Parametric EQ for mains

[TomyN]

Well, first of all I'd suggest to buy a crossover/controller and go two way active.
Second would be to download and read http://www.take-sat.de/download/timealignmentE.pdf

Tomy

[Yogi]

Richard, look in the help file on page 50 on the discussions on Minimum Phase.

[RBIngraham]

Richard, look in the help file on page 50 on the discussions on Minimum Phase.

Yep I found a few threads in the forum as well. Thank you.

So just so everyone else knows that might read this, yes you can find the delay times with Room EQ Wizard. If you loop one of your sound card outputs back to the input and enable an option in the preferences to use that as a timing option, then REW can tell you the delay time to your test mic. Obviously that includes any devices you send the signal through. But by taking a measurement of your main speakers then a fill system you can just subtract the time differences from one another and you have the delay time.

It shows up in the "Measurement"'s details. In this case they use the term measurement to mean a stored impulse measurement.

I tinkered with it a bit today and it works pretty well. I went in to a space I've worked at for quite some time. It was nice to know that the delays and EQs I had mostly set by ear were pretty much on the mark.

[RBIngraham]

+1

RTA is much better than people using a 58 and repeatedly saying "yup" .."check 1,2,3" as a method to set EQ. There is still a huge world of people out there that still do this because they cant afford or understand the tools.

Obviously it takes a certain amount of skill and experience in knowing what your own voice should sound like. But I worked with Rick Southern once for a Joel Gray benefit. He mixed all the Rat Pack guys and Bennett and Gray for many years and I was told later he helped design the PM3000. Anyway, he showed up and asked for the wireless handheld for Grey. Went in the house and made some noise in the mic, told me what to tweak on the parametrics (this was a while ago...) and then we went on stage and did the same for the wedges. Only touched the RTA to notch a couple of rings in the monitors and he was done. Took almost no time at all and the show sounded great. When I asked him about his methods he gave me the best advice I have ever been given as a mixer.... He said "well... what is the most prominent and important thing that is going to come out the FOH system?" I was experienced enough to say Joel Gray's voice. He said "right... so why not make the system sound best for a voice using the same mic we are going to use during the show...". Couldn't argue with that. I practiced and have used the same method for many years. Only I know better what my voice should sound like with a Countryman B3 or a B6 or a MKE2.

I learned more on that one off benefit concert than I did in years of school and practice before that day. Still use that technique and his method for micing a grand.

[Mattseymour]

Still use... his method for micing a grand.

Do tell.

[Andy Hamm]

+1

RTA is much better than people using a 58 and repeatedly saying "yup" .."check 1,2,3" as a method to set EQ. There is still a huge world of people out there that still do this because they cant afford or understand the tools. I take multiple measurements with Smaart throughout the venue to get an better profile of how my speakers are interacting with the room. To some people, a BBE sonic maximizer is the only time alignment tool they know.

Excuse me?!?? WTF!!!!

If you think that an RTA is better than the talent of a human being, man you are a sad excuse for one. RTA's, Feedback suppressors, Automatic EQ's and Pesets are all tools used by people who don't have the experience or talent to be sitting behind a FOH console.

The end result of what you are mixing is detected by the listener, with their ears and body. In the 20 plus years I've been mixing, no one has yet come along with an RTA to show me I was doing it wrong....


I've been EQing FOH and Monitors with a track or two and my primary vocal mic. Most of the LDs I work with can call out frequencies from the stage when setting up monitors, so to think that there are techs out there that don't know their frequencies is just appauling.


A fair amount of sysyems I use are in fact tuned electronically, some even have locked processors where you have no access to mains eq or compression. They allways sound bland, and require a fair amount of tweeking on the strips to get things sounding right. When they do allow you access to the FOH EQ, the local tech is usually pretty quick to save the changes we make as well.

There simply is no substitute for talent, and if you are in this business it behoves you to know your frequencies by ear. It's that simple.

What do you consult when you grab a channel strip btw?

[Butch Bos]

I have been using RTAs since 1971 and still do on most shows
BUT I always do final eq by ear

Anybody remember the HP analyzer from the 70s or the original TEF

Butch

[Yogi]

The problem with RTA is that a really poor acoustical environment can wreck havoc on trying to get a good eq curve. Of course poor acoustics are hard to overcome no matter what but pink noise won't get you even close to close enough in my experience in highly reflective environments. I've found doing an impulse response with a waterfall to be much better. I can look at what are the sources of the first bounce (closest structures that result in a reflection) and limit the curve up to that reflection point time line. EQ based on that point usually is the best curve since nothing you can do to the signal past that point will make a hill of beans. The other point I try to go after is being inside critical distance with the calibrated mike. Not all software can tell you what critical distance is. EASERA is one of the best in that department but it ain't cheap. A good rule of thumb for critical distance if your software won't give it to you is to fire up the pink noise and RTA and then put the mike as close to a speaker as possible then start moving it farther away. The point where the eq starts to change appreciably is close to critical distance. Come back inside that point and set your eq from that point.

[Brent Evans]

Who cares what tool you use as long as it gets the job done, the customer is happy with the result, and you get paid?

Analyzers (particularly the better PC based ones) can show you things your ears can't, and your ears can tell you things that analyzers can't. A great engineer can use both, and knows when to rely on one or the other to get the job done.

[soundchicken]

Who cares what tool you use as long as it gets the job done, the customer is happy with the result, and you get paid?

Analyzers (particularly the better PC based ones) can show you things your ears can't, and your ears can tell you things that analyzers can't. A great engineer can use both, and knows when to rely on one or the other to get the job done.

I've heard mix guys that put together great sound that don't give 2cents for what the frequency is and "engineers" that make their content so bland that I put my plugs back in.

+1 to your get paid comment Brent, but I have to alter your last line to something a little closer to heart:

A great technician knows when to use which tool in his tool bag.

IMHO there is nothing in this profession that will ever compare to good ol' fashion experience, except for possibly the newest fangled gadget that someone else with even more experience than you designed and the young punk that know how to operate it.