Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
1 - 20 of 49 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Allright,
I have calibrated and measured and I think I have this almost under control. I am going to post my graphs to make sure everything is looking alright. The first picture is my soundcard calibration with my mic cal (I think that is the to line). The second graph is my left channel response, the third is my right channel reponse, and the last is my left channel response with the impulse response controls. Not sure what the last graph is supposed to look like. Everytime I applied the Impulse Response Control and set the pre ref to 125, my graph turned into a bunch of very close vertical lines. I will let you respond to this before I ask any more questions. Curious if the soundcard looks okay and how bad the response graphs are? Also, it doesn't matter if I run the left or right channel measurement, all four subs fire. Is that weird?
Roly
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
The first picture is my soundcard calibration with my mic cal (I think that is the to line)
I don't really understand this statement, but the soundcard cal in the first graph looks perfect except for the squiggly line I've highlighted. I have no idea what that is. Hopefully you saved the soundcard file.

Text White Line Slope Plot



You show 5 graphs. The first is the soundcard response. I take it the second graph is with the soundcard loopback in place and you're checking for a flat response to verify the soundcard calibration went correct.

You've lost me on the next two graphs that you call left and right channel? It is the sub you're measuring?
I do remember you had a stereo 2500 power amp driving your 4 IB's. You split the signal from the BFD and fed both channels. If that's the case then the sub out of your receiver is a mono signal that you check as one channel. All 4 IB's will play in concert.
Select the SUB tab and do the response - no LEFT and RIGHT.

Remember to reset your GRAPH AXIS LIMITS each time you measure to return to the default settings. The axis is incorrect on your left and right graphs.

Everytime I applied the Impulse Response Control and set the pre ref to 125, my graph turned into a bunch of very close vertical lines.
Yes, but that's the Impulse graph - you now need to return to your response graph. Select View and return to Filtered Adjustment screen where your graph is shown..
You don't need to provide the Impulse response graph. Once you take a measurement simply set the window to 125ms and return to your graph and that's it.

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
Yikes, perhaps that squiggly line is Rolys ecm8000 calibration file. Not good, for sure.

If so, you have corrupted the file somehow. If you had your ecm8000 professionally calibrated, then reload the file (and perhaps post it here so we can see it as John says).

You should read THIS thread that Sonnie posted and perhaps download his ecm8000 calibration file that he has provided there...

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Hello,
Yes, that squiggly line is my mic cal. I just reinsterted the cal files and came up with the same thing. Here is a paste of the cal file.
As far as the left and right measurements go, just to the right of the SPL on the REW are two tab circles listed as right and left. One of them is checked at all times. Is this not supposed to be this way? It looks built into the program.
10 2 0
15 2 0
20 2 0
25 2 0
30 2 0
35 3.08 0
40 2.5 0
45 2.5 0
50 2.5 0
55 2.5 0
60 2.5 0
65 2.5 0
70 2.5 0
75 2.4 0
80 2.3 0
85 2.3 0
90 2.4 0
95 2.4 0
100 2.4 0
150 2.5 0
200 2.4 0
250 2 0
300 1.7 0
350 1.7 0
400 1.5 0
450 1.3 0
500 1 0
550 1 0
600 1 0
650 0.9 0
700 0.9 0
750 0.8 0
800 0.6 0
850 0.4 0
900 0.4 0
950 0.4 0
1000 0.4 0
1500 0 0
2000 0 0
2500 0.4 0
3000 -0.4 0
3500 -1 0
4000 1.2 0
4500 0.8 0
5000 0 0
5500 1 0
6000 1.6 0
6500 1 0
7000 -0.3 0
7500 0 0
8000 0.3 0
8500 -0.8 0
9000 0 0
9500 0.3 0
10000 0 0
11000 1 0
12000 1 0
13000 0 0
14000 0 0
15000 1 0
16000 0.8 0
17000 0.6 0
18000 0.4 0
19000 0.4 0
20000 0 0
21000 1 0
22000 2 0



Thanks

Roly
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
Here is a paste of the cal file
Yeah, I see the problem - that file is nuts. The file is providing frequency/level/phase without proper decimal points (where did you get this file) and seems to be quite crazy. A microphone just doesn't have that form of reponse.
You should use Sonnies file here and I feel it will provide a better representation of your mic - see how smooth it is in his thread on the subject.. Save it as your mic.cal file

As far as the left and right measurements go, just to the right of the SPL on the REW are two tab circles listed as right and left. One of them is checked at all times. Is this not supposed to be this way? It looks built into the program.
As I said, simply use the SUB tab and do your measurement for the 4 speakers. :)

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I got that file from two different sources, most recently at AVS forum. I am glad you have discovered a problem. It gives me hope. I will paste a new pic to make sure the new file looks alright. As far as the axis, I set them to L 15, R 200, Top 105, bottom 45. Correct? So I don't do that once, but everytime I measure? Also, does it matter if I apply that before or after the reading? Thanks a ton. I am on my way to measure again.
Roly
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
So I don't do that once, but everytime I measure?
Yes, the axis limits are only preserved as long as the most recent measurement you have taken are inside the graph axis limits of the setting. No big deal - just look at the graph, and if it's not at the values you have set in the axis limits, then make it so.

got that file from two different sources, most recently at AVS forum.
Oh my gawd. AVS? , are you serious ? !!!!!!........ Use Sonnies file and you'll be fine...

