Room measurements
- Thread starter mep
- Start date
It's obvious that the two readings you posted are commensurate, and describing the same room, while one actually doesn't describe the entire range up to 20kHz, and that's your preferred one.
I use Analyzer on an iPad, and find it quite useful. Have a number of other apps, as well, but this does a good job of pointing out "what's what."
on my iPad it is up to 20khz, which is what I normally use. i think it's just a scale numbering issue on the iPhone due to lack of space.
Yes! Adding bass traps improves clarity at low frequencies by flattening the response and reducing ringing decay times, and also improves midrange clarity by lowering bass peaks and reducing bass decays that masks the high frequencies.
--Ethan
This is an older video I took, but it still shows the main room treatments. I will take some more pictures soon.
I did some filter outlay and measurements today of the new system ,inroom measurements under 300 hz i dont take very serious because of room influence but above that are surely workable , smoothe factor is 1/6 , octave
Measurements are taken with the ATB 801 system and a NADY precision /measuring mic
From 650 hz - 19 khz +- 1,5 db
Measuring distance : listening spot /earheight
DSC_0034 by andromeda61, on Flickr
Measurements are taken with the ATB 801 system and a NADY precision /measuring mic
From 650 hz - 19 khz +- 1,5 db
Measuring distance : listening spot /earheight
DSC_0034 by andromeda61, on Flickr
Last edited:
The dynamic range of your signal is less than 30dB, why do you show a scale between 10 and 105dB, covering 95 dB?
Why not, it doesnt matter anything for the FR tolerance i want to see , plus it looks nice to have the graphic a bit high , i think .
I can post a different scale if i want but the tolerance stays the same
I can post a different scale if i want but the tolerance stays the same
Yes, it looks nice ...
It is why very often manufacturers and reviewers show this type of graph with an extended scale - subjectively it hides any irregularity. In science it is often considered a poor and misleading practice, and as you seem to be interested in attracting comments you should show the readers graphs showing the maximum of information and detail. I always do it in my room measurements - in this case I want to see the truth, not to please me. Just my .02 IMHO.
It sounds also very nice .
It is not misleading, it would be misleading if i would post a 1/2 octave smooth factor graph and not mentioning the smoothfactor so people might think it was done at 1/6 smooth factor .
But i will post some small scale graphs also at a later time , for clearification
It is not misleading, it would be misleading if i would post a 1/2 octave smooth factor graph and not mentioning the smoothfactor so people might think it was done at 1/6 smooth factor .
But i will post some small scale graphs also at a later time , for clearification
especially for micro , on a 35 db scale and also 1/6 octave smooth factor , still well within +- 2 db , from 500 hz - 18 khz.
But to clarify also ,the filter is not yet 100 % optimised , it will be better
DSC_0035 by andromeda61, on Flickr
And 1/3 octave smooth factor
DSC_0036 by andromeda61, on Flickr
But to clarify also ,the filter is not yet 100 % optimised , it will be better
DSC_0035 by andromeda61, on Flickr
And 1/3 octave smooth factor
DSC_0036 by andromeda61, on Flickr
Last edited:
Sorry, but I would plot this one in a 15dB scale
and it would be nice to move the parameter box to the bottom - it interferes with the scale reading. Anyway, the only document I am remembering that establishes practical quantitative limits for appreciation of in room measurements is the Nyal Mellor and Jeff Hedback white paper "Acoustic Measurement Standards for Stereo Listening Rooms." It would be nice to have Nyal comments on these matters.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hedbackdesignedacoustics.com%2Ffiles%2FQuickSiteImages%2FAMS_for_Stereo_List._Rms.pdf&ei=0ZxdUc-JLqKv7Abz-YCQBw&usg=AFQjCNGT5yQKt1bMqa-T3iC8E_TN7VBHVg&sig2=ALZnaGf4TELc94vPx5vNhA&bvm=bv.44770516,d.ZGU
Another time micro, i ll come back in this topic , when the filter is finallized
As i said before due to room influence the measurements under 300 hz are not to be taken serious , thats why the parameter menu is there .
Do you have the FR of your speaker /room on a 35 db scale , 1/6 octave smoothe factor ???
As i said before due to room influence the measurements under 300 hz are not to be taken serious , thats why the parameter menu is there .
Do you have the FR of your speaker /room on a 35 db scale , 1/6 octave smoothe factor ???
Last edited:
Hundreds of them with many speakers! The good thing is that REW makes a measurement, that can be saved as raw data, and you can apply any scaling and weighting either immediately or offline. The choice of weighting depends on what you are looking for. See my old post showing the effect of weighting, at that time using the demo version of SpectraPlus. Now I am using REW.
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?5893-Speaker-Room-calibration&p=93512&viewfull=1#post93512
Has anyone here actually tried the REW + Tascam US-122 Mk2 + calibrated Dayton EMM-6 combo and got it working? I'm about to pull the trigger on this stuff and although it looks like I should be good to go, a little reassurance in this area wouldn't go amiss...
I've used REW + Tascam US-122 MK2 (and US-144 MK2) + calibrated Dayton EMM-6 (and Behringer ECM8000) with no issues.Has anyone here actually tried the REW + Tascam US-122 Mk2 + calibrated Dayton EMM-6 combo and got it working? I'm about to pull the trigger on this stuff and although it looks like I should be good to go, a little reassurance in this area wouldn't go amiss...
Similar threads
