I've been busy testing and updating my DSP settings. Running all kinds of new tests to find more ideal combinations.
Retesting a lot of old stuff I've done, like the anti-cross talk, which had grown to a three part solution.
I tried to analyze all I had and if necessary re-adjust. Put back the "S"curve bass mod where I've had it way back in the beginning, when I was using JRiver's Surround Field, at Medium enhancement. Re-checked all levels like the anti crosstalk dips etc. Lots of little hearing tests to find optimum settings.
What did it get me? Based on what I heard today: pure bliss! 😀
Even simple pop songs come to life. They become more of a "sound event". It really gets you deep into the song. This is what I do it for. Slowly learning, yes, still learning, but slowly but surely understanding how to combine all the crazy stuff I've experimented with. There's more to do, always. But I'm back to enjoying the time spend listening, and then some.
Finally got: "Roger Waters - Three Wishes" from the album "Amused to Death (Gold Edition)" back to it's fun and insane self like I remembered it.
(so much better than headphone listening if the whole room around you comes alive! Hear it, feel it, experience it)
Retesting a lot of old stuff I've done, like the anti-cross talk, which had grown to a three part solution.
I tried to analyze all I had and if necessary re-adjust. Put back the "S"curve bass mod where I've had it way back in the beginning, when I was using JRiver's Surround Field, at Medium enhancement. Re-checked all levels like the anti crosstalk dips etc. Lots of little hearing tests to find optimum settings.
What did it get me? Based on what I heard today: pure bliss! 😀
Even simple pop songs come to life. They become more of a "sound event". It really gets you deep into the song. This is what I do it for. Slowly learning, yes, still learning, but slowly but surely understanding how to combine all the crazy stuff I've experimented with. There's more to do, always. But I'm back to enjoying the time spend listening, and then some.
Finally got: "Roger Waters - Three Wishes" from the album "Amused to Death (Gold Edition)" back to it's fun and insane self like I remembered it.
(so much better than headphone listening if the whole room around you comes alive! Hear it, feel it, experience it)
I was watching a podcast and I thought of you when they mentioned the Ozone Imager.
It's a free app, so I had to take a look.
It's pretty fun to see the sound positioned in 2D, with the stuff in the middle, and the stuff to the sides (or out of phase).
It also has a slider to expand the stereo image.
Might be fun for you to see all your M/S tweaking in real time.
It's a free app, so I had to take a look.
It's pretty fun to see the sound positioned in 2D, with the stuff in the middle, and the stuff to the sides (or out of phase).
It also has a slider to expand the stereo image.
Might be fun for you to see all your M/S tweaking in real time.
It was fun to see the songs panning the sound around, and then, I played Takla Makan by Touch Yello. There's LOTS of side stuff and phase stuff happening in there! 🙂
Thanks for that, your post helped me to find the one song that my son was looking for. A crazy song that was imaging like nothing else.
It just had to be Yello, and it was... that song was: Planet Dada (the flamboyant version).
Next to Infected Mushroom, Yello do create their own world 🙂. Not sure to call it all music, though with Malia & Boris Blank it's close enough.
Most of the time it's fun!
Takla Makan has things going on that I don't particularly hear but definitely can feel (in my floor boards and couch)
A quick frequency analysis about halfway the song shows there's plenty going on 😉
It just had to be Yello, and it was... that song was: Planet Dada (the flamboyant version).
Next to Infected Mushroom, Yello do create their own world 🙂. Not sure to call it all music, though with Malia & Boris Blank it's close enough.
Most of the time it's fun!
Takla Makan has things going on that I don't particularly hear but definitely can feel (in my floor boards and couch)
A quick frequency analysis about halfway the song shows there's plenty going on 😉
Lately I'm having more fun just listening than tinkering... or even posting for that matter.
Listening to Stereo, playing movies as a 4.2 system... it's doing what it's supposed to do and very satisfyingly so.
We didn't get much reactions on the voice panning that @krivium did for me. If there's at least some interest in it, I'm sure we could start a separate thread on it? Just say the word (right, @krivium ?).
Listening to Stereo, playing movies as a 4.2 system... it's doing what it's supposed to do and very satisfyingly so.
We didn't get much reactions on the voice panning that @krivium did for me. If there's at least some interest in it, I'm sure we could start a separate thread on it? Just say the word (right, @krivium ?).
I'm always on the lookout for new toys...
Have you seen/heard SplitEQ?
It's pretty cool as you can separate the EQ part into transient and tone. So, one can accentuate or soften the transients for a particular frequency (bell, shelf, etc) and do the same for tone, but separately.
There's also a cool feature where you can pan either the transients or the tone (or both), and a stereo widener/narrower for again, the transients and the tones separately.
Worth a look. Looks fun!
Have you seen/heard SplitEQ?
It's pretty cool as you can separate the EQ part into transient and tone. So, one can accentuate or soften the transients for a particular frequency (bell, shelf, etc) and do the same for tone, but separately.
There's also a cool feature where you can pan either the transients or the tone (or both), and a stereo widener/narrower for again, the transients and the tones separately.
Worth a look. Looks fun!
