I have just updated my blog for someone who may be interested in Acourate
http://www.digitalroomcorrection.blogspot.com/
http://www.digitalroomcorrection.blogspot.com/
Hi ackcheng,
Thanks for the link - had a quick read -and it looks very interesting. I think I might require a bit more deatail to achieve what I intend to do though.
I should receive my DEQX early next week. I intend to write up a comparison of the following setups:
1) Foobar -> (ASIO) -> RME -> (word clock sync) -> Esoteric D70 -> 2 x Pass Labs XVR1s -> 6 x amps (Pass Labs & PS Audio at the moment) -> Wilson Benesch Chimera (passive XOs removed)
2) Acourate + Foobar -> RME -> 6 x amps (Pass Labs & PS Audio at the moment) -> WBC
3) Foobar -> (ASIO) -> RME -> (PLL) -> DEQX PDC2.6P -> 6 x amps (Pass Labs & PS Audio at the moment) -> WBC
I hope you'll be 'on-hand' to help me configure Acourate properly. I'll also get in touch with Uli at some point.
Mani.
Thanks for the link - had a quick read -and it looks very interesting. I think I might require a bit more deatail to achieve what I intend to do though.
I should receive my DEQX early next week. I intend to write up a comparison of the following setups:
1) Foobar -> (ASIO) -> RME -> (word clock sync) -> Esoteric D70 -> 2 x Pass Labs XVR1s -> 6 x amps (Pass Labs & PS Audio at the moment) -> Wilson Benesch Chimera (passive XOs removed)
2) Acourate + Foobar -> RME -> 6 x amps (Pass Labs & PS Audio at the moment) -> WBC
3) Foobar -> (ASIO) -> RME -> (PLL) -> DEQX PDC2.6P -> 6 x amps (Pass Labs & PS Audio at the moment) -> WBC
I hope you'll be 'on-hand' to help me configure Acourate properly. I'll also get in touch with Uli at some point.
Mani.
Thanks ShinOBIWAN.
The WB Chimeras are actually a 2.5-way 'true linear phase' design, though they house 4 drivers in the bass cabinet and 3 in the mid/high cabinet:
- 4 x bass units (two pairs in an isobaric clam-shell configuration)
- 1 x ABR unit (identical to bass units)
- 1 x mid unit (identical to bass units)
- 1 x silk tweeter
I'm tri-amping, but maintaining the 2.5-way design (i.e. no low pass roll-off for mid). It means that the mid takes a lot of the load... but they sound better that way.
Mani.
ShinOBIWAN said:
The WB Chimeras are actually a 2.5-way 'true linear phase' design, though they house 4 drivers in the bass cabinet and 3 in the mid/high cabinet:
- 4 x bass units (two pairs in an isobaric clam-shell configuration)
- 1 x ABR unit (identical to bass units)
- 1 x mid unit (identical to bass units)
- 1 x silk tweeter
I'm tri-amping, but maintaining the 2.5-way design (i.e. no low pass roll-off for mid). It means that the mid takes a lot of the load... but they sound better that way.
Mani.
Has anyone used Logic Pro's Space Designer as a convolver?
http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/effects/#space
I was thinking about using Accourate to design the IR's and Space Designer as the convolver.
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Brad
http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/effects/#space
I was thinking about using Accourate to design the IR's and Space Designer as the convolver.
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Brad
Hi dc,
there are not many convolvers around for MAC.
Please see also
http://www.kvraudio.com/get/2042.html
IIRC its maximum filter size is 32768 taps. As I do not have a MAC I cannot tell you if it works well.
just updated my blog for digital crossover for those who are interested.
http://digitalroomcorrection.blogspot.com/2008/01/drivers-alignment.html
http://digitalroomcorrection.blogspot.com/2008/01/drivers-alignment.html
I'm building a pair of open baffle 3-way loudspeakers, using (per side):
1 SLS PRD1000 ribbon tweeter
1 McCauley 6328 10" midrange
2 PHL 6090 15" woofers
I'm trying to decide between Acourate and the DEQX PDC-3.0 for XO, driver EQ, time alignment and room correction. I have some experience with the PDC-2.6, but no experience with Acourate or BruteFIR or any of the other PC-based setups. I want as much control as possible over the final setup for tweaking, but I do want set-it-and-forget-it kind of ease, rather than having to deal with software upgrades and computer crashing -- I have enough electronic battles in my life.
Shin, you seem to be the only one on this post who has ridden both sides of the fence. I believe in one post, you said that nothing beats a proper PC-based setup, but I believe you've also been waiting for the release of the DEQX PDC-3.0. Where do you stand on this topic now? In what ways is the sound of the PC-based setup superior? I've been told by another CES attendee that DEQX is claiming that the 3.0 is "more transparent" than the 2.6, but no hard data to back that up, and they're not discontinuing the 2.6...
