M-Noise
Meyer has built a new test signal with a frequency dependent crest factor.
It's based off pink noise and is supposed to replicate music better.
It's used to more accurately measure when non linear compression takes place.
A generous undertaking and sharing by Meyer, IMO.
Very interesting
Meyer has built a new test signal with a frequency dependent crest factor.
It's based off pink noise and is supposed to replicate music better.
It's used to more accurately measure when non linear compression takes place.
A generous undertaking and sharing by Meyer, IMO.
Very interesting
REW isn't a dual channel analyser though so can't measure compression in real time? worth to note that speakers with very large amplifiers on compression drivers will come out well from a test with high crest factor for the HF.
Yep, like kipman said. ARTA might be the best/low cost way to get dual channel.
And be prepared to make alot of noise Lol.
I haven't been able to try it yet....my gear is too loud.
And be prepared to make alot of noise Lol.
I haven't been able to try it yet....my gear is too loud.
Is it really applicable for home?? It makes perfect sense for live but all the stuff we play has been through the wash cycle.
Rob 🙂
Rob 🙂
There is some data to indicate a listener preference for speakers with low compression at high output E.G JBL M2 and this test is an attempt to quantify this. it's a bit unclear from the M-NOISE site whether you can perfrom this test in a 'normal' enviroment, they specify coherance but I'm unsure if this is achivable at 1m? 10m? in a typical space (as I don't have SMARRT). If the microphone could be located further from the speaker that would reduce the cost of testing as you would no longer need a high SPL mic. EG ECM8000 is good to ~120dB so if you could measure at 10m you could measure a 140dB capable speaker.
Hi guys, Meyer shows one of their line array boxed being testes at only 1m outdoors in the vid at 2:00 min.
I've also noticed using Smaart, that transfer coherence is always highest the closer the mic is to speaker, reducing any reflections into the measurement.
So evidently, coherence is relatively blind to near-field vs far-field summation.
As to applicability for home .....
Super interesting to ponder imo...
On one hand with live sound proaudio, you have speakers often used at or near max SPL capability, and with far higher dynamic range signal than recorded music. So heck yeah, applicable as can be.
On the other hand with home audio, you have the smaller dynamic range or recorded music, but you also have speakers that are much less capable in terms of max SPL.
My bet is, if a realistic home level for is defined at 85 dBC at listening position, M-Noise will show relatively more compression for home audio, than at least 20 dB higher for proaudio. So, i'd say yeah, probably very applicable for home.
I've also noticed using Smaart, that transfer coherence is always highest the closer the mic is to speaker, reducing any reflections into the measurement.
So evidently, coherence is relatively blind to near-field vs far-field summation.
As to applicability for home .....
Super interesting to ponder imo...
On one hand with live sound proaudio, you have speakers often used at or near max SPL capability, and with far higher dynamic range signal than recorded music. So heck yeah, applicable as can be.
On the other hand with home audio, you have the smaller dynamic range or recorded music, but you also have speakers that are much less capable in terms of max SPL.
My bet is, if a realistic home level for is defined at 85 dBC at listening position, M-Noise will show relatively more compression for home audio, than at least 20 dB higher for proaudio. So, i'd say yeah, probably very applicable for home.
Last edited: