Hi everybody , this tread it should be place for ideas with a goal to fine tune methodology for measuring active speakers and producing filters as a result.
Wright know it is strange situation on that matter,because nearly all methods used for filters production it is directly imported from speaker manufacturers making speakers with PASSIVE FILTERS and for all kind possible folks with all kind living areas . This what they must do and that is called massive production.
This process looks like this:
1.Producing drivers for speakers measurements done In the anechoic chamber.
This is perfectly OK and acceptable unless will be technology allowing to make driver for your listening space.
2.Producing speakers with hard filters measurements done In the anechoic chamber.
This is perfectly OK and acceptable,because speaker it is for mass production and must to cover needs of anyone.
3. Those speakers arriving to customers room. From this moment on it is whole bunch of speaker measuring methodology principles and software tools ( like Dirac Live )
and other commercial products ( sound traps,diffuses and much more such ) to mach that speaker sound like in In the anechoic chamber.
With that I have a problem . Active speaker system have upper hand to grand fathers technology (passive filters),much more flexibility .
It is two mane schools for making mass production speakers to work for your room and get manufactures achieved result in the anechoic chamber.
First school is - Traditional and use all tools/products mentioned in 3.
Second school is -Modern and can use same tools/products mentioned in 3 but goal is to make any music listening area work with a speaker.
Extreme example is B&O BeoLab 90 speakers, which is expensive and 90% of us mortals never ever will not have any slightest chance those standing in our rooms.
When we (DIY) speaker builders are not targeting to massive production market ,but most of the time but we trying to build best speakers for drivers/room or just speakers concept. Active speakers will have many pros vs passive.
Please don't start discussion about it because is not a point for this thread.
Could be a way start discussion is just describing methodology I'm using at the moment to measure active speakers.
1. Staring point for microphone is at listening position ( have a hard time to justify 1meter or 0,5 meter distance) and sweeps at 75dB ( that should bee to discussion,because filters be targeting 75dB listening volume if you change volume -must change a filter unless it is implemented Equal-loudness contour or fletcher-munson curvein your system) .
Sweeps are done at 0,15,30,45 degrees and averaging all scans in to the one in REW . That is done to the right and left speaker separately and for individual drivers. Results are used for FIR or IIR based.
Wright know it is strange situation on that matter,because nearly all methods used for filters production it is directly imported from speaker manufacturers making speakers with PASSIVE FILTERS and for all kind possible folks with all kind living areas . This what they must do and that is called massive production.
This process looks like this:
1.Producing drivers for speakers measurements done In the anechoic chamber.
This is perfectly OK and acceptable unless will be technology allowing to make driver for your listening space.
2.Producing speakers with hard filters measurements done In the anechoic chamber.
This is perfectly OK and acceptable,because speaker it is for mass production and must to cover needs of anyone.
3. Those speakers arriving to customers room. From this moment on it is whole bunch of speaker measuring methodology principles and software tools ( like Dirac Live )
and other commercial products ( sound traps,diffuses and much more such ) to mach that speaker sound like in In the anechoic chamber.
With that I have a problem . Active speaker system have upper hand to grand fathers technology (passive filters),much more flexibility .
It is two mane schools for making mass production speakers to work for your room and get manufactures achieved result in the anechoic chamber.
First school is - Traditional and use all tools/products mentioned in 3.
Second school is -Modern and can use same tools/products mentioned in 3 but goal is to make any music listening area work with a speaker.
Extreme example is B&O BeoLab 90 speakers, which is expensive and 90% of us mortals never ever will not have any slightest chance those standing in our rooms.
When we (DIY) speaker builders are not targeting to massive production market ,but most of the time but we trying to build best speakers for drivers/room or just speakers concept. Active speakers will have many pros vs passive.
Please don't start discussion about it because is not a point for this thread.
Could be a way start discussion is just describing methodology I'm using at the moment to measure active speakers.
1. Staring point for microphone is at listening position ( have a hard time to justify 1meter or 0,5 meter distance) and sweeps at 75dB ( that should bee to discussion,because filters be targeting 75dB listening volume if you change volume -must change a filter unless it is implemented Equal-loudness contour or fletcher-munson curvein your system) .
Sweeps are done at 0,15,30,45 degrees and averaging all scans in to the one in REW . That is done to the right and left speaker separately and for individual drivers. Results are used for FIR or IIR based.
Last edited: