# EQ or no EQ



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

Just finished two sub enclosures. I have them placed on either side of my mains. Do you guys think an EQ will make a noticable difference or should I just save my money. Heres my In room graphs. The first one is without audessey enabled on AVR, the second one is with audessy. I have a dip at 50 hz that gets worse as I move the mic around. I am guessing an EQ cant fix that.


----------



## akakillroy (Jul 9, 2008)

That is pretty impressive for sure :hail:


----------



## salvasol (Oct 31, 2006)

hot grits said:


> Just finished two sub enclosures. I have them placed on either side of my mains. Do you guys think an EQ will make a noticable difference or should I just save my money. Heres my In room graphs. The first one is without audessey enabled on AVR, the second one is with audessy. I have a dip at 50 hz that gets worse as I move the mic around. I am guessing an EQ cant fix that.


Do you have bass traps or accoustic panels on your room??? ... maybe that can help too.:yes:


----------



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

Yeah, I doubt EQ would do anything audible for you, except maybe help dial in a house curve.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

no bass traps yet. Thats my next project. I need a subsonic filter for the sub. Was just wondering if I should look for a unit that can handle the SSF which also had an EQ.


----------



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

Might not be a bad idea, don't know of any stand-alone SSF's...

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## imbeaujp (Oct 20, 2007)

no need for an EQ, on my oppinion.

But it is useful to have one to set diffrent house curve: Movie, pop music, classic, etc...

JP


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Might not be a bad idea, don't know of any stand-alone SSF's...
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


no they all pretty much have an EQ. I could get the eD eQ2 or reckhorn b1 which has a very limited EQ that I probably wouldnt even use. and they are both pretty cheap.

Or if an EQ would really make a noticeable difference I would get the Rane PE17. But it is rather pricey.


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

While I am posting graphs, I might as well show you guys the graphs of my mains plus the subs with and without audessey. 

The first is without audessey, the second is with it enabled.

Audessey really seems to do a good job on these graphs. There really seems to be alot of dips and valleys in these graphs. These looks acceptable or am in some major need of room treatments?


----------



## salvasol (Oct 31, 2006)

hot grits said:


> While I am posting graphs, I might as well show you guys the graphs of my mains plus the subs with and without audessey.
> 
> The first is without audessey, the second is with it enabled.
> 
> Audessey really seems to do a good job on these graphs. There really seems to be alot of dips and valleys in these graphs. These looks acceptable or am in some major need of room treatments?


Can you post them using 15Hz to 20KHz insteadof just 15Hz to 200Hz???? :bigsmile: (I think you have to use 1/3 smoothing if I recall correctly).


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

All I have is an RS meter. I hear they are not too accurate up at the higher frequencies.


----------



## salvasol (Oct 31, 2006)

hot grits said:


> All I have is an RS meter. I hear they are not too accurate up at the higher frequencies.


You're correct (I think they're good up to 5KHz ... but it gives you an idea :yes


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

As I move my mic to different listening positions, I really have a bad dip between 45 and 70hz. I tried other spots but this seems to be the best locations. Is this something bass traps can fix?


----------



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

hot grits said:


> As I move my mic to different listening positions, I really have a bad dip between 45 and 70hz. I tried other spots but this seems to be the best locations. Is this something bass traps can fix?


Actually, it's merely a dip at 50 Hz, at least with the top graph. Bass traps can probably help get more uniform response (i.e., more consistent at multiple locations), if you have room for them. Often it takes a lot of them to do the job.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## stepyourgameup (Jul 30, 2008)

Just curious as to why he is getting that dip at 50hz and why boosting it with an eq wouldn't fix it.:dontknow:


----------



## salvasol (Oct 31, 2006)

stepyourgameup said:


> Just curious as to why he is getting that dip at 50hz and why boosting it with an eq wouldn't fix it.:dontknow:


Maybe is room related ... :yes:


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S (Sep 15, 2007)

HotGrits...sounddot.com ... refurb eQ.2's for $65.
Got mine there and recieved it within a wekk and it works perfectly. 
Basically for SSF as well, but I've found myself using the EQ for a little boost around 50Hz.


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

Jut got the the Rane PE 17 on Ebay. I'm gonna start playing with it. I'll post some graphs.


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

I applied a 15 hz HPF on the Rane. I dont see any difference on the b4 and after graphs.

I was going to start to apply some filters to tweak my response. I ran sweeps from the 3 main listening positions. As you can see in the graphs below certain peaks are dips and vice versa as i move the mic. So if I calibrate for one location, I worsen that frequency at a different location. 

Should I even bother with the EQ on the Rane? 

Is there a way to get the target line to show up under the measured or averaging tab in REW?


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> Should I even bother with the EQ on the Rane?


It looks quite good, so I don't think I would equalize with those responses. You've got a bit of a peak at 35Hz, but not too bad.



> Is there a way to get the target line to show up under the measured or averaging tab in REW?


No...

brucek


----------



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

> I applied a 15 hz HPF on the Rane. I dont see any difference on the b4 and after graphs.


That's because your graph ends at 15 Hz. The filter's effect would be _below_ 15 Hz.



> As you can see in the graphs below certain peaks are dips and vice versa as i move the mic. So if I calibrate for one location, I worsen that frequency at a different location.


Basically, that's correct. Typically we EQ For the "sweet spot," i.e. where we sit (assuming we're the primary user and the one who cares the most about sound quality).



> Should I even bother with the EQ on the Rane?


Well, the hump just below 35 Hz is common to all positions, so taming that could get an audible improvement. If you move the HPF up to 20 Hz or 25 Hz it could help tame that nasty rise at 15 Hz.

Also, as mentioned, you could add another couple of filters for the "sweet spot" for when you're veiwing or listening to music alone. The nice thing about an EQ like the Rane is that you can easily switch those filters out when you have guests.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

Thanks for the quick replies.
I also did a sweep from 10hz to check the effect of the HPF.
The results are in this graph. Still no difference. Maybe it is the limitations of the mic down that low? 
Green is without the SSF.
Yellow is with the SSF at 15hz.

I would like to confirm it is working as it modeled in WinISD. I am dying to test out the WOTW scene with out risking bottoming out the sub.


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> Maybe it is the limitations of the mic down that low?


Hopefully you're using the correct calibration file from our download page.....


----------



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

> Green is without the SSF.
> Yellow is with the SSF at 15hz.


There is no specific bypass for the filter, so I assume you're bypassing the whole EQ?

Also, the filter is only 12 dB/octave, which means with it set at 15 Hz response will be down 12 dB at 7 Hz. I think I'd want a little better protection than that. :huh:

Also, there's no telling how accurate the front panel markings are. I suggest nudging the slider upwards and taking new readings until you get the attenuation your looking for.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> Also, there's no telling how accurate the front panel markings are


Test it with REW as a line device and calibrate the markings and also get a good look at the curves...

brucek


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

I have a newer digital model 33-2055 and I am using the 33-2055_4050.cal file


----------



## hot grits (May 9, 2008)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> There is no specific bypass for the filter, so I assume you're bypassing the whole EQ?
> 
> Also, the filter is only 12 dB/octave, which means with it set at 15 Hz response will be down 12 dB at 7 Hz. I think I'd want a little better protection than that. :huh:
> 
> ...


I didnt have the EQ bypassed, I just had the low cut at the lowest value. How do I know I have reached the attenuation I need? 

The graph is already starting to drop at 15 hz without the filter. 
So am I just looking for a steeper drop? 
I would rather not lose anything above 15 hz if possible.


----------



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

> I didnt have the EQ bypassed, I just had the low cut at the lowest value.


That doesn't bypass the filter, it just moves it from 15 to 10 Hz. That's probably why there isn't much difference between your "bypassed" and "engaged" readings. The only way to bypass the filter is with the EQ bypass button. That bypasses all filters as well, of course. 



> How do I know I have reached the attenuation I need?


You'll have to decide for yourself what attenuation you need, based on what you determine your sub's capability is, because we have no idea what that is. At that point we can help you figure out if you've met the objective. 



> I would rather not lose anything above 15 hz if possible.


It will be impossible to "brick wall" below that frequency. Get us a true bypassed reading so we can see of that rolloff you have below 15 Hz is natural, or the result of the filter.

Regards,
Wayne


----------

