Speaker Testing Software - which one's actually good?

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
I never said that it was better than LMS, nor do I believe anyone else here did. It's cheaper and does many of the same things as well or better. It has its limitations in the software department, as I mentioned. The only one that is truly comparable is the Woofer Tester Pro, as it can do the high power testing that LMS can do.

It's impressive for its price, hence the good value description that some of us are giving it. If I implied to anyone that it was better than LMS, I'm sorry for that, I didn't mean to, and I don't believe that is true.
 
LMS vs. WTPro

I wouldn't say one was better than the other but each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

The way I see them, LMS is made more for testing finished products. It does sweeps and even has rub/buzz testing for raw drivers. I find it easy to use and very reliable. I prefer using it for anechoic measurements of amplitude response. I also like using it to chart polars, because it has a tool that makes them from a series of off-axis measurements.

WTpro has more in the way of R&D tools. The ICD (interactive crossover designer) is one good example. You describe a crossover with a Spice model, and the system makes what is effectively a digital filter for it. You then connect it through amplifiers to your speakers and do acoustic in-air measurements too learn how the proposed crossover will perform. Changing the crossover is as easy as changing a few lines in the Spice model.

It also has the ability to do T/S measurements and acoustic measurements like amplitude response, phase and (harmonic and intermodulation) distortion using several signal types. The ability to choose the input signal is nice because some signals are more appropriate than others, depending on what you're looking for. You can use sine, swept sine, chirp, noise or MLS.

 
Re: LMS vs. WTPro

Wayne Parham said:
I wouldn't say one was better than the other but each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

The way I see them, LMS is made more for testing finished products. It does sweeps and even has rub/buzz testing for raw drivers. I find it easy to use and very reliable. I prefer using it for anechoic measurements of amplitude response. I also like using it to chart polars, because it has a tool that makes them from a series of off-axis measurements.

WTpro has more in the way of R&D tools. The ICD (interactive crossover designer) is one good example. You describe a crossover with a Spice model, and the system makes what is effectively a digital filter for it. You then connect it through amplifiers to your speakers and do acoustic in-air measurements too learn how the proposed crossover will perform. Changing the crossover is as easy as changing a few lines in the Spice model.

It also has the ability to do T/S measurements and acoustic measurements like amplitude response, phase and (harmonic and intermodulation) distortion using several signal types. The ability to choose the input signal is nice because some signals are more appropriate than others, depending on what you're looking for. You can use sine, swept sine, chirp, noise or MLS.


The WT pro sounds interesting , the ability to design the xover and then test your predicted x-over , sounds very good. I'm sure you have done comparisons between predicted and what your system with the actual x-over looks like ..

Have you tried the full LMS/Leap package ?

Hmmm based on what you have outlined above , the WTpro deserve a look see !
 
Re: Re: LMS vs. WTPro

a.wayne said:


The WT pro sounds interesting , the ability to design the xover and then test your predicted x-over , sounds very good. I'm sure you have done comparisons between predicted and what your system with the actual x-over looks like ..


This same funcionality exists in SoundEasy as well as LspCad Pro.

Regards,

Dennis
 
I use LEAP Crossover Shop and use Clio for measurement. Crossover Shop is a really good tool. If you get a good measurement set into it you can get really good predictions out of it.

Granted you can't do realtime digital filtering with it but the predicted results are very close so I don't know how much of a drawback it really is not being able to do it of the fly.

I am to the point now where I am confident what it predicts is what I am going to end up with.

Rob:)
 
Re: Re: LMS vs. WTPro

a.wayne said:
The WT pro sounds interesting , the ability to design the xover and then test your predicted x-over , sounds very good. I'm sure you have done comparisons between predicted and what your system with the actual x-over looks like ..

Have you tried the full LMS/Leap package ?

I use the full LMS package as well as WTPro.

As for comparison of an ICD digitally simulated crossover with an actual physical passive crossover, I've done that and the correlation through the crossover region is very good. I have a mature line of speakers that I had already designed and measured with LMS. I designed them using Spice to analyze and design the crossovers, and that's what attracted me to the WTPro system. I was able to import existing models into the system and try it out. I already knew how they performed, so I could compare a known physical model with an ICD simulated version.

I really like the Spice implementation of the ICD. It is very natural for me.
 
Robh3606 said:
I use LEAP Crossover Shop and use Clio for measurement. Crossover Shop is a really good tool. If you get a good measurement set into it you can get really good predictions out of it.

Granted you can't do realtime digital filtering with it but the predicted results are very close so I don't know how much of a drawback it really is not being able to do it of the fly.

I am to the point now where I am confident what it predicts is what I am going to end up with.

Rob:)

While the ability to measure the predicted result is nice; the main advantage with the XO emulator is being able to actually listen to your XOs before building them and do on the fly listening comparisons between slopes, XO points etc. It is also very useful for doing voicing.

Regards,

Dennis
 
Robh3606 said:
I use LEAP Crossover Shop and use Clio for measurement. Crossover Shop is a really good tool. If you get a good measurement set into it you can get really good predictions out of it.

Granted you can't do realtime digital filtering with it but the predicted results are very close so I don't know how much of a drawback it really is not being able to do it of the fly.

I am to the point now where I am confident what it predicts is what I am going to end up with.

Rob:)

Hi Rob,

Which version or model of Clio do you own? Could you share your experiences with Clio?

Thank you,

-David
 
"Which version or model of Clio do you own? Could you share your experiences with Clio?"

Hello David

I have the 7.0 version. I started with Clio Lite and then upgraded to the full version. I have been using it for a couple of years now and it is very reliable and is easy to use. I am running it in XP Pro staying away from Vista for as long as I can. You just run through your set-up, pull up a measurement window and go. I have not had any real issues with it and it's fine for what I am using it for so I am very happy with it.

It's not cheap and there are other options out there however the Lite version is reasonable and you could always upgrade latter if you feel the need. You can also still upgrade 7-8 through Automatica for a reasonable fee. It may not hurt to look around for a new 7.0 system. They had some for close-out I don't know if any are still around.

Rob:)
 
HK26147 said:
David:
I debated purchasing the WT II.
Wasted time on free software and building a jig, could not get it to calibrate.
Bought the WTII and am completely satisfied.
You can calibrate and generate in less than 5 mins.
AudioXpress had tests of past versions. Not as accurate as dedicated bench set up perhaps, but I built a design and generated an impedance sweep that was in agreement withe the published impedance curve.
The results are repeatable.

Does the smith and larson WTII do driver break in? I have the software and am a new to this. If so, what steps do you follow in WTII to do driver break in.
 
NTSBuilding said:


Does the smith and larson WTII do driver break in? I have the software and am a new to this. If so, what steps do you follow in WTII to do driver break in.
You don't need any special software for break in. Just get a pair of (LF or mid) drivers, place them cone to cone, wire them out of phase and either use a sine or slightly off tune FM station as a signal. Just adjust levels to ensure they never exceed Xmax.
They make very little noise this way too.
 
Brett said:

You don't need any special software for break in. Just get a pair of (LF or mid) drivers, place them cone to cone, wire them out of phase and either use a sine or slightly off tune FM station as a signal. Just adjust levels to ensure they never exceed Xmax.
They make very little noise this way too.

Thanks, but since I have the software I might as well use it. There is a line out for a mini jack to do break in on S&L WT2. I just want to know if this is for a stereo mini jack to 2 rca plugs or mono mini jack to one rca plug. Do I need to use an actual amplifier and not a stereo receiver. I have tried my Yamaha stereo receiver for both types of plugs and nothing is happening. Have plugged the rca jacks into CD, Phono, etc.. on the receiver and connected to the mini jack on WT2. I have set FS at the required frequency. If anyone has used S&L WT2, would appreciate help for a new guy. Manual does not go into detail on this. What am I doing wrong??
 
hifimaker said:
I'd really like to go out and buy a used Audio Precision ATS-2 for $5-$10K, but that's not in the cards. :rolleyes:

What packages actually work for a DIY budget for audio spectrum analyzers?

Is the RTA package any good? http://www.trueaudio.com/rta_abt1.htm

Clio8 looks interesting, but it's not much cheaper than a used AP product. It looks like the Clio Lite only measures 1khz to 22khz for $1kusd plus $400 for the mic. The firewire version of Clio8 is $2700usd plus $400 for the mic and measures 1Hz-90kHz.
http://estore.websitepros.com/1736754/Categories.bok?category=CLIO

What else is out there that easy to use and actually measures accurately?

What is the experience of others?

Thank you for the help!

-David
If you are looking for Freeware, Speaker Workshop is probably your best bet. SoundEasy gives you the most bang for the buck. Anything else really depends on what your prorities are and what you wish to accomplish.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.