Trying to get my room out of the way

[newlash09]

Hi all.....

( Iam completely new to how DSP & active crossovers work, so please go easy on me )

I have been trying different amps and different speakers in my listening room. The different amps are Marantz SR6011 (warm amp ), Sony STR-DN850 ( bright amp ) & Bluesound powernode ( Neutral ). The speakers are QA Concept 40's ( slightly laid back ) and Audiopro floor standers ( very pacy and rythmic , but over powering bass). And iam convinced that irrespective of the amp+speaker pairing, all iam ever hearing is my room. Because everything sounds similar, with lots of bassboom.

So, after reading posts here on DSP, was planning on getting a DDRC-22D. Source would be from a bluesound node2. I was planning on buying an integrated amp to drive them for stereo duties, And they would also be used for HT from pre-outs of my surround amp.

Once on the miniDsp website, I saw that they had active crossovers and single channel amps, upto 250W class-D amplification per channel.

1). So, this got me thinking if I could use the Dirac room correction to adjust the signal to suit my room.

2). Then split the audio frequncies with their active crossover into 2, at a cross over frequency of 2300Hz as per my speaker specs.

3) Then use 4 poweramps to drive the 4 drivers ( 2 mid bass & 1 tweeter per speaker ).

4) The total cost will be

- DDRC-22D = 800$

- 350$ per 250W poweramp x 4 nos = 1400$

- Could'nt find the price of their active crossover online. It could be in-built in the DDRC-22D or might cost another 400$ extra.

- Total price of the build will be 2600$ or 2080 sterling.

Iam aware that I could go the active speaker route for the same money with spectacular results. Or I could go with the "ELAC Element Series EA101EQ-G Integrated Amplifier" which does something similar for not a lot of money at $700. However, my reasons for proposing the above are as follows :

1. The speakers will also be the front speakers in my HT setup in my living room. So aesthetics are very important.

2. I don't need an amplifier urgently. So, I can take my time to save the required money, and buy each component as and when my budget permits. And end up with a high quality system, that I cannot buy outright considering the price.

3. The ELAC elemental amp's DSP might not be as thorough as the DIRAC system. But mainly it doesnt have pre-outs to add external poweramps if required.

So, my biggest doubt is, by implementing the above plan, and using the bi-wiring posts of the Concept40 speakers, will I be bypassing the inbuilt cross over completely. Did some reading on the subject and this is what i found :

" In a bi-wire/amp-able speaker the crossover is split into 2 physically separate circuits - one attached between the high frequency binding posts and tweeter which filters out the low frequencies and one between the LF binding posts and the woofer to filter out the high frequencies. The link plates between the binding posts ensure that the signal reaches both from a single set of cables. In my experience bi-amping is worth it " - By Mr.Dan Turner.

1) Is the above applicable to the concept 40's.

2) And are there any other things, that I need to bear in mind.

3) Iam also not certain if the active crossover is implemented in the digital domain. If it is in the digital domain, then i might need 4 Audiolab M-dac's to route to the 4 poweramps. And this will kind of blow things out of proportion and i will have to shelve the whole thing or use miniDSP's own DAC's.

Thanks for your time....cheers

 

[drummerman]

DSP seems to be the flavor of the month.

Whilst I understand that most systems benefit from some optimization I do wonder if we don't make to big a deal of it. I have never yet had a room where I couldn't get a decent enjoyable sound with a bit of fine tuning.

The other side of it is that you could place your Hifi in the garden for an experiment.

No reflections etc but my guess is you would soon crave those imperfections that annoyed you previously in your room such as boundary reinforcement.

 

[chelstondave]

If you are troubled by bass boom have you kept the speakers away from the back wall or tried bungs in the reflex ports

 

[ellisdj]

If you are troubled by bass boom have you kept the speakers away from the back wall or tried bungs in the reflex ports

Both of those tactics are typical hifi things to do - what makes that the correct approach?

To me that is the wrong approach in 99% of cases

Bunging the ports completely changes the bass output of the speaker - leaning the sound right out I bet in 99% of speakers. Why would you want to do that because there is one region of the bass that is a problem - you ruin all the bass as a last resort to try and compensate for that one problem that is not a fix or a sensible tactic at all. Glossing over a very big crack

Same as moving speakers out away from boundaries - what does that do?

It may give the impression of space - but its very probably going to be at the expense of upper bass and lower mid range and increased chance of SBIR unless you are very lucky. Technically its the worst thing to do for bass unless the room is huge.

