 44 7th January 2014 02:19 PM
Omni full range line array??? Melo theory Full Range 42 25th November 2012 05:44 AM
Full range line array inrank Full Range 39 20th January 2009 12:27 PM
Full-range line array? mazeroth Full Range 20 1st November 2004 03:47 PM
line array with full range drivers? leadbelly Multi-Way 9 25th January 2003 04:48 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:20 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2017 diyAudio
Wiki