RME sound card choice for PC
I wish to try the active crossover and Room correction using either Acourate or the Allocator/ arbitrator programs. The only focus is high quality music playback from CD and analogue sources. Hence PC, a slightly older version to experiment, will be a dedicatd to this.
Which of the following would be more suitable?
1. RME Hammerfall 9632 with AO expansion board
2. Fireface 400.
My current system:
Jordan JX 53 linear array ( Ted's Design)
Low freq Seas EXCEL 8" magnesium alloy cone in a sealed box.
Passive crossover as recommended in Ted Jordan's site.
Home made preamp valve ( Daniel 1 circuit) with extrem PSU upgrade
CD player Musical Fidelity A5
Turtable: Rega Planar3 Denon 103 cartridge
AMP: Pass ZV9 ( very good; low gain)
Marantz 8B - undergoing mods/ upgrade of caps, to be deployed in the active XO setup
the approx USD300 difference not a major consideration.
Any opiniions and advice would be appreciated as I am a novice in this area
I wish to try the active crossover and Room correction using either Acourate or the Allocator/ arbitrator programs. The only focus is high quality music playback from CD and analogue sources. Hence PC, a slightly older version to experiment, will be a dedicatd to this.
Which of the following would be more suitable?
1. RME Hammerfall 9632 with AO expansion board
2. Fireface 400.
My current system:
Jordan JX 53 linear array ( Ted's Design)
Low freq Seas EXCEL 8" magnesium alloy cone in a sealed box.
Passive crossover as recommended in Ted Jordan's site.
Home made preamp valve ( Daniel 1 circuit) with extrem PSU upgrade
CD player Musical Fidelity A5
Turtable: Rega Planar3 Denon 103 cartridge
AMP: Pass ZV9 ( very good; low gain)
Marantz 8B - undergoing mods/ upgrade of caps, to be deployed in the active XO setup
the approx USD300 difference not a major consideration.
Any opiniions and advice would be appreciated as I am a novice in this area
I have the Hammerfall card, which I use with an external ADAT converter. It works for me flawlesly with the Allocator. I have one Beta tester/user who has the Fireface 800 and we had a lot of problems getting his rig to work right with the Allocator.
The problem is with Allocator using very large processing blocks of 8192 samples. The Fireface driver allows for only 1024 samples buffers max, so the operation is not as smooth as it could be. Also you are limited by the Windows Firewire driver, which is optimized for efficient streaming of small blocks.
With a PCI card and proprietary driver there is less variables and things tend to go smoother. My Hammerfall driver allows me to go up to 8192 samples long ASIO buffers which makes the operation of the Allocator optimal. From the two choices you outlined I would recommend the HDSP9636 card with analog expanders (RME or other ADAT compatible external converters).
Also, did you look at the RME Multiface II? It comes with a PCI card and external converter box for about $100.00 less then the Fireface 400. You don't get the mic preamps, but you can get a mic pre suitable for measurements for less than $100.00.
The problem is with Allocator using very large processing blocks of 8192 samples. The Fireface driver allows for only 1024 samples buffers max, so the operation is not as smooth as it could be. Also you are limited by the Windows Firewire driver, which is optimized for efficient streaming of small blocks.
With a PCI card and proprietary driver there is less variables and things tend to go smoother. My Hammerfall driver allows me to go up to 8192 samples long ASIO buffers which makes the operation of the Allocator optimal. From the two choices you outlined I would recommend the HDSP9636 card with analog expanders (RME or other ADAT compatible external converters).
Also, did you look at the RME Multiface II? It comes with a PCI card and external converter box for about $100.00 less then the Fireface 400. You don't get the mic preamps, but you can get a mic pre suitable for measurements for less than $100.00.
Well it should be simple : BruteFIR runs on Linux. Hammerfall works perfectly on Linux. Fireface has no driver.
RME sound card
Thunau, Peufeu,
Thanks for your advice.
Thunau,
Any advantage experienced with the Multiface in terms of sound quality compared to HDSP 9632 because of the external box?
