No matter whether I use a compensation/target curve that includes a rise in bass, and/or the the -bass-boost parameter,ī1. (perhaps tho that point is moot? as it being a sort of "digital hpeq", it doesn't need that, as 0dBFS be that with or without PEQ = maximum analog output ?) I also like to use my E1DA PowerDAC v2, which has a seven band PEQ. That is all background & context to my question and/or issue. Which in turn minimizes equalizations needed up to about 1KHz. As that compensation file doesn't have elevated bass, I used the -bass-boost parameter to best closely match the native measured response to the equalization. But as this was generated from a measurement made by Crinacle, I thought using his target would be advisable, especially in the "over 8K" range where it is said error is high. I perhaps like Oratory's target curve the most. others I could have and had used prior.Ī1. A couple of notes regarding why I used some of the parameters vs. (*) I call this "v5" successful equalization, out of the many many more passes I had made than just 5. $ python3.8 autoeq.py -input_dir="INPUT" -output_dir="OUTPUT" -compensation="measurements/crinacle/resources/crinacle_harman_in-ear_2019v2_wo_bass.csv" -equalize -parametric_eq -max_filters=8+2 -max_gain=9 -show_plot -treble_f_lower=9000 -treble_f_upper=13500 -bass_boost=9.5 Take the following AutoEQ generated set of PEQ parameters for my Audeze Euclid, based on the measurement made by Crinacle, turned into data points by WebPlotDigitizer: If not, hoping you can consider the request and possibly add it to your backlog or equivalent, should you keep one of those, as a future enhancement of AutoEQ. If so, I would much appreciate if you can describe how. Perhaps it is presently achievable with the capabilities and input parameters and/or files of AutoEQ today. But then if of particular interest to others, to further serve as a place that others can communicate with him to discuss his AutoEQ product and pose usage assistance and/or enhancement As mentioned in the thread cited above, here is a description of my use case. I'm therefore opening this thread to first pose my question. In the "List of Amir's Headphone GEQ filters" thread Jaakko replied "I think I prefer ASR over all others" when I asked him "What is your forum of choice where you spend your most time, where I can discuss my particular use cases?". Is there is a way now to get only cuts / negative PEQ parameters output by AutoEQ? Hope you can shed some insight into that. Please see my comment under "Re-Edit: " at the bottom Post #2 below in this thread. So I should know if it works shortly.ĮDIT: it partially works. I'm about to try it anyway in a few seconds. This pioneering Gibson circuitry is studio quality with very little noise and/or signal loss, which delivers as much of the guitar's authentic tone as possible.EDIT: Before spending time on this wordy opening post, I believe I may have figured out how to achieve my desired result today simply by creating my own compensation targets. The Dark Fire's tone potentiometer and CPA have also been redesigned so that turning the tone knob allows a very intuitive and significant change in tone, thus giving you even more ability to dial in your desired tone. "Furthermore, the Tone control and the CPA are designed to yield significant yet intuitive tonal changes from just slight rotations of the knob, and all of this is achieved via studio quality circuitry with much lower noise and signal loss than ever before achieved on such a guitar, so the full authentic Les Paul tone - along with its many new pickup combinations - comes through unhindered.įWIW - I only measured -58dbr SNR from the Piezo "Out" using a Terrasonde Audio Toolbox.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |