AudioCircle
Industry Circles => GR Research => Topic started by: Captainhemo on 27 Jun 2018, 09:34 pm
-
Thought this may interest some of you guys.
We picked up a pocket CLIO a while back so I've been playing :)
I used the M165X -08 woofers in my Oticas ( I had them on hand already .... so wtf) I felt they could handle a some boost down low. I pulled the subs out of my room, pulled the Oticas a bit further apart and started tinkering.
This is in room (18'x 12'). Running Roon ROCK on a stand alone server. that upsamples everything to DSD 256 and is also being used for a 64bit volume control ( kind of clunky but it works). Running direct from my Mivera Audio MKI DAC directly into my prototype Mivera Audio PurePower amp, no pre in the loop.
I knocked off a bump at 200hz and applyed some boost at 40 hz and below. The M165X's don't seem to have any issue with the extra boost down low.
Sounding preety darn good even without the subs :thumb:
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=181906)
and just for you Ananad :wink: :thumb:
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=181909)
jay
-
Jay,
I'm glad you changed the smoothing from 1/3 octave to 1/6th octave on the horizontal axis, but how about shrinking the vertical axis to a 50dB window :wink: ?
Regardless, it still looks pretty flat :thumb:
Best,
Anand.
-
Those NX-Otticas get shockingly low in my room as well. Love those speakers.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=182626)
-
:o where have you been hiding ?
jay
-
:o where have you been hiding ?
jay
Shhhh!
-
Oticas only, 1/6 octave smoothing, no DSP. 40 to 50 Hz maybe? Room size: 16x32x9 ft ceiling.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=182634)
-
So the CLIO thing is just a measuring device. How, then, exactly, did you execute the boost at ~40hz? This scheme appeals to me since the NX-Oticas would be ideal except for the bass drop-off.
-
So the CLIO thing is just a measuring device. How, then, exactly, did you execute the boost at ~40hz? This scheme appeals to me since the NX-Oticas would be ideal except for the bass drop-off.
I use Roon so adding 3 small filters below 40hz is easy. I ended up doing away withthe boost at 20hz so really only 2, one at 40, one at 30.
jay
-
Hello guys, I am interested to have your opinion on NX Otica in a small room (16x19) with no ability to move the listening position from the rear wall, is it a viable solution? will the NX-Otica be able to provide enough bass with an akward room layout > see the images here on this thread: https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=167755.msg1779841#msg1779841
Are they better solutions than open baffle in this configuration?
Thanks for your feedback.
-
I think you might get ok sound but I don't think you'll get a lot of bass reinforcement because the room is open to your dining area on the left. Also keep in mind that you'll be looking into the back of the speaker from your dining area which is not it's most attractive angle.
As much as I love the NX-Oticas, I think you'd probably be happier with the Tekton DIs, or some other closed box speaker, in your room.
Jay
-
Oticas only, 1/6 octave smoothing, no DSP. 40 to 50 Hz maybe? Room size: 16x32x9 ft ceiling.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=182634)
A simple DSP low pass shelving filter will flatten out the response at the low end.
I can do it on all sources and works well here.
-
I think you might get ok sound but I don't think you'll get a lot of bass reinforcement because the room is open to your dining area on the left.
Jay
Thanks Jay,
It means that at least a Subwooer will be required with the Nx-oticas in this configuration right ?
Also keep in mind that you'll be looking into the back of the speaker from your dining area which is not it's most attractive angle.
That doesn't really bother me, It ha a steampunk/geeky look, I personnally prefer that than a big black box.
As much as I love the NX-Oticas, I think you'd probably be happier with the Tekton DIs, or some other closed box speaker, in your room.
I was under the impression that the Oticas were superior sonically compared to same budget box speakers, with superiori feeking of openess and fine details in bass, is the room srtip canceling that effect ?
BTW I ma renting, so the room may change over the years.
Thanks,
-
OB speakers actually do MUCH better in acoustically difficult rooms than box speakers. Ask me how I know that, lol.
-
OB speakers actually do MUCH better in acoustically difficult rooms than box speakers. Ask me how I know that, lol.
How do you know that ? :lol:
-
Before I had the OB subwoofers completed, I used the NX-Oticas on their own for a couple of weeks. If I wasn't familiar with the recordings I was listening to, I'm not sure I would have noticed any significant low-frequency deficit. But my room has very little natural bass absorption at the front end of the room (stone floor, cinderblock walls). And as Jay (Captainhemo) mentioned, if you are using software that provides DSP functionality, you can always add a bit of low frequency boost to extend the frequency response a bit lower.
The NX-Oticas (any dipole speakers for that matter) will sound their best if placed well out into the room. Danny indicates a minimum of 3ft, but they will provide a more open, airy, and deeper sound stage with a few more feet of air behind them.
If you've got the room to bring the speakers out from the walls (particularly the front wall) and don't mind their look from the back from your dining table, then I'd say go for it. You'll probably want to add some treatment to your walls behind the speakers - at least some drapes in front of the glass.
-
OB speakers actually do MUCH better in acoustically difficult rooms than box speakers. Ask me how I know that, lol.
Yeah... how do you know that?. :o
-
Yeah... how do you know that?. :o
Years wasted trying to get various box/tower speakers to work in my old condo where one side was closed off & the other side was open to the rest of the house. Nothing I did ever, ever, ever worked. Acoustic treatments didn't fix it. Very powerful and sophisticated EQ did not fix it.
Going OB fixed it.
-
Years wasted trying to get various box/tower speakers to work in my old condo where one side was closed off & the other side was open to the rest of the house. Nothing I did ever, ever, ever worked. Acoustic treatments didn't fix it. Very powerful and sophisticated EQ did not fix it.
Going OB fixed it.
INteresting, maybe a begining of an explanation of this effect https://youtu.be/n25AlcKa6wk?t=969 (https://youtu.be/n25AlcKa6wk?t=969)
''OB does not conflict with the acousticof the room'' for what it worth.... .
-
Just my opinion add a dual OB servo sub. Small in size and use the NX-Oticas. OB offers no other sound can match. Sealed, porterd, horn loaded, planar ribbon, or even elctrostatic. Imaging in all areas are fast and smooth. Without adequate low end in the equation your missing out but, the room does play a role. I just ran across the brand the guy in the video was talking about and his are $20k a set sent to your door to assemble. That also depends on the tweeter you choose. Room treatments which you already are incorporating will help. Ron from New Record Day tells you that. The NXs in his previous room didn’t need a sub and in his new room wow what a difference the OB H Frames made.
-
As much as I love the NX-Oticas, I think you'd probably be happier with the Tekton DIs, or some other closed box speaker, in your room.
Eeeek!
OB speakers actually do MUCH better in acoustically difficult rooms than box speakers. Ask me how I know that, lol.
Tyson is correct.
And with the addition of OB subs it should give the flexibility to make it work really well.
-
Didn't mean to offend Danny. :oops: I was assuming no subs since he posted in this thread, and with the opening to the dining area reducing bass reinforcement, and looking into the rear of the speaker, it seemed to me NX-Otica wouldn't be the ideal choice. An OB sub or two would certainly make a difference though.
In the right room, with the stereo subs, I can't think of another speaker system that comes close to the sound of the NX-Oticas for the price (or even several times the price). Although I haven't heard the Line Force yet. :wink:
The more time I have with them, the happier I am that I decided to take plunge, sound unheard, to build a set.
-
They are a great speaker :thumb:
I've had the Super 7's up and runing for almost a year now and would have no issues if for some reason I had to go back to the Otica's.... would I coose to, probably not but at the same time I wouldn't consider such a move a "step back/down". Just differnt animals
jay
jay
-
Eeeek!
Tyson is correct.
And with the addition of OB subs it should give the flexibility to make it work really well.
So GReat news I solved my Acoustic issues in about a week with the Audiocircle folks, Thanks to them !.
Now I have this new setup, and it works well, the question is Will I need a sub in this room knowing that I already got great bass with B&W 686 bookshelves and Digital APO EQ Loudness activated ?
The room dimensions are below:
Original thread on Acoustic problem https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=167755.20
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=204199)
-
So GReat news I solved my Acoustic issues in about a week with the Audiocircle folk, Thanks to them !.
Now I have this new setup, and it works well, the question is Will I need a sub in this room knowing that I already got great bass with B&W 686 bookshelves and Digital APO EQ Loudness activated ?
The room dimensions are below:
Original thread on Acoustic problem https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=167755.20
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=204199)
If you want full range sound (down to 20Hz) then yes, you need a sub. However, if you are happy with the bass output you have then no, you don't need a sub. It comes down to personal preference.
Mike
-
If you're in a condo or a duplex (it looks like you are), then avoid a sub. Bass that low goes through walls like they aren't even there. Unless you want to piss off your neighbors.
-
Now you tell me just got the flat pack for the dual OB sub.
-
Now you tell me just got the flat pack for the dual OB sub.
OB subs won’t bother your neighbors. They don’t pressurize the room like sealed or ported subs do
-
Now you tell me just got the flat pack for the dual OB sub.
Mike is right - OB subs will be fine. It's boxed subs that pulse and pressurize the room & spill over to the neighbors.
-
That's great to hear. After hearing Tyson's system it made sense for me to do this and fill in the gap I didn't realize was there.
-
That's great to hear. After hearing Tyson's system it made sense for me to do this and fill in the gap I didn't realize was there.
Im betting you'll be wanting a 2nd one soon enough Howard... ob in stereo is primo :wink:
jay
-
If you want full range sound (down to 20Hz) then yes, you need a sub. However, if you are happy with the bass output you have then no, you don't need a sub. It comes down to personal preference.
Mike
Thanks Mike, I guess my question is more around the ratio room size / lowest frequency response audible. Is there a way to calculate how low the oticas on their own will go in a specific room size ?, and will this be consistent over all type of music? Or it's more about luck, trial and error ?
Cheers,
-
Your new room layout should give you better bass from the NX-Oticas without subs, particularly with a bit of bass boost equalization. If your happy with the bass from your bookshelf speakers, you'll probably be more than happy with the NX-Oticas.
The NX-Oticas have exceptional mid-to-upper bass so things like bass guitar, drums, and deep male vocals have excellent energy and impact. Probably the best I've heard in this area.
That said, with music that goes deep, the stereo OB subs are to die for. The clarity, speed, and naturalness of the bass is fabulous. But there is a lot of great music out there that doesn't go so low that you'd really miss not having them. So it all depends on the type of music you like and how important really deep bass is to your enjoyment of the music.
You can always start with the NX-Oticas and add the subs later. Or start with one sub and add the second down the line.
-
I don't think there is any way to predict the exact bass extension you'll get based on room dimensions since it will depend a lot on speaker position, materials used for floor, walls and ceiling, what kind of furniture you have in there room, etc. But since your new layout reduces the distance between the speakers and sidewalls (particular near the left speaker), this will definitely reduce the rolloff.
The bass extension you get will not be dependent on the type of music, but how noticable the rolloff is certainly will.
-
But there is a lot of great music out there that doesn't go so low that you'd really miss not having them. So it all depends on the type of music you like and how important really deep bass is to your enjoyment of the music.
Good point,
I don't have any experience with these subs, I have always been limited by the vibration generated by boxed spekers, so no idea on what to expect,
Is this going low enough to get huge improvements ?
https://soundcloud.com/rusko/cockney-thug
-
If you listen to this kind of music or bad recording you do not need to spend a lot of money in the audio system, and much less with this room. Very low DR -> you need few watts.
http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/year?artist=Rusko
Yesterday, Tech Talk 32
YouTube GOOD Gear in BAD Rooms! with GR-Research (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGWvbgmzQwQ)
-
Thanks Mike, I guess my question is more around the ratio room size / lowest frequency response audible. Is there a way to calculate how low the oticas on their own will go in a specific room size ?, and will this be consistent over all type of music? Or it's more about luck, trial and error ?
Cheers,
IMO the NX-Otticas need subs. Obviously the NX-Ottica Towers plus OB subs get you the best performance. But if it's a question of budget and/or space, I'd recommend getting the MTM bookshelf sized NX-Otticas and use a pair of OB subs as stands. That saves money and saves space and still gets you excellent overall performance.
-
As it's been pointed out, it really depends onthe room whether or not you need the subs... see my original post (post 1 ) of this thread.
My comments there were not done having never had the 2 dual 12 he-frames in the room, I'd been using them for well over a year but we had a customer who wanted them so the stand alone Otica's were left.
I lleft the Otica's on their own until they were sold. In 95% of music in my room, they were fantastic on their own. In the room being discussed here, with the one open side I don't think they'll reach down quite as low as they did in my room but I wouldn't guess as to where they'd play to.
I like the idea mentioned above, try the Otica's on their won and see what you think. If you are happy, great... if not, add the subs .
jay
-
If you listen to this kind of music or bad recording you do not need to spend a lot of money in the audio system, and much less with this room. Very low DR -> you need few watts.
http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/year?artist=Rusko
Yesterday, Tech Talk 32
YouTube GOOD Gear in BAD Rooms! with GR-Research (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGWvbgmzQwQ)
Hello Maty,
I am sure you have a ton of experience in audio, and sorry if I do not completely understand what you are saying but I am trying, and the more I learn the better.
Forgive me if my questions seems too basic but I'd like to better understand your point on what you are saying:
- If you listen to this kind of music ...
As stated in other threads, I listen to a wide range of music from classical to electro, pop, ''world'' etc... . I provided this example in the context of my question on the bass response of the OB Subs. I could provide other examples but this track has a particularly agressive bass line very difficult to reproduce by subs with a long decay period. if the speaker is fast enough that will be interesting to get an opinion on what it can do other subs can't. If the example is not relevant, then it will be awesome to provide another one I guess.
... or bad recording you do not need to spend a lot of money in the audio system, and much less with this room.
Again I am not a sound engineer, but I am not sure ot understand the impact of a recording on a digitally produced file. Thre is no recording per say in this situation, or am I missing something ?. Fom my knowledge if you are talking about mp3 it is affecting more the top end, and resolution in the bass, but you should still be able to hear below 40Hz or again am I missing somehting else again ? .
you do not need to spend a lot of money in the audio system, and much less with this room.
Well that's the point of asking to experienced people in a forum, that has never been my goal, I am more open to suggestions to enhanced my system at the lowest cost possible.
. Very low DR -> you need few watts.
http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/year?artist=Rusko
I am not sure about what you are trying to say here, this artist is playing with heavy bass all the time, that's not a surprise to not find dynamics in his repertoire. I am trying hard but I don't get your point on measuring DR for a question about subs... . and few watt for what ? which system ? I am running currently 100w per channel ... and I am not necesseraly looking at having more dynamics ? So again, I am certainly missing somehting in your logic that can explain all this.
Yesterday, Tech Talk 32
YouTube GOOD Gear in BAD Rooms! with GR-Research (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGWvbgmzQwQ)
I don't think this video answers my questions ... that was an educative video but I felt bad at the end to see how people are mocking other because they don't have the right room on their pics. not everyody is an expert, and we all start our audio journey somewhere regardless of our budget and social status.
Again I just feel this answer is off topic or I am too much of a newbie to understand, either way I'll be happy to learn.
Cheers,
-
As it's been pointed out, it really depends onthe room whether or not you need the subs... see my original post (post 1 ) of this thread.
My comments there were not done having never had the 2 dual 12 he-frames in the room, I'd been using them for well over a year but we had a customer who wanted them so the stand alone Otica's were left.
I lleft the Otica's on their own until they were sold. In 95% of music in my room, they were fantastic on their own. In the room being discussed here, with the one open side I don't think they'll reach down quite as low as they did in my room but I wouldn't guess as to where they'd play to.
I like the idea mentioned above, try the Otica's on their won and see what you think. If you are happy, great... if not, add the subs .
jay
Thnaks for the details Jay I appreciate, good suggestion.
-
@Zitoun - the track you posted doesn't seem to have much really low bass. This is mostly mid-bass which would probably be fine without the subs.
Here's a track (Terje Isungset - Fading Sun) that has really low bass that you will barely hear without the subs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dONSkfbxnao
And here's an example of a track (Jennifer Warnes - Way Down Deep), that will sound ok without the subs, but the subs really add to the power of the performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_alN-IzNFM
You'll find a lot of jazz with double bass, and electronic music that will really leverage the subs, but a lot of music that sounds like it has a lot of bass really doesn't go that low.
Regarding the Tech Talk video that maty mentioned - I think he was trying to convey that room acoustics are at least as important as the quality of the gear, so doing some treatment in your room can often make a bigger difference in how much you enjoy your system than anything else. With OB speakers, a lot of the sound you will be hearing is reflected off the front wall, so you need to pay some attention to this.
- Jay
-
that was an educative video but I felt bad at the end to see how people are mocking other because they don't have the right room on their pics. not everyody is an expert, and we all start our audio journey somewhere regardless of our budget and social status.
The point wasn't to mock anyone. The point in showing those pictures illustrates that spending a LOT of money on a high end system isn't going to get you top level performance without spending some attention on the room acoustics. The room is an important factor. And some of those rooms had mega buck systems in them.
-
The point wasn't to mock anyone. The point in showing those pictures illustrates that spending a LOT of money on a high end system isn't going to get you top level performance without spending some attention on the room acoustics. The room is an important factor. And some of those rooms had mega buck systems in them.
These setups indicate that some people aren't primarily motivated to get good sound. These expensive systems are visually impressive, and that's what matters most to them.
-
The ironic part is that if they did some room treatment, the systems would be that much more impressive ....
jay
-
These setups indicate that some people aren't primarily motivated to get good sound. These expensive systems are visually impressive, and that's what matters most to them.
Or...they are truly ignorant. There is a tremendous amount of that imho. There is also the other issue of 'WAF' which I can't understand in some cases when you look at the monumental amount of $$ spent on the gear. How did the 'WAF' get to be SO powerful? :icon_lol:
Best,
Anand.
-
And there are clearly ways to create acoustic treatments that are totally invisible if money is not a factor.
-
I thought that many of the pictures of gear looked fairly impressive. Not really sure how they sound...
-
@Zitoun - the track you posted doesn't seem to have much really low bass. This is mostly mid-bass which would probably be fine without the subs.
Here's a track (Terje Isungset - Fading Sun) that has really low bass that you will barely hear without the subs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dONSkfbxnao
And here's an example of a track (Jennifer Warnes - Way Down Deep), that will sound ok without the subs, but the subs really add to the power of the performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_alN-IzNFM
You'll find a lot of jazz with double bass, and electronic music that will really leverage the subs, but a lot of music that sounds like it has a lot of bass really doesn't go that low.
Regarding the Tech Talk video that maty mentioned - I think he was trying to convey that room acoustics are at least as important as the quality of the gear, so doing some treatment in your room can often make a bigger difference in how much you enjoy your system than anything else. With OB speakers, a lot of the sound you will be hearing is reflected off the front wall, so you need to pay some attention to this.
- Jay
Thanks Jay, really helpful, that's great stuff.
Question though on low frequencies, how can you measure if you have frequencies below 40/30 hz in a track without having a sub?
That will be great to be able to scan few tracks to know before auditioning.
Thanks,
-
The point wasn't to mock anyone. The point in showing those pictures illustrates that spending a LOT of money on a high end system isn't going to get you top level performance without spending some attention on the room acoustics. The room is an important factor. And some of those rooms had mega buck systems in them.
Hey Danny, I didn't mean that was something intentional.
I know for a fact that a lot of people have poor room for many reasons:
- They live in expensive cities to find job, and nowadays housing in many cities is out of reach
- They can't have a dedicated lone wolf room
- They rent and can't do a lot of modifications
- They don't want to mess around with their wife/husband
- They are not aware because their audio shop makes more profit on selling hardware than services like acoustic counseling.
- They don't have the time required to read/learn about laws of physic, acoustic, sound reproduction, diffusion, absorption etc... they'd rather work, spend time with their family or on other hobbies.
- They see more interest in buying gears they can resell than acoustic treatments.
- They are very rich and want gear to impress their friends, boss, colleagues the same way they do with their car.
- The sound quality with great gear and poor acoustic is already good enough for them, they don't care about saving money with acoustic, and would rather keep their decoration.
I understand your point and it was a very interesting video, but IMHO the public who will be doing DIY acoustic won't necessarily be the same than the one buying hundred K systems, they have different goals, and that's fine.
I would have been a lot more interested to learn how to improve a room based on one of this picture as a case study .
The reason is simple, I won't invest in acoustic until I will have better speakers, because I will have to change it anyway if I move to dipole or any different technology. Hence I will probably be proud of my new system and take a picture with bare walls to post on Facebook (I hope you won't publish it on YouTube ;) ), then it will take several months to get a good balance between Wife Acceptance Criteria and good sound, and not investing much in a rented place.
I hope that will give you a better understanding of what I meant from someone new in this community interested to learn, and open minded about others choices, and setup.
Hopefully that will maybe inspire you for other videos.
Cheers.
-
Hey Danny, I didn't mean that was something intentional.
I know for a fact that a lot of people have poor room for many reasons:
- They live in expensive cities to find job, and nowadays housing in many cities is out of reach
- They can't have a dedicated lone wolf room
- They rent and can't do a lot of modifications
- They don't want to mess around with their wife/husband
- They are not aware because their audio shop makes more profit on selling hardware than services like acoustic counseling.
- They don't have the time required to read/learn about laws of physic, acoustic, sound reproduction, diffusion, absorption etc... they'd rather work, spend time with their family or on other hobbies.
- They see more interest in buying gears they can resell than acoustic treatments.
- They are very rich and want gear to impress their friends, boss, colleagues the same way they do with their car.
- The sound quality with great gear and poor acoustic is already good enough for them, they don't care about saving money with acoustic, and would rather keep their decoration.
I understand your point and it was a very interesting video, but IMHO the public who will be doing DIY acoustic won't necessarily be the same than the one buying hundred K systems, they have different goals, and that's fine.
I would have been a lot more interested to learn how to improve a room based on one of this picture as a case study .
The reason is simple, I won't invest in acoustic until I will have better speakers, because I will have to change it anyway if I move to dipole or any different technology. Hence I will probably be proud of my new system and take a picture with bare walls to post on Facebook (I hope you won't publish it on YouTube ;) ), then it will take several months to get a good balance between Wife Acceptance Criteria and good sound, and not investing much in a rented place.
I hope that will give you a better understanding of what I meant from someone new in this community interested to learn, and open minded about others choices, and setup.
Hopefully that will maybe inspire you for other videos.
Cheers.
Zitoun,
Thank you so much for that perspective. It’s important for individuals to realize to not have the chase of having the “best” system consume you and your other pleasures in life.
Best,
Anand.
-
Why doesn't Danny promote the use of REW?
-
Why doesn't Danny promote the use of REW?
https://youtu.be/6W1W_K2nKx4
Start at 4:00 and watch till 4:30.
It confirms to me that Danny does not understand the primary use and application of Room EQ Wizard. Unfortunately REW is named as it is but if Danny plays with it (it is free!) he’ll see it’s a powerful room measurement tool. It is also routinely upgraded for other uses by the software designer, John Mulcahy, again, for free.
Best,
Anand.
-
https://youtu.be/6W1W_K2nKx4 (https://youtu.be/6W1W_K2nKx4)
Start at 4:00 and watch till 4:30.
It confirms to me that Danny does not understand the primary use and application of Room EQ Wizard. Unfortunately REW is named as it is but if Danny plays with it (it is free!) he’ll see it’s a powerful room measurement tool. It is also routinely upgraded for other uses by the software designer, John Mulcahy, again, for free.
Best,
Anand.
OMG. :lol: :duh:
-
I'm not sure what you guys are griping about re REW. Danny was using REW as an example of software that can be used from room equalization, not saying that it is is only use. He has demonstrated using REW for measurement purposes on numerous occasions, but it can also be used to create a convolution filter or multiple equalization filters to correct for room and speaker response.
The problem is that any kind of room EQ is not effective at all at higher frequencies, at least as far as correcting room issues, and is way less effective than room treatments at lower frequencies. The best use of room EQ (the process, not the program) is to compensate for room modes at low bass frequencies, but even this is best done after treatments since it's difficult to adjust for nulls by more than a few db, and the high Q of the filters required will cause other issues.
-
It's also worth noting that, for the must part, the optimal treatments for a room are a function of the room, not the audio system, so changing speakers is not going to have a big impact on the ideal treatments.
Exceptions are:
The position of the treatments at first reflection points are determined based on speaker and listener position, which might change from one speaker to another, but this doesn't affect the desirability of treatment at the first reflection point
If the speakers have limited low frequency response, this may reduce (but not eliminate) the requirement for bass traps in the corners.
Dipole speakers reflect a lot more energy off the front wall so this increases the need to make sure this wall has good acoustic properties. Moderate absorption with good diffusion is generally the best approach, but this will often also work well for non-dipole speakers.
I'm not suggesting that people should forget about buying nice gear if they don't want to invest in room treatments, but I think a lot of people just don't know any better. I've seen some well treated rooms that you would never know by looking that they were treated at all. It's quite possible to add treatments that are very tastefully done, particularly if you're willing to invest some money. And some of the systems Danny showed probably have >$20k invested in cables. Spending $5k, $10k, or $20k on acoustic treatments would likely provide a much more significant improvement in sound quality than spending the same amount in better cables (above, let's say, $5k in cables as a baseline).
-
I'm not sure what you guys are griping about re REW. Danny was using REW as an example of software that can be used from room equalization, not saying that it is is only use. He has demonstrated using REW for measurement purposes on numerous occasions, but it can also be used to create a convolution filter or multiple equalization filters to correct for room and speaker response.
The problem is that any kind of room EQ is not effective at all at higher frequencies, at least as far as correcting room issues, and is way less effective than room treatments at lower frequencies. The best use of room EQ (the process, not the program) is to compensate for room modes at low bass frequencies, but even this is best done after treatments since it's difficult to adjust for nulls by more than a few db, and the high Q of the filters required will cause other issues.
Jaytor,
I am not the one you need to lecture to. Just look at my previous posts/threads. I was only answering Jason’s query.
Anybody who reads my posts (and understands them) will see that I use REW primarily below 300Hz as a very necessary tool and for above 300Hz (only one speaker at a time) to serve as a “check” but not for EQ implementations.
The fact is, MOST if not all of Danny’s customers would be better served by learning how to use REW as a room measurement tool since a great majority have subs and one cannot integrate low frequency sources with the room and main speakers without a room measurement piece of software.
So don’t bark at me by saying “I’m not sure what you guys are griping about...”
Best,
Anand.
-
Jaytor,
I am not the one you need to lecture to. Just look at my previous posts/threads. I was only answering Jason’s query.
Anybody who reads my posts (and understands them) will see that I use REW primarily below 300Hz as a very necessary tool and for above 300Hz (only one speaker at a time) to serve as a “check” but not for EQ implementations.
The fact is, MOST if not all of Danny’s customers would be better served by learning how to use REW as a room measurement tool since a great majority have subs and one cannot integrate low frequency sources with the room and main speakers without a room measurement piece of software.
So don’t bark at me by saying “I’m not sure what you guys are griping about...”
Best,
Anand.
Agreed, that should be the first place to start, any good ressources on how to use REW ?
Is this their website ?
https://www.roomeqwizard.com/
Can you predict behavior of sub or OB with this tool?
Thanks,
-
Agreed, that should be the first place to start, any good ressources on how to use REW ?
Is this their website ?
https://www.roomeqwizard.com/
Can you predict behavior of sub or OB with this tool?
Thanks,
Zitoun,
It is a measurement tool. So below 300Hz, you can comfortably use it to integrate sealed, ported, open baffle, horn subs, etc....or put another way, integrate monopole, dipole or cardiod based low frequency transducers into a room and with your mains.
It doesn't predict behaviors. It give you real time data so it is far more powerful from that perspective. The only way to know is to use it.
AV Nirvana is the best forum and website to discuss these details, I encourage you to look into it.
https://www.avnirvana.com/forums/official-rew-room-eq-wizard-support-forum.10/
Best,
Anand.
-
Agreed, that should be the first place to start, any good ressources on how to use REW ?
Is this their website ?
https://www.roomeqwizard.com/
Can you predict behavior of sub or OB with this tool?
Thanks,
The latest REW has updated room modeling with ported and sealed subs for 200Hz and below. A simple start to see speaker positions in a user defined rectangular room model. Looks to be a room modal model and the speakers are movable and surface reflection coefficients are inputs.
Just click the Room Sim button.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=204409)
-
The latest REW has updated room modeling with ported and sealed subs for 200Hz and below. A simple start to see speaker positions in a user defined rectangular room model. Looks to be a room modal model and the speakers are movable and surface reflection coefficients are inputs.
Just click the Room Sim button.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=204409)
HAL,
That room simulation model in REW has been out for over a year now, but the problem it has is that it assumes a room with very low leakage and also assumes one has a room that is a simple shape, ie rectangles or a variation on rectangles, the worst being a square from a modal standpoint. It's very cool indeed and I did play with it even to see how well it could predict things in my room which is very much rectangular and quite sealed as well. John Mulcahy has also been very open to improvements to the model. For a free program, it's pretty nice and the accuracy is not too bad even in custom rooms like my own. My colleague who has a rectangularish room but with 20 foot ceilings didn't find it to be as useful as just using the mic and making real world measurements.
I've talked to Nyal Mellor of Acoustic Frontiers quite extensively about boundary element software solutions and he does provide a service with his own software but it can get expensive. That being said, I can see it as a feasible solution for folks who do not want the diy approach:
http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/services/design/low-frequency-optimization/
Best,
Anand.
-
Anand,
Yes, he posted that last week he had updated the room modeling in the latest beta release. After that you can do measurements and see what you have. Very useful and on my systems for use.
Other programs like CARA 2.2+ have more involved modeling capabilities for complex rooms. Been around a long time and uses ray tracing models. Good video that gets you going as it is complex.
-
Why doesn't Danny promote the use of REW?
Man, you never put that stir stick down do yoiu ?
He (danny) does promote the use of REWW, he is saying not to use it for the wrong thing, not a cure for high frequency reflections etc
-
Man, you never put that stir stick down do yoiu ?
He (danny) does promote the use of REWW, he is saying not to use it for the wrong thing, not a cure for high frequency reflections etc
Based on your comment, I don't think you know what it is either.
-
Guys,
Nothing wrong with using REW as cheap measuring software. I just don't recommend that as a solution for room reflections rather than room treatment.
-
Reposted a comment of Floyd Toole
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/some-comments-from-floyd-toole-about-room-curve-targets-room-eq-and-more.10950/
(https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/average-steady-state-room-curve-using-very-highly-rated-loudspeakers-as-a-guide-jpg.46323/)
...It is essential to note that this is the room curve that would result from subjectively highly-rated loudspeakers. It is predictable from comprehensive anechoic data (the "early reflections curve in a spinorama). If you measure such a curve in your room, you can take credit for selecting excellent loudspeakers. If not, it is likely that your loudspeakers have frequency response or directivity irregularities. Equalization can address frequency response issues, but cannot fix directivity issues. Consider getting better loudspeakers. Equalizing flawed loudspeakers to match this room curve does not guarantee anything in terms of sound quality.
...An addendum: If you think about it, many/most? suppliers of "room EQ" algorithms do not manufacture loudspeakers. If they did, they might treat them more kindly. This is not a blanket statement, but one with significant truth. The stated or implied sales pitch is: give me any loudspeaker in any room and my process will make it "perfect". A moment of thought tells you that this cannot be true.
...Conclusion: full bandwidth equalization may not be desirable, especially if any significant portion of the target curve is flat. On the other hand, some amount of bass equalization is almost unavoidable, and will be most effective in multiple sub systems (Chapter8). It is useful if the EQ algorithm can be disabled at frequencies above about 400-500 Hz. There should be no difference to equalization for music or movies. Good sound is good sound, and listeners tell us that the most preferred sound is "neutral". Because of the circle of confusion, some tone control tweaking may be necessary to get it at times.
-
Guys,
Nothing wrong with using REW as cheap measuring software. I just don't recommend that as a solution for room reflections rather than room treatment.
There isn't much else for measuring software that's necessarily better. No idea what you're talking about as a solution for room reflections. What do you mean?
-
I love how the guys that worshipped at the alter of "flat frequency response" 5 years ago have come around to idea that maybe flat isn't ideal and are babbling on about the house-curve slope now.
Re: EQ, I've spent a lot of time dealing with bass & have a general approach that works pretty well. First, deal with the room itself. Use either OB bass or if you must use boxed bass, then use a swarm approach with boxes. Either of these approaches will get you bass that's much better than a single sealed sub, or even stereo sealed subs.
Then, if you can fit a bass trap, use one that's tuned to the worst spike in your room when you measure it.
Only after all that should you EQ. But here's the rub. IME, the more EQ you apply, the worse things sound. It's a tradeoff, as always. I used to EQ everything to be as close to flat as possible but my bass started to sound constipated. A better approach is to ONLY use EQ to reduce a peak and never, ever to fill in a null. And even with peaks, ONLY do 1 (the worst one) or 2 at most. This will get you much closer to flat response in room, but will still not smother the bass with too much EQ.
-
When I was researching which speakers to buy to build a second system, in the near field, I informed myself very well. One of the things I did was read the famous Floyd's book. About seven years ago.
Unfortunately people avoid reading documentation, manuals, specifications ... intellectual laziness surrounds us!
-
When I was researching which speakers to buy to build a second system, in the near field, I informed myself very well. One of the things I did was read the famous Floyd's book. About seven years ago.
Unfortunately people avoid reading documentation, manuals, specifications ... intellectual laziness surrounds us!
Like the old saying, “When all else fails, read the instructions” :lol:
-
There isn't much else for measuring software that's necessarily better. No idea what you're talking about as a solution for room reflections. What do you mean?
I'm not Danny, but I might be able to help on this one.
I agree that REW is now a pretty robust measurement tool, and that it is (still) generously given for free is a great thing for audio hobbyists. Reading your posts a few further up, I think I understand your confusion. As best I remember it, way back in the early 2000s when REW was new (and I was reading up on it and very briefly tinkered with an early beta when I was getting back in to the home theater thing for myself), as Anand pointed out in reference to its name - Room Eq Wizard - REW was originally designed as an EQ management solution, primarily for subwoofer management in a home theater setup. Think of it like a primitive solution like Audyssey or ARC (Anthem Room Correction) that nowadays is baked in to home theater processors. At the time, this functionality was a pretty big deal because processors didn't just automagically have it built-in.
In short, automatic room EQ management functionality - now at the very bottom of the feature list on the REW home page - was actually the bread and butter of REW as a software product; the measurement functionality (which arguably is now possibly more commonly associated with being the "core" functionality of REW as a software product) was simply a vehicle to getting the room EQ functionality to work.
In the end, I think, "know(ing) what it is," when it comes to REW is a function of how long you've been in the game playing with it. For fun, check out the history link on the REW home page to follow the change log to see how the software has evolved - again as Anand pointed out - to now really having very little to do with what the software is named. I think Danny's statement regarding a, "solution for room reflections," is likely just saying what was said in the video from the start - although REW (or fill in the blank with whatever your room EQ solution of choice may be) CAN do room EQ, using EQ to try to fix room acoustics (example being managing what happens as a result of room reflections) isn't going to be a great solution. That sentiment by no means, I think, is meant to suggest that REW as a measurement tool - rather than as a literal Room EQ Wizard - is not a great tool to use to help you figure out how to tackle in-room acoustics using physical means in-room.
-
I'm not Danny, but I might be able to help on this one.
I agree that REW is now a pretty robust measurement tool, and that it is (still) generously given for free is a great thing for audio hobbyists. Reading your posts a few further up, I think I understand your confusion. As best I remember it, way back in the early 2000s when REW was new (and I was reading up on it and very briefly tinkered with an early beta when I was getting back in to the home theater thing for myself), as Anand pointed out in reference to its name - Room Eq Wizard - REW was originally designed as an EQ management solution, primarily for subwoofer management in a home theater setup. Think of it like a primitive solution like Audyssey or ARC (Anthem Room Correction) that nowadays is baked in to home theater processors. At the time, this functionality was a pretty big deal because processors didn't just automagically have it built-in.
In short, automatic room EQ management functionality - now at the very bottom of the feature list on the REW home page - was actually the bread and butter of REW as a software product; the measurement functionality (which arguably is now possibly more commonly associated with being the "core" functionality of REW as a software product) was simply a vehicle to getting the room EQ functionality to work.
In the end, I think, "know(ing) what it is," when it comes to REW is a function of how long you've been in the game playing with it. For fun, check out the history link on the REW home page to follow the change log to see how the software has evolved - again as Anand pointed out - to now really having very little to do with what the software is named. I think Danny's statement regarding a, "solution for room reflections," is likely just saying what was said in the video from the start - although REW (or fill in the blank with whatever your room EQ solution of choice may be) CAN do room EQ, using EQ to try to fix room acoustics (example being managing what happens as a result of room reflections) isn't going to be a great solution. That sentiment by no means, I think, is meant to suggest that REW as a measurement tool - rather than as a literal Room EQ Wizard - is not a great tool to use to help you figure out how to tackle in-room acoustics using physical means in-room.
Exactly!
-
@Zitoun - the track you posted doesn't seem to have much really low bass. This is mostly mid-bass which would probably be fine without the subs.
Here's a track (Terje Isungset - Fading Sun) that has really low bass that you will barely hear without the subs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dONSkfbxnao
And here's an example of a track (Jennifer Warnes - Way Down Deep), that will sound ok without the subs, but the subs really add to the power of the performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_alN-IzNFM
You'll find a lot of jazz with double bass, and electronic music that will really leverage the subs, but a lot of music that sounds like it has a lot of bass really doesn't go that low.
Regarding the Tech Talk video that maty mentioned - I think he was trying to convey that room acoustics are at least as important as the quality of the gear, so doing some treatment in your room can often make a bigger difference in how much you enjoy your system than anything else. With OB speakers, a lot of the sound you will be hearing is reflected off the front wall, so you need to pay some attention to this.
- Jay
Hello Jay,
Thanks for your track I didn't know ''terje Insungset'' I love it it sounds like Bjork stuck in a truck in a middle of a storm in Quebec with Hang massive freezed in the trunk.
So I did find a tool to analyse the files I found that Rusko's track do have low frequencies as well, but the sound is way faster.
see below
Rusko Bassline
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=204566)
''Terje Insugset'' (never ask me to prononce this name) Bassline
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=204567)
I also listen to way down deep, with my headphone, (that goes to 5hz) this is not even the same song than on my speakers... !
In conclusion I will probably select an artist I know that has similar bass than rusko in a much slower pace such as Amon Tobin, ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiPu-qYBTZU ) I think that should be a good test. And have another track to assess speed, and not both at the same time.
But in a nutshell that answers my question... I will need at least 1 sub. and a super fast one.
Thanks for providing a clear explanation, that helped a lot.
-
Hello Jay,
Thanks for your track I didn't know ''terje Insungset'' I love it it sounds like Bjork stuck in a truck in a middle of a storm in Quebec with Hang massive freezed in the trunk.
So I did find a tool to analyse the files I found that Rusko's track do have low frequencies as well, but the sound is way faster.
see below
I also listen to way down deep, with my headphone, (that goes to 5hz) this is not even the same song than on my speakers... !
In conclusion I will probably select an artist I know that has similar bass than rusko in a much slower pace such as Amon Tobin, ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiPu-qYBTZU ) I think that should be a good test. And have another track to assess speed, and not both at the same time.
But in a nutshell that answers my question... I will need at least 1 sub. and a super fast one.
Thanks for providing a clear explanation, that helped a lot.
Edit
I did some test with APO digital EQ and activate loudness then pushed a little bit the volume ... .
I think with thew new setup I have I pushed my system to it's liumits, the kevlar dome is very rersistant on this BW they handle frequency down to 35 hz (instead of 40)and still have a decent mid and high, pretty sttunning for these little speakers.
Of course it sounds boxy, and the bass sounds a bit muffled, but I am already surprised I can handle these basslines with this little kid.
So questions:
I use spectroid on phone to measure frequencies, is that accurate enough ?
If I add loudness in digital EQ with an open baffle like NX-O wil this force te speakers to go down to 35 hz as the B&W does ?
Thanks
-
If you are really into bass, then trying to push the NX-Oticas down low enough is probably not your best option. They are really designed to be used with subwoofers. The OB servo subs integrate extremely well and the combination produces an exceptional full range speaker system.
-
You're gonna need a sub dude. Preferably OB, and 2 if you can fit them.
-
You're gonna need a sub dude. Preferably OB, and 2 if you can fit them.
Having heard the NX Otica's myself on numerous occasions, I have to concur, they MUST have subs. Without them, from a psychoacoustic standpoint they sound threadbare (ie forward upper midrange), and as we all know, if the tonality is off, then nothing else matters! But I'm a bass freak so YMMV.
Best,
Anand.
-
Having heard the NX Otica's myself on numerous occasions, I have to concur, they MUST have subs. Without them, from a psychoacoustic standpoint they sound threadbare (ie forward upper midrange), and as we all know, if the tonality is off, then nothing else matters!
Best,
Anand.
And can only 1 sub offload the 2 towers ? Or you really need 2 to have a complete setup ?
-
And can only 1 sub offload the 2 towers ? Or you really need 2 to have a complete setup ?
I'm probably the wrong person to ask.
I am a multisub convert and see a bare minimum of two subs in any system to be honest. 4 preferably, with 3 being the middle ground. I have heard the NX Otica's with (2) Triple 12 inch OB's and the bass sounds fine, although, after the owner came and listened to my system, he then added 2 more sealed subs to his OB collection...which pretty much made it a multisub system overall.
I think what you will realize is that there is an upfront cost to having excellent bass and that investment needs to be made along with some measurements or else the results can be less than optimum.
Best,
Anand.
-
Best solution is to use NX-Ottica towers with dual OB sub. But that costs a fair bit of money and takes up a lot of floor space. If that's the issue, then next best solution is to get the NX-Ottical MTM top portion only with dual OB subs and use the subs as stands for the MTM speakers.
Something like this:
(https://i.pinimg.com/474x/3f/46/54/3f4654b56e7d027217234b0b642eef4c.jpg)
Third best would be the NX-Ottica towers mated to a multiple sealed subs.
Fourth best would be the NX-Ottica towers mated to a single sealed sub.
-
I am a multisub convert and see a bare minimum of two subs in any system to be honest. 4 preferably, with 3 being the middle ground. I have heard the NX Otica's with (2) Triple 12 inch OB's and the bass sounds fine, although, after the owner came and listened to my system, he then added 2 more sealed subs to his OB collection...which pretty much made it a multisub system overall.
I recently went from two dual subs to three, and I can attest to the benefits of having more than two. A single sub is an appetizer. Two subs is like Chinese food -- you're hungry two hours later. Three subs is sirloin steak & roasted potatoes, and four is a big, belly-busting buffet. If I had the space to add a fourth sub, I'd most certainly do it.
-
Best solution is to use NX-Ottica towers with dual OB sub. But that costs a fair bit of money and takes up a lot of floor space. If that's the issue, then next best solution is to get the NX-Ottical MTM top portion only with dual OB subs and use the subs as stands for the MTM speakers.
Something like this:
(https://i.pinimg.com/474x/3f/46/54/3f4654b56e7d027217234b0b642eef4c.jpg)
Third best would be the NX-Ottica towers mated to a multiple sealed subs.
Fourth best would be the NX-Ottica towers mated to a single sealed sub.
Indeed added 2 subs will double the price (if you add flat packs) it's a sgnificant surge.
Wher does the 2 NX + 1 OB Subs fits in your palmares ? or is it even in there ?
That's personnal, but I don,t feel like the MTM speakers will fit in a living room, they have kind of an akward shape, you can tell it's a DIY. whereas the NxO if well done looks like a regular speaker. Ahestetically the Super7 seems to be the best, but I guess you won't sell it ;).
-
I recently went from two dual subs to three, and I can attest to the benefits of having more than two. A single sub is an appetizer. Two subs is like Chinese food -- you're hungry two hours later. Three subs is sirloin steak & roasted potatoes, and four is a big, belly-busting buffet. If I had the space to add a fourth sub, I'd most certainly do it.
I see, remember that I currently have 2 B&W 686 for 8 years, so my bar is not that high yet, My fear is that the NxO won't have enough bass to beat my B&W in this territory.
If you think it will I can certainly start with that with some digital Eq, For the note: My room is exactly 15.4 x 16.7 (with Recess) So based on comments that will require subs, but if I can hit 36hz I don't think I will see an issue until I add a sub.
What do you think ?