New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Equalizer update - Page 7

post #91 of 165
9/20/04 at 2:10am
Bump and a chance for the west coast guys and fellows down under to share your knowledge about audiophile grade PC based equalizers.
I'd prefer software, no matter what it costs.
I don't need another ugly, power consuming box.
Reply
post #92 of 165
9/20/04 at 5:08am
Nope, eq is definitely not the best solution. It doesn't treat the root of the problem, which is the room. Bass traps and other acoustic treatments are the best way. EQ at best only treats the listening location. Fluctuations caused by the room can vary by the inch. Or less.
Reply
post #93 of 165
9/22/04 at 8:06am
gsferrari, I've seen you take a stand for equilizers in other threads before. One of such of your posts have stayed stuck in my head and with the help of the rest the characters here, gerG included, I'll be hoping to buy the DEQ2496 when I return to Singapore this Saturday. This component had better save me lots of money in future!

I spent 3 hours reading through the instruction manual this morning and I'm glad I understand most of it(I hope), but what should I look out for before buying?

I have a cheap DVD player for the time being with a digital optical out. I'll have to check what sampling rate it does but I know it should be either 44.1, 48, 88.2 and 96 kHz or the digital in won't work and I might have to use analog in. However, is there anything else I should look out for? Is the rest just plug and play?

My main aim at this time is to enable good low-volume listening with the HD600 and I hope the dynamic equalizer function will help that!
Thanks for your time!
Reply
post #94 of 165
9/22/04 at 1:16pm
Thread Starter 
fleabag, you read the manual??? Heck, I haven't even done that. I am impressed. You should have no problem with sampling rate. I have plugged into various players, and the DEQ just resets itself. Interestingly, the digital output sample rate always equals the input rate. That makes me suspect that it operates at whatever the source frequency is all the way through (no sample rate conversion going on).

Tomek, I agree with ooheadsoo on the best treatment for room acoustics. Use of acoustic treatment and careful placement is more effective that equalization. The problem with eq is that room response variations are caused by unwanted reflections. By simply adjusting the amplitude you will get the level more uniform, but the level of reflection relative to source (speaker) will remain the same. This plays hell with image and detail.

HOWEVER, having a mic and rta is extremely useful in helping resolve the room issues. The eq is also useful for broad level matching. For example I have a system with a broad sag in the response from 2 Khz to 7 Khz. I use a wide parametric centered at 5 K to pull it up a few db. It is also safe to eq low frequency peaks. It is not good to try to fix lf valleys (a very strong null may require HUGE amounts of boost, straining drivers and amps, and creating problems elsewhere in the room). Dr. Toole has a good white paper on the subject over at the Infinity website.

Sorry, I tend to get verbose on this stuff. Bottom line: I think that a DEQ with mic would be a very valuable tool in setting up a speaker system in a room. It has certainly been an ear opener for me

I am in the process of setting up a room and speakers. I stumbled across something seemingly remarkable. Sort of a new twist on an old concept (think Roy Allison). It eliminated a lot of room acoustic issues. I hope to write it up this weekend.


gerG
Reply
post #95 of 165
9/22/04 at 1:49pm
Hey gerG, is that dip you're talking about from 2khz to 7khz room related or just a problem with the speaker design? The frequency range you listed makes it look like the tweeter choice wasn't exactly ideal for the woofer and it's a xover/design problem of sorts. Or it could be a diffraction problem I guess since you're talking about an in room measurement, but those usually aren't so broad in range.
Reply
post #96 of 165
9/22/04 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerG
fleabag, you read the manual??? Heck, I haven't even done that. I am impressed. You should have no problem with sampling rate. I have plugged into various players, and the DEQ just resets itself. Interestingly, the digital output sample rate always equals the input rate. That makes me suspect that it operates at whatever the source frequency is all the way through (no sample rate conversion going on).

gerG
Thanks! Regarding sample rate adjustment, on page 13, column 2 of the instruction manual (section 3.6, I/O menu); I came across the wording in bold:

'If the connected sample rate does not correspond to the rate adjusted on the DEQ2496, this field shows the message UNLOCKED, which mutes all outputs of the DEQ2496.'

This message was a bit misleading and worried me a bit but then I read more carefully and I read this in the earlier parts of the same section:

'When the digital input(source) has been selected, the sample rate cannot be changed, because the DEQ2496 tracks the sample rate contained in the input signal.'

Phew... I now hope to get my hands on the 2496 really soon!

