[MGbert]

MGbert,

I've only changed the frequencies at 500hz and below by Roger Sanders advice (which once again has proved to be correct). I'll quote part of a response he gave me yesterday as it mainly applies to his speakers being so direct, but may apply to yours a bit with your setup and the brightness you hear...

"As for the DEQ, it is expected that you will see significant frequency response errors above 1 KHz.  This is due to delayed reflections from the room interacting with the direct sound being picked up by the microphone.
 
However, you will not hear this.  This is due to precedence effect.
 
In other words, your ears will hear only the sound coming directly from the speakers.  The sound that is reflected around the room will be so delayed and attenuated by the controlled dispersion characteristics of my speakers that your brain will recognize that these severely-delayed sounds are not part of the original sound and will ignore them.
 
But a microphone has no precedence effect.  It will hear both the direct sound and the delayed sounds and sum them together, thereby forming large errors in the frequency response.  But again, you do not hear like a microphone, so you should ignore these errors.
 
You can prove this if you wish by correcting the faults shown above 1 KHz on an experimental basis.  You will immediately recognize that the corrected sound is quite awful and that the sound is far more accurate when left alone. "

He may be very stubborn in his ways, but I like and agree with most of what he says about things. And keep this in mind when you see the two dips around 2-3khz and 10khz on my DEQ's pink noise.
Not sure why the link isn't working in AA...My living room dimensions are 12x20x8 in my new house of 3 years (they were 16.5x25x7.5 in my old condo with my 3.6's). I'll take pic's by this weekend of both my room and the DEQ. I also have changed the DXQ slightly from how Roger sends them out. I lower the midrange by 2db and the bass by 3db along with the settings from the DEQ to get the sound that is best to me, though I still have a lot of experimenting I wanna do!

Regards,
Jon

Jon:

Ya gotta love it when advice is technically right and yet also incomplete.     I don't think it's fair to say that the ear does not hear the precedence effect - it does have some comb filtering effect on sustained frequencies.  But the same phenomenon happens under 500 Hz also, so if the use of the DEQ is efficacious for those frequencies, why not higher frequencies?

A possible answer is that the ear interprets comb filtering effects of higher frequencies differently than lower ones.  But I'd counter that at higher frequencies, the resulting combs get messier and messier since the wavelength gets shorter with frequency.  Floyd Toole in his "Loudspeakers and Rooms" book covers that.  But keep in mind that the width of the graphic equalizer on the DEQ (1/3 octave) and the RTA (1/6th octave) does not change as frequency goes up, so the effect on those increasing number of combs per band has a tendency to normalize within each band.**  But even if this is not the case, and that the accuracy of the RTA in the room diminishes as the frequency increases, there is the subjective fact (oxymoron?    ) that the resulting sound of well-recorded music in my room with my setup sounds like all kinds of veils have been lifted when the DEQ is engaged, and that the overall accuracy of sound actually suffers when I don't allow the DEQ to handle higher frequencies. 

So, let's assume that, in my room (the FRTs might affect this) that the DEQ is actually letting the overall frequency response to be more linear than without.  I have no illusions that it's "perfect", just closer to linear.  Since most recordings are not mastered with totally flat transducers in an anechoic chamber, they won't "sound good" that way.  That's where the idea of a "house curve" comes in, to get closer to what the mastering engineer heard.

I have been playing with the house curve, btw, and I've settled on a +2 dB hump centered at 50 Hz, a wider +2.5 hump at 500 Hz, the so-called "BBC Dip" of -2.5 dB centered at 2500 Hz, and a roll-off starting at about 6000 Hz of maybe -2 dB.  Reduces stridency without veiling detail in many recordings - I could listen for hours.   

So in summary: I'd recommend trying to use the DEQ full range, and try to apply a "house curve" similar to mine as a starting point.  After all, it's your house.      As long as you're careful to keep levels below clipping, there's no harm... and you might really like what you hear!    Maybe physics would say otherwise - but then it took quite a while before the physics of bumblebee flight were understood.

MGbert

** Stereophile's Test Disk Vol 2 included 1/3 octave warble tones exactly aligned with the DEQ's frequency bands.  I tried to use those in lieu of the built in pink noise generator, and found the resulting settings 1) different and 2) worse sounding than the pink noise equivalent.  The randomized nature of pink noise possibly aids in reducing/confounding the comb filtering effect, but that is just a guess.

[MGbert]

Oh, just for info, I'm not the only one who's bullish on full-range EQ.

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/GetPost.aspx?PostID=792

Although his advice mostly didn't work in my room... except for the "BBC dip", which works great, it's an interesting read.

MGbert

[Kiefer74]

MGbert,

I'm not sure whether Rogers comment was meant as a blanket statement or just referring to his speakers in their proper setup, but I got what he was saying. I only suggested it to you as you mentioned that your speakers sounded bright and with the tweaks done to your room I wasn't sure if you had created a more 'beamy' speaker setup. I don't mind things sounding slightly on the warm side of neutral, but never or very rarely bright even if it has more detail.

Roger also wished me the best on experimenting, feeling confident that I'd find his recommendations to be best in the end. I'll be experimenting further this week and weekend with the DEQ and DXQ. My second Magetech had a fault in it caused by shipping and will be arriving back to me on Tuesday (using my Zeus in place for the woofers). I'll take pictures of my room, DEQ settings and pink noise graphics that night or the next day. Interesting article BTW...the last section had some good general reminders and tips.

[kevin360]

Ya gotta love it when advice is technically right and yet also incomplete.     I don't think it's fair to say that the ear does not hear the precedence effect - it does have some comb filtering effect on sustained frequencies.

You must let go of your idea that we hear with our ears and you definitely must let go of the concept that we hear like measurement tools. The precedence effect is not some bad thing that Roger claimed we don't hear; it's what happens in our brains when the reflected sound is sufficiently delayed: The direct sound has precedence and the reflected sound does not affect the perceived frequency response in the way that it will your brainless tools.

Perception is a creative, not a passive process. Whereas measurement tools may record the harmonic differences between a Les Paul and a Stratocaster, our brains instantly identify each. Indeed, we can readily identify who is playing the instrument in many cases. Likewise, brains interpret the delayed sound (which has the same structure as the direct sound) as such, whereas your measuring tools have no idea what an echo is and just detect frequency aberrations.

We do not hear like measurement devices (which don't even 'hear' at all). 

[MGbert]

@ Jon & Waz:

I think we are closer to agreeing than you think.  I know we are not measuring devices - or actually we are quite a bit more discerning than the average RTA meter.  That's why I mentioned the bumblebee analogy at the end - the measurement tech has not quite caught up to where we are as discerning listeners.

I guess I'm a bit defensive about my use of EQ full range, since I know there is controversy.  And I know that the ones against have some seemingly valid points to back them up, IN THEORY.  I'm here to say, though, that as a practical thing, using it full range has so many positives that the downside (excessive brightness) is minor, since it can be easily compensated for by a so-called "house curve".  The house curve concept also happens to make sense based on the argument that studio monitors are not flat, but engineers use the output from them to EQ their recordings away from totally flat.  OK, some like Chesky don't very much, and guess what?  Some of their stuff sounds really great on my rig without the house curve!

The end result I'm shooting for is that a recorded bass drum sounds like a real bass drum, a recorded cymbal sounds real, a recorded piano... well, you get the pattern.  With the full range EQ and house curve activated, I get a WHOLE lot closer to that goal than without... whether or not the process introduces errors which depart from true linearity.  I keep falling back to the comments previously posted here by jarcher about his audition of my rig and how surprisingly successful he found my strategy, given his previous resistance to the use of EQ.

MGbert

[Kiefer74]

MGbert,

I can't upload pics from my iphone for some reason so I used my iPad to get these...



GEQ





RTA






EVS Oppo with Roku stick, Apple TV, Sanders preamp and the Behringers with the 'ears' shaved. Still need to get them off the glass and clean everything up a bit.

The settings below 172hz may change a bit when I install the other Magtech later today (going from the my Zeus gain on the woofers at 33db to the Magtech at 26db), but this is what sounds best now for both music and movies. I changed the DCX back to the default settings that Roger programmed in a few days ago and re-ran the DEQ. Pics of my room (speakers and setup) tomorrow after I clean up.

Regards,
Jon

[Kiefer74]

*RTA picture was taken before the auto EQ kicked in. Looks like a lot of bass between 20-40hz, but it sounds just fine.

[jsm71]

Jon, the 10c speakers are responsible in no small way for the system I have today.  I heard Roger's full setup at RMAF a couple of years ago and was blown away.  My wife was with me and actually asked TWICE to go back to his room after hearing a ton of way expensive stuff that just didn't do it for us.  I had Maggie 1.7s at the time and was in the market for the Magtech which I made buying arrangements for at the show with Roger.  The Magtech and meeting Roger was my reason for going into his room. 

I had heard many ESL's in the past dating back to KLH nines but the 10c system was the first that had the total sound I was looking for.  I was also doing some early looking for what might be retirement speakers, thinking bigger Maggies might some day be the ticket.  About a year ago I met (long story) David Janszen and ended up buying his latest ESL speakers, which are the closest alternative to the full and impressive sound Roger gets with his system and they have a wide sweetspot.  Before pulling that trigger I had to consider once again the 10c system.  In the end the 10c system was just too much; too much money, too much gear, too much size.  The sound however kept it in my thoughts.

I know you must be really enjoying this system.  It rocks.

Scott

[Kiefer74]

Scott,

I actually had never heard of Rogers speakers. I did hear about his Magtech amplifier (I'm sure you enjoy yours, they're great amplifiers) from a few Maggie owners and decided to give it a try along with his preamplifier on a 30 day money back deal of course. Next thing I know I'm giving his entire system a home trial. I figured it would be a nice chance to hear a modern electrostatic speaker system, but had no plans on keeping it, after all is just wanted the Magetech and preamp to go with my 3.6's.

But, once I hear them properly set up in my living room there was no going back. I found the sound I'd been searching for, but never thought I'd be able to have myself. Absolutely no regrets on purchasing his system.

I read up a bit on David Janszen's speakers. I like his take on the WTW setup. I'm sure you're enjoying your new system and I bet the  Magtech drives them beautifully!

Regards,
Jon

[Kiefer74]

Waz,

Regarding MOG I have a couple thoughts. Sorry for the delay, but I wanted to get some real listening time in before I made any suggestions. In short MOG is CD quality through a computer based system as heard in my jam room using a Mac tower, Apogee Duet Dac, Rogue Audio m-150's going to my Maggie 1.6's.

Unfortunately it is just slightly under par on my main system. I'm using it through a Roku Stick plugged into my EVS Oppo 105s HDMI front port. My guess is that it has to be processed through a DSP chip inside the Oppo before exiting and the sound is slightly degraded during this process.

If Oppo, Bryston or Sony (speaking of their new HD based players except for the Oppo) incorporates MOG inside their unit itself without the additional processing it would be a game changer IMO and even with its slight degrade in sonics I'm still using it...at the gym, in my jam room and in my main system as it's a great alternative to buying a bunch of new CD's and has a 'radio' option that is kind of like Pandora One, with better sonics of course.

With all the $ put into my Oppo and it's mods I really hope they adopt MOG. It's truly a universal player. They have Rhapsody integrated, but it playback is at 192kbps opposed to MOG's 320kbps. MOG can also be used on a computer based system for only $5 a month. Anyways, hope you get a chance to hear it on your main system. I think you'll like what it has to offer...I sure do!

Regards,
Jon

[SwamisCat]

After two or three weeks of listening and playing around with MOG I am extremely impressed. I can find ninety percent of the albums I am interested in, and most sound great.

I definitely hear a distinct sound that differs clearly from full CD quality. Dynamics are just not quite as sharp. Depth and soundstage layering suffer.  I also get the sense that the frequency extremes are slightly rolled off. I assume this sound is an artifact of MOG or 320 bits, but it could be influenced by something in my system.*

That said I love it and will continue to pay for their expanded service until an affordable CD quality service is available in English (I have not tried the expensive French company).


* I have listened to it from both a mac air and (separately) a solos music streamer through a benchmark dac 2 into Maggie 3as driven by Emotiva mono block amps.

[Kiefer74]

Swamis,

I have to agree with your take on MOG. I thought it was being caused by the DSP chip in the Oppo, but maybe that's just the sound of music at 320kbps? Anyways, it's not perfect, but a great deal at $10 a month (I also use it on my iPhone at the gym in place of Pandora).

[Kiefer74]

Speakers are 9.5' apart (from center to center) and 9.5' from listening position...

[jsm71]

Jon, it's funny how one decision drives others.  I thought I had things nailed down after supporting my Maggies with the Magtech, and it was indeed wonderful.  Like you, getting the Magtech amp took me in another speaker direction but for different reasons.  It turns out the Magtech is overkill for the JansZen speakers.  They are quite an easy load with a simple first order crossover and fairly narrow top to bottom impedance swing. 

A friend had me try his Decware 25 watt push/pull tube amp and I loved the sound so much I bought one.  Now I'm in line for Decware's next amp, a similar layout but with more watts and an over the top power supply setup.  It will allow the JansZens to fully exceed any volume output I will ever need, even though the current amp does just fine.  I have a small room today, but I'm thinking I will need more oomph if I ever get a bigger rooom.  I'll likely sell the Magtech after the new amp arrives.  It's a fabulous amp, but I just don't need it anymore.  The JansZens are keepers.  Like Roger, David Janszen is a brilliant designer and very easy to work with.  He is working on adding to the product line with both lesser and greater models than the zA2.1 he is currently selling.  I hope I don't like the future upscale models.  My wife would roast me. 

Your room looks great.  Have you had any issue with the speakers so close to the side walls?

Scott

[MGbert]

MGbert,

I can't upload pics from my iphone for some reason so I used my iPad to get these...



GEQ





RTA

Regards,
Jon

@Jon K:

WOW, that's a whole lot of subsonic activity from those Sanders.  If that were in my room, I'd be thinking there was a hum being picked up by them.  But as you say, if they sound good...

And you do know, right, that by setting all the sliders above 630 Hz at -2.5 dB you are introducing slight non-linearities and whatever bad ju-ju equalizers do to the upper midrange and treble, right?     Seriously, I can see why you're happy with the settings as they are, since you wind up with a slight downward trend to the "flat" response which most listeners come to expect, particularly far field and the dip at 2500 Hz, while deeper at -5dB than the setting at -2.5dB I use, is basically the "BBC dip" which Thorsten wrote about in the last link I posted.

That plot looks scarier, though, if you first turn on the pink noise in the I/O section then set the RTA display width to 15 dB vice the AutoEQ default of 30 dB.  Since you've already gone to the dark side of the Force by EQ'ing the treble down, try playing with squashing some of the peaks a bit so the trend stays the same.  Whether or not the results are theoretically valid, you just might like what you hear - which is the whole point, no?  And your Sanders do look quite handsome...  Congrats!  I wish my room was as well behaved as yours appears to be.  For me, IN MY ROOM (standard disclaimer) I couldn't get away with a setting like yours where you keep the DEQ linear past 630 Hz.

MGbert

[a.wayne]

Sweeet Setup Kiefer74, how do you find the behringer ? .............   

[Kiefer74]

@jsm, with that 1st order xover doesn't the midrange get a lil muddy or at least lack the clarity of just the Stat playing itself? I'll have to read up on his design.
This audio game is strange. Even my closest of friends have always thought I was nuts even though they understand how much I love music. I purposely got two Magtechs instead of a Magtech and an ESL amp 'cause if I ever sell these speakers I would like my next pair to be Maggie 20.7's...though admittedly I'm totally hooked on the electrostat clarity now.
Never heard of Decware. I'm totally good with amps now, but I'll still have to look it up to see what you're talking about. It'll be interesting to see what Janszens new speaker models look and sound like. Oh, and the 10C's can be close to the side wall or back wall just not anywhere near corners!

@MGbert, from what I understand (from a review, I haven't asked Roger yet) there's an intentional boost below 35hz. I've lowered it to where it looked flat with the pink noise, but the low end sounded too thin. The boost makes Music that goes that low sound full and natural.
I knew what you were talking about when you mentioned the 'BBC dip' and was a bit surprised to see it show up on my RTA. I still think the sound my ears hear at the listening position is a lil different than what's gathered by the mic for the RTA meter...going back to what the brain interprets from direct music vs. delayed and reflected sound coming from the room.
I'm not sure I get what you're saying about the RTA width. I'll have to play around with the DEQ a bit and see if I can figure out what you mean. I have about 8 settings so far. While I'm mainly concerned with the frequencies between 125-200hz, I'm still doing a lot of experimenting with frequencies up to 1k...above that it really does effect the sound for the worse with these speakers.

@a.wayne, the Behringer DCX comes with the speakers. The Behringer DEQ was suggested by Roger Sanders to deal with the room modes that were bothering me (he uses them in his personal setup(s) for different reasons).


Regards,
Jon

[MGbert]

@MGbert,
I'm not sure I get what you're saying about the RTA width. I'll have to play around with the DEQ a bit and see if I can figure out what you mean. I have about 8 settings so far. While I'm mainly concerned with the frequencies between 125-200hz, I'm still doing a lot of experimenting with frequencies up to 1k...above that it really does effect the sound for the worse with these speakers.

Regards,
Jon

@Jon K:

Do you have the manual for the DEQ?  On page 13, it describes how to have the DEQ output pink noise separate from the autoEQ function.  So if you do that (remember to set the gain of the pink noise to about -10dB or so, as also described on that page) then go to page 16 where you select the RTA MIC IN, and set the MAX and RANGE parameters.  I was referring to the RANGE, which I find useful to have set at 15 dB.  Note that when you use AutoEQ, it defaults to 30 dB, which is OK but I don't believe can be changed when using AutoEQ.

And if you're using the ECM8000 mic, you do have the sensitivity set at -37 (described on pp. 12-13 on the Utility menu), right?

MGbert

[a.wayne]

Kiefer74,   Are you running everything thru the DCX ..............?

[Kiefer74]

MGbert,

It only came with the Quick Start Guide so I've been using the online pdf manual.

The pages seem to be a little bit off from yours. For example the I'm using the ECM8000 mic set at -37 on page 14 (3.11.1), the Range is on page 13 (3.8.1). I don't like Behringers manuals (DEQ or the DCX). I just skim through them then play around with the buttons 'till I figure it out, which fortunately didn't take long. Not sure if I understand what you're referring to regarding Range, though I did figure out how to erase all my presets which is nice.


a.Wayne, yes.


Regards,
Jon