Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Frequency response plots for Behringer MS16 needed (Read 3868 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Frequency response plots for Behringer MS16 needed

I just bought a pair of MS16 to occasionally watch movies in my office. For this kind of usage, I did not want to spend more than their price (40€). The sound is  and considering the costs I think the speakers even have exceptional value. Still, their frequency response sounds far from flat and I think good equalization could give them a large boost. But for that I need data. The professional Behringers come with FR plots, but not this model. Can anyone help?

Frequency response plots for Behringer MS16 needed

Reply #1 –
Quote from: googlebot on
I just bought a pair of MS16 to occasionally watch movies in my office. For this kind of usage, I did not want to spend more than their price (40€). The sound is  and considering the costs I think the speakers even have exceptional value. Still, their frequency response sounds far from flat and I think good equalization could give them a large boost. But for that I need data. The professional Behringers come with FR plots, but not this model. Can anyone help?


To do what you seem to want to do *best*, you need a FR curve taken in the location you wish to use the speakers.  It takes about $100 worth of hardware and software to do this.
 

Frequency response plots for Behringer MS16 needed

Reply #2 –
Of course, the FR curve at an actual listening position differs considerably from an anechoic chamber measurement. However, on average the correction of a low quality speaker according to its anechoic room measurement should be better than uncorrected, even if you make things worse for some ranges.

PS I just got confirmation, that I can borrow a ECM-8000 microphone in a week, so that I can record an impulse response with that. What would I have to do to with that file to get the inverse filter after feeding it into a convoluter?

Frequency response plots for Behringer MS16 needed

Reply #3 –
Quote from: googlebot on
Of course, the FR curve at an actual listening position differs considerably from an anechoic chamber measurement. However, on average the correction of a low quality speaker according to its anechoic room measurement should be better than uncorrected, even if you make things worse for some ranges.


Most speakers are located in a half-space (infinite plane or wall),  quarter-space (infinitely tall corner)  or eighth-space (corner that ends in a floor or ceiling), etc.  If you try to correct the speaker for a full space (anechoic chamber) you will usually end up with tons of excess bass.

Quote
PS I just got confirmation, that I can borrow a ECM-8000 microphone in a week, so that I can record an impulse response with that. What would I have to do to with that file to get the inverse filter after feeding it into a convoluter?


Don't forget to use an appropriate mic preamp with phantom power to do right by that ECM8000.

Frequency response plots for Behringer MS16 needed

Reply #4 –
Quote
...so that I can record an impulse response with that. What would I have to do to with that file to get the inverse filter after feeding it into a convoluter?
You'll probably have to plot the frequency response and set your equalizer manually.

Or if you're using a computer as your A/V source, Vista and Win7 have "Room Correction" built in.  (I've never tried it.)

And, I'm not sure if your RTA (Real Time Analyzer) software will use an impulse...  I think pink noise or a swept-frequency tone are more common.  Impulses are more-frequently used to measure/capture reverberation.