Measurements, EQ, and what we actually hear

This is funny - everything has shifted 180 degrees.

I'm the one who trusted my hearing, and I was told that I shouldn't, and that measurements like the REW software offers are more reliable as far as what's really happening.

Now you're saying what you hear is more important, regardless of measurements.

Then why get the REW software and use it to measure and equalize stuff? You can just as easily just get an equalizer and do it manually, the way I'm probably going to do it.

Personally, I'm very interested in the correlation (or lack of it) between measurements and what I hear. If/when my test tones correlate with what I hear in music it makes me happy. If I got the REW software and it showed a vastly different response than what I hear, it would bother me.

As an aside, the REW software looks very complex to me, and like it would take quite a while to learn how to use it correctly and/or well for one's particular situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

This is funny - everything has shifted 180 degrees.

I'm the one who trusted my hearing, and I was told that I shouldn't, and that measurements like the REW software offers are more reliable as far as what's really happening.

Now you're saying what you hear is more important, regardless of measurements.

Then why get the REW software and use it to measure and equalize stuff? You can just as easily just get an equalizer and do it manually, the way I'm probably going to do it.

Personally, I'm very interested in the correlation (or lack of it) between measurements and what I hear. If/when my test tones correlate with what I hear in music it makes me happy. If I got the REW software and it showed a vastly different response than what I hear, it would bother me.

As an aside, the REW software looks very complex to me, and like it would take quite a while to learn how to use it correctly and/or well for one's particular situation.

---

What I have been saying is you can not reliably say how a speaker will sound by looking at measurements.

What is not bad idea is to try and correlate what (an anomaly) you hear with measurements, not the converse.

The use of REW is to work on issues with the room, not the speakers. You buy speakers for how they sound, the room affects that sound. That is why it is called Room EQ Wizard.

BTW...the Ascend demo room uses NO EQ. It is treated though, and doesn't have any noticeable echo.

All of the equalization that REW applies are to the speakers, if I understand it right. It's not doing anything to your room.

Room treatments treat the room.

There's been some debate about whether or not equalizers work well for room issues, with some people (Richard Hardesty, for one) advocating room treatment instead (and buying speakers with neutral anechoic measurements to start).

Two of the things I'd plan on using an equalizer for seem like it should work very well - raising the bottom end a bit to compensate for Fletcher Munson, and taming a slight rise in the speaker response. I'm not as sure that it is the best solution for room modes.

But I don't have the space or budget for more room treatment - we already have two GIK Tri-traps in a corner behind the speakers, but there aren't really any other good places to put things like that (it's our living room).

Further to Curtis' comments on REW, it can be useful to help with speaker/subwoofer positioning. For that, Quick Measure in ARC Genesis also works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

All of the equalization that REW applies are to the speakers, if I understand it right. It's not doing anything to your room.

---

You adjust the speakers to compensate for the room.

Right from the first paragraph on the Room EQ Wizard page:
"The audio measurement and analysis features of REW help you optimise the acoustics of your listening room, studio or home theater and find the best locations for your speakers, subwoofers and listening position."

Yes, I understand that.

As I said, there's some debate about how well that approach works.

I've used the test cd I mentioned to help with finding the best place and orientation of our speakers. It's been very helpful for that.

If you can't hear the problems, but find them with measuring tools, how likely is it that you'll hear any potential improvements? And if you do hear the problems, then you can use an equalizer to improve things and you should hear those improvements.

I think you're trying to make an extremely complex subject seem simple, and it's not simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by racrawford65

Further to Curtis' comments on REW, it can be useful to help with speaker/subwoofer positioning. For that, Quick Measure in ARC Genesis also works.

---

You beat me too it.

On another note, I re-ran ARC Genesis a couple days ago. My room had gone through some changes over the years, but nothing that I thought warranted re-measuring. I was wrong, it made a difference.

Had you heard anything different before you measured it again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

I think you're trying to make an extremely complex subject seem simple, and it's not simple.

---

LOL....that is what I think you are trying to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

Had you heard anything different before you measured it again?

---

I had always known that if you make a change to the room, you should run the routine over again, but I was lazy.

All the talk on the forum about measuring, and I also thought I noticed my bass/mid-bass seemed a little "sloppy" in the last few months, but I wasn't sure why. Combined to the two, I decided to break out the mic, mic stand, and long USB cable and do it again.

This morning, I realized the coffee table is not where I want it to be. I will leave it for now, but move it later, and then re-measure. I haven't put the mic/stand away yet, but the last two nights I have been having a good time just listening to music (after the Dodger game).