Old 03-18-2021, 04:21 AM   #41
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
Even at that amount, the 'correction' does sound good [better than without]. Pushing any harder than that starts to sound confined and lifeless.
Could possibly be worth doing a before/after sound test using REW (which should be able to load the calibration file for the mic if you download it from the sonarworks site using the code printed on the side of the mic). In my experience over many years, Sonarworks gets me closer to "flat". Possibly you're just super used to whatever the sound of your room and speakers are as-is? Or maybe something went wrong with the calibration.
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2021, 06:39 AM   #42
maxdembo
Human being with feelings
 
maxdembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: All Hallows End
Posts: 1,195
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dub3000 View Post
Possibly you're just super used to whatever the sound of your room and speakers are as-is? Or maybe something went wrong with the calibration.
I find this, but a few minutes and the same old 'getting used to the sound' happens (I only use headphones for Sonarworks), then when I turn it off or come back out into speakers, everything sounds great again.

Tho it must be said, the switch from headphones to speakers is now way less jarring.
maxdembo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2021, 06:56 AM   #43
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dub3000 View Post
COr maybe something went wrong with the calibration.
From my short experience, SW having issues getting the mic in the right spot for the multi-position measurements is a possible clue to an issue with monitor position or angles or, issues with the monitor spacing and distances entered/calculated in the step before that one. Because...

SW is using SPL and SPL differences between speakers to map mic locations, if it has a problem doing that, it's the above or something interfering via reflections etc. so I'm guessing if that step is a PIA there might be something wrong that needs to be fixed before measuring again.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2021, 09:29 AM   #44
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
From my short experience, SW having issues getting the mic in the right spot for the multi-position measurements is a possible clue to an issue with monitor position or angles or, issues with the monitor spacing and distances entered/calculated in the step before that one. Because...

SW is using SPL and SPL differences between speakers to map mic locations, if it has a problem doing that, it's the above or something interfering via reflections etc. so I'm guessing if that step is a PIA there might be something wrong that needs to be fixed before measuring again.
Very true ... and thanks for that reminder.

This time, I did manually override the speaker distance and listening distance.

Didn't do that with my v3 Reading/Calibration [years ago].

With the v3 Cal, I usually found 30% correction to sound most natural. [but I didn't have a 'calibrated' mic at that time. Now I have the factory correction file.

Interestingly, the differences I see in the v3, v4 graphs look quite similar ... minus the correction in the upper spectrum. Where the new Cal mic had a +3dB correction.

Overall, the goal for me is not a Zero flat line response for normal work. For possible 'critical' analysis maybe ... but not for expected listening pleasure/work.

I'll do a re-shoot, and let SW calculate the distances next time.

Granted, I probably ERRORed changing the listening distance. My Monitors are focused 12" behind the Listeners ears [monitors are 52" apart].

Anyway ... thanks for sharing some insights on all this.

Appreciated.
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2021, 12:45 PM   #45
Reflected
Human being with feelings
 
Reflected's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beingmf View Post
Speaker or headphone version?
not sure on both.
__________________
PLEASE Devs: "FX-Container" --> https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=226533
Reflected is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2021, 11:46 PM   #46
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
From my short experience, SW having issues getting the mic in the right spot for the multi-position measurements is a possible clue to an issue with monitor position or angles or, issues with the monitor spacing and distances entered/calculated in the step before that one. Because...

SW is using SPL and SPL differences between speakers to map mic locations, if it has a problem doing that, it's the above or something interfering via reflections etc. so I'm guessing if that step is a PIA there might be something wrong that needs to be fixed before measuring again.
Yeah, it can be difficult to place the mic in each spot. I ended up putting the mic in a mic stand, and clamping the mic stand down on to a small platform with swivel wheels. That worked better then trying to hold the mic.

I bought a cheap behringer ECM8000 mic for this, back when I first got Sonarworks. I think it did a pretty good job. Maybe down the road I might get the Roland mic that they are selling.
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2021, 12:31 AM   #47
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod View Post
Yeah, it can be difficult to place the mic in each spot. I ended up putting the mic in a mic stand, and clamping the mic stand down on to a small platform with swivel wheels. That worked better then trying to hold the mic.
I generally had to hold the mic 5-10 seconds on average for the multi-position test.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2021, 01:23 AM   #48
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

I did some further reading on the SW site ...

In particualar, if one was having troubles with SW finding and locking to the Mic position.

When first shooting, there are 3 choices of 'test tones' ... the 'Default' is not the only choice, and the other choices may work better.

[basically seems to be a different Frequency, rather than the default 1k].

Obviously after my difficulty, we'll be trying a different option.
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2021, 07:17 PM   #49
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
Obviously after my difficulty, we'll be trying a different option.
I also found that you need to set your sound card buffer low, if there is too much latency, it screws with the mic position detection.

Also, concerning my defective mic... After sending audio samples and REW output screenshots to SW, they are going to ship me a new mic so they did good so far.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2021, 07:42 PM   #50
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I also found that you need to set your sound card buffer low, if there is too much latency, it screws with the mic position detection.

Also, concerning my defective mic... After sending audio samples and REW output screenshots to SW, they are going to ship me a new mic so they did good so far.
SC Buffer ... ok ... I'd not read of that before.

I'll be doing another re-shoot, and will test this out.

Thank-you.

Hey ... good to hear about the replacement mic.
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2021, 07:52 PM   #51
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

I may have misremembered. This may be what I remember which is more to do with the speaker distance calculation (between each other) - maybe they meant additional latency.

Quote:
When measuring your speakers, we recommend removing anything unnecessary from the audio chain to avoid affecting the signal or potentially adding latency to it

https://support.sonarworks.com/hc/en...tance-detected
It's also possible I saw it mentioned in some forum or YT video or something concerning jumping mic issue and latency, and just assumed I should set it low to be safe.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2021, 01:15 AM   #52
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I may have misremembered. This may be what I remember which is more to do with the speaker distance calculation (between each other) - maybe they meant additional latency.



It's also possible I saw it mentioned in some forum or YT video or something concerning jumping mic issue and latency, and just assumed I should set it low to be safe.
That's cool ... I'll be checking that out for sure ...

I had the jumping Mic, and although I finally got the position to calibrate, if left me with doubts. [took almost 3 hours to do all positions] !

Yet ... I kept my original 'shoot out' from years back [v3], and the correction response was 'similar' [I'd not expect it to be the same after changes we made].

2. I think I screwed up the initial 'distance' calculations too .... :|

I was reading up on this, and apparently when they say measure each speaker a 1/2" or so from the Woofer cone ... I think I placed it more from the Rim distance [still focused at the cone].

I used a Mic stand during measuring ... but I didn't like putting the mic so close to the cone ... I now made some room to get better position to place the mic that close.

yeah .... and the new mic I had to order !! no longer comes with the wind screen ... oh well ... will be careful.

Still ... I'm bugged. I'm finding that I only like the V4 plugin set at 8% wet/dry [using the Min Phase]. Any more than that [past 10%], and my Reference tracks don't sound as good. At 8%, they so good ... and it sounds 'natural'.

I know this is a 'preference' thing ... and I struggle to think of any Controlroom I been in that was razor flat. I know that sound [via pink noise], and I know what a track plays like when razor flat.

That's fine for analytical work ... but Clients don't want to hear it that way ... they can't relate.

Anyway ... sure appreciate your comments and observations [and too any one else].

This is highly important subject ... like it affects every decision we make.

Obviously, how it plays in the outside world is the only thing to matter.

thanks again
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2021, 07:23 AM   #53
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post

I was reading up on this, and apparently when they say measure each speaker a 1/2" or so from the Woofer cone ... I think I placed it more from the Rim distance [still focused at the cone].
For a two-way monitor I think that's right, my DynAudio LYD48s are 3-way so used the midrange driver; on my Adam A7Xs I used the woofer because it carries the midrange as two-way.

Quote:
Still ... I'm bugged. I'm finding that I only like the V4 plugin set at 8% wet/dry [using the Min Phase]. Any more than that [past 10%], and my Reference tracks don't sound as good. At 8%, they so good ... and it sounds 'natural'.
Maybe your room is really close already? My correction is @ 100% wet but I trust it because I always thought my three monitor sets (DynAudio/Adam/Equator D5) sounded a little muddy, and the correction seemed address the exact frequencies I thought were wrong based on my ears but not fully trusting them.

Backstory: I used the original Mackie HR824s for years (circa 2000) and I still have them stored in another room - which are supposed to have hyped high end. So when I switched those out for Equator D5s, Adam AX7 and DynAudio over the course of couple years - all seemed muddier than the Mackies, so I just assumed I had trained my ears wrong with the Mackies all those years.

Turns out the SW calibration put things back closer to what my Mackies sounded like. I'm guessing that since I'm in a small room that is mildly over absorbent dealing with it's size, I'm sucking out high-end I need. Which ironically makes the Mackies not so far off in my setup. I may pull those back in here one day and measure with those just to see what SW thinks. /ramble



Quote:
thanks again
You too, take care!
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 03-31-2021 at 07:28 AM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2021, 07:59 AM   #54
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
I had the jumping Mic, and although I finally got the position to calibrate, if left me with doubts. [took almost 3 hours to do all positions] !
You know that you can change the impulse sound? That gave me much better calculations, no jumping mic, every distance accurate within 3cm.
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!
beingmf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2021, 09:19 AM   #55
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beingmf View Post
You know that you can change the impulse sound? That gave me much better calculations, no jumping mic, every distance accurate within 3cm.
That's something else I read a bit on ... and definitely I'm going to test.

If I recall, there seemed 3 choices ...
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2021, 02:38 PM   #56
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Replacement mic showed up (haven't tested yet) but it shipped 48 hours ago from Riga, Latvia. That's amazingly fast from there to US.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2021, 06:44 AM   #57
Dannii
Human being with feelings
 
Dannii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Adelaide, South Australia (originally from Geelong)
Posts: 5,568
Default

I really must get around to checking out the update. I'm about to experiment with some different monitor layouts so it will be interesting to see how I can work around the stereo limitations of SW.
For the past few years, I've been running a cube array of eight Auratone 5Cs and four EV DL15W subs. I ran four instances of SW with each instance correcting one pair of Auratones.
I'm going to explore other layouts such as 7.1.2 so I'll need to rethink how I incorporate SW there.
__________________
Dannii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 02:37 PM   #58
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Replacement mic showed up (haven't tested yet) but it shipped 48 hours ago from Riga, Latvia. That's amazingly fast from there to US.
Is this mic for testing your room Karbo?
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 03:06 PM   #59
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod View Post
Is this mic for testing your room Karbo?
Right, the calibrated measurement mic from SW. The first one was defective, so I ordered one separately, then they sent me a new one to replace the defective one so now I have 3 LOL, each with their own calibration file, except one is the bad one - I may open it up one day and see if I can fix it.

I have two ECM8000s but those only have generic cal files and I wasn't sure how much I trusted those after using the SW mics.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 04:01 PM   #60
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I have two ECM8000s but those only have generic cal files and I wasn't sure how much I trusted those after using the SW mics.
I'd be especially glad if you can post the differences you find between the ECM8000 and the SW mic. I'm using an ECM8000 too and been thinking of getting the SW mic.

I've been doing some testing with pink noise to see exactly what SW looks like and have come up with some interesting finds. I'm going to try posting the results in the next few day.
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 04:05 PM   #61
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod View Post
I'd be especially glad if you can post the differences you find between the ECM8000 and the SW mic. I'm using an ECM8000 too and been thinking of getting the SW mic.
The thing I can do the quickest is to do an REW sweep with each mic. Will take longer to do a full SW Reference Calibration to compare. I did that early on but I wasn't trying to do a proper comparison at the time.