The op is doing the best thing in terms of going down this route to address the issue not overlook it.

However I would suggest start by looking at what your room is doing - use REW and see what sound you have now. Then you can make an informed approach to improvement.

 

[shadders]

If you are troubled by bass boom have you kept the speakers away from the back wall or tried bungs in the reflex ports

Both of those tactics are typical hifi things to do - what makes that the correct approach?

To me that is the wrong approach in 99% of cases

Bunging the ports completely changes the bass output of the speaker - leaning the sound right out I bet in 99% of speakers. Why would you want to do that because there is one region of the bass that is a problem - you ruin all the bass as a last resort to try and compensate for that one problem that is not a fix or a sensible tactic at all. Glossing over a very big crack

Same as moving speakers out away from boundaries - what does that do?

It may give the impression of space - but its very probably going to be at the expense of upper bass and lower mid range and increased chance of SBIR unless you are very lucky. Technically its the worst thing to do for bass unless the room is huge.

The op is doing the best thing in terms of going down this route to address the issue not overlook it.

However I would suggest start by looking at what your room is doing - use REW and see what sound you have now. Then you can make an informed approach to improvement.

Hi,

Blocking the ports and moving the speakers away from the room is cheap.

Blocking the ports with a hard material, or with dense material will effectively turn the speaker into a sealed enclosure. You will reduce the bass - increase the cut off frequency where the speaker starts to roll off in the bass. There may be a slight amplitude reduction in the bass. So, you can then move the speaker closer to the wall.

You could use less dense material - such as low density fibre wool - or other similar.

If the floor is reflective - place some rugs on the floor.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[chelstondave]

If you are troubled by bass boom have you kept the speakers away from the back wall or tried bungs in the reflex ports

Both of those tactics are typical hifi things to do - what makes that the correct approach?

To me that is the wrong approach in 99% of cases

Bunging the ports completely changes the bass output of the speaker - leaning the sound right out I bet in 99% of speakers.  Why would you want to do that because there is one region of the bass that is a problem - you ruin all the bass as a last resort to try and compensate for that one problem that is not a fix or a sensible tactic at all.  Glossing over a very big crack

Same as moving speakers out away from boundaries - what does that do?

It may give the impression of space - but its very probably going to be at the expense of upper bass and lower mid range and increased chance of SBIR unless you are very lucky.  Technically its the worst thing to do for bass unless the room is huge.

The op is doing the best thing in terms of going down this route to address the issue not overlook it. 

However I would suggest start by looking at what your room is doing - use REW and see what sound you have now.  Then you can make an informed approach to improvement.

The op seems to have tried several different systems and not got the sound he wants. It seems to me that before he throws more money at the problem, and his potential solutions include one costing £2000 and another of buying 4 m-dacs, then it is worthwhile ensuring that he has eliminated a possible free one first before he parts with any more cash

 

[ellisdj]

A 50hz wavelength is 22 feet long.
What is a 2inch rug on the floor going to do to that??

The rug is also probably in the middle of the room the low pressure area so its doing even less than nothing.

Bung the ports reducing the bass output especially at the low end move the speakers back towards the wall and you think all will be bass well - come off it.

You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?

 

[shadders]

A 50hz wavelength is 22 feet long. What is a 2inch rug on the floor going to do to that??

The rug is also probably in the middle of the room the low pressure area so its doing even less than nothing.

Bung the ports reducing the bass output especially at the low end move the speakers back towards the wall and you think all will be bass well - come off it.

You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?

Hi,

Placing rugs on the floor will reduce reflections - will not be an anechoic chamber - but it will help.

Placing material in the ports is a known and well used method to reduce bass. No harm in trying, and if it works to an acceptable level - then great - money saved.

You stated "You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?" - so you may not have 20dB swings. Who knows.

The rear port is reflecting from the rear wall - so gradual movement coupled with port obscuring may help obtain similar effect (to the listener) without much outlay.

I do not see why we should dismiss obvious and standard methods if they achieve the benefits required.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[ellisdj]

A 50hz wavelength is 22 feet long. What is a 2inch rug on the floor going to do to that??

The rug is also probably in the middle of the room the low pressure area so its doing even less than nothing.

Bung the ports reducing the bass output especially at the low end move the speakers back towards the wall and you think all will be bass well - come off it.

You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?

