[darrenyeats]

Ted,
It all depends on what you think is the purpose of EQ.

For example, for me and some others the EQ is there only to adjust for speaker/room effects in the bass frequencies. The '22 second' delay is a non-issue from this point of view.

If you are wanting a tone control then 22 seconds is not workable from that point of view.
Darren

[ted_b]

Agreed.  I had been posting about using it as a tone control and no one mentioned this buffer-clearing issue (makes technical sense).   I'll look into "fooling it" by chaging songs, etc and see if it's workable.  OTOH, I'd love to find some generic ideas about presets (i.e "half db down at 6k, 1 db down at 8k...for bright recordings") and then just try them.  The delay would be irrelevant.   I'll fiddle....Thx
Ted

[ted_b]

A couple of points:

• The EQ function appears to be completely transparent. Like several others here I EQ just the bass frequencies (200Hz and below) and I hear zero effect on the rest of the sound. I would expect just that since the filters being used are non-physical and are limited in extent to 200Hz. As mentioned there isn't even a S/PDIF interface to add potential jitter.
• The EQ presets can be defined separately from the EQ GUI plug-in. There is an xml file for each preset which you can configure by hand to have an indefinite number of EQ bands. On Linux the preset files live at /usr/share/InguzEQ/Settings/. I use 16 bands for example.

Regards, Darren

Darren,
Thanks.  In Windows Vista the conf files are located in a hidden folder called C:\Program Data\InguzEQ\settings.  I've created a few presets with different EQ points for bright cd's.  Kinda followed Steve Hoffman's position that 1 db may be enough, at 6k or 8k, to tame some bright cd's.  It will take time, but I think creating a few of these may be better for me than on-the-fly with its delay issues.  Thanks again.  I'll report back.

[bprice2]

Well, in 7.0.1 I got it installed and enabled (EQ only). The EQ menus show up on the Transporter, and all is present and accounted for. Problem is, it doesn't work...or shall I say it doesn't work for me.....any changes I make to the settings (i.e balance, bass, midrange, etc.) shows up on the front panel but takes almost 22 seconds to kick in. That is way too long to assess what the correct levels might be, etc (being that the increments are .1 db and sometimes that's enough).  And I have a duo core processor running 3.16 gigahertz, with no DRC enabled.  CPU seems to be around 13-15% utilized.

Any ideas?  Thx

Edit:  A response on Slim forum said this 22 second pause was "ok" and due to buffer.  Ouch!  Can you imagine having a volume control that took 22 seconds to respond.  Then, all of a sudden it's way too loud, so you turn it down and wait another 22 seconds (while it blares) to find out it's still too loud, or now not enough.  Unworkable IMHO.
Ted

You're right 22 seconds is too long.  But...if you re-start the track you're listening to, your transporter should re-buffer with the EQ changes.  I find this very helpful and the changes are much more noticeable and timely than simply waiting the 22 seconds.  This method also allows you to listen to the same segment of the track (assuming its the beginning of the track you want to hear) with EQ changes applied, which is also helpful.

Still, it would be better if changes were noticeable immediately, but that may be impossible in a buffered world.

[ted_b]

Well, in 7.0.1 I got it installed and enabled (EQ only). The EQ menus show up on the Transporter, and all is present and accounted for. Problem is, it doesn't work...or shall I say it doesn't work for me.....any changes I make to the settings (i.e balance, bass, midrange, etc.) shows up on the front panel but takes almost 22 seconds to kick in. That is way too long to assess what the correct levels might be, etc (being that the increments are .1 db and sometimes that's enough).  And I have a duo core processor running 3.16 gigahertz, with no DRC enabled.  CPU seems to be around 13-15% utilized.

Any ideas?  Thx

Edit:  A response on Slim forum said this 22 second pause was "ok" and due to buffer.  Ouch!  Can you imagine having a volume control that took 22 seconds to respond.  Then, all of a sudden it's way too loud, so you turn it down and wait another 22 seconds (while it blares) to find out it's still too loud, or now not enough.  Unworkable IMHO.
Ted

You're right 22 seconds is too long.  But...if you re-start the track you're listening to, your transporter should re-buffer with the EQ changes.  I find this very helpful and the changes are much more noticeable and timely than simply waiting the 22 seconds.  This method also allows you to listen to the same segment of the track (assuming its the beginning of the track you want to hear) with EQ changes applied, which is also helpful.

Still, it would be better if changes were noticeable immediately, but that may be impossible in a buffered world.

Great idea!  Thanks!!

[Bob in St. Louis]

I realize there's a buffer at work here, but I can't help but to wonder if this 22 seconds doesn't have anything to do with the softwares automatic screen (page) refresh rate? 
If so, that's an adjustable number.
Just a thought.

Bob

[ted_b]

Well, I did some testing of presets last night and got very optimistic results.  The EQ seems to add little if any artifacts or noise, and doesn't seem to detract from any "audiophile" aspect (soundstage width/depth, tonal accuracy, etc.).  It was a subtle change for some bright cd's I like to listen to (John Hiatt, Stolen moments, for example) even though my custom preset had 6k down 2.3 db and 8k and 10k down almost 3.8db. 

However, a critical problem was uncovered.  I may be an anomaly here, so it may not be an issue elsewhere.  You see, my ripping methodology is to rip to large album-sized FLAC or WAV files with associated cue files (the file that tells the software all about the metadata, including track lengths, etc).  Well, I have a playlist created that includes audiophile-quality cuts from various albums ('evaluation") and when i began playing it I noticed the wrong songs wer being picked...the song that starts the album, not the specific song...but only for certain tracks in the playlist.  I assumed it was a playlist error so i went directly to those problematic albums.  Same thing.  it would play the album in its entirety, regardless of whether i tried to advance to next track or not (and yet the next track metadata was showing on the screen).  I went to bed scratching my head, and this morning realized that the problems were all with wav files, not FLAC files.  Then i went to the server settings and notice that there is no InguzDSP decoder for wav, just for FLAC.  My wav choices are still the classic "default/disable".  ??  I even tried telling SC to convert wav to InguzDSP/FLAC on the stream, but still no luck.  No I wonder if the wav files are even affected by the EQ settings (everything I EQ tested last night were ironically FLAC files; I just started ripping to wav recently).  Is Inguz unavailable for wav?  I do have some "normally ripped" wav files (i.e track selections) in my collection so I'll try and hear if any EQ affects them.  What a pain!  I mean, even if it has a wav EQ problem, it should at least read my wav and cue file normally and present me my tracks appropriately.

Any ideas would be helpful.  I have to admit that even though I consider myself quite a SlimServer/Squeeze Center veteran I still have difficult time reading and fully understanding the multiple and seemingly parallel choices that can be made in "file formats", and the newly added "InguzDSP/encoder-name" selections are no easier. 

So..I'm not enamored enough yet with the flexibility or value of Inguz to encode/compress my existing wav files into FLAC so I can be all-FLAC all-the-time.   It makes no sense (and is why I said I'm likely an anomaly) that Inguz doesn't support wav files.  ("Cheddar?"  "Not much call for it around here, sir."  "Not much call?  It's the singular most popular cheese in the world!"  "Not 'round here, sir." )

[mikel51]

Ted,

Are you planning to get a calibarated microphone and try to dsp your system to a target curve?  I downloaded the latest Inguz, but haven't installed it yet.  I'm exclusively using FLAC for the TP.  I have it in the back of my head to install Inguz tools, get a Behringer microphone and a USB preamp....but I know this will be a solid weekend to multi-week project and haven't quite built up the energy to undertake it.
Mike

[ted_b]

Ted,

Are you planning to get a calibarated microphone and try to dsp your system to a target curve?  I downloaded the latest Inguz, but haven't installed it yet.  I'm exclusively using FLAC for the TP.  I have it in the back of my head to install Inguz tools, get a Behringer microphone and a USB preamp....but I know this will be a solid weekend to multi-week project and haven't quite built up the energy to undertake it.
Mike

Nope.  As stated before, i have no need for the Digital Room Correction and am eval'ing Inguz purely for tone controlling poorly mastered cd's (too bright, etc.).  My room is well treated with dozens of RealTraps' minitraps, first reflection panels, diffusors, etc and therefore I have no real need for DRC.  Good luck with it.

I went ahead and moved all my newer wav to FLAC anyway (93 wav files, took about an hour; the global find-n-replace programs come in handy for cue files, etc) so I'll listen more tonight.

[darrenyeats]

Ted,

Are you planning to get a calibarated microphone and try to dsp your system to a target curve?  I downloaded the latest Inguz, but haven't installed it yet.  I'm exclusively using FLAC for the TP.  I have it in the back of my head to install Inguz tools, get a Behringer microphone and a USB preamp....but I know this will be a solid weekend to multi-week project and haven't quite built up the energy to undertake it.
Mike

I don't know if you've read this thread from the top, but some people avoid the whole DRC shooting match.

Even though using it for 'correction' purposes some of us stick to just EQ - and EQ in the bass frequencies at that. In fact, one reason I avoid DRC is that it's not clear to me whether DRC can be restricted to only the bass frequencies.

From afar it looks like doing full DRC is more complex and there are more variables to get wrong than with EQ. With EQ you can use a Radio Shack SPL meter for which calibrations are known (for a discussion of different catalogue numbers and calibrations see  http://forum.inguzaudio.com/index.php?showtopic=12). Also you can use warble tones which I think are beneficial in avoiding 'noise' in the FR measurements. In other words, moving microphones a tiny distance or a slight adjustment of the frequencies measured can change the FR curve a lot in a way that isn't useful for correcting what a human hears. I believe it is referred to sometimes as comb filtering. It's a bit like playing a test tone on vinyl and correcting for the pops and crackles - there's a lot of noise which shouldn't be corrected. Warble tones don't solve that, but they mitigate it.

Take a look at the typical FR response based on an impulse recording and it has a tooth-comb effect. These localised spikes are not significant and shouldn't be corrected. Warble tones help with this problem IMHO.

These are just some thoughts - I am open to other suggestions or experience if anyone has it. DRC in the bass only would be appealing to me...I realise DRC is more than EQ and it would be nice to try out - I just need to have more confidence the issues I'm worried about can be dealt with.
Darren

[rydenfan]

Ted, did you get a chance to listen last night? I have held off installing the EQ till you see what you think. Thanks for being the Guinea 

[ted_b]

Well, the jury is still out, but so far the results are good, and the effects are generally clean, sonically.  My biggest concern is about artifacts and noise in a flat or bypass mode.  I sense little if any.  I will spend the next couple of nights, though, playing with the presets to a greater degree.  last night all I was trying to accomplish was making sure my now all-FLAC environment worked as planned, and that Inguz was indeed in the path.  I toyed around with things like "width" which is a nice effect for those mixes that are a bit too mono for my taste, or which have center fill that seems too over saturated.  I also toyed around with "skew" (ability to add delays per side that equate to one-third of an inch movements) and found that if I moved my right speaker back not quite two inches I locked down imaging a little better.  So, instead of doing it electronically, I simply repositioned, got out the laser level, and voila, i think my balance and overall soundstage is better matched.  More to come. 

[rydenfan]

Thanks for the thoughts Ted. Any further impressions?

[jrebman]

I realize there's a buffer at work here, but I can't help but to wonder if this 22 seconds doesn't have anything to do with the softwares automatic screen (page) refresh rate? 
If so, that's an adjustable number.
Just a thought.

Bob

Bob,

Where do you change this number?  With my screen reader these page refreshes are a real PITA.  Are you talking about slimserver or slimcenter?  Haven't tried the latter yet.

-- Jim

[ted_b]

With the help of one Steve Hoffman, engineer extraordinaire, I've developed a couple of presets that lower the sizzle and airy range of 10k to 12k to 16k, and it really does the trick on some very bright 90's cd masters.  I like the subtlety of this EQ plug-in so far,  Still playing around with presets. 

[woodsyi]

Keep it coming Ted.  You got the Steve Hoffman to work on this?  Awesome.   

[Bob in St. Louis]

Where do you change this number?  With my screen reader these page refreshes are a real PITA.  Are you talking about slimserver or slimcenter?  Haven't tried the latter yet.

Hey there Jim,
I'm at work now, so I don't have access to my Slimserver (SS). If memory serves, here's how to change the screen refresh rate:
On the title "home" page of SS, look in the upper left corner. There's a dropdown menu. Choose "behaviour" tab. On that screen you'll see a short paragraph about what refresh rate is, and how to change the rate at which it updates. You can jack that number to just about whatever you want.
The only disadvantage to telling it an extreme length of time is that your "song now playing" may not be as up to date as you'd like.
When I get home, I'll check if my instructions were correct. {They were not. See below}

Bob

[ted_b]

I can't imagine that the GUI page refresh rate has anything to do with the physical buffer for TCP/IP or the bitstream, but even if it does, a simple fwd/rev clears it (the buffer, that is).  So If I make an EQ change i just go to next song then back and I hear the change.

[Bob in St. Louis]

Ted, I agree it's a long shot, and ultimately I doubt it would fix the issue, but it's an easy experiment and easily reversable.

Jim: {disregard my earlier instructions}
On the title page click on "Server Settings" Then, from the drop down menu on the upper left corner chose, "Interface". Scroll down until you see "Browser Refresh Timing" and change the default number from "30" to say.... maybe "120".

Bob

[jrebman]

Bob,

Thanks.  I'll look tomorrow.  My fingers are very sore and numb from braiding some cable for internal wiring of my new, still being built, speakers.

-- Jim