Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com

Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com (https://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/)
-   REW Forum (https://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/)
-   -   Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated (https://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/138889-integration-sub-new-receiver-new-fronts-comments-appreciated.html)

FargateOne 12-22-15 09:39 PM

Help to time alignment sub at xover with new front speakers
 

2 Attachment(s)
Hello,
I have new front speakers (B & W 705) and a new receiver (Rotel RSX-1562). My center and surrounds are PSB Alpha b series. The fronts are better than the others. The receiver does not have an automatic PEQ but have a 10 filters than I can manually set for each channels.
I run a 5.1 HT system and the sub is equalized with Antimode Dual core 2.0.
The first thing to do (after placement; I can not make roomtreatment) is to find the best way to integrate my sub with the new speakers.

I join the mdat file of 3 measures ofthe Front right speaker at full range and with xover at 80hz: FR alone, sub only and FR+ sub.

Attachment 108345

The speakers are at 2,70m from the MLP.
I have found that a 3,70m distance for the sub with 180 phase ( it is a setting on the sub which is PSD PC-2000 be; the receiver does not has the option to reverse polarity of the sub) would be the best.
Attachment 108337


Any comments or suggestion would be greatly appreciated

jtalden 12-23-15 10:58 AM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

This analysis was limited due to the measurements posted.
> There are significant room mode effects in the XO range that are different for the SW Vs Mains. This is not unusual, but does make the alignment more difficult. There is trade off to each setting rather than a clear best choice.
> The 180° phase setting on this SW does not invert the polarity. It instead shifts the phase near the XO point so that it may match better with the phase of the mains. Thus, the SW measurement (#4) matched measurement 'sb 80 et droit full' (#2) and not '3,70m phse180 xover80' (#1). This made it impossible to analyze any other timings using the '3,70m phse180 xover80' SW setting.

Comments:
> Both timings are probably the best possible for the 2 different SW phase settings.
> Measurement #2 judgment is based on looking at optional SW timing settings.
> Measurement #1 judgment can only be based on the SPL. It does look to be slightly improved compared to measurement #2.
> In this case I assume you just used the either RTA or repeated sweeps with different phase control and SW distance settings. This method is probably the best way in a case like this with competing room modes. There are many other settings that would result in significantly worse XO range SPL support. It is very unlikely that a significantly better setting can be found from either of these 2 SW phase settings.
> A different SW location, or less likely, a different SW phase settings may result in slightly better measured SPL results. My guess is though that it is not too likely that a marginal SPL improvement, if found, would result in a noticeable sound improvement.

FargateOne 12-23-15 12:30 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

Thank you Jtalden.

I can not use RTA with this receiver. I did repeated sweeps with different phase control and SW distance settings that I wanted to show you. Unfortunatly I can not upload mdat (29k only) file for now and I do not know why.

Phillips 12-23-15 03:17 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

213 Attachment(s)
Quote:

FargateOne wrote: (Post 1354761)
Thank you Jtalden.

I can not use RTA with this receiver. I did repeated sweeps with different phase control and SW distance settings that I wanted to show you. Unfortunatly I can not upload mdat (29k only) file for now and I do not know why.

You say you cant use RTA (REW) with the receiver.

If you can do sweeps you can do RTA (REW).

RTA is good to use for placement as it is live.

FargateOne 12-23-15 04:11 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

When I go to Rotel osd menu for delay settings of the speakers, it mute off the sound. I made repeated sweeps with different phase control and SW distance settings.


I would like to send the mdat files of this but I can not upload it even it is less than the 50 meg limit.

FargateOne 12-30-15 10:10 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

Quote:

jtalden wrote: (Post 1354713)
This analysis was limited due to the measurements posted.
> There are significant room mode effects in the XO range that are different for the SW Vs Mains. This is not unusual, but does make the alignment more difficult. There is trade off to each setting rather than a clear best choice.
> The 180° phase setting on this SW does not invert the polarity. It instead shifts the phase near the XO point so that it may match better with the phase of the mains. Thus, the SW measurement (#4) matched measurement 'sb 80 et droit full' (#2) and not '3,70m phse180 xover80' (#1). This made it impossible to analyze any other timings using the '3,70m phse180 xover80' SW setting.

Comments:
> Both timings are probably the best possible for the 2 different SW phase settings.
> Measurement #2 judgment is based on looking at optional SW timing settings.
> Measurement #1 judgment can only be based on the SPL. It does look to be slightly improved compared to measurement #2.
> In this case I assume you just used the either RTA or repeated sweeps with different phase control and SW distance settings. This method is probably the best way in a case like this with competing room modes. There are many other settings that would result in significantly worse XO range SPL support. It is very unlikely that a significantly better setting can be found from either of these 2 SW phase settings.
> A different SW location, or less likely, a different SW phase settings may result in slightly better measured SPL results. My guess is though that it is not too likely that a marginal SPL improvement, if found, would result in a noticeable sound improvement.


Thank You very much !
I am doing some test and come back later.
Happy New Year !

FargateOne 01-07-16 10:08 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

3 Attachment(s)
Hello
I finally made more measurements. Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
Please open the front left file first followed by the distances tweak file to get all the measurements made.
The fronts are at 285cm of the listening position. I made all measures at same mic position, same spl level and at full range. Front speakers were set to small and the sub was manually eq with 5 filters from REW auto EQ .
I have delays for the sub from 225 cm to 345cm and one measures with phase at 180degreees set into the sub.
The 3rd mdat file is front right small only and with and sub at 285cm.
Thank you for your help

Attachment 109817

Attachment 109825

Attachment 109833

jtalden 01-08-16 01:11 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

I reviewed your files.
I think I followed the situation correctly, but understanding is always a risk with limited info. I hope the comments below agree with my original recommendations. If not, I may have missed the situation.

Timing/Delays/Distance Settings:
> The Left and Right timing posted with SW at 2.85m is as good as possible with the current setup.
> The FR channel has room modes with this setup that creates a significant sag in the response around the XO, but this cannot be improved via timing changes.
> Different speaker or listening locations may be beneficial to that FR sag, but without that type of change, the current settings are as good as it will get.

Other comments:
I am not sure if your intent here was to ask instead about the next steps, but if you are set now on the timing, then the obvious next step is to adjust the levels and EQ. My thoughts would be:
> Chose a target curve for your house curve. It is impossible to say what house curve you will prefer so I would suggest you pick a common one in the middle of range. My concept of that is something relatively flat from 20-1k Hz and then dropping smoothly to maybe -5dB at 18kHz.
> Smooth the measurements of each channel for EQ for purposes to 1/3, 1/6, variable, or Psychoacoustic.
> I suggest the SW level be first increased from the current level by maybe 6dB before the EQ process is started. That will decrease the EQ filter boosts/cuts.
> After setting the EQs to achieve the house curve then adjust the SW level a little if needed to suit your preference.
> it is not possible or desirable to match the target very closely with PEQ filters and it is not good to use large boost/cut filters or to use high Q filters.

There are a wide variety of approaches and recommendations for EQ so it is more a matter of experimentation until you find a house curve that works well for you:
> Select a house curve.
> EQ to that curve.
> Evaluate the sound quality with your preferred program material.
> Adjust the house curve or EQ scheme and repeat as needed.

Good Luck.

FargateOne 01-08-16 03:20 PM

Re: Integration sub with new receiver and new fronts, comments appreciated
 

Quote:

Quote:

jtalden wrote: (Post 1364561)
I reviewed your files.
I think I followed the situation correctly, but understanding is always a risk with limited info. I hope the comments below agree with my original recommendations. If not, I may have missed the situation.

Timing/Delays/Distance Settings:
> The Left and Right timing posted with SW at 2.85m is as good as possible with the current setup.
> The FR channel has room modes with this setup that creates a significant sag in the response around the XO, but this cannot be improved via timing changes.
> Different speaker or listening locations may be beneficial to that FR sag, but without that type of change, the current settings are as good as it will get.

Thank you very much for your help. You understood correctly the situation. I made some changes following the first post and your comments agree with the original recommendations.

Quote:

Other comments:
I am not sure if your intent here was to ask instead about the next steps, but if you are set now on the timing, then the obvious next step is to adjust the levels and EQ. My thoughts would be:
> Chose a target curve for your house curve. It is impossible to say what house curve you will prefer so I would suggest you pick a common one in the middle of range. My concept of that is something relatively flat from 20-1k Hz and then dropping smoothly to maybe -5dB at 18kHz.
> Smooth the measurements of each channel for EQ for purposes to 1/3, 1/6, variable, or Psychoacoustic.
> I suggest the SW level be first increased from the current level by maybe 6dB before the EQ process is started. That will decrease the EQ filter boosts/cuts.
> After setting the EQs to achieve the house curve then adjust the SW level a little if needed to suit your preference.
> it is not possible or desirable to match the target very closely with PEQ filters and it is not good to use large boost/cut filters or to use high Q filters.
Yes, next step is to adjust levels and EQ the fronts, center and surrounds with REW and the manual filters settings available in the receiver (Rotel RSX-1562) for each channels, beginning with fronts.

Quote:

There are a wide variety of approaches and recommendations for EQ so it is more a matter of experimentation until you find a house curve that works well for you:
> Select a house curve.
> EQ to that curve.
> Evaluate the sound quality with your preferred program material.
> Adjust the house curve or EQ scheme and repeat as needed.
The guides you have provided are precious; knowing the steps and order to do it was needed.

Quote:

Good Luck.

You bet I need it !


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright ©2006 - 2019, Home Theater Shack, LLC.


vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

 


For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome