I haven't figured out how to implement the Linkwitz transform in Akabak yet. I think I may have to manually enter biquad coefs. But without that can't model the excursion properly.
I am just learning how to use Jeff Bagby's PCD program. Maybe that models cone extrusion? Probably not because TS params were never part of the input.
WinISD is something I can't seem to get working right. It is too picky with how TS params are entered and most of the time doesn't seem to save the parameters. That was about a year ago and I haven't tried it again since - it just felt buggy. It would freeze or not exit properly. I think this is enough impetus to force me to figure out how to put Linkwitz transforms as biquad coefficients into the generic filter function in Akabak.
Fill in the parameters in WinISD in the following order and you'll get it working....
1 – Qes
2 – Qms
3 – Fs
4 – Vas
5 – Znom (nominal resistance, for example 2,4 of 8 ohm)
6 – Re
7 – Choise: Sd of Bl
8 – Pe
9 – Xmax
I'd recommend using Sd if you got that information at step 7.
It's also recommended not to fill in Le as WinISD don't handle it all that well...
Exiting the program doesn't work properly in Win 7 or above. I just kill the task.
1 – Qes
2 – Qms
3 – Fs
4 – Vas
5 – Znom (nominal resistance, for example 2,4 of 8 ohm)
6 – Re
7 – Choise: Sd of Bl
8 – Pe
9 – Xmax
I'd recommend using Sd if you got that information at step 7.
It's also recommended not to fill in Le as WinISD don't handle it all that well...
Exiting the program doesn't work properly in Win 7 or above. I just kill the task.
Last edited:
Well, Ive done some more listening.
As the amount of processing increases, it seems like the dynamic range decreases. Of the versions Greg made, I liked the one with only FR correction the best.
As I moved up to the 2 cycle, then 3, then 4, there was this gradual increase in compression.
Most of the things I said after the first test with the 4 cycle correction are still generally valid here. I really dont have any juicy details to add.
One test I cant perform is what effect DRC correction does for untreated rooms. I suspect the positives would outweigh the negatives in greater fashion than in my room.
As the amount of processing increases, it seems like the dynamic range decreases. Of the versions Greg made, I liked the one with only FR correction the best.
As I moved up to the 2 cycle, then 3, then 4, there was this gradual increase in compression.
Most of the things I said after the first test with the 4 cycle correction are still generally valid here. I really dont have any juicy details to add.
One test I cant perform is what effect DRC correction does for untreated rooms. I suspect the positives would outweigh the negatives in greater fashion than in my room.
I'm a little surprised but not much. Your room is very different from most and you've spend quite a bit of time on it to perfect the results there.
I still think you could benefit from a little correction but that would mean changing your source to a computer etc. You'd have to be in control of the knobs and sliders to find it.
No way we can even start to predict what it sounds like already.
Part of the fun for me was to find out what does what when playing with targets and settings.
You started with a very well behaved speaker and an awesome room. Still I can think of a few tweaks to get ahead. But those might work and then again it might not. I'm not relying entirely on DRC alone. I do a sort of cross talk manipulation too, in a way.
There is a big difference between having that included or living with DRC alone. But I think part of why it works in my case might be because I'm using line arrays.
I saw on your room build thread it was something you were working on passively as well.
I still think you could benefit from a little correction but that would mean changing your source to a computer etc. You'd have to be in control of the knobs and sliders to find it.
No way we can even start to predict what it sounds like already.
Part of the fun for me was to find out what does what when playing with targets and settings.
You started with a very well behaved speaker and an awesome room. Still I can think of a few tweaks to get ahead. But those might work and then again it might not. I'm not relying entirely on DRC alone. I do a sort of cross talk manipulation too, in a way.
There is a big difference between having that included or living with DRC alone. But I think part of why it works in my case might be because I'm using line arrays.
I saw on your room build thread it was something you were working on passively as well.
This is quite true. Greg could only guess as to how I would like things, or what things needed correction and what does not.
Its entirely possible that if I could set everything myself, I could achieve improvement on an overall basis.
As things are, I can see its potential.
I am getting a new computer sooner than I had thought. One of the things that might really help implement DRC is a solid state hard drive, which my new box will have. Streaming bandwidth should be very high.
Glad to read that, I do think there's potential there, even in a room like yours.
As I have said before on this forum, the difference between good and great is often very small.
Still it's been fun to have you try this though. It was also very cool to see what your room did or did not do. I've never seen measurements this clean in FR response actually taken at the listening position in a room before.
My 1/12 smoothed FR is still rough compared to your 1/48 predicted room response.
I hope we have sparked a little interest here that keeps on growing. There are so many ways to play with this kind of software. And it's a marvel that it is available for free.
I'll always wonder if software like Audiolense and especially Acourate would be even more powerful.
By the way, I agree on solid state disks, I have 2 of those in mirror raid configuration for playback. But I do use normal drives for storage.
As I have said before on this forum, the difference between good and great is often very small.
Still it's been fun to have you try this though. It was also very cool to see what your room did or did not do. I've never seen measurements this clean in FR response actually taken at the listening position in a room before.
My 1/12 smoothed FR is still rough compared to your 1/48 predicted room response.
I hope we have sparked a little interest here that keeps on growing. There are so many ways to play with this kind of software. And it's a marvel that it is available for free.
I'll always wonder if software like Audiolense and especially Acourate would be even more powerful.
By the way, I agree on solid state disks, I have 2 of those in mirror raid configuration for playback. But I do use normal drives for storage.
Last edited:
To me that would be a lot. I still believe in the time coherency, remember?
Are you referring to the Step response?
Yes I am. But don't take my word for it. I haven't heard your room .
I am convinced though it helps in creating a believable musical experience. And that's part of the journey I'm on. But I wouldn't start with a speaker with second order filters like yours. Although I do admire how well they are designed.
Weather I'm right about it or not remains to be seen. I'm not there yet, fighting my room and my chosen compromises to get there.
.I am convinced though it helps in creating a believable musical experience. And that's part of the journey I'm on. But I wouldn't start with a speaker with second order filters like yours. Although I do admire how well they are designed.
Weather I'm right about it or not remains to be seen. I'm not there yet, fighting my room and my chosen compromises to get there.
Of all the things DRC put a dent in, the Step response didnt change much. Given that, I cant really say how important it is.
But I am pretty sure that the speakers I have will not give the timing response your looking for.
At the end of the day, I feel my speaker/room setup does pretty well in all but this one area. And even here, I really cant know until I hear a system where this is substantially different (corrected).
Its an interesting goal. I just might be careful about giving up too much in other areas to achieve it.
But I am pretty sure that the speakers I have will not give the timing response your looking for.
At the end of the day, I feel my speaker/room setup does pretty well in all but this one area. And even here, I really cant know until I hear a system where this is substantially different (corrected).
Its an interesting goal. I just might be careful about giving up too much in other areas to achieve it.
This is why I keep digging down the Rabbit hole. GD is just one of my latest adventures. But I am interested in all the relevant data that can be measured. Over time, I have learned to pay attention to some things more than others.
But to your comment, I am still learning what defines good, in order to know what great looks like.
This is maybe the most important comment made in this thread. I say that because in my experience, the vast majority of the time, in order to make one thing better, you trade away a little of something else. Knowing what choices to make is key to musical nirvana. All too often ive made the wrong choice, only to fight my way back to an earlier room configuration.
Sometimes its a nuance that makes all the difference. And being a nuance, it doesnt jump out when skimming the measurement data. Or it might be a combination of things that work just right together, and change one piece of it, and it falls apart or collapses.
To add one more thought to the DRC vs NOT on my system. Listening to music is an experience to me. The experience defines the pleasure I get from it. When thinking about the DRC sound vs NOT, the DRC sound is more refined. More polished. And better balanced. But it subtracts something I still dont quite have a word for. Without DRC, the sound is a little more raw, but also more robust. More convincing (IMO). A better sense of being there. Some of this is dynamics, which ive already addressed. But its a couple other things as well.
Perhaps to achieve the response needed DRC applies FIR filters which involve pre-ringing - the only way to do what it needs to do. Real sound from actual sources like a live band have no pre-ringing. It could be that our ears detect this as "unnatural" which is why it sounds less convincing. In a way, it may be like listening to music in an anechoic chamber - there's no reverberations to reinforce our brain that it is a reality possible? Which is why you strategically added a "reflection" to give ambience.
jim1961,
Thanks again for sharing. The playback of many tracks will seem to lose some dynamics as the correction strength increases, and without a perfect reference system for comparison, it can take a while to understand what's really happening. My thinking is that as any speaker/room resonances are excited by the signal, the extra energy adds to the sound dynamically and harmonically. In other words, the sonic elements that are de-emphasized with the correction in place may not actually be part of the recording. Of course, there are different philosophies regarding this subject and many people seem to enjoy or even prefer a system with at least a little bit of this coloration. I'm still willing to believe that if you were to listen for a while to all of your music corrected over 3-4 cycles, you might develop stronger feelings about it.
Thanks again for sharing. The playback of many tracks will seem to lose some dynamics as the correction strength increases, and without a perfect reference system for comparison, it can take a while to understand what's really happening. My thinking is that as any speaker/room resonances are excited by the signal, the extra energy adds to the sound dynamically and harmonically. In other words, the sonic elements that are de-emphasized with the correction in place may not actually be part of the recording. Of course, there are different philosophies regarding this subject and many people seem to enjoy or even prefer a system with at least a little bit of this coloration. I'm still willing to believe that if you were to listen for a while to all of your music corrected over 3-4 cycles, you might develop stronger feelings about it.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.