DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
2013 VW CC
Joined
·
114 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I can’t seem find the thread I once read about using 31 bands to fine tune the center image.
Can someone direct me to the post? Or give a quick rundown?

Is it as simple as it sounds? Play each of the 31 bands. Then raise or lower one side to center it?

if it needs to go right slightly would I lower the left or raise the right?

after all said and done will this throw off the measurement when measuring all the drivers together?
Thank you all
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
 

·
Registered
2013 VW CC
Joined
·
114 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
THATS THE ONE!! thank you so much!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
Keep in mind - that thread was from 2007, before everyone had DSPs, RTAs, measurement MICs and parametric EQ. :) Nowdays, you'd just use REW to get your response to match a target curve and get left and right to match. Once you do that, all of the frequencies will be perfectly centered without any "guessing" by adjusting 31 graphic EQ sliders "by ear". I just think that an RTA would be a much more accurate way to accomplishing this.

At least that is my opinion. Curious to hear what others think.
 

·
Registered
2013 VW CC
Joined
·
114 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Oh that’s true and I didn’t think about that. It’s pretty focused as it is. I hear a slight shift to the left sometimes when a female sings certain frequencies. That’s what got me thinking about this. Maybe I’m hearing it shift around the crossover frequency?

It seems this could be a way to slightly tweak the center. I did check and most bands were centered.... I just didn’t want to go adjusting and throw everything off.

I agree about using REW. But my issue is using the ear to ear technique unless you are a robot and put the mic and move it in the very exact same location and motion the results can vary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,090 Posts
Agreed but that’s why you take averages while measuring. I usually do like 16 or so while moving the mic and it takes the variances into account. Also your head is not perfectly still and in the same place so the averages work pretty well. Even if you get it dead on with the 31 band when you move your head or seat that changes slightly. I don’t think it makes a ton of difference but it seems that it would.
I imagine that it would be difficult in the competition world because everyone is different heights and sit different in a car. What would be the ultimate sweet spot for one person will not be for another.

sorry, I ramble. But the averages seem to be our friend. Then take into account the technique for the minidsp 8x12 using up to 12 or 16 different measurement locations in the car. Lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
I wouldn't hesitate to adjust something by ear if you definitely hear an issue with certain freqs - I mean nobody has "perfect" hearing, so it's entirely possible that while the measurement MIC measures everything as being the same level for left and right speakers, your ears may not actually hear all freqs the same in both your left and right ear.

I just don't think I'd use the "by ear" method as my main adjustment method. I'd use a MIC and RTA and then adjust only what really needs adjusted to compensate for our imperfect hearing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,379 Posts
I disagree somewhat. While it's nice to have all the latest tools (I do have and use them), there's one that's most important and also unique to each individual... your ears. Use the fancy tools to check & set things that's not so obvious to pinpoint. However, your hearing matters as well (ever viewed the left/right results of a hearing test?). Using 1/3 octave band pink noise as noted in that thread allows you to to include your actual hearing albeit it'll be more customized to the individual.

Man & Machine... Power Extreme!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,873 Posts
The trouble with only using your ears in this case is that you will almost certainly boost some frequencies to match the other side, when lowering the other side would have brought you closer to the curve. Doing this by ear can get left and right pretty close to each other, but it isn't very effective at getting the response to match a house curve. I think setting L/R EQ using an RTA, then adjusing by ear makes a lot more sense than hoping that you can match the curve just your ears.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,379 Posts
You should never use just one. Jtrosky somewhat suggested that was the case when mentioning the year that thread was created and the lack of DSP. However, that lack of DSP wasn't that extreme and it is still a good if not essential technique to use to this day as he also suggested later.

I believe we're all saying the same.. agreeing that it's best to use every tool at disposal including your ears.

Man & Machine... Power Extreme!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,873 Posts
You should never use just one. Jtrosky somewhat suggested that was the case when mentioning the year that thread was created and the lack of DSP. However, that lack of DSP wasn't that extreme and it is still a good if not essential technique to use riu this day as he also suggested later.

I believe we're all saying the same.. agreeing that it's best to use every tool at disposal including your ears.

Man & Machine... Power Extreme!
I agree, you don't have to buy a mic and use an RTA to get pretty good results, but there are some definite advantages with using an RTA, if you have access to one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
Agreed. I think the reason that I tend to rely on measurements first is simply because "by ear" adjustments are very "subjective", whereas "by mic" measurements are much more "objective". Even our mood can change the way we hear things, so I just prefer the rely on measurements to get me most of the way there and then adjust if/as needed by ear from there. MIC measurements will be much more consistent compared to "by ear" measurements. I also feel that MIC measurements allow me to "visualize" how certain changes affect the sound better than my ears alone could. It's easier to compare changes via MIC measurements that is by ear (IMO).

But yes, I completely agree that we need to to use all tools available to us.

Also, and this is probably a big one - I think noob's like myself tend to rely on measurements more than more experienced folks - simply because a lot of times, us noobs don't really know what to listen for - so being able to "see" a measurement and compare it to measurements from systems tuned by those more experienced than us, does help us learn what "ballpark" our measurements should be in - and helps us learn to tune better. At least I think it does. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,873 Posts
Agreed. I think the reason that I tend to rely on measurements first is simply because "by ear" adjustments are very "subjective", whereas "by mic" measurements are much more "objective". Even our mood can change the way we hear things, so I just prefer the rely on measurements to get me most of the way there and then adjust if/as needed by ear from there. MIC measurements will be much more consistent compared to "by ear" measurements. I also feel that MIC measurements allow me to "visualize" how certain changes affect the sound better than my ears alone could. It's easier to compare changes via MIC measurements that is by ear (IMO).

But yes, I completely agree that we need to to use all tools available to us.

Also, and this is probably a big one - I think noob's like myself tend to rely on measurements more than more experienced folks - simply because a lot of times, us noobs don't really know what to listen for - so being able to "see" a measurement and compare it to measurements from systems tuned by those more experienced than us, does help us learn what "ballpark" our measurements should be in - and helps us learn to tune better. At least I think it does. :)
And, us experienced enthusiasts still use measurements because we've learned how tough it is to make adjustments without starting with a pretty smooth response. If you have a pre-tuned, jagged response, it's tough to pinpoint which problems need attention. If you have a decently smooth response it's much easier to hear the adjustments you make to certain frequencies/sides.

Let's say you have a 5 gallon bucket full of Lego, and you dump them on the floor. Now you have to find the only blue 2x2 in the whole bucket. This is a real pain. But, if you first sort by color, you'll have a much easier time finding your piece. It's tough to make adjustments by ear when the frequency response is as much of a mess as the pile of unorganized Lego on the floor.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top