# Need help with graphs



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi i have decided to go back to the drawing board.

Before setting up my stereo subs for music i want to get the mains right as much as possible.

I have attached mdat files (zipped) with the Yamaha Z9 bass tone 125hz adjusted (Left & Right separate mains & both together), i guess these are shelf filters. They are Energy Veritas 2.3i floorstanders.

The increments in the receiver are 0.5 but because of file size i have reduced the size. I still have the other measurements if required.

Because of my 1 octave EQ restrictions, please can someone suggest the best ones (Left & Right) to start to EQ.

Also looking for a recommended crossover for the subs?

Thanks in advance.

View attachment Left Main Speaker 125hz.zip


View attachment Right Main Speaker 125hz.zip


View attachment Both 125hz.zip


----------



## Barleywater (Dec 11, 2011)

Yes, we've been here before.

Now you have Omnimic V2

Since EQ is 1 octave, 1 octave smoothing gives good picture of EQ behavior. It does what is asked of it:









So what are objectives? Mains appear quite capable. Do you intend subs primarily to enhance music or LFE in movies?

Receiver gives modes for mains? Full range settings usually rely on mains roll off for integration with subs.

Need to get subs and mains into same measurement set.

Measurement of sub(s) without crossover on them or receiver should be made. Or use highest crossover setting. Idea is to get idea of sub level in anticipated crossover region first, and then get mains at same level in same region.

With this crossover settings are chosen and measured. 60-80Hz is good place to start.

Phasing of measurements is used in resolving delay settings.

I and others have posted extensively on this.

Keep on measuring. :bigsmile:

Regards,

Andrew


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

The recommend crossover setting doesn’t change despite having full-range speakers. It should be something like 80-90 Hz.

I have no idea what this means:


> ... the Yamaha Z9 bass tone 125hz adjusted... i guess these are shelf filters.


As Andrew mentioned, you didn’t give us any indication of your objectives, so I’m not sure I get what the problem is. Your Yamaha Z9 has an auto-EQ function for the main channels. Have you been unhappy with its results?

As far as manual equalizing goes with the Yamaha’s graphic EQ, it’s pretty simple: You study your graph and look for anomalies in response. Then you see if the equalizer has a filter at the right location. If it does, you’re good to go. If it doesn’t, you can’t do anything about that particular problem. For example, here’s your right channel graph, with 1/3-octave smoothing applied to eliminate the comb filtering:







​

Starting from the low frequencies, you have a dip at 50 Hz. However, the closest filter the Yamaha has is at 63 Hz. Sixty-three Hz on the graph is still somewhat depressed, so you could go ahead and boost that filter a few dB. But it’s not going to do much for the 50 Hz dip.

Moving up the scale a bit, you have a fairly broad depression centered at about 180 Hz. However, the Z9 has filters at 125 Hz and 250 Hz, so you can’t really do much about that one: Boosting the 125 Hz or 250 Hz filters will bring up the 180 Hz depression, but it will also boost areas that don’t need adjusting. For instance, boosting the 250 Hz filter will get you a nice new peak at 300 Hz that you don’t have before. So, trying to solve the 180 Hz problem with the filters available is only going to cause additional problems.

Moving up the scale again, you have a significant depression at about 3 kHz. The Yamaha has filters at 2 kHz and 4 kHz. So as with the 180 Hz issue you can’t fix this one either without causing other problems.

You can experiment in REW and see the predicted results for yourself. Just select the “Generic” parametric EQ from the menu, set the filters for “manual” and “PK.” Then set the frequency for the values the Yamaha’s graphic equalizer has – 63 Hz, 125 Hz, 250 Hz, etc. – and set the Q for 1.40 (which is a one-octave bandwidth filter). When you boost or cut the filter, you’ll see on the graph the effect it will have on response.

As you can see, there isn’t a lot you can do with a one-octave equalizer. About the only thing they’re good for is making temporary adjustments to program material. The Z9’s quasi-parametric Cinema EQ feature would be much more useful, but unfortunately it only equalizes all three front channels in tandem and not individually. Major bummer.

Overall you have a downward slope of the highs above 2 kHz. A shelving filter would be a good fix for that, but the Z9 doesn’t include one of those either.

The Yamaha has pre-amp out and main in jacks for the front three channels. In other words, it has the connections to accommodate outboard equalizers. So if you’re unhappy with the Yamaha’s auto EQ capabilities and really want to employ manual equalization, why don’t you just get an outboard equalizer? That's what I did.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> I have no idea what this means:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Never mind, I figured out that you’re talking about the basic tone controls for bass and treble. I didn’t know you could adjust the frequency they work at! Yes, they are shelving filters. Which means you could use the basic treble control to do something about your high-freq sag above 2 kHz.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Barleywater said:


> Yes, we've been here before.
> 
> Now you have Omnimic V2
> 
> ...


Hi Andrew thank you.

Yes i have the V2 which you can see the difference is substantial.

Intentions are flat as a mark.

Music is my main listen with the odd movie.

Sorry i don't understand _*Receiver gives modes for mains?*_


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> The recommend crossover setting doesn’t change despite having full-range speakers. It should be something like 80-90 Hz.
> 
> I have no idea what this means:
> 
> ...



Thanks Wayne

My objectives are as flat as i can get it with the GEQ. The auto peq was hopeless.

I have used the Generic with Q1.0 so i will change to Q1.40 thank you.

I am about to post some more measurements.


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi 

Attached are the other measurements (350hz & 500hz) bass tone.

What i am trying to achieve is which combination has the most merit for EQing with the GEQ.

Which facility in REW under Generic filters (manual) would i use to see the effects of the treble tone (shelving filters) with the Z9?

Do i EQ the mains full range first and then set the crossover on the Z9 vs set the crossover on the Z9 first then EQ?

Has anyone had any dealings with the Antimode Dual Core 2.0, all i have seen is "saying it is very good" but no actual measurements made with REW (or any other software)?

View attachment Left Main Speaker 350hz.zip


View attachment Right Main Speaker 350hz.zip


View attachment Both 350hz.zip


Thank you


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Sorry about this i couldn't load these files in the last post.

View attachment Left Main Speaker 500hz.zip


View attachment Right Main Speaker 500hz.zip


View attachment Both 500hz.zip


Thank you


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi i have also added the subs, appears i can't load more than 3 files.

These are all with the crossover on them disabled.

The subsonic filter is set to 15 & slope 24.

View attachment Subs Velodynes.zip


Thanks again


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Phillips said:


> Attached are the other measurements (350hz & 500hz) bass tone.
> 
> What i am trying to achieve is which combination has the most merit for EQing with the GEQ.


Okay, I’m back to being confused. I can’t find anything in the manual about changing the turnover frequency of the bass tone control, so I have no idea what that 350 and 500 Hz thing is or how it relates to what you’re trying to accomplish.




> Which facility in REW under Generic filters (manual) would i use to see the effects of the treble tone (shelving filters) with the Z9?


 Same place where you turned on the manual filters and set the Q. Instead of the usual “PK” (peak) choose “HS” (high frequency shelving) or “LS” (low frequency shelving). :T




> Do i EQ the mains full range first and then set the crossover on the Z9 vs set the crossover on the Z9 first then EQ?


If you intend to use a crossover on the main channels, then have it engaged when you equalize. Otherwise you might end up applying filters below the crossover point.




> Has anyone had any dealings with the Antimode Dual Core 2.0, all i have seen is "saying it is very good" but no actual measurements made with REW (or any other software)?


Traditionally I haven’t been too fond of it, because its auto EQ function only cuts peaks and ignores depressions - see here. If you have depressions in bass response, addressing them will get an improvement in sound. The latest model Antimode (the one you’re referring to) has on-board parametric equalization, so that problem might be addressed now. However, if you have to manually set the parametric EQ, then it makes more sense to just get something like the BFD for a lot less money.




> My objectives are as flat as i can get it with the GEQ.


In case it wasn’t clear in my previous post, this is a lost cause with the Z9’s GEQ. A one-octave graphic equalizer just doesn’t have the resolution and precision required to flatten response. 

I’m afraid there’s nothing we’re going to be able to do for you long-distance, Phillip. If you had parametric equalization it would be easy for us to tell you (for example), “You can fix that peak at 85 Hz with a 1/4-octave filter cut about 5 dB.” But if all you have available in that range are a couple on one-octave filters at 63Hz and 125 Hz, there’s no way you can accurately fix that 85 Hz peak. 

On top that, one-octave filters are as wide as the Pacific Ocean, so they’re going to be affecting way more than the small area you’re targeting. To show you what I mean, look at this graph, which shows a pair of equalizer filters boosted 5 dB. The filter at 100 Hz is a relatively tight 1/3-octave, while the filter at 2 kHz is a one-octave filter, the kind your Z9’s GEQ has.







​

Bottom line, there’s just no way for us to predict from across the internet what effect filters like this are going to have on your response, so there’s really not much we can tell you. Your best bet to get as much as you can with the Z9’s on-board equalization will be to use REW’s RTA feature. That way you can apply and tweak filters and instantly see in real time what they’re accomplishing.

If you’re intent on using only on-board equalization, you might consider a later-model upper-tier Yamaha receiver (i.e. newer than the one you have). They have independent 1/3-octave parametric filters for all channels with fully adjustable bandwidth. The operation is a bit clumsy, but it’s very powerful and very effective. I got great results from the RX-V2500 I have in my bedroom system.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Okay, I’m back to being confused. I can’t find anything in the manual about changing the turnover frequency of the bass tone control, so I have no idea what that 350 and 500 Hz thing is or how it relates to what you’re trying to accomplish.
> 
> 
> Hi Wayne thank you.
> ...


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi Wayne

With the treble drop (2k + ) i have increased the treble 2k shelving filter.

I tried to reduce from 2k down individual filters (best to cut than boost)?

Which one would be the best option?

Is it best to use the shelving filters (even boosts) first?

I didn't think you rated the BFD

With the purchasing of the Yamaha YDP 2006, what concerns me is condition etc, any thoughts?

