Hello,
(i've been reading stuff here and there about diy speakers, so i have very limited knowledge, i'm sorry if question is too stupid, or it was discussed elsewhere, didn't found it.)
From what i've heard so far, ppl are going through great trouble of choosing right speakers, building good crossover, compensating room response, baffle step and stuff.
IF it all comes to a flat frequency/spl response at listening place, is it possible to take just any mediocre speakers, get a mic, play few songs, through software, compare spl at each frequency in recording, to that mic heard and then automatically creates software equalizer which boosts/lowers exact freq, so that resulting spl response in listening post would be flat. Basically change whole output so that with combination with faulty speaker response, it would create "flat" response intended in original recording. If my speakers have 3db peak at 2khz a, simply eq output so that 2khz is played -3db, so with speaker peak its 0db as in recording.
Is such solution available? (also pc software).
If yes, what for example?
If yes, what is the point of building expensive speakers, when you can get same end result at listening place?
What other factors to sound quality there are? (except speaker simply not able to play such frequency and disorts) and how are ppl achieving improvements in those factors.
I think something similar and very basic is done by av receivers, but i don't get why it's not done to perfection, today computing power should do it with ease.
PS, if you could provide longer answers with explanation, because i will learn from them 😉
(i've been reading stuff here and there about diy speakers, so i have very limited knowledge, i'm sorry if question is too stupid, or it was discussed elsewhere, didn't found it.)
From what i've heard so far, ppl are going through great trouble of choosing right speakers, building good crossover, compensating room response, baffle step and stuff.
IF it all comes to a flat frequency/spl response at listening place, is it possible to take just any mediocre speakers, get a mic, play few songs, through software, compare spl at each frequency in recording, to that mic heard and then automatically creates software equalizer which boosts/lowers exact freq, so that resulting spl response in listening post would be flat. Basically change whole output so that with combination with faulty speaker response, it would create "flat" response intended in original recording. If my speakers have 3db peak at 2khz a, simply eq output so that 2khz is played -3db, so with speaker peak its 0db as in recording.
Is such solution available? (also pc software).
If yes, what for example?
If yes, what is the point of building expensive speakers, when you can get same end result at listening place?
What other factors to sound quality there are? (except speaker simply not able to play such frequency and disorts) and how are ppl achieving improvements in those factors.
I think something similar and very basic is done by av receivers, but i don't get why it's not done to perfection, today computing power should do it with ease.
PS, if you could provide longer answers with explanation, because i will learn from them 😉
"Because" sound isn't defined by what is captured by the mic at 1m on axys or whatever.
Then you enter the realm of "it depends". What are your expectations and goals, how you can manage thru technique and materials. Also remember that the speakers are part of a system, so generally the expense put on them is leveĺed to the rest of the system...no downgrades allowed 😱
Then you enter the realm of "it depends". What are your expectations and goals, how you can manage thru technique and materials. Also remember that the speakers are part of a system, so generally the expense put on them is leveĺed to the rest of the system...no downgrades allowed 😱
lets pretend we have speakers that have absolutely flat response at listening place. What other sound qualities are there to consider? Disortion of a speaker just ads some tones to the mix, so that frequency response isn't flat.
Thing that comes to mind is for example "bass boomyness", that also ads tones that shouldn't be there.
Is there something like sound "color" as ppl tend to describe sound as tight, soft, fast etc, what exactly is that? aren't those just another tones added to the mix ?
Thing that comes to mind is for example "bass boomyness", that also ads tones that shouldn't be there.
Is there something like sound "color" as ppl tend to describe sound as tight, soft, fast etc, what exactly is that? aren't those just another tones added to the mix ?
Yes, of course you have to reduce all the possible errors. Distortion is fairly general, and "bass boominess" is an example. You shouldn't allow any extra coloration (s). Classic music, if you frequented concertos and you can recall the original sound in your mind, is good for discovering the possible faults in the system...maybe it, the error, originates from somewhere else, not the speakers.
Anybody with some DSP and a couple of hours can achieve a dead flat (+/- 0.5dB maybe) response through a measurement mic. At one position. At one level. With one test signal.
Flat response is just one of a number of important aspects of performance. The phase response, off axis response, time domain response, all are relevant.
I have heard / made very flat systems that sounded bad, and lumpy-response systems that sang like an angel.
Anyway, if you think your in-room response is flat, move the mic a few inches and see what happens.
Flat response is just one of a number of important aspects of performance. The phase response, off axis response, time domain response, all are relevant.
I have heard / made very flat systems that sounded bad, and lumpy-response systems that sang like an angel.
Anyway, if you think your in-room response is flat, move the mic a few inches and see what happens.
Group Delay is another factor that is grossly underlooked as well.
To high of a Group Delay in woofer is usually the cause of poor transient response and muddy bass characteristic's.
This is usually the case of a improperly tuned ported system or one that it is not optimized for the lowest Group Delay that is acceptable for the lower end of its passband.
This is also an issue for the midrange as well when transitioning to the next band of frequency's and drivers.
IMHO probably why many prefer a single full range driver type of system.
Fliter's and crossovers can add a significant amount of Group Delay and if it is not dealt with properly it is what can make or break your imaging ( or soundstage) in a stero or mono setup.
Sure you can easily add filtering to EQ your system flat but the filtering adds several points of differing group delays at different frequency's along the way as well.
There already are a few systems out the that try to correct this using a DSP or similar software.
Some claim that it works great and some say that it does not work so good.
I personally don't have any experience with such programs as of yet but I have tried to use a few VST type filters and such and they worked okay as a crossover, but something was amiss when I tried them.
I just couldn't get my two divers (Desktop ESL & Small sealed woofer) to sound good together as they were one using the digital method.
I never investigated this any further in the setup I was testing, but I do plan to have another look it and try it again sometime in the future.
I think the digital setup I was using was adding some unequal delays to each of the individual drivers and I never checked them to see if this was the case.
The writers of the more sophisticated programs have made provisions for such adjustments but their programs are not by anyway what I would consider cheap, Affordable maybe but not cost effective, IMHO.
Until I actually hear such a system that works and works well, I will stick with the traditional analog methods.
But that's just me, as I am no programmer when it come to a DSP and just one afternoon. 😉
Typically when my big system was working it was fairly flat as it was and it had a great sound with no boomyness what so ever.
But there was just something about when I tweaked them with the EQ's from my Mixing board (Mackie 32-8).
It didn't do a whole lot to make them any flatter as I have tested this with some frequency response sweep tests!!
But the stereo imaging would just hit you in the face in the EQ's were on!!
I suspect that filter settings were doing some thing to correct the group delays of the drivers as I was just using simple 6db crossovers for the tweeter's and midrange's in the system.
I have shown pictures of the system and response charts of it before in these threads as it had 4x10's and 4x12's and 2x8's.
It was nothing special but but a bunch of cabinets that I rebuilt with what I had to move some air.
But the did sound really good until I burned 3 of the 12's one night of rockin' out. He,he,he,he 😕
🙄
I had the power to back them as well via Crown DC300a II or a Ashley FTX2000.
The Ashley was to much for them and what took them out eventually.
But, I will get them running again soon with some 12's that are better than the stock ones that I was using.
Just waiting on a good deal from PE to come up. 😉
My point is, I didn't get the chance to find out what it was exactly why the EQ was doing what it did when it change very little to the response of the system as a whole since it was just very small tweaks of 1to2db or so.
It was more about what frequency the sweepable filters were set at more than anything.
If remember correctly it was right around in the range that my crossover frequency's were (I think).
It had been two years now since I have used the systems as it was. 😀
FWIW
jer 🙂
To high of a Group Delay in woofer is usually the cause of poor transient response and muddy bass characteristic's.
This is usually the case of a improperly tuned ported system or one that it is not optimized for the lowest Group Delay that is acceptable for the lower end of its passband.
This is also an issue for the midrange as well when transitioning to the next band of frequency's and drivers.
IMHO probably why many prefer a single full range driver type of system.
Fliter's and crossovers can add a significant amount of Group Delay and if it is not dealt with properly it is what can make or break your imaging ( or soundstage) in a stero or mono setup.
Sure you can easily add filtering to EQ your system flat but the filtering adds several points of differing group delays at different frequency's along the way as well.
There already are a few systems out the that try to correct this using a DSP or similar software.
Some claim that it works great and some say that it does not work so good.
I personally don't have any experience with such programs as of yet but I have tried to use a few VST type filters and such and they worked okay as a crossover, but something was amiss when I tried them.
I just couldn't get my two divers (Desktop ESL & Small sealed woofer) to sound good together as they were one using the digital method.
I never investigated this any further in the setup I was testing, but I do plan to have another look it and try it again sometime in the future.
I think the digital setup I was using was adding some unequal delays to each of the individual drivers and I never checked them to see if this was the case.
The writers of the more sophisticated programs have made provisions for such adjustments but their programs are not by anyway what I would consider cheap, Affordable maybe but not cost effective, IMHO.
Until I actually hear such a system that works and works well, I will stick with the traditional analog methods.
But that's just me, as I am no programmer when it come to a DSP and just one afternoon. 😉
Typically when my big system was working it was fairly flat as it was and it had a great sound with no boomyness what so ever.
But there was just something about when I tweaked them with the EQ's from my Mixing board (Mackie 32-8).
It didn't do a whole lot to make them any flatter as I have tested this with some frequency response sweep tests!!
But the stereo imaging would just hit you in the face in the EQ's were on!!
I suspect that filter settings were doing some thing to correct the group delays of the drivers as I was just using simple 6db crossovers for the tweeter's and midrange's in the system.
I have shown pictures of the system and response charts of it before in these threads as it had 4x10's and 4x12's and 2x8's.
It was nothing special but but a bunch of cabinets that I rebuilt with what I had to move some air.
But the did sound really good until I burned 3 of the 12's one night of rockin' out. He,he,he,he 😕
🙄I had the power to back them as well via Crown DC300a II or a Ashley FTX2000.
The Ashley was to much for them and what took them out eventually.
But, I will get them running again soon with some 12's that are better than the stock ones that I was using.
Just waiting on a good deal from PE to come up. 😉
My point is, I didn't get the chance to find out what it was exactly why the EQ was doing what it did when it change very little to the response of the system as a whole since it was just very small tweaks of 1to2db or so.
It was more about what frequency the sweepable filters were set at more than anything.
If remember correctly it was right around in the range that my crossover frequency's were (I think).
It had been two years now since I have used the systems as it was. 😀
FWIW
jer 🙂
Attachments
Hi,
Whlst you can correct response and some room issues digitally,
you have no chance of correcting distortion, poor driver integration,
poor power response and poor SPL capabilities (especially in the bass).
And realistically the frequency response of poor drivers.
And further no chance of correcting speaker colouration, which is
essentially time domain if the frequency domain is well sorted.
e.g. poor cabinets will always sound like poor cabinets.
rgds, sreten.
Whlst you can correct response and some room issues digitally,
you have no chance of correcting distortion, poor driver integration,
poor power response and poor SPL capabilities (especially in the bass).
And realistically the frequency response of poor drivers.
And further no chance of correcting speaker colouration, which is
essentially time domain if the frequency domain is well sorted.
e.g. poor cabinets will always sound like poor cabinets.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.