Page 10 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 143

Thread: Redefine your budget room EQ 'flat' target curve to Harman's pro curve

  1. #91
    [WBF Founding Member] audioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Near Atlanta, GA but not too near!
    Posts
    2,465
    Interesting thread. Anyone know the X and relative Y data points on this (black) target curve?
    Name:  image.jpeg
Views: 862
Size:  46.4 KB

    If push comes to shove, I am sure I can approximate it but if I can get the exact data, it might be helpful.

    If I recall correctly, when Harmon did this study, they used music. Anyone know what this might look like if Harmon had used movies instead. With current subwoofer abilities and more movies providing sub 25HZ content, this particular target looks like it might (relatively) hide those frequencies.

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    16,051
    I don't think I have ever seen the actual numbers for the target curve JBL Synthesis uses. But here is the latest version/measurement of our theater at work when we first built it:



    The dashed line is the target curve for main channels with an 80 Hz crossover. Faint red is pre-correction and bright red is post correction measurement.

    I don't think there is much research as to what needs to be there below 80 Hz especially for movies where it is all artificial anyway. So best is to adjust that by ear as we do (in general, the target curve should also be adjusted by ear after the initial optimization).

  3. #93
    Member Sponsor Addicted to Best! dallasjustice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,090
    There is no universal target. But I've found that a hinge at 1khz out to 20khz at -4db is very desirable and consistently good. I believe there are psychoacoustic reasons for HF to be attenuated a bit in so called "small rooms."

    Below 1khz, I prefer pretty flat response down to 15hz. IME, this preference varies depending on bass accuracy of the recording. There are many bass shy recordings. In those cases, a little LF tilt can help. The newest version of Acourate Convlolver has a real time tilt the user can play with and various presets. I'll prolly set up a few different bass settings.

    IMO, I believe there is so much inconsistency with bass in recordings partly because many professionals think they are EQing the recording. Instead, they are really EQing their own room-boom bass problems. There are prolly some other factors too. (None of which is my system/room.)


    Quote Originally Posted by amirm View Post
    I don't think I have ever seen the actual numbers for the target curve JBL Synthesis uses. But here is the latest version/measurement of our theater at work when we first built it:



    The dashed line is the target curve for main channels with an 80 Hz crossover. Faint red is pre-correction and bright red is post correction measurement.

    I don't think there is much research as to what needs to be there below 80 Hz especially for movies where it is all artificial anyway. So best is to adjust that by ear as we do (in general, the target curve should also be adjusted by ear after the initial optimization).
    Last edited by dallasjustice; 01-02-2016 at 12:37 PM.
    MUSIC IS GOOD

  4. #94
    Addicted to Best!
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,086
    Quote Originally Posted by dallasjustice View Post
    There is no universal target. But I've found that a hinge at 1khz out to 20khz at -4db is very desirable and consistently good. I believe there are psychoacoustic reason for HF to be attenuated a bit in so called "small rooms."

    Below 1khz, I prefer pretty flat response down to 15hz. IME, this preference varies depending on bass accuracy of the recording. There are many bass shy recordings. In those cases, a little LF tilt can help. The newest version of Acourate Convlolver has a real time tilt the user can play with and various presets. I'll prolly set up a few different bass settings.

    IMO, I believe there is so much inconsistency with bass in recordings partly because many professionals think they are EQing the recording. Instead, they are really EQing their own room-boom bass problems. There are prolly some other factors too. (None of which is my system/room.)
    Dallas - your target sounds like the one that Bob Katz uses I think? I like the bog standard B&K.

  5. #95
    Member Sponsor Addicted to Best! dallasjustice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Audiophile Bill View Post
    Dallas - your target sounds like the one that Bob Katz uses I think? I like the bog standard B&K.
    Yes and also Mitch Barnett, Uli and a few others. I try to learn as much as I can from a few of these guys. They are Jedi Knights and I'm merely low level resistance.
    MUSIC IS GOOD

  6. #96
    Member Sponsor Addicted to Best! dallasjustice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,090
    It is funny how much consensus there is among those who use target curves. Almost everyone agrees on a downward tilt into the very high frequencies.

    IMO, this normal human preference might explain a lot about the attraction to certain pieces like tubes, true NOS ladder DACs (eg. TotalDAC) and certain speaker cables.

    The new JBL 4367 allows the user to reduce the HF as well. I think this is very smart. Some other speaker manufacturers design their speakers like this as well.

    One of the best side effects to using high performance DSP like this is that it greatly reduces gear swapping, as long as the user starts off with relatively neutral gear.
    Last edited by dallasjustice; 01-02-2016 at 12:47 PM.
    MUSIC IS GOOD

  7. #97
    Interesting topic. Just passing along some info and impressions as I spent over 30 years with room curves starting with RTA's, 31 band eq's then TEF, 10 years of which working professionally in a variety of recording studios/control rooms and the last 5 years with digital loudspeaker and room correction software systems. In addition to the Harman and B&K target responses, there is also the European Broadcast Union produced a Tech note (EBU-Tech 3276) called, “Listening conditions for the assessment of sound programme material: monophonic and two–channel stereophonic”. https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3276.pdf Check out Figure 2 on Page 6.

    However, these "targets" are all very similar where the spectral response is flat to some frequency hinge point and then some slope of a roll off, typically between -4 dB and -10 dB ending at 20 kHz depending on the amount of HF absorption in your room and of course personal taste :-) The Bob Katz curve which I documented in an article in Acourate on CA is flat to 1 kHz and then a straight line to -6 or -7 dB at 20 kHz. Again, some tolerance variability for personal taste, HF absorption, program material being listened to (pop rock mixes with heavy dynamic range compression tend to have a brighter spectral balance than minimal mic'd orchestra music).

    Toole's latest free paper at AES: http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V63/7_8/#paper1 also supports this approach. See Figure 14 on preferred room curves and the comments about trained listeners.

    I have a lot of respect for JJ Johnston and feel his presentation on the Acoustic and Psychoacoustic Issues in Room Correction that can be downloaded from here: http://www.aes-media.org/sections/pn...2008/jj_jan08/ represents the state of the art understanding of room correction. Since then, most of the DRC products use frequency dependent windowing (FDW) based on jj's research which is a major leap forward from 1/3 or 1/6 octave analysis and correction systems.

    What I find interesting is that if one is looking for the most neutral or natural response, something close to Bob Katz's spec seems to be closest. What do I base this on? Well, doing some correlation with a number of diyAudio members, we shared our measured responses at the listening position. Here is one example, where throughput the passband, myself and another diyAudio member are basically listening to the exact same response, yet our systems and rooms and have nothing in common. His speakers are 25 full range 5" driver line arrays and mine are 3-way old school active horn system. Aside from different gear, we are also using different DRC systems:

    Name:  mitch_zpsiocwyxfe.jpg
Views: 569
Size:  56.2 KB

    Several other members share virtually the same measured response at the listening position. Coincidence? I just find it interesting. Given the power of computers and sophisticated DSP software like Acourate, one can modify a target curve, regenerate the filters, and be listening to a new response in less than a minute. If using playback software like JRiver, one can AB correction FIR filters with different targets in real-time and determines one's own preference.

    Personally, I am waiting for the industry to catch up and start looking at target step responses (i.e. time coherent speakers), in addition to target frequency responses, like the step response described in the latter half of this post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...ml#post4258668 But that's another can of worms :-) Hope some of that is helpful and Happy Listening in 2016!

    Cheers, Mitch

    PS. Very kind of you Michael. Happy New Year to you!

  8. #98
    Addicted to Best!
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,086
    Quote Originally Posted by dallasjustice View Post
    Yes and also Mitch Barnett, Uli and a few others. I try to learn as much as I can from a few of these guys. They are Jedi Knights and I'm merely low level resistance.
    I read all of Mitch's sublime articles on CA actually so concur.

  9. #99
    Addicted to Best!
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitchco View Post
    Interesting topic. Just passing along some info and impressions as I spent over 30 years with room curves starting with RTA's, 31 band eq's then TEF, 10 years of which working professionally in a variety of recording studios/control rooms and the last 5 years with digital loudspeaker and room correction software systems. In addition to the Harman and B&K target responses, there is also the European Broadcast Union produced a Tech note (EBU-Tech 3276) called, “Listening conditions for the assessment of sound programme material: monophonic and two–channel stereophonic”. https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3276.pdf Check out Figure 2 on Page 6.

    However, these "targets" are all very similar where the spectral response is flat to some frequency hinge point and then some slope of a roll off, typically between -4 dB and -10 dB ending at 20 kHz depending on the amount of HF absorption in your room and of course personal taste :-) The Bob Katz curve which I documented in an article in Acourate on CA is flat to 1 kHz and then a straight line to -6 or -7 dB at 20 kHz. Again, some tolerance variability for personal taste, HF absorption, program material being listened to (pop rock mixes with heavy dynamic range compression tend to have a brighter spectral balance than minimal mic'd orchestra music).

    Toole's latest free paper at AES: http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V63/7_8/#paper1 also supports this approach. See Figure 14 on preferred room curves and the comments about trained listeners.

    I have a lot of respect for JJ Johnston and feel his presentation on the Acoustic and Psychoacoustic Issues in Room Correction that can be downloaded from here: http://www.aes-media.org/sections/pn...2008/jj_jan08/ represents the state of the art understanding of room correction. Since then, most of the DRC products use frequency dependent windowing (FDW) based on jj's research which is a major leap forward from 1/3 or 1/6 octave analysis and correction systems.

    What I find interesting is that if one is looking for the most neutral or natural response, something close to Bob Katz's spec seems to be closest. What do I base this on? Well, doing some correlation with a number of diyAudio members, we shared our measured responses at the listening position. Here is one example, where throughput the passband, myself and another diyAudio member are basically listening to the exact same response, yet our systems and rooms and have nothing in common. His speakers are 25 full range 5" driver line arrays and mine are 3-way old school active horn system. Aside from different gear, we are also using different DRC systems:

    Name:  mitch_zpsiocwyxfe.jpg
Views: 569
Size:  56.2 KB

    Several other members share virtually the same measured response at the listening position. Coincidence? I just find it interesting. Given the power of computers and sophisticated DSP software like Acourate, one can modify a target curve, regenerate the filters, and be listening to a new response in less than a minute. If using playback software like JRiver, one can AB correction FIR filters with different targets in real-time and determines one's own preference.

    Personally, I am waiting for the industry to catch up and start looking at target step responses (i.e. time coherent speakers), in addition to target frequency responses, like the step response described in the latter half of this post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...ml#post4258668 But that's another can of worms :-) Hope some of that is helpful and Happy Listening in 2016!

    Cheers, Mitch

    PS. Very kind of you Michael. Happy New Year to you!
    Mitch - what are your thoughts on the future of dsp and what do you think about the future of dsd and potentially the two?

  10. #100
    Member Sponsor Addicted to Best! dallasjustice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,090
    I like Toole's reference to rental car stereos with boosted bass and HF. Untrained listeners surely like their boom and sizzle.

    Happy New Year Mitch!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitchco View Post
    Interesting topic. Just passing along some info and impressions as I spent over 30 years with room curves starting with RTA's, 31 band eq's then TEF, 10 years of which working professionally in a variety of recording studios/control rooms and the last 5 years with digital loudspeaker and room correction software systems. In addition to the Harman and B&K target responses, there is also the European Broadcast Union produced a Tech note (EBU-Tech 3276) called, “Listening conditions for the assessment of sound programme material: monophonic and two–channel stereophonic”. https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3276.pdf Check out Figure 2 on Page 6.

    However, these "targets" are all very similar where the spectral response is flat to some frequency hinge point and then some slope of a roll off, typically between -4 dB and -10 dB ending at 20 kHz depending on the amount of HF absorption in your room and of course personal taste :-) The Bob Katz curve which I documented in an article in Acourate on CA is flat to 1 kHz and then a straight line to -6 or -7 dB at 20 kHz. Again, some tolerance variability for personal taste, HF absorption, program material being listened to (pop rock mixes with heavy dynamic range compression tend to have a brighter spectral balance than minimal mic'd orchestra music).

    Toole's latest free paper at AES: http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V63/7_8/#paper1 also supports this approach. See Figure 14 on preferred room curves and the comments about trained listeners.

    I have a lot of respect for JJ Johnston and feel his presentation on the Acoustic and Psychoacoustic Issues in Room Correction that can be downloaded from here: http://www.aes-media.org/sections/pn...2008/jj_jan08/ represents the state of the art understanding of room correction. Since then, most of the DRC products use frequency dependent windowing (FDW) based on jj's research which is a major leap forward from 1/3 or 1/6 octave analysis and correction systems.

    What I find interesting is that if one is looking for the most neutral or natural response, something close to Bob Katz's spec seems to be closest. What do I base this on? Well, doing some correlation with a number of diyAudio members, we shared our measured responses at the listening position. Here is one example, where throughput the passband, myself and another diyAudio member are basically listening to the exact same response, yet our systems and rooms and have nothing in common. His speakers are 25 full range 5" driver line arrays and mine are 3-way old school active horn system. Aside from different gear, we are also using different DRC systems:

    Name:  mitch_zpsiocwyxfe.jpg
Views: 569
Size:  56.2 KB

    Several other members share virtually the same measured response at the listening position. Coincidence? I just find it interesting. Given the power of computers and sophisticated DSP software like Acourate, one can modify a target curve, regenerate the filters, and be listening to a new response in less than a minute. If using playback software like JRiver, one can AB correction FIR filters with different targets in real-time and determines one's own preference.

    Personally, I am waiting for the industry to catch up and start looking at target step responses (i.e. time coherent speakers), in addition to target frequency responses, like the step response described in the latter half of this post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...ml#post4258668 But that's another can of worms :-) Hope some of that is helpful and Happy Listening in 2016!

    Cheers, Mitch

    PS. Very kind of you Michael. Happy New Year to you!
    MUSIC IS GOOD

Page 10 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Target Room Response/Equalization Article
    By amirm in forum Audio, Video And Computer Technology Expert Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-22-2015, 01:33 PM
  2. Angle & Curve CarbonCans "Made in England" Headphone review
    By dalethorn in forum Headphones/Earphones
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-07-2015, 07:08 AM
  3. Using RTA To Get A Curve
    By jcmusic in forum Room Acoustics Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-30-2014, 02:21 PM
  4. Fear Is Mounting On Wall Street That The Fed Will 'Fall Behind The Curve' Like In 199
    By Steve Williams in forum Off Topic Forum-Anything Goes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-21-2014, 07:46 AM
  5. Trouble with the Curve-Official Trailer 2012
    By Steve Williams in forum General Cinema Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-02-2012, 10:24 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •