# What RTA curve are you guys aiming for?



## Earlysport (Jul 23, 2015)

Hi all

Just wondering what those of you that compete in SQ or have a serious SQ system are tuning your frequency response to for general daily driver listening? 

For example a smooth downward slope from 100-20khz going from 0 to -10dB ?

I think we all vary sub level to suit road noise and or music track.

Thanks,

Earlysport


----------



## bugsplat (Nov 7, 2014)

I went RTA slope crazy once and setup "the perfect waterfall." Problem is it sounded like crap to me. Turned the mic off and set it up how I liked it. Sounded great but technically was not right. If this is a SQ match car build it to win. If this is a daily driver set it up how you like it. I've been known to sit in my driveway just listening to music. I love it.


----------



## Grindcore (Dec 12, 2012)

Yep....if anything i will just RTA a sytem to find any major peaks and dips...cut the peaks...and if possible or needed correct any dips...i used the jbl curve as a base but then do whatever i like the sound of after that...the rta will come out again if i have changed any equipment....or made major changes to crossovers etc...


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

I always go for the Harmon curve. It satisfies my bass head part and sounds good playing everything


----------



## therapture (Jan 31, 2013)

Me, I like a bit of pronounced midbass up front. Even though it is not IASCA perfect, it really helps anchor the image and upfront bass.

Then flat out to about 1k, tapering to 10k, then a slight taper down from there.


----------



## Earlysport (Jul 23, 2015)

bugsplat said:


> I went RTA slope crazy once and setup "the perfect waterfall." Problem is it sounded like crap to me. Turned the mic off and set it up how I liked it. Sounded great but technically was not right. If this is a SQ match car build it to win. If this is a daily driver set it up how you like it. I've been known to sit in my driveway just listening to music. I love it.


So out of curiosity what does your curve look like after setting up your EQ by ear?

I too agree that final tuning needs mostly to be done by ear but I guess I like to start the process with a target curve. I think anywhere I need to make a boost more than 3db generally indicates an acoustic or mechanical issue that needs to be solved rather than EQ. 

Cheers.


----------



## Earlysport (Jul 23, 2015)

DDfusion said:


> I always go for the Harmon curve. It satisfies my bass head part and sounds good playing everything


I found a pic..


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

It would be nice to see some curves posted. Everyone talks game, but never willing to post graphs.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

I tune an equal loudness curve according to my hearing. Not sure what the curve looks like because I don't own an rta. The only places I defect from my personal equal loudness curve is by fattening up the lower midbass and cutting the 2000-5000 range a little. I call it "laid-back-impact".


----------



## oabeieo (Feb 22, 2015)

Lately I been likening 6db gain at 31 and overall 20 to 160 flat but 15db higher than 315 and a hill downward from 100 to 315, than flat to 2k than a hill downward to about 5k totaling about 6db than flat from 5k to 20k.( with a 18dbnotch filter at3626hz with approx 96db slopes to tame the HOM


----------



## The Max (Aug 4, 2012)

Earlysport said:


> Hi all
> 
> Just wondering what those of you that compete in SQ or have a serious SQ system are tuning your frequency response to for general daily driver listening?


I've been recently doing some more tweaking after replacing my crappy Rockford Fosgate T800-4ad amp with an Arc Audio XDI600.4 v2 beastie. I don't have an RTA of my own but I have borrowed one to flatten the curve right out and then from there, I flavour it accordingly.

It's a bit of a diminishing rolling wave like at the beach, with the peak starting at the beginning of the spectrum, gradually rolling down to form a slightly wide scoop centred at the 800Hz mark that gradually rolls back up to a peak around the 5kHz mark slightly for a bit of presence in the vocals and add a little sparkle to guitar solos and drums, then rolling back down to the 8kHz mark where it then plateaus out to what is the lowest point of the curve.

Then somebody else sits in the car and asks me why it sounds a little dull. That's because they've gone deaf over jackhammers on the worksite. 

Which is why I'm not sure why you're curious about the curves of others' systems. Everyone's perception is unique and even if you get a concert pianist with the best trained ears on the planet to tune your system, you may still not like the results because only your ears and your brain interpret the sound in your way. So if you're not competing, forget about curves of someone else's winning formula. Just tune it to what your ears tell you sounds killer! Start at a reasonable all-day volume and once you're satisfied with that, give it some more stick and see if anything needs a little more fine tuning until you find that middle ground that suits both volumes.

Trust your own ears, never anyone else's.


----------



## Earlysport (Jul 23, 2015)

I have to be honest I trust other peoples ears that have spent way more time critical listening more than I trust my own. As I'm just getting back into it I need to relearn great SQ, and one way to do that is listen to others systems and keep resetting my benchmark.

Back in the day when I was attending the US IASCA finals and events regularly, and setting up many cars for our own local Aussie events I think I had a good ear. Now I think they're probably just OK. 

Like most things, the best you know is the best you've heard. Sometimes there's a new best just around the corner.

Cheers all and thanks for the good information!


----------



## High Resolution Audio (Sep 12, 2014)

Here is my curve with pretty much no tuning. So far only EQ was a -6DB adjustment at 4K. The bump at 31.5 Hz is to a boost on the subwoofer amp at 31.5 which when I will reduce slightly to make the bass response perfectly flat from 20 - 100 Hz.

I do not care for waterfall curves. To me they sound dull and lifeless. The curve I have now sounds alive, lifelike, and dynamic. Almost as if you were there at a live performance.

I have only 20 decibel difference between the loudest and softest between 20- 20K


----------



## Roper215 (Oct 21, 2012)




----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

Nice to see some curves!!


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

Roper215 said:


>


You've peaked my curiosity, I'd love to know how this sounds :O

I go for the JBL curve myself. I find that if I tune to my liking by ear, it wont stay as impressive over different genres. Eg; If I end up with something I like for hip hop, I cant have an immersive experience with a live recording.

fwiw..


----------



## Roper215 (Oct 21, 2012)

Check out my build in my sig, it will provide additional color to my response.

With this tune, its a bit mid bass heavy sitting in a parking lot, but that fades away when moving, if anything it may need just a tad more for impact at speed.

Other than that, the only thing its missing is a little bit at the very extreme low end 20-50hz.

It was tuned by an IASCA judge who also has an award winning car, he said I should compete bc I'd do well. 

Its real natural, and is good for almost all types of music except for some rap, but I'm pretty sure its how it was recorded. I routinely listen to this at high volumes for hours at a time and suffer no ear fatigue/headaches, and the presence is truly outstanding.

Depending on your equipment, I'd say save your current image and see what you can do to reproduce the one I posted, worst case you spend a few hours or so and realize you like yours better.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

Roper215 said:


> Check out my build in my sig, it will provide additional color to my response.
> 
> With this tune, its a bit mid bass heavy sitting in a parking lot, but that fades away when moving, if anything it may need just a tad more for impact at speed.
> 
> ...




I bet it does sound very balanced and natural. Similar to my curve.


----------



## ezland86 (Nov 10, 2008)

I am fairly new. what tool do you guys use to measure your system? I've been doing some research. seem like most audio shop uses the audio control's sa-3055, however it cost around $1800. there are also many iPhone rta apps, but many clam they are not accurate.


----------



## High Resolution Audio (Sep 12, 2014)

ezland86 said:


> I am fairly new. what tool do you guys use to measure your system? I've been doing some research. seem like most audio shop uses the audio control's sa-3055, however it cost around $1800. there are also many iPhone rta apps, but many clam they are not accurate.


Here is a link to instructions on how to plot your curve with a plain old sound pressure level meter and test tone CD. There is a correction formula that you must use to correct for weighting.

Fine Tuning Your Car Audio System


----------



## therapture (Jan 31, 2013)

Kazuhiro said:


> You've peaked my curiosity, I'd love to know how this sounds :O
> 
> I go for the JBL curve myself. I find that if I tune to my liking by ear, it wont stay as impressive over different genres. Eg; If I end up with something I like for hip hop, I cant have an immersive experience with a live recording.
> 
> fwiw..


This is what I tend to end up with. With a touch more midbass though...but the slope of the general curve downwards is very similar to mine.


----------



## Earlysport (Jul 23, 2015)

ezland86 said:


> I am fairly new. what tool do you guys use to measure your system? I've been doing some research. seem like most audio shop uses the audio control's sa-3055, however it cost around $1800. there are also many iPhone rta apps, but many clam they are not accurate.


I've been using audiotools for iphone / ipad. I bought the audiocontrol calibrated mic for it, however there's not much difference from the internal mic or the calibrated Dayton for $15. I use the average setting and let it run 30 seconds or so.

I also like it's FFT measurement tool with a sweep for finer resolution and looking at individual driver responses. 









This is my current curve from it. This has been compressed and has 10dB steps rather than the usual 5, so the curve would normally look steeper. There's roughly a 20db decline from 20hz-20khz. 

I think I'm going to try that harmon curve as a comparison. 

Cheers.

Earlysport


----------



## Kevin K (Feb 11, 2013)

That looks like a good sounding curve there.




therapture said:


> This is what I tend to end up with. With a touch more midbass though...but the slope of the general curve downwards is very similar to mine.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Here's my final curve.
Measured using REW 1/6 octave smoothing.










I personally like as flat as possible high frequency (4k++) rather than downward slope on this region. Using planar tweeter (BG Neo3) this sounds very smooth and sexy.


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

masswork said:


> Here's my final curve.
> Measured using REW 1/6 octave smoothing.
> 
> 
> ...


Did you experiment with where you started the flat region there at 500hz? Did you find this works better than 200hz

I might give something close to Hanatsu's curve a try


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

*Goes through a long RTA session to match target*

*Realises scale was in 10dB not 5dB...*


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

Been there....


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Gonna try Jazzy's spreadsheet for creating REW EQ curves and see where it takes me. Alas my UMM-6 died a horrible death and gotta sell the NVX amp to replace it. Such is tuition woes.



Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Justin Zazzi (May 28, 2012)

I'm currently using the "half of whitledge" curve in that spreadsheet and love it!


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Jazzi said:


> I'm currently using the "half of whitledge" curve in that spreadsheet and love it!


which one? the left side or right side?


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

Quick question about matching these curves.

You match it with left side and right side individually with sub right?

After that should I be using L+R to check for additional modal peaks and dips?


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

I do left and right separately with sub and finalize with both sides playing.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Jazzi said:


> I'm currently using the "half of whitledge" curve in that spreadsheet and love it!



Say it ain't so!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## subterFUSE (Sep 21, 2009)

Kazuhiro said:


> I might give something close to Hanatsu's curve a try




It's very similar to the Whitledge curve.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Kazuhiro said:


> Did you experiment with where you started the flat region there at 500hz? Did you find this works better than 200hz


Yeah, i used to flat starting at around 200-250.
But this final curve changed only for my latest install which uses a planar midrange (Neo8s crossed at 350Hz/24db). 

If i use the usual flat from 200, this makes the midbass unable to cope with midr and tw combo (both planar). So, i decided to raise until 400-450 and it makes the sound perfect to my ear. 

Oh, and this happens with the sub too. My install uses flat sub, rather than usual cone one. So, the final curve tries to flat out between 20-80 and only has +10db more compared to 200.

Anyway... I don't have any scientific explanation why planar speaker sound differently even though the FR shows the same (aka: flat).


----------



## davewpy (Jun 22, 2014)

JBL curve for me. Sounds good for about everything.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Yeah I noticed I must have a "jazz" curve going now. Sounds glorious. Then flip on some harder rock and it's like a buzz saw coming at you. Hehe. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

Try the Harmon curve. My library is vast. Jazz to metal to classic rock to rap.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

I've got a bunch of REW curves. Are you referring to the JBL or MS-8 curve or a different Harmon curve? Checked. Got an MS-8 and Andy curve. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

It's all the same. The MS-8 builds the JBL/Harmon curve. One reason I got one since that's what I like anyway.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

here is my latest


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

Jazzi said:


> I'm currently using the "half of whitledge" curve in that spreadsheet and love it!


What is this spreadsheet you speak of?


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Kazuhiro said:


> What is this spreadsheet you speak of?


Enjoy!
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/technical-advanced-car-audio-discussion/206881-jazzis-tuning-companion-room-eq-wizard.html

Can't wait to get the new mic so I can try this.


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

Does that export in individual driver targets?


----------



## Justin Zazzi (May 28, 2012)

Yes. And for some reason the download link in the first post is not working so try downloading it from post number 53 here:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/2959154-post53.html


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Been messing with a custom curve in that spreadsheet. Created another tab where I have it charted next to Andy's curve and MS-8 curve. Fun hobby!


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

Kazuhiro said:


> *Goes through a long RTA session to match target*
> 
> *Realises scale was in 10dB not 5dB...*


How do you change the scale? 

I just started using REW and the rta goes 0db 50db 100db. Is there a different way of changing it besides zoom?


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

Aw335tt said:


> How do you change the scale?
> 
> I just started using REW and the rta goes 0db 50db 100db. Is there a different way of changing it besides zoom?


I just change the window limits


----------



## subterFUSE (Sep 21, 2009)

Screw REW RTA mode. It shows too much HF roll off.

Use IR sweeps from different locations and average them together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Aw335tt said:


> How do you change the scale?
> 
> 
> 
> I just started using REW and the rta goes 0db 50db 100db. Is there a different way of changing it besides zoom?



Sure you can set range on your graph. Also right click on the graph for adjustment options. The range box up in the upper right will let you set freq and amplitude ranges precisely. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

subterFUSE said:


> Screw REW RTA mode. It shows too much HF roll off.
> 
> Use IR sweeps from different locations and average them together.
> 
> ...


Ya I noticed that.

I don't have REW hooked up to the car, I was just using a mic with the RTA mode.


----------



## subterFUSE (Sep 21, 2009)

I was using both methods recently.... REW sweeps, averaged together from 4 points & RTA pink noise averaged from same points with 32 samples each. The RTA method showed a tremendous drop off in upper octaves. I believe the sweeps were more accurate, personally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

Well when it comes to the levels, I'm pretty happy with the curve, I just want to fix some dips and peaks. It should be fine for that right?


----------



## subterFUSE (Sep 21, 2009)

Yes. It shows the shape. And maybe my technique was wrong, but the results were so far off that I stopped with the RTA mode completely and stuck with multiple sweeps averaged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

Thanks, I'll mess with it a bit and see how it goes. 

I was going to start a new thread to ask this but maybe you can give me some advice here. I'm going to try the parametric Eq in the PS8 again (tried it once when I first got it and it sounded like ****), is there a particular process in using it? 1 channel at a time? Left side, right side then fine tweak? 

I can do 31 bands per channel, should I only reassign problem freq bands or give all custom bands to all channels? 

If this is too off topic for this thread I can just start a new thread.


----------



## subterFUSE (Sep 21, 2009)

It really depends on how you like to tune.


For example, if you want to match left and right sides to be equal but then want to link the sides and adjust their EQ together for tonality, then it becomes important to manage which EQ bands you put parametric EQ on.

When you link 2 channels EQ bands, the slider will adjust both channel simultaneously. This is a great feature when you already matched left vs. right levels, but then want to adjust them together to change the overall sound without changing the balance of left vs. right. But, if you have used parametric EQ on any of the bands that you want to link, then those bands are no longer the same. You might have changed the frequency and/or the Q on those bands such that the sliders are no longer changing the sound the same way on both. In that case, you don't want to link those channels and adjust the bands together because the changes will be incongruent.


That's why I have decided in my tuning, I will use parametric EQ as little as possible.... and I limit the parametric bands to those bands that are outside of the usable range as defined by the crossover points.

What do I mean by that?

Let's say I have my midbass drivers playing from 55Hz to 315Hz. For the EQ bands in that range, I leave them as normal 1/3 octave default. If I want any parametric bands, then I use the bands above 315Hz that would otherwise not be useful to these midbass due to the crossover setup.

That way, if I do decide to link the left midbass and right midbass together and adjust for tonality, I can do it by using the 1/3 octave bands between 55-315 which are kept at the same frequency and Q settings.

For tweeters, I would use the 20Hz-1000Hz range for parametric and keep everything above that as 1/3 octave.

For subs, I use the upper bands for parametric and leave the lower bands in 1/3 octave.



Lately, I have been tuning by making standard, 1/3 octave adjustments first and then if there are any remaining peaks that are not possible to fix with 1/3 octave bands then I use parametric for those peaks.
I began to work this way because of what I described above. This allows me the freedom to link channels together and adjust tonality while keeping the general left/right balance approximately the same.

Now, I'm certainly not trying to steer anyone to tune one way or another.... but that's just how I do it, and I have been pleased with the results of late.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

^^^^ For those whose dsp gives the option of PQ/GEQ on every band the suggestion above is excellent use geq in pass band and peq in stop band. Just make sure you pick a frequency ~ an octave above the actual xover, put the peq on a wide Q and cut the max that you can. Make sure the frequency and Q is same for L&R.


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

subterFUSE said:


> It really depends on how you like to tune.
> 
> 
> For example, if you want to match left and right sides to be equal but then want to link the sides and adjust their EQ together for tonality, then it becomes important to manage which EQ bands you put parametric EQ on.
> ...


Thank you for the write up. That's actually what I was planning on doing. Leaving the current used bands at 1/3 and just assigning new frequencies to the bands I'm not using.


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

Well... Fk parametric eq! For the 2nd time loll. 

After hours of messing with it, I couldn't get it to sound the way I wanted. Thought I could just fix the dips and peaks but my processor had other plans for me lol.


----------



## subterFUSE (Sep 21, 2009)

Aw335tt said:


> Well... Fk parametric eq! For the 2nd time loll.
> 
> After hours of messing with it, I couldn't get it to sound the way I wanted. Thought I could just fix the dips and peaks but my processor had other plans for me lol.



Explain your process. Maybe we can help?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

subterFUSE said:


> Explain your process. Maybe we can help?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Ok, I don't know where to start but I guess I'll start with some system info first. 
2 way setup
Subs underneat front seats.
Scan illuminator 1" soft dome tweeters HP 3000hz @ 24db
Focal 100krs mids HP 160hz @ 24 - LP 3000hz @ 24db 
Zapco Ref350 running mids and tweeters
Audison Bitplay digital into PS8 

Channels for tweeters have all frequencies below 1000hz all the way down. So I measured the right side, wherever I saw either a peak Or big dip, I clicked on the graph, got the frequency, assigned a band to that frequency and tried correcting it. No matter how much I messed with the Q, I couldn't pin point the area I wanted. It would either lower a huge area or pick it up but the dip/peak it's self was still there. 

Maybe my idea of a parametric eq is off, I was under the impression that if I saw a peak or a dip, I can select the desired frequency, adjust Q and just either cut or fill it that area. 

My mids are where most of the problem is, REW is showing huge dips and peaks in the mid range area. especially from 500hz+ all the way to the tweeters.


----------



## Aw335tt (Sep 27, 2014)

subterFUSE said:


> Explain your process. Maybe we can help?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I kind of found out what might have been the problem, well part of the problem (besides my lack of parametric tuning capability lol).

I downloaded the IASCA Setup CD and was going through it, I noticed the pink noise on this CD sounded different than the one I was using, which I think was from the EMMA cd. I decided to just measure my speakers at home and compare the graphs of the two tracks. The IASCA track produced and much more flat graph. The high end drop was wasn't as big, peak around 400-600 was smaller, 600-2000 was flat, gradually sloping down, EMMA cd pink noise looked like the Rocky Mountains between 400-2000. 

There was over a 10db difference @ 10khz. IASCA cd had minor peaks and dips from 3k-15k but was flat, didn't slope down. EMMA cd dropped off about 20+db between 3k and 12k and spiked back up about 7db from 11khz to 16khz

Total slope of both tracks
IASCA: [email protected] 110hz to 0db at 14khz 
EMMA: [email protected] 70hz to -13db at 11.3khz and -5db at 17khz

I'm going to try some tuning tomorrow with the new track and see how it goes.


----------



## Kazuhiro (Apr 28, 2015)

I have a quick rew question: I am unsure about my scale.
I have the umik-1 at 25% in the audio panel, any lower, and REW will say my measurements are too low, and must be greater than -25dB FS. The scale of the measurements on the rew graph however, are reading around 100 - 120dB...and I am sure my tests arent that loud. They are only discomforting. Any ideas what might be the cause of this? Mic plugs in as UMIK-1 Gain:12dB.


----------

