[Desertpilot]

Yes, that's totally normal and is what's known as insertion loss.  To deal with the volume swap between filters, you can use the Audiolense or Mitch's own Hang Loose Convolver which will balance all volume for you automatically so you just select them and listen.   

Thanks Jason,

Mitch told me he would fix volume reduction.  We are just not there yet.

Here's an interesting thought.  When I was younger, much younger, my Dad would call me for "tech support" because he couldn't get his computer to work.  I would get so frustrated because he didn't understand computer "lingo".  Thus, calls would last much longer.  My email interactions with Mitch strike me as familiar.  I do not know all the DSP lingo.  A few times, I confused him terribly, as I was trying to explain what was happening here at my home.  But, Mitch is patient and we are making it work.

[jtwrace]

Thanks Jason,

Mitch told me he would fix volume reduction.  We are just not there yet.

Here's an interesting thought.  When I was younger, much younger, my Dad would call me for "tech support" because he couldn't get his computer to work.  I would get so frustrated because he didn't understand computer "lingo".  Thus, calls would last much longer.  My email interactions with Mitch strike me as familiar.  I do not know all the DSP lingo.  A few times, I confused him terribly, as I was trying to explain what was happening here at my home.  But, Mitch is patient and we are making it work.

He can only fix so much unless there isn't much with your system since it's not fully active (hopefully you'll do that next).  I would suggest using REW and just play some pink noise with an SPL meter at your listening position using both filters so you know if you need to adjust the volume and if so, by how much. 

[Desertpilot]

The new music server (Intel NUC12 (i9)) is performing flawlessly.  This has turned out to be an excellent purchase!  One thing I noticed while listening and switching between using the DSP filters and not using them is the volume difference, now that I have the new computer, is not as great as it was before.

Mitch wrote me today and said he thinks my frequency response using his 2nd filter set is excellent.  I agree.  He welcomes a new set of measurements because we want to nail down a final set of filters.  He thinks I got the subwoofer volumes on all three X3s aligned perfectly using each speaker's volume control.  Later this week, I will run new sweeps using Audiolense XO (from the new computer).  I also want to run REW and see what it has to say.

My impression of music with Mitch's DSP filters is getting better all the time.  Instruments sound more precisely placed within the soundstage.  Clarity is improved as well.  Once I complete the measurements, I will post results.

Thanks
Marcus

[Desertpilot]

My final thoughts.

I completed a new set of measurements (Audiolense XO, Version 6.20) and sent them off to Mitch.  He replied with a third filterset which I am now using.  I will give it a lot of listening time over the next few days.  I can still switch between using the filters or not using them right from the MLP.

Minor changes:
- Incorporate a 30 Hz crossover for my front three X3s to my SVS Subwoofers.
- Keep the 90 Hz crossover on my rear SVS Bookshelf speakers.
- Confirmed that all three X3 subwoofers now have equal volume.

Mitch's overall judgment:  "You are getting excellent frequency and timing response."  My judgment with the 2nd filterset was excellent.  Subtle changes, for sure, but I always preferred using the filters.  Never any colorization or detriment to the sound.  I'm looking forward to extensive listening with the 3rd filterset.  Hopefully, no more measurements or new filtersets.  I think we are done.

Marcus

[Desertpilot]

Mitch and I spoke today about the third filterset.  If you want to know what he does when designing filters, watch his YouTube video, "Understanding the State of the Art of Digital Room Correction", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfGAUvyvdNU&t=5010s.  I admit, he presents a lot of information and it can be tough to get through it in one sitting.  I had to watch it several times.  But, once you find out his process, you realize this truly is "State of the Art" stuff.

Edit:  The YouTube video that got me connected with Mitch was an interview by Jason (The Intellectual People Podcast).  This might be the best way to learn about DSP and Mitch Barnett.  Accurate Sound Calibration using Digital Signal Processing (DSP) | Mitch Barnett, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1n8o7Wv4LQ.

Over the weekend, I listened to hours of music (classical, multichannel surround).  Music included orchestras, ensembles, vocals and choirs.  In my opinion, he made an already great sounding system even better.  Clarity, realism, width and depth are all improved.  Never once did I feel the sound quality was diminished.  In fact, I was so enjoying all the music, I didn't fall sleep in my recliner (how's that for no listening fatigue!).

We are done with the process.  I can put the measurement microphone away!  Mitch did give me two methods to overcome "filter insertion loss".  I'll try each one.  But, even with no changes, I have plenty of volume so this is a low priority.

Here's Mitch's assessment:  "... you are getting an excellent response, both in the frequency and time domain. Technically, you are getting the ideal minimum phase response to your ears without any frequency or time domain distortions."

Here's the "simulated" frequency response with Mitch's filters. 





Here is the "step" response:





I still don't understand all of it but his final thoughts to me were very motivating:  "That is an awesome open baffle system you have there, and the correction filters fully optimize what you have. I bet it sounds pretty good."

I agree.  Time to listen to music and forget about "adjustments".

Edit:  I implemented Mitch's method of overcoming filter insertion loss.  Works perfect.

Marcus

[fiat79]

Hi Marcus,
I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts concerning your audio journey and your efforts to extract the maximum amount of enjoyment from your X3s!  I was wondering, now that you've had time to live with your DSP enhancements, are you still a Fan?  Do you happen to have a measurement of the response at the LP before DSP vs the  response after?  I'd like to see what areas of the response were improved by the DSP and try to correlate them to what you hear while playing your favorite music, again, vs what you were hearing before.  Thanks for all of your postings and including us in your odyssey!!

[Desertpilot]

Hi Marcus,
I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts concerning your audio journey and your efforts to extract the maximum amount of enjoyment from your X3s!  I was wondering, now that you've had time to live with your DSP enhancements, are you still a Fan?  Do you happen to have a measurement of the response at the LP before DSP vs the  response after?  I'd like to see what areas of the response were improved by the DSP and try to correlate them to what you hear while playing your favorite music, again, vs what you were hearing before.  Thanks for all of your postings and including us in your odyssey!!

I super appreciate your positive comments on my posts.  I'm always a bit nervous that my posts are "not worthy".  LOL.

I always play music with the filters engaged.  I have the ability to switch between using the filters or not using them.  For me, the filters improve the sound.  It is a subtle improvement.  I had my speakers set up as best I could before measurements and implementing DSP.  It is noteworthy that measurements pointed out that my X3 subwoofers had a gain imbalance.  Additional measurements and fiddling with the volume knob on each speaker fixed that issue.  Yes, I am still a fan!  I admit, a lot of what we hear is psychological.  After employing the filters, I know for a fact that the frequency response and time response are improved from a measurement perspective.  I believe I "hear" the improvement.  However, in my mind, knowing these two issues are improved lets me "relax" and focus on the music without any nagging thoughts about room interference.

I am posting the "before" DSP measurement.  Mitch and I decided to use a 30 Hz crossover to my SVS Subwoofers based on these results.  Not much happening at 30 Hz and below anyway.  I do not know how to take a measurement with the filters engaged since they are employed inside of my media player, JRiver Media Center.  I take Mitch's word for it that the "simulated" result is what is actually happening in my room.  It cost money to buy the program and hire Mitch.  But, I was a complete failure using REW and would not know what to do with the results or how to make DSP corrections anyway.  So Mitch was the way to go for me.




The grey line is the SVS Subwoofer which holds up well to 10 Hz.

Marcus

[fiat79]

Marcus, thanks for the update and your posts, more than most, are always worthy.  I really like your careful, systematic approach to changes and upgrades.  I always feel , reading your posts, that you never just jump on the bandwagon, changing or buying something just because everyone says that's the thing to do now, don't you know.  I feel like before you plunk down your money, you do a careful analysis of the expected benefit vs expenditure and whether it holds up to logic.

To my mind, DSP for home audio is the future.  I know Danny Ritchie of GR research rails against it but it's true - it's a lot like where Digital Audio was and the bias against it and look at where it is now.  No other technology (DSP) promises more for a comparable investment.  I have been building loudspeakers for a very long time and I have built many that have measured and sounded fine at a 50", FWD'ed distance only to fall apart at the LP.  REW and MiniDSP help but i feel the algorithms used are not rigorous enough and do not address the impulse response.  Thank goodness I live in a time where DSP is coming into it's own and there are people like MItch here to help it along.

I find it instructive that both Clayton Shaw and Mitch Barnett have prior Pro Audio experience and recognized immediately the lack of realism in home audio......

[Desertpilot]

Marcus, thanks for the update and your posts, more than most, are always worthy.  I really like your careful, systematic approach to changes and upgrades.  I always feel , reading your posts, that you never just jump on the bandwagon, changing or buying something just because everyone says that's the thing to do now, don't you know.  I feel like before you plunk down your money, you do a careful analysis of the expected benefit vs expenditure and whether it holds up to logic.

Yes, I do research, likely to a fault.  I would like to get a new Amp for my three X3s.  But, I am literally lost with all the choices.  I'm looking seriously at Class D monoblocks.  But, I am so happy with my Parasound A52+ that I am likely to go with their A31, three channel amplifier.  Why the amplifier?  I have an older Outlaw Audio amp driving my 4 height speakers (ATMOS or Auro 3D).  My Parasound drives my three X3s and two rear surround speakers (SVS Ultra Bookshelf).  But, I also own two side surround speakers that are unused because I do not have an amp to drive them.  So, the A52+ will drive the two rear and the two side surrounds while the new amp will drive the front three X3s.  That's the plan once I make a decision.

To my mind, DSP for home audio is the future.  I know Danny Ritchie of GR research rails against it but it's true - it's a lot like where Digital Audio was and the bias against it and look at where it is now.  No other technology (DSP) promises more for a comparable investment.  I have been building loudspeakers for a very long time and I have built many that have measured and sounded fine at a 50", FWD'ed distance only to fall apart at the LP.  REW and MiniDSP help but i feel the algorithms used are not rigorous enough and do not address the impulse response.  Thank goodness I live in a time where DSP is coming into it's own and there are people like MItch here to help it along.

I find it instructive that both Clayton Shaw and Mitch Barnett have prior Pro Audio experience and recognized immediately the lack of realism in home audio......

I spent a lot of money on GIK acoustic panels.  But, not nearly as much as advocated by many acoustics experts.  I finally decided I'm done with more panels (wife liked that decision).  If DSP gets me to a "happy place" with my room and setup, I'm good!  Measurements and DSP tells me my system is working as it should at the MLP.  Now, when I listen to music, it sounds great with no nagging doubts.

Thank you again for your encouraging words.

Marcus

[jtwrace]

One of these days you'll listen to me.  6ch amp from Buckeye, then go direct from your exa > amps > drivers and have Mitch do a full digital xover for you in Audiolense XO.  YOU will thank me after!  You can't imagine what you're giving up by not doing it. 


 

[fiat79]

Those are some interesting looking amps, Jason!  In today's marketplace, they even pass as a reasonable price.  It wouldn't hurt my feelings though if they came with a longer warranty though - 1 yr isn't that long for electronics.  Still, I'll be checking them out - thanks for making us aware.

[dallaire1]

Congrats Marcus ! Glad to hear another person using and enjoying DSP, Its not a replacement for passive room treatment but it sure makes one hell of a difference. Pretty much gets rid of listening fatigue for me entirely. Passive room treatment like you have employed along with DSP must sound really good indeed !! I don't know why so many people trip on it. What does everyone think is used in most studios by sound engineers..?? Guess some people still only listen to records too...

[Desertpilot]

Congrats Marcus ! Glad to hear another person using and enjoying DSP, Its not a replacement for passive room treatment but it sure makes one hell of a difference. Pretty much gets rid of listening fatigue for me entirely. Passive room treatment like you have employed along with DSP must sound really good indeed !! I don't know why so many people trip on it. What does everyone think is used in most studios by sound engineers..?? Guess some people still only listen to records too...

Thank you!  Feels good to know I am not alone.  I am still very satisfied with my DSP implementation.

[dallaire1]

I'm sure you are my friend  I tried just keeping DSP just for the low end at first, but after purchasing the full license for full range calibration I was blown away by the difference in every aspect ! As I'm sure you are as well. Imaging is locked in dead center, bass if clear and corrected for phase issues, etc. etc... It reminds me of when CD players hit the scene and some said "I would never let that replace my turntable" and now everyone pretty much is streaming music content with some amazing recordings. I just listened to my friends system. All Linn gear, all active, $100,000 mains $30,000 center channel, yada yada. No DSP though and I would not trade him for my M3's with my NAD with Dirac for NOTHING. Don't get me wrong it sounds "good" but has some issues even at that price, because he can't tweak a thing. I'm sure you probably have zero listening fatigue now if I had to guess. You did it right, passive treatment till you hit a wall, then bring in the DSP ! frosting on the cake ! anyone that bags on DSP probably hasn't spent ANY time listening to the difference with and without for a month or so. After a month I don't think anyone would defeat it, given it was done properly.