In Reply to: 3.7 Frequency Response from listening position posted by Mark Man on April 5, 2014 at 20:21:38:
I would repeat the measurements for each speaker separately with the meter aimed at the midrange. If they have the sweep with 1/3 octave warble tones it will give you a better feel for the measurements. Your positioning is fine.
Though I agree with the folks about REW and use it myself, the fact that the sweep is fast and you don't control tone duration etc didn't give me a feel for the significance of the values for music, so I returned to doing all my freq sweeps by hand exactly as you do, just working each speaker separately (and together) and repeating with different aims. That way I have a better idea of what a freq aberration may mean for music.
When measuring around bass dips it is useful to hunt them down. you change the measurement location to find where the dip is forming and where it is less severe. The one you have should not be corrected electronically but its source should be located and treated - it would be a reflection from a particular surface that causes the dip and you need to find where that surface is. I use a large sofa cushion and place it on surfaces that seem suspect as reflectors - particularly of the backwave.
The main resonance of the 3.7 should be around the 60hz area so it is odd that it is where you have a big suckout.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: 3.7 Frequency Response from listening position - Satie 09:32:07 04/06/14 (2)
- RE: 3.7 Frequency Response from listening position - Mark Man 13:22:50 04/06/14 (1)
- RE: 3.7 Frequency Response from listening position - Satie 19:35:35 04/06/14 (0)