A how to for a PC XO.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#862
ackcheng said:

I am using SPL Volume8 which sounds good, but not as good as my digital volume control using BruteFIR. I am looking into the DAC output so that I can reduce the output voltage and I can keep the digital volume high.
Click to expand...

I was wondering about the SPL Volume8 myself recently.
Does it have any competitors in the same price range?

As to digital volume. Here's what I've been thinking...

Most of my music is 44.1khz/16-bit CD.

My DAC's are 24-bit. Any way to shift my music up into the MSB bits either prior to crossover or just before the DAC's?

In effect, I'd be using the upper bits of resolution of my DAC as the volume control.

I'm not wanting to change the frequency, just go from 16-bit 44.1khz to 24-bit 44.1khz.
 
#863
I use BruteFIR and I believe this is how it works. Correc tme if i am wrong

Interna to BruteFIR, all calculations were done at 64 bit double precision floating points. I use BruteFIR for digital crossover functaion and now I use it to control volume by setting different gain. After dithering, it is than output to 24 bit. So there is alot of headroom for the DSP to work with.
 
#865
Hello.

I must say that this is for me one my favorite threat on the diyaudio. Im very excited to make my own PC XO.

Now i have BSS Minidrive and DCX and i would like try something new.

So before i go to shop to spend money here is my equipment i allredy have:

PC
RME fireface 800
6 x power amplifier

Do i need any other hardware like 6 channel preamplifier or can use sound card?
Anything else????

Thanks for help.
 
#866
Hi 007

You've got everything you need to try this out. I wouldn't go buying any more hardware until you've satisfied yourself that this is the right route to take.

If you want to experience, in the best light, what this whole thread embodies then get yourself a copy of Acourate from Uli @ $500. Alternatively email Uli and ask him to generate a set of example filters for your room before you put down money for the program.

uli.brueggemann@gmail.com

http://www.acourate.com

Oh I almost forgot, do you have measurement facilities ie. omni mic + supporting software?
 
#868
ackcheng and ShinOBIWAN, thanks to your posts I retried the removal of the preamplifier.
This time I switched to RCA where Transporter has output resistor attenuation jumpers; set it to -20dB. Now I mainly listen on 0dB digital, sounds the same if not better than with the preamp.
For those interested with the same player here is more details:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Connect_To_PowerAmp#Transporter_Built-in_Attenuation

And also Acourate sweep of 120 seconds seems smoother when convolved than it was with 60 second sweep, per channel.
Maybe because of the pc noise, I have one more fan to deal with.
 
#869
nuhi said:
ackcheng and ShinOBIWAN, thanks to your posts I retried the removal of the preamplifier.
This time I switched to RCA where Transporter has output resistor attenuation jumpers; set it to -20dB. Now I mainly listen on 0dB digital, sounds the same if not better than with the preamp.
For those interested with the same player here is more details:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Connect_To_PowerAmp#Transporter_Built-in_Attenuation

And also Acourate sweep of 120 seconds seems smoother when convolved than it was with 60 second sweep, per channel.
Maybe because of the pc noise, I have one more fan to deal with.
Click to expand...

That's is the nature of most steady state stimulus signals, swept sines included. They take a small amount of time to build up to full energy so you do tend to get more accurate results with longer durations. The laws of diminishing returns quickly hits though and I find 60 second in a limited bandwidth sweep to be accurate enough and quick enough.

The lower the frequency the more benefit from longer sweeps.
 
#870
Accurate or Audiolense

I have tried both programs and I got the best filters by using Audiolense. Audiolense is also hundred times more userfriendly.

Audiolense can be bought from: http://juicehifi.com/

I run the filters in Console and use the Convolver plugin.

My hardware is a Lynx Two B soundcard connected directly to 6 B&O Icepower 600W.

I use volumecontrol in the digital domain. With the Lynx card I can not hear any digration in sound quality even at low volumes.

The volume is changed using Girder which sends commands directly to the Lynx card using the Lynx SetControl API. This way I can use a remote or touchscreen to control the volume.
 
#871
Re: Accurate or Audiolense

harruharru said:
I have tried both programs and I got the best filters by using Audiolense. Audiolense is also hundred times more userfriendly.

Audiolense can be bought from: http://juicehifi.com/
Click to expand...

Just a quick note from my perspective.

Audiolense is definitely easier to use but fell short on flexibility and quality when I tried it last year. I see there's been some updates to the program since so I'd like think there's been improvements.

Acourate is certainly less user friendly but for a good purpose though. It allows very specific tweaking in all area's of filter creation leading to more potential for an optimised system, there's also a lot of scope to get things very wrong so its a double edged thing. Simply put, there's a much wider range of options and tweaks available. You only need look at the crossover types available in Acourate for a hint of this. In comparison, Audiolense generally just churns out filters with a minimum of input or knowledge from the user - you trust that its making the right choices as it works through the script that's generating your filters.

Actually, Acourate now too offers a number of macro's to automate various task but the option is still there to do these things yourself.

That's not a put down on Audiolense per-se but personally I found it restrictive. There's others whom don't need that complexity and for those Audiolense looks a good alternative.
 
#872
I also share the same feeling as Shin. I do not have Audiolens so I cannot comment on the quality. But with Acourate, it is very flexible, that is why Uli labelled it as an audio toolbox. I started with no knowledge about crossover and after I went through the setup, I understood a lot more about crossover / filter and stuff and I found this the most valuable thing I acquired. Afterall, we are talking about DIY!
 
#873
Re: Re: Accurate or Audiolense

Hello ShinOBIWAN,

Just a quick note from my perspective.
Click to expand...

I think it is appropriate to inform the audience that your perspective on Audiolense is a beta testers perspective. I assume that you fullfilled your part of the deal and reported back your experiences, opinions, bugs, questions and issues. In which case you can rest assured that most if not all issues you might have had with Audiolense back then was gone by the time it hit the market.

And I can confirm that a lot of refinement has gone into Audiolense ever since.

As far as flexibility goes, there has been a very long time since I've been exposed to particular demands that wasn't already addressed in Audiolense. And as they say in the oil business: "Including but not limited to..." an inquiry from a former Audiolense beta tester / fresh Acourate user on how make crossovers that support driver overlap. And I think there were a few others too.


In comparison, Audiolense generally just churns out filters with a minimum of input or knowledge from the user - you trust that its making the right choices as it works through the script that's generating your filters.
Click to expand...

That is partly true.....

Uli describes Acourate as an audio tool box.
Audiolense is more of a filter factory. The inexperienced user can perform a measurement, draw a target, select one of the correction procedure presets, press about two more buttons and load the correction filters and listen.


... but not entirely so.

The "filter factory" comes with a number of "control room" functionalities. Audiolense provides the user with great flexibility when it comes to:

* Very flexible crossover configuration system
* Almost universal speaker setup support.
* Target designer
* And a filter procedure designer where the user is allowed choose between different correction methods and to specify all detalis deemed to be of sonic consequence.


And it works sonically too. What you see is what you get. When you've learned what to look for the good sound is just around the corner.
 
#874
Re: Re: Re: Accurate or Audiolense

Hi Bernt,

Your to be applauded for trying to make this whole area more approachable yet still offer great sound. I also thank you for the beta test last year. Had it not been for Acourate I'd have almost certainly gone with your own program.

But for me Acourate offers a level of in-depth tweaking and step by step analysis that I need and that's pretty much what it boils down to.

Good luck with your endeavour.
 
#876
Control RME's TotalMix via windows master volume

For those of you who use RME stuff I put together a little utility that is available on the RME site that allows you control TotalMix via windows master volume control. Check it out.

I have been exploring this PC XO thing lately myself. I'm still getting up to speed on everything but I do have a working system now. I hope to make it better as I learn more about everything involed.

I have been looking at Acourate, AudioLense, and Crossvolver.

I know Crossvolver is not as complete or as sophisticated as the others but it will create crossovers pretty well and it's (still) free.

I'm thinking maybe I should run VoxengoCurveEQ after ConvolverVST rather than trying to convolve everything. What do you think?

How do you guys deal with the latency issue with ConvolverVST?

I was going to try and optimize the code for 64 bit but when I tried to rebuild it there were too many file missing. Have any of you been able to compile it?


Here is a link to my system with a bunch of pictures:
http://67.19.167.226/~tdacquis/forum/showthread.php?t=7342
 
#877
Re: Control RME's TotalMix via windows master volume

ScottGardner said:
For those of you who use RME stuff I put together a little utility that is available on the RME site that allows you control TotalMix via windows master volume control. Check it out.
Click to expand...


ScottGardner! This sounds great, I have been looking for this for a looong time. Can you please post a link to where we can find the utility?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom