Thanks guys, it will be a work in progress for at least a little while I get a few things ironed out but I am having a blast with it for sure!
Hey Bob, first off I want to say thanks for your input on the SVS thread the other because it helped identify a consistency issue between all of the graphs and I have since gone back and reposted the measurements setting the same limitations on each so again, thank you a bunch it really helped us identify that issue.Hi Dale, I had responded to your SVS sub post, thinking that the responses do not look correct to me. Sorry if my "tone of voice" seemed harsh in those posts. It appears to me, as I reread them, they appear curt. (insert "sorry" smilie icon)
Anywho... myself and others appreciate your efforts, I am sure. :T:hsd:
I do have some thoughts and questions though, to help in "our" pursuit of measuring accuracy and its implications.
Since we are using REW and REW has its standards, those standards must be adheard to. The reason for my insistance on your graphs are so myself and others can directly compare and collaborate what we are measuring with what we are hearing.
You should attach the mdat with all measurements.
You should start out measuring at 75db, the REW standard, and then increase your measurements 5 or 10 db till compression sets in. I myself never measure past 75db, so I would need to compare my graps directly to yours at the same level.
Also you should post the SPL level that you are measuring at for each graph. For instance looking at the Emotiva SPL graph what is its measured SPL level? Where would I put my line looking at that graph? IE 100 db or 95db, it makes a difference.
Which SPL meter are you using?
Since you do review the subs giving descriptions of the woofers sound characteristics should you also not give the measured freq response in the listening room along with the measured response of the entire system as you listen too it?:hsd:
Thanks,
Bob
PHP143
"If the first 100db suck, why continue?
While I am using REW as a tool for measuring, the emphasis should be on the methodology. While 75db is the default for REW it is hardly a standard per se. There has been a lot of emphasis over the years on 75db being a standard of some sort but it is really just a reference guideline for level setting speakers.Since we are using REW and REW has its standards, those standards must be adheard to. The reason for my insistance on your graphs are so myself and others can directly compare and collaborate what we are measuring with what we are hearing.
You should attach the mdat with all measurements.
The purpose of the Sub Zone is to compare to manufacturer specifications and published measurements not general guidelines such as the 75db reference level.You should start out measuring at 75db, the REW standard, and then increase your measurements 5 or 10 db till compression sets in. I myself never measure past 75db, so I would need to compare my graps directly to yours at the same level.
I actually thought about this and you have convinced me that it would be helpful in the reviews to include this measurement so I will start doing that moving forward.Since you do review the subs giving descriptions of the woofers sound characteristics should you also not give the measured freq response in the listening room along with the measured response of the entire system as you listen too it?
Bob, I understand what your preference would be however; I have clearly outlined what the methodology is and how I will go about taking the measurements. If I were to cater to everyone's preference I would never get anything done. The purpose here is to compare my measurements to the measurements posted, published, etc by the manufacturer. 75db is not a standard. I do not know how else to explain that. Additionally this is not REW forum discussion, The Sub Zone is it's own forum and the fact that I happen to use REW is irrelevant to this discussion outside of the defined methodology. The consistency comes from the measurements listed and outlined below taken directly from the methodology.Thats great, we have to show consistency and that is why you should start measuring at 75db. That is what everyone else is holding to at REW forum, unless there is a house curve or for measuring for compression.
You have just made my point. I could start using 75db, but it is irrelevant to the tests that I perform. Saying it repeatedly does not make it true. You are more than welcome to start your own forum and start all of your measurements at 75db or whatever number you would like. Starting at 75db and moving it up 10db per sweep is no more scientific than starting at 90db and raising it by 5db as I have outlined in the methodology.Right, so stick with it! If you started at 75db then you could go up in 10 db increments and have this reapeatable for all of your measurements. Would this not make sense from a sciencetific/reference standard.
Uhm.. What? I did state the target. 'From 0 Hz to 200 Hz starting at 90db and raising it 5db until the signal compressed. Please let me know what part of this is unclear to you.Looking at your graphs of the 5 woofers that you measured there are no target lines. If you are not measuring at 75db you then need to state the target level for the measurenent taken. IE: on the graph for the Emotiva where would you place the target level? And in the graph for the SVS is the target level 116db? If so you missed it by 20db!
