Recent content by user44455555

I compare with better resolution now also headphone and focal at 10 cm. only very few focal is slower(the time is scale, only 0.04 sec focal is slower. but on hearing pos focal is much slower as I do a near field measure and compare headphone and the focal. here the diffrence is very small...

and what can be the reason then ?. bad driver ? . the focal sound with Eq correct really very boomy and muddy with a EQ correct other speaker. the csd compare only show what i hear. I can hear that in blind test easy.

the AI have a CSD comparision tool i tell features it should have. there can clear see now, the focal have more resonances. the readme also create the google AI. that a high resolution clarity not work good in small rooms i think the scientiest use bad speakers, and because of the small room...

the CSD mode with 3d i not see before. I test and it look good, but problem i notice with diffrent level at same frequency. there is a normalize to peak at each frequency feature to avoid this, but it create huge noise. Is a normalize to maybe 60 db(or a choosable db values) not better ?. this...

I liike the measure also to decide speaker quality. In the spectrogram can see that the focal have worse resonances. But it show strange results depend on levels. i do the measures with measure ramped levels settings and set the level of speaker with check levels so they are same in db. The...

In topts display in REW can also see much diffrence between speakers at same place and microphone positions. is topts better as clarity for small rooms ?. Problem i notice since long time in my measure always the 64 hz band in topts jump randomly alot between repeat measures and diffrent...

here find audio science https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23312165221092919 that tell that C50 C80 is good for small rooms. in small rooms changes of position some cm really change the FR and clarity alot. this is no measure mistake. i hear this too, so when have precise clarity display...

How much qm room you think is need that clarity can work correct ? . I notice by test of my diffrent speakers, the clarity also show speaker case resonances. sound quality is clarity of room and speaker case. AI can not confirm what i say, because i ask questions and do not tell what my opinion...

Hi John The google AI suggested and offer code(and write most of english text) that in small, non-diffuse rooms, the standard 1/3 octave averaging "smears" the time-domain data, making it difficult to see the impact of specific narrow-band resonances on subjective clarity. The AI provided a...

ok, it is your program and you can add what you like but because REW allow upto 12 db gain enhancement, it can also use this gain to reach more low frequency or more mid, same as other speaker correction . boost low frequency also give better transients and timeshift. google can calc this it is...

please look on this 2 pictures. the right side is ok, it do the target curve boost at 60 hz. on the left side it is not, it do not boost, but at other frequencies it is more precise. or maybe need more as 32 filters ? . is that easy possible ? On left side i use LF cutoff 50 hz, on right side i...

here you can see in the test 3only HF fall start and HF fall slope is correct add to filters. I do the test with flatness target 3, so there are 7 eq stages free. with 1 also not work. but a test of a loopback measure which is linear work

This work only when the HF Fall start or HF Fall slope is change. when LF cutoff or LF slope parameters change, the filters stay the same if still not clear, i do then a new thread and show a video when i change HF fall and it change filters. but when i change LF cutoff or LF slope LF rise...

Yes this i think too. see example. I use huge values to see good in EQ curve. I use 1000 and 3.5 db for the HF Fall and this is add in the EQ curve correct. but LF cutoff LF Slope and LF rise start /end /slope is not add to the EQ settings

and for what is then this setting usefull ?