Pale Rider
|
I spent quite a bit of time yesterday running through my first effort with the DEQX Mate. It is a powerful device. Unlike the DSPeaker, it has no "auto" mode that will simply perform a room correction for you. The DSPeaker is amazingly effective at that, BTW. And even its more sophisticated functionality—e.g., multi-positions and multiple readings, choosing between single and multiple speaker configurations, manual EQ—is relatively accessible from the front panel screen, and with a brief reference to the manual. Not so with the DEQX.
The DEQX is a full size piece of equipment, with a very spartan front panel: power switch, volume buttons, and small buttons for selecting which profiles are active. Nothing about its appearance says hi-end audio. It looks more like something built in a Hammond or other assembly line chassis. Not ugly, just very utilitarian in its appearance. It is quite solid, but not quite like the PWD or Lumin. More like the Baetis. Functional, solid, utilitarian, but sort of "small shop" in look and feel. But not in performance.
Setup requires a PC running Windows. I used my MacBook Air running Win 7 in a VMWare environment. That was connected to the DEQX via USB. The PC controller is a powerful part of this process, but it is also a disadvantage. plugging in your computer every time you want to run the software is inconvenient (I am going to look into running the software on the Baetis; that would minimize the inconvenience of having a separate computer). The DEQX has three microphone inputs. You either buy or rent (hire a consultant) a calibrated microphone package. I opted for the standard Behringer package. The package comes with a microphone holder and wind screen, and it can be mounted on a microphone boom or tripod. I used a tripod, and wrapped it with a heavy blanket to minimize unintended reflections. All these DSP devices require a microphone, of course, so the inconvenience of running microphonic input is just part of the deal.
The DEQX manual is not short at 140+ pages. It is very thorough, and shows screen shots at every step of the way. Although DEQX recommends using a professional consultant, or will also provide email or telephone support as you walk through the process (including plodding and downloading files and profiles for review), you can in fact slog your way through it. And I think it is worth doing.
The DEQX process is: (1) measure your speakers anechoically, or as close to anechoically as possible (and they provide quite a few suggestions for this); (2) correct your speakers using the measurements just made (not a physical step, just the application of the measurements to the profile to correct transient, phase, and impulse variations), and you can choose to run a separate process to verify the corrections made; (3) place the speakers in their listening position; (4) measure the room, apply corrections for these measurements, and load it all up to the DEQX. Enjoy.
The impact of this process is not subtle. It is amazing, on many levels. Interestingly, the ERRs are very smooth (I don't like the term "flat") speakers. Given the well-tuned radial design, and the crossover-less tweeter, that should not be terribly surprising. Still, it's impressive. But the design of the ERRs poses a challenge to the DEQX process. The ERR is intended to use room reflections as part of its transduction. I doubt the ERR sounds very good in an anechoic chamber. The first stage measurement process of the DEQX is constructed to remove room reflections, if possible in an anechoic chamber. My first efforts at speaker correction yesterday illustrated this conundrum. Each time, I ended up with pretty severe aural ringing or overshoot in the midrange, but not in the graphs of the speakers. It seemed the DEQX was doing a very good job of "correcting" the ERRs by "solving" for their perceived deficiency. And then as soon as I restored them to their listening position, I had way too much energy in the mid to mid-high bands. Almost hurt the ears. We all know that many speakers are sensitive, sometimes in the extreme, to room positioning. The ERRs are also more or less effective based on their placement, but generally in a manner counter to the typical "get it way out there in the room for optimum presentation."
The DEQX offers a number of ways to adjust for this challenge, including narrowing or widening the time window for adjustment of the amplitude, impulse, and frequency elements. This is slick and powerful. I ran out of time last night to refine this very far, but it appears that a combination of a "little less anechoic" initial measurement, and a little bit more reflection in the "correction window" might go a long way.
With respect to sub/bass management, the DEQX is very impressive. On the first pass, it essentially eliminated all my room boom. Bass is extremely tight in the room now, and very deep. I can even stand in my notorious "bass hole" in the primary room corner and now hear nice tight bass for the first time. This will actually make passive room adjustment a lot easier.
|