[pinoybboy2004]

Hey gang,

I wanted to get your input on these graphs that I generated using REW...I hope it's OK to post so many graphs...

The sweep was 20-20000hz.

I used a DBX RTA-M calibrated mic and file.

I'm going to try to take these results and adjust the EQ for a room using a DBX 31 band. I'd like to know if these graphs are on the right track and, if so, how to go about boosting and cuting on the EQ while keeping respectable sound fidelity. The graphs seem a little shakey (especially the water fall plot 200hz-700hz) The waterfall seemed like it was not decaying, even when I set the viewing parameter to 1000MS....Is this normal? My teacher showed me a quick demo of REW in class and his waterfall plot peaks seemed to die off much quicker...

Thanks in advance!
Brent

 

[pinoybboy2004]

Reading other posts looks like it would be best that I lower the dB of the speakers generating the tone...

 

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

That, plus waterfalls are only relevant for the lower frequencies, below (IIR) about 300 Hz. Also, please use our standard graph vertical scaling of 45-105 dB for in-room measurements.

Other than that, looks like you have a handle on things. :T

A teacher is using REW in class? Cool!!

Regards,
Wayne

 

[Weasel9992]

Hmmm...that plot doesn't look right. It's very unusual to see that kind of "smiley face" plot. What's the size, shape and composition of the room?

Careful with the 31-band EQ. Any change you make by EQing the speaker output may help a tiny bit and the listening position, but it's almost guaranteed to make the room response much worse in other places, plus you'll lose your gains if you move your head a foot...or less. I'm not saying that some kind of filter-based correction isn't a good thing (it can be)...I'm just saying that a DBX 31-band is not the right tool.

Frank
GIK Acoustics