[darinf]

Quote:

Is there a Magico PRIR on dropbox?  Missing it somehow.
 
Stewart

The PRIR he was referring to was the one I did with some Magico speakers. If you look in the Darinf folder, the Magico Speaker PRIR is in the Audio Revelation folder.
 
-Darin

 

[Kiritz]

Thanks!

 

[Kiritz]

Quote:

The PRIR he was referring to was the one I did with some Magico speakers. If you look in the Darinf folder, the Magico Speaker PRIR is in the Audio Revelation folder.
 
-Darin

I ust downloaded Revelation 2.  I assume this is one of the Magico setups?  In any case, it is outstanding and for me the best PRIR.  Great soundstage, localization of instruments, depth, bass, and all around good!
 
Stewart

 

[jazzfan]

Quote:

Okay, just posted up another PRIR for the Quad setup. 
 

 
I just tried looking for this PRIR on Dropbox without success.  I did find an empty \Silverlight\Quad 57 ASR Emitter\Near Field In Phase folder.  Could you point me to where I might find your latest PRIR?

 

[darinf]

Quote:

 
I just tried looking for this PRIR on Dropbox without success.  I did find an empty \Silverlight\Quad 57 ASR Emitter\Near Field In Phase folder.  Could you point me to where I might find your latest PRIR?

Someone must have accidentally moved the file instead of copying the file. I have no idea why Dropbox defaults to "move" instead of "copy". Makes no sense.
 
That's why I make it a habit of copying all the files from Dropbox to my local hard drive just in case the files disappear from the Dropbox account.
 
Anyway, I put the file back, but I hope it's the right one. Otherwise, maybe Silverlight can put his original files back just in case.
 
-Darin

 

[darinf]

Quote:

Okay, just posted up another PRIR for the Quad setup. 
 

I tried your near field PRIR.
 
Although the localization seems to work pretty well, I am just not hearing anywhere near the detail in the highs that I know these speakers are probably capable of. Compared to my favorite PRIR, the Aduio Revelation/Magico PRIR, yours sound veiled and rolled off in the highs to my ears.
 
Of course all our ears are different, so that can certainly account for a lot of it, but when switching back and forth, this PRIR almost sounds muffled relative to the Magicos.
 
I'm not saying that it has anything to do with your measurement. That's just how it's working with my ears.
 
Interestingly enough, I had a similar problem with another PRIR measurement I did, the Jan Montana system. His system was VERY detailed yet my PRIR sounded similar to the Quad PRIR, in that the detail just wasn't anywhere near the detail in the actual speakers. I have yet to return to do another PRIR at Jan's to see if I can get a better PRIR. I have no idea what could have affected the measurement so greatly.

 

[silverlight]

Quote:

I tried your near field PRIR.
 
Although the localization seems to work pretty well, I am just not hearing anywhere near the detail in the highs that I know these speakers are probably capable of. Compared to my favorite PRIR, the Aduio Revelation/Magico PRIR, yours sound veiled and rolled off in the highs to my ears.
 
Of course all our ears are different, so that can certainly account for a lot of it, but when switching back and forth, this PRIR almost sounds muffled relative to the Magicos.
 
I'm not saying that it has anything to do with your measurement. That's just how it's working with my ears.
 
Interestingly enough, I had a similar problem with another PRIR measurement I did, the Jan Montana system. His system was VERY detailed yet my PRIR sounded similar to the Quad PRIR, in that the detail just wasn't anywhere near the detail in the actual speakers. I have yet to return to do another PRIR at Jan's to see if I can get a better PRIR. I have no idea what could have affected the measurement so greatly.

 
I wonder if there are any higher quality in-ear mics available that could be used and if this would have an impact on quality of measurements?  While for my ears the PRIR's I'm getting are very good, there is some roll-off occurring in the HF for sure (per earlier comment).  But it's not drastic, and perhaps some of it could be handled with individualizing the HPEQ manually.  However it would be nice to try to solve for this and understand the differences or if this is a limitation to to the design.  FWIW I also hear strange roll-offs and tunnel like sounds from some PRIR's so I'm assuming some of the variation is user-to-user differentials.
 
Here's an example of mic's I came across, would be fun to try to see if there's any difference, of course I could be completely missing the point....  http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/item/MS-TFB-2

 

[darinf]

Quote:

 
I wonder if there are any higher quality in-ear mics available that could be used and if this would have an impact on quality of measurements?  While for my ears the PRIR's I'm getting are very good, there is some roll-off occurring in the HF for sure (per earlier comment).  But it's not drastic, and perhaps some of it could be handled with individualizing the HPEQ manually.  However it would be nice to try to solve for this and understand the differences or if this is a limitation to to the design.  FWIW I also hear strange roll-offs and tunnel like sounds from some PRIR's so I'm assuming some of the variation is user-to-user differentials.
 
Here's an example of mic's I came across, would be fun to try to see if there's any difference, of course I could be completely missing the point....  http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/item/MS-TFB-2

I don't know how much of the PRIR measurement is affected by the microphones vs. the mic placement and insertion. I know the mics are capable of full frequency PRIRs. Since my best PRIR measurement sounds like it captured all the high frequencies, I know the mics can pick up the sound. But then on another day in a different location, I can't seem to get an accurate PRIR.
 
The thing that doesn't make sense to me is that I can do multiple PRIR measurements on the same system on the same day where I do a new mic insertion for each measurement, but the overall sound signature of each PRIR is fairly similar. Yes, there are differences from one to the next, but nothing as dramatic as the high end roll off I have experienced on some systems. You would think if it was simply mic insertion issues, then I would get one PRIR sounding a lot different than the next. I also suspect that overall system gain may have an affect on the measurement even though Lorr assures me that the system gain is taken into account automatically during the CAL process. In fact, he maintains that the Realiser is set to be overly sensitive to differences in gain. He said even if the CAL process says that a speaker level is too low or too high, the PRIR will still be fine.
 
I think it comes down to doing enough measurements to figure out what variables can affect the overall measurement.
 
Of course, with my home system, which I have unlimited access, I have never experienced reduced detail or rolled off high's. If I had, then I could try to troubleshoot the problem. It only seems to be a problem when I am measuring a system that I can't spend endless hours doing multiple PRIR's.
 
I am going to try to get as many different systems measured as I can this week at a local hi-fi store. It will be interesting to see how those turn out.
 
-Darin

 

[YCH]

Quote:

 
I wonder if there are any higher quality in-ear mics available that could be used and if this would have an impact on quality of measurements?  While for my ears the PRIR's I'm getting are very good, there is some roll-off occurring in the HF for sure (per earlier comment).  But it's not drastic, and perhaps some of it could be handled with individualizing the HPEQ manually.  However it would be nice to try to solve for this and understand the differences or if this is a limitation to to the design.  FWIW I also hear strange roll-offs and tunnel like sounds from some PRIR's so I'm assuming some of the variation is user-to-user differentials.
 
Here's an example of mic's I came across, would be fun to try to see if there's any difference, of course I could be completely missing the point....  http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/item/MS-TFB-2

 
I'm told (info from Lorr Kramer) that the pair of microphones that come with the Realiser are fairly pricey - $300 a pair. They apparently have them custom made and each pair are matched to within 1dB of each other. Although I haven't measured their performance (I have access to anechoic chamber, dummy/mannekin, etc) I would imagine they'd choose a pair of microphones with super flat response - or at least well compensated for in the Realiser.

 

[West726]

Quote:

OK, that makes more sense that you can generate the MD5 checksum. Can you post the checksum for a file that does work? Post the PRIR description so I know which file it is and the checksum to see if it matches what I have.
 
Clearly if the checksums are different, then the files are different.

Sorry to keep littering the thread with my apparently unique problem, but perhaps someone else will have it later too, so I'll post.
 
I tried a new SD card, brand spanking new, with the quad 57 file and others that had given me problems.  As always, it all looks good until I try to listen, and then there is no sound, even though the realiser recognizes how many channels are working.
 
I just ran a checksum on one file that works.  For Egyptian Theater, I got  9493bb16941f25a5ef00e83acca5b671e814e0dd.  Again, no clue what this means -- I just know that this one makes sound and the others don't.  Advice appreciated.

 

[blubliss]

Do you have the latest firmware installed, there are newer files that don't work with the older firmware?  Maybe a silly question.

 

[darinf]

Quote:

Sorry to keep littering the thread with my apparently unique problem, but perhaps someone else will have it later too, so I'll post.
 
I tried a new SD card, brand spanking new, with the quad 57 file and others that had given me problems.  As always, it all looks good until I try to listen, and then there is no sound, even though the realiser recognizes how many channels are working.
 
I just ran a checksum on one file that works.  For Egyptian Theater, I got  9493bb16941f25a5ef00e83acca5b671e814e0dd.  Again, no clue what this means -- I just know that this one makes sound and the others don't.  Advice appreciated.

Yes, please post your firmware version.
 
The MD5 I get for the Egyptian Theater PRIR in the Blubliss folder is: be8c718076440e12bfe0f4b8f89f11bb
 
So either you're not generating the MD5 file properly or the file is getting changed somewhere in the copy process from Dropbox to your computer to your SD card. But since this is the MD5 from a file that works for you, I am guessing that the MD5 value is not right.
 
-Darin

 

[Kiritz]

Hi Everyone,
 
I may have a chance to go to Chicago before too long, and I was thinking of trying to set up a measurement in Glenn Poor's very high end two-channel system.  Does anyone have contact information for who I would talk to in their shop about setting this up?  I want to make sure that I can do the calibration with one of their really top systems or it won't be worth the time, effort and expense.  What was your experience like, if you went their for a PRIR, and who is best to talk to?
 
While I am at it, I have another question.  Despite differences between the PRIRs, I have sometimes thought that there are limitations using the STAX phones that I received with the Realiser.  I'd be interested in your thoughts about whether a more expensive STAX kit would make a big difference.  Lorr doesn't seem to think so.  I am just curious what accounts for the common variance I experience across PRIRs using the same phones.
 
Many thanks in advance,
 
 
 
Stewart

 

[darinf]

Quote:

Hi Everyone,
 
I may have a chance to go to Chicago before too long, and I was thinking of trying to set up a measurement in Glenn Poor's very high end two-channel system.  Does anyone have contact information for who I would talk to in their shop about setting this up?  I want to make sure that I can do the calibration with one of their really top systems or it won't be worth the time, effort and expense.  What was your experience like, if you went their for a PRIR, and who is best to talk to?
 
While I am at it, I have another question.  Despite differences between the PRIRs, I have sometimes thought that there are limitations using the STAX phones that I received with the Realiser.  I'd be interested in your thoughts about whether a more expensive STAX kit would make a big difference.  Lorr doesn't seem to think so.  I am just curious what accounts for the common variance I experience across PRIRs using the same phones.
 
Many thanks in advance,
 
 
 
Stewart

I bought my Realiser from Glenn Poor's. The person who seemed to handle the internet sales was David White whose e-mail was just the main Glen Poor's e-mail address off their website.
 
However, unless you bought your Realiser from them, or are willing to pay them for the "rental" of the room, they might not be too open to just letting you come in and do the measurement. It's hit or miss with the hi-fi stores. I think they realize that you are probably not going to buy anything so they don't seem to receptive to letting you come in and do a measurement so you don't have to buy anything. Other stores will let you as a gesture of goodwill in hopes that you might come back at some point to buy something else. I would just call them and see what happens. They are familiar with the Realiser so at least they know what's involved.
 
As far as the headphones go, I have only heard the 2170 system once with the Realiser. I have the Stax 407/323 combination. Of course there are differences in overall sound quality, but regardless of the headphones, the localization effects still work well. I have even tried listening with some $7 IEM's and it sounds pretty good. Yes, if you are trying to get the exact sound of some high end speakers, then that last little bit of detail may be apparent in higher end headphones. I opted for higher end Stax just because I was able to buy the 407/323 combo used for about the same price as the 2170 so I figured why not get the better ones just in case it makes a huge difference. I guess I could have a different opinion if I ever got to hear a pair of Stax 009's!
 
Maybe someone who has the 009's might be able to give you a better idea of the differences.

 

[Kiritz]

Quote:

I bought my Realiser from Glenn Poor's. The person who seemed to handle the internet sales was David White whose e-mail was just the main Glen Poor's e-mail address off their website.
 
However, unless you bought your Realiser from them, or are willing to pay them for the "rental" of the room, they might not be too open to just letting you come in and do the measurement. It's hit or miss with the hi-fi stores. I think they realize that you are probably not going to buy anything so they don't seem to receptive to letting you come in and do a measurement so you don't have to buy anything. Other stores will let you as a gesture of goodwill in hopes that you might come back at some point to buy something else. I would just call them and see what happens. They are familiar with the Realiser so at least they know what's involved.
 
As far as the headphones go, I have only heard the 2170 system once with the Realiser. I have the Stax 407/323 combination. Of course there are differences in overall sound quality, but regardless of the headphones, the localization effects still work well. I have even tried listening with some $7 IEM's and it sounds pretty good. Yes, if you are trying to get the exact sound of some high end speakers, then that last little bit of detail may be apparent in higher end headphones. I opted for higher end Stax just because I was able to buy the 407/323 combo used for about the same price as the 2170 so I figured why not get the better ones just in case it makes a huge difference. I guess I could have a different opinion if I ever got to hear a pair of Stax 009's!
 
Maybe someone who has the 009's might be able to give you a better idea of the differences.

Thanks much!  I am happy to pay a shop to do a measurement.  I've done this with several places.  I think I'll just try to get in touch with David White and see what he says.  In the meantime, yes, the localization effects I'm sure are very similar from one set of phones to another.  Being an audiophile type, I am very interested in the actual tonality/sound quality of the signal in addition to localization/sound stage.  Maybe I will wind up upgrading to better phones at some point and see what that is like.