image description


Forum Index » Profile for chrisatrational » Messages posted by chrisatrational
Author
Message
StudioLive General Discussion » A Sneak Peek at Universal Control 1.7 with Smaart » Go to message
twostone wrote:Anybody know if the speaker wizard is FFT ? being that's what;s makes smaart smart.


Yes! you can re-create the trace in Smaart by setting transfer function measurement settings to 1/3 octave smoothing, 3 second averaging, and 50% Coherence blanking.
24.4.2 » Measurement Mic Choice » Go to message
No disrespect here! The RA mic is the same capsule as a majority of the microphones on the market - the only real benefit that you get by purchasing it from us is that you get a cool bag swag to go with it Mono is right on, it doesn't matter what mic you use.

Measurement microphone capsules are essentially all made at the same factory; the best capsules with the best tolerances go to the better more expensive mics. The rest get distributed around as needed. You would notice that the Supperlux ECM999 is the OEM product that is the same mic as the Behringer, Audix, the Cross-Spectrum low-budget offerings, and many more. Frequency response and calibration files are really a non-issue. A measurement mic is essentially flat from 20-20k, with any derivation being around 3dB upwards of 10-15k, typically closer to 1.5 dB. A concert PA system isn't even concerned with energy passed 8k. So, it really doesn't matter which mic you use as long as it powers up - at least under normal conditions.

The more expensive mics have better tolerances to sound pressure levels, and stay stable when receiving high SPL's. However, for tuning, it doesn't matter how loud the signal is as long as it is equal to or above noise floor. If you tune a PA at 80 db SPL, or 105 dB A SPL, you are going to get the same results. Reverb propagation or any room anomalies are time based, not sound level based, and any program worth its salt uses averaging and coherence to account for these issues. I purchased a mic with a calibration file, however, it was because I wanted the mic's sensitivity to use it for accurately reading SPL - correcting for frequencies above or below the range we actually work in are not needed for doing fantastic work.

If your rig consists of several different RTA mics, and you want to get them all pretty matched up, calibration files may come in handy for that - however, they are largely unnecessary. Also, unless you are viewing your measurements at the highest possible resolution you won't be able to see the difference. What's most important are consistent and repeatable results and work flow. After all, you are the one making the decisions, not the analyzer. Considering what your mic is doing or being aware of your mics frequency response and having that in your back pocket doesn't cost you anything - and will provide for you the same results in your work.

No ones ever said "you know, the energy at 16k sounds like it's 2 dB off, did you use a calibrated mic?"

FWIW, the guy that does the calibration on the Cross-Spectrum mic is the same guy that does all of ours. Until you decide to spend more $$$ then 100$ - any mic you are going to look at is the same exact thing.



StudioLive General Discussion » Anyone using REW (Room EQ Wizard) with a StudioLive mixer successfully? » Go to message
No Worries! Now you can impress all your friends by knowing the full name

You may want to be sure that the 4 channel interface you purchase works with REW before you get it, or you'll be in the same situation you are now with your 16.4.2. Also, does REW allow for more multiple measurement inputs? if not, you can get away just fine with a standard 2 channel I-O.

Furthermore, I doubt that REW allows for multi-device measurements (different device for input and output) - so you may want to check that as well. The best option would probably be to have a stand alone rig using the same interface for in and out - that way clock drift, sample rate, and other digital audio dilemma's stay to a minimum.

interesting that you can get signal out to the SL console, but not in! Perhaps if you bug REW enough, they'll generate a .rev build to work with SL's.
StudioLive General Discussion » Anyone using REW (Room EQ Wizard) with a StudioLive mixer successfully? » Go to message
Just FYI the product is called "SMAART", and stands for System Measurement Acoustical Analysis Real Time.

Ah, I hadn't heard of REW until today. Sounds like you are just having driver issues - which is the downfall of freeware, they generally can't keep up with the support necessary to work all the time; what with frequent OS changes, driver changes, computer modifications etc. It's definitely not a PreSonus issue. Also, the built in input is a very VERY very sure way to unstable or inaccurate measurements, so tread lightly my friend. Grounding issues, computer noise, and crosstalk are very serious concerns when you take an I-O out of the equation.

