[Cappy]

I agree with a lot of what Jason is saying.  I do think, however, that for most people a hybrid digital/passive crossover is the way to go, using one of the SOTA DSP solutions.

Doing it the hybrid way means one DAC, one preamp, one amp.  A lot less cabling.  The ability to choose components based on their sound quality produced instead of a narrow range of multichannel solutions.  Much less hassle factor too.

Jason's system impulse response is fantastic.  The impulse response will never look at good with a passive crossover in the mix but the sound results can be excellent and probably better in most cases.

I use both Audiolense and Acourate and recommend them both.  With Audiolense it is easier to get good results with less effort.

I could never go back to uncorrected speakers and room at this point.  My ears/brain are trained now to hear the benefits of smooth frequency response and correct timing.

[Saturn94]

Uh, because it will sound better the better it measures  If you don't know what it sounds like when it measures well, then you really have no clue what it's capable of.

“Better” is in the ear/brain of the beholder.

If one doesn’t mind or enjoys the effort of measuring/correcting, go for it and decide if it sounds “better” or not to you.  Just don’t assume a pretty graph will sound great to everyone. 😉

[genjamon]

Here I am, for months, telling everyone how great my X3s sound (to me).  Finally, I dragged out my UMIK 1 and fired up REW.  Inside I was fearful of the results.  And, of course, the results were horrible.  Now, in my defense, I tried to play REW through my music server to my DAC (DAC is connected via USB).  REW would not work with the DAC's ASIO driver.  So, I switched to JAVA.  Left speaker, right speaker and both L+R.  All traces were almost identical showing a 25 dB peak at 40 Hz.  10 to 15 dB peaks at 60 and 80 Hz.  The speakers combined smoothed out the rest to within 10 dB.  Waterfall was miserable.  25 to 80 Hz was the worst.  But, there were additional frequencies in trouble as well.  I got room treatments.  I'm stuck with seating location.  All I can do is move speakers closer to front wall (which I don't want to do).

I'm going to try again tomorrow but run REW through my preamp so I can use ASIO4ALL and test all my speakers.  If my speakers fail again tomorrow, I'm likely to go the DSP route (Audiolense XO).

Arghhhhh.

Marcus

Back to the original, it's strange that you have such a huge bass response by measurements, but things sound good and balanced while listening.  I'm assuming you're a fairly experienced listener and would notice something so far out of whack.  It might be good to make sure everything was set up correctly. 

Did you apply the calibration file for the Umik mic? 

And what is involved in playing REW through your music server to your DAC?  Does this mean you're running REW on your music server and just playing it through USB to your DAC?  What kind of music server are we talking about here?  A PC of some kind you use as music server (i.e. running Windows)?  Or something with a specialized operating system? 

[WGH]

You can double check your measurements using Audio Check, a fun way to spend an afternoon.
Any donation ($5) will be rewarded with • uncompressed .wav files downloads for every test • increased durations and sample rates up to 192 kHz in the Tone Gen section
https://www.audiocheck.net/

I use my trusty Radio Shack 33-2050 Sound Level Meter with the analog display and SPL correction table, it's accuracy is just good enough not to depress me.

Audio Check tests:

Frequency Response Tests
    Low Frequency Response and Subwoofer Audio Test (10-200 Hz)
    Subwoofer Kick Test
    Subwoofer Midrange Frequency Test
    High Frequency Response and Hearing Audio Test (22-8 kHz)
    Aliasing Test
    Mosquito Tone Audibility Test (17.4 kHz)
    Audiometric (Hearing Loss) Test (125-8,000Hz)

Stereo Imaging Tests
    Left/Right Stereo Audio Test
    Loudspeakers Polarity Audio Test
    LEDR Imaging Audio Test
    Stereo Perception and Sound Localization
    Low Frequency Sound Localization and Subwoofer Imaging Test

Dynamic Range Test
    16-bit Dynamic Audio Test
    Dynamic Range, Dithering and Noise Shaping

Room Tests
    Musical Articulation Test Tones (MATT)
    MATT as a Listening Test NEW

Distortion Tests
    Low Frequency Extension and Subwoofer Harmonic Distortion Test (THD)
    Total Harmonic Distortion (<1kHz) NEW

Pure (Sine) Tones
    Full Sine Sweep (20-20,000 Hz)
    Low End Sine Sweep (20-200 Hz)
    Perceptual Sine Sweep (20-20,000 Hz)
    Sine Bursts (20-200 Hz)

Distortion
    Total Harmonic Distortion NEW
    Intermodulation Distortion (IMD) Test Tone

Noises
    White Noise
    Pink Noise
    Brown (Red) Noise
    Blue (Azure) Noise
    Violet (Purple) Noise
    Grey (Perceptual) Noise

Impulse
    Impulse Tone

Dynamic
    Dynamic Test Noises

Higher Sample Rates (up to 192 kHz)
    High Definition Audio Tests

Others
For the curious mind...
    Brown Note
    Shepard Tone Illusion

Pure Tone Generators
    Single Sine Tone Generator
    Dual Sine Tone Generator
    Sweep Tone Generator

Other Audio Generators
    Audiocheck's SpectroTyper
    DTMF Tone Generator

Blind Tests

Latest pages added:
    MATT as a Listening Test: using MATT and... your ears NEW
    THD Test Tones - the Extended Set: more distortion... tests!
    THD Test Tones: how little distortion can you hear?
    How good is your room? MATT will help you find out!
    Timing Blind Test: when shortest is the best!
    The whole site has been redesigned. Enjoy the new (responsive) look!
    The 16-bit v/s 8-bit Blind Test, Part 2: featuring Neil Young
    Perceptual Sine Sweep: the sweep, sweet to your ears
    The non-linearities of the Human Ear: you think your ear is perfect, right?
    The 16-bit v/s 8-bit Blind Test: can you hear a difference?
    Dynamic Range, Dithering and Noise Shaping: when noise becomes your best friend
    The Subwoofer Kick Test: give your subwoofer a kick (or two... or six!)
    Subwoofer Midrange Frequency Test: use your sub only for what your sub is meant to!
    Low Frequency Sound Localization Test: the reason why you don't want to hear where your basses come from.
    Stereo Perception and Sound Localization ...and the human auditory cues.
    Subwoofer Harmonic Distortion Test: how good is your bass extension?

Most popular pages:
    Headphone (and Earbud) Benchmarking Test Files: the ultimate headphone sound test. UPDATED
    High Frequency Sound Check: test the upper limit of your hearing.
    Low Frequency Sound Check: evaluate the lowest bound of your audio equipment.

[abomwell]

Based on the measurement graph, that 40Hz peak is likely the horizontal room mode, assuming the room's width is about 14'. This seems a little odd since the speakers are not toed in and would not excite that mode very much.

[jtwrace]

Cool.  Is there a way to try them out?

Yes, you can buy it with a 90 day full refund. https://juicehifi.com/terms-and-conditions/


Bernt is such a nice reasonable person that I'm sure if you emailed him on day 89 and asked for 30 more days he's probably honor your request. 

[jtwrace]

“Better” is in the ear/brain of the beholder.

If one doesn’t mind or enjoys the effort of measuring/correcting, go for it and decide if it sounds “better” or not to you.  Just don’t assume a pretty graph will sound great to everyone. 😉

I can argue the point that if you don't know what proper actually sounds like, you've just been fooling yourself.  If you go by science and actually measure, then you know where the system stands and then and only then you can tweak to your liking but most of the time it's very minor differences. 

[Cappy]

A "must have" companion to Acourate is the following book by Mitch Barnett:

https://www.amazon.com/Accurate-Sound-Reproduction-Using-DSP-ebook/dp/B01FURPS40/ref=sr_1_1?crid=CT5T59V4CRZY&keywords=accurate+sound&qid=1641773648&s=books&sprefix=acourate+sound%2Cstripbooks%2C111&sr=1-1

Acourate software has moved ahead to a 2.0 release now, but most of the book is still... accurate.

[Tyson]

Yes, you can buy it with a 90 day full refund. https://juicehifi.com/terms-and-conditions/


Bernt is such a nice reasonable person that I'm sure if you emailed him on day 89 and asked for 30 more days he's probably honor your request. 

Nice, I will give it a shot.  I ran a DEQX unit for a while and also demo'd a Trinnov preamp recently and both of them suffered from the 'sucking the life out of the music' issue I noted before.  Both of them did correction in the frequency and time domains, I had high hopes, which made it fairly disappointing. 

But, I like new technology and I want something like this to work because it would elegantly solve so many thorny issues with high end audio.  So far I've been disappointed but hopefully someone will really nail it and produce something awesome.

[Rusty Jefferson]

For goodness sake, there's an identical 25db peak centered on 40hz on both channels. That's unusual. Measure again with the built in subwoofers turned down by half and post please.

[jtwrace]

Nice, I will give it a shot.  I ran a DEQX unit for a while and also demo'd a Trinnov preamp recently and both of them suffered from the 'sucking the life out of the music' issue I noted before.  Both of them did correction in the frequency and time domains, I had high hopes, which made it fairly disappointing. 

But, I like new technology and I want something like this to work because it would elegantly solve so many thorny issues with high end audio.  So far I've been disappointed but hopefully someone will really nail it and produce something awesome.

Yeah these are totally different. 


Watch this by Mitch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfGAUvyvdNU


and my interview with Mitch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1n8o7Wv4LQ

[Tyson]

Yeah these are totally different. 


Watch this by Mitch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfGAUvyvdNU


and my interview with Mitch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1n8o7Wv4LQ

Just finished watching the "Understanding the State of the Art of Digital Room Correction." 

Well that's disappointing.  I was hoping that the underlying tech for Acourate and Audiolense was different than what was used by DEQX, but it's exactly the same.  The only real difference I can see is that Acourate and Audiolense are software and run a computer, while the DEQX is a dedicated piece of hardware.  Oh, and it's a lot less expensive than the DEQX (which is nice).  Unless I'm missing something major that's different/better?  If so, please let me know. 

[Cappy]

Tyson,

What is going to sound better, a DEQX DAC or your iFi Pro iDSD DAC with tubes enabled? 

[Tyson]

Tyson,

What is going to sound better, a DEQX DAC or your iFi Pro iDSD DAC with tubes enabled? 

That's an easy choice - the tube DAC of course

[Cappy]

That's an easy choice - the tube DAC of course

I rest my case.

[sockpit]

I’ve yet to attend a live performance where a room was likely to have measured anywhere near flat. Orchestra, jazz, rock, folk, you name it, the room usually sucks. So if live music is our gold standard, why should we not believe our ears and instead fret about what a computer program tells us? Ok, a huge mode might concern me, but don’t let what you’ve supposedly learned by a graph rob you of your enjoyment—which is no illusion.

[Tyson]

I rest my case.

Well, I do use EQ, it's very useful for the bass peaks.  And I also treat the room with 4 inch thick acoustic panels to deal with reflections from about 600hz and up.  And getting speakers with some attempt at constant directivity also helps.  As does getting an OB speaker (particularly in the bass) as it naturally excites less room modes. 

Frankly it's a lot of fussiness, trying to deal with the room.  I wish just using FIR filters and convolution fixed everything perfectly in the digital domain, and giving you perfect sound in-room in the analog domain.  That would be super cool.

[genjamon]

Sticking a DEQX between pre and subwoofers got me damned close to flat bass/mid bass response three houses ago. The best bass I’ve ever had. Tried it between DAC and pre to handle more than just the subs, and the whole sound went to shit. I’m with you, Tyson.

[Cappy]

Tried it between DAC and pre to handle more than just the subs, and the whole sound went to shit.

Well, yeah.  Apart from the DEQX sounding like crap compared to carefully chosen two-channel high end gear, there was an extra analog to digital then digital to analog conversion in there.  And extra cabling too.

My claim is that any pretty much any multichannel hardware, or special purpose correction hardware like DEQX or Trinnov is going to sound poorly compared to the terrific components we already have in our two channel systems.  There are some exceptions -- Jason's carefully constructed multichannel digital system being one of them.

[Daryl Zero]

I’ve yet to attend a live performance where a room was likely to have measured anywhere near flat. Orchestra, jazz, rock, folk, you name it, the room usually sucks. So if live music is our gold standard, why should we not believe our ears and instead fret about what a computer program tells us? Ok, a huge mode might concern me, but don’t let what you’ve supposedly learned by a graph rob you of your enjoyment—which is no illusion.

That's a point I've been thinking about. Whenever I've gone to hear music, it is diffusing all over the place including off the people in front of me. When I played in small clubs, the music would be bouncing off of everywhere.

I like my music diffused just like I like plots to tv shows.