Spend some time reading up on that tool. Looks like fun to remix an already mixed track, make it more lively or wider etc.
I can't see the charm for what I'm trying to do, as it generally splits transients from non transients, so the onset of notes vs their sustain.
See a quote from Eventide:
Source: https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15743357&postcount=5
Doing stuff like that is more of a mixing/mastering job than I'm prepared to do I guess. Although I could think of a few tracks or even albums that could use that kind of work (lol). Especially lots of 80's stuff (the early days of digital) then again, they may be beyond repair.
I could see how one could enhance some transients to trick the brain into perceiving more of what Griesinger calls the onset of vocals, to emphasize its proximity effect. But that could/would vary from song to song/singer to singer. I'm merely trying to overcome a stereo defect, which is more prominent in the absence (or lower level of) of early reflections. Interesting though, it seems more of an 'effect EQ' than a true equalizer. One could really use it to shape songs. But that's way beyond my skill level, though as said, it may be welcome on quite a few tracks or albums.
I can't see the charm for what I'm trying to do, as it generally splits transients from non transients, so the onset of notes vs their sustain.
See a quote from Eventide:
Eventide's aagnello said:
Source: https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15743357&postcount=5
Doing stuff like that is more of a mixing/mastering job than I'm prepared to do I guess. Although I could think of a few tracks or even albums that could use that kind of work (lol). Especially lots of 80's stuff (the early days of digital) then again, they may be beyond repair.
I could see how one could enhance some transients to trick the brain into perceiving more of what Griesinger calls the onset of vocals, to emphasize its proximity effect. But that could/would vary from song to song/singer to singer. I'm merely trying to overcome a stereo defect, which is more prominent in the absence (or lower level of) of early reflections. Interesting though, it seems more of an 'effect EQ' than a true equalizer. One could really use it to shape songs. But that's way beyond my skill level, though as said, it may be welcome on quite a few tracks or albums.
I've been experimenting a bit with my anti-crosstalk scheme. I wanted to apply it to the mid part, and not to the sides.
So therefore I split the Stereo signal into it's separate streams, L+R and L-R using a plugin to do the work.
As I though about it some more, I figured the mid or phantom center stream always has some left and right info in it, as it is a simple sum.
So I started experimenting with applying anegative positive impulse to both side streams, figuring it would leave me with a more pure left and pure right track, where the anti-crosstalk pulse is removed.
Below the last MSED one can see the added complexity of removing any anti-crosstalk from the sides. At least, that was the intention.
Upon listening tests it sure was fun on selected tracks. But other songs were sounding worse, not as convincing as before.
After removing the added side channel edits, it became obvious that the biggest difference was in depth perception.
Especially in the center/phantom part. Lesson learned.
Additional info:
MSED is to split Stereo into mid/side or vice versa
TrackControl is a simple delay, I'm using two to fine tune exact delay as noted in a prior post
Equilibrium is a whole lot of EQ (lol) not as much as you'd think though 😉
So therefore I split the Stereo signal into it's separate streams, L+R and L-R using a plugin to do the work.
As I though about it some more, I figured the mid or phantom center stream always has some left and right info in it, as it is a simple sum.
So I started experimenting with applying a
Below the last MSED one can see the added complexity of removing any anti-crosstalk from the sides. At least, that was the intention.
Upon listening tests it sure was fun on selected tracks. But other songs were sounding worse, not as convincing as before.
After removing the added side channel edits, it became obvious that the biggest difference was in depth perception.
Especially in the center/phantom part. Lesson learned.
Additional info:
MSED is to split Stereo into mid/side or vice versa
TrackControl is a simple delay, I'm using two to fine tune exact delay as noted in a prior post
Equilibrium is a whole lot of EQ (lol) not as much as you'd think though 😉
Last edited:
Interesting thread on ASR (yes I still read some stuff there 😉): https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...creates-a-large-and-precise-soundstage.48542/
This experiment did stir up my thought process again though. What if I added the crosstalk to the sides, namely the opposite side.
I think I can really hurt my brain on this. But something that was said in the ASR thread I linked above stirred all this up again.
I think I have a few more things to try 😉. Will be a couple of days before I do get the chance, but I'll report back.
Predictably this keeps the feeling of depth and space. Had a small session so I'll wait until I've had more time to enjoy.
Another day, another small session. Compared the old way of implementing crosstalk to center sum only to this new way of applying it to the complete Stereo signal. Different? Yes. Better? I don't think so. Slight differences in positions of imaging but also in clarity. I prefer the old way. I hear a better tonal balance that way. Maybe I'm just used to hearing things like that 🙂.
Am I alone in this or does the action on the forum seem a bit slow lately.
Always expecting to see nice new things, but there isn't that much action lately.
No new array projects on their way? 😀 Or any other interesting project for that matter.
Always expecting to see nice new things, but there isn't that much action lately.
No new array projects on their way? 😀 Or any other interesting project for that matter.
Well not exactly on their way but I have been reading parts of this long thread and trying to decide whether i could emulate your fantastic arrays, especially as I have plans to buy AudioLens to try with some other speakers.
