Update: the Inguz room correction EQ system is now running on Linux
(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31620).
Mac OSX support should be quite straightforward. But I don't have a Mac
to play on yet...
--
inguz
I also would like to chime in with a request for Mac support for Inguz
room correction. Once ported to Linux, I hope it wouldn't be be too
difficult to bring it to Mac OSX. Are there any other DRC developments
that could work on Mac OSX? Thanks!
--
Robert57
Is there any digital room correction scheme that will work on MAC?
Failing that, will the digital room correction written to work on
Windows work using Virtual PC on the Mac?
--
atkinsonrr
atkinsonrr's Profile:
I have a Behringer 2496 but feel that it would be very nice to have
parametric digital EQ at the PC end as well.
However, if you have multiple squeezeboxes in different rooms requiring
different sorts of correction, you run into problems with a PC based
system.
Room correction by equalisation
OK, I have finally, after much trial and error, gotten Brutefir to work
with slimserver. So far I can only filter a flac stream. I just
cannot get mp3 to work with this proccess. But since 99.6% of my music
collection is stored as flac, that's OK with me.
Here's what I did:
First off, I
Mattias,
I am very interested in your progress on this front. I have been
testing Hugh's (Inguz's) room correction plugin/processor for some time
now in WinXP. The results have been substantial and very satisfying.
Hugh has really done a marvelous job.
However, I currently dual boot between
On 8/23/06, HoZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mattias,
I am very interested in your progress on this front.
My progress has been fairly non-existent. I got as far as I documented
in the wiki, then I stopped because I had to buy measuring equipment.
I now have the measuring equipment, but I haven't
I was hoping that someone would tell us how they went.
I have all the software set up and running. I got an Alesis io2 audio
interface off ebay (the Tascam was out of stock). I am just waiting on
a microphone. I am not 100% sure how to do the measurements (exactly
what am I measuring?) but I
GreenMan Wrote:
I haven't had a chance to try this out yet. Has anyone done anything
with the Inguz tools?
I've been using Inguz's plugin since an early alpha version a few
months ago. Due to lack of time and lots of travelling, I haven't
upgraded yet to the more recent versions, but the one
opaqueice Wrote:
... makes a very significant improvement in sound.
That's good to hear!
In my experience the hardest part of DRC is getting a good measurement.
Any tips? I should be trying this in the next few days and any
suggestions would be appreciated.
regards
Steve
--
stevo
Any tips? I should be trying this in the next few days and any
suggestions would be appreciated.
Steve
Hugh (Inguz) had some nice step-by-step instructions posted somewhere
to get you started. Basically, you record the sweep played through a
speaker on one channel using the mic, and you
opaqueice Wrote:
Hugh (Inguz) had some nice step-by-step instructions posted somewhere to
get you started. Basically, you record the sweep played through a
speaker on one channel using the mic, and you record the analogue out
of your SB or DAC on the other channel. Then you do the same for
GreenMan Wrote:
Why would you try to play as loud as possible? Wouldn't that
artificially generate echo that wouldn't otherwise be there at ordinary
listening volume? Wouldn't that skew the results for equalization at
listening volume? (Alas, I'm no longer a teenager. Max volume is not
Phil Leigh Wrote:
what about room compression? - surely you want to use a typical
listening volume rather than getting the air in the room into an air
brick state? (I realise it would have to be VERY loud to do that but
even so...)
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by room compression, but
opaqueice Wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by room compression, but I'm guessing
you mean non-linear response of the air to compression versus
rarefaction. If so I think that's an extremely small effect, and if
you want with some thought I can give a numerical estimate on how small
JohnnyLightOn Wrote:
Can I use this plug-in as a balance control, even if I don't do the room
analyzing yet? My integrated amp has no balance control.
No, it doesn't include balance controls.
--
inguz
inguz's Profile:
OK, thanks inguz.
--
JohnnyLightOn
JohnnyLightOn's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=28
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24519
bump***
--
GreenMan
My computer - SB2- Krell KAV-300i - Thiel CS2
GreenMan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1173
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24519
azinck3 Wrote:
You can pretty much take your pick from this list (any of them that are
stereo and have a mic preamp):
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/category.php?c=695sb=catalogpriceso=asc
I certainly haven't used all of them but to give you a starting point I
should say that I've been
I've got a bettery-powered Radio Shack sound level meter with an RCA
line level output:
http://www.radioshack.com/sm-digital-display-sound-level-meter--pi-2103667.html
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/spl-meter_e.html
Can I use this with the plugin by plugging the line out directly into
my
GreenMan Wrote:
Here's something I never thought I'd ask, but given that many of us who
go down this new road of unspent money are going to get an inexpensive
TASCAM or similar, does it make much of a difference what quality
microphone cable I use for my freakin' high fidelity digital room
GreenMan Wrote:
I believe it does. I'm looking at the product manual and it says:
Setting the Sample Rate and Bit Depth
The US-122 supports sample rates of
44.1kHz and 48kHz. In the Audio
Control Panel, select the pull-down
menu for Sample Rate and select either
44.1 kHz or 48 kHz.
inguz Wrote:
Multiple squeezeoxes each get their own settings (because presumably
they're in different rooms or driving different systems).
Tonite I'm setting this up on a friend's reference system, and ...
hmmm, something's very wrong (muddy, no top end at all, everything is
off). So
You need to be able to record at 44.1kHz (same as CD). The sweeps are
44.1kHz FLAC. Be sure to measure with equipment which really does
record at 44.1. Some of the cheap equipment will only record at 48kHz,
and you won't get a good measurement that way.
(For now, 44.1 is the only sample-rate
This looks like great work. And the documentation is even pretty good,
to boot!
But I haven't installed it yet (I don't have a reference mic) and in
reading through the docs I had a question. The docs state The
inguzDSP system turns everything (even low-btrate MP3s) into 24-bit
FLAC to send to
Sorry, I don't think the current version will work with SB1. Added to
the bug list.
--
inguz
inguz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1139
View this thread:
inguz Wrote:
Sorry, I don't think the current version will work with SB1. Added to
the bug list.
Thanks for the quick response. SB1 support would be greatly
appreciated. But if you don't add it then I suppose Slim will probably
sell another SB3...;)
--
azinck3
... from, say, using a powered mic and Room Eq Wizard?
(http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/)
I know you seem to have developed a SB-specific solution. What are the
advantages over other methods at this point, in your view?
--
GreenMan
My computer - SB2- Krell KAV-300i - Thiel CS2
GreenMan Wrote:
... from, say, using a powered mic and Room Eq Wizard?
(http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/)
I know you seem to have developed a SB-specific solution. What are the
advantages over other methods at this point, in your view?
I know this was for Hugh, but I couldn't help
GreenMan Wrote:
We've passed the $300 threshold for this free solution already.
I bet you could get it all closer to $200 on the 'low side', and it
WILL be free in the next room (should you have more than one room).
The expensive part for me will be the Server upgrade... Is it XP only
or will
GreenMan Wrote:
I wonder though. Starting from scratch, I'll need an audio interface,
which look like they run about $250 on the low side. An adequate
Berhinger mic looks to be about another $60 - $80. We've passed the
$300 threshold for this free solution already. Granted, the Behringer
azinck3 Wrote:
What's not clear to me is if a filter that's generated with the Room EQ
wizard could be plugged into InguzDSP or if you have to use the tools
Hugh provides...
Any stereo WAV file in the impulse folder (C:\Documents and
Settings\All Users\Application Data\InguzEQ\Impulses\) can
azinck3 Wrote:
Yeah, I hear what you're saying. There are plenty of perfectly fine
interfaces for $200, but even so, I know what you mean. For me, I
have an interface already and can probably find a place to borrow the
mic. The advantage is that you only need the equipment for a one-time
Here's a question: I only have one SB to be concerned with, but for
those who have multiple SBs around the house, isn't getting the mic to
the audio interface near a computer something of a problem? Many
(including myself) don't own a laptop, so that won't help.
I wonder, are there any
GreenMan Wrote:
Would you kindly name a few of those interfaces here?
I also failed to include the cost of 30ft of mic cable that I need to
get my mic to reach my computer in the next room, which adds about
another $30 onto the price tag
You can pretty much take your pick from this
Inguz, the future of audio is here thanks to you.
--
vdorta
DIY computer (EAC/FLAC) -- wireless SB2 (Bolder digital analog mods,
Sonicap Platinum bypass caps, Bolder Deluxe Power Supply) -- Stello
M200 monos -- ACI Sapphire XLs on dedicated Sound Anchors and REL
Storm III | JMT PPA headamp
vdorta Wrote:
Inguz, the future of audio is here thanks to you. I don't know if it's
possible or not, but I hope you can add a fourth type of equalizer with
several filters in the 20Hz-100Hz bass range.
Hmmm.. its been around for quite some time. He, however, seems to be
making some
Sleestack Wrote:
Keep in mind TACT gear makes correction for time, level and freq.
responses, in addition to allowing you to design fletcher munson curve
for volume dependent corrections. I'm not sure if the Behringer covers
all of those factors.
I'm sure it doesn't, but then it only
Announcing: the inguz room correction system for SqueezeBox:
http://inguzaudio.com/RoomCorrection/
This quietly moves from a short Beta test period (thanks to my
generous helpers!) to a likely much longer Evaluation (which should
be fairly usable out of the gate; over time I'll drop a series of
Boinggg.
any movement here people?
This is possibly my favourite topic in audio at the moment, DRC on my
Squeeze box.
cheers all
Nick.
--
Grumpy_Git
Grumpy_Git's Profile:
What would you like to know? As you can see in my sig, I'm quite an avid
TACT user. Keep in mind TACT gear makes correction for time, level and
freq. responses, in addition to allowing you to design fletcher munson
curve for volume dependent corrections.
--
Sleestack
*headphone:* singlepower
khewa Wrote:
actually it is not all digital. It would be all digital if you
eliminated the Benchmark DAC1 and put in a Digital amp, like the Nuamp
or Flying Mole
I mean the signal processing that does the room correction is all done
in the digital domain. Nothing analog is generated until
Mike Anderson Wrote:
I mean the signal processing that does the room correction is all done
in the digital domain. Nothing analog is generated until after the EQ
is done and the signal is sent out of the DAC1.
Do the amps from Nuforce an Flying Mole even accept digital inputs?
Don't they
mauidan Wrote:
So, if you have already have a PC, SB and an amp all you need is a RCS.
RCS 2.0 sell on audiogon for less than $1K or you can buy
a factory refurbished unit for $1490.
Thanks for the detailed and useful info on their products. It's
something I've been considering, and I
In case you guys are unaware, several guys use the program here;
http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/ for room correction in
combination with the Behringer.
I have yet to try it myself, as the last thing I want is another box in
the signal path. But all you really need is a mic or SPL meter
mauidan Wrote:
Do you have any first hand experience with the TacT RCS or TCS?
I've played with a 2-channel TacT amp (so RCS I guess), but not the
TCS. Why do you ask? Do you have any experience with computer-based
DRC?
--
opaqueice
Just a gentle bump for this thread. I see that the plugin from Inguz
audio is, sadly, still not available for download.
Inguz, will that happen any time soon? I'll reiterate my offer to be a
beta-tester and/or guinea pig. I'm impatient to try a room correction
system, and if I have to wait
...and a significant disadvantage as wellthe processed files would
likely be unsuitable as a source for transcoding to MP3 in support of a
portable device.
I'd probably end up keeping unprocessed files, processed files, and
MP3s in your library.
Michael
--
mgraves
mgraves Wrote:
...and a significant disadvantage as wellthe processed files would
likely be unsuitable as a source for transcoding to MP3 in support of a
portable device.
I'd probably end up keeping unprocessed files, processed files, and
MP3s in your library.
Michael
You could do
It seems to me there is one advantage of computer equalization which
hasn't been discussed here, namely that the processing is not done in
real time on an isynchronous audio signal, but instead in faster than
real time on the audio file on the computer.
One advantage of that is that it
ScottMayo Wrote:
Nobody gets a room flat from 100-18k using foam. Foam does next to
nothing for bass. People who can get to +/-5db using real room
treatments *and* EQ are doing quite well. Untreated rooms often swing
20db or more, even with EQ.
Scott
Oh dear, I do apologise...I
From cusory examination the plug-in did not seem to offer sufficicent
precision (# of band of eq) or types of eq.
In contrast the DEQ9624 provides 31 band graphic eq, also parametric
eq, and shelving type filters. All have independent Left right
processing. It also offers dynamics processing
Another consideration, I'm partial to having physical knobs to twiddle
in real-time. Comes from a music recording background and working at TV
stations for years.
Perhaps the plug-in is more capable than I thought initially.
Nonetheless, I was able to satisfy myself that the Behringer monitoring
mgraves Wrote:
Nonetheless, I was able to satisfy myself that the Behringer monitoring
hardware was a decent purchase.
Agreed. I spec'd their B2031's for a small classroom installation and
was really impressed by their performance.
--
azinck3
radish Wrote:
Because inexpensive != free? Even if the Behringer costs $100, what if I
want to use DRC on every squeezebox in my apartment? That's plenty of
cash. Free is better :)
True enough. But at the very least, you're going to have to buy a
microphone!
--
Mike Anderson
'FREE
Mike Anderson Wrote:
True enough. But at the very least, you're going to have to buy a
microphone!
