Digital Room Correction vs Room Treatments

@lemonhaze Thanks.  It sounds good to me, filling in the lower parts of vocals quite noticeably so it goes from thinner/slightly nasal to more substantial and better balanced.

But here’s the thing: I’m having to set the SVS LPF all the way up to 200Hz.  Because I’m trying to address the original 100-200Hz null from the mains:

If I cut off where you would normally cut off with a sub, that null stays there.

Is it a total disaster that I have to overlap the sub and mains by that much to fill out the null, even if the final curves look pretty good?

Thread update:

I ended up getting a second SVS SB-1000 Pro and set them up on the left and back of the room where space allowed.

I also bought a miniDSP Flex and am now using that as my preamp.  Between REW measurements and it's AutoEQ functionality, as well as a lot of experimentation on relative delays between subs, as well as between subs and mains, I was able to get what is an acceptable result for me.

The vast majority of the EQ/correction is being done via the AutoEQ files biquad files being uploaded into the Flex for both subs (using the same correction file) and the mains (each having their own correction file).  The SVS just have some very light tweaks (-0.5dB, +1dB) overlaid on top to further smooth the bass response. 

I ended up crossing over the subs and mains at 90Hz with no overlap.

Final FR Curve:

Impulse:

RT60:

Waterfall:

Spectrogram:

I know those early peaks on the Impulse graph should ideally be dealt with.

To wrap up, this shows the subs, left main channel, and right main channel prior to correction and the all channel combined FR after correction (this is the same as the first graph in this post).  Pretty significant improvement.

In the end, at least so far, this was done with a minimally treated room and not using a paid package like Dirac Live.  While the Flex supports Dirac as an upgrade, it doesn't support the Bass Control module of Dirac, so I opted to do things manually.  I considered using MSO to integrate the two subs, but MSO only runs on Windows, and I'm on a MacBook, so again, did it manually.

Below 5k looks good but that seems like a lot of high end rolloff. You may be missing a lot of detail and air. But if you're happy, so be it. 

Enjoy the music. 

@mashif Yes, agree!  The thing is, the FR curves I took yesterday didn't show so much rolloff.  The red curve is yesterday, and the blue curve is today:

The difference in the bass region was due to a change in EQ to try and even out the bass response, but everything above 5K shouldn't have been affected.  I even went back to the original EQ (identical to the red curve) and the above 5K response was still like the blue curve.  

I didn't change the EQ at all and tried to position the mic in the same place as yesterday.  The AI answer to my asking how this could happen was that high frequency response is very dependent on things such as precise mic positioning among other factors.  

I have a single listening position (bigger leather chair, but just one seat), so I can optimize for one position, but if such small changes in side to side or height can really make that big of a difference, then no matter how I equalize up there, I may have some variation.

As it is, if I walk around in my room retrieving CDs or records from my racks, I can hear that the bass varies a fair amount.  It doesn't matter so much to me because I'm the only one that ever is in this room and I'm always in my chair when listening, but this is probably the side effect of equalizing to a single listening position versus treating the room with acoustic treatments.

Right now my mains have zero toe-in.  Maybe the consistency spot will widen a bit if I do some toe-in, but traditionally I've liked no toe-in in my setups because the soundstage sounds wider.