Phil Leigh;270124 Wrote:
> I'd certainly suggest you try it...but your experiences might be very
> different to mine.
> In my system, the moment I turned on DRC it was like...magic!. After 3
> years of living with it, I'm still very happy.
Actually, I have made up my mind already...
To try out a
haraldo;270118 Wrote:
> It is very! interesting to realize what you get out of the Tact
> Sounds like I really need to get hold of a new Lyngdorf with
> roomperfect.
>
> -Regards
>
> Harald N
I'd certainly suggest you try it...but your experiences might be very
different to mine.
In my
Phil Leigh;270068 Wrote:
> The system sounds very natural (to me) with DRC on and very boring and
> uninvolving with it off.
>
It is very! interesting to realize what you get out of the Tact
Sounds like I really need to get hold of a new Lyngdorf with
roomperfect.
-Regards
Harald N
My TACT can produce a pretty much ruler-flat response from 20Hz to 16Khz
in my room with my system - but I prefer a gentle roll-off from 14k up
of about -2dB.
I don't agree there is anything magic about 200hz or how well DRC works
above/below that. My experience has been very different from those
darrenyeats;269826 Wrote:
> Agree with you there.
>
> There are a couple caveats:
> 1. If your speakers are near to room boundaries due to domestic reasons
> then the room reflections start to get perceived as part of the direct
> sound, hence measured response at the listening position starts
haraldo;269760 Wrote:
>
> Additionally, I think the physics of DRC below 200Hz is very different
> from above 200Hz.
> Because of the fact that below some 150 - 200Hz the ear/brain is not
> really able to distinguish the direct sound waves from the reflected
> sound waves, hence you may easily c
Phil Leigh;269687 Wrote:
>
> So, really the room basic mechanics need to be OK - then DRC can work
> its magic with regard to freq/phase/image response.
>
Phil, Now I agree with you :-D
Basically, I believe you need some sort of treatments to bring RT60
figures down to an acceptable level in
Don't get me wrong...I'm assuming that the room is not already crippled
by uncontrolled RT60 etc.
Of course DRC can't compensate for the walls/floor flapping around.
So, really the room basic mechanics need to be OK - then DRC can work
its magic with regard to freq/phase/image response.
The prob
Phil Leigh;269655 Wrote:
> I disagree - there's no limit to what you can doand a 14dB peak is
> easily zapped out with DRC. A 14dB trough is rather more problematic!
>
One of the things you really want to control by using bass traps and
similar stuff is to bring down the reverberation time
haraldo;269649 Wrote:
> This definitely depends on room height, For instance: There will be
> serious issues if room height is exactly half of room width, and room
> width is half of room length.
>
> Then you will have standing waves in three directions at the same
> frequency, I Have been in su
nuhi;269646 Wrote:
> If you do not have a room problems with standing waves then you can not
> appreciate what the room correction does.
>
> Seen in some article that it depends on the room height.
This definitely depends on room height, For instance: There will be
serious issues if room height
If you do not have a room problems with standing waves then you can not
appreciate what the room correction does.
Also it must be done properly, not too much corrected because it
becomes sterile, and test multiple target curves.
I have a 9dB boost around the 130hz area, imagine listening to that
seanadams;268177 Wrote:
> I've never had much success with room correction or any kind of
> automatic EQ - to me things always sound better without, provided that
> levels and crossover points are right. Nothing against the Tact in
> particular, but I prefer not to use it for daily listening.
An
cheetah;267883 Wrote:
> Sean,
>
> Can you tell us more about your experience with TACT 2.2XP and
> transporter? Does it work to your satisfaction? Would you prefer
> standalone DSP and preamp to DSP/preamp combo with transporter? Thanks
I've never had much success with room correction or any
seanadams;264761 Wrote:
> Yes, this is the digital loop feature. It is in firmware 40 which is now
> in the nightly "trunk" builds.
>
> Give it a try. I have only tested with Tact XP and with a loopback
> cable. Would be interested to hear how it works with something like a
> Behringer EQ.
>
>
I have 3.2GHz Celeron linux box and it takes roughly 30-35% cpu.
The filters can be generated by DRC software or InguzEQ plugin (I use
the latter).
Darren
--
darrenyeats
SB3 / Inguz -> Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) -> PMC AB-1
Dell laptop -> JVC UX-C30 mini system
--
Aha, thanks! I will give it a try when I get a chance.
Is there any significant processor hit due to the extra number
crunching?
--
Kiep
Kiep's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8844
View this threa
Kiep;265563 Wrote:
> I just don't know how it would be implemented with the SlimServer and
> Transporter.
Like this: http://inguzaudio.com
Works a treat for me,
Darren
--
darrenyeats
SB3 / Inguz -> Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) -> PMC AB-1
Dell laptop -> JVC UX-C30 mini system
---
I have had DEQ2496 for few years now. I don't use it as I don't really
have a need to EQ anything but I won't be selling it because it is a
great tool for those rare occasions and for $200 worth keeping (I also
have the mic). I may use it if I ever get to build a HT system. Never
had any problems
GuyDebord;265197 Wrote:
> Which Behringer model are you considering? ULTRA-CURVE PRO DSP8024?
I'm thinking about a DEQ2496. but that's way from final.
I read that they're not any good in the long term, that they're prone
to breaking down after some months of use. (more then a single source).
an
Heimiko;264827 Wrote:
> @Sean - Can you shed some light on:
> digital volume control, before or after loopback?
> DSP loopback usable with other digital sources?
>
> thanks! i hope some of you might have a behringer deq laying around to
> test this with, as its a strong contender for a place in
nuhi;265153 Wrote:
>
>
> Oh maybe you meant "if you already own one then now you can use it"?
> Nothing against that.
That's exactly what I meant. :0)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...SB3+Stontronics PSU - Alt
Phil Leigh;265071 Wrote:
> all digital room correction is in the software domain! (eg TACT)
Doesn't it have to reclock the data, add jitter?
Unless you use word clock but I doubt those devices have that support.
IMHO it's better to use specialized software like Acourate to generate
your filters
nuhi;264986 Wrote:
> Ever heard of Inguz ?
> http://inguzaudio.com/
>
> You can also use ConvolverPipe:
> http://convolver.sourceforge.net/convolverpipe.html
>
> My Transporter is a room correction device in the software domain, no
> point in degrading the signal with extra hardware.
>
> But t
Heimiko;264740 Wrote:
> Great!! I've been wanting automatic room correction for ages, but didn't
> want an additional AD->DA convertor in between.
Ever heard of Inguz ?
http://inguzaudio.com/
You can also use ConvolverPipe:
http://convolver.sourceforge.net/convolverpipe.html
My Transporter is a
Robin Bowes;264869 Wrote:
> Phil Leigh wrote:
> >
> > Which model B&K's? - you can get them calibrated but it will cost...
> >
>
> Oh, I know. I'm actually a qualified acoustician and know all about the
>
> cost of calibrating professional microphones!
>
> R,
Robin - That's cool!.
--
Phi
haraldo;264866 Wrote:
> Sean"
>
> isn't it so that with a digital volume control at very low volumes that
> you're decreasing the resolution.
That's correct, if you reduce the signal you're reducing the SNR
accordingly. Whether that is a practical concern depends on the noise
floor of the rest
seanadams;264853 Wrote:
> Before. It should probably be put after though - we could do it in the
> DAC chip, like we do when Transporter is being used as a DAC.
Yeah, if that could change to be afterwards, that would be great.
seanadams;264853 Wrote:
>
> No that would not work because the dig
haraldo;264866 Wrote:
> isn't it so that with a digital volume control at very low volumes that
> you're decreasing the resolution.
>
> Say you have 24 bit resolution and you're decreasing the volume by
> 50dB, then most of the bits will be zeros, don't you then decrease the
> digital resolution
"You guys at Slimdevices are the best
Talk about providing choices to the consumers...
I can't ever remember to have seen a product ever that provides a
combination of the flexibility and performance of the transporter at
any price"
___
Phil Leigh wrote:
>
> Which model B&K's? - you can get them calibrated but it will cost...
>
Oh, I know. I'm actually a qualified acoustician and know all about the
cost of calibrating professional microphones!
R,
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiop
Sean"
isn't it so that with a digital volume control at very low volumes that
you're decreasing the resolution.
Say you have 24 bit resolution and you're decreasing the volume by
50dB, then most of the bits will be zeros, don't you then decrease the
digital resolution by utilizing a digital volu
haraldo;264859 Wrote:
> My initial thoughts is that the digital volume control does have a
> significant impact on the sound quality, epspecially at low volumes
> Which is why I have never ever used it
>
> What are your thoughts on this?
>
> -H
It's not an issue of sound quality for th
Heimiko;264827 Wrote:
> @Sean - Can you shed some light on:
> digital volume control, before or after loopback?
>
Before. It should probably be put after though - we could do it in the
DAC chip, like we do when Transporter is being used as a DAC.
>
> DSP loopback usable with other digital sou
You guys at Slimdevices are the best
Talk about providing choices to the consumers...
I can't ever remember to have seen a product ever that provides a
combination of the flexibility and performance of the transporter at
any price - when the digital loop works :-))
-H
--
haraldo
Sus
joeriz;264831 Wrote:
> Whoa! Just to be sure...did I read correctly above that this dig loop
> would allow something like the Behringer to be used in the loop while
> allowing the TP to still do D/A conversion??
>
Indeed, that's the main reason for having it.
--
radish
-
Whoa! Just to be sure...did I read above that this dig loop would allow
something like the Behringer to be used in the loop while allowing the
TP to still do D/A conversion??
Very cool!
Joe
--
joeriz
Transporter > DIYtube ST-35 amp > JM Reynaud Arpeggione Signature
speakers
Thanks Sean..
--
haraldo
Suse Linux -> SB3 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Krell KAV400xi -> Meadowlark
Kestrel2
haraldo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13472
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevice
@Sean - Can you shed some light on:
digital volume control, before or after loopback?
DSP loopback usable with other digital sources?
thanks! i hope some of you might have a behringer deq laying around to
test this with, as its a strong contender for a place in my rack ;-)
--
Heimiko
Transpor
haraldo;264773 Wrote:
> Sorry... I'm new here, don't know what the "SVN Trunk" is...
SVN == subversion, a tool which we use to manage our source code.
Trunk == the version of the software which is in active development
7.0 == the version of the software which is very close to being
released. I
haraldo;264773 Wrote:
> Sorry... I'm new here, don't know what the "SVN Trunk" is...
>
> Another argument to buy transporter :-))
> (like I needed that)
>
> -Harald
E.g:
http://www.slimdevices.com/downloads/nightly/SqueezeCenter_trunk_v2008-02-01/
--
alekz
-
Sorry... I'm new here, don't know what the "SVN Trunk" is...
Another argument to buy transporter :-))
(like I needed that)
-Harald
--
haraldo
Suse Linux -> SB3 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Krell KAV400xi -> Meadowlark
Kestrel2
Yes, this is the digital loop feature. It is in firmware 40 which is now
in the nightly "trunk" builds.
Give it a try. I have only tested with Tact XP and with a loopback
cable. Would be interested to hear how it works with something like a
Behringer EQ.
Note there is a setting in SlimServer whe
It's not in the specs, if you read the first post in this thread you'll
see it's a new feature being tested in the latest firmware build.
--
radish
radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
View
Please prove me wrong.
I can't see from the spec's of the transporter that there's a digital
loop... It would be nice, but it's not clear to me
-Harald N
--
haraldo
Suse Linux -> SB3 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Krell KAV400xi -> Meadowlark
Kestrel2
--
> Transporter -> XLR Attenuators (-20db) -> Electrocompaniet AW100 DMB ->
> Dynaudio Audience 122
The combo Transporter, AW100 DMB, Audience 122 really sounds like
something :-D
Not an insane pricetag, each product really shine for themselves, but
how does all of this work together?
With DSP, th
Robin Bowes;264739 Wrote:
> Heimiko wrote:
> > As I saw in the SVN Trunk, FW40 has a new feature allowing for a DSP
> > loopback.
> > I I know what this means, but I want to ask to be sure, before I go
> > running off and by myself some DSP only to find out later that it
> > doesn't work as I th
Robin Bowes;264739 Wrote:
> Heimiko wrote:[color=blue]
> That's exactly what it means.
>
Great!! I've been wanting automatic room correction for ages, but
didn't want an additional AD->DA convertor in between.
now, for my last question, about the volume control, can anyone fill
this one in?
Heimiko wrote:
> As I saw in the SVN Trunk, FW40 has a new feature allowing for a DSP
> loopback.
> I I know what this means, but I want to ask to be sure, before I go
> running off and by myself some DSP only to find out later that it
> doesn't work as I thought it would.
>
> FW40 will allow the
As I saw in the SVN Trunk, FW40 has a new feature allowing for a DSP
loopback.
I I know what this means, but I want to ask to be sure, before I go
running off and by myself some DSP only to find out later that it
doesn't work as I thought it would.
FW40 will allow the following setup?
PC -> tra
50 matches
Mail list logo
