EQing a system with Smaart 7 and other Smaart things

BTproductions

Ok this should be pretty simple or at least it should start that way...

The seminar was really great and got me started and all but ya it was like you guys said learn as much before going as you can and you'll come out with more. Well I didn't have time to do that at all. In fact the first time I opened the software was in the classroom also was was the guy next to me so we didn't feel all so dumb sitting beside eachother. We both we're kinda hoping for a walkthrough from start to finish of how to setup a system on day 3 but it wasn't quite like that. I've not had the time myself to use the software for other than running pink noise, getting an average, and laying in a simple parametric scheme like observed in the class. So there was a couple things Jamie mentioned but didn't elaborate on as I assume most the attendees know this information.

So after setting your parametrics over your average he said set a bump in your bass to your preference of course. Well I'm not used to EQing with a PEQ so I'm assuming this should be done with a low shelf?

Also he showed and explained your perceptive crossover point on the graph can be at a much higher point than say the 100Hz your set to crossover into your subs. Ok but what do you do with that information? Do you lower your crossover point? Put a PEQ in there to kill that area? Leave it alone?

I'm sure you can all understand my sitting quietly aside and letting those who setup large line array systems ask all the questions and get out of the class what they needed first.

Man I felt like a little worm on a big f*****g hook in there but was glad I could at least follow along

Dra

Have you checked youtube (and other sources)? You never know.

DRA

Dennis

BTproductions wrote:

So after setting your parametrics over your average he said set a bump in your bass to your preference of course. Well I'm not used to EQing with a PEQ so I'm assuming this should be done with a low shelf?

No...not a low shelf. Rather than giving you a bump, that would raise the entire low pass band. Use PEQ bell and experiment with a few "bump" locations.

BTproductions wrote:

Also he showed and explained your perceptive crossover point on the graph can be at a much higher point than say the 100Hz your set to crossover into your subs. Ok but what do you do with that information? Do you lower your crossover point? Put a PEQ in there to kill that area? Leave it alone?

It depends. You have visual data from SMAART7 and audible data from your system/ears. Listening to the subs by them selves and determining if there is information there that doesn't belong such as vocals would be helpful in determining if the xo point should be lowered. About half the time I will lower the xo and other times I don't. Another factor to take into account is how much time you have to work with your system. If you have only 15 minutes to make noise, save anal retention for another day.

Finding an outdoor location to spend 4 hours doing some base line settings would save you a lot of time at your venues...a lot of your settings won't change from gig to gig.

BTproductions

Ok Jamie did demonstrate a bump and plotted it on the screen but didn't explain what kind of filter it was. He was using a UX8800 and I now have the same processor. It appeared as tho he used only 1 PEQ and it came up fast (aprx 24db bw slope or actually steeper) flattened out then back down. It appeared to be dead flat across the top from say 30-70Hz. It didn't looks like a typical bell.

I'm trying to find an outside location or any location and someone to give me some freelance engineering hands on training. So far no luck and I'm pretty sure I pissed off the entire neighborhood back when the weather was nice. Well except the one girl across the neighborhood who txt me what's going on wondering if there was a party... Hehe

Dennis

BTproductions wrote:

Ok Jamie did demonstrate a bump and plotted it on the screen but didn't explain what kind of filter it was. He was using a UX8800 and I now have the same processor. It appeared as tho he used only 1 PEQ and it came up fast (aprx 24db bw slope or actually steeper) flattened out then back down. It appeared to be dead flat across the top from say 30-70Hz. It didn't looks like a typical bell.

I'm trying to find an outside location or any location and someone to give me some freelance engineering hands on training. So far no luck and I'm pretty sure I pissed off the entire neighborhood back when the weather was nice. Well except the one girl across the neighborhood who txt me what's going on wondering if there was a party... Hehe

You don't have to run pink noise with smaart loud enough to piss off neighbors...I do it all the time

Gadget

Dennis, how then, are you dealing with the speakers response change as the volume increases?

BTproductions

I've wondered the same but there was no mention of performance volume during the seminar so...

It wasn't the pink noise that bothered the neighbors rather the short checks with music at full volume. Ya can't take all that setup time and not give it a listen. well I can't

Dennis

Gadget wrote:

Dennis, how then, are you dealing with the speakers response change as the volume increases?