Thanks in advance


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Hey Phillip,



> With the treble drop (2k + ) i have increased the treble 2k shelving filter.


You might want to set the filter frequency higher, as shelving filters typically effect beyond their turnover frequency setting.












> I tried to reduce from 2k down individual filters (best to cut than boost)?
> 
> Which one would be the best option?


If you’re asking whether or cut or boost, the answer is it doesn’t matter, as the adjustment is in the digital realm as is the program material. 




> Is it best to use the shelving filters (even boosts) first?


The order in which filters are applied is of no consequence.




> With the purchasing of the Yamaha YDP 2006, what concerns me is condition etc, any thoughts?


Look for one that’s from a permanent installation – like a studio or public auditorium – not one that was using in a portable system. That type typically have been beat to death.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Thanks Wayne

Is this best method/order to intergrate the sub for stereo subs

Set the crossover (80HZ) in the Z9 take measurements for separate mains 
Take separate mesurements for each sub
Eq the subs for each channel (15-125)
Maybe increase the Z9 crossover, and adjust the each sub crossover to best intergrate with each main speaker
Adjust the phase (varable) for each main/sub
Then measure combined mains/subs and adjust phase

Yamaha YDP 2006 where would be the best place to look for one of these?

Thanks in advance


----------



## Barleywater (Dec 11, 2011)

Set the crossover (80HZ) in the Z9 take measurements for separate mains 
Take separate measurements for each sub
Eq the subs for each channel (15-125)

Adjust levels so each sub and main have same level at 80Hz

1) Adjust the delay in the Z9 for each sub to get best phase match with is corresponding main.

or 

2) Adjust the phase of each sub to get best phase match with its corresponding main.

Possibly a combination of 1) and then 2).

From difference in phase for given frequency delay may be calculated. This greatly reduces number of measurements needed to check results for changes in settings.

When done, results with subs and mains together should be good, otherwise more of the above.

Regards,

Andrew


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Barleywater said:


> From difference in phase for given frequency delay may be calculated.
> 
> Andrew



Thanks Andrew

Please can you explain this, i don't quite understand, how i go about this?

Thanks


----------



## Barleywater (Dec 11, 2011)

Concrete example:

speed of sound = 343m/sec

for 80Hz wave each wave is 343/80 meters long and is 1/80th sec

Each wave may be divided by circle so 360degrees/wave. 

So if phase difference is 90degrees we get 1/4th a wave, and with 80Hz 1/4th x 1/80th = 1/320th second delay.

Regards,

Andrew


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

I have recalibrated (need to fine tune), when i measured each main with each sub the phase was ok, but when i measured with all mains and subs together i had to reverse the phase on one sub.

Why is this?

Thanks in advance


----------



## Barleywater (Dec 11, 2011)

Please post some measurement sets. Chances are acoustic crossover slopes don't match all that well for subs and mains.

You should be able to use trace arithmetic to do A-B; with good alignment a deep notch will be seen at crossover point.

Andrew


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Barleywater said:


> Please post some measurement sets. Chances are acoustic crossover slopes don't match all that well for subs and mains.
> 
> You should be able to use trace arithmetic to do A-B; with good alignment a deep notch will be seen at crossover point.
> 
> Andrew



Hi Andrew i have attached some measurements (mdat).

The Subs measurements are with the subs crossover disabled and with the Z9 crossover set to 200HZ with the mains turned off.

View attachment 80hz Crossover.zip


View attachment Subs.zip


Please see the other 2 x mdat files in the next post, only lets me load so many per post.



Thanks in advance


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi Andrew attached are the added files from the last post.

Any more measurements required please let me know.

View attachment 80hz All Playing Left and Right.zip


View attachment 80hz All Playing Both.zip


Thanks in advance


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi please can anyone help with my above post questions.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Barleywater (Dec 11, 2011)

Hello,

Sorry for leaving you dangling. Omnimic remains problematic for use with single sweep methods. Omnimic approach with secondary fixed source is hassle. Other route to phase alignment is via RTA. If RTA is set with enough narrow bands, then measurement with noise will show deep dip in response at crossover frequency when polarity of sub or main is reversed. Band corresponding to crossover frequency is monitored while slowly adjusting delay of speaker or sub. If sub is longer distance then main is delayed, otherwise sub is delayed.

Confirmation is done with sweeps of system with polarity reversal, and with normal polarity.

Hope this helps

Regards,

Andrew


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Barleywater said:


> Hello,
> 
> Sorry for leaving you dangling. Omnimic remains problematic for use with single sweep methods. Omnimic approach with secondary fixed source is hassle. Other route to phase alignment is via RTA. If RTA is set with enough narrow bands, then measurement with noise will show deep dip in response at crossover frequency when polarity of sub or main is reversed. Band corresponding to crossover frequency is monitored while slowly adjusting delay of speaker or sub. If sub is longer distance then main is delayed, otherwise sub is delayed.
> 
> ...



No need to be sorry 

With delay which frequencies will be effected, i hear all of them?

I will give the RTA option a go for phase and delay.

For the RTA which octave do you think?


Thanks


----------

