HOLMImpulse: Measuring Frequency & Impulse Response

Just a quick OT question: why obsolete HOLMImpulse and not ARTA? Is 80€ license too much or is there some "actual" issue(s)?
Alternative tool with more flexible and visual UI for converting ARTA pir-files (and CLIO mls-files) to FRDs is available in VituixCAD, though that won't make ARTA freeware or improve support on other platforms than Windows.
What about REW too? It's free and it's available for multiple platforms.
 
What about REW too? It's free and it's available for multiple platforms.
I haven't used ARTA but I find Holmimpulse really easy to use. It has a nice interface, understandable interface, all of which seems to be a rarity in software.



I am sure ARTA is great. But choice, and competition, is a nice thing to have. I for, for one, think that Linux has made Windows better.
 
Here are the things I would like to see added to HOLM, in priority order:
- bug/crash corrections (wav import for example, as well as random crashes)
- more smoothing and gating options (variables gating with finer options, psychoacoustic frequency smoothing, etc.)
- be able to see more than 3 measurements at once, for things like off axis response analysis or spinoramas
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to install HolmImpulse on a Windows 10 laptop (64-bit), and I'm constantly being told by the installer that I also need to install Windows .Net framework v2.0. However, my laptop already has a more recent .Net framework (v4.7.x, IIRC). What does one do under this situation? Anyone else encountered any of this?

I used HolmImpulse on an older Windows 7 laptop and there it worked fine.
 
Could we keep this thread on topic please?
I would love to see HolmImpulse actively maintained again, and if there is a chance for this to happen let's not miss it!

Has the author ever talked about reasons for development stopping? (Or the possibility of releasing the source code to be open source?) Just too busy with other things in life I imagine? I would guess that while some of us would very much like to see an update, perhaps the "market" is not that large, and even if we tried something like a "go fund me" it wouldn't gain enough participants to really be worth while?
 
I read an article by ARTA (http://www.artalabs.hr/AppNotes/AP4_FreeField-Rev03eng.pdf) where you can see measurements done at 0 cm, 3 cm, 6 cm, 12 cm, 24 cm, 48 cm, and 96 cm.

Although the industry standard is 1 meter, it seems to me that 1/2 meter is a "good enough" middle ground between near field and far field.

Any thoughts on this?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2019-05-01 at 22.57.29.png
    Screenshot 2019-05-01 at 22.57.29.png
    942.8 KB · Views: 295
I read an article by ARTA (http://www.artalabs.hr/AppNotes/AP4_FreeField-Rev03eng.pdf) where you can see measurements done at 0 cm, 3 cm, 6 cm, 12 cm, 24 cm, 48 cm, and 96 cm.

Although the industry standard is 1 meter, it seems to me that 1/2 meter is a "good enough" middle ground between near field and far field.

Any thoughts on this?


I believe farther is always better. The near field has things going on that don't get top the far field. You don;t want to measure those. But you do need to gate, otherwise you have altogether another problem.
 
I read an article by ARTA (http://www.artalabs.hr/AppNotes/AP4_FreeField-Rev03eng.pdf) where you can see measurements done at 0 cm, 3 cm, 6 cm, 12 cm, 24 cm, 48 cm, and 96 cm.

Although the industry standard is 1 meter, it seems to me that 1/2 meter is a "good enough" middle ground between near field and far field.

Any thoughts on this?

It depends on what you want to see in the measurement. A single driver's spl-response with typical narrow speaker baffle is ok at 50cm. Wider baffle and multpiple drivers summing up needs more distance. Also reliable off-axis measurements should be done at at least 1m, preferably 2m distance.

Reflections start to show in measurements only after a few milliseconds, depending on distace to boundaries and by ratio of direct vs. reflected sound energy. FFT analysis with variable impulse response gating enables the user to see reflections in impulse response and help to decide IR gating for spl/F, short gating doesn't show spl well in low freq. So, it is always a compromise.

Distortion is typically measured very close to a single driver, but the problem is to be able to use high enough voltage/spl, because mic easily gets overdriven. At 1m distance spl should be at least 95dB, preferably 100dB, depending on the level of ambient noise.

For an amateur measuring her/his own project, it is very easy to get blind to artefacts. It is a bit more difficult to learn to "see through" those artefacts!

Comparing measurements done by others is always problematic, because we don't know excact conditions of the measurement
 
A single driver's spl-response with typical narrow speaker baffle is ok at 50cm. Wider baffle and multpiple drivers summing up needs more distance. Also reliable off-axis measurements should be done at at least 1m, preferably 2m distance.

Should've mentioned I was indeed referencing single driver measurements for XO simulation and so forth :)

Doing measurements at 1m I actually usually don't get much different results with and without gating (typically 3ms)
 
Very strange results after importing a mic-calibration file.

Hello

I need some help or advice. Am I doing something wrong?

E888F_dir_00d.mic is the original calibration file done by professionals.
It's working in ARTA as expected.

When I imported it in HolmImpulse the results were very strange as you can see in the picture (green = FR with cal-file, red =FR without cal-file)

I have replaced all tabs with semicolons (E888F_dir_00d.cal) but nothing changed.

At least I found the cause. In C:\user\...Holmimpulse a new calibration file had been created (CalibrationMic.cal). And HI uses this file for FR-correction.

The values obviously have changed in a way, I can't explain and I do not understand.

Does someone know what is happening here?
Did I something wrong?


Thanks in advance
 

Attachments

  • E888F_dir_00d.mic.txt
    2.2 KB · Views: 44
  • E888F_dir_00d.cal.txt
    2.2 KB · Views: 44
  • CalibrationMic.cal.txt
    2.2 KB · Views: 45
  • FR-Cal.jpg
    FR-Cal.jpg
    149.3 KB · Views: 183