Just to be clear for those who are following along at home, I think of setting a system baseline and tuning a system in a venue as two totally separate jobs that are barely related. When I am setting a baseline, I am working with one box at a time at low volume and usually spend about 4 hours with it before I am happy. To answer BTproduction's question, in order for SMAART to read correctly, the level of the pink noise is increased until the Coherence Trace (in the Magnitude window) stabilizes. At that point, you may have to adjust for wind and wait for planes to fly over but that beats having the neighbors show up with pitchforks, torches, and a rope.

Getting back to the single speaker box I am measuring, when I finish with it I will add a single sub to the mix and get a ball park setting on the two of them. For baseline, my measurement technique for the mid/hi cabinet is a groundplane reading with the cabinet laying on its side and the mic almost touching the ground about 12' from the cabinet. Gadget, I believe you have a pic of this configuration that you could post for BTproductions.

Getting back to the original question of speaker response as volume increases, I believe this is an issue best dealt with during the venue tuning the same time as you would do array correction. Once the baseline is set much less time is needed at the venue so I think of doing the baseline as quality time that can be done at home at low volume and not piss off the neighbors. Having to crank the system to max in the neighborhood is a lack of self control and a lack of thinking ahead....BTproductions, you don't want the neighbors to get in the habit of calling the police. It will be much easier for them after the first time.

Dennis

Gadget

Here is as close as I can get, I believe you would tip the speaker on it's side? and the mic would be 12' out or so?



How do you deal then with the 3dB boost to the cabinets low end response being ON a boundary (ground plane coupling)?
G

Dennis

Gadget wrote:

Here is as close as I can get, I believe you would tip the speaker on it's side? and the mic would be 12' out or so?

That is correct. I could have sworn you had a pic of a speaker on its side with a mic aimed straight down in a shorty stand on a cement floor (like maybe a garage)

Gadget wrote:

How do you deal then with the 3dB boost to the cabinets low end response being ON a boundary (ground plane coupling)?
G

More often than not, I am dealing with systems that include subs which will make the two way top cabinet a mid/high rather than a full range. This mid/high cabinet will have a 100Hz +/- high pass filter as part of the sub xo point. I question this arrangement will have a full 3dB boost from a groundplane measurement set up but whether it does or not, the result is something to deal with at the venue tuning.

For the sake of arguement, lets say groundplane does create a full 3dB boost. You remove the speaker from the floor and lose that boost. You array two speakers in the air per side that couple with each other and you gain boost. I could go on with variations but the point is that it can be quickly dealt with at the venue.

I have tried different methods of baseline tuning and I find groundplane achieves a product that is closer to plug and play for multiple scenarios. Since groundplane measurements eliminate reflections from the ground, SMAART data is much cleaner and there is less chance for mistakes. This isn't to say I never use other measurement methods to collect different data but it still is my first choice for the initial baseline.

Dennis

Gadget

I could have sworn you had a pic of a speaker on its side with a mic aimed straight down in a shorty stand on a cement floor (like maybe a garage)

I do...


And

Gadget

Might be interesting to do a ground plane V/S freespace measurement and compare traces, of only to see just how far the boost extends, In a seminar by Meyer sound, they postulated that the horn is the only component that doesn't get affected by coincident coupling.

I now have Smart 7 and am "getting SMAART" as it were

Dennis

Gadget wrote:

I could have sworn you had a pic of a speaker on its side with a mic aimed straight down in a shorty stand on a cement floor (like maybe a garage)

Gadget wrote:

I do...

That's the one

Gadget wrote:

And

Or two

Gadget

BTproductions

Ya they mentioned doing this at the seminar. The only difference being in the way he mentioned placement of the speakers and mic. I know he said the most ideal way is to lay the speakers on their back facing straight up with the mic directly overhead on axis and at a distance which is apprx the height of the cabinet. This way you can move cabinets in and out without much deviation. I do believe however this way needs to be done in an anechoic room so...

This was only mentioned as a way to compare all your equiptment and make sure everything is coming out the same and working correctly. Are you suggesting I make presets this way and save those with already set PEQ's and start with those at a venue? As for now I go and run pink noise with a flat PEQ get a few spots collected make an average and trace its median with PEQ's through Smaart using the reference to generator and inverted settings. That's about all I've had time for so far tho I'm not incredibly fast at it yet.

Here's another question. After I do all of the above should I pick a spot and run pink noise again to see where my filters put me? Jamie didn't tho it was a classroom demonstration. For the most part this has given me a good result with a couple exceptions.

I need more practice. I wish it was warm outside!!!