Real Time Analyzer - RTA - Cool and Cheap

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Winston @ Nov 14 2007, 10:48 AM) [snapback]539428[/snapback]</div>

After you get a chance to play around with it, let us know how well it works. Considering how expensive real RTA's are, this is definitely worth the money if you can actually tune a flat curve with it!

jonas.

 

The real problem there is getting a microphone that's actually flat,
or at least a DSP frontend that knows all about its curve and can
compensate. The former is rarely if ever achievable, and the latter
obviously requires a mic matched to the device.
.
A chicken-n-egg to consider: What do you use to measure the flatness
of a speaker or mic? How do you know the characteristics of the
measurement devices used on your DUT, and the characteristics of the
devices used to measure the measurement devices, etc etc? Where do
you start?
.
_H*

 

You may have missed the theory-discussion point. What did they
measure the flatness WITH, and how do "they" know how flat *that*
device is in the first place? What was used to generate the sound
for the mic under test to hear, and how flat is that? See?
.
_H*

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hobbit @ Nov 17 2007, 05:49 AM) [snapback]540892[/snapback]</div>

...with a very expensive setup such as http://www.bksv.com/2981.asp or http://www.bksv.com/4069.asp

 

Another thing to consider is that generally speaking, flat dos not always sound very good. In fact many would argue that it never sounds good completely flat.

In IASCA events people would tune with an AudioControl RTA machine and 31-band EQs (per channel) then create a template for a FLAT response and then retune it to their ear for Sound Quality and make a new template. This would allow them to quickly retune between judging sessions. Two of the guys at my shop judged the IASCA finals for a few years and this is where I get my info from. I only judged one show in my life and that was using the RTA but I was nothing more than the mic boy as this was back in 1996. lol




That being said I'm sure you know it is a rough tuning device but for some others that are not car audio savy, I'm hoping this information helps before they spend money expecting big things.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Nov 22 2007, 08:55 AM) [snapback]542913[/snapback]</div>

Finally something from F8L I completely agree with! I knew we couldn't be totally opposite on EVERYTHING.

In my youth I worked and even managed pro sound studios. After listening to measurably "flat" high-powered systems for an hour or two behind the console, I was physically fatigued. To fix this we rolled off the top end sometimes dramatically or did final mixing using small unequalized speakers.

Believe me, it's all relative anyway. Winston has invested in a tool that will help him measure "relative" points and adjust until he likes the sound. Nothing wrong with that approach.

I've used $1000+ B&K calibrated mics and $50 mics with very similar results all things considered. The key is being able to come back to a previous point and start again until you like the sound. You don't need an expensive mic to do that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(banjoman @ Nov 22 2007, 12:29 PM) [snapback]542974[/snapback]</div>

:lol: and I agree with the second part too.

 

Someone has the expectation that every sound card is flat and is as good as any other sound card?

I guess with increasing world population, there's even more than one born every minute.