CLS, the problem you hear with equalized room response peaks has nothing to do with loss of detail/dynamics in digital domain! Your measurement mic detects a room mode peak and converts it by FFT as a graph. If you implement a similar correction in source signal, the signal is (room) peak should be equalized in dsp, set F prescisely right and use high Q . My tests with 45Hz room mode support that.
-
I personally don't do any room eq with minidsp, only driver eq, xo, level and delay. Room modes and reflections should be dealed with acoustic treatment. I haven't heard FIR room eq (rephase etc.) but I believe that it can be better, taking care of delayed sound/energy better. But anyway even this "treatment" is not correcting the real origin of problems!
-
I personally don't do any room eq with minidsp, only driver eq, xo, level and delay. Room modes and reflections should be dealed with acoustic treatment. I haven't heard FIR room eq (rephase etc.) but I believe that it can be better, taking care of delayed sound/energy better. But anyway even this "treatment" is not correcting the real origin of problems!
Last edited:
I edited the previous message it "broke" and appears to be nonsense now!
A new try!
CLS, the problem you hear with equalized room response peaks has nothing to do with loss of detail/dynamics in digital domain! Your measurement mic detects a room mode peak and converts it by FFT with some smoothing as a graph. If you implement a similar correction in source signal, you overcorrect and spoil it!
I have noticed a general recommendation that a measuered (room) peak should be equalized for only 1/3 in dsp in source signal, set F prescisely right and use high Q . My tests with 45Hz room mode support that.
-
I personally don't do any room eq with minidsp, only driver eq, xo, level and delay. Room modes and reflections should be dealed with acoustic treatment. I haven't heard FIR room eq (rephase etc.) but I believe that it can be better, taking care of delayed sound/energy better. But anyway even this "treatment" is not correcting the real origin of problems!
A new try!
CLS, the problem you hear with equalized room response peaks has nothing to do with loss of detail/dynamics in digital domain! Your measurement mic detects a room mode peak and converts it by FFT with some smoothing as a graph. If you implement a similar correction in source signal, you overcorrect and spoil it!
I have noticed a general recommendation that a measuered (room) peak should be equalized for only 1/3 in dsp in source signal, set F prescisely right and use high Q . My tests with 45Hz room mode support that.
-
I personally don't do any room eq with minidsp, only driver eq, xo, level and delay. Room modes and reflections should be dealed with acoustic treatment. I haven't heard FIR room eq (rephase etc.) but I believe that it can be better, taking care of delayed sound/energy better. But anyway even this "treatment" is not correcting the real origin of problems!
Last edited:
Hi
rephase is not really meant to be a room correction tool, but more of a manual speaker correction and crossover tool, exactly like a miniDSP or DCX but with more freedom regarding the amplitude/phase relation and number and type of correction points.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.