Poor SQ

MacLeod

Morel and DLS are probably my favorite. If I won the lottery tomorrow Id outfit my car with DLS Nobellium.

arun1963

MacLeod wrote: »

I think Ive proven that to be a load of bull over the passed 5 years. With the Polk SR's, Ive competed and beaten pretty much every brand of speaker out there.

Just to set the cat among the pigeons.........

Since tuning is such a huge part of good sound, have you ever wondered what the DLS, Morels, Mille's would sound like in your hands?

Have heard the Morels but not DLS. If you rate the DLS higher wow, I can only imagine what they would sound like.

arun1963

Was going through the thread to see if I had missed anything else and discovered that I'm the only one not learning here. Mac doesn't count, cause there's no one here he can learn off.

So here's a question to Mac.

Not sure, but I think you ran the sr's with the momo sub. Did you feel the sub bass was not as tight as it should be? Is it a power issue? Or are my ears fooling me again?

Obviously, my next question is what was the gain in switching to the sr subs?

Ishouldbeworkin

arun1963 wrote: »

So was it an economist who said something like 'Numbers are like a bikini. They reveal a lot, while hiding the critical stuff'. Poor joke but apt in a twisted way.

Don't tell my advisor, but I think a better bikini joke relating to my research is: Numbers are like a bikini...the more they're off, the better

Set the eq to 0 for all frequencies then measure one driver at a time. Do your mids from like 20-10khz and your tweets from 800-20khz. Put the raw data on a format like the one attached...

Faceplate keeps popping off on my Eclipse CD7200 mkII, so I am replacing that head unit (got a new Alpine one on the way from eBay that should be here by Friday.)

You're right about Bose being a poor ref point. All three issues you mentioned, are linked to your peak at 5-6.3 range, to varying degrees.

I will have to start completely over on my settings after installing the new HU and processor, but I have a good idea where to start now and should be able to get back to the same place soon enough.

MacLeod

arun1963 wrote: »

Just to set the cat among the pigeons.........

Since tuning is such a huge part of good sound, have you ever wondered what the DLS, Morels, Mille's would sound like in your hands?

Have heard the Morels but not DLS. If you rate the DLS higher wow, I can only imagine what they would sound like.

Eh, dont know. Its not really that Im a better tuner than they are necessarily, its more that I work my **** off. I bet I have twice as many tuning hours on my system than the next closest guy. 2 weeks before finals, Im in my car at least 3 hours a day, every day leading up.

Never liked the Hertz speakers.

Not sure, but I think you ran the sr's with the momo sub. Did you feel the sub bass was not as tight as it should be? Is it a power issue? Or are my ears fooling me again?

Not at all. The Momo sub worked just fine. Played the IASCA 18 Hz note and the MECA 21 Hz note with no problem.

Obviously, my next question is what was the gain in switching to the sr subs?

More power handling, greater impact and smoother frequency response.

Ishouldbeworkin

DSkip wrote: »

Also, to Mac, you were breaking down the frequencies and what kind of sound they produce in those ranges. I know a lot of this comes from experience and listening closely, but is there a breakdown guide or anything like that? I had a decent enough approach to doing the EQ, but you having listed them liked that really helped a lot. Once it was pointed out, it really clicked and was much easier to get it where I wanted it.

I think arun1963 posted some tuning sheets on a thread about tweeter placement that might help you here.

arun1963

MacLeod wrote: »

Eh, dont know. Its not really that Im a better tuner than they are necessarily, its more that I work my **** off.

I bet I have twice as many tuning hours on my system than the next closest guy. 2 weeks before finals, Im in my car at least 3 hours a day, every day leading up.

You'll never say that you are great at tuning. That's one of the reasons you're great at it. Having good ears and the hours are ofcourse essential.

That's what is so amazing about this hobby. I can make all the notes, record my settings etc etc, but unless I put in the hours, the sound doesn't get better. At least that's the way it is for me.

MacLeod wrote: »

Never liked the Hertz speakers.

Kinda figured that .

MacLeod wrote: »

Not at all. The Momo sub worked just fine. Played the IASCA 18 Hz note and the MECA 21 Hz note with no problem.

Oh yes they play the 15-50hz range nice and loud, that is not the issue.

MacLeod wrote: »

More power handling, greater impact and smoother frequency response.

That is what I was talking about. Does the SR sub blend better with the sr mid because it has a better freq respone and its pacier?

For some reason I'm fixated on this thought and its messing with my head. Everytime I hear music that has a bit in the sub and mid bass, this thought goes through my head. Maybe I'm just hearing things and slowly going insane. :eek:

arun1963

Ishouldbeworkin wrote: »

Don't tell my advisor, but I think a better bikini joke relating to my research is: Numbers are like a bikini...the more they're off, the better

Ishouldbeworkin wrote: »

Faceplate keeps popping off on my Eclipse CD7200 mkII, so I am replacing that head unit (got a new Alpine one on the way from eBay that should be here by Friday.

Ok, which model?

Ishouldbeworkin wrote: »

I will have to start completely over on my settings after installing the new HU and processor, but I have a good idea where to start now and should be able to get back to the same place soon enough.

Yeah, but how would you know if the same place is the right place to start from? JK, but yeah do post the L/R numbers so that we can help you with balancing things. Then you can take up the level matching bit.

DSkip wrote: »

How did you two set up your tweeters? Were they both firing at the drivers seat, or were they hitting opposite seats? I couldn't really care less how it sounds to a passenger at this point. No one I know would ever tell a difference I don't think. Hopefully this weekend I will begin making custom pods for my tweets and wanted a little input..

They are still in temp mount on the dash like the pic I posted. However they are more on axis though. The near side tweet is firing at the far side B pillar and the far tweet is firing to the drivers window about 6-8" in from the B pillar on my side. I'm about 85% where I want to be, so I guess its still WIP.

DSkip wrote: »

I did get some answers for the tweeters from one of those thread. What I was more interested in was not so much tuning, but descriptive terms of different frequency ranges. Mac's post was the first time I heard of sibilance. It sounds silly to want that, but it seemed to help me quite a bit having those descriptive terms when tuning.

Will try and post a bit on this, once I'm home.

jay27

MacLeod wrote: »

Morel and DLS are probably my favorite. If I won the lottery tomorrow Id outfit my car with DLS Nobellium.

I always figured that those who have had success competing like you have would have companies lined up to sponsor and give you the equipment for free.

With the SR line going away, will you switch all of your Polk gear out to go with another company?

arun1963

You have a hole in your upper mid/highs between 2-5khz. Try and avoid gaps between your xover points.

Ishouldbeworkin

arun1963 wrote: »

Ok, which model?

It's a DVA-9861. I don't plan to use it for dvd's, but it didn't seem like any of the newer Alpine CD units had optical outputs, with the exception of the F1-status, which is way too expensive for me right now. The remote for tuning my AudioControl DQS EQ would have cost over $200, so instead I got a pxa-h701 to go with my new head unit. I figured eliminating some wires might reduce some of my noise issues. (Though I know some of those issues will be related to my power/ground wiring which will also be redone.) Now I need to figure out how long of a fiber optic cable to order, since it might be hard to find a decent quality one over a few feet here. I can tell you though that I am not looking forward to tearing my trunk apart since I wasn't the one who built the enclosure.

arun1963

Yes I know, I've read that thread many, many, times and picked up tons from it. But I think maybe that was Dan's setting.

I think that thread will answer all your questions. Right from tweet angles, to balancing for L/R, to level matching, to what each frequency does, to limitations etc. For me to rehash all that would just not be right.

However, I have attached Mac's tuning sheet from '08 finals. We can walk thru the sheet and see how he sets things up. Project for tmrw.

g'nite

arun1963

DSkip wrote: »

It was something Mac had been trying in that post. I like the results other than the hollowness. I'll mess around with some different crossover points today.

Yes I know, I've read that thread many, many, times and picked up tons from it. But I think maybe that was Dan's setting.

I think that thread will answer all your questions. Right from tweet angles, to balancing for L/R, to level matching, to what each frequency does, to limitations etc. For me to rehash all that would just not be right.

However, I have attached Mac's tuning sheet from '08 finals. We can walk thru the sheet and see how he sets things up. Project for tmrw.

g'nite

jay27

arun1963 wrote: »

Yes I know, I've read that thread many, many, times and picked up tons from it. But I think maybe that was Dan's setting.

I think that thread will answer all your questions. Right from tweet angles, to balancing for L/R, to level matching, to what each frequency does, to limitations etc. For me to rehash all that would just not be right.

However, I have attached Mac's tuning sheet from '08 finals. We can walk thru the sheet and see how he sets things up. Project for tmrw.

g'nite

Do you know where the tweeter/midbass placement was for these settings? Also, would you need to have the identical gear (amps/processor/hu) to achieve somewhat similar results?

arun1963

jay27 wrote: »

Do you know where the tweeter/midbass placement was for these settings? Also, would you need to have the identical gear (amps/processor/hu) to achieve somewhat similar results?

By seperating or overlapping your drivers at the xover points, you are basically trying to resolve an existing peak or null issue around the xover point. This is better addressed with with either the eq, or changing the xover point or slope. Solving a peak or a null by creating another elsewhere, is one possible solution, just not the best one.

IIRC Dan ran his miids in the doors and his tweets under the dash. Stage height would be an issue. The effect of overlapping / seperating would be simmilar (not same) for all equipment.

hc_416

you have to much power going to the tweeters and mids, also I like to keep the x-over around 12db so you can get a good mix with the next driver, when you swith to the alpine face you will only get "5" volts and should hear a reduction in sound. If not you have your amp set to high, also don't try to give the spearkers to much if you do you won't get want you want. I learned this the hard way, either spend the money to get the sound or be happy with what you got, don't forget you can get all the graphs you want but you have to be happy with the sound. First look up the specs on the speaker, then the amp and the the face, match them up, Also one word of advice, you have to many compents hooked up if you get the alpine 9887 or the inprint for the DVD player, you can set the the crossover thought limited and get a paramatic eq. The reason I say this is for the fact less concontions= better sound.

arun1963

I owe a post. Just need to put it together in my head and get some time to puy it down. Almost there.

Hey, ISBW, did you get your dvd hu? how does it shape up?

Ishouldbeworkin

Haven't got the dvd HU yet. UPS says i should by Monday , so probably a week before i have it hooked up at least since I still havent figured out what length of fiber optic cable to get yet. I did get the pxa-H701 though, but won't hook it up until i do the HU as well.

Got some new upholstery material to work on some interior upgrades while I wait though. Someday I will start posting pics:P

arun1963

Measure the distance from your back of your hu along the path you plan to run the toslink. Mount the processor near the amp so that you have run short rca's. Thats what Mac does. Whatever length you come up with, add like a couple of feet to it just in case.

MacLeod

I really only did that because it made running wires MUCH easier having everything lying right next to each other and Im really lazy. I just use the "short RCA's for no noise" because it sounds good. I ran 18' RCA's in my Dodge Ram and never had any noise issues.

MacLeod

Absolutely! No question.

arun1963

Do you mean the stage on the far side has more impact than the near side? When you say 'image is well centred', do you mean in front of you or centred at the somewhere near the rear view mirror? Can you set your eq for left and right side independently?

Yes it is possible to move the centre stage around a bit and yes you can have better balanced impact on both sides. But you need seperate L/R control on your eq for this this.

I owe a post on Macs sheet. I have covered a bit on this topic there. Man, writing that post was waaaay tougher than I thought it would be. I've re written the damn 2 pages on word like 4 times. Just another example of how the sq chase keeps knocking you on your a$$, everytime you get ahead of yourself. Love it.

I will get it wrapped up and posted today.

arun1963

DSkip wrote: »

Right now its centered pretty much between me and the rear view mirror, probably closer to me than the mirror.

Thats fine just leave it there. If you don't have L/R control, trying to dial in the centre stage around the rear view may actually cost you in terms of tonality. I'd stay focused on tonality.

DSkip wrote: »

I still have some issues w/ the sound being pulled down when the higher frequencies are absent, I just figured this was normal.

Yes it is. Height cues are 2khz and upwards. So if you're listening to a track that doesnt have much in the 5+ range, your stage height is going to be a bit lower.

DSkip wrote: »

I can't do my EQ L/R separately with my HU. Its more about the width I guess is the term that was used. For instance, when listening to Pink Floyd or Tool, I get the sound effects happening around me fairly well, except for the left side.

This could also be a TA issue. Play with the delay on your near mid a bit. See if that helps.

Don't know if you can do this, but cut your tweets and first play your sub and only the far side mid, then sub and near side mid. On which side is the bass stronger? If its much stronger on the far side, chances are the lower end is getting pulled to the far side. Thats why you feel there is more impact from the far side.

If this is the case, play your near side mid and your sub and tweak the TA for the near mid till get get a bit more impact. Now cut the sub and tweak the far mid to fall in phase with the near mid. You may find that this has pulled the image a bit more towards you, but the impact from the two sides would be better balanced.

arun1963

Something tells me you're getting hooked on this.

arun1963

This is not going to fit in one post.

I figure, it took me a good eighteen months and over 2,000 hours to realize what Macs tuning sheet was all about. A huge chunk of that time was spent just wandering around aimlessly. Funny thing was, that I was given everything on a platter, I was just too dumb to absorb it and put it together sooner.

Macs sheet is about a great mix of balance and impact. That’s what gives the sound amazing grace and makes it ‘live-er’. I’m not hearing it ‘live-er’ and probably won’t, till I get a processor and devote some serious time to managing reflections etc. However, I’m kinda close enough to appreciate what it would sound like.

The first thing one notices is that after balancing for left/right and level matching, practically everything is attenuated. Mac’s taken maybe 4-6db out of the sound, when compared to running the eq flat. That’s the first and obvious observation.

The other thing you will discover is, that all the settings are linked. Each frequency is set relative to everything else. With sound, everything is linked. What you do at one frequency will impact the frequencies around it and in some cases an octave or two above and below. Everything is linked. So if you boost something, you may have to attenuate something else and then boost something else. It’s all relative. Level matching is about making the frequencies fall into place relative to each other. A quick peek at how the different ranges are set relative to each other.

1. Sub Bass 20-63hz:

The only tuning you do in this range, is to blend it with the front stage. To get a good blend, the xover point has to be set properly. Also don’t cross much higher than 40-60hz. For competition, Mac’s got it crossed at 40hz. With my limitations, 50hz gives a good mix of clarity and impact. Any higher and I lose mid bass and lower midrange clarity, even though I get more impact and for some reason, a slightly higher stage height.

Think of the crossover point as the baton exchange, in a relay race. The guy who’s completing his lap, is slowing down as he hands over the baton to the next guy, who is just breaking into his run. You want this exchange to be as smooth as possible.

Look at 20-80hz on the sheet for sub and mids. The sub runs flat till 63 and is then pinched by 9db’s, 80hz onwards. With the sub cut off at 40hz, it’s starting to roll off around 30hz and by 60hz the sub is already down by about 15db’s. The mids are gradually raised from 20-63hz. At 63, the sr mids are well into their element. I think, the baton exchange is starting at around 50hz and is done by 63hz. Frequencies in this range are sensitive to phase and not to intensity from left/right as seen from the way the mid is set.

2. Mid Bass 70-200hz:

This range is the most sensitive to phase issues. Getting your TA right is critical for this range and to gives stability and cohesion to your image. A common symptom of mids out of phase, is a split stage and image. For L/R intensity, this range is pretty neutral. Except of course at 80 and 160hz. 160hz is much louder from the right, that’s where I sit. The fact that I don’t control this frequency is a huge PITA.

