I'd like to take some measurements of my IPL M3TL transmission line speakers.
I have never taken any acoustic measurements before of ANY loudspeaker.
I only own a Dell Precision 7510 laptop (Windows 10).
I know I would need some kind of external USB audio interface/sound card.
I'm thinking of buying a QuantAsylum QA401 audio analyser (mainly for its ability to measure distortion). Could this be used for speaker measurements? Are there any other hardware/software combinations that would work. Thanks.
I have never taken any acoustic measurements before of ANY loudspeaker.
I only own a Dell Precision 7510 laptop (Windows 10).
I know I would need some kind of external USB audio interface/sound card.
I'm thinking of buying a QuantAsylum QA401 audio analyser (mainly for its ability to measure distortion). Could this be used for speaker measurements? Are there any other hardware/software combinations that would work. Thanks.
Last edited:
A quick search shows that it should be possible Release 1.791 and Portable Speakers– QuantAsylum
I didn't think you could use the QA401 as a normal sound card, but apparently now you can, which is very good to know.
Tony.
I didn't think you could use the QA401 as a normal sound card, but apparently now you can, which is very good to know.
Tony.
Last edited:
A Behringer UMC202HD is fine for anything you're likely to want to do. Pair it with the Behringer measurement mic (cheap) or something more expensive. I use a Beyerdynamic MM1.
By making up a couple of cables (I actually just got a pair of guitar leads and cut them in half), you can measure impedance, too.
Chris
By making up a couple of cables (I actually just got a pair of guitar leads and cut them in half), you can measure impedance, too.
Chris
+1
For speaker testing, the UMC's are totally sufficient.
(The QA401 seems more appropriate for electronics testing....and overkill for accurate speaker measurements.)
So are the cheap Beh mics, especially if you average measurements.
In terms of making better, useful measurements that can be acted on,
I'd take a four channel UMC 404, and three ECM8000 mics....total cost under $300... and make 3-mic averaged spacial measurements....
...over an expensive calibrated single-mic / high-spec sound card setup.
VHF response accuracy is the only thing I've seen high quality measurement mics do consistently better, and most often (in my measurement experience), it's who cares..
I say that because when I use a single high-spec mic and sound card, and average spacial measurements after taking them individually, i see very little difference from averaging three cheap mics at same measurement locations in real time.
I've used a USB interface and either Behringer, Earthworks, AT, Shure or Dayton calibrated mic for years to good results.
For a very low investment you could use the Dayton iMM6 and a TRRS extension cable with either your laptop or your phone. I done it and it works well enough.
Dayton Audio iMM-6 Calibrated Measurement Microphone for Tablets iPhone iPad and Android
For a very low investment you could use the Dayton iMM6 and a TRRS extension cable with either your laptop or your phone. I done it and it works well enough.
Dayton Audio iMM-6 Calibrated Measurement Microphone for Tablets iPhone iPad and Android
Thanks for all of your replies.
If using a UMC404 do I have to use 3 calibrated mics or are 3 mics averaged close enough when using standard ones?
Are there any step by step guides on how to use 3 mics to measure 1 loudspeaker? Is it as simple as pointing the 3 microphones at the driver of each speaker in turn and taking a measurement? New to all this so thanks.
If using a UMC404 do I have to use 3 calibrated mics or are 3 mics averaged close enough when using standard ones?
Are there any step by step guides on how to use 3 mics to measure 1 loudspeaker? Is it as simple as pointing the 3 microphones at the driver of each speaker in turn and taking a measurement? New to all this so thanks.
Pano is correct, you only need one mic.
Multiple mic averaging is an advanced technique, and I should probably not have mentioned it.
But the QA401 is an advanced piece of gear, so I thought maybe the shoe fits....
My point was more to say don't spend alot of money on an expensive mic, but do maybe think ahead on how to bring multiple mics into the measurement.
equation..especially when such can be done relatively cheaply.
Cause the more measurements i take, the more i'm learning not to rely or act on single point in space measurements...fwiw
Multiple mic averaging is an advanced technique, and I should probably not have mentioned it.
But the QA401 is an advanced piece of gear, so I thought maybe the shoe fits....
My point was more to say don't spend alot of money on an expensive mic, but do maybe think ahead on how to bring multiple mics into the measurement.
equation..especially when such can be done relatively cheaply.
Cause the more measurements i take, the more i'm learning not to rely or act on single point in space measurements...fwiw
One mic can do it.
Setting up the Nathan 10
Even simple noise based RTA software with a time averaging function can give useable data considering the frequencies involved.
Setting up the Nathan 10
Even simple noise based RTA software with a time averaging function can give useable data considering the frequencies involved.
What's your opinion on using a MiniDSP 2x4 HD with a UMIK-1 to help? Could this be used to help with adjusting conventional passive crossovers (meaning i could make adjustments quicker in software and hopefully transfer this over to hardware)? I've also got my eyes on a set of Linkwitz LXMINI speakers in the future so the MiniDSP could be reused later on.
I've just been listening to the speakers today, and they are pretty good but I don't know how good they COULD sound.
I've just been listening to the speakers today, and they are pretty good but I don't know how good they COULD sound.
djsb, before digital methods I used to use an analogue graphic equaliser to assist in tweaking overall. I was also able to indirectly determine when a problem was with the cross itself, at which time I'd change tactic.
What you propose is a little along these lines, however doing a full cross by ear is not what I described. I prefer to judge a crossover by ear only after I have measured it to be in some way correct. This way, for example, I can tell if the bands should be crossed tighter, or power needs adjustment.
What you propose is a little along these lines, however doing a full cross by ear is not what I described. I prefer to judge a crossover by ear only after I have measured it to be in some way correct. This way, for example, I can tell if the bands should be crossed tighter, or power needs adjustment.
Hi djsb,
First thing is to be able to take measurements. UMIK-1 and REW would work fine.
Choice of processor is a different animal..has nothing to do with measurements really ....it's just a matter of ability to manage the speaker. 2x4HD is an excellent choice for getting into active management imo.
I would suggest to disconnect your drivers in your IPL M3TL from the passive xover, and measure their raw response individually.
See for yourself where the xover region lies.
Then use the 2x4HD to roll your own xovers, and EQs, as well as time delays and levels. Great learning experience, that inevitably leads to better sound ime
One biggie.....do not use an RTA for your measurements...it's totally bogus speaker tuning data, as it does not account for the time domain in measurements.
Use REW's sine swept SPL and phase traces; or better yet ARTA, Smaart, or some other dual channel analyzer software.
First thing is to be able to take measurements. UMIK-1 and REW would work fine.
Choice of processor is a different animal..has nothing to do with measurements really ....it's just a matter of ability to manage the speaker. 2x4HD is an excellent choice for getting into active management imo.
I would suggest to disconnect your drivers in your IPL M3TL from the passive xover, and measure their raw response individually.
See for yourself where the xover region lies.
Then use the 2x4HD to roll your own xovers, and EQs, as well as time delays and levels. Great learning experience, that inevitably leads to better sound ime
One biggie.....do not use an RTA for your measurements...it's totally bogus speaker tuning data, as it does not account for the time domain in measurements.
Use REW's sine swept SPL and phase traces; or better yet ARTA, Smaart, or some other dual channel analyzer software.
I had a thought last night. A lot of newer laptops now have a single headset 3.5mm jack. This uses a TRRS type connector. It should be possible to use a dayton IMM6 with an extention cable, and to run a second cable from the passthrough jack on the IMM6 to the amplifier.
This would allow measurements with nothing more than a roughly $30 calibrated mic, and a few cables. I'm not sure whether the IMM6 passthrough socket is TRRS or just TRS (I suspect just TRS) I'll have to do an experiment when I get a chance. This may be a VERY cheap way for people to start to get into the world of doing measurements.
Tony.
This would allow measurements with nothing more than a roughly $30 calibrated mic, and a few cables. I'm not sure whether the IMM6 passthrough socket is TRRS or just TRS (I suspect just TRS) I'll have to do an experiment when I get a chance. This may be a VERY cheap way for people to start to get into the world of doing measurements.
Tony.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.