My intial reaction is to go with 9632 because of 192khz operation and reported robustness, so that when software and other aspects catch up with the higher freq. the investment will still be relevant
Thunau, Peufeu,
Thanks for your advice.
Thunau,
Any advantage experienced with the Multiface in terms of sound quality compared to HDSP 9632 because of the external box?
My intial reaction is to go with 9632 because of 192khz operation and reported robustness, so that when software and other aspects catch up with the higher freq. the investment will still be relevant
Sorrry, I have no first hand experience with the Multiface 2. But, all RME coverters have generally very good specs and are well respected by audio professionals. You should be happy with the sound quality either way you go.
192kHz processing is probably overkill. Oversampling CD's to 88.2kHz and processing at that frequency seems like the sensible solution.
192kHz processing is probably overkill. Oversampling CD's to 88.2kHz and processing at that frequency seems like the sensible solution.
Hi everyone,
I am the new one 😀 .
I am very interested in FIR-Filters and this thread is nearly the best what ever happend in this direction. I read a lot about BrutFIR, a big pro is its` price ....0.00 € . But I don`t have the skills in programming or what ever.
So my question is:
1. How steep are the filter slopes of the waves linear EQ FIR-Filter ?
2. Are there anywhere cards listed, which are very good, inexpansive and compatible with CONSOLE
?
3. Are there any BruteFIR-based programmes, which an noob can usw? 😀
I am the new one 😀 .
I am very interested in FIR-Filters and this thread is nearly the best what ever happend in this direction. I read a lot about BrutFIR, a big pro is its` price ....0.00 € . But I don`t have the skills in programming or what ever.
So my question is:
1. How steep are the filter slopes of the waves linear EQ FIR-Filter ?
2. Are there anywhere cards listed, which are very good, inexpansive and compatible with CONSOLE
?3. Are there any BruteFIR-based programmes, which an noob can usw? 😀
I'm not sure if youre asking the right question here.
BruteFIR doesn't generate any filters. It's an engine used to run any FIR filter that you might wish to run.
How steep can a Fir XO be?
I think there's no limit here. With the right math you can make the filter as steep as you want. -300dB @ +/1 octave is no problem, for instance.
BruteFIR doesn't generate any filters. It's an engine used to run any FIR filter that you might wish to run.
How steep can a Fir XO be?
I think there's no limit here. With the right math you can make the filter as steep as you want. -300dB @ +/1 octave is no problem, for instance.
Hi,
In fact, max slope will decrease with frequency, given a constant numbrer of taps. I'm using 64k taps filters, that gives a vertical cut at 2000 hz., and something like 300 dB/oct at 150 hz.
That happens using sinc windowed filters, but of course you can design any curve you want, with less slope, if you have enough coefficients.
Hawksford gave some interesting linear crossover functions that mixes both ways in a complex manner, but I think that a steep cutoff if part of the interest of FIR filters. Say goodbye to off axis cancellations and associated image and tonal balance anomalies. People use to say that my speakers sound "in one piece", much like a full-ranger.
Cheers,
Roberto
In fact, max slope will decrease with frequency, given a constant numbrer of taps. I'm using 64k taps filters, that gives a vertical cut at 2000 hz., and something like 300 dB/oct at 150 hz.
That happens using sinc windowed filters, but of course you can design any curve you want, with less slope, if you have enough coefficients.
Hawksford gave some interesting linear crossover functions that mixes both ways in a complex manner, but I think that a steep cutoff if part of the interest of FIR filters. Say goodbye to off axis cancellations and associated image and tonal balance anomalies. People use to say that my speakers sound "in one piece", much like a full-ranger.
Cheers,
Roberto
No, no, my question was referring to the Console and the Wave Plugins. But BruteFIR is also very interesting, but like is said...i have no idea of programming or even using this thing...🙁
doctrin said:
Well, I'm just getting into this and haven't used Brutefir - but I gather is it is more of a command line interface than programming.
Learning a new command line interface and it's various switches, syntax, and other quirks can seem daunting.
But really isn't that hard. Takes a certain amount, or even a goodly amount of effort? yes. But the alternative is to pay higher and sometimes exorbitantly higher prices
It is definitely not programming, it just seems complex until you get used to it.
Hey, it's not that much different from DOS, linux, etc.
come on now - copy, xcopy, deltree, md for make directory, etc in DOS is just a simpler command line interface.
You're doing something more technical in brutefir, and need more technical commands and it will have more technical complexity due to the technical nature of what you are doing.
this is not all bad, because it will lead to a greater and more in-depth of knowledge of the technical side of what you are doing.
Having said that _big grin_
If thunau's stuff does what I want, and isn't lacking in scope of abilities, performance and useability, I will likely buy it - providing a reasonable cost/benefit ratio - it's hard to come up with the time to learn a new interface.
thunau's stuff is very interesting and a really good work, but my interesst is in high, in very high cut slopes 😉 .
BruteFIR would also be very interesting, because of its performance and its price ^^ . But where can i get the filters for the engine? 🙂
BruteFIR would also be very interesting, because of its performance and its price ^^ . But where can i get the filters for the engine? 🙂
generating filters for brutefir
it is pretty easy to generate filters using Octave. Have a look at Chris Birkenshaw's example octave code on www.duffroomcorrection.com.
You can also generate filters using drc. I use Octave-generated filters for xo, and then drc for filters (in series with the xo filters) to do room correction. I'm very happy with the results.
it is pretty easy to generate filters using Octave. Have a look at Chris Birkenshaw's example octave code on www.duffroomcorrection.com.
You can also generate filters using drc. I use Octave-generated filters for xo, and then drc for filters (in series with the xo filters) to do room correction. I'm very happy with the results.
Who has compared IIR style filters with FIR filters and found that one sounds better than the other?
Who is using steeper than 24/db octave filters? And what drivers are you using?
(With my setup I found that 48db/octave sounds artificial/electronic and that sounds were easily localized to which driver they were coming from. But then again I'm using a ribbon and woofer with about 3 inches gap between them horizontally. I've heard that ears can easily localize sounds in the horizontal plane, but not as easily vertically.)
Who is using steeper than 24/db octave filters? And what drivers are you using?
(With my setup I found that 48db/octave sounds artificial/electronic and that sounds were easily localized to which driver they were coming from. But then again I'm using a ribbon and woofer with about 3 inches gap between them horizontally. I've heard that ears can easily localize sounds in the horizontal plane, but not as easily vertically.)
Daveis said:
Not with the pc, but with a BSSFDS366 digital crossover, I am using 52 DB slopes, which is the steepest available.
When I have listening sessions, the dixie bottleheads seem to always prefer the steeper slopes. Major listening positions are about 14.5' from the horns.
I am using large Azurahorns with DX4's, 10" DDS waveguides with 1" Radians, and 12" nht1259 sealed subs. From the center of the Azuras to the center of the DDS horns is about 28", from the center of the Azuras to the center of the subs is probably 30"
IMHO, it imay not be the steep slopes, it is possibly a time alignment issue that allows you to hear the localized sounds. Steeper slopes may make it more readily apparent.
In my case, when the delay was correctly set on my subs, the sound of the subs appears to be coming from the center of the horns which are considerably higher.
or possibly, your system simply needs lower slopes for best integration.
When it's right - you won't really hear the location of drivers, you just hear the soundstage and positioning of the instruments
Daveis said:
It's really easy to compare IIR to FIR for the same slopes using lspCAD and its emulator function. You have a choice of IIR or FIR for filtering and you can switch between them quickly. FIR has a different sound- I find a bit edgier- which to some people might appear as more detailed. IIR tends to sound smooth.
ShinOBIWAN commented on the difference in sound a few posts above. He is using the FIR based DEQX and the IIR based Allocator. He found the DEQX "processed" sounding and preferred the Allocator for his setup.
brutefir
I just use the normal slope that results from the Octave FIR function. It is extremely steep. I agree there is a bit of edginess and look forward to trying my setup with Thuneau's program soon.
I just use the normal slope that results from the Octave FIR function. It is extremely steep. I agree there is a bit of edginess and look forward to trying my setup with Thuneau's program soon.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.