As a range you try and run this level without too much attenuation, but you still need the balance here, for accuracy. If this range is too hot, the sound will be fat and boomy. A bass guitar will sound smooth i/o snappy. If it’s under done, it will be thin. A thin mid bass can make the rest of your sound hollow or overly bright.

80hz gives impact to this range, 100hz gives the range solidity. 200hz is set a touch under 80-100. You don’t want ‘boomy’ issues. If 80 and 200 are hot, you can get Sarah McLachlan to sound like Tracy Chapman. When you pinch down on 200hz a bit it pulls in your stage width a bit. It also adds clarity.

3. Mid Range 300-1.25khz:

There’s another baton exchange happening at the bottom of this range. 200-500 is a range you should tune together. 200-400hz sets the base for 500. If you look at Macs sheet, 60hz, 500-630 and then 5khz are running slightly brighter than everything else on the mid driver. So while everything else is well balanced but a bit muted, setting these frequencies a bit brighter is bringing the whole sound alive.

If you set 500hz a bit brighter but 200-800 isn’t balanced and level matched properly, the sound will have telephone like, from behind a wall quality. Drums will never sound right if this range is out. The range is also important for clarity and solidity of vocals. The sr’s mids have a distinct peak at 800hz. Setting 800-1khz brighter makes the sound tinny. Set 800 a few db’s lower than 500. 1.25khz is another baton exchange between the mid range and the upper mids. It’s also the starting point of sibilance issues.

4. Upper Mids 1.25khz-5khz:

The range 1-3.5khz is where you take out the biggest chunks from your sound. Thanks to all the problems happening in this range. The crappy acoustics, tons of reflective surfaces and the beaming of a 6.5” cone, are all catching up with your sound in this range. That’s the reason this is a heavily attenuated range. Yet this is also a range that is very sensitive to L/R intensity in order to achieve the right balance. Frequencies from this range on, are less affected by phase issues.

All 6.5-7” drivers would beam at around the 2.5-3.25khz range. This is when your near and off axis mid is much weaker that the far side but more on axis mid. If these frequencies aren’t set properly, the far side mid will smear the image towards the near side. So the range 1.25-3.25 khz is heavily attenuated and then 4khz onwards its brought back up. 4-6khz is the upper end of most male vocals.

Setting 5khz a touch brighter raises the impact level of the sound and also pulls the stage out a bit. If this is set too bright it causes listening fatigue. If its set too low and 800-2khz is brighter than it should be you get the ‘aaaaahhhh’ syndrome. This is also the range where your tweets ae makig their presence felt. Having seperate control of these frequencies a.k.a. processor is great for accuracy. Your tweets aren't beaming at 3khz.

contd...2

arun1963

5. The Highs 5khz+:

Yet another reason that the 1-3khz range is pinched down is that the tweets are going to flow into this range and make them brighter. This range is all about balancing for L/R and them leveling. 12khz adds air to the sound and can be set a bit brighter than 8-10kz.

Some things that were missed in the earlier post:

1. 500-1khz also defines the size of your image. You don't want the image to be larger than what you have filled inside it.

2. A shallower slope on the tweet can raise or lower your stage height a bit. On a shallower slope the tweet would play lower and you will need to pinch down a bit at 800-2khz, depending on your xover point.

This post was more to establish the linkages that may help while tuning. I hope this was of some help.

Happy Listening.

TakeTheTime

A lot of good information here.

arun1963

Tks guys but on review its full of holes. Gaps that I should have covered. :rolleyes: By 4 am I just wanted to post the damn thing and be done.

Will update in due course.

MacLeod

Id leave it centered myself. Youre going to have some frequencies hotter on one side and other frequencies hotter on the other side. Playing with the balance probably wont help.

MacLeod

The problem is the EQ'ing. The vocals are heavy to the left because 200-400 are usually hotter on the listeners side. Ill be ya that higher frequencies seem like their coming from the right, because theyre beaming at you since theyre more on axis. Until you get an independent EQ, you wont be able to fix this without physically moving the speakers.