Astonishing bass correction with a DSpeaker antimode 2.0

[raghupb]

Hmmm ....
This is a hailstorm. Let's not rain on @newlash09's acquisition

If memory serves me right, he has been grappling with those speakers in that particular room for a long time.
After all he's just searching for a solution

"And I Still Haven't Found ... What I'm Looking For ..."
Let's hope he doesn't turn Bono

Edit:
Unless @newlash09 does not mind the banter

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[superczar]

You can introduce the correction/antidote upstream (close to the source) or downstream (closer to the listener). Since the problem is caused by the room, which is closest to the listener, isn’t it better to apply the antidote there?

For example, the water of Ganga gets polluted around Allahabad due to waste that gets added downstream. Would you rather remedy the waste there, or instead add disinfectants into the stream at Haridwar?

You are right but the issue is that the process of fixing gets extremely complex once the signal has attained a higher amplitude post amplification.

or in the case of the river analogy, It’s like if you had the choice of building a bridge at where the river is narrow vs where it’s turned into a 100 mile wide mangrove

@raghupb : I guess the lockdown has gifted all of us with a lot of spare time

 

[newlash09]

Someone in the industry once told me this.

If you plan to do any sort of sound processing in 2 channel audio, go active with an outboard active crossover first. Let the midrange and high frequencies go untouched to the speakers. That is where your tone resides. And any issues in freq response is easily fixed in the mids and highs by traditional room treatments. Then do sound processing only to the bass frequencies that comes out of the active crossover. This way the life in music does not get sucked out and bass gets fixed as well.

Thanks

This is exactly what I will be doing. The only correction will be in the bass, with the Dspeaker coming just before bass amps.

Happy to hear about the OPs experiements and improved results. However for me - rather than plug in more hardware I would prefer taking a one time measurement (meaning repeated iterative test cycles in a day or two) generate 4-5 EQ profiles and upload them to a software in the source player for corrections - then switch between different EQ profiles to see which ones I like best. Extra hardware means more extra and expensive cables and the link chain from source to speaker is no longer simple. With a software approach one can continue to use ones existing investment in a favorite DAC without messing with the chain.

The challenge in the latter approach - is that this defeats the pure unprocessed bitperfect transfer from source player to USB DAC... need to figure out how to do this on a Linux/Android box.

Edit: Just found out Volumio has an EQ plugin so this looks easily feasible... The audiophile music player designed and fine-tuned for high quality music playback. Free and Open Source Forever . The trick is then to obtain the room corrections graph for before/after and set your EQ ...

PS: I dont want my post to sound diversionary - do continue with the original discussion - just posted my gut feel and opinion ...

Hi Gobble

I do understand where you are coming from. I did try that. As I already have a umik-1 microphone. And I could have uploaded convulation filters into roon on my NUC to correct the same, only if I knew how

That is why I choose the automated system, as I dont have that skill to interpret these graphs, and keep tweaking as my NUC is headless, and I will have to keep running to the living room tv to plug the NUC in and make the next tweak.

Point 2 is that Iam trying to get the pc out of my system period. I will live happily with a digital streamer like a lumin. Good app, good quality, no faff.

Does that not presume that any correction/equalization will do something unspeakable to the signal?
But If that’s true then the same unspeakable horrors would apply to the process of amplifying the signal too, no?

I guess what I am saying is that a vanilla amplified signal would have some coloration lended by the room - whether or not to remove this coloration (mildly or aggressively or anywhere in between) is a subjective and individual choice .

Analogue to digital and back to analogue correction is completely transparent these days. It is just like the dac chips in your favourite dac, each put in the loop on reverse. Both have the same failings, so each will cancel each other out. There are no alterations to tone or timber there. I've tried it. First with a devialet amp, and then with a very cheap Dayton dsp400. They are completey transparent, if I got into your room at night and planted one. You really wouldn't know even after one year...unless I tell you where I planted it

Hmmm ....
This is a hailstorm. Let's not rain on @newlash09's acquisition

If memory serves me right, he has been grappling with those speakers in that particular room for a long time.
After all he's just searching for a solution

"And I Still Haven't Found ... What I'm Looking For ..."
Let's hope he doesn't turn Bono

Edit:
Unless @newlash09 does not mind the banter

Cheers,
Raghu

Haha...there is a popular term for it in English, it called as "pissing on one's parade"

But keep it going chaps...Iam open to suggestions , we all have our own views and perspectives, on most things audio. So spit it out

 

[Kannan]

Thanks

This is exactly what I will be doing. The only correction will be in the bass, with the Dspeaker coming just before bass amps.

he already has some drool stuff to go active. A full analogue 4-way active sound processor, a full digital 4-way active DSP, now this new DS Speaker tool...and I am not far off seeing Dirac too sitting in his hands.
I don't think he has still done that real active programming by dividing the frequencies between drivers, but more so for bi and tri amping.

The low notes apart from hanging often like a Damocles sword, can also add notoriety to the lower midrange and overweight the entire bandwidth. Properly controlled, it can add that oomph to the music and often a nice warmth to the mids.

I am sure the man of the oceans is riding the waves of music in his home sojourn....Enjoy....

 

[Deleted member 15865]

Haha...there is a popular term for it in English, it called as "pissing on one's parade"

But keep it going chaps...Iam open to suggestions , we all have our own views and perspectives, on most things audio. So spit it out

Sorry mate, got carried away with the side-discussion your post generated, especially as @superczar’s and my debating itch matched. Enjoy the improved sound.

BTW, are your custom-built speakers up and running? That’s one experience I am eager to read.

@raghupb, thanks for talking sense into us.

 

[newlash09]

Sorry mate, got carried away with the side-discussion your post generated, especially as @superczar’s and my debating itch matched. Enjoy the improved sound.

BTW, are your custom-built speakers up and running? That’s one experience I am eager to read.

@raghupb, thanks for talking sense into us.

Hi Sachin

Come on its all just light banter

Please keep it going. Nothing else to do under lock down. Ian getting bored at home and have under taken my annual open and clean program yesterday. Atleast these conversations are safer than opening up stuff, with out knowing how to box them back

 

[jls001]

Hmmm ....
Let's not rain on @newlash09's acquisition

+1 to this.

However hard the purists may sneer at it, even a simple bass and treble tone knobs can overcome most room issues. Coupled with parametric equalizers (where possible), one can get even better sound. It is better to have acceptable sound in the room using these aids than have "pure" and unmolested signal spewing garbage into the room.

 

[drkrack]

There are two schools of thought here. One that goes for total acoustic room correction without the use of any DRC programs and the other that favours DRC or a combination of both.

That said, most recordings that are almost 100% digital today involves substantial amount of mixing and play with frequencies and amplitudes.
That said, the goal of an ideal music system is to reproduce close to 100% what has been churned out by the music director.

So let us presume that we have built that magic system with the best of source, DAC and the rest of the chain, but what is not in our control is the room response that is added to the sound waves generated by the speakers before reaching our ears.

Technically speaking, when we take the DRC route, we are actually manipulating the near perfect sound signature generated by the music system to compensate for the deficiencies of the room.

Instead the better route would be to detoxify the room to the extent possible, so that the near perfect sound signature reaches your ear before being manipulated before the final stage of amplification.

That said, some nodes can be notorious and will need DRC enforcement. Further practically speaking, it might be impossible to employ acoustic room corrections due to some limitations (like rented premises, living area etc), where DRC can be a great boon.

There's a 4th School of thought as well.
They optimize their hardware to certain heavily colored ( Wow factor) version of distortion that the SQ becomes 'relatively' independent of the Source and Room. Whatever the garbage source material you input, irrespective of the room; the the sound output is just a variation of their heavily colored version ( mostly rounded HF, lush vocals and likable bass). You are least bothered about what the artist had intended, least bothered about the flat uniform accuracy of the response ; but the end user gets a beautiful SQ response.

The emotional tonality (it appeals more to heart, than brain) is so appealing that you tend to overlook the Non puritan expression of frequency spectrum, and just focus on listening more. It's the listener and his subjective preference takes a center stage instead of what sound engineers or recording artists would have preferred. For people who like that kind of SQ response it achieves a cult status, with most loyal brand following for every device in the chain. Well, by this time you know what brands I am talking about. Though pricey, They don't delve too much into specifications, their system set-up is overtly simplified and focus on initial wow factor which brings cash flow.

Finally, beauty lies in the eyes of beholder, So if the listener prefers this altered version of SQ ; his quest ends there. It's a great option for non objectively discerning listeners, which constitutes 90% of the population. Let the puritans crib, objective evidence seekers throw tantrums, but that hardly matters. In reality most of listeners probably crave for their version of this altered reality but our thinking brains puts hurdles in accepting the fact. Remember music is an artistic & emotional extravaganza not a Scientific one!

 

[Deleted member 15865]

There's a 4th School of thought as well.
They optimize their hardware to certain heavily colored ( Wow factor) version of distortion that the SQ becomes 'relatively' independent of the Source and Room. Whatever the garbage source material you input, irrespective of the room; the the sound output is just a variation of their heavily colored version ( mostly rounded HF, lush vocals and likable bass). You are least bothered about what the artist had intended, least bothered about the flat uniform accuracy of the response ; but the end user gets a beautiful SQ response.

The emotional tonality (it appeals more to heart, than brain) is so appealing that you tend to overlook the Non puritan expression of frequency spectrum, and just focus on listening more. It's the listener and his subjective preference takes a center stage instead of what sound engineers or recording artists would have preferred. For people who like that kind of SQ response it achieves a cult status, with most loyal brand following for every device in the chain. Well, by this time you know what brands I am talking about. Though pricey, They don't delve too much into specifications, their system set-up is overtly simplified and focus on initial wow factor which brings cash flow.

Finally, beauty lies in the eyes of beholder, So if the listener prefers this altered version of SQ ; his quest ends there. It's a great option for non objectively discerning listeners, which constitutes 90% of the population. Let the puritans crib, objective evidence seekers throw tantrums, but that hardly matters. In reality most of listeners probably crave for their version of this altered reality but our thinking brains puts hurdles in accepting the fact. Remember music is an artistic & emotional extravaganza not a Scientific one!

We all know whom you are alluding to, Boss!

 

[drkrack]

We all know whom you are alluding to, Boss!

That's just the tip of the Iceberg, there are audiophile versions and tube versions of that brand , who'd ask you to buy Cables, ICs etc. From their brand only.

They know that, even puritans won't mind buying them as a 2nd setup; because ultimately one gets exhausted with constant mixing and matching of other components to extract the best out of their systems.
We need to enjoy our music, explore different music more; than just concentrate on the sound. That's why I admire people who post music reviews like you (@SachinChavan) than people like myself (Well. I'm changing now) who can talk endlessly about components.

 

[raghupb]

That's just the tip of the Iceberg, there are audiophile versions and tube versions of that brand , who'd ask you to buy Cables, ICs etc. From their brand only.

They know that, even puritans won't mind buying them as a 2nd setup; because ultimately one gets exhausted with constant mixing and matching of other components to extract the best out of their systems.
We need to enjoy our music, explore different music more; than just concentrate on the sound. That's why I admire people who post music reviews like you (@SachinChavan) than people like myself (Well. I'm changing now) who can talk endlessly about components.

Just listen to the "Music" not the sound of music, unless it is "The Sound Of Music" album.

I have been pursuing this hobby for about 35+ years (partly with dad's money, mostly with my own)
The fundamental guiding principle has been, how does it sound to me?
Does it make me sit and listen to music as a whole?

Time and budget permitting, we all take different approaches to bettering this wholesome experience.
Experiments can be:
- like tone control (least expensive, assuming your system has them)
- cable experiments (some time & expense involved)
- adding a sub, changing components (some more time & larger expense involved)
- active/passive room correction (some expense, but requires a lot of time/patience)
- all of the above (recipe for insanity, if handled all at once)

@newlash09 has the gear, tools, and most importantly time now to fiddle around
This thread is one such example.

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[newlash09]

There's a 4th School of thought as well.
They optimize their hardware to certain heavily colored ( Wow factor) version of distortion that the SQ becomes 'relatively' independent of the Source and Room. Whatever the garbage source material you input, irrespective of the room; the the sound output is just a variation of their heavily colored version ( mostly rounded HF, lush vocals and likable bass). You are least bothered about what the artist had intended, least bothered about the flat uniform accuracy of the response ; but the end user gets a beautiful SQ response.

The emotional tonality (it appeals more to heart, than brain) is so appealing that you tend to overlook the Non puritan expression of frequency spectrum, and just focus on listening more. It's the listener and his subjective preference takes a center stage instead of what sound engineers or recording artists would have preferred. For people who like that kind of SQ response it achieves a cult status, with most loyal brand following for every device in the chain. Well, by this time you know what brands I am talking about. Though pricey, They don't delve too much into specifications, their system set-up is overtly simplified and focus on initial wow factor which brings cash flow.

Finally, beauty lies in the eyes of beholder, So if the listener prefers this altered version of SQ ; his quest ends there. It's a great option for non objectively discerning listeners, which constitutes 90% of the population. Let the puritans crib, objective evidence seekers throw tantrums, but that hardly matters. In reality most of listeners probably crave for their version of this altered reality but our thinking brains puts hurdles in accepting the fact. Remember music is an artistic & emotional extravaganza not a Scientific one!

That's very well put across karthik. One needs to enjoy the music, to hell with the truth. Because that is the recording/ mixing engineers interpretation of what might be the likable truth. When one has spent enough time in this hobby, and knows the sound he likes. Best he chases that which gives him happiness.

 

[Kannan]

It's a great option for non objectively discerning listeners, which constitutes 90% of the population. Let the puritans crib, objective evidence seekers throw tantrums, but that hardly matters. In reality most of listeners probably crave for their version of this altered reality but our thinking brains puts hurdles in accepting the fact. Remember music is an artistic & emotional extravaganza not a Scientific one!

It is possibly much higher at 95% and of the rest 5%, 99.999 per cent that includes me are possibly Audiophools...not audiofools ...phools like is flowers (multicoloured and multifaceted)