So let me ask you this; if you were starting afresh, which driver would you pick for the arrays And what would you do differently?
So let me ask you this; if you were starting afresh, which driver would you pick for the arrays And what would you do differently?
Good to see/read that we still have some builds to look forward to, eventually.
Let's see, when on a budget, I cannot think of any other driver I'd rather use than the Vifa/Peerless TC9/FD18-08 (or the TG9/FD10-08 if you can find any, not the 4 ohm TG9).
I opted to use the Scan Speak 10F 8414G10 more recently out of a large dose of curiosity. And I'm not disappointed. Measurements have shown it is a cleaner driver above about 200-250 Hz. But in all honesty, it cannot do that the Vifa/Peerless can do on the bottom end. I used the TC9 full range from say 30 Hz up to its upper limits.
So if (multiple) subwoofers or maybe even subwoofer towers are planned (*), the Scan Speak becomes a viable option. But and it's a big but.... I started with the TC9 and the Scan 10F is kind of a direct drop in. Starting fresh there's always the SB Acoustics SB65WBAC25-4 2.5” full-range driver, just as long as you're covering the bottom end with something else. The Scan Speak 10F requires help too, so not much would hold me back to go for smaller drivers with closer center to center spacing.
Other than that, I wouldn't do much different. I'm happy with the various tweaks I did trough the years and even with the original build, that is after I fixed the cracked enclosures. The passive filters that make my arrays more of an expanding array do work well. But I could have easily lived without it. Yes it is measuring better, acting better in the room but you also loose something. If I did not have the ambience speakers in the back, I do wonder which version I would prefer.
What I did and basically set out to do is get the arrays working together with the room. It worked but I did have to learn quite a bit about room behavior and it's quirks.
I wanted a resolving system with good tonality, dynamics,, imaging and even a feel of envelopment, basically all the things I like about music playback all rolled into one.
For that to happen you simply have to have a system that can play nice in your specific room. So plan ahead and prior to starting, find out what you like and want from the system.
I got a mighty fun stereo play back system that can still knock me off of my feet, get to use it for TV duties at times (primarily for Formula 1) and Home Theater. It fits in the room, I'm lucky to get away with it while having a family, but it isn't even that imposing or taking up that much space.
What would be my ultimate system? A dedicated room (I'd have to have that for such a system) with a big Horn based system, again with all bells and whistles for multichannel and/or ambience channels, probably something that takes those big old Western Electric, Electro Voice or Altec systems into the new age, using Danleys Unity/Synergy inspiration as the key.
(*) Keep the sub part stereo! It is very rewarding to do that for the feel of envelopment. To be able to get away with it, you'd have to have multiple subs or subs + capable lower array output to contribute, to fight the room modes.
Let's see, when on a budget, I cannot think of any other driver I'd rather use than the Vifa/Peerless TC9/FD18-08 (or the TG9/FD10-08 if you can find any, not the 4 ohm TG9).
I opted to use the Scan Speak 10F 8414G10 more recently out of a large dose of curiosity. And I'm not disappointed. Measurements have shown it is a cleaner driver above about 200-250 Hz. But in all honesty, it cannot do that the Vifa/Peerless can do on the bottom end. I used the TC9 full range from say 30 Hz up to its upper limits.
So if (multiple) subwoofers or maybe even subwoofer towers are planned (*), the Scan Speak becomes a viable option. But and it's a big but.... I started with the TC9 and the Scan 10F is kind of a direct drop in. Starting fresh there's always the SB Acoustics SB65WBAC25-4 2.5” full-range driver, just as long as you're covering the bottom end with something else. The Scan Speak 10F requires help too, so not much would hold me back to go for smaller drivers with closer center to center spacing.
Other than that, I wouldn't do much different. I'm happy with the various tweaks I did trough the years and even with the original build, that is after I fixed the cracked enclosures. The passive filters that make my arrays more of an expanding array do work well. But I could have easily lived without it. Yes it is measuring better, acting better in the room but you also loose something. If I did not have the ambience speakers in the back, I do wonder which version I would prefer.
What I did and basically set out to do is get the arrays working together with the room. It worked but I did have to learn quite a bit about room behavior and it's quirks.
I wanted a resolving system with good tonality, dynamics,, imaging and even a feel of envelopment, basically all the things I like about music playback all rolled into one.
For that to happen you simply have to have a system that can play nice in your specific room. So plan ahead and prior to starting, find out what you like and want from the system.
I got a mighty fun stereo play back system that can still knock me off of my feet, get to use it for TV duties at times (primarily for Formula 1) and Home Theater. It fits in the room, I'm lucky to get away with it while having a family, but it isn't even that imposing or taking up that much space.
What would be my ultimate system? A dedicated room (I'd have to have that for such a system) with a big Horn based system, again with all bells and whistles for multichannel and/or ambience channels, probably something that takes those big old Western Electric, Electro Voice or Altec systems into the new age, using Danleys Unity/Synergy inspiration as the key.
(*) Keep the sub part stereo! It is very rewarding to do that for the feel of envelopment. To be able to get away with it, you'd have to have multiple subs or subs + capable lower array output to contribute, to fight the room modes.
Last edited: