AI guided Room Optimization.

I am working with Chat on a ‘How-to’ guide to help those who might wish to do a DIY optimization.

I have no desire to ‘sell’ anything.
 
crwilli said:
I am working with Chat on a ‘How-to’ guide to help those who might wish to do a DIY optimization.

I have no desire to ‘sell’ anything.
Click to expand...
You might want to check out YouTube. There are quite a few videos that you can follow to learn how to do it. IMO, it is easier to follow the video than reading about how it is done.

The videos guide you through the entire process.
 
@AJ Soundfield
I get the sentiment. The DSP bothers me more when I use my TT or 15 IPS tape.

And I keep hearing people say they never feel fully satisfied with their crossover settings. Yet the amount of turnover of equipment also speaks to the same sort of dissatisfaction.
 
Kingrex said:
@AJ Soundfield
I get the sentiment. The DSP bothers me more when I use my TT or 15 IPS tape.

And I keep hearing people say they never feel fully satisfied with their crossover settings. Yet the amount of turnover of equipment also speaks to the same sort of dissatisfaction.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware of audiophile OCDs, MoFi comedy gold etc
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Yeah like MoFi and everything else recorded > 80s.
Click to expand...
You keep mixing up recording with playback requirements its two totally different situations..!

Get a local band and do your own reference recordings , its a necessity if designing speakers ..

DSP on playback is a bandaid always heard , DSP for a recording doesn't affect playback the original recording is the reference no different than running artificial reverb , digital or spring ..

Regards
 
a.wayne said:
wouldn't let it (DSP) anywhere near the mains Bass/mids/Highs though
Click to expand...

a.wayne said:
Play mostly Server (NAS) /Streamer (DSP) , for new music and convenience LP /R2R (DSP recordings>80s) when i really want a treat or bought new stuff
Click to expand...
a.wayne said:
You keep mixing up recording with playback requirements its two totally different situations..!
Click to expand...
So now you admit you didn't realize like most audiophiles, DSP was in your mains all along. Just an inferior analog version.
Well, Craig decided he could do better...and did.
 
AJ Soundfield said:
So now you admit you didn't realize like most audiophiles, DSP was in your mains all along. Just an inferior analog version.
Well, Craig decided he could do better...and did.
Click to expand...
Need to work on your comprehension, when and where did i say that , are you like those deaf audiophiles who cant tell it’s a bad setup needing a DSP bandaid.

Funny you wanting to tell me how recordings are made ..

🤣
 
Last edited:
a.wayne said:
Need to work on your comprehension, when and where did i say that
Click to expand...

a.wayne said:
Play mostly Server (NAS) /Streamer (DSP) , for new music and convenience LP /R2R (DSP recordings>80s) when i really want a treat or bought new stuff .........wouldn't let it (DSP) anywhere near the mains Bass/mids/Highs though
Click to expand...

Completely oblivious to the DSP imbedded in your system via recordings and of course there will never be any measurements of your inferior analog conversions showing where "bandaids" would fix. IOW, the typical audiophile system like the 100s, maybe 1000 including shows, I've heard. Don't worry Mr Wayne, no one will ever hear your "No DSP" system, you're safe. :)
 
The process I used can work with systems that can or cannot apply DSP. I don’t feel there is an either or.

The entire point of my post was the aid the AI engine could bring to analyzing your REW measures. And, how it can speed up the optimization of your system in your room.

Point of fact, when I first ran the optimization, Chat did not want me to run the D.A.R.O. (DSP analysis) that my JL Audio subs can do. When I came back to it and plugged the ports of my Kharmas, it did want me to use the DSP engine of my subs.

The overall result is clearly better to my ears and to the REW measurements.

I am not a fan of using DSP for the 200-20,000hz range. I have done it via convolution filters and could never stick with them. Can’t explain what I didn’t like but I couldn’t stay with them.

Maybe it was too dry and neutral for my ears. Again, convo filters are only as good as the house curves you target and how well you address phase and timing issues.
 
crwilli said:
I am not a fan of using DSP for the 200-20,000hz range. I have done it via convolution filters and could never stick with them. Can’t explain what I didn’t like but I couldn’t stay with them.
Click to expand...
Did you measure the speakers and then apply adjustments based on those measurements, or....
crwilli said:
Again, convo filters are only as good as the house curves you target
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as a house/target curve ;-). The only "target" should be as flat/smooth on AND off axis of your speakers native/onset response. If your speakers already possess this, then indeed "filters" applied would be incorrect. Might make a microphone or some EQ for Dummies program happy, but not your 2 binaural hearing ears.
Don't take my word for it https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...avorite-house-curve.2382/page-25#post-1970927
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Did you measure the speakers and then apply adjustments based on those measurements, or....

There is no such thing as a house/target curve ;-). The only "target" should be as flat/smooth on AND off axis of your speakers native/onset response. If your speakers already possess this, then indeed "filters" applied would be incorrect. Might make a microphone or some EQ for Dummies program happy, but not your 2 binaural hearing ears.
Don't take my word for it https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...avorite-house-curve.2382/page-25#post-1970927
Click to expand...
I only know what I have watched and read from Mitch Barnett. The corrections I have created with convolution filters needed to have a target or house curve.

I know from listening and reading about the Fletcher-Munson work that flat from 20hz to 20,000hz is not it. That will be totally lifeless.

I am willing to learn. Maybe tuning a room and tuning speakers are different endeavors?
 
crwilli said:
I only know what I have watched and read from Mitch Barnett. The corrections I have created with convolution filters needed to have a target or house curve.
Click to expand...
Oh dear. No wonder you didn't like it.
crwilli said:
I know from listening and reading about the Fletcher-Munson work that flat from 20hz to 20,000hz is not it. That will be totally lifeless.
Click to expand...
FM curves show our varying sensitivity to frequencies at varying levels. It has nothing to do with this. Your speakers, like your source, pre and amp, should have a "flat" or linear/neutral response. You hearing will respond accordingly at different levels. It will recognize "neutral" vs non. You might enjoy a non neutral sound, but that is personal preference, not some arbitrary "target". If you use REW to measure your speakers on/off axis >500hz, where you can get clean data, then you could use that as a basis of "correction" to smoother. Linear response isn't "lifeless", thats audiophile nonsense folklore. Are your source, pre and amps "lifeless" because their response is linear? Of course not. These days its extremely likely your music was produced using "lifeless" monitors FYI.
crwilli said:
I am willing to learn. Maybe tuning a room and tuning speakers are different endeavors?
Click to expand...
Yes. >500Hz +/-, its speakers, below its room dominant. They should be approached separately.
Though in truth, if you're happy with your sound, doing nothing is perfectly fine.
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Oh dear. No wonder you didn't like it.

FM curves show our varying sensitivity to frequencies at varying levels. It has nothing to do with this. Your speakers, like your source, pre and amp, should have a "flat" or linear/neutral response. You hearing will respond accordingly at different levels. It will recognize "neutral" vs non. You might enjoy a non neutral sound, but that is personal preference, not some arbitrary "target". If you use REW to measure your speakers on/off axis >500hz, where you can get clean data, then you could use that as a basis of "correction" to smoother. Linear response isn't "lifeless", thats audiophile nonsense folklore. Are your source, pre and amps "lifeless" because their response is linear? Of course not. These days its extremely likely your music was produced using "lifeless" monitors FYI.

Yes. >500Hz +/-, its speakers, below its room dominant. They should be approached separately.
Though in truth, if you're happy with your sound, doing nothing is perfectly fine.
Click to expand...
Good stuff AJ. If I remember correctly, the house curves have very little ‘correction’ above the ~400Hz level. I think that is largely consistent with what you are suggesting.

Hope to see you again at FLAX and talk more about this stuff. I enjoy the process.
 
crwilli said:
Good stuff AJ. If I remember correctly, the house curves have very little ‘correction’ above the ~400Hz level. I think that is largely consistent with what you are suggesting.

Hope to see you again at FLAX and talk more about this stuff. I enjoy the process.
Click to expand...
Talk is cheap, I'll demonstrate ;-). See you then, take care till Craig.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top