OK can finally wrap this thread up, hope that it is/was of some interest to some.
My Xenyx 802 arrived yesterday, able to put the behringer mic to good use. Of course as it's not calibrated, it can't be relied upon to be totally accurate, but I'm sure any room anomolies more than outweigh any mic innacuraccies! My supplier is adamant that the UB 802 has been discontinued, so maybe behringer keep older units on their site for a while after being discontinued? Also, the main reason the 502 is unsuitable is that it doesn't have phantom power.
Quote:
|
The anomolies at the higher frequencies are usually handled better with room treatment. You do have to be careful trusting the RS meter at the higher frequencies. Some say 5K is the upper limit.
|
Yes you are totally correct Bruce. However, what I did was to set up the speakers outside to measure them (boy doesn't the response clean up when away from the room!) so I could get as anechoic a response as possible. Then using the DEQ's 'target response' feature I eq'd the raw speaker response to flat. This leaves me with a flat speaker that I can then put into a real world ( listening room ) situation.As you rightly suggest, it is not the best idea to try and get flat 'fighting' the room.
This by the way is exactly the methodology used by DEQX. Flatten the speaker to a 'perfect' flat anechoic response then let the natural response in-room be as it may be, as any room anomolies up in the frequency range are best handled by room treatment, but it is always preferable to be starting with 'flat' speakers, which was the purpose of this little exercise.
The differences in the mic responses really take off after 5k
This is the plot with the Radioshack meter
outside measurement radioshack meter.jpg
And this is with the behringer
outside using ecm 8000.jpg
the HUGE rise in the response above ten k was not even hinted at by the radio shack meter, what is a bit suprising is how close the graphs are below that point.
Anyway, the following graph should be fairly self-explanatory, and the difference in sound IS as significant as the graphs might suggest!
The graphs (seperated) are of left and right before and after the auto eq function on the DEQ. As mentioned, done outdoors for as 'pure' a response as possible.
deq before and after.jpg
It was suprising just how much ambient noise there is outside that we become accustomed to, and I live on sixteen acres in the bush! No way you could do it outside in the city.
Nearly there now, have shown sub before and after eq previously, so straight to full response in room
full response.jpg
Can't do much about the dip at around 140, as an experiment threw a parametric at it, hardly changed so seems definately room related, would need treatment rather than eq.
Have not got any boost in the bass, I'm only interested in music so no need for house curve. But the room curve now shows what is supposed to be desirable, that is 20k down a few db, and that is a natural result of a flat speaker when placed in the room environment.
That's enough, hope it was of interest. I can tell you that the difference between DEQ in and out of circuit is dramatic, and I'm afraid that it is basically unlistenable without it now, like an old tinny wireless with BOOM ( as could be guessed from the raw curves?). The bass correction you are all aware of, it's the rest of the frequencies that get tamed with this unit.
Of course any tailoring to personal preferences are possible eg up the response at the top end to be flat in the listening position etc etc.
lots of love
terry