1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Help, ETF doesn't show difference measured with CD+RS meter!

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Dennis B, Jul 26, 2002.

  1. Dennis B

    Dennis B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    0
    I finished my first TubeTrap-like 16"x4' bass trap last weekend and have been testing it during this week. I started off with a listening test and I needed only 5 minutes to hear a remarkable improvement in sound.
    So I moved on to the scientific testing phase [​IMG], started with my self-burnt CD with tones every other Hz and measured the freq response with a RS SPL meter from 20 to 200 Hz. BTW, I modified my RS meter so that it reads flat in the bass frequencies.
    I used Excel to plot it and there it was, a graph showing significant improvement around some of the room modes.
    So far, so good. Then I started measuring with ETF5, and strangely no difference came up at all. So I took the trap out of the room, measured the room again, then brought it back in, another measurement and... nothing!
    So now I'm thinking the trap "broke" or I didn't take valid measurements before, so I repeated the procedure with the CD and the RS meter, and I got exactly the same curve as before, clearly showing the differences.
    Could someone please help me understand why ETF is not showing what's going on, even being it so clear that I can hear it?
    Thanks!
     
  2. Pete Mazz

    Pete Mazz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2000
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    0
    What test did you run in ETF and what gate timing did you use.

    Pete
     
  3. Dennis B

    Dennis B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    0
    I ran the LF test and used the default gating (10ms, I believe). Thx.
     
  4. Rick Guynn

    Rick Guynn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 1999
    Messages:
    473
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you would probably need arounn 60 ms gating if you are looking at the lower octave.

    Which graph are you looking at? If it is the low frequency response, you may be only seeing the direct sound. Try looking at either the waterfall or using the time slices in the low-freq plot to see if the resonances you had die out quicker now.

    RG
     
  5. Dennis B

    Dennis B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rick,
    Actually I was already using 100 ms gating, sorry.
    When looking at the waterfall or using the time slices, I can see the differences now.
    Thanks! [​IMG]
     
  6. Pete Mazz

    Pete Mazz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2000
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    0
    It might show up with a 200 ms gate time.

    Pete
     

Share This Page