0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 6309 times.
Thanks for you vote of confidence...
I agree with John, it's about the knowledge of it and using it to ones best advantage! Jim
Somewhere along this continuum should be the location that yields the greatest improvement in damping the room's longitudinal resonant behavior. This position will also yield the flattest bass response.
In any case I don't have an equalization program for parametric digital equalization that will run on Linux anyway.
I really like the way my system sounds. At the end of the day, it is only me that I need to please, right or wrong.
At some point I will take proper measurements and see where it takes me.
One thing I will not endenvour to do is go with a digital room eq correction, but that is me.
I guess I don't get the anti-EQ bias. Like measurements, it's just a tool. You can learn to use it effectively, or not.
You think DRC == EQ?
Yes but DRC (one box unit) typically is automatic with very little flexability.
Right... and DRC can do other tricks as well, like for example, adding random delays to try and make the response flatter. A bit like you do with your subs...I mean, your statement above is a bit like saying "I tried an automatic pilot for my car and it didn't get me there as fast as I can drive myself, therefore I avoid using GPS units."
with delays messing up the timing just to make the steady-state response look good.
jtwrace, what are you using to give delay to rear subs output and how many milliseconds or feet of delay do you have dialed in?
As far as EQ of the front mains is concerned I only have 100 watts a channel of power available, even a 3dB boost is going to cause me to clip peaks. EQ could be applied to the rear sub as it has a 350 watt amplifier driving it but I don't currently have the ability to EQ only the feed to that sub. Scotty
jtwrace, if both subs are in the same plane on the rear wall, why have you used two different delay times?Scotty
Page created in 0.047 seconds with 27 queries.