However, could I just ask what 'Pink Noise generation' is?
Reply
post #97 of 165
9/22/04 at 3:43pm
Thread Starter 
fleabag, pink noise is synthesized broadband noise that has equal energy per octave. As such it best represents how we perceive sound, as well as how most RTAs (real time analyzers) acquire data. A system yielding perfect reproduction will measure flat across the spectrum using an RTA with pink noise. If you are using an FFT rig, you probably need "white noise" which is equal energy per frequency interval. The noise part refers to the fact that it is a random blend of sine waves, without any stationary frequencies. One can also measure room behaviors using sine wave sweeps (can be misleading) or steady state sine waves (tedious, but best for nailing down killer resonances).

ooheadsoo, I haven't tracked it down yet. The speakers are specified at +/- 1.5 db from 100 hz to beyond 20 Khz. It is Infinity's flagship, so I don't think that they exagerated too much. Nevertheless, I will have them outdoors for a listen in the real listening room, and I will put a mic on them at that time.

I am a bit ashamed to admit that I actually bought speakers, but I don't have time to build my next ones just now (although the design is about half complete). At least the new subs are DIY, and man can they do the job!


gerG
Reply
post #98 of 165
9/22/04 at 4:13pm
Thanks for the time and effort gerG,

On a different matter, my desired setup seems to be very similar to yours (963sa upsampled to digital 96kHz to Behringer to an amp (which I'm not sure which one to upgrade to yet) and then to HD600 with Oehlbach cable! Seems like you've got a good cost-effective rig!
Reply
post #99 of 165
9/22/04 at 4:40pm
Your subs make me drool

I would be really interested to know if the Infinity flagship has big xover related dips in it or not You never know, if they went for a first order xover on it, maybe they had reason to not care about having it dip.
Reply
post #100 of 165
9/22/04 at 8:58pm
Thread Starter 
Actually they are supposed to be fourth order crossovers, set at 300 hz and 2 Khz. The dip would be solidly in the tweeter range. Unfortunately there are no provisions for bi or triamp, so I can't try an active xover.

flea, I am very happy with my Grace amp. Having the built in D/A convertor makes it a very flexible system. I just solder up long digital cables to reach wherever I feel like listening around the house. When I get through with my speaker/room project I hope to pick up a benchmark dac. Then I can use it for d-to-a, and use the 2 Graces as fully balanced amps for the left and right channels. The ultimate in system complexity!


gerG
Reply
post #101 of 165
9/23/04 at 1:54am
gerG -

The DEQ has done a fantastic job with my Stax and Senn headphone setup - love it. I just picked up another DEQ2496, with the intention of equalizing my living room stereo. Can you point me to a thread summarizing some "tricks of the trade" relating to loadspeaker equilization? Speakers are Dalhquist DQ10s with amplified Dalhquist subwoofer - old, but I still like it for my chamber and classical guitar music.

Jim
Reply
post #102 of 165
9/23/04 at 4:20pm
Thread Starter 
Jim, you may want to consider this toy for speaker management:
digital crossover
Most of the benefits of the DEQ, plus full up 3-way digital crossover capability. I have a similar dbx unit, and it is amazing, even if you are only working with subs and satellites.

Man, I haven't heard DQ-10s for awhile. I don't know why I don't have a pair. The DQ subs were pretty nice as well.

I don't have many good resource links. There is an awful lot of incorrect information out there, so I mostly go the basic physics + experimental route. It is also a lot more fun as well. Here is a good paper by Floyd Toole that covers a lot of aspects of room acoustics, and some eq remarks:

loudspeakers and rooms

I will rummage through bookmarks when I get home. I was actually planning to start a "Room Acoustics" thread this weekend. Maybe we can lure in some experts.

Have fun.

gerG
Reply
post #103 of 165
9/23/04 at 6:16pm
Here are some links to Ethan Winer's articles. He makes Real Traps as a commercial product. David Chesky liked them, for one His articles are all in plain english, which helps.

Some general articles with some really good acoustics articles mixed in: http://ethanwiner.com/articles.html

A direct link to his excellent acoustics FAQ: http://ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html

Here's a link to his Real Traps affiliated articles, including one written for Rives: http://www.realtraps.com/articles.htm
Reply
post #104 of 165
9/25/04 at 8:22am
A little comment regarding the onboard DAC, a member of zerogain has the DEQ2496 and he says its comparable to his Arcam Alpha 9 CD player in quality, which is no mean feat....

http://www.zerogain.com/forum/showth...hlight=deq2496
Reply
post #105 of 165
9/25/04 at 11:30am
I think the DEQ2496 DAC is excellent also. I use it to drive my Stax 006t amp via the XLRs. Very engaging, musically.

The interesting thing about that particular setup is that I can't seem to find an eq setting that makes the Stax sound better to my ears than unmodified response. I have the frequency response measurement from Stax, and I've used it to create very subtle eq patterns which provide, for instance, flattened bass response. But upon critical listening sessions, I still prefer the unmodified response. Curious, because the measured Stax response cries out for a +3 dB shelving filter below 1 kHz. OTOH, 3 dB isn't much of an amplitude variation.

Now, this is not true for the DEQ -> Grace -> HD650 setup. In that case, I much prefer the flattening of the bass hump, as outlined in gerGs post (above), although I tend to prefer leaving the midrange and treble unmodified.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home