One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. You cannot correlate a subjective opinion to a sine sweep. The best you could hope for is to correlate it to a given part of a song or film that I happen to capture that I also commented on. Subjective, emotional responses to audio are not measurable.Of course it would, you are describing what you hear in your room, we need to see the actual in room freq resp to correlate what is measured with what is heard.
Wow Erin, that is a great example! Thank you for contributing your knowledge to the conversation!Why 75dB? I think it's more important to start somewhere where compression becomes a legitimate concern. If the driver is moderately efficient (mid 80's), compression isn't of concern until you're at least there. So, to me, 75dB testing is moot.
I have a very fundamental issue with the talk around compression testing here. What's catching me off guard here is people saying to test compression by increasing the output to achieve 10dB steps. This is flawed. Compression shouldn't be solely focused on the FR. Compression is a measurement of input vs output. It is not a measurement of response as you increase the output itself. For example, if you increase the input voltage at a speaker's terminals then you should get that same relational value in dB output by the DUT. Anything less is due to the effect of compression.
Yes, you are looking to see how the response changes but what's the point if a driver is so inefficient at higher output that you're having to feed it twice as much as you should for the same output?
Consider this: What happens if you're increasing SPL by 10dB but your voltage ratio from your previous input voltage of 4v to your new voltage input, which should be 12.6 volts, is actually 14.6v? All you've done is increase the output but you've failed to acknowledge the 2v loss in your test, which equates to about 14watts or 6dB! Yikes! So, yea, the curve at the reference frequency increased by 10dB, but it's not illustrating the fact that you just had to make up more than 6dB by turning the amp gain up higher and higher.
This is what compression testing should tell you. Again, voltage in vs SPL out vs what should be there. Then you get the FR curve, but most importantly, you get to see how efficiently the driver is able to use the power provided to it.
Hope that makes sense. Maybe my assumption on how this kind of testing is being performed is wrong so please correct me if so.
- Erin
Below I've attached a picture of compression testing I did on a Seas w18nx driver. This is the 20-110hz band. As long as the lines are stacked on top of each other, what you're seeing is what is expected; no loss in output vs voltage input. Where the lines deviate, is an indication of how much output (in dB) is lost with the input vs the initial voltage vs frequency. As you go higher in frequency in the chart, you can see a loss of about 0.4dB from 1v to 8v input.
![]()
This is the same thing but from 400hz to 6khz. You can see a loss of about 0.8dB at 3800hz. Likely due to inductance issues (yet to verify).
![]()
I keep forgetting the SPL, it is a Galaxy CM140. For measuring I am using the IBF.Hi Dale, I will give you that what you are measuring, the reason why and your methodology is different form mine. As this is your forum, so be it.
Though, I have no idea why you would bother measuring speakers like this, but thats OK, I am a little behind the obvious learning curve. Does it not matter most what the speaker is doing in your room, rather than out in your driveway? But that is your methodology, and I will respect it.
But when you measure your system as you listen to it in your room, and give SUBJECTIVE reports to how it sounds then I am sure you will go by the standard REW specifications.
You have not answered my question as to which SPL meter you use, .... so please do.
Dale said, "Uhm.. What? I did state the target. 'From 0 Hz to 200 Hz starting at 90db and raising it 5db until the signal compressed. Please let me know what part of this is unclear to you.
Uhm....Yes that is correct, you have to state a target level as you are the one measuring. Otherwise I can infer any level I want to on your graph if you don't state what is the actual level. So you say that in all of your graphs, the first measurement is 90db going up in 5db increments, is that correct? Then looking at the following graphs:
the Axiom your initial reading of 90db is 4db too high.
the Chase is so wrong I dont know what to say
the Emotiva is 5db to high
the power soud is about correct is about correct but we need to see it overall freq response since it is clearly not a "subwoofer"
the svs graph clearly shows that you did not correlate 90db with you intended target.
Dale said, "One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. You cannot correlate a subjective opinion to a sine sweep. The best you could hope for is to correlate it to a given part of a song or film that I happen to capture that I also commented on. Subjective, emotional responses to audio are not measurable."
I say, really? Then why are you measuring? If measured freq response has no correlation with what you are hearing, why bother measuring?
Bob
"Make more progress, less excuses"
No, what I stated was that the volume is level set at to 90db AT 50Hz and then I will begin the sweeps and raise the volume by 5db.the first measurement is 90db going up in 5db increments, is that correct?
If you would actually read the words instead of just looking at the pictures you would have seen at the top of the Chase test that I stated:the Chase is so wrong I dont know what to say
To show an estimated room gain benefit.I say, really? Then why are you measuring?
Hey Glen, sorry I missed this one. I have been working out the SPL thing. I actually think it will be possible but probably will not be added until next Spring.I guess no spl capability will be tested since that would be a very long power run; even at low current it will require a decent gauge cord.
Cool idea
Thank you Erin and I would like to discuss this in more detail when you have time for me to call. I understand all about letting the data talk however; there are other elements outside of hard numbers that need to be told as well. I do plan to do in room measurements, moving forward but am not yet committed to a methodology around it.Dale,
I really do implore you to consider what I wrote above regarding the fundamental purpose of compression testing. Raising the output by 5dB doesn't really tell us anything about compression other than how the curve changes. That's fine... but that's only one (small) part of compression. We need a way to gauge input voltage for each step vs output SPL. You can do this pretty easily with online calculators. Just figure what each voltage input will be, in steps, and that should tell you what your output should be. Make a table with 6-7 stepped voltages, then the theoretical (what you should get, if compression were not inherent in design), and the real result. Then you'll see how much output in SPL is lost due to inefficiency at your reference frequcney of 50hz and you can still provide your FR curves so we can see how the overall curve is affected. It's not quite as pretty as the examples I gave above, but it'll suffice. Once I get set up, I will be providing the compression testing the same way as I did above. Flying in the face of apparent standard REW convention. lol.
Playing devil's advocate: As far as subjective vs objective, I actually agree. I'm more of a 'let the data talk' kind of guy. I stay away from subjective thoughts regarding sound; I freely talk subjectively on my likes/dislikes with a product interface, usability, etc. I do agree that when a subjective review is given, objective data should be provided to help the both the reviewer and the viewers (possibly) understand why your subjective analysis came out the way it did. Subwoofers are especially prone to placement and as we know placement will dictate response at the seated position. A simple 6 point spatial average of frequency response would suffice in objective/subjective correlation.
Just my $.02....
- Erin
Thanks for the questions. The relationship between the compression measurement and THD measurements are based on the THD measurements being taken at the same time. Compression is not necessarily indicative of high distortion. Take the SVS SB-13 Ultra, which is an awesome sub by the way, if you look at the Max output before compression you can see that the signal falls on itself at around 80Hz but the THD at that point was only 2%. So compression does not necessarily indicate higher distortion is present.1. It would seem that there should be a direct relationship between the compression measurements and harmonic distortion, i.e. as the measurement level reaches onset of compression, harmonic distortion would also be going through the roof. Does this appear to be the case? If so, is there any value in correlating the two as a measurements sanity check of some sort? If there is no such correlation, what am I missing?
Normally most manufacturers will only post their response but not the actual measurement graph. It has been my experience thus far that those that do not post graphs usually post their frequency response then a typical in-room response. I am starting to get in the habit of taking an in room measurement to add to the tests or review.2. As I see it, your measurements are half-space measurements, due to obvious physical limitations. How does that compare to typical manufacturer's measurement methods and specifications for subs? It is clearly a restatement of the obvious that whole space versus half space versus quarter space versus corner loading would have a big effect on frequency response measurements for a sub. Is there any industry-standard for how manufacturers approach this, and what is your feeling for how it affects your ability to correlate your measurements with manufacturers specs and measurements?