The downside of the DEQX is the lack of flexibility. If I decide to add subs to the speakers detailed above, I'm apparently SOL, as the PDC has only 6 channels of output, and I would need 8 at that point. I believe I could add a second DEQX, but I'm not sure how that would work, and it would seem to complicate timing issues.
I have a Lynx Two-B, which, with Acourate, could support a 3-way setup. Replacing it with an Aurora-8 or -16 would allow for the subs. Any thoughts on which direction I should go first?
Thanks.
Brad
1 SLS PRD1000 ribbon tweeter
1 McCauley 6328 10" midrange
2 PHL 6090 15" woofers
I'm trying to decide between Acourate and the DEQX PDC-3.0 for XO, driver EQ, time alignment and room correction. I have some experience with the PDC-2.6, but no experience with Acourate or BruteFIR or any of the other PC-based setups. I want as much control as possible over the final setup for tweaking, but I do want set-it-and-forget-it kind of ease, rather than having to deal with software upgrades and computer crashing -- I have enough electronic battles in my life.
Shin, you seem to be the only one on this post who has ridden both sides of the fence. I believe in one post, you said that nothing beats a proper PC-based setup, but I believe you've also been waiting for the release of the DEQX PDC-3.0. Where do you stand on this topic now? In what ways is the sound of the PC-based setup superior? I've been told by another CES attendee that DEQX is claiming that the 3.0 is "more transparent" than the 2.6, but no hard data to back that up, and they're not discontinuing the 2.6...
The downside of the DEQX is the lack of flexibility. If I decide to add subs to the speakers detailed above, I'm apparently SOL, as the PDC has only 6 channels of output, and I would need 8 at that point. I believe I could add a second DEQX, but I'm not sure how that would work, and it would seem to complicate timing issues.
I have a Lynx Two-B, which, with Acourate, could support a 3-way setup. Replacing it with an Aurora-8 or -16 would allow for the subs. Any thoughts on which direction I should go first?
Thanks.
Brad
Hi Brad,
I tend to recommend the DEQX route if your wanting an easy life. Its real problem is the 6 channels of processing and outputs. Your limited to a stereo 3-way setup unless you daisy chain a second DEQX - a costly solution. The real beauty of the DEQX is the well presented and easy to use setup procedure and that its a self contained measurement kit with lots of goodies. You can have a competent and well dialled in result within a matter of hours and you can sit back to enjoy at that point. You've also got no worries about latency with video and other realtime applications which is something the PC can't as easily claim.
On the other hand an easy PC setup is possible in relative terms but Acourate is more indepth than most of the other PC implementations and takes some getting used to, nothing to worry about for those willing to explore though. Acourate offers a few ways to deal with the problem. The range of tweaks and adaptability is impressive and is really only limited by the hardware and time your prepared to put in. The DEQX offers a simple but competent solution whereas the PC offers both a simple or a complex but competent solution depending on the software you choose to do the deed. At this point its clear I prefer the PC but DEQX can offer a smoother ride and that's important.
Since you've already got a capable soundcard all you need to do at this point is try it out for yourself. I'd recommend frequency allocator lite or Acourate as the starting points for either a respectively easy or complex solution.
If you download the Acourate demo, capture some sine sweeps of your drivers and then kindly ask Uli(author of Acourate) he will generate an example set of filters and take you through a step by step process of crossover generation, then driver linearisation, then time alignment and finally room correction. Each step of the way you'll be able to better understand and hear what's needed and how the program is used to achieve this.
These example filters created with the help of Uli will help you decide if Acourate does what you need. If it does then you can buy the full program and create better filters through the process of tweaking and refining to get the greater performance gains.
PS. I'm now fully committed to the PC route so the DEQX PDC3 isn't something that I'm looking at for the moment. As I understand its not a large step over what the 2.6 is.
I tend to recommend the DEQX route if your wanting an easy life. Its real problem is the 6 channels of processing and outputs. Your limited to a stereo 3-way setup unless you daisy chain a second DEQX - a costly solution. The real beauty of the DEQX is the well presented and easy to use setup procedure and that its a self contained measurement kit with lots of goodies. You can have a competent and well dialled in result within a matter of hours and you can sit back to enjoy at that point. You've also got no worries about latency with video and other realtime applications which is something the PC can't as easily claim.
On the other hand an easy PC setup is possible in relative terms but Acourate is more indepth than most of the other PC implementations and takes some getting used to, nothing to worry about for those willing to explore though. Acourate offers a few ways to deal with the problem. The range of tweaks and adaptability is impressive and is really only limited by the hardware and time your prepared to put in. The DEQX offers a simple but competent solution whereas the PC offers both a simple or a complex but competent solution depending on the software you choose to do the deed. At this point its clear I prefer the PC but DEQX can offer a smoother ride and that's important.
Since you've already got a capable soundcard all you need to do at this point is try it out for yourself. I'd recommend frequency allocator lite or Acourate as the starting points for either a respectively easy or complex solution.
If you download the Acourate demo, capture some sine sweeps of your drivers and then kindly ask Uli(author of Acourate) he will generate an example set of filters and take you through a step by step process of crossover generation, then driver linearisation, then time alignment and finally room correction. Each step of the way you'll be able to better understand and hear what's needed and how the program is used to achieve this.
These example filters created with the help of Uli will help you decide if Acourate does what you need. If it does then you can buy the full program and create better filters through the process of tweaking and refining to get the greater performance gains.
PS. I'm now fully committed to the PC route so the DEQX PDC3 isn't something that I'm looking at for the moment. As I understand its not a large step over what the 2.6 is.
Dear Shin,
This is actually the second time I did drivers alignment. Last time I used LR filter and i had a lot of problems identifying the relevant peaks and I got some values that does not make sense. This time I used Brussels filters. I guess, i was confused the prerining as the starting point of the pulse in the previous setup?
Anyway, with the new setup, the sound is alot more coherent and the bass is more tight and less smearing. I will do more listerning this weekend and report back.
dc:
I also have DEQX 2.6 before and i was also a Tact 2.0s owner. At that time, the room correction of DEQX was not impressive at all and so I used tact 2.0s for that part. I concur with what Shin has suggetsed. If you are looking for simplicity, go for DEQX. INO, if you look for an "ultimate" setup, go for the PC route, the room correction filters generate with Acourate is much better than Tact 2.0s and the flexibility in choosing the different crossover setup are almost unlimited. I am now also a total PC person as well.
Good Luck!
This is actually the second time I did drivers alignment. Last time I used LR filter and i had a lot of problems identifying the relevant peaks and I got some values that does not make sense. This time I used Brussels filters. I guess, i was confused the prerining as the starting point of the pulse in the previous setup?
Anyway, with the new setup, the sound is alot more coherent and the bass is more tight and less smearing. I will do more listerning this weekend and report back.
dc:
I also have DEQX 2.6 before and i was also a Tact 2.0s owner. At that time, the room correction of DEQX was not impressive at all and so I used tact 2.0s for that part. I concur with what Shin has suggetsed. If you are looking for simplicity, go for DEQX. INO, if you look for an "ultimate" setup, go for the PC route, the room correction filters generate with Acourate is much better than Tact 2.0s and the flexibility in choosing the different crossover setup are almost unlimited. I am now also a total PC person as well.
Good Luck!
I would recommend Audiolense by Juice Hifi (www.juicehifi.com) over Accourate. This program is quite easy to use compaired to Accourate, and the end results was better at least for me.
I use Console and convolverplugin in my setup.
I use Console and convolverplugin in my setup.
thadman said:
If your talking about specifically manipulating min phase and excess phase for best characteristics then the DRC component of Acourate could easily do that. From there you'd need 16-32 channel of convolution running in something like Console.
Main problem is a soundcard with 16-32 channels of analogue output - non exist that I know of BUT you could buy a digital only card such as the RME HDSP5236:
http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdsp_9652.php
And this will allow you to connect up to 52 channel via external DAC's over ADAT.
Ah, well in that case I really have no idea. I can say since your specifically manipulating the phase relationship of the signal and wouldn't want to be doing the same with frequency so min phase XO's are out of the question and you'd be looking at linear phase.
Are you trying to vertically shift the main lobes of the driver using such techniques?
You'd have to get in touch with Uli and ask him if this is possible with Acourate.
Are you trying to vertically shift the main lobes of the driver using such techniques?
You'd have to get in touch with Uli and ask him if this is possible with Acourate.
I'd just like to add here that I've been using Shin's PC x-over solution for approx 2 years now. Its the greatest thing I've ever tried! Period.
My hardware is a IBM T61 laptop with RME Fireface 800 and RME ADI8-QS AD/DA in addition (it sounds better). Digital input signal comes from a Squeezebox, and from an analog turntable on two mic inputs of the Fireface (RIAA is just an EQ plugin here of course). I use all 8 channels on the DAC, because I have a 4-way speaker system.
On the sofware side there is of course Console, Waves LinEq for x-over, Waves paragraphic for speaker EQ and Voxengo sample delay for time alignment.
A million thanks from me to Shin for his ideas.
My hardware is a IBM T61 laptop with RME Fireface 800 and RME ADI8-QS AD/DA in addition (it sounds better). Digital input signal comes from a Squeezebox, and from an analog turntable on two mic inputs of the Fireface (RIAA is just an EQ plugin here of course). I use all 8 channels on the DAC, because I have a 4-way speaker system.
On the sofware side there is of course Console, Waves LinEq for x-over, Waves paragraphic for speaker EQ and Voxengo sample delay for time alignment.
A million thanks from me to Shin for his ideas.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.