Waterfall plots may be an interesting way to view impulse response, however the best way to view impulse response is by actually viewing an impulse response measurement . Perhaps you are reaching the point where investing a little bit to have less hassles and acquire more stable results is worth considering.

StudioLive General Discussion » Anyone using REW (Room EQ Wizard) with a StudioLive mixer successfully? » Go to message
Hello! Can you clarify what REW is? is this something outside of the Smaart wizards? I don't know of any room eq wizard (but I'm relatively knew to the PreSonus community, so forgive me if I'm missing something), however there is a system response analysis wizard. What is the PreSonus set-up wizard?

Also, if you are running a full version of Smaart (or possibly another FFT program) there is the ability to enter mic calibration files, however this is considered a power user thing and is not necessary for the measurements that we are all doing (i'd love to talk more on this if you want to PM me). If you are viewing the Smaart implemented tools from UC1.6 and 1.7, there isn't nearly enough resolution to benefit from calibration files - basically what I'm saying is that if you are trying to do measurements to the level of detail you may be trying to achieve, you would require a full version stand alone FFT analyzer.

Also Also, I'm wondering where you are having trouble with the routing? The wizard prompts you to put the measurement mic into the talkback input and then you analyze whatever output you wish to that is connected. If you are using a stand alone program, Mac's see the studio live as an input and output device, all you need to do is select which channels you want to use - you don't even need to engage the FireWire button on the console.

24.4.2 » After 1.7 - GEQ & Sub Delay Wackiness » Go to message
Monolithent wrote:So here's a thought to keep everyone up and running until we can get this fixed. Set a delay at the lowest you can set. I think it's .1 on each of the subs and may work if you just do it on one of the four. It shouldn't offset the audio enough to be noticeable and it will keep I from changing with the GEQ.

This will keep everyone running until we can get a solution. Everyone cool with that? Give it a test and see what you think of it.


The increments are .5ms, I tried to keep one there and still saw the same behavior. Any new word on this little bugger?
Live Sound » Universal Control 1.7 Released, Bask in the Smaart laden, Wizardy goodness!!!!! » Go to message
mamerica wrote:I haven't tried it yet. Does this version show the SMAART Spectrum behind the FAT Channel Parametrics like the early promo pics from last year?


We weren't able to do that do to limitations with DSP. It would be a very very awesome feature and perhaps the awesome folks at PreSonus will figure out something along that effect soon!
StudioLive General Discussion » 1.7 - Whats the point of having SMAART wizard only on the semi parametric? » Go to message
Right, this update is really about bringing a tool that is used in more demanding and professional environments and making it accessible to everyone else. The system response wizard is an FFT transfer function, which gives far better and more pertinent information then an RTA is capable of (namely coherence for this implementation, however with the full version (Smaart v7) you can view insanely high resolution of magnitude, coherence, phase, and impulse response- enabling you to phase align sub systems, delays etc). The goal is to encourage proper workflow, that you show up to a gig, tune the system with as few Eq decisions as possible, leaving the Graphic Eq free for the during the show, on the fly, or act specific adjustments (more artistic then aesthetic). Think of the parametric Eq tuning as 'setting the table' for the mix engineer to do their work. or if its you mixing, then you have a tool that you can reset and use appropriately for the act on stage.

Yes, you could go back and fourth with a GEQ and get your tuning that way, but what's the point when you can achieve the same result in less time with less filters, and STILL have the GEq to tweak to taste?

Also, about the "auto Eq" comment - This is something that we are very enthusiastically against. There are just too many variables in a sound system, and environment, to account for everything and make the proper decisions automatically. We don't know what speaker(s) you're using, their tolerances, their polarity, their power handling, manufacturer processing, a CAD of the room for proper sound prediction, or what the type of act you are tuning for (different styes require different tunings). However, YOU do know all of this stuff and can make a better decision then a blind computer. What I'm saying is, there is a bit of engineering you actually have to be responsible for. Use your ears, and brain, and you'll always make a better decision then any automatic Eq is capable of. The SRA wizard gives you a tool to make more accurate and informed decisions.
Live Sound » Implanting an RTA? » Go to message
I understand completely! sometimes, a tight notch on the offending vocalists channel strip is just what the doctor ordered as well.

We do have a a couple SL's, and you are right about the graphic Eq. If you read the owners manual (GASP!) for the SL 24.4.2 on page 57 it says....

"The StudioLive Graphic EQ features an innovative design that sets it
apart from traditional graphic EQs. Traditionally, a 31-band graphic EQ uses 31 second-order shelving filters with fixed frequencies in order to simulate a curve set by the user via 31 front-panel sliders. A well designed graphic EQ creates an output frequency responses that corresponds as closely as possible to the curve displayed graphically by the sliders.
In an analog EQ, this is achieved by carefully choosing the bandwidth of the filter and deciding how or if it varies with the gain and how the filters are summed
or cascaded. In general, narrower bandwidth signifies a higher quality EQ But
in traditional graphic EQ designs, the center frequency of each band is fixed.
PreSonus took a different approach with the StudioLive. The StudioLive Graphic EQ is a pool of shelving filters from which coefficients like cutoff frequency, bandwidth, and gain are extracted through a process of curve-fitting The curve entered by the user is first oversampled. The system then works with an internal curve made up of 128 bands to find coefficients for the first shelving filter
that, when subtracted from the user’s curve, will produce the flattest possible response: 0 dB. The resulting response is then used to find coefficients for the second shelving filter through the same optimization process. Coefficients for all available shelving filters are found through a recursive process
Unlike conventional designs, the frequency and bandwidth of the “bands” depends on the curve entered by the user. This allows for much tighter matching of that curve. Because of this innovative design, the accuracy of the StudioLive EQ might feel “wrong” at first. The curve fitting process is capable of very steep transitions and, unlike conventional analog graphic EQs, what you see is what you get. With a carefully drawn, smooth curve the StudioLive EQ will have almost no frequency ripple. The StudioLive EQ is also capable of very sharp notches. To widen a notch or a bump on a particular band, just bring the adjacent bands closer to that band‘s gain and the bandwidth will change accordingly. Making drastic adjustments too quickly, may create an audio artifact as the new curve is redrawn and crosses over an audio peak. If you are hearing audio artifacts while setting up your Graphic EQ, try creating a smoother curve"
Live Sound » Implanting an RTA? » Go to message
"It is like I want to hit a button that re-locates those ISO centers to the half way mark in between the standard frequencies. It is crazy! "

Jerryd - I believe what you are talking about is that the feedback frequencies don't match up exactly with your graphic Eq sliders, correct? This is not surprising, and simply repositioning the sliders wouldn't be a proper solution. Graphic Equalizers are fixed frequency and bandwidth, the only control you have is gain. Therefore, if you are experiencing feedback at 2.35kHz, you are out of luck with a Graphic Eq, because that lands right in the middle of two bands, 2kHz and 2.5kHz. The Smaart Spectrograph is a visual representation of all frequencies, over time and amplitude - not just the frequencies that you can attenuate with the graphic Eq.

The tool you are after is a Parametric Eq; inserted on the main L/R. With a parametric (which has variable Q and Frequency), you have a surgical tool in your arsenal for feedback mitigation. A graphic, although will get the job done as well, may require two slider adjustments until the desired result is heard. It is worth mentioning that these situational "Mix Equalizers" are separate, and should be considered aesthetic, from the dedicated parametric system Eq.

Live Sound » Implanting an RTA? » Go to message
Thank You Mr. Supreme Baconator!
Live Sound » Implanting an RTA? » Go to message
Hello all. The talk-back input is going to be the input for the upcoming Smaart system analysis wizards. Yes, there is a workaround for using a channel and an RTA microphone for during-the-show snapshots of that microphones frequency content by sacrificing a GEQ output. However, the information garnered from such a procedure is system independent and has no way of telling you how the room is affecting the sound coming out of the console. As far as not using a computer and still being able to view an RTA....the little bitty screen on the console is not designed or intended to facilitate that function.

For system tuning, an RTA is inferior to more advanced measurement tools; namely the transfer function, or FFT analysis. The reason being, and the common misconception, is that an RTA is able to view its middle name...Time. In fact, that is where an RTA falls short. The RTA can't compare itself to anything, doesn't know where it's signal has been, or where it's going, so it can't discern between direct and reflected energy. Dual channel measurements compare the output of the console, to the output of the system. Because they are matched in time (a process in Smaart called 'delay tracking', or 'find/insert delay' - one of the steps that the wizards do for you), the analyzer is able to show exactly what happens to the signal as it passes through the system and interacts with the environment. The wizards coming in 1.7 incorporate dual channel FFT measurement by way assisted automated processes. You will be able to set a system Eq with a reasonable amount of precision that was previously unachievable without purchasing a stand alone FFT analyzer.

- C
StudioLive General Discussion » SMAART in StudioLive! » Go to message
Hey folks, I just want to clear up some of your questions/concerns -

"another manufacturer getting SMAART.
http://www.systemscontractor.com/article/72708.aspx

Don't get me wrong, I think the SMAART integration into UC is great and I can't wait. I just can't understand their apparent new business model, of "sell them at a loss, but make it up in volume." "

The Apex and Lake integration are simply data-pulls from SMAART. In order to use these features, you must have purchased, and have running, a full version of SMAART V.7 on your machine. We did not design or program the integration, LAKE and APEX did the development on their own for our mutual benefit. In fact, APEX didn't consult us about their integration of SMAART, so we were very excited and delighted when they unveiled it at Musikmesse earlier this year.

"How does SMAART expect to stay around if they are giving away their technology? Is this a case of them letting us have a free taste, figuring some of us will get hooked?"

Although the SMAART integration in PreSonus VSL is free to you - I assure you there is a monetary exchange going on behind the scenes, and you already paid for it by purchasing a StudioLive Console

"The complete Smaart system has controls (usually via MIDI) to outboard things like crossovers which allows you to set up the complete system from a single point. "

This is simply not true. Think of SMAART as a 'cat scan' and you, as the operator, are the 'doctor'. SMAART is a tool to help you understand and diagnose what is happening with your system/systems. However, SMAART is not going to tell you how to set up a crossover - that is precursory knowledge that you should A) already have, or B) learn about on your own , and then apply that knowledge to how you interpret the data that SMAART gives you.

Furthermore -

Do to limitations in the StudioLive's internal DSP, the SMAART features of RTA and Spectrograph are currently only available on the GEQ's of the output section. You can, however, come up with clever ways to view the solo buss - perhaps by designating an AUX output for viewing individual instruments. The Spectra features are not on a per channel basis or Fat Channel.

In regards to the value statement. I encourage you to download a demo of SMAART V7 from the Rational Acoustics site (rationalacoustics.com) and play around with the Spectrograph and RTA. You will notice that numerous averaging and banding options, as well as scaling, peak holds, capturing, windowing, etc. have all been omitted in the StudioLive VSL in favor of a very simple and effective, or streamlined, feature set of what we and PreSonus feel are performing the essential functions to help the StudioLive users achieve certain tasks - NONE OF WHICH ARE SYSTEM ALIGNMENT OR TUNING. The Spectra features are simply ways to graphically interpret what is happening on a per output basis, these functions are completely blind to room acoustics.

I'll keep monitoring this thread - if you'd like to reach me directly - please send me an email to chris@rationalacoustics.com - C

StudioLive General Discussion » How to ring out feedback so Wheel of Me doesn't get out of hand » Go to message
RTA and Spectrograph views will be on all available parametric and GEQ's .
StudioLive General Discussion » How to ring out feedback so Wheel of Me doesn't get out of hand » Go to message
I love that the video is showing SMAART as the tool used to find the feedback frequencies....and now SMAART will be embedded into the VSL control. Users rejoice!
 
Forum Index » Profile for chrisatrational » Messages posted by chrisatrational