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Yes, I did use Sonnie's file and I posted a graph of it a few threads ago. The mic cal response is the flat line that jumps at about 5k Hz as you move right. I guess I am not getting the Graph Axis thing. I just reset it and will try another graph. If it doesn't work, you can shoot me, please.
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
If it doesn't work, you can shoot me, please.
Hehehehe, good one Roly...

OK, that graph has the correct vertical and horizontal axis. Good job - now we can evaluate. :T

As you say, it is a bit challenged in the bottom end. It drops off rather quickly below 30Hz, which is not what you would expect from a 4 driver IB.

I was wondering about your hookup in regard to your 2500 power amp? Have you seen this thread from Chrisbee who has the same equipment basically?

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I am on my way to that thread right now. Just out of curiousity I meausured a 10" Polk and an Earthquake 12" MKIV. Now I know they are not all calibrated, so what I did was to use my SPL and change the volume on each sub until the SPL read 80. That way the subs volume was at the same level as my 4 subs. Then I ran each test seperately. Not sure if that even works, but the response is interesting. All the graphs are very similar. The Polk and Earthquake are powered, both Xovers at 80. Could it be something in my hookup that isn't allowing me more output? First is Earthquake, then Polk, then mine.
Roly
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
so what I did was to use my SPL and change the volume on each sub until the SPL read 80. That way the subs volume was at the same level as my 4 subs. Then I ran each test seperately. Not sure if that even works, but the response is interesting.
Now you're getting it........ good job..

Could it be something in my hookup that isn't allowing me more output? First is Earthquake, then Polk, then mine.
I don't think it's your hookup. It seems correct. The room determines a lot of what happens...

The Earthquake looks the best for sure. Look at that Chrisbee thread I referenced on the 2500 hookup and try again...

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Perhaps a solution. Reading the 2500 amp manual, I notice some dip switches on the back. Currently I have the low cut filter set to 50Hz. It has a 30 Hz option, which the manual says is better for subwoofers, but I can also just shut off the low cut filter. I think this may be the big problem. Looking at my graph it plummets, right at the 50 Hz range. If I disengage the filter, it states that "frequencies below 5 Hz are cut to prevent damage." So should I try the 30 and see what happens, or just turn the **** thing off?
Roly
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 · (Edited)
Okay, I shut of the low cut filters. Good news is I guess it shows a little higher output at lower frequency, but the overall response doesn't look as good to me. So here is the graph with the low filter off in comparison to on. The first is without filter, the second is with low cut filter. The third is a measure with the mike close to the subs, near field. I guess this is a more accurate reading if comparing to the Polk and Earthquake, since that is how I measured them.
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
Yeah, that looks better.

I would stop doing the near field and do your measuring at the listening position.

Let's discuss graph 1, which is your IB sub with the filters off - leave them that way.

If you increased the overall level of the measured signal, it would be quite good except you'd have a hump at about 5oHz. Fine, that can be eliminated with a BFD.

Go ahead and do a measurement of your IB at the listening position and set the Measurement level at about 90dB instead of 80dB. That should track your target except you'll have a peak at 50Hz......

BTW, is your BFD ready to rumble?

brucek
 

· Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Here is the graph at a 90 dB range. To make sure I did this correct, I calibrated the REW for an 80dB reading, but my SPL was registering 90dB. So I fudged it 10dB. Is this how to properly test at a higher range? Also, I keep posting the original graph to give you something to compare to. Would you like me to stop doing that, or is it beneficial to have the side-by-side?
Roly
Also, not sure if my BFD is ready to rumble, but it is hooked up and looking pretty.
 

Attachments

· Registered
Joined
·
7,514 Posts
Is this how to properly test at a higher range?
No that won't do anything, sorry. The point I'm trying to make is that you have a large peak at 50Hz. It would be better for determining filters if your entire response was about 5-10dB higher. Set the entire procedure up using 85-90dB, but put the target at 80dB (you'll have to manually click the target thumbwheel after the setup to get to 80db). This will give more filtering to that large area around 50Hz. Try it and see what happens.

Just post the single graph....

Can you also attach your saved graph.mdat file next post so I have something to work with to provide pictures rather than words - it's so hard to describe some of this stuff in words. Save the measurement under the pull down FILE / Save Measured Data Set

brucek
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top