Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j  why did you say measurements would help move the thread forward? |
I never said that! You asked what measurements are useful, and I listed them.
Quote:
|
Waterfall: FR (as expected) looks very good in amplitude, due of course to the deqx. But the thing that I most notice is the very dense, discrete sharp bundling of tails/mountains. So what does that tell us?
|
Not much because I think you said you're using an equalizer in the playback path. In that case you can force any response at the one place you have the microphone, thus hiding what the room is doing. I suggest you measure again with no EQ. You could also try measuring again with the EQ, but in that case I suggest you move the microphone around and see what happens a foot to the left, a foot to the right, etc.
Quote:
|
what target would we aim for as a general rule, and how does my value compare?
|
Yeah, 350 ms is okay for a big room. But it needs to be much lower in the bass range than you have now. It's okay to have longer decays at the lowest frequencies, but that much disparity is a problem. Again, my
Hearing is Believing video shows more or less ideal results to aim for.
--Ethan