room analysis software for osx?

[matt thomas]

Hi

What are the current best choices for room analysis software for OSX?

Its been a few years since I used some, and that was pc based..

thanks in advance

Matt

[Washington]

Smaart comes to mind, but I'd be einterested if there is any alternative... I'm not even sure it has waterfalls.

[SAC]

Native - probably FuzzMeasure.
With VMWare Fusion or Parallels, virtually all.
From RoomEQWizard (possibly on OSX) to ARTA to EASERA.

Smaart 7 has lots of bugs - check out the latest FOH for that - plus for the money there are better platforms.

To be a smart aleck...why aren't you running VMWare and creating an additional Windows virtual machine and having the best of all worlds and programs?

[matt thomas]

Originally Posted by SAC

Native - probably FuzzMeasure.
With VMWare Fusion or Parallels, virtually all.
From RoomEQWizard to ARTA to EASERA.

Smaart 7 has lots of bugs - check out the latest FOH for that - plus for the money there are better platforms.

To be a smart aleck...why aren't you running VMWare and creating an additional Windows virtual machine and having the best of all worlds and programs?

thanks

BTW. I don't want to run windows just for this cos I don't need the best of all worlds, just something good.

Out of interest does anyone know what the limitations are of the demo version of FuzzMeasure? ( I haven't downloaded it yet, I don't like to install stuff until I'm sure I want it)

thanks

Matt

[SAC]

Read FM's webpage!

I think you get a trial for 30 days - but I am not aware of all the details as we don't/can't use it.

You might also check out RoomEQWizard. It is reputed to run on both Windows and Mac, but I have not hear anyone speak conclusively as to its current state on the Mac or of any issues that may, or may not, exist.

[matt thomas]

Originally Posted by SAC

Read FM's webpage!

I think you get a trial for 30 days - but I am not aware of all the details as we don't/can't use it.

You might also check out RoomEQWizard. It is reputed to run on both Windows and Mac, but I have not hear anyone speak conclusively as to its current state on the Mac or of any issues that may, or may not, exist.

Yeah I have been reading FM's site. All it says is that paying for it unlocks some features, but it doesn't say what (as far as I can see), and you get free updates, and a good feeling..

perhaps I will just install it and see..

matt

[SAC]

After doing a bit (actually a lot) more searching among web links, I too am unable to find an 'official' statement of trial term(s).

In a previous post here (can't recall the thread) a user mentioned that his "30 day trial had expired". Yet on another download site, it mentions a "14 day" trial period.

One might think that such an opportunity for trial, and the limitation (in that it does end), might be better specified.

If Chris reads this, hopefully he will provide more info and also make sure the product/resource web sites list the terms of such options.

[DanDan]

The demo question has popped up a couple of times. Seems to be a mystery. Ask Chris.
Or don't bother, just buy it. It is ridiculously good for the money. Plus it gets better. Chris fixed the one bug and has implemented our various requests over time.
Just this week V5 of REW came out. This is another fine piece of kit.
The manual alone is worth the price....:-)
REW is free of course, but the manual is extremely well written.
This version is running fine on my new MacPro. Except for the previously wonderful Sweep Follow Cursor feature. Some Java issue.
The interface and general ways of doing things is not 'home' to a Mac person, but perfectly learnable.

Both now have a very very similar feature set. FM is definitely Mac in nature though. The easy drive alone is worth the money.

If you have an iPhone or iTouch or iPad already, you might take a look at StudioSixDigital. Looks like fine stuff there, including some version of Smaart eventually.
I have an issue about the fact that they work in 16Bit, but maybe that will change. It matters for decay measurements.

DD

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by DanDan

I have an issue about the fact that they work in 16Bit, but maybe that will change. It matters for decay measurements.

Have you ever encountered a situation, measuring room acoustics, when this was a problem?

[Jeffrey Hedback]

After spending some time interactively with client and SSD (Studio Six Digital) I have concluded that it is a moving target. The software itself is excellent. But, the interface needs are just buggy to use your own test mic. I did not however use their Iinterface mic. They do offer software updates of course (which are advancing rapidly), but you may have to chase a bunch of hardware items to make it work. Better (for now) to stay with the givens of Fuzz, REW etc with USB or other known connection to computer.

BTW- DD, I'm curious about your 16-bit reservations. I've not had issues, but have open mind to know what you've experienced.

Thanks

[DanDan]

A 'mystery' graph was posted some time ago. It had a recurring pattern in the IR or Log squared view. FM2 so no ETC at the time. It looked vaguely reminiscent of comb filtering except they were time energy graphs and the dips were equally spaced in time.
We puzzled over this for a while. Lupo offered to investigate.
With bitscopes and whatever, he found that the looping was due to low bit truncation.
I can contact Andreas and maybe find some of the comms and graph or the post again if ye would like to see it.

Anyhow, FM is I think 32 Bit float now. Presumably the actual resolution is up to the converters used.
With care, 16 Bit is of course useful, maybe even fully useable. However with noisy rooms, inadequate speakers, the level setting for decay measures is a delicate enough business. I believe 24 makes it a lot easier, just as in audio recording. I thing the resolution of 24 Bit diminishes to 16 Bit, at -48dB. Quite a comfort margin!

DD

[andrebrito]

Room Wizard works fine in MAC OSX here

I then use VirtualLab to run Windows for other acoustical applications such has
ARTA or CATT

[SAC]

Andre...be careful...

Despite the VAST dominance Windows has for acoustical products, like it or not,and rather than take full advantage of the fact that the Mac is simply a PC capable of running all x86 based OSes, they have already ruled out the commonsense approach to using a VM software like VMWare Fusion, Parallels or others available allowing access to the rest of the software world of both acoustical and non-acoustical tools...

[Sebg]

faberacoustical seem to write v good acoustical software but it is not as cheap as REQW...

Faber Acoustical

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by DanDan

A 'mystery' graph was posted some time ago. It had a recurring pattern in the IR or Log squared view. FM2 so no ETC at the time. It looked vaguely reminiscent of comb filtering except they were time energy graphs and the dips were equally spaced in time.
We puzzled over this for a while. Lupo offered to investigate.
With bitscopes and whatever, he found that the looping was due to low bit truncation.
I can contact Andreas and maybe find some of the comms and graph or the post again if ye would like to see it.

Yes, I would love to have a look at that file since I find it a bit hard to believe that 16 bit would cause a problem in room measurement situations unless the recording gain was completely off. High frequency cancellation due to averaging would be my first guess. This is not a big debate since everyone is using 24 bit anyway but I don’t want to contribute to this "higher number is always better" –hype.

[SAC]

Originally Posted by Sebg

faberacoustical seem to write v good acoustical software but it is not as cheap as REQW...

Faber Acoustical

Be aware that it only offers an impulse squared response and Not an ETC.

[DanDan]

Hi Jens, can't find that thread. I will ask Andreas, maybe he keeps emails and such longer than me. It was some time ago. The recording gain may well have been off. FWIW FM did have a bug to do with the vertical scale. Can't remember the detail but it didn't get noticed for a long long time. When we told Chris he fixed it immediately. To my knowledge the only bug in FM.
There may be a remaining issue where where the ETC initial spike is not high enough. Chris was having a bit of a struggle with this.
I think we can be quite sure that Andreas saying it was truncation was a result of some forensic investigation.
In any case FM is 24 or 32 Bit now. The reason this 'cropped' up was that I expressed reservations about Auditools which is 16 Bit.

DD

[Nordenstam]

Hello!

Here's the 16 bit thingy: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5186157-post136.html

It was stored at low level, peaking at -28dBFS, then truncated to 16 bit. Which resulted in most of the data disappearing. A dithered 16 bit file would not have been much of an issue (except for the overall low level).

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Hello!

Here's the 16 bit thingy: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5186157-post136.html

It was stored at low level, peaking at -28dBFS, then truncated to 16 bit. Which resulted in most of the data disappearing. A dithered 16 bit file would not have been much of an issue (except for the overall low level).

So there we have it. If recorded properly, 16 bit is not an issue. The room (background noise level), speaker (not playing loud enough above the rooms noise floor) mic or even preamp will be the bottleneck in terms of dynamic range (I say).

[DanDan]

As best I can remember Jens, it's not that simple.
The recordings were fine for all the other graphs. It was a bug in FM at the time. That bug is mainly gone but the ETC levels are still nowhere near the other graphs. 24 Bit makes this no problem.
BTW You can delete your own posts in the 'Go Advanced' version of Edit.

DD

[Nordenstam]

Originally Posted by DanDan

The recordings were fine for all the other graphs. It was a bug in FM at the time. That bug is mainly gone but the ETC levels are still nowhere near the other graphs.

If the dataset (impulse .wav) is messed, so will all the graphs based on the dataset be. It's just happen not be as noticable in the other ones as in the impulse and ETC graphs.

[DanDan]

Hi Lupo, thanks for finding that. From the title that appears to be an optimised version! Minimum Phase Copy and Normalised.
The levels in the other graphs were fine, the data is valid. This is THE bug.
I will test the new version later, I am fairly sure the ETC level is still not perfect. Plus on a brief test run of REW5 I saw 44/16 at the bottom of the screen.

Irrespective I would not buy 16 Bit software.
If we use measure the SPL with no weighting (Z) the background noise in many prosumer rooms can easily hit 45-50dBSPL. Many mid sized active monitors start flashing warning lights at the HF end of a 85-90dB sweep.
Factor in a 20dB or more variation on the graphs and....
Level setting with 16Bit is not at all easy.

DD

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by DanDan

As best I can remember Jens, it's not that simple.
The recordings were fine for all the other graphs. It was a bug in FM at the time. That bug is mainly gone but the ETC levels are still nowhere near the other graphs. 24 Bit makes this no problem.
DD

Can’t imagine how a 16 bit file format could be the bottleneck (assuming somewhat descent recording levels) when measuring room acoustics. All other stages in the recording chain will have a lower dynamic performance. Ok if the above example was due to a bug in the software but that just supports my theory.

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by DanDan

Irrespective I would not buy 16 Bit software.
If we use measure the SPL with no weighting (Z) the background noise in many prosumer rooms can easily hit 45-50dBSPL. Many mid sized active monitors start flashing warning lights at the HF end of a 85-90dB sweep.
Factor in a 20dB or more variation on the graphs and....
Level setting with 16Bit is not at all easy.
DD

So, in the above situation, when you only have an effective dynamic range of about 40 dB, do you then need the benefits of 24 bit resolution even more?

And also, I assume we are talking about the resulotion of the recording format, not the actual program.

[DanDan]

24Bit makes level setting a lot easier.

DD

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by DanDan

24Bit makes level setting a lot easier ...

If the setup only offers 40 dB of dynamic range, setting levels wouldn’t be critical even for a 14 bit resulotion.

Originally Posted by DanDan

I request that we not pursue this any further as it would be of no real value. Debate or argument without a positive goal in sight doesn't do it for me.

Why can we not discuss this as adults? Someone might learn something.

[Jens Eklund]

Please note that I’m not saying that everyone should use 16 bits instead of 24 bit, I’m just trying to stay grounded.

Originally Posted by Jens Eklund

This is not a big debate since everyone is using 24 bit anyway but I don’t want to contribute to this "higher number is always better" –hype.

[DanDan]

Jens I am mindful of the Topic, the original question.
I still fully recommend FuzzMeasure to the OP.
The 16 Bit thing was totally an aside. The details are so far back, I can't really say if that was an example of THE bug or poor level setting skills.
I really don't think it serves anyone to ponder aside issues here.
Theoretically 16 Bit should be able to fully convey the full range of an orchestra. Done fully correctly it should be indistinguishable from 24Bit.
In practice there are difficulties. These difficulties and practicalities trump the hypothetical. I think no-one prefers 16 to 24 now that the converters and clocks are up to it. My reasons for dissing 16Bit in Analysis Software are considered and irrespective of the asides.
I wouldn't buy 16 Bit and I hope AudiTools moves on, as it looks like very affordable, portable, and powerful, kit. Furthermore I hope FM has managed to get higher ETC spikes or will in the future. In the meantime there is no problem with FM3. Just scale it up, which would not be possible with 16 Bit.
So what were we not discussing again......

DD

[maaaquemeseyo]

FuzzMeasure is really easy to use. Great soft and it has a fantastic support too.

[Jeffrey Hedback]

DD,

The 16-bit limitation is not due to StudioSixDigital (this from Daniel Valente of SSD) but Apple. Part of why I said SSD is a moving target.