|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 2, 2016 18:11:22 GMT -6
Hey Guys, I redid my rooms freq response using the sonarworks calibration software but with sound coming through my amphion one 18's. I'm pretty good (flat from about 500-14K) but have some problems from: dip 60-120 (-6 db) two little peaks 50 ish and 2-400 (+6 db ), and
dip 15K -18K (-6db)
Interesting the amphion one 18 crossover at 1600, so these monitors are pretty well behaved there.
So, I am thinking a helmholtz resonator could be the solution ?
Do people agree and, if so, how do I go about figuring out the dimension to attunuate the 2-400 cycle peak and what do people think I should do with the dip below 100 ?
Thx !
|
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Jan 2, 2016 19:22:36 GMT -6
Are you using a calibrated mic?
Do you get the same results in REW?
Did you ever calculate your modal response?
The hi frequency drop is probably due to the mic you are using.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 2, 2016 19:24:24 GMT -6
I used the Mike that came with the Sonarworks package.
I could run REW again it would be good to compare; thx !
|
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Jan 2, 2016 19:27:22 GMT -6
I used the Mike that came with the Sonarworks package. I could run REW again it would be good to compare; thx ! If it came with it I would hope it's calibrated or has a calibration file that you load into the program. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 2, 2016 20:03:52 GMT -6
it has calibration file and yes I loaded that as part of the system set up.
that hi end dip is interesting as when I did the test a few months ago, that was with my adams a7x and they go up to like 40k cycles also since then I built two large and deep front corner bass traps and moved other traps to ceiling and wall joints
I will check but I don't think I had such a pronounced high end dip before.
|
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Jan 2, 2016 20:32:11 GMT -6
While spending lots of time calibrating your room with software and trying to figure out what all the problems look like on a graph is kinda useful, the best thing you can do is spend an hour each day playing your favorite tunes and the tunes that you are trying to produce similarly to and just get used to what your room sounds like. Get used to what those professionally mixed songs sound like in your non-professional room. That'll teach you more about how to mix in your room than any graph about room response will.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jan 2, 2016 23:39:42 GMT -6
Just trap more bass, all those other freq's in the lows into the mids will smooth because of it, the biggest problem i c is you have what appears to be approaching an 18db swing between 250+ and 80-, that is indeed a problem that needs addressing.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jan 2, 2016 23:47:48 GMT -6
While spending lots of time calibrating your room with software and trying to figure out what all the problems look like on a graph is kinda useful, the best thing you can do is spend an hour each day playing your favorite tunes and the tunes that you are trying to produce similarly to and just get used to what your room sounds like. Get used to what those professionally mixed songs sound like in your non-professional room. That'll teach you more about how to mix in your room than any graph about room response will. bad advice imo, what happens when you go to another studio and have no clue what it is that you're hearing? what happens when you get another AE/musician at your place who you have to explain the unprofessional quirks of your system to and hope they figure out? get your room sounding as good as you can whether it's for tracking or mixing, you'll be happy you did. |
|
|
|
Post by unit7 on Jan 3, 2016 2:48:23 GMT -6
I chime in only because I made a Helmholtz wall on my back wall in 2009. I had one of the few VERY experienced acousticians here to advice, and he said he would have been able to give me all directions if I had told him the room measurements on the phone. It was his way to say that the math for trapping bass, which is almost always the biggest issue, is quite basic. Paying him to visit was very good because he could help with some tips and directions that are unique for my room. I did my Helmholtz covered with diffusors (with gaps between, for the Helmholtz 'effect'), so the wall serves two purposes. I guess this isn't unique, but it's neat nevertheless. I've got approx 50 cm insulation + the diffusors on my back wall and 40 cm insulation on my front wall (much more in the corners). The difference after the treatment was HUGE. I still have a 30-40Hz bump in the middle of the room, but I've learnt to live with that and even use it for reference. In that sense I agree slightly with NoFilterChuck. But otherwise, if your goal is to be able to do at least some semi serious mixing in your room, room treatment is a game changer. If I had to choose between all my outboard+console placed in an untreated room and working ITB in a treated room the choice would be simple. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 3, 2016 6:01:17 GMT -6
I am selling my Sonarworks calibration system today ( to help pay for my amphions  , so wanted to redue its test with its mike whiel I had it but I have REW too. I agree with everything said here. I do listen to pro mixes on my system to learn it and the room and to use that for context when mixing, I have treated my room and positioned things carefully, but know that the room needs some more work. I do hear and see improvement in what I have done. I think that more bass trapping is the ticket as we all know getting control of a smaller room is challenging. Thx All ! |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jan 3, 2016 14:32:54 GMT -6
Yeah for sure, don't just be learning to compensate... IMO it kills creativity because it's something you're having to be aware of instead of just being able to go at it. I used to do that and it made things really hard. Get things taken care of down there where Tony suggested and I think a lot of the other will take care of itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Jan 3, 2016 14:51:52 GMT -6
While spending lots of time calibrating your room with software and trying to figure out what all the problems look like on a graph is kinda useful, the best thing you can do is spend an hour each day playing your favorite tunes and the tunes that you are trying to produce similarly to and just get used to what your room sounds like. Get used to what those professionally mixed songs sound like in your non-professional room. That'll teach you more about how to mix in your room than any graph about room response will. bad advice imo, what happens when you go to another studio and have no clue what it is that you're hearing? what happens when you get another AE/musician at your place who you have to explain the unprofessional quirks of your system to and hope they figure out? get your room sounding as good as you can whether it's for tracking or mixing, you'll be happy you did. Any pro always brings their reference CD with them to listen to a new room for a few moments before they start working, so it's not bad advice. It's practical advice given to me by folks who work a whole hell of a lot more than you or I do. Fixing a room to sound good is good advice, but after a while, you run out of money and just need to learn the room the way it is. That's what I'm advocating. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jan 3, 2016 15:51:45 GMT -6
Well that's my bad too for mis-understanding, I thought you were telling him to listen to music for a while and then learn to compensate for the rooms problems. I listen to ref's everyday... usually I'll have them going while I'm setting up or turning things on and what not, and I'll use them throughout the mix in critical parts and then at the final. That's definitely something that should be practiced but in terms of getting the room tuned, those freq's that he's having an issue with are ones that will really really mess you up, big time. They will cause the bass to be wrong, the vocal to not sit where you want, I mean it's one of the most critical bands to flatten out if you want your stuff to translate.