I'm curious as to your findings and how they compare with any overall findings of mine.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 04-07-2021 at 04:21 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 05:48 PM   #62
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Not sure if this helps. I had read that generic profiles for mics like the ECM8000 struggled the most in the high end. Maybe that's what I'm seeing here? I do remember the cal file having a huge correction on the entire high side of the spectrum FWIW.

My problem in the low end below, which is ~80 Hz is a room mode due to the walls on the left/right of me (based on some quick math). I don't have an easy way to solve that as it's really low to be trying to absorb with traps. If I could solve it, it would also help flatten a few other anomalies aka harmonics of that frequency.

__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 04-07-2021 at 06:02 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 08:15 PM   #63
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

Maybe all you need to do is view the Mic's CAL file. It's a TEXT file.

It will show each of the Freq 'correction' values in dB.

After seeing that ... I was glad I decided to order the new Cal Mic WITH the correction CAL file.

It also 'explained' why the correction that SW had done was not correct in the Mid to Hi Freq Bands with my UN-Calibrated ECM-8000 mic.

So ... it was time to remove that 'unknown' from the Monitor Sweeps.
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 08:26 PM   #64
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
Maybe all you need to do is view the Mic's CAL file. It's a TEXT file.
I haven't looked yet but I thought about it.... Maybe bump what's lacking in the sweeps and calibrate the mic to that to see if it gets a little closer.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2021, 10:08 PM   #65
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Not sure if this helps. I had read that generic profiles for mics like the ECM8000 struggled the most in the high end. Maybe that's what I'm seeing here? I do remember the cal file having a huge correction on the entire high side of the spectrum FWIW.

Wow, they are very similar up to 1K and then the ECM8000 starts to drop off significantly.

Just based on the sound that I'm getting, I'm pretty happy with my monitors. My pink noise tests show the high end is there and looking good. All my mixes and masters sound okay.

Thanks for doing that Karbo.
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2021, 06:10 AM   #66
garanimals
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 135
Default

Has anyone compared Sonarworks to IK Multimedia ARC?

They claim to do the same thing, right? (except for headphones).
garanimals is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2021, 04:38 PM   #67
garanimals
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 135
Default

Boy... I really know how to kill a conversation
garanimals is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2021, 05:04 PM   #68
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

I have not sorry!
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2021, 07:11 PM   #69
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garanimals View Post
Boy... I really know how to kill a conversation
funny ... but no, I've not compared. Maybe back when these products were initially released.

For whatever reason, SW became the one I ended up using.
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 12:51 AM   #70
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garanimals View Post
Has anyone compared Sonarworks to IK Multimedia ARC?

They claim to do the same thing, right? (except for headphones).
Yes, indeed. I've used SW for about 2 years, for speaker and headphone correction. Enter Sienna (mid march). Acoustically comparing the headphone profiles in each program made me listen up: there was a bump in SW's upper midrange which seems to clear up the signal, but is it translating into "reality"? I A/B'd for about one week, at the end of which I perceived the SW sound as veiled under an artificial mid-bump haze.

Just two weeks later I read a forum post somewhere about ARC3 being much much better than ARC2 (which I found ridiculously bad) and I decided to give the demo a go. Yes, you've guessed correctly: I heard that same haze in the speaker correction. Midrange that isn't really there in the first place. I'm sure there's engineers who can work better with the SW profiles (due to exactly that midrange "clarity"), but I'm not one of them. ARC3 to my ears sounds much more effortless and, yes, "natural".

OTOH one upside of SW is the "mixed mode" algorithm(s). In ARC3 I have to decide if I want to get a tighter image (linear phase) or no ‒ severe! ‒ pre-ringing in the bass (natural phase).
Regardless of this, there's no going back for me. Sienna and ARC3. Italians seem to do it better. Salute!

EDIT: no honeymoon phase involved. I'm a very critical listener and a very critical customer not falling for hypes. I was the harshest critic of Sienna in the first days after release … until I learned how to listen and what to listen for. As a result my current mixes are two leagues above the previous ones. Translation is incredible, be it with Sienna or ARC3. One thing to consider though: Fletcher-Munson. I've since settled for 2 monitoring levels: "low" and "high" (and a final crank-up if I feel like it). That way your ears won't get fooled into the "louder is better" trap. Or vice versa: I just turned the volume down and "obviously" I need more bass.
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!

Last edited by beingmf; 04-15-2021 at 01:02 AM.
beingmf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 04:56 AM   #71
garanimals
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beingmf View Post
Yes, indeed. I've used SW for about 2 years, for speaker and headphone correction. Enter Sienna (mid march). Acoustically comparing the headphone profiles in each program made me listen up: there was a bump in SW's upper midrange which seems to clear up the signal, but is it translating into "reality"? I A/B'd for about one week, at the end of which I perceived the SW sound as veiled under an artificial mid-bump haze.

Just two weeks later I read a forum post somewhere about ARC3 being much much better than ARC2 (which I found ridiculously bad) and I decided to give the demo a go. Yes, you've guessed correctly: I heard that same haze in the speaker correction. Midrange that isn't really there in the first place. I'm sure there's engineers who can work better with the SW profiles (due to exactly that midrange "clarity"), but I'm not one of them. ARC3 to my ears sounds much more effortless and, yes, "natural".

OTOH one upside of SW is the "mixed mode" algorithm(s). In ARC3 I have to decide if I want to get a tighter image (linear phase) or no ‒ severe! ‒ pre-ringing in the bass (natural phase).
Regardless of this, there's no going back for me. Sienna and ARC3. Italians seem to do it better. Salute!

EDIT: no honeymoon phase involved. I'm a very critical listener and a very critical customer not falling for hypes. I was the harshest critic of Sienna in the first days after release … until I learned how to listen and what to listen for. As a result my current mixes are two leagues above the previous ones. Translation is incredible, be it with Sienna or ARC3. One thing to consider though: Fletcher-Munson. I've since settled for 2 monitoring levels: "low" and "high" (and a final crank-up if I feel like it). That way your ears won't get fooled into the "louder is better" trap. Or vice versa: I just turned the volume down and "obviously" I need more bass.

I used to use ARC2 in my studio - I liked it until I got larger speakers, then I could not make it sit well.

I've been using Sonarworks for headphone use as I'm not really able to use speakers right now.

Hadn't heard of Sienna until now.
garanimals is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 05:45 AM   #72
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garanimals View Post
Hadn't heard of Sienna until now.
Absolutely demo it if your headphone profile is available. Warning: learning curve! Don't judge it after day one or even day three.
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!
beingmf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 02:04 PM   #73
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beingmf View Post
Yes, indeed. I've used SW for about 2 years, for speaker and headphone correction. Enter Sienna (mid march). Acoustically comparing the headphone profiles in each program made me listen up: there was a bump in SW's upper midrange which seems to clear up the signal, but is it translating into "reality"? I A/B'd for about one week, at the end of which I perceived the SW sound as veiled under an artificial mid-bump haze.

Just two weeks later I read a forum post somewhere about ARC3 being much much better than ARC2 (which I found ridiculously bad) and I decided to give the demo a go. Yes, you've guessed correctly: I heard that same haze in the speaker correction. Midrange that isn't really there in the first place. I'm sure there's engineers who can work better with the SW profiles (due to exactly that midrange "clarity"), but I'm not one of them. ARC3 to my ears sounds much more effortless and, yes, "natural".

OTOH one upside of SW is the "mixed mode" algorithm(s). In ARC3 I have to decide if I want to get a tighter image (linear phase) or no ‒ severe! ‒ pre-ringing in the bass (natural phase).
Regardless of this, there's no going back for me. Sienna and ARC3. Italians seem to do it better. Salute!

EDIT: no honeymoon phase involved. I'm a very critical listener and a very critical customer not falling for hypes. I was the harshest critic of Sienna in the first days after release … until I learned how to listen and what to listen for. As a result my current mixes are two leagues above the previous ones. Translation is incredible, be it with Sienna or ARC3. One thing to consider though: Fletcher-Munson. I've since settled for 2 monitoring levels: "low" and "high" (and a final crank-up if I feel like it). That way your ears won't get fooled into the "louder is better" trap. Or vice versa: I just turned the volume down and "obviously" I need more bass.
hmm
curious

sonarworks targets perfect flat response for speakers, but apparently they use a non-flat target curve for headphones "to aid translation". I wonder if that's part of what you're hearing.

Last edited by dub3000; 04-17-2021 at 05:38 AM.
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 10:22 PM   #74
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dub3000 View Post
sonarworks targets perfect flat response for speakers, but apparently they use a jon-flat target curve for headphones "to aid translation". I wonder if that's part of what you're hearing.
Based on physical/biological facts it'd be clueless to make a headphone truly flat.
Possible that SW chose to add the 1.x k (haven't measured, feels like 1.8 or so) bump for presence or for other reasons. which might appeal to some. I found it of a nasal quality, and as a result I would rather attenuate this area – which isn't there "in reality".
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!
beingmf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2021, 01:05 PM   #75
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Just thought I'd mention, I finally got a Sonarworks microphone and it works much better then my EMC8000, it added some missing warmth.
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2021, 03:29 PM   #76
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Good to hear Tod.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2021, 07:05 PM   #77
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Good to hear Tod.
Thanks Karbo, what finally convinced me to get the Sonarworks mic is that I always thought my monitors lacked a little warmth.

So I shot the room with pink noise with the Sonarworks plugin in line going out to my speakers. I recorded both the left and right speaker separately, then looked at them in Span. I could clearly see where the warmth was missing.



So I EQed both the left and right to get somewhat of a straight curve, and when I added the EQ to Reapers Monitor FX output, I could also hear the difference and I rather liked it.

But now I wanted it in the Sonarworks Systemwide too, So I inverted the EQ and used that in line, while I measured the room again with Sonarworks. As you can see in the picture below, it really flattened out the curve quite a bit.



when I get time I'm going to shoot the room with pink noise again to see what this new profile looks like with my new Sonarworks microphone.
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2021, 12:02 PM   #78
Dannii
Human being with feelings
 
Dannii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Adelaide, South Australia (originally from Geelong)
Posts: 5,568
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod View Post
Just thought I'd mention, I finally got a Sonarworks microphone and it works much better then my EMC8000, it added some missing warmth.
Hmm. Very interesting. Was your 8000 an early one or a later one? I've heard the capsules in the later ones weren't as good.
I'm using an early one with Sonarworks but perhaps I'd still get better results with the Sonarworks mic.
Not that I'm unhappy with what it does now. I'm quite happy with it but if it could be better again, well....
__________________
Dannii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2021, 02:31 PM   #79
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dannii View Post
Hmm. Very interesting. Was your 8000 an early one or a later one? I've heard the capsules in the later ones weren't as good.
I'm using an early one with Sonarworks but perhaps I'd still get better results with the Sonarworks mic.
Not that I'm unhappy with what it does now. I'm quite happy with it but if it could be better again, well....
I'm not sure Dannii, I got the 8000 a couple of years ago. There isn't a big difference in the spectrum between the two, but I noticed it immediately after I measured it with the Sonarworks mic. I also found it easier to mix and get the tones right.

I remixed an old orchestra piece I did for an outdoor video, and it came together very well. I also remastered a couple of old songs I did in the late 70s, and it was much easier to make them better.
Tod is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2021, 03:28 PM   #80
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 27,937
Default

Mine was from 2001. The thing to remember is the worst of ecm8000 issues are in the high end. That doesn't mean the low end couldn't be more accurate but those using it with REW for bass traps are probably are not suffering as much.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.