WiiM RoomFit, FIR filters, and PC-based playback

[Cyclist]

Hi Audioholics community,

Greetings from Italy! I’m a music lover who enjoys a natural, engaging musical experience.

My current hi-fi setup is:

• Streamer/DAC: WiiM Ultra
• Power amplifier: Audiophonics AP300-S250NC
• Speakers: AsciLab C6B
• Subwoofer: Arendal 1723 1S
• Measurement microphone: UMIK-1
• USB interface: SMSL PO100 Pro
• PC: Acer Nitro — Ryzen 7 8845HS, RTX 4060, 16 GB RAM, 1 TB SSD
• Music service: Qobuz
• Connection: Ethernet to the WiiM Ultra

At the moment I use the WiiM RoomFit feature, measured with the UMIK-1. The results are generally good. I have experimented with different correction ranges, and in my opinion the system sounds most enjoyable when I correct only the bass region.

My crossover is set at 80 Hz, so everything below that is handled by the Arendal 1723 1S. I am not correcting the AsciLab C6B speakers, because whenever I apply any kind of correction filter to them, I feel that something sounds wrong or less natural.

I have also been experimenting with convolution WAV filters generated by GSonic Reference. I would like to understand how to use these filters with WASAPI Exclusive mode, ideally while playing Qobuz from my PC.

I have experimented with REW as well, but whenever I apply the generated filters, the system seems to lose some of its enjoyment and musical engagement. I would like to learn how to use measurements and correction without sacrificing the qualities that make music enjoyable.

Is there a recommended software solution for building a proper PC based audio station using Qobuz, WASAPI Exclusive, and FIR/convolution filters while preserving sound quality? I would also appreciate suggestions on whether I should keep correction limited to the subwoofer/bass range or consider another approach.

One more thing I would love to understand: when I listen to metal on my inexpensive Sony WF-C500 earbuds, the guitar riffs often sound amazingly engaging and exciting. On my hi-fi system, however, I sometimes feel that “something” is missing. Interestingly, with genres such as jazz and blues, my hi-fi system sounds fantastic. Could this be related to the speakers’ voicing, room acoustics, bass integration, EQ, or simply the different sound signature of the Sony earbuds?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Best regards,
Cyclist

 

[TLS Guy]

Hi Audioholics community,

Greetings from Italy! I’m a music lover who enjoys a natural, engaging musical experience.

My current hi-fi setup is:

• Streamer/DAC: WiiM Ultra
• Power amplifier: Audiophonics AP300-S250NC
• Speakers: AsciLab C6B
• Subwoofer: Arendal 1723 1S
• Measurement microphone: UMIK-1
• USB interface: SMSL PO100 Pro
• PC: Acer Nitro — Ryzen 7 8845HS, RTX 4060, 16 GB RAM, 1 TB SSD
• Music service: Qobuz
• Connection: Ethernet to the WiiM Ultra

At the moment I use the WiiM RoomFit feature, measured with the UMIK-1. The results are generally good. I have experimented with different correction ranges, and in my opinion the system sounds most enjoyable when I correct only the bass region.

My crossover is set at 80 Hz, so everything below that is handled by the Arendal 1723 1S. I am not correcting the AsciLab C6B speakers, because whenever I apply any kind of correction filter to them, I feel that something sounds wrong or less natural.

I have also been experimenting with convolution WAV filters generated by GSonic Reference. I would like to understand how to use these filters with WASAPI Exclusive mode, ideally while playing Qobuz from my PC.

I have experimented with REW as well, but whenever I apply the generated filters, the system seems to lose some of its enjoyment and musical engagement. I would like to learn how to use measurements and correction without sacrificing the qualities that make music enjoyable.

Is there a recommended software solution for building a proper PC based audio station using Qobuz, WASAPI Exclusive, and FIR/convolution filters while preserving sound quality? I would also appreciate suggestions on whether I should keep correction limited to the subwoofer/bass range or consider another approach.

One more thing I would love to understand: when I listen to metal on my inexpensive Sony WF-C500 earbuds, the guitar riffs often sound amazingly engaging and exciting. On my hi-fi system, however, I sometimes feel that “something” is missing. Interestingly, with genres such as jazz and blues, my hi-fi system sounds fantastic. Could this be related to the speakers’ voicing, room acoustics, bass integration, EQ, or simply the different sound signature of the Sony earbuds?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Best regards,
Cyclist

The answer is straight forward. You are using small bookshelf speakers. People think if they have a sub, then they have plenty of bass. WRONG!

The bass range extends to well above sub range and to 400 Hz at least. In addition there is a lot of power in the midrange up to at least 3.5KHz.

You only use bookshelf speakers if you absolutely have to, but you will never get realistic spls. across the acoustic spectrum. Actually I tend to find where many designs are short changed is in the mid range band.

 

[Cyclist]

That is an impressive system !!! Clearly designed to deliver effortless, realistic sound at high levels.

Thanks for the input. I’m happy with my current equipment and I’m not looking for higher SPL or a speaker upgrade. My aim is simply to fine-tune the system I already have for my room and listening levels.

Jazz and blues already sound excellent. With metal, I’m trying to understand why some guitar riffs feel less immediate and exciting than on my Sony WF-C500 earbuds, and whether careful speaker/sub integration, placement, or subtle bass region DSP could improve that without changing the natural sound I enjoy.

 

[ski2xblack]

Welcome to the forum, Cyclist.

One more thing I would love to understand: when I listen to metal on my inexpensive Sony WF-C500 earbuds, the guitar riffs often sound amazingly engaging and exciting. On my hi-fi system, however, I sometimes feel that “something” is missing. Interestingly, with genres such as jazz and blues, my hi-fi system sounds fantastic. Could this be related to the speakers’ voicing, room acoustics, bass integration, EQ, or simply the different sound signature of the Sony earbuds?

Perhaps the Sony earbuds produce nonlinearities conducive to your enjoyment of that specific genre? Have you attacked this from that angle? The earbuds have a peak of several db at 3khz, which would definitely result in more "immediate and exciting" guitar riffs. If that's what you want from your speakers, try some eq to give them a similar response.

 

[lovinthehd]

I wouldn't try and determine differences by genre particularly. Personally I don't try and compare headphones/earbuds to speakers, they're just different; the earbuds may do something you prefer over your speakers. Generally though I'd look to the quality of the recording itself rather than the type of music. While many people look to limit any eq correction to the lower frequencies (under schroeder frequency) that would include your speakers as schroeder in a typical room extends well above 80 hz.

 

[ski2xblack]

I agree with lovin's post, and your current practice of not trying to "correct" the Asilabs above transition frequencies. Those speakers are really good, so "correction" would make them worse. Sure, they start to cry for mercy at levels above 96db or so, but if you listen at levels below that it's not a problem. (Selective eq to taste for snarling metal guitars is still valid.)

The whole system is pretty darn good as well, with a very good sub and the means to tune the bass pretty thoroughly.

The glaring issue (aside from the speakers dynamic limits) is that a single sub can be optimized for a small spot but in the process makes variability worse over the broader listening area in the room. This can make calibration of a one sub rig a more frustrating endeavor. A second sub would allow more uniform bass over a much broader area, and such uniform response takes much more kindly to the eq/calibration you want to apply. Multiple subs are just a better starting point and easier to dial in. They'll require less eq than a single sub, and the eq you do end up using is more effective over a wider swath of the room.

That's a pretty expensive way to get improvements, but you could better utilize the tools on hand to dial it in, and great bass is a wonderful improvement afterr all.

You know we're going to pester you about your bikes, too. I hope you're still tuning in to the thread.

 

[j_garcia]

The reviews do look impressive for those speakers. -3dB at 50Hz is plenty to blend with pretty much any sub. With how flat their response curve is though, it may almost be too accurate giving a flat or analytical sound. I have heard speakers like this that sound exactly how they should, but don't quite sound lively. I would stick with them for a while though and see if you get used to their sound, without correction. You may come to find your earbuds are the ones that have the colored sound vs. the AsciLabs.

 

[TLS Guy]

The reviews do look impressive for those speakers. -3dB at 50Hz is plenty to blend with pretty much any sub. With how flat their response curve is though, it may almost be too accurate giving a flat or analytical sound. I have heard speakers like this that sound exactly how they should, but don't quite sound lively. I would stick with them for a while though and see if you get used to their sound, without correction. You may come to find your earbuds are the ones that have the colored sound vs. the AsciLabs.

Actually speakers with a flat response sound excellent. I can attest to that. The issue is that an FR response can only be obtained on a speaker at relatively low power, otherwise you blow the speaker. That issue confounds designers as they think they can go home and put their feet up based on the FR. They are wrong. They forget about dynamic compression in speakers, which really skews the response as power is increased. Again and again, I see speakers with not enough resources placed where it counts, and especially in the midrange, and to an extent the HF.
This is a major issue, and designers need to be trained better and not walk right into that mistake, which they often do.

 

[j_garcia]

Actually speakers with a flat response sound excellent. I can attest to that. The issue is that an FR response can only be obtained on a speaker at relatively low power, otherwise you blow the speaker. That issue confounds designers as they think they can go home and put their feet up based on the FR. They are wrong. They forget about dynamic compression in speakers, which really skews the response as power is increased. Again and again, I see speakers with not enough resources placed where it counts, and especially in the midrange, and to an extent the HF.
This is a major issue, and designers need to be trained better and not walk right into that mistake, which they often do.

Yes, I am actually saying that very neutral speakers should sound good. It is personal preference that people may not be looking for that flat, accurate sound. It can be a preference for more bass or overly bright highs, I don't know. I prefer neutral sounding. I went to a guy's place to pick up a sub some years ago and he had a very simple setup of only a few components, but all were high quality (Musical Fidelity preamp or integrated, some fancy class A amp that I can't recall, nice transport). He had some studio monitors, I don't recall which, and it sounded amazing.

You and Dennis need to teach a class for new speaker designers, clearly. It is a skill that seems to be harder to come by. I own three sets of Philharmonic speakers because he clearly pays attention to that midrange. Clear midrange is the first thing I listen for. They all sound clear and natural across the range and I've never been anything less than impressed with his speakers.

 

[Cyclist]

This is my first hi-fi system, so I am still learning. I spent nearly a year reading and comparing components because I had no real experience of neutral versus more coloured speakers.

I first bought Teufel Ultima 40 floorstanders. They had a big sound in my room, but I felt I was missing some clarity and precision.They were colored and so I decided to choose the opposite, neutral-based system, and I have been very happy with it, especially with jazz, jazz fusion, progressive rock, and blues.

The Arendal 1723 1S was a major improvement. I am not trying to redesign or replace the system.I simply want to learn how to fine tune room integration and correction without losing the natural sound I enjoy. Or maybe I have to apply some coloration in order to make the metal guitars sound so powerful?

Dirac is beyond my budget at the moment, so I am trying to make the best use of the equipment and tools I already have.

 

[Cyclist]

Welcome to the forum, Cyclist.

Perhaps the Sony earbuds produce nonlinearities conducive to your enjoyment of that specific genre? Have you attacked this from that angle? The earbuds have a peak of several db at 3khz, which would definitely result in more "immediate and exciting" guitar riffs. If that's what you want from your speakers, try some eq to give them a similar response.
View attachment 80128

Thanks.
That makes a lot of sense. I had not considered the Sony earbuds’ 3 kHz peak as a possible reason for the extra immediacy and excitement I hear with guitar riffs.

I will try a small, careful EQ boost around that frequency while listening to metalcore and compare it with the uncorrected sound.

 

[TLS Guy]

Yes, I am actually saying that very neutral speakers should sound good. It is personal preference that people may not be looking for that flat, accurate sound. It can be a preference for more bass or overly bright highs, I don't know. I prefer neutral sounding. I went to a guy's place to pick up a sub some years ago and he had a very simple setup of only a few components, but all were high quality (Musical Fidelity preamp or integrated, some fancy class A amp that I can't recall, nice transport). He had some studio monitors, I don't recall which, and it sounded amazing.

You and Dennis need to teach a class for new speaker designers, clearly. It is a skill that seems to be harder to come by. I own three sets of Philharmonic speakers because he clearly pays attention to that midrange. Clear midrange is the first thing I listen for. They all sound clear and natural across the range and I've never been anything less than impressed with his speakers.

It was clear to me as soon as I started reading what Dennis has to say and corresponding, that he knows very well what he is doing. It also has been clear to me that a large number of designers in the major commercial spheres don't. You have that right.

 

[TLS Guy]

This is my first hi-fi system, so I am still learning. I spent nearly a year reading and comparing components because I had no real experience of neutral versus more coloured speakers.

I first bought Teufel Ultima 40 floorstanders. They had a big sound in my room, but I felt I was missing some clarity and precision.They were colored and so I decided to choose the opposite, neutral-based system, and I have been very happy with it, especially with jazz, jazz fusion, progressive rock, and blues.

The Arendal 1723 1S was a major improvement. I am not trying to redesign or replace the system.I simply want to learn how to fine tune room integration and correction without losing the natural sound I enjoy. Or maybe I have to apply some coloration in order to make the metal guitars sound so powerful?

Dirac is beyond my budget at the moment, so I am trying to make the best use of the equipment and tools I already have.

If it sounds right now, then leave it alone. I am highly skeptical and feel that these so called room corrections are misnamed. I think a more accurate descriptions is a misguided attempt to correct ubiquitous lousy speakers.

I have three systems here, and none can be improved with so called room correction, but it definitely downgrades them. So, I am skeptical of that whole system. One thing I do know is, that the better the speaker, the more room agnostic it is.

 

[j_garcia]

If it sounds right now, then leave it alone. I am highly skeptical and feel that these so called room corrections are misnamed. I think a more accurate descriptions is a misguided attempt to correct ubiquitous lousy speakers.

I have three systems here, and none can be improved with so called room correction, but it definitely downgrades them. So, I am skeptical of that whole system. One thing I do know is, that the better the speaker, the more room agnostic it is.

I believe it is a combination; bad speakers is just one. Others that definitely affect sound: Bad room and/or no understanding of basic sound control in the room (not treatments, just not realizing simple things that impact the sound), poor speaker placement, poor seating position placement, Wife Acceptance Factor, AKA WAF, dictating "less visible" vs performance, etc... These things all have the potential to degrade the sound and room correction is used to try to fix things that people can mitigate themselves. I feel like it is intended to address multiple problems that shouldn't really be problems. IMHO, it ISN'T intended to fix outright flaws in system design and setup, but that's what it ends up getting used for.

 

[TLS Guy]

I believe it is a combination; bad speakers is just one. Others that definitely affect sound: Bad room and/or no understanding of basic sound control in the room (not treatments, just not realizing simple things that impact the sound), poor speaker placement, poor seating position placement, Wife Acceptance Factor, AKA WAF, dictating "less visible" vs performance, etc... These things all have the potential to degrade the sound and room correction is used to try to fix things that people can mitigate themselves. I feel like it is intended to address multiple problems that shouldn't really be problems. IMHO, it ISN'T intended to fix outright flaws in system design and setup, but that's what it ends up getting used for.

I don't disagree with that.