Camverton

Wammer
  • Content Count

    4,070
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Camverton last won the day on August 8 2019

Camverton had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

817 Excellent

About Camverton

  • Rank
    Wammer
  • Birthday May 26

Personal Info

  • Location
    Herefordshire
  • Real Name
    Malcolm

Wigwam Info

  • Turn Table
    In the garage!
  • Digital Source 1
    PC JRiver
  • Digital Source 2
    Node 2i
  • DAC
    Chord Qutest
  • Integrated Amp
    MBL C51, Hegel H360
  • Pre-Amp
    MiniDSP SHD
  • Power Amp/s
    Quad 606 etc etc
  • My Speakers
    German Physiks, MBL
  • Headphones
    Stax, Sony
  • Trade Status
    I am not in the Hi-Fi trade

Recent Profile Visitors

2,609 profile views
  1. Did no one tell him about the little boy who cried wolf?
  2. Ooh! Your link is fun and from areas I know, quite accurate. Thanks.
  3. Some nice looking rooms there. I went through this process a couple of years ago when moving from Sussex. Despite having a wide search area - Herefordshire and Shropshire and a bit to the west - I found it very difficult to find a house which suited my hifi and I. My priority was finding a detached house with no near neighbours and with a decent sized room for the hifi. Sellers were quite bemused when I went into their lounges and started clapping to check the acoustics! Whilst we think of small sitting rooms as being the norm for end of twentieth century, it was also the norm for old country cottages. In the end I bought a 17th century cottage which has a decent sized extension and main room of 4x7.3m. Oddly enough it has been more difficult to get decent sound here than in my old 5x3.5m room. Perhaps I should have set my hifi up in the houses I was viewing. I suspect that with a larger room and no near neighbours I tend to listen louder and that puts more demand on my hifi. New, larger speakers have proved the point and I’m now very happy. Best of luck with your search.
  4. Bit busy at the moment but will reply in detail later when I have Rew open in front of me. Firstly don’t just wind up the volume on your amp until the recording level is correct; this could mean that you are running your equipment at too high a level in your room, both for your speakers and your ears. So, first thing to do is get the volume correct in your room at 75 dB (or thereabouts) using check levels - full range at bottom of REW preferences. Unless you are doing this regularly it is very difficult to judge volume by ear and without an SPL meter, an iPad app should be adequate for the job, which app are you using. The second thing is to adjust the sensitivity of the mic in settings. Your mic may not be sensitive enough even with input/mic setting at max. If so don’t compensate by winding the volume in your amp up. Many, many, years ago, when playing with test tones I blew a pair of tweeters; I won’t make that mistake again! I wouldn’t worry about timing loops just yet and if you do at sometime down the line a umik mic will be invaluable. A umik mic makes life so much easier but that depends on your means and how much use you might get from it. They do seem to be in demand second-hand, so I guess it would be possible to sell on after use. Don’t worry about taking two steps forward and one back; it isn’t easy and anyone who claims it is has forgotten their time learning, is a genius or doesn’t know what they are talking about! Pleasure to try and help by the way.
  5. Indeed, I think the problem is that without checking the volume of the measurement sweeps it would be possible to use way above 75dB by accident. Without a meter most people wouldn’t have any idea how loud 75dB actually is. A simple phone or tablet app will suffice for getting the level near enough. As ever, when setting volumes for measurements start at a very low volume and slowly increase until 75dB, as an example, is reached.
  6. It’s a tricky one and I suppose the best thing is to try both approaches and see which works best in practice. I expect many of us have set up our system to sound great and then found that when half a dozen friends come round for a listen the system sounds dire because of the damping effects of their bodies. Perhaps I should make a dirac preset with a room full of people , although the chance of getting a room full of my friends not to pass wind in an extravagantly noisy fashion during measurements would be remote! So I think that when measuring we should have the same damping items in the room. FWIW I move my listening chair back a couple of metres to leave room for the mic on its stand. My thinking is that an unoccupied chair will be very different to one upon which I am slumped and so is best removed from the equation. In my old place where moving the chair wasn’t practical I reclined the back of the chair and dumped cushions and duvets on the seat. The PC I run REW, JRiver and dirac on is at the back of the room so I stay in the room whilst measuring. Those who know me will realise that keeping quiet for nine dirac measurements is quite a feat! In practice this gives me good results both in Dirac and when creating filters for JRiver.
  7. 1) I’ve found that it is best not to overdo it when it comes to EQ. If you EQ precisely for one listening position then any correction will be wrong for another position, or in my case, when I find myself reclining more as the evening goes on. Using smoothing on the measurement plot will make the EQ less precise but still take care of broad peaks that are clearly audible. As Martin points out, taking readings at multiple mic positions is best but you then have to decide how to balance the readings around the main position to the main listening position. If starting out it is probably easier to measure at the listening position and use smoothing to get usable filters. 2) See Martin’s reply. 3) First off, before taking measurements I set the output to 75dB by measuring the sound coming from the speaker (s) using the “check for level” full range in preferences. Consistency is more important than absolute value here. This is one advantage of using a calibrated mic such as a umik but you can also use an SPL meter or app on a smart phone. Clicking on the “set target level” will automatically compensate if your measurements are at too high or low a value. I usually click on it to see what it gives but also adjust to give me the filters I am looking for. How do you know what you are looking for? A lot of measuring and listening to the results helps here! I tend to look at the frequency response and decide what sort of filters I want and then use EQ to calculate the values for me. (This bit is for another day, perhaps, but having got the frequency response right and measured again to confirm I then look at spectrogram and waterfall plots etc to look for any oddities in delay, although by and large reducing a bump in the frequency response will reduce a delay - it can get quite involved so keep to the basics first!) 4) See Martins reply but it is best if your measurements are at 75dB to get a good result. If measuring at too low a level you get nearer the noise floor - usually 35 - 45dB in many rooms and if you measure at too high a level you could damage your equipment or hearing. 5) I started off playing with a radioshack SPL meter then moved on to an iPad app before buying a umik mic. I certainly wouldn’t want to do this sort of thing now without a calibrated mic. I guess it depends on whether the outlay is worth it to you and how much use might get from it. Be warned though, that having peered down the rabbit hole you might find all this stuff fascinating and find yourself in ever expanding burrows! It is an interesting hobby in its own right and can give results that greatly improve ones enjoyment of the dear old music.
  8. I guess it depends on where you are when you operate the computer running dirac. A big blob like me could act as a very effective sound absorber - well, at least until I open my mouth . I’ve often thought that the best way to take the listener into account would be to have the mic sticking out of ones nose, but even my nose isn’t big enough for that!
  9. Many thanks for the update. I did notice that there is now a setting whereby you can delay the measurements so that you have time to exit the room. Is that what unattended usage refers to?
  10. And therin lies a great problem with discussing things on the internet; working out who posts from knowledge, experience and expertise (very valuable), who posts from misguided enthusiasm (acceptable but needs to be taken at face value, and probably includes me!), those whose appearance of knowledge is little more than an extension of their troubled ego (sad and sometimes, hopefully rarely, includes me), and those with little knowledge who are just out to provoke and annoy (best put on ignore where they belong!). The more entertaining posters tend to be quite adept at swapping categories!
  11. Not easy is it Stuart? It’s great software but there are choices to be made at every stage which will affect the results. Just a quick thought on your recent posts, and I’d welcome Martin’s input. You appear to be trying to create filters using a single measurement with no smoothing of the measured response. There is a problem with this as any filter will be particular to that precise listening position. As you can see, moving the measuring mic a bit will give a different result. A couple of solutions come to mind. The first is a bit time consuming and involves taking an extra number of measurements around the area of the listening position and average them, then average them with the measurement taken at the listening position. A simpler method would be to alter the smoothing of the measured plot in the EQ page. By smoothing more (say going from 1/48 octave smoothing to 1/6) you will see that the filters are not so extreme and fewer in number. You could also change the setting that adjusts the adherence to the target curve. If set to 1dB the software will try to correct every variation in the measured curve. By increasing this setting you might get a more useful, in listening terms, set of less extreme filters. These will give a broader brush approach that might well be enough to achieve a good listening experience which isn’t just suitable for the precise position of the measuring mic. The important thing is to try various options and then listen carefully to find out which works best in practice. Hope this helps rather than confuses.
  12. I found it a great pleasure to meet him in person. Whether or not one agreed with his conclusions his forum contributions were based on his wealth of knowledge and experience which mean’t that he was able to explain his points without posting pointless links to other forums. Mind you, he posted from a desire to help rather than annoy. All measurists are not the same!
  13. I think you’re right there. Shows can give one a hint of what might be worth considering but I think to come to firm conclusions is foolhardy.
  14. I think you would find that very interesting. I did it a couple of years ago and, along with visitors, was extremely impressed with the sound a finest measuring loudspeaker can make. Only one little snag, it didn’t sound like music was being performed in front of us. Being impressed with its technical merits soon wore off and it was a relief to return to a pair of loudspeakers that not only sounded as if I had living performers in front of me but also evoked the sensations that real music produces in me.