Anyone tried REW?

[Sliced Bread]

So has anyone tried REW?

Did it improve the sound, when compared to your Auto-calibration?

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Yup.

Not experimented following measurements but not clear.how to make adjustments. Auto is a start but always measure distances and tweak settings manually.

I found REW measurements difficult to interpret.

 

[Sliced Bread]

Yup.

Not experimented following measurements but not clear.how to make adjustments. Auto is a start but always measure distances and tweak settings manually.

I found REW measurements difficult to interpret.

Hmmmm, that's what I feared.

Would like to give it a shot, but it looks like quite a commitment.

 

[ellisdj]

REW is the best tool, everyone should know how to use it.

Most of it is more advanced than you need but just a basic freq sweep shows a lot about how your system is performing in your room.

Great investment time learning how to use it - as i say i feel all should do this

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Can we ask (ellisdj) what yr results.showed and how u adjusted/altered things to improve yr sound on these readings? :cheers:

 

[Sliced Bread]

Sounds interesting. I too would be interested to hear how big the changes were between REW and the auto-calibration.

Also, what were the subjective observations? Was it warmer, filler brighter etc?

Just curious.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

For any not familiar with REW software it gives detailed frequency analysis so that (theoretically) adjustments can be made to smooth or flatten the frequency response within yr specific room. Auto calibration however not only does the analysis but also makes adjustments to the equaliser in order to achieve that flatter response. We can not therefore, 'compare' auto with REW since they do different things. Hence my interest in how REW results lead to making specific adjustments.

 

[ellisdj]

You can use REQ Eq feature to give you filters for an equalizer - thats one tool. I use this to set my filters for my hard knee and to you can adjust the filters and see what the effects will be on the freq response and waterfall (decay very important). This is an excellent tool I have used a lot

You can eq as much or as little as you want - with lots of variable and options to select - personally I think you want as least eq as possible - concentrating on bass frequencies 250hz and down and still using a minimal amoutn of eq to resolve then problems

Another use is looking at your frequency resonse in general, waterfall in general and rt60 to analyse what your room is doing to the sound.

You can then target the problems and see what you are actually hearing and not hearing - its quite shocking actually.

Its particularly useful for best placing a sub in the best spot in the room and ensuring that sub is in phase with the mains - extremely important

Its design I think to help improve room acoustics - you then measure after the see what the change is to quantify the work

Its useful to see what the auto calibration is actually doing or not doing to the overall sound - you would be quite surpirsed I would imagine.

Often graphs used in auto calibration tools are 1/3 smoothed, changes appear more drastic and the picture much rosier - look at the same results with no smoothing or 1/12 smoothing and the picture is very different

 

[RobinKidderminster]

I guess I need to look into rew in more detail. Could do with an illustrated walk through really but I will take another look soon.

 

[Sliced Bread]

There are some manuals on line, but bewarned...they are biiiig.

I've been using the reveb measurement graph in my Pioneer amp and it's quite interesting to read. There is a spike in my room at 250hz on all channels (standing wave?!?), but it is several times higher coming from the centre speaker.

Pioneers graph only covers 9 frequencies, so it would be good to see more detail via REW.

My plan is to use REW to make some changes to the room, then finish off with some EQ to touch things up.