Also this is sort of off topic, but if you go to like Walmart and buy one of those really cheap springy looking Bluetooth speakers it's great to ref with other mixes on.
One more thing, if you can measure the transient difference between each speaker and then either move the lagger forward or delay the other one it will clean up your imaging dramatically.
|
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Jan 3, 2016 16:57:23 GMT -6
One more thing, if you can measure the transient difference between each speaker and then either move the lagger forward or delay the other one it will clean up your imaging dramatically. shouldn't that be fixed with a tape measure? Your statement implies the speakers aren't equidistant from the listening position, so break out the tape measure to line 'em up! |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 3, 2016 17:21:42 GMT -6
yup I have centre marked and the tape measure out. Actually sonarworks re-confirms this and depth from monitoring position as part of its set and calibration. I find these graphs just confirm what you knew intuitively: you know where you are struggling to hear/discern properly. I read another thread where the guy just bought a bunch of ikea bookcases and put floor to ceiling hemp pads almost a foot thick for his front wall behind his monitors; tightened things up nicely  |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jan 3, 2016 18:19:07 GMT -6
One more thing, if you can measure the transient difference between each speaker and then either move the lagger forward or delay the other one it will clean up your imaging dramatically. shouldn't that be fixed with a tape measure? Your statement implies the speakers aren't equidistant from the listening position, so break out the tape measure to line 'em up! That's a good starting point yeah..... but, if you can measure the transient response between the speakers it will let you get even more precise than a tape measure, and also will tell you if one needs to be toed in a little more etc.... the thing is you're talking about all things being perfect by rule of physical measurement... I'm talking about real world acoustics where anomalies might want you to move or adjust to compensate for something interfering. You can do it however you want... I'm just trying to pass along things that helped me. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 4, 2016 8:52:16 GMT -6
How about this..
Move the mic a couple feet backward and do the test again. I bet those dips and peaks move as well. If so, then it's proof it's room modes.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 4, 2016 20:19:57 GMT -6
how do you measure transient response between the two speakers ?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jan 4, 2016 22:33:37 GMT -6
There should be something in whatever program you're using to measure the transient difference between the two speakers.... When you compare them overlaid measure the MS and do some math to convert that into a physical measurement and then move the lagging speaker forward however much you come up with, or you can just move it up little by little until it is matched. A lot of folks overlook this, they think that simply getting rid of nulls and peaks will clear the imaging a ton, which it will, but after you get those transients in time you'll be amazed how much more clear the imaging will become. Phase is phase right, so if one speaker is slightly behind you're still dealing with a phase issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 5, 2016 7:21:45 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by jayson on Jan 5, 2016 7:23:51 GMT -6
Strange. It almost looks as if the response plot creates a sine wave shape between 60 and 250 Hz (looks almost like there's a little harmonic bump from it centered around 1.5kHz). I don't really know squat about acoustics, but I could see that creating some summing and cancellation problems depending on your position in the room. I wonder what performing additional tests around the room would reveal? I wonder, if you do more measurements around the room, if you might be able to infer where you need to place some bass traps just by watching the amplitude changes in that "sine wave"?
If I were looking at this in my room, I think my first (and probably incorrect) notion would be to try to tame that initial 120 Hz resonance...like I said; I don't really know squat about acoustics.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 5, 2016 8:40:18 GMT -6
I have my montiors on stands a little behind my desk although they are isolated their could be some reflection going on.
I have sold the Sonarworks kit but I think I can redo the test will just switch to a different mike. I will redo test in same position so that I can have a sense of the effect of the mike change.
But I want to experiment like svart said try mike further back in room and also I will move montiors on to my desk as I curious to see if my stands are isolating the monitors or a contributing factor in the db swing between 60-200 cyces, a bump like what I have is normally associated with montiors on a speaker bridge and energy bouncing off your desk.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 8, 2016 15:38:53 GMT -6
Hmm I bought a used Behringer ecm-8000 omni mike, recommended to work with REW. Mike showed up and seems to be working fine but decals have ben removed so no serial number. Without that I don't know if I can get the calibration file. I ran the Sonarworks analysis again and picked the non 30 degree calibration, as this Mike is omni I thought it shouldn't use the calibration file that came with the cardiod sonarworks mike. Graph is similar in lower end but top end it drops off sooner than the cardio mike. Should I not be doing this at all if the calibration is not clear or do you think the onmi mike is more accurate than the cardiod ?  |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 8, 2016 16:07:04 GMT -6
I was curious what REQ test would look like. Here is waterfall for below 500.  |
|
, so wanted to redue its test with its mike whiel I had it but I have REW too.
