• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

New RCA cables. Sound is horrible.

Thomas_AA said:
Well I am measuring it another way - I like storing things in wav - and importing a pink noise file into REW needs 10 dB/decade correction. Since not many records contain good sweeps or pink noise; I left those rather poor tracks long time ago for high quality sweeps (CA-TRS1007/Ortofon).


'
Click to expand...
OK, fired up REW . . . The *only* way I can get to not display pink noise as flat is to errantly select "Spectrum" as a mode, as opposed to one of the RTA modes . . .

1769799617924.png

Or, on the most current version, with RTA 1/48 octave:

1769800347937.png
 
Last edited:
As a sanity check, turn up the bass and treble controls and verify that the frequency plot goes up at both low and high frequencies.
 
Thomas_AA said:
Running RTA is fine with pink noise. As mentioned I don’t do octave measurements for cartridges or other gear.
Click to expand...
And is the standard for audio analysis . . .

The point is, I said "pink noise is flat on an RTA", and you argued. Set REW to actually *BE* and RTA and, well . . . true there as well.

And how you (atypically) use the tool does not change that.
 
The big question on built ins and such, is how flat is the response for measurement, and will they interface with a calibrated mic? (and I can't think of a single commercial solution that suggests that you use an internal sound device for system tuning).
 
But, meansuring/tuning a system is not (or should not be) "relative". You need to know that the potential issues that you see are real, and not artifacts of craptastic hardware. If you choose to deviate based on "taste", fine, but that doesn't justify a flawed tool (in the name of audiophool, perhaps?) :)

Sure, if you are measuring just changes, it might work. (I could count the number of times I have felt the need to do that with a missing hand though . . . ).
 
Stating what's required for relative measurements doesn't imply that relative measurements are universally suitable for all applications. Obviously for before/after FR they'll do just fine, and if one is targeting a specific response they won't.

I couldn't count the number of times I've measured changes on the fingers and toes of everyone I know.
 
I guess that to find the reason of a "horrible sound" (see the topic description) - any sound card will do.
 
JP said:
Stating what's required for relative measurements doesn't imply that relative measurements are universally suitable for all applications. Obviously for before/after FR they'll do just fine, and if one is targeting a specific response they won't.

I couldn't count the number of times I've measured changes on the fingers and toes of everyone I know.
Click to expand...
But making a global statement (as per your comment) regarding your corner case isn't exactly accurate or honest either, since the initial comment did not specify your use case.

And, @catBot, for this one, dixie cups and string might have been enough! :)
 
tadawson said:
But making a global statement (as per your comment) regarding your corner case isn't exactly accurate or honest either, since the initial comment did not specify your use case.
Click to expand...

It was a standalone, self-explanatory comment. I never gave a specific case, certainly not "my" corner case. It would fit the OPs situation had they captured a before and after of the FR. The spirit of the comment was of enablement; that there are humble methods.

Do you have another straw man in mind, or are you about done?
 
It was immediately after my comment, which placed it firmly in the context that I had set, since you made no statement(s) otherwise. (And I guess disproving BS and bad information is now considered "straws"?)

(And I find it hysterical that "relative" measurements and pretty much "irrelevant" in the majority of cases . . . ) :rflmao:
 
Last edited:
tadawson said:
And is the standard for audio analysis . . .

The point is, I said "pink noise is flat on an RTA", and you argued. Set REW to actually *BE* and RTA and, well . . . true there as well.

And how you (atypically) use the tool does not change that.
Click to expand...
Yes that a mistake, but it works both ways with calibration. I don't use RTA much, perhaps if I do room measurements. For frequency response I use sweeps.
 
Thomas_AA said:
Yes that a mistake, but it works both ways with calibration. I don't use RTA much, perhaps if I do room measurements. For frequency response I use sweeps.
Click to expand...
NP! I just strive to ensure that other readers here get good information, that is generally based on best industry standards and practices.

And, for your use case, I'm a bit surprised that you don't use white noise, since no "compensation" is needed (as with sweeps).

Myself, I tend to stick to pink, since it is more similar to human hearing, although most of what I do is system/room tuning, although running pink through a device post repair to validate seems viable as well from here.

It's all good, and hopefully folks can now understand both use cases!

- Tim
 
tadawson said:
NP! I just strive to ensure that other readers here get good information, that is generally based on best industry standards and practices.

And, for your use case, I'm a bit surprised that you don't use white noise, since no "compensation" is needed (as with sweeps).

Myself, I tend to stick to pink, since it is more similar to human hearing, although most of what I do is system/room tuning, although running pink through a device post repair to validate seems viable as well from here.

It's all good, and hopefully folks can now understand both use cases!

- Tim
Click to expand...
For the actual use case, there are no accurate pink or white noise tracks for frequency response measurements of cartridges that I know of. My initial suggestion was to use pink noise since the cable switch changes appeared to cause very large differences, and, secondly, pink noise tracks are more common to find on test records. If that would have showed no change, then he'd know it was not the cables at all and this thread would not have started. I don't use those pink or white noise any longer since I've got better test records.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom