PDA

View Full Version : Inguz - my brain hurts!



Phil Leigh
2011-01-23, 02:37
OK so having managed to get Inguz working in its most basic form as an EQ for TOUCH+7.6 (with control of settings via the web UI only!) I thought I would have a go at getting Inguz DRC to run so I could compare with my TACT hardware solution.


To save money (initially) I decided to use the TACT measurement microphone, but it needs phantom power. So I got a Tascam US-122L from eBay, for phantom power+mic pre-amp+usb recording.

Spent most of yesterday trying to get this combo to work, with little success. I installed the latest Tascam drivers and that all works fine. The problem I have is that there is very little gain for the mic input and I can't get a decent level for recording.

I'm not sure if the problem lies with the mic (which works perfectly when connected to the TACT) or the US-122L.

I guess a few Inguz users here have this Tascam interface and are using the Behringer or Earthworks mics?

Do you folks have any "level" issues?

Mnyb
2011-01-23, 03:14
My Behringer mic also need phantom power i actually got a small mixer for the phantom feed and to correct levels.

The "BEHRINGER UB802 EURORACK" has been superseded by
http://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_xenyx_802.htm?sid=d797fb4aad42fb1c23fa19 3052a6571d

for 44£ ? it's very cheap but probably not to bad

I used to measure my Meridian DRC .


Edit: it was 44£ or 53€

Phil Leigh
2011-01-23, 03:41
My Behringer mic also need phantom power i actually got a small mixer for the phantom feed and to correct levels.

The "BEHRINGER UB802 EURORACK" has been superseded by
http://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_xenyx_802.htm?sid=d797fb4aad42fb1c23fa19 3052a6571d

for 44£ ? it's very cheap but probably not to bad

I used to measure my Meridian DRC .


Edit: it was 44£ or 53€
Thanks - I ordered one of these:

http://www.thomann.de/gb/the_tmix_mix_802.htm


which will be useful anyway for other stuff.

I can take the line output of this mixer into my m-audio card - I know this works fine.

Mnyb
2011-01-23, 03:52
All 802 seems to be the same mixer in different ugly chassis :)

I baffled by the low prices + spec are not to bad either, guess that the hobby recorders and home studio folks wants good gear but don't want to pay silly audiophile money.

Phil Leigh
2011-01-23, 04:30
All 802 seems to be the same mixer in different ugly chassis :)

I baffled by the low prices + spec are not to bad either, guess that the hobby recorders and home studio folks wants good gear but don't want to pay silly audiophile money.

Ugly - but functional :-)

home studio folks will NOT pay audiophile prices.
Interestingly, when the bottom fell out of the Pro studio market, manufacturers had to reduce prices a lot to appeal to semi-pro folks... but they had to maintain the specs!

Phil Leigh
2011-01-23, 06:30
Can anyone explain what is being recorded on the right channel in these screenshots from the Inguz site?

I thought the idea was to playback a swept tone over the left and right speakers in turn and record the results - why does the other channel need to be recorded at all and what is in it?

krzys
2011-01-23, 10:04
Hi Phil, I don't use Inguz tools any more, I use Audiolense now, but from what I remember the right channel records the sweep which is further used by the impluseprep to generate the inverse signal required to calculate the impulse response and then the impulse response of the correction filter.
Chris

Phil Leigh
2011-01-23, 10:17
Hi Phil, I don't use Inguz tools any more, I use Audiolense now, but from what I remember the right channel records the sweep which is further used by the impluseprep to generate the inverse signal required to calculate the impulse response and then the impulse response of the correction filter.
Chris

Chris - Hi!

OK - so one channel has the generated "perfect" sweep and the other has the sweep modified by replay chain/room/microphone... that makes sense.


I installed Audiolense yesterday (the demo version, that can be used to generate measurements...)
I may need some help on that, once I have the ability to do some actual recording!

I presume I can use Audiolense to generate files that can drive the Inguz convolver... ?

krochat
2011-01-23, 11:13
To save money (initially) I decided to use the TACT measurement microphone, but it needs phantom power. So I got a Tascam US-122L from eBay, for phantom power+mic pre-amp+usb recording.

Phil,

Sorry to break the news, but the TacT mic uses 9 volt phantom power - the Tascam provides 48 volts. In all likelyhood you've fried the TacT mic. You can try it with the RCS and see if it's working OK.

If so, you need to make a 9v phantom power cable like this:
http://www.linearx.com/files/pdf/LVPcables.pdf

Except you can use a 9v battery instead of the AC adapter shown.

If you've fried your TacT mic, the LinearX M31 is a higher-quality direct replacement and they will provide a TacT mic calibration file on request.

http://www.linearx.com/products/microphones/m31/M31_1.htm

Good luck,
Kim

Phil Leigh
2011-01-23, 12:13
Phil,

Sorry to break the news, but the TacT mic uses 9 volt phantom power - the Tascam provides 48 volts. In all likelyhood you've fried the TacT mic. You can try it with the RCS and see if it's working OK.

If so, you need to make a 9v phantom power cable like this:
http://www.linearx.com/files/pdf/LVPcables.pdf

Except you can use a 9v battery instead of the AC adapter shown.

If you've fried your TacT mic, the LinearX M31 is a higher-quality direct replacement and they will provide a TacT mic calibration file on request.

http://www.linearx.com/products/microphones/m31/M31_1.htm

Good luck,
Kim

Thanks Kim - I'll check out the mic tomorrow, but I'd be rather shocked if the mic couldn't handle 48v. The standard phantom power spec is 48v and all electrets I've used in the past can handle 9-48v without a problem.

However, that LinearX mic looks interesting... better than the Behringer.
cheers
Phil

krzys
2011-01-23, 13:21
I presume I can use Audiolense to generate files that can drive the Inguz convolver... ?

exactly so , wav file and in a much easier way than in DRC, especially the target can be drawn very easly, but it is not free....
Chris

Phil Leigh
2011-01-26, 11:40
Phil,

Sorry to break the news, but the TacT mic uses 9 volt phantom power - the Tascam provides 48 volts. In all likelyhood you've fried the TacT mic. You can try it with the RCS and see if it's working OK.

If so, you need to make a 9v phantom power cable like this:
http://www.linearx.com/files/pdf/LVPcables.pdf

Except you can use a 9v battery instead of the AC adapter shown.

If you've fried your TacT mic, the LinearX M31 is a higher-quality direct replacement and they will provide a TacT mic calibration file on request.

http://www.linearx.com/products/microphones/m31/M31_1.htm

Good luck,
Kim

Good news - my tact mic is fine - it would appear that the US122L has inadequate gain for this mic. The mic works fine with the new mini mixing desk that arrived today :-)

I'll be trying Audiolense to do some measurements at the weekend!

iPhone
2011-01-26, 11:52
After reading this tread, my brain now hurts too.

I should have gone to the frig, scooped out some Moose Tracks, and eaten it to fast. At least I would have enjoyed something before the brain freeze pain!

Anