|
|
Post by markus on Apr 21, 2010 17:11:21 GMT -5
I have been using this with TrueRTA and a calibrated mike and I seem to be getting very ambiguous results on equalization (like I up one frequency 10dB and can;t see the effect on TrueRTA. You're measuring the speakers AND the room but we want to see what the UMC is doing. So the best approach is to directly measure the RCA outs. Use continuous white noise or pink noise (depends on how you analyzer works) as a test signal. Besides, the free version of TrueRTA allows for one-third octave accuracy only. That's too coarse. Best, Markus |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 21, 2010 18:17:25 GMT -5
Just measured it - no the EQ is still not working. But why would anybody want to use the graphic EQ anyway? It's a pretty useless feature. The whole UMC-1 bass management is still a mystery to me. I asked Emotiva but didn't get a detailed answer. There's also no routing diagram available. Measurements just revealed more strange behavior. Maybe my firmware update is corrupted, maybe it's not, who knows... Regarding the LFE confusion in the last few posts, please see www.genelecusa.com/faq/multichannel/lfe-channel/Best, Markus Wow!! Its still not working....    I wouldn't go so far as to call it useless. My intention was to use it to help me dial in my sub via REW. I was eventually gonna add the Behringer DSP unit with its parametric EQ's. |
|
|
|
Post by markus on Apr 21, 2010 20:27:40 GMT -5
I wouldn't go so far as to call it useless. My intention was to use it to help me dial in my sub via REW. To correct low frequency room modes with an EQ, you need continuously variable control over amplitude, center frequency and bandwidth. Only parametric EQs provide that. Graphic EQs like the ones of the UMC-1 have a fixed bandwidth and center frequency which makes them useless for the task. Best, Markus |
|
|
|
Post by oldnickt on Apr 21, 2010 20:55:28 GMT -5
I have been using this with TrueRTA and a calibrated mike and I seem to be getting very ambiguous results on equalization (like I up one frequency 10dB and can;t see the effect on TrueRTA. You're measuring the speakers AND the room but we want to see what the UMC is doing. So the best approach is to directly measure the RCA outs. Use continuous white noise or pink noise (depends on how you analyzer works) as a test signal. Besides, the free version of TrueRTA allows for one-third octave accuracy only. That's too coarse. Best, Markus But the version of TrueRTA I have goes to 1/24th octave which is very fine and I have every expectation that if I drop a frequency by 10dB and the adjacent frequency by +10dB I would see a very large difference in the sweep. But I don't |
|
|
|
Post by rp on Apr 22, 2010 1:06:46 GMT -5
I wouldn't go so far as to call it useless. My intention was to use it to help me dial in my sub via REW. To correct low frequency room modes with an EQ, you need continuously variable control over amplitude, center frequency and bandwidth. Only parametric EQs provide that. Graphic EQs like the ones of the UMC-1 have a fixed bandwidth and center frequency which makes them useless for the task. Best, Markus Correct! UMC-1 does not apply parametric EQs only Graphic EQs which just can't fix room resonance. To learn more about good implementation of parametric EQs look here: www.avforums.com/forums/miscfiles/TMREQCaseStudy.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by markus on Apr 22, 2010 7:58:28 GMT -5
But the version of TrueRTA I have goes to 1/24th octave which is very fine and I have every expectation that if I drop a frequency by 10dB and the adjacent frequency by +10dB I would see a very large difference in the sweep. But I don't If the room and the speakers is in your data, changes might be hard to see. Did you measure only single speakers or all speakers together? Just quickly measured one channel set to "fullrange" and I can confirm the EQ works here, although it applies different Qs for raising and cutting. But as I said before, a graphic EQ is really no useful feature. Best, Markus |
|
|
|
Post by maseline98 on Apr 22, 2010 10:03:11 GMT -5
Same graphs...just more info...   This may be a little off subject, but what software do you use for this(it says 'Room EQ Wizard)? How can I get it? And what other materials do I need to use it? I have a radioshack spl meter...How does it connect to the PC? |
|
|
|
Post by markus on Apr 22, 2010 10:39:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dropzone7 on Apr 22, 2010 10:42:32 GMT -5
I want to try this one day but it seems pretty complicated. |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 22, 2010 10:44:58 GMT -5
Baloney...the RS meter is acceptable for freq's up to about 2Khz as long as you download and use the calibration file. Are there meters more accurate??..yes. But the RS is a cheap way to get you going.... |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 22, 2010 10:47:45 GMT -5
I want to try this one day but it seems pretty complicated. Its really not that bad...there is active forum support with some pretty knowledgeable people..including the guy who wrote the REW program. If you know your way around a PC you should be okay. Its pretty fun to use once you get going.... |
|
|
|
Post by markus on Apr 22, 2010 11:11:55 GMT -5
the RS meter is acceptable for freq's up to about 2Khz as long as you download and use the calibration file. I doubt the RadioShack's fabrication tolerances are small enough to be compensated by a universal calibration file. By the way: www.realtraps.com/art_microphones.htmBest, Markus |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 22, 2010 11:25:03 GMT -5
Baloney...the RS meter is acceptable for freq's up to about 2Khz as long as you download and use the calibration file. Are there meters more accurate??..yes. But the RS is a cheap way to get you going.... Besides, it says in the instructions that an SPL meter is required and for most folks that means Radio Shack. Their charts are already calibrated for its deficiencies. Speaking of which.. I always wonder why doesn't someone come out with an alternative to Radio Shack's meter? I know there are others out there but I don't know of anything that is as affordable. Can't someone make one comparably priced that is more accurate? I bet there would be a decent market for it. (okay, now everyone will start suggesting that Emo come out with an SPL meter.. to go along with that toaster we are all waiting for). |
|
|
|
Post by markus on Apr 22, 2010 11:56:08 GMT -5
I use a RadioShack for SPL measurements myself but I would never use it for anything else.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,493
|
Post by DYohn on Apr 22, 2010 11:59:14 GMT -5
Chack out the REW forum and FAQ on The Shack. There are many alternates to the Rat Shack meter and some are in the same price range.
|
|
|
|
Post by markus on Apr 22, 2010 12:51:43 GMT -5
While trying to figure out how the bass management is implemented, I discovered that the "SubWoofer" EQ is not past the summing stage but somewhere in front of it:  So it's not a subwoofer EQ but a LFE channel EQ... Best, Markus |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 22, 2010 13:34:37 GMT -5
While trying to figure out how the bass management is implemented, I discovered that the "SubWoofer" EQ is not past the summing stage but somewhere in front of it: So it's not a subwoofer EQ but a LFE channel EQ... Best, Markus I thought about that too..and that may be the case.....but what's the is the point of having an LFE channel EQ??? What would you use to set them?? I do not know of any way to run LFE test tones. I heard that the Avia test disc has LFE test tones..but I'm not sure. |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Apr 22, 2010 13:36:00 GMT -5
Baloney...the RS meter is acceptable for freq's up to about 2Khz as long as you download and use the calibration file. Are there meters more accurate??..yes. But the RS is a cheap way to get you going.... Besides, it says in the instructions that an SPL meter is required and for most folks that means Radio Shack. Their charts are already calibrated for its deficiencies. Speaking of which.. I always wonder why doesn't someone come out with an alternative to Radio Shack's meter? I know there are others out there but I don't know of anything that is as affordable. Can't someone make one comparably priced that is more accurate? I bet there would be a decent market for it. (okay, now everyone will start suggesting that Emo come out with an SPL meter.. to go along with that toaster we are all waiting for). There's another SPL people called Galaxy..something. I forget the exact model number. Its much more accurate than the RS meter and is good up to about 8Khz. Cost about $100. |
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Apr 22, 2010 13:45:12 GMT -5
You can get a calibrated ECM8000 mic for $ 80 - basic to $100 - premium , I use the $85 basic +
|
|
|
|
Post by maseline98 on Apr 22, 2010 13:50:55 GMT -5
I wasn't looking to do anything that was perfect. Just wanted to do a test on my room(as EmoQ certainly doesn't work properly)....you know, for a beginner(or n00b)  |
|
