Room EQ yes or no or sparingly

ryanosaur

ryanosaur

Audioholic Spartan
Measuring a driver or programming the driver? (You said "But I’m uncertain if DATS can program a mDSP product (which REW does)"). You're asking if the Omnimic software can create and transfer a suggested eq like REW can I assume rather than the DATS gear. Try this http://www.daytonaudio.com/OmniMicV4/hs117.htm
Cool! Thanks for sharing that!
But yes, my initial interest in DATS was to test drivers. I knew OmniMic was compatible with REW, but not that it could program a mDSP. Super useful!!!
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Seriously, I have no life.
Cool! Thanks for sharing that!
But yes, my initial interest in DATS was to test drivers. I knew OmniMic was compatible with REW, but not that it could program a mDSP. Super useful!!!
The Omnimic mic itself isn't really what is Omnimic, it's the software and test tone discs more than the mic itself which is pretty much a UMM-6 (and the mic/calibration file does work with REW).
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
So I’ve spent a few days listening to my current layout and the bass was a little bloated. It hit hard but it lacked definition. It was also much more localized closer to my wall. I was still experiencing my Atmos modules getting drowned out. So... I scrapped it all. I moved my towers in closer to my OLED and put my subs on the outside moving them away from the wall 8.5 inches away. This definitely fixed my Atmos issue. The above effect is much better and clearly more defined. They were spread too far apart before. My bass is just perfect now. It’s no longer boomy and localized. I can also noticed the lower frequencies now. I’ll have to calibrate tomorrow morning while the wife is out but I’m happier with this coming configuration.
 
Last edited:
R

RTG

Audioholic
Well I have a very patient wife, she let me do another calibration. Very different subwoofer results from my last. I had almost a 10db dip at 150hz. It was a problem because that’s where my rears and Atmos modules are crossed at. There was also a 5db dip at 120hz. 20hz-100hz isn’t as flat but it looks okay I think, they look minor. Obviously this isn’t truly accurate since I don’t have REW. Bass does sound better. It sounds fuller and better integrated. It also sounds more nuanced. It has more natural impact especially in the lower frequencies. I think this is as good as it gets until I add another PC2000 or PB1000 in behind my couch.

What do you guys think?
Latest calibration


First calibration
 
Last edited:
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Seriously, I have no life.
Well I have a very patient wife, she let me do another calibration. Very different subwoofer results from my last. I had almost a 10db dip at 150hz. It was a problem because that’s where my rears and Atmos modules are crossed at. There was also a 5db dip at 120hz. 20hz-100hz isn’t as flat but it looks okay I think, they look minor. Obviously this isn’t truly accurate since I don’t have REW. Bass does sound better. It sounds fuller and better integrated. It also sounds more nuanced. It has more natural impact especially in the lower frequencies. I think this is as good as it gets until I add another PC2000 or PB1000 in behind my couch.

What do you guys think?
Latest calibration
I don't think you can use those graphs for much at all...
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
... I am just being super curious about things like this.:D
That is the type of curiosity, combined with your willingness to share your expertise that allows the rest of us to be (reasonably) knowledgeable and lazy!:cool::D
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Well I have a very patient wife, she let me do another calibration. Very different subwoofer results from my last. I had almost a 10db dip at 150hz. It was a problem because that’s where my rears and Atmos modules are crossed at. There was also a 5db dip at 120hz. 20hz-100hz isn’t as flat but it looks okay I think, they look minor. Obviously this isn’t truly accurate since I don’t have REW. Bass does sound better. It sounds fuller and better integrated. It also sounds more nuanced. It has more natural impact especially in the lower frequencies. I think this is as good as it gets until I add another PC2000 or PB1000 in behind my couch.

What do you guys think?
Latest calibration


First calibration
I don't think you can use those graphs for much at all...
The improvement reflected in the "before" graph after you relocated the subs is pretty clear. These graphs should not be the final word (and I'm really hoping you'll post a REW graph of the same results so we can get a sense of the difference between the Audyssey app and REW measurements), but I would expect a relative improvement between two graphs using the same software to be legit - especially the "before" graph!

I assume the after graph is estimated since it does not actually remeasure after the changes are applied (right? or is the app different?)
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
The improvement reflected in the "before" graph after you relocated the subs is pretty clear. These graphs should not be the final word (and I'm really hoping you'll post a REW graph of the same results so we can get a sense of the difference between the Audyssey app and REW measurements), but I would expect a relative improvement between two graphs using the same software to be legit - especially the "before" graph!

I assume the after graph is estimated since it does not actually remeasure after the changes are applied (right? or is the app different?)
Yeah I’m going to have to bite the bullet soon and move forward with REW. There is a clear improvement now with not just the bass but my Atmos modules so it looks like I’m settled until I add another sub later this year.
 
F

fftfk

Enthusiast
Hopefully I’m not derailing this thread...how does EmoQ compare with other room correction? (Audissey, Dirac, etc.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
William Lemmerhirt

William Lemmerhirt

Audioholic Spartan
Hopefully I’m not derailing this thread...how does EmoQ compare with other room correction? (Audissey, Dirac, etc.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From the VERY TINY bit I’ve seen, not favorably. Anything I’ve read was in passing though, and not a deep dive. Even curious to go the the emotive lounge just to snoop.
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
I’ve spent the last few months listening with Audyssey full range and I definitely prefer it to no EQ. I did move my towers in beside my OLED and my subs outside as this produces the best bass. I leave it in Reference 1, MRC off and DEQ ON.
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
I went back to limiting MultiEQ to 300hz and turning OFF DEQ. I still think it’s a great tool and sounds good but I prefer the more natural sound with it off. I also feel my Klipsch RP’s are much clearer when they are not eq’d.
 
Last edited:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I went back to limiting MultiEQ to 300hz and turning OFF DEQ. I still think it’s a great tool and sounds good but I prefer the more natural sound with it off. I also feel my Klipsch RP’s are much clearer when they are not eq’d.
You seem to prefer something one day and something else another day, I remember reading something about even one's mood could, or would affect one's perceived sound quality. May be there is some truth to that..:D
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
You seem to prefer something one day and something else another day, I remember reading something about even one's mood could, or would affect one's perceived sound quality. May be there is some truth to that..:D
I think there is validity with that. I’ve been using a Flat curve for years, going back to about 2006. It’s only since using the MutiEQ app last January that I have been flip flopping. It mostly revolves around Dynamic EQ and bass which unfortunately sounds different on every soundtrack. I’ve been enjoying all processing off and EQ limited for a few months now and don’t think I’ll be switching back. It’s all trial and error with my dual sub placement and with DEQ off my bass was lacking but now that my subs are in their optimal positions I don’t feel like I’m missing out on the low end. Feels like I finally have a good balance.
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
And to add the dynamics with MuliEQ limited is significantly improved. No surprise since I have Klipsch RP’s which are forward sounding. Any EQ really tames them. I’ve added acoustic panels and I have a quite a bit of natural dampening that has really improved acoustics.
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
You seem to prefer something one day and something else another day, I remember reading something about even one's mood could, or would affect one's perceived sound quality. May be there is some truth to that..:D
The magic happens after a couple of single-malts :)

- Rich
 
RichB

RichB

Audioholic Field Marshall
I think there is validity with that. I’ve been using a Flat curve for years, going back to about 2006. It’s only since using the MutiEQ app last January that I have been flip flopping. It mostly revolves around Dynamic EQ and bass which unfortunately sounds different on every soundtrack. I’ve been enjoying all processing off and EQ limited for a few months now and don’t think I’ll be switching back. It’s all trial and error with my dual sub placement and with DEQ off my bass was lacking but now that my subs are in their optimal positions I don’t feel like I’m missing out on the low end. Feels like I finally have a good balance.
Since my room measures well, I found that there has been a negative impact of the original Audyssey XT32. That was the original version with the flat curve. Dirac running on the XMC-1 with the curtain (correction) limited to 25Hz and below there was an easily perceived impact on the sound stage. The DSP processing was having an effect on imaging.

Many simply run these programs multiple times until they like what they hear . Nothing wrong with that but it is not scientific. Independent room measurements are can provide an objective view. Thus far, I prefer the results with targeted PEQ and REW over REQ.

In any case, I also like to have a pure path as a baseline to subjectively evaluate the effect of the PEQ/REQ.
For two channel, I use the Oppo UDP-205 to a Benchmark LA4 (preamp) connected to the AHB2's (in low gain mode) that drives the Salon2's.
This is the best my system has ever sounded. When I next upgrade my HT processors, I will doing a comparison with REQ and PEQ.

- Rich
 
R

RTG

Audioholic
Since my room measures well, I found that there has been a negative impact of the original Audyssey XT32. That was the original version with the flat curve. Dirac running on the XMC-1 with the curtain (correction) limited to 25Hz and below there was an easily perceived impact on the sound stage. The DSP processing was having an effect on imaging.

Many simply run these programs multiple times until they like what they hear . Nothing wrong with that but it is not scientific. Independent room measurements are can provide an objective view. Thus far, I prefer the results with targeted PEQ and REW over REQ.

In any case, I also like to have a pure path as a baseline to subjectively evaluate the effect of the PEQ/REQ.
For two channel, I use the Oppo UDP-205 to a Benchmark LA4 (preamp) connected to the AHB2's (in low gain mode) that drives the Salon2's.
This is the best my system has ever sounded. When I next upgrade my HT processors, I will doing a comparison with REQ and PEQ.

- Rich
Yeah I was interested in Dirac or Anthem since both don’t touch the high end, I know Dirac does if you pay extra. I do think there is a place from room correction especially if setup properly. But I have plenty of absorption with panels and soft furnishings that EQing the top end just removes clarity. In a livelier room my Klipsch RP’s would sound too bright but they sound just right in my room as is.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top