# REW for an Idiot



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Hi Folks
This is my first post so as usual be gentle
I have read extensively about room acoustics and room tratments and really appreciated the effect the room could be having on my home theater but the more I read the more confused and frustrated I get.

I have read loads on Subwoofer placement but am non the wiser where to position mine before doing any EQ.

Ive looked at buying the "XTZ Room Analyzer Package " but wonder if this is a false economy if I end up buying a SVS AS-EQ1 SubEQ

Of course there ia also the free REW software, brilliant graphs but how does an idiot like me analyse and understand them

If it shows a hump / dip does it also show where in the room that is? how do you treat it? reposition your sub? adjust something on your AVR ?
Because REW is not the same as a SVS AS-EQ1 SubEQ which I believe is left in line how do you adjust the freq reponse.
By now you should realise I am stupid and need to either give up or get some back to basics help which I havn't so far found searching around on REW
My dedicated room is an awkward 20ft X 17ft + a 8ft 7"X 31.5" Alcove , the room is 8' High
My System is a Panasonic AE-3000 , Denon 2500 BT Transport, Yahama Z7 AVR, M&K S-150 L/C/R, M&K SS-150 Surrounds , Polk Ls/FX Rear Back and a M&K MX-350 Sub.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
Thanks in advance


----------



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

> Can anyone point me in the right direction?


First of all, why get the XTZ package? It does basically the same thing as REW, and REW is free. Okay, not totally free, as you have to buy at the very least a compatible sound card (assuming the one your computer has isn’t) and an SPL meter (if you don't already have one). Still, it’s far cheaper than XTZ. 

XTZ does appear that it may be easier to set up and operate than REW, so if you’re technically challenged with computer stuff, it might be worthwhile for you. However, the problem most people seem to have getting REW going is choosing sound cards that aren’t compatible with their operating systems.




> I have read loads on Subwoofer placement but am non the wiser where to position mine before doing any EQ.


The frequency response graphs REW generates can help with that. Basically, you can situate the subwoofer at your listening location and take response readings with the measurement mic at potential subwoofer locations. The one that gets the best response reading is the best location for the sub. From that point, equalization can be performed, and response readings will show the results of equalizing.




> Of course there ia also the free REW software, brilliant graphs but how does an idiot like me analyse and understand them


We are here to help people understand the graphs. Or at least let them know they’re headed in the right direction.




> If it shows a hump / dip does it also show where in the room that is? how do you treat it? reposition your sub? adjust something on your AVR ?


Repositioning usually gets the best results. There is only so much equalization or treatment can do to compensate for a bad sub location.




> Because REW is not the same as a SVS AS-EQ1 SubEQ which I believe is left in line how do you adjust the freq reponse.


The SVS equalizer does room evaluation and equalization automatically. Other equalizers require manual adjustments, using frequency response plots as a guide.




> By now you should realise I am stupid


Eh, don’t be so hard on yourself. No one is an expert at everything. I don’t know a blessed thing about designing microchips, for instance. I’m sure you’re an expert at something that I don’t know anything about. :T

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> First of all, why get the XTZ package? It does basically the same thing as REW, and REW is free. Okay, not totally free, as you have to buy at the very least a compatible sound card (assuming the one tour computer has isn’t) and an SPL meter (if you don't already have one). Still, it’s far cheaper than XTZ.
> 
> XTZ does appear that it may be easier to set up and operate than REW, so if you’re technically challenged with computer stuff, it might be worthwhile for you. However, the problem most people seem to have getting REW going is choosing sound cards that aren’t compatible with their operating systems.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the quick response Wayne and confirming some of my concerns especially XTZ v REW ,
While researching all products come into the radar it is sometimes not obvious that some things that flag up may be a few years old and superseded by something more up to date.

I will try your suggestion of putting the Sub at my listening position and using REW at possible Sub locations , that makes sense to me.

As for adjusting any anomalies , I take it this would have to be done manually inside the AVR using the Yamaha Z7 YPAO , now thats frightening

I suppose the answer would be to get a SVS Sub equalizer , by then the Sub position should at least be in the ballpark


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

Another thing to consider (not to confuse you) is that the location of that listening position is just as important as the sub location. Sometimes options are limited due to aesthetics and WAF. Also, even if you get the SVS EQ, you may find the desire to use REW to measure before and after, just for bragging rights!
One thing you could do is post a sketch of your room for placement suggestions.


----------



## Tufelhundin (Jan 25, 2010)

New guy here and Greg is right on, I have dual PBU's in a 2800 cft room and I use the ASEQ due to having duals and I love it, but I do use the REW along with an SPL/UCA202 just to see what it shows. I enjoy using REW alot but I found that after I got the ASEQ dealing with my duals became less of a heartache. Maybe one day I'll get more than 5 post so I can post my graphs and ask some questions concerning them


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

Looks like you just got there!


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

glaufman said:


> Another thing to consider (not to confuse you) is that the location of that listening position is just as important as the sub location. Sometimes options are limited due to aesthetics and WAF. Also, even if you get the SVS EQ, you may find the desire to use REW to measure before and after, just for bragging rights!
> One thing you could do is post a sketch of your room for placement suggestions.


Hi
Thanks for the reply , I was/am hoping to use REW to optimise the listening position as well ,as I am aware that by accident you could have your position in a null ( Any suggestions as to how to avoid this before running REW appreciated )

Dont think I can post a sketch yet , not enough posts
Regards
Andy


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

Sorry for the delayed reply...
Best way to avoid the deepest null is to avoid the direct center of the room. If the room is "regular" 38% off the front or back walls is often a very good spot.


----------



## Siamize (Apr 10, 2010)

lesmor said:


> Hi
> Thanks for the reply , I was/am hoping to use REW to optimise the listening position as well ,as I am aware that by accident you could have your position in a null ( Any suggestions as to how to avoid this before running REW appreciated )
> 
> Dont think I can post a sketch yet , not enough posts
> ...


It seems that you aren't alone ... many people don't know/can't find how to set up a room. I recommend first that you have a read of the thread

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/12661-target-curve-new-discovery-4.html

There's been a good bit of information there.

After reading all that I've been testing my room. My biggest mistake I must admit was that I was only testing at one location. I'd read that taking averages from like 4 locations produced the same results basically as at one. I followed that advice and wondered why my results changed each day of the week. Answer ... enviromental factors. See:

http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/Enviromental Effects on the Speed of Sound.pdf

For even more details see: http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/atmos sound absorbsion.pdf

So from there I tested in a range of listening locations which seems representative. If you only ever listen from one location I guess you only need that location but unless it's at a studio mixing desk, I think that you'll have more than one location. From experience I've found that this removed all the ups & downs that occur due to nodal points. When you think about it, the wavelength of 1kHz is about 300mm or 1 foot, so every 300mm each way you are likely to experience an interferance and a construction node of varing degree depending on how much reflection you have in your room. In short, you will have sound going everywhere in your room in all directions so you need to take that into account when testing and setting up your system.




Also as to the response that you "want"/"need", I've found that the Modern X Curve as describe in the following page is pretty good:

http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/the_mythical_x_curve.pdf

For a bit more of a background see:
http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/Dolby_The X-Curve__SMPTE Journal.pdf
and 
http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/Article-Xcurve.pdf


----------



## Siamize (Apr 10, 2010)

Also see
http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/StdHouseSoundResponse.html


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Hi guys
Thanks for all your replies which will take a minute to digest
the 38% off front /back wall is interesting ,I take it that is the seat position ,so on a 20ft long room that equates to 7'6"
the reason I ask is.
I have been reading an artical by George Cardas , (rules wont allow me to post the link)
who gives a formula for speaker/ listener placement ,it looked promising but when set up on a 20ft long room you end up with the front of the speakers at 7'6" from the front wall , then your seat is at 7'6" from speaker fronts which only leaves 5'0 of room left behind the listener, the speaker position to me looks to be too much in the centre of the room , is anyone familiar with or used this formula, or has any comments on it?
Thanks again appreciated


----------



## laser188139 (Sep 19, 2009)

I think that is two sides of the same idea for avoiding a position that is a simple fraction of the overall distance. As you recognized, moving the seat that distance from the back wall and moving the speakers that distance from the front wall does not leave much space and does not make much sense. You could try one or the other as a starting point. Not many of us have the space to leave the couch at the wall and move the speakers 38% from the front wall. 

The nice thing about REW is that it is easier to move the mic and take spectrum or sweep measures than move the chair or the speakers.


----------



## Siamize (Apr 10, 2010)

lesmor said:


> I have been reading an artical by George Cardas ...
> 
> http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/roomsetup.pdf
> 
> when set up on a 20ft long room you end up with the front of the speakers at 7'6" from the front wall , then your seat is at 7'6" from speaker fronts which only leaves 5'0 of room left behind the listener, the speaker position to me looks to be too much in the centre of the room , is anyone familiar with or used this formula


I'm guessing that your room is kinda setup like so (sorry about the metric units) ... 









It does look somewhat like in the centre of the room.

I would have thought that the room height would have had more of an effect than the distance from the speaker wall as such as most of the sound is projected forwards.

The suggested setups are mostly to try and deal with nodal points of low freq sounds. But as I said before, you usually listen from more than one position anyway, so it's all a bit of give and take.


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Siamize said:


> I'm guessing that your room is kinda setup like so (sorry about the metric units) ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Many thanks again
laser188139 You are correct, when setting it up in this way it just doesn't look right , the diagrams on the Cardas Site do not seem to be to scale so do not show how bad it is in reality.
This of course should not be taken as a criticism of the theory regarding node points, as if this gives the best sound then so be it.
Also would suggest it lends itself More to 2 channel stereo than home theater

Nice sketch siamize what did you use to create it, as I may now have enough posts to send one of my room
which had previously been requested
Regards
Andy


----------



## Siamize (Apr 10, 2010)

lesmor said:


> Nice sketch siamize what did you use to create it.
> Andy


Thanks .... AutoCad ... seeing I'm a civil engineer I have access to such drawing packages & the ability to use them to produce a reasonable sketch. 


I found this little bit of research (not just theoretical waffle but also real testing) into the analysis of room sizes, speaker locations & listening locations interesting. Particularly the last sections.

http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/Room_acoustics.html

*Horrible/Optimum Rooms* - _The response also changes a lot when the listening point is moved two feet in any direction._ 
From testing my room I couldn't agree any stronger. I found it interesting when I read in some article how the movement of a speaker by a few inches could make a huge difference. I believe it does just as much as so does moving the listener a few inches. My point being ... whoever sits that still fullstop.


Another bit I found interesting was this in the last section.

_Don't take a speaker manufacturer's claim of ±1 dB frequency response too seriously either. _
So you're going to have to have a graphic equalizer (or similar) at hand if you are to have an even response no matter what room you have. Therefore you can adjust it for whatever frequencies reverberate too much / not enough in whatever room you are in. Having said that, the location & positon of your speakers will determine how even the response will be over your target listening area.



I also found this little setup simple ... the first method of the Golden Rule has been mentioned prior in this post the the second seems a little more flexible.

http://siamize.vpscustomer.com/sound/Speaker_Placement_Simple.pdf


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Hi Guys
Back again
Many thanks to all who have responded ,very good feedback whick I have looked at and taken onboard
My room upgrade is near complete , and hopefully will be able to use REW in the next week.

I have just checked my meter and have some questions as to its suitability if you dont mind.

1.The leaflet says it is a Techcessories Sound level meter ,it was sold by Tandy ,although it says Radio Shack on the actual meter, there is no model number ( Cat.No 33-2050 ) bought in 1995 ,so which calibration file should I use?

2. The leaflet says the frequency response is flat from 32 to 10000 Hz , is that what is required for REW?

Regards
Andy


----------



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

Hi lesmor,

The meter's rated "frequency response" is of no consequence. You'll find a calibration file for the 33-2050 meter on our downloads page. It's what you'll want to use if you're using the meter for your measurements. If you're using another mic for measuring, and the meter for SPL only, then no calibration file is needed.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Many Thanks Wayne for the clarification
Looking forward to my first attempt with REW , will probably need some assistance to interperate the graphs so will post when I have some


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Hi Guys
Finally got REW set up ( I Think ) after having problems with my sound card ( see different thread )
One thing is still not clear is , when doing measurements , sub only at the moment , using the right channel , should you still have the left channel looped back to the sound card like you do when calibrating the sound card ?
Many thanks to all who have helped me so far on this and my other thread :clap:


----------



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

> should you still have the left channel looped back to the sound card like you do when calibrating the sound card ?


No reason to do that...

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

lesmor said:


> One thing is still not clear is , when doing measurements , sub only at the moment , using the right channel , should you still have the left channel looped back to the sound card like you do when calibrating the sound card ?


Not for FR measurements.


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Following on from previous screenshots for my Soundcard problem thread
Moved seating position as suggested
Now seems to be a dip at 50HZ with no EQ
Have run one sub with Phase switch selected positive and one selected negative through my SVS Sub EQ this seems to sound better than having them both the same ,any thoughts as to why that would be?
Why does the level run up and peak at 100+ db when reference is set at 70db?
Any Suggestions to improve the un EQ response prior to running the SVS Sub EQ again?
How can I tell how low my subs can go in frequency from these graphs??


----------



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

> Have run one sub with Phase switch selected positive and one selected negative through my SVS Sub EQ this seems to sound better than having them both the same ,any thoughts as to why that would be?


Impossible to say without seeing your room layout, but obviously the positioning that sounded better resulted in better frequency response.




> Why does the level run up and peak at 100+ db when reference is set at 70db?


 The test tone REW uses for calibrating the SPL level is not broadband. It does not include signals down to the lowest frequecies. In your case, you have tremendous output at the lowest frequencies, which is why you’re hitting far above the Target in that range.




> Any Suggestions to improve the un EQ response prior to running the SVS Sub EQ


The only thing you can do is experiment with different locations.




> How can I tell how low my subs can go in frequency from these graphs??


Looks to me like they’re still going strong at 15 Hz, so they obviously have output even lower than that. :T

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Thanks for the feedback Wayne
Taken on board your reply as to measuring different seating , so have been moving meter forward and back and taking shots.
Also good to know my subs can go low, but because of room response I'm not hearing the benefit I think.

Couple more shots 
The ones with one sub pos Phase and one neg Phase with no EQ ,look good to my untrained eye , would just like professional opinion.
Same set up with SVS enabled does not look as good although I did not run the SVS EQ with subs set up and in this position so depending on your view that would be my next move

Also note no large peak at start of measurement this time , I have changed nothing on output , only measurement ( Potential Seating ) position
has been changed


----------



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

The W/EQ graph looks a little peculiar. I thought SVS’s on-board equalization was cut-only, yet there’s an _increase_ in output in the 35-50hz range. :scratch:

That top graph – if you added a parametric EQ and tamed that hump in the 28-32 Hz range, you’d be rockin’. You’d hear that stuff <30 Hz like never before. :T

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> The W/EQ graph looks a little peculiar. I thought SVS’s on-board equalization was cut-only, yet there’s an _increase_ in output in the 35-50hz range. :scratch:
> 
> That top graph – if you added a parametric EQ and tamed that hump in the 28-32 Hz range, you’d be rockin’. You’d hear that stuff <30 Hz like never before. :T
> 
> ...


Brilliant looks like I might have a decent seating position, so I will run the SVS tonight in that area and see how it measures.
Strange how things look so much better with one sub neg and one positive , must be some kind of cancellation ongoing.
It would be good to finally hear some bass , as although a newbie even I can hear that things are not as they should be.

Just to clarify it is not onboard EQ , I am using a SVS AS-EQ1
Likewise I thought you could only cut peaks with any system, but it seems to boost ,and also for the SVS to always report back a flat graph after calibration is a bit deceptive even though it is an average.

So a bit of calibration work tonight, some remeasuring , and most important if looking good listening

Again many thanks for your time and analysis couldnt do it without the feedback.
Regards
Andy


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Well based on last readings I have recalibrated my Yamaha Z7 reciever , then taken some unEQ readings.
Then run the SVS on the best set
Screenshot with SVS AS-EQ1 enabled
I have GIK Tri-traps floor to ceiling in front wall and alcove corners
Also half a tri-trap at left side back wall due to full height affecting surround speakers
Now considering absorbers at first reflection points , also behind seating at rear wall


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Done some subjective listening with new position and what looks like flat response
But no bass at listening position 
Walk around the room at sidewalls plenty bass , walk back to listening area and it disappears.
Any suggestions
Also have to have volume high to hear bass ( reference ) which makes higher frequencies too loud for comfort
Any suggestions appreciated


----------



## JohnM (Apr 11, 2006)

Do a sweep out to 1kHz or so to see how the sub level compares with the level of the mains.


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

JohnM said:


> Do a sweep out to 1kHz or so to see how the sub level compares with the level of the mains.


Will do as suggested although when doing a calibration with the SVS AS-EQ1 you have to use a main speaker and adjust its volume to give a reference level , which is usually -7.0 db on my receiver
Then you adjust each subs gain individually to match that.
Once EQ is done the SVS AS-EQ1 reports back a distance and trim level to input into your receiver
Which in my last calibration was 6.2m and +1.8db
I run my sub woofer trim volume on my receiver at + 5.0 db


----------



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

If you’ve moved your listening position to the center of the room, as you mentioned previously, that probably accounts for it. The position that’s best for stereo imaging or (whatever it was in the George Cardas article you mentioned) isn’t necessarily the best for bass response. The problem is that in most rooms with more-or-less symmetrical dimensions is that the center of the room is a “bass hole.” Perceived bass output or intensity increases as you move from the center towards a boundary.

In addition, your flat response might be part of the problem. Many people think it sounds a bit thin or weak. You might try a house curve.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> If you’ve moved your listening position to the centre of the room, as you mentioned previously, that probably accounts for it. The position that’s best for stereo imaging or (whatever it was in the George Cardas article you mentioned) isn’t necessarily the best for bass response. The problem is that in most rooms with more-or-less symmetrical dimensions is that the centre of the room is a “bass hole.” Perceived bass output or intensity increases as you move from the centre to wards a boundary.
> 
> In addition, your flat response might be part of the problem. Many people think it sounds a bit thin or weak. You might try a house curve.
> 
> ...


Hi Wayne
Thanks for the reply
My seating position is now 8 ft from the rear wall of a 19 ft 7" Long room this is where I have the flattest response.
It is certainly further forward than I would like to be , but walking the centre line of the length of the room and listening there is no strong bass anywhere?
I rejected the Cardas method of speaker layout that I mentioned as it was totally impracticable.

Excuse my ignorance but do you not need to be able to adjust your EQ to use a house curve? 
There is no user adjustment with my SVS AS-EQ1 Sub EQ I'm afraid


----------



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

Forgot that you were using the SVS equalizer – sorry. It would require a different equalizer to do a house curve.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Forgot that you were using the SVS equalizer – sorry. It would require a different equalizer to do a house curve.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Thanks Wayne no problem
After racking my brain I believe the problem is that the SVS requires that I reduce reference level -7db less than my SPL meter to satisfy the calibration, which is pretty poor.
As already said after calibrating the 2 subs it recommends +1.8 db trim in my receiver.
So conclusion I have come to is that I am thinking the SVS is setting the subs to reference level but in reality the gain on my subs is too low by about 9db.
To check this out I have increased my sub woofer level on my receiver by 10 db and now can hear bass at the listening position.
now this is bound to affect the REW readings I have taken , and having previously sometimes had high output at the start of measuring , and instances of clipping I am back to Zero.


----------



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

> To check this out I have increased my sub woofer level on my receiver by 10 db and now can hear bass at the listening position.
> now this is bound to affect the REW readings I have taken , and having previously sometimes had high output at the start of measuring , and instances of clipping I am back to Zero.


Your receiver’s sub level setting has no bearing on your REW measurements. During the “Calibrate SPL” routine that’s done before measurements, the measurement level is adjusted by the receiver’s volume control. That’s going to adjust the proper level for measuring, no matter what the receiver’s sub level is set for.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Your receiver’s sub level setting has no bearing on your REW measurements. During the “Calibrate SPL” routine that’s done before measurements, the measurement level is adjusted by the receiver’s volume control. That’s going to adjust the proper level for measuring, no matter what the receiver’s sub level is set for.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Well things might not be so bad , have repositioned the subs and I am going to see If I can move the hot spot further back
Thanks again
Andy


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Moved to new position,1800 from rear wall
Measurements taken with subs phase switched both pos ,both neg
Right pos left neg ,Right neg Left pos
What would be the best combinatin to have them prior to using EQ ?
Or are there any suggestions given the readings
very high out put when readings start , tried different adjustments but cant seem to be able to reduce them?


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Any suggestions as to why my readings have such a high db reading?
Calibrated SPL meter to approx 72-75 db but get constantly high 100+ reading on graphs.
Have played about with receiver volume , sound card volume , sweep level is -12 which I also tried adjusting.
but after trying to reduce the db get report of volume being too low?
Do I need to consider buying a USB sound card?


----------



## laser188139 (Sep 19, 2009)

Your graphs from Sept 14 showed averages around 80dB and peaks near 100dB. Now your waterfalls show peaks near 170dB. So one has to infer that you did something different. 

Did you go through the SPL Calibrate process before this run? Changing anything in the computer output/input volume levels or mic preamp gain invalidates the calibration. One mistake I've seen people make is start the SPL Calibrate process, adjust the SPL level to 75dB, and then close the window without pressing Finished. If you just close the window, this acts like a cancel and the SPL calibration is unchanged. 

After the fact, in the SPL & Phase window, you can enter an Offset to adjust the levels down to whatever level you want them to be on the display, and use the Add offset to data button if you want to modify the underlying measurement values permanently. 

Bill


----------



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

lesmor said:


> Moved to new position,1800 from rear wall
> Measurements taken with subs phase switched both pos ,both neg
> Right pos left neg ,Right neg Left pos
> What would be the best combinatin to have them prior to using EQ ?
> ...


If you want us to evaluate your response curve, please give us response curve graphs, not waterfalls.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

laser188139 said:


> Your graphs from Sept 14 showed averages around 80dB and peaks near 100dB. Now your waterfalls show peaks near 170dB. So one has to infer that you did something different.
> 
> Did you go through the SPL Calibrate process before this run? Changing anything in the computer output/input volume levels or mic preamp gain invalidates the calibration. One mistake I've seen people make is start the SPL Calibrate process, adjust the SPL level to 75dB, and then close the window without pressing Finished. If you just close the window, this acts like a cancel and the SPL calibration is unchanged.
> 
> ...


Can't think I changed anything other than the system said that my SPL meter needed calibration as normal, but you could be correct perhaps I did not press finished.
Will give it another go
Thanks for the pointer
Andy


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> If you want us to evaluate your response curve, please give us response curve graphs, not waterfalls.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Sorry about that
Living up to my thread title


----------



## sbx (Oct 12, 2010)

Hi just started to look in to using REW as a total novice :R, what programme do you use/recommend to run the calibration file?

Thank you


----------



## JohnM (Apr 11, 2006)

sbx said:


> what programme do you use/recommend to run the calibration file?


The calibration files are loaded into REW via the mic/meter or soundcard preferences panels, they are not run by external programs but they are just text files so any text editor can open them.


----------



## lesmor (Dec 30, 2009)

sbx said:


> Hi just started to look in to using REW as a total novice :R, what programme do you use/recommend to run the calibration file?
> 
> Thank you


Hi
The calibration file is as per Johns reply , but just to add that as a novice when you see it you may be confused , as it was not what I expected the file to be.
I would recommend saving it to your desktop until it is required , that way it will be easy to find.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank John for providing everyone with such an excellent program god knows how many hours went into its development all credit to you for providing it for free.

Also many thanks to everyone who had the patience to help me resolve my issues while setting up REW


----------

