Digital Room Correction vs Room Treatments
I finally got a mic and used REW to analyze my room. Attached is the freq response for 3 different speakers (Monitor Audio Gold Reference 20, Sonus Faber Electa Amator II, and Sonus Faber Concerto Domus).
They all show similar characteristics - at least the most prominent ones. I did play around with the Amators trying them closer together and more forward in the room, but the major characteristics you see were mostly unchanged.
With this magnitude and number of deviations from a more ideal frequency response curve, am I better off biting the bullet and just doing digital room correction, or can these issues be addressed with room treatments without going crazy and having the room look like Frankenstein’s lab.
Cost is a consideration, but doing it right/better is the most important factor.
If digital room correction is a viable way to address this, what are the best solutions today? My system is largely analog (80’s/90’s Mcintosh preamp/amp, tube phono stage), and streaming isn’t a priority (though I’m not against it).
If the better digital correction solutions come in the form of a streaming HW solution, that’s fine, I’d do that.
Just looking for guidance on the best way to deal with the room, as both serious room treatments and digital EQ room correction are both areas I haven’t delved into before.
Thanks all. If more info is needed, let me know. My room is 11.5’ wide and 15.5’ long with the speakers on the short wall. Backs of speakers are 3-3.5’ off the front wall and they’re at least 2ft from either side wall. Some placement flexibility is there, but not a huge amount.
@yyzsantabarbara Where does Mitch's DSP insert into my system? I'm using one of either of two preamps: a late 80's/early 90's Mcintosh C35 or an '80's Conrad Johnson PV5. Typically, I'll have 2-3 analog inputs into the preamp (CD player, DAC, and tube phono stage into C35 or will use built in phono stage when using PV5). Both have processor loops where something could be inserted into the signal chain to work on all inputs, but for Mitch's solution, would this have to be a computer? |
uhm you should never smooth bass region in REW... so use VAR smoothing. Also you need to tackle the modes. Push your speakers closer to the front wall and see how that changes the RTA and the modes in your room. DSP is used in tandem with treatment, but treatment takes precedence @captouch |
Room treatment is as much about reverb time (Rt) as frequency variations, particularly in frequencies above 100hz. You don't want sound bouncing around your room. Below 100 is a different story. EQ can help there. Diffusion and absorption can help minimize frequency variations above 100hz as well as get Rt down below 300ms, or about 1/3 second. Below 100 hz, Speaker placement and subs are the better solution. EQ is most useful below 80hz. Your room is a system like your components. You have to work with various elements to optimize it. REW can help but I find a real time analyzer to be important as well. With a live 1/3 octave display, you can walk around your room with a calibrated Mic and see what's going on. Then you can try different solutions and both measure and more importantly, hear the results. |
based on your measurements there is very little really wrong here,
the more pertinent question is what are you trying to accomplish?
just because you don't have a perfectly ruler flat curve doesn't mean your system isn't perfect as it is.
for most people a perfectly flat response is not desirable a bit of coloration can be a good thing as it creates a " more Musical sounding experience. So the real question is what are you unhappy with? and why do you think a flatter response curve is necessarily better? As as per acoustical treatment vs dsp acoustic treatments are always best as a dsp is always going to be in the signal path. In our reference sound room and theater we strive for acoustical tuning first and then dsp as a final tune Hope this helps
Dave and Troy audio Intellect NJ
|
