What type of EQ should i buy to balance out my room?

[dodittydada]

you have been advised incorrectly! Do some research here, you will see it is folly to go down that track.

[Glenn Kuras]

EQ'ing really is not the way to go. If anything you might be able to bring down a peak at as 40hz. To treat 1K is pretty easy if you know what you are doing. I would do some research on acoustics around hear.

[Eatpeople420]

Back in the day, people would use White series 4000 eqs...not for me though

[seen-da-sizer]

I remember Bob Hodas saying that EQ-ing is 5% of the tuning. He did not say 0%! The way I read it, this is a last resort. Try fixing your room response at the source first: the room. Of course it is an impossibility to get a perfect room response, especially in a hobbyist, home studio, bedroom situation. I am guessing a quality parametric EQ will do (to a certain degree) the job.

Here is a paper by Bob Hodas about Optimizing and briefly touching EQ-ing:

Bob Hodas - Optimizing The Studio Environment

I am in the same situation, where my room treatment did not fix everything. For now I use a stereo parametric EQ, until I have time to build and test some tunable traps.

There is Room correction SW as well. Some people love it, other ones are not convinced. DanDan, can you share any more information/experiences on this?

[SirTralala]

From what I`ve heard, DanDan changed his Speaker Setup a little, and decided to bypass his Room EQ

[Beano Bean]

The main reason i was advised to get one is because my monitors (M1 Active MK2's) do not have cut off switches on the back.

Due to the size and materials in my room further treatment is not possible.

Here are some pics of the room and graphs (if they help)

Graph of Room Before Treatment

24 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Graph of Room After Treatment

23 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Front View

17 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Front Left

20 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Front Right

18 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Back Left

22 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Back Right

25 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Fake Floor

19 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Ceiling (Above Seating Area)

26 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Thanks for all of the input so far. I may just see if i can hire a professional for an hour to come and take a look if all else fails.

Thanks,

BB

[seen-da-sizer]

Because your waterfall's dynamic range is less then 30dB, the peaks and nulls look worse than they are. I suggest to post the zipped REW file. In addition you should limit the frequency range of the waterfall to something like 20 to 300 Hz.

Check Jens' post about posting graphs/measurements:

Before posting your measurement results

As it is now, your waterfall does not show the full picture. Hold off of that EQ for now!

[SirTralala]

I also think about Equing a little. Specially because of speaker placement, I got a Bass Boost which could be compensated by that.

My plan was, to use a hand tuned VST equalizer (stereo) on the sum, but I am interested in seeing, how this EQ would change the Room Response, therefore I would like to integrate this VST Plugin into REW, after the generated Sinus Sweep, before the Output, tune it there and keep the settings for the DAW. But didn`t figure out if this is possible with REW.

[BusterBobby]

Don't use eq. It's not like all it does is tame the frequency in question. One move affects the whole response of your speakers.

Don't do it.

[Syncamorea]

What kind of room can I buy to balance out my Massive Passive?

[DanDan]

I do hope we don't see Eq pitted against Treatment again.
That's like comparing Tanks to Prams.
Room Treatment is cheap, durable, hassle free in operation, and sonically great bang per buck.
The only drawback is that many or most situations are acoustically small requiring massive treatment. Cost, space, rental, domestic factors, all tend to limit the amount of treatment. So we are left with a job not fully done.
Sometimes all the more audible due to treatment!

SirT, REW can generate recommended EQ settings and then predict the result of applying them. This is virtual, there is no plug-in. It does not actually apply Eq just predicts the likely result.

I tried third octave graphics in the past. Didn't work, as they could not focus on the very narrow strong modes. LF Modes can be as narrow as 3-5Hz.

I have experimented with parametric eq for the usual lowest first axial mode.
i.e. often in the 30-40Hz range. Many of use do not have the space or freedom to treat such low frequencies. A single band of parametric cut works well. It also shortens modal decay according to my tests, and others. JohnPM explains why and includes a feature in REW to show when Eq will succeed and when it will not.
So if treatment at extreme LF is not fully adequate or successful (nearly always!) seems to me Eq is a no brainer.

Tests and experience have shown me that speakers are nothing like as perfect as the reviews or nice graphs indicate. Swapping speaker types in a room can be quite revealing.
Eq is perfectly able to adjust such anomalies.
Many of us like to work with a Target Curve. HF rolled off to taste and to promote mix translation. If your speaker is passive, Eq rules.

Recently I have been experimenting with a high end Mac compatible DRC app. Initially it remarkably improved my listening spot which has been fixed for years and translates very well.
The remarkable improvement and the strong filters visible in the software prompted me to relocate my speakers and listening area, carefully, down to 20mm increments once I had zoned in.
Now with some tweaking of the Eq on the speaker, there is only a subtle (but welcome) difference with the DRC engaged.


BTW, I hate that term DRC. Improvement in a small listening area is what actually happens, not Room Correction.



Software Eq's by DAW plug-in or standalone apps seem to all have operational issues. For this reason I have abandoned use of Eq during tracking and most of the mix time. I use headphones of bass/kick marriage, reverb choice, vocal eq, and so on. At the critical time, the final polish, or Mastering, I turn on the Eq for speaker listening and live with the latency.

I do intend to go hardware. The MiniDSP seems to be well regarded and affordable. Behringer make great doorstops.

DD

[seen-da-sizer]

Originally Posted by DanDan

Many of use do not have the space or freedom to treat such low frequencies. A single band of parametric cut works well. It also shortens modal decay according to my tests, and others.

Thanks DanDan! In short; Don't use an EQ to fix your room. You may use an EQ to fix minimal problems that your treatment could not correct.

[DanDan]

Well....not exactly. I have a multifaceted view on it.
Hardware eq would not suffer from latency or other practical issues, so I would use it all the time. I would call the lowest mode a big problem, insurmountable by inadequate treatment. In my CR I have found the Eq most useful when the speakers were basically in the wrong place. So Eq seems to be most useful when one is in trouble. A recent survey in Control Rooms using 4 different DRC products came to a similar conclusion. i.e. In poorly performing rooms the DRC made a significant and very welcome improvement. But in good CR's it had little to contribute.
One could view it either way. ElastoPlast or Icing on the Cake.
Or both, which would make a strange mouthful....


DD