Can BFD be used on recording studio monitors?

[alw4416]

Everything I have been reading refers to the BFD being used for subs and subs only? Can they be used in a recording studio setup to achieve a flatter response at the mixing position? I hope so because I just ordered 2 of them and installed REW. I also wanted to add that I already have extensive broadband treatment in the room. It is a small room 10X12 and I am trying to obtain a super flat response along the quality to master in.

[brucek]

Can they be used in a recording studio setup to achieve a flatter response at the mixing position?

It's not really advisable. The quality simply isn't there for full range use.

brucek

[alw4416]

Oh no. Well I suppose I just wasted some money then..? So what is advisable, in addition to room treatment which I already have too much of in my opinion? What about IK Multimedia's new ARC system?

[brucek]

I have no experience with the ARC system, but it is targetted toward mixing and recording applications for a home studio, and is quite a bit more expensive. So, I suspect it would be better.

The FBQ 2496 has better specs than the BFD 1124P. I would be much more inclined to test the FBQ out full range and see how you liked it. You simply wouldn't be pleased with the 1124P.

brucek

[alw4416]

The reason I ask about the ARC system is because I actually purchased it and I am not impressed at all. I have a pair of Dynaudio BM15A's and Adam P12 speakers and when I used the ARC system it completely killed the low end in my room. I noticed after experimenting that it does not like it when the speaker port holes are in the front as where they are with the BM15A's. I stuck a sock in the BM15A's port holes and re-ran the tests and the bass response got better. I simply can't rely on the ARC system. I will be surprised if the FBQ2496 wouldn't do a better job. I was using DBX EQ's 1/3 band octave to smooth out the response a little and they seemed to work fairly well, I am just trying to step that up. The frequency range I am targeting is only between 40-500hz.

[brucek]

I stuck a sock in the BM15A's port holes

I suppose if you're doing near field correction (with the mic at the near field) the port location would be very important. I know as an example, it's difficult to do any sort of near field tests with a ported sub since the driver takes care of the higher LF's and the port outputs the low LF's - so, location of the mic is everything. I suspect the ARC gets overwhelmed with the front ports of your monitors and so dials down the low end.

I was using DBX EQ's 1/3 band octave to smooth out the response a little and they seemed to work fairly well,

The FBQ specs aren't too bad and certainly REW will measure correctly for you if you have a calibrated mic. The upper frequencies in the 40Hz-500Hz range can certainly benefit from low Q filters from an FBQ (much like a graphic eq would provide). Also the FBQ can correct any modal resonance in that 40Hz-100Hz region.

You can certainly give the BFD's a try, but I think you'll find the poor crosstalk (-76dB) and noise (94dB) not to your liking (especially nearfield).

brucek

[alw4416]

I am an idiot when it comes to 'crosstalk' and 'noise' generated from the FBQ so can you put it in terms for an idiot? Do you think I am better off sticking with my DBX 31 band 1/3 band EQ? The reason I was looking to switch was because I can't dial in the specific frequencies I need to tame. Also what is your opinion on boosting a dip in the 70-80hz range?

[brucek]

The reason I was looking to switch was because I can't dial in the specific frequencies I need to tame.

Well exactly. That's why a GEQ is not suitable. You need a parametric equalizer like the FBQ. It allows full control of all parameters - gain, frequency and bandwidth.

when it comes to 'crosstalk' and 'noise' generated from the FBQ

If we trust the specs given for the FBQ and the BFD, the FBQ would be considered quite reasonable for a small studio and the BFD would not. The noise floor will not be objectionable and the crosstalk would be insignificant with an FBQ.

Also what is your opinion on boosting a dip in the 70-80hz range?

I'm not a fan of boosting, but a small amount is fine as long as the dip appears to respond. There are dips that are caused by modal resonance in a room that you could throw as much gain as you like at and they won't budge. It's easy with REW to test and tweak and find out.....

brucek

[alw4416]

So you are saying I should be fine with the FBQ but not the BFD? I believe the dip does respond as it does not appear to be an infinite null. How many decibel are you comfortable with when it comes to boosting? How many decibel when it comes to cutting? Also at what smoothing level in REW should I be working with the FBQ to smooth out my room response? Thanks for all the help by the way!

[brucek]

How many decibel are you comfortable with when it comes to boosting?

That's up for debate. I wouldn't go much past about +5dB. Any gain filters require that the input level is decreased. This adds noise and decreases the number of bits available in the ADC. It's up to you how much you're willing to lose.
Cut as much as you like, but of course, this lower the output level of the FBQ at that frequency. Sometimes you can cut so much and so wide that you're left with nothing...

Also at what smoothing level in REW should I be working with the FBQ to smooth out my room response?

This doesn't really make sense. Smoothing is applied to REW graphs to get a better representative feel for trends of the signal. At higher frequencies, the combing is so bad you can't even see the signal, so you use smoothing. Smoothing is never applied to low frequencies (15-100Hz), and especially never applied before filters are created in REW as they won't match the modal response of the peaks properly.

brucek