...and a mic pre/phantom power source, then feed that into something
like a USB port that can drive a RTA program on your PC.
--
Ben Diss
Mike Anderson Wrote:
True enough. But at the very least, you're going to have to buy a
microphone!
Which I would also need if I used the Behringer.
And I already have a mixer which takes XLR mics and does phantom power
so no problem there. The point is, replacing the $300 Behringer with a
radish wrote:
The point is, replacing the $300 Behringer with a free piece of
software will save $300 from whatever the total cost of the solution
is.
And allow us to continue to make use of the SB's internal DAC.
--rt
___
audiophiles mailing list
Free is only better than $300 if they are equivalent solutions. They
aren't.
Two weeks ago my brother-in-law brought in his DEQ9624 and reference
mic to test my SB setup. I have SB3 feeding a small Soundcraft mixer
with Behringer 2031A self-powered monitors and a pair of the matching
powered
Free is only better than $300 if they are equivalent solutions. They
aren't.
Two weeks ago my brother-in-law brought in his DEQ9624 and reference
mic to test my SB setup. I have SB3 feeding a small Soundcraft mixer
with Behringer 2031A self-powered monitors and a pair of the matching
powered
mgraves Wrote:
...It would benefit from having an integrated PC interface, even a web
based set of controls.
Michael
I think you can drive it via midi control.
--
dwc
dwc's Profile:
mgraves Wrote:
Free is only better than $300 if they are equivalent solutions. They
aren't.
In what way? You didn't explain that at all.
--
radish
radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
Phil Leigh Wrote:
Are you saying that you think your room is substantially flat from
100-18Khz? - must be fun living with all those funny shaped bits of
foam on the floor, ceiling and walls...
:o)
Nobody gets a room flat from 100-18k using foam. Foam does next to
nothing for bass. People
To get close to the TACT approach, independant treatment of l/r channels
is a must. Also, l-r delay is required.
--
Phil Leigh
Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
View this thread:
opaqueice Wrote:
It seems that we SB users have a far more attractive option available -
to run a room correction system on the computer, *asynchronously*, and
then stream the corrected file to the SB. In other words, calibrate by
measuring the room response with a test signal and
inguz Wrote:
I think you nailed it.
There are lots of reasons I like SqueezeBox. Of course the hardware,
which has a really excellent engineering attention to detail, while
still being built to an affordable price-point. But the system
architecture overall is so nice, and this
azinck3 Wrote:
The possibilities are exciting. Thanks for all of your work in this
area, Hugh.
Yeah, I second that. For a while now I've been considering spending
some money on a room-correction device, but I think this has the
potential to be a superior solution. I'd be happy to pay for
opaqueice wrote:
azinck3 Wrote:
The possibilities are exciting. Thanks for all of your work in this
area, Hugh.
Agreed. I'm very interested in trying this.
I might even have tried out the DEQ, but I like using the analog outs on
my SB2s. Using the DEQ would mean either using it's
inguz Wrote:
Eventually, high-power DSP (powerful enough to process long filters)
will be everywhere.
The Behringer DEQ2496 is pretty inexpensive. And it can do all the
processing in the digital domain, in 1/3rd octave gradations. Why do I
even need to involve my computer at this point?
Mike Anderson Wrote:
The Behringer DEQ2496 is pretty inexpensive. And it can do all the
processing in the digital domain, in 1/3rd octave gradations. Why do I
even need to involve my computer at this point?
Because inexpensive != free? Even if the Behringer costs $100, what if
I want to use
Looks really cool, but it's a bit crude at 9-channels.
[for comparison the DEQ is 31-channels, independent L+R control]
It would be great to see this idea developed, but it looks like some
serious coding and a serious load on the CPU to run in stream.
-Dan
--
dwc
dwc Wrote:
Looks really cool, but it's a bit crude at 9-channels.
[for comparison the DEQ is 31-channels, independent L+R control]
It would be great to see this idea developed, but it looks like some
serious coding and a serious load on the CPU to run in stream.
-Dan
Perhaps, but the
dwc Wrote:
Looks really cool, but it's a bit crude at 9-channels.
[for comparison the DEQ is 31-channels, independent L+R control]
It would be great to see this idea developed, but it looks like some
serious coding and a serious load on the CPU to run in stream.
-Dan
About the load on
I've had very good results using the Behringer DEQ2496. Unfortunately,
on the topic of room correction the manual leaves a lot to be desired.
Here's my little primer:
http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=16568
--
Mike Anderson
'FREE RADICAL
RADIO!' (http://nvo.com/cd) Hours of
74 matches
Mail list logo
