BFD Alternate Channel As Center EQ

[thewire]

For no cost to me I could have some RCA to XLR Adapaters, and use my mic cable with the other side of my BFD for equalizing my center channel. I would like to try and equalize it so that it will match my other speakers using cuts. I do not have a BFD hum issue that I am aware of. I remember reading that the BFD might not be suited for this?

I have a FBQ2496, Polk Csi40 cneter channel, Marantz MA500 mono amp, and DVD player. The other speakers are Polk RTi70's on MA500 mono amps, and a Denon POA-5200. I use the left channel for subwoofer EQ. Thank you.

[Otto]

Well, the BFD might not have the specs of some high end systems, so some users might not want to put it in the main audio path, especially for critical listening. However, since you have all the parts and it won't cost you anything, I'd say give it a try. I think it will be fine for applying EQ to your center. If you find it noisy, take it back out. Let us know what you hear in terms of improvement, as well as potential degradation.

Good luck!

[thewire]

Otto wrote:

Well, the BFD might not have the specs of some high end systems, so some users might not want to put it in the main audio path, especially for critical listening. However, since you have all the parts and it won't cost you anything, I'd say give it a try. I think it will be fine for applying EQ to your center. If you find it noisy, take it back out. Let us know what you hear in terms of improvement, as well as potential degradation.

Good luck!

Thanks Otto. I was running some test tones on a CD with the RTA and I may have forgot which order they were in. If it is not that than my center channel has a very large boost in the 80Hz - 100Hz range when adding the subs, but I suspect it was the order in the CD. After some RTA measurements in REW, and positioning my left right and center as best possible with two support beams on the left side of the room making it very difficult, I get the results bellow. This was a non calibrated Pink PN using -33dB FS RTA 1/12 Octive that I applied 1/12 smoothing to.



Blue - Center
Red- Left
Green - Right

It appears as though my right wall has added some boost to the 80Hz area because there is foundation behind it. Moving the speaker so much as an inch makes this increase dramaticly increase. I will try and do some cut to that with the BFD, and some boost in the center channel around 300Hz and 400Hz and see how it sounds. It will be awhile before I get the accessories but I will report my findings.

Added note: My door was off the hinges for these.

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

Like Otto said, can't hurt to try the BFD for your center channel. I tried it out a while back on my main L/R channels and honestly it didn't sound as bad as I thought it would. I didn't like it as much as my Yamaha EQ, but I really couldn't put my finger on exactly why. It was a fairly subtle difference. It did add some noise, but it wasn't audible unless the volume was turned up really high with no signal. If you can get away with using it with the back-panel switch in the lower-level consumer position (a probability with the center channel, since its signal levels should be significantly lower than the LFE), even that should be a non-issue. Not sure I would ever use it permanently for the L/R channels, but for the center perhaps so.

I will try and do some cut to that with the BFD, and some boost in the center channel around 300Hz and 400Hz and see how it sounds.

You might also try cutting that spike you have just south of 50 Hz. It can make male voices unnaturally boomy.

Regards,
Wayne

[thewire]

Wayne A. Pflughaupt wrote:

Like Otto said, can't hurt to try the BFD for your center channel. I tried it out a while back on my main L/R channels and honestly it didn't sound as bad as I thought it would. I didn't like it as much as my Yamaha EQ, but I really couldn't put my finger on exactly why. It was a fairly subtle difference. It did add some noise, but it wasn't audible unless the volume was turned up really high with no signal. If you can get away with using it with the back-panel switch in the lower-level consumer position (a probability with the center channel, since its signal levels should be significantly lower than the LFE), even that should be a non-issue. Not sure I would ever use it permanently for the L/R channels, but for the center perhaps so.

You might also try cutting that spike you have just south of 50 Hz. It can make male voices unnaturally boomy.

Regards,
Wayne

I use the consumer lower-level setting on my BFD for the subwoofers. Is that right? When I use the +4 I thought it sounded a little warm sounding, but at the same time a little more tight and punchy. Did not know exactly which was right so I left it at consumer since I could not find the tight or punchy sounding bass in my measurements.

Now that you mention it there does seem to be a little boominess in the sound. I would not describe it the same as subwoofer boominess and a better way to describe it for me might be like a boxy kind of sound. The opening to Transformers with that voice is an excellent example where it just sounds boxy to me.

Edit: Don't think Transformers intro is a good example. Not sure I can tell the difference with a 12" sub on each side of the center channel. Worth a try anyways.

[thewire]

If anyone has a good example of something I could listen to and hear the difference better specifically such as a male movie announcer, live concert vocal , etc, let me know and I will add it to my que.

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

I use the consumer lower-level setting on my BFD for the subwoofers. Is that right?

Use the setting that gets the best signal level without clipping.

When I use the +4 I thought it sounded a little warm sounding, but at the same time a little more tight and punchy. Did not know exactly which was right so I left it at consumer since I could not find the tight or punchy sounding bass in my measurements.

There should be no difference in SQ. But then, we're talking about a $99 equalizer here...

All the switch does is change the operating range. The consumer level has a lower noise floor, but will take less of a maximum signal before overloading. The pro setting shifts that window upward, if you will, allowing for a hotter maximum signal at the expense of a higher noise floor.

Now that you mention it there does seem to be a little boominess in the sound. I would not describe it the same as subwoofer boominess and a better way to describe it for me might be like a boxy kind of sound. The opening to Transformers with that voice is an excellent example where it just sounds boxy to me.

Personally I prefer the center channel to start rolling out in the 100-200 Hz range, 'cause I don't like boomy male voices. Sounds unnatural. Sometimes, though, the program is poorly EQd with boosted lows in the voices, which overrides the equalization.

Regards,
Wayne

[thewire]

Wayne A. Pflughaupt wrote:

Use the setting that gets the best signal level without clipping.

There should be no difference in SQ. But then, we're talking about a $99 equalizer here...

All the switch does is change the operating range. The consumer level has a lower noise floor, but will take less of a maximum signal before overloading. The pro setting shifts that window upward, if you will, allowing for a hotter maximum signal at the expense of a higher noise floor.

I think I will try the other setting because I measure 90dB - 92dB uncorrected and the input level on the BFD never goes higher than -18.

Personally I prefer the center channel to start rolling out in the 100-200 Hz range, 'cause I don't like boomy male voices. Sounds unnatural. Sometimes, though, the program is poorly EQd with boosted lows in the voices, which overrides the equalization.

Regards,
Wayne

I will see if I can make it sound more natural than it does.

[thewire]

It looks like the idea of EQ with the center channel as on hold awhile. I still may try the BFD eventually. If anything I could play around with the phase of my subs and EQ each pair independently with a couple XLR adapters also. So for the cost of the adpaters it might worth the learning experience. Instead I have sold my MCM plate amp and using the money towards a pre/pro. This way I can have a crossover that works and does not reduce my LFE -5dB. The Outlaw 950 I am currently bidding on has a panarama feature in it I could try out and see if that does not improve the smoothness arcoss the front three speakers. There are a few others I am looking at also in the same price range, but they do not have EQ on them eather.

[Andysu]

thewire wrote:

I use the consumer lower-level setting on my BFD for the subwoofers. Is that right? When I use the +4 I thought it sounded a little warm sounding, but at the same time a little more tight and punchy. Did not know exactly which was right so I left it at consumer since I could not find the tight or punchy sounding bass in my measurements.

Now that you mention it there does seem to be a little boominess in the sound. I would not describe it the same as subwoofer boominess and a better way to describe it for me might be like a boxy kind of sound. The opening to Transformers with that voice is an excellent example where it just sounds boxy to me.

Edit: Don't think Transformers intro is a good example. Not sure I can tell the difference with a 12" sub on each side of the center channel. Worth a try anyways.

The unit is expensive cheap as chips why not

It’s a foggy dialogue narration track that is spread over LCR but that is internal of the transformers to give them large scale even thou they are only tiny bits inside a computer.

Opening sequence from Transformers (2006) LCRS/LFE.1