Room correction using your iPhone and HouseCurve

You’re right, I selected frequency range 30-4KHz for the correction but I can extend the range

There is so much flexibility in House curve and Roon to make adjustments that if there’s any uncertainty make small adjustments & listen for improvements.
I’m sorry if my previous post seemed facetious but, if you save your configuration files you can always revert to the previous successful configuration so nothing is lost, small or big changes are a personal decision but the former is preferable.

I don’t mind some humor and I could have answered myself the definition of “few” if another poster had the same inquiry… :smile:

1 Like

@Greg_Wilding

I measured left and right speaker and applied FIR separately since my listening room was asymmetric. I verified the result for left and right separately and found that it aligned with the expectation nicely. But when I measured the result with left and right together, besides some minor dips and peaks across the spectrum, there’s a gradual increase SPL from mid to low frequency.

So I correct this result for the second time. I applied another convolution filter but this time for the combined measurement for L and R. That means I layered two convolution filters. The result curve finally aligned with the target curve, but the sound was very dull with poor stereo imaging.

I wonder what have I done wrong. Should this a wrong approach? How exactly should I address this issue?

The combined measurements should have been reasonably close to the prediction. I suspect there’s something wrong. Thoughts:

When doing mult-channel measurements, make sure you use the manual curve fit. The automatic fit might shift the curve causing unbalanced corrections. Likewise when re-measuring, be sure to use the same manual curve fit.

When re-measuring L/R together, be sure to average in the listening area. No location will exactly match the prediction, but the average will get close.

I guess if you were happy with the original correction, you could just ditch the second one. If your ears are happy, take the win :slight_smile:

I used manual curve fit already.

Let me show you measurement screen cap later, worth as a case study

1 Like

@Greg_Wilding how can I rename a saved measurement?

This isn’t supported right now :slight_smile: . If you still have the original measurement session on the screen (green) then you can always save under a new name.

The saving feature was meant for short term storage (I’m always redoing measurements). Some users want to keep measurements around, more like a REW-like session. The app needs some re-work to support that, which is on the list.

1 Like

Hi Greg, any chance measurements can be saved in sync across ios devices?
happy new year
cenk

1 Like

Not at this time, but I have it on my list. I’m curious, how would you use such a feature?

Happy new year!

Greg I need to more research but I re-did one of my zones using the FIR filters, and found the roon sync between zones got messed up.

One zone was using the new FIR based convolution, and the other the regular filters.

Should this have compensated correctly?

Should what have compensated for what?

Depending on their tap length, FIR filters almost always have significantly greater latency than IIR filters do.

AJ

I hope (and expect) that roon would take this into account when syncing two zones with different convolution filters.

Hi Greg,
Measuring with my iphone+Umik at other people’s homes and tinkering with the filters at home.
Figuring out the best place for a sub is also easier with the phone.
thank you

2 Likes

@Greg_Wilding just wanted to tag you in case you hadn’t seen my question.

Expert advice welcome!

This is what I would expect. The “regular” PEQ based filter has a delay of zero. The FIR filter, as designed, introduces a 250 ms delay. This gives it the ability to do things a PEQ can’t, like change magnitude without also changing phase.

I don’t think Roon will automatically fix this between zones. The PEQ filter needs to be delayed to match the FIR (ex: add silence to the beginning of the PEQ .wav file). Or just pick one kind of filter for all zones?

(Nerdy note - When PEQ is converted to an impulse response to work with Roon’s convolver, that makes it an FIR filter - one designed to exhibit the behaviour of PEQ :nerd_face: )

Thanks Greg,

I’ll add an enhancement suggestion - it seems taking account of convolution filters latency is something roon zone sync should do.

But for now I’ll just work through my other filters - and make them all FIR.

Thanks again!

1 Like

Wouldn‘t it be possible to shorten the pre-impulse windowing to minimize latency?

I did that when using REW for my convolution filters, thus reducing latency to 100us, as Roon has no facility to introduce delay for individual endpoints in a group.

Roon can‘t know and account for the filter‘s intrinsic pre-impulse latency, I‘d wager, so not fixable.

But, they could easily introduce a facility to add a user configurable delay to individual endpoints in a group!

Can’t they run a test signal with and without filter and compare?

They‘d have to setup and run some sort of software loopback device, adapted for each relevant server OS variant, and run specific code to analyze the filter behavior - I strongly doubt that‘ll ever happen, given my experience with Roon development.