Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well , ran the headphone output to the preamp input and this is the waterfall graph I came up with. Any help with interpretation? Looks quite the mess to me. 2 channel audio only system here.
It was quite difficult to generate the graph, any technical tips?
 

Attachments

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,921 Posts
Was this measuring with both speakers playing? You might try one at a time. Have you created a soundcard calibration, and do you have a .cal for the mic you used?

The mountain around 50-60Hz is most likely a room mode that needs some attention.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Was this measuring with both speakers playing? You might try one at a time. Have you created a soundcard calibration, and do you have a .cal for the mic you used?

The mountain around 50-60Hz is most likely a room mode that needs some attention.
Both speakers were playing. I can try one at a time but would that give me information as to the speakers interaction with the room in the same way as if they were playing together. Yes, there is a .cal for the mic loaded and I created a sound card calibration. I may redo both of those tho.

Thanks for the help!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,921 Posts
All that's wrong there is that your plot limits are set to too wide of a range. The lower limit should be something like 75dB, not -60.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
All that's wrong there is that your plot limits are set to too wide of a range. The lower limit should be something like 75dB, not -60.
Sorry to be so dense. How do i go about doing that? Us 2-channel guys are not so sharp sometimes.

After fooling around, I got it to look like this. I know I need to address the resonances at 20 and 50 hertz but what do I make of all the raggedness in the plot? Is the goal to get a smooth surface with decay times all the same? Thanks for any and all help>
Dave
 

Attachments

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,921 Posts
Besides the two places you've already identified, I'd say the whole thing looks pretty nice and uniform. As for the non-flat appearance of your frequency response (FR), even if a pair of speakers played perfectly flat getting a perfectly flat measurement would be difficult to obtain. What range is your mic good for? Is this what you are asking.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,252 Posts

Hi Wntr,


I know I need to address the resonances at 20 and 50 hertz but what do I make of all the raggedness in the plot?
The raggedness is inherent in any frequency response measurement, but waterfall graphs are only meaningful up to about 300 Hz.


Is the goal to get a smooth surface with decay times all the same?
I hope not, because as fusseli mentioned that’s an impossible goal. Speaking of goals, what are yours? Are you interested in taming your subwoofer response? Improving full-range response? Installing treatments? If the former or median, then a basic frequency response graph is what you want. Generally aside from "FYI," there’s no reason to use a waterfall graph unless you intend to install bass traps (although it can be of some use when equalizing a subwoofer).

Regards,
Wayne
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
I'm interested in getting smooth response from my audio only 2 channel system. There is no sub-woofer involved. I am not against some room treatments as long as I don't destroy the astetics of a beautiful 1950s room.
I've been primarily looking at RTA with pink noise. So I should use the Frequency Response graphs? Do I generate one like the waterfall? Thanks for all the help guys
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top