Hi,

Placing rugs on the floor will reduce reflections - will not be an anechoic chamber - but it will help.

Placing material in the ports is a known and well used method to reduce bass. No harm in trying, and if it works to an acceptable level - then great - money saved.

You stated "You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?" - so you may not have 20dB swings. Who knows.

The rear port is reflecting from the rear wall - so gradual movement coupled with port obscuring may help obtain similar effect (to the listener) without much outlay.

I do not see why we should dismiss obvious and standard methods if they achieve the benefits required.

Regards,

Shadders.

Its not a case of who knows Shadders you can and should know - then you will see how the mentioned tactics quite clearly dont work comprehensively.

 

[shadders]

A 50hz wavelength is 22 feet long. What is a 2inch rug on the floor going to do to that??

The rug is also probably in the middle of the room the low pressure area so its doing even less than nothing.

Bung the ports reducing the bass output especially at the low end move the speakers back towards the wall and you think all will be bass well - come off it.

You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?

Hi,

Placing rugs on the floor will reduce reflections - will not be an anechoic chamber - but it will help.

Placing material in the ports is a known and well used method to reduce bass. No harm in trying, and if it works to an acceptable level - then great - money saved.

You stated "You may have 20db swings in the bass at the mlp and thats accepteble as a sound ethusiast?" - so you may not have 20dB swings. Who knows.

The rear port is reflecting from the rear wall - so gradual movement coupled with port obscuring may help obtain similar effect (to the listener) without much outlay.

I do not see why we should dismiss obvious and standard methods if they achieve the benefits required.

Regards,

Shadders.

Its not a case of who knows Shadders you can and should know - then you will see how the mentioned tactics quite clearly dont work comprehensively.

Hi,

There is no harm in trying with the port bung and speaker position. Quick, cheap, and easy and may give the listener acceptable results.

Is the fine grained DSP option better - yes. Can the port blocking offer acceptable results - possibly. Just because the frequency response is not perfect, doesn't mean the listener will have less enjoyment.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[shadders]

Shadders there is no harm in trying anything - if something can improve sound then its worth trying - see where that is going.

However using this tactic will never acheive the bass quality that is possible - never

Hi,

No one has said that you can replicate DSP granularity and control with port blocking or speaker placement. People are proposing a cheaper alternative where the listener may have similar benefits - reduced bass.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[ellisdj]

Shadders there is no harm in trying anything - if something can improve sound then its worth trying - see where that is going.

However using this tactic will never acheive the bass quality that is possible - never

Is DSP better - in an ideal world probably not - but we dont live in that

 

[ellisdj]

And I am saying that is bad advice and a bad tactic.

What the op is doing is much better - to then advise to him to move the speakers or bung the ports is bad advice. Its just glossing over a Massive crack. Might sound alright for this song - next song sounds terrible

Dont worry blame the recording which is BS

 

[shadders]

And I am saying that is bad advice and a bad tactic.

What the op is doing is much better - to then advise to him to move the speakers or bung the ports is bad advice. Its just glossing over a Massive crack. Might sound alright for this song - next song sounds terrible

Dont worry blame the recording which is BS

Hi,

It is not bad advice if the listener is happy with the results. Blocking the ports is effectively modifying the loudspeaker to a sealed enclosure. So, it is not bad advice. There are many sealed enclosure speakers on the market.

If the listener is happy with the change then how can it be bad advice.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[insider9]

I'm in the process of something quite similar though at a smaller budget.

One thing to note is that you will certainly not need such powerful amp. Active crossovers are much more efficient hence the power required is lower. For tweeters you'd only ever need a couple of watts output.

 

[ellisdj]

It is bad advice - good advice is to measure, see and fix - not hope and prey

 

[shadders]

It is bad advice - good advice is to measure, see and fix - not hope and prey

Hi,

It is not bad advice - it is an alternative solution. If the listener likes it - then great - no money spent. If not, then they can invest in the DSP solution.

Blocking the ports has been done for decades - before DSP was available. It is a cheap and effective solution - maybe not optimal - but that depends listener.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[DocG]

I'm in the process of something quite similar though at a smaller budget.

One thing to note is that you will certainly not need such powerful amp. Active crossovers are much more efficient hence the power required is lower. For tweeters you'd only ever need a couple of watts output.

And more good news: you won't need 4 Mdacs. Using a DSP cross-over, you'll need one stereo dac for treble and one for mid-bass. Having said that, the MiniDSP's dac could be perfectly acceptable. Dedicated DACs should not be your priority.

As for your question about the Concept 40's crossover and biamping, I'm not sure. Maybe you can ask Q Acoustics, or maybe the schematics are on the net. But possibly, you'll have to take the passive cross-over out of the cabinet and connect the drivers directly.

 

[ellisdj]

Just because something has been done for decades doesnt make it right - its been done wrong for decades simple as that and could have been done much better

I am not saying sealing an enclosure is a bad thing for a speaker - thats a design consideration but lets not confuse that with the issue here.

The issue mentioned here is boomy bass - which is caused by room modal issues and bass ringing

The tactic of bunging the ports is to try an reduce the volume of the problem freq - thats fine - but what about all the other frequency you dont want to change? What is the overall effect of bunging the ports - likely making the overall situation no better likely worse just to try and fix one thing.

And to make matters worse that advice is all pure guess work. Why would any one advise this tactic when you dont have to? Would you accept guess work in the engineering of any of the boxes you buy - but you accept guess work for the sound you are actually hearing?

 

[shadders]

Just because something has been done for decades doesnt make it right - its been done wrong for decades simple as that and could have been done much better

I am not saying sealing an enclosure is a bad thing for a speaker - thats a design consideration but lets not confuse that with the issue here.

The issue mentioned here is boomy bass - which is caused by room modal issues and bass ringing

The tactic of bunging the ports is to try an reduce the volume of the problem freq - thats fine - but what about all the other frequency you dont want to change? What is the overall effect of bunging the ports - likely making the overall situation no better likely worse just to try and fix one thing.

And to make matters worse that advice is all pure guess work. Why would any one advise this tactic when you dont have to? Would you accept guess work in the engineering of any of the boxes you buy - but you accept guess work for the sound you are actually hearing?

Hi,

It has not been done wrong for decades - it is an alternative method. Blocking the ports will effectively turn the speaker into a sealed enclosure. This means that the extended frequency response provided by the port in the bass region will be reduced.

There will be a frequency range that is the problem, not one specific frequency - example - if 60Hz is a problem, so is 61Hz, and 62Hz etc. As you increase in frequency, then these modes/issues are reduced - and the port blocking effect is negligible on the final sound.

You are guessing that the solution is no better or worse. Let the listener decide.

It is not guesswork - sealed enclosures are not guess work - they have a known response. It is a cheap method to achieve a result that the listener may accept/enjoy. The enclosure already has copious amounts of fibre wool, adding more just changes the response in the bass region - that is why the designers add it.

Let the listener try it and see if they like it.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Vladimir]

Butchering domestic hi-fi speakers and stacking up amps and cables to get some bodged improvisation of an active setup with room DSP seems daft, especially at those prices. To solve a 70Hz room mode? No way dude. Get some headphones or bass lean and punchy speakers, or keep experimenting with speaker positioning (on all 3 axis).

 

[andyjm]

It is refereshing to see this forum finally move into the 21st century.

Mechanical systems suck. I am a car enthusiast and have a couple of 60's sportscars. People forget how dreadful engines were before the advent of engine management systems. They won't start, cough and splutter when they are cold, miss and run rough when they are hot. Power delivery is uneven, with flatspots and 'harry and willy'.

I have a little modern mini that I run around in. Starts first go, no hesitation or rough running at any speed or any temeperature. Economical, and easy to drive.

The difference is electronic control of a mechanical system.

Speakers are no different. Frankly its a miracle they work as well as they do, but they are a mechanical system in a room that the speaker designer has never seen - and room effects are all powerful. No wonder the OP has bass issues.

DSP solutions are the obvious way to go. Cheap, accurate and reliable. The only caveat is that DSP can't fill a null, but within the limitations of the room and the equipment, DSP will allow you to experience the best that your setup can deliver.

 

[Frank Harvey]

DSP seems to be the flavor of the month.

Whilst I understand that most systems benefit from some optimization I do wonder if we don't make to big a deal of it. I have never yet had a room where I couldn't get a decent enjoyable sound with a bit of fine tuning.

The other side of it is that you could place your Hifi in the garden for an experiment.

No reflections etc but my guess is you would soon crave those imperfections that annoyed you previously in your room such as boundary reinforcement.

I mostly agree with this post.

At this point, we don't know how bad (or good) your room is. You say you need EQ, but we don't know that, so until we know more about your room, we can't really advise any further. I don't use any room treatment (although my room is moderately damped due to the amount of crap in it), and I don't use any room EQ at the moment either. My system sounds great. Will EQ improve my system? Yes, of course it will, as all rooms have issues, but it is the extent of those issues and our reliance on being able to detect those issues that really points to whether we the system just needs a bit of tweaking, or whether digital EQ is the only way forward.

Room issues aside, a system should still sound good - if it doesn't, it's doing something wrong. Your system is providing the signal quality, your room is only shaping it. In my view, adding EQ to a substandard system is like the usual saying, "polishing a turd". So first, you have to assess the quality of the system itself. I'm in no way casting any aspersions on your system there, just making a generalisation to illustrate a point

I have been trying different amps and different speakers in my listening room. The different amps are Marantz SR6011 (warm amp ), Sony STR-DN850 ( bright amp ) & Bluesound powernode ( Neutral ). The speakers are QA Concept 40's ( slightly laid back ) and Audiopro floor standers ( very pacy and rythmic , but over powering bass). And iam convinced that irrespective of the amp+speaker pairing, all iam ever hearing is my room. Because everything sounds similar, with lots of bassboom.

If you're getting a lot of bass boom regardless, I'd firstly look at smaller standmount speakers rather than floorstanders. Chances are you're exciting room modes with them, and that is what you're hearing. If these issues are predominantly below 100Hz, you can let the sub or subs take care of that area and EQ them - all subs will need EQing to produce a flatter in-room response, midrange frequencies generally don't need EQing once you've taken care of the su frequencies, unless you've got a real awkward room.

From a personal point of view, I don't want to be messing about too much with the sound that is supposed to coming from my speakers - applying EQ to get a flat response at your listening position can massively change that, which is why you don't see this method in studios (they'll normally take the room treatment route). I don't mind removing any nasty bass peaks out of the signal, as they'll be masking information elsewhere, as long as I can do that within the same digital domain that has come from the Bluray. I'd rather not add in an analogue to digital conversion in order to do this, then have to convert back to analogue again. It's unnecessary.

I also find some people use EQ systems incorrectly. The better EQ systems allow full user configuration (like DIRAC), but the lesser ones tend to EQ everything to a preset curve. It's this type of preset curve that removes the characteristic reasons that you bought your speakers for in the first place. At least with DIRAC you can retain any peaks or troughs higher up in the frequency range that were made intentionally by the manufacturer, so at least after improving your in-room response, your speakers will still sound like the speakers you bought.

[/quote]

 

[ellisdj]

Shadders you describe the situation there perfectly and the problem

Bass problem is 60hz approx - but you dont actually know that for sure obviously, cant tell that by ear - saying we do know that is the problem. You seal the speaker and that reduces the bass at 60hz by 10db and reduces the boom somewhhat - thats great

But and its a very big But - what about 50hz and 40hz and 30hz and 70hz and 80hz etc that are all reduced as well as a result of sealing the speaker - we have affected all the other bass trying to reduce just one small range of it??

And thats assuming we have perfect bass to start with and only 1 problem - but that is never the case in a normal sized room. Never the case.

In most rooms that I have seen measured the bass problems are horrendous and the bass is horrendously bad. And most of the time overall there is not nearly enough bass - so to try and reduce the bass furher by sealing the speaker to fix just one issue by Pure Guess work - is pointless, bad practice and will result in worse sound not better. Its not a sensible thing to do its an ill informed thing to do and mistake - unless you have measured and checked and confirmed it will fix the problem - I know for a fact bass in a room doesnt work like that - its far from that easy

 

[DocG]

Before going too far in suggesting specific solutions for a problem, we don't actually understand, can I come back to the opening post?

I have been trying different amps and different speakers in my listening room. The different amps are Marantz SR6011 (warm amp ), Sony STR-DN850 ( bright amp ) & Bluesound powernode ( Neutral ). The speakers are QA Concept 40's ( slightly laid back ) and Audiopro floor standers ( very pacy and rythmic , but over powering bass). And iam convinced that irrespective of the amp+speaker pairing, all iam ever hearing is my room. Because everything sounds similar, with lots of bassboom.

A part of the story I'm missing is : where is your listening position? Cos if you were seated really close to the back wall (or a side wall, but that's less likely), about any speaker in combination with any amplifier will sound boomy. That's physics.

So my question is: does the boom get better and worse when you walk through the room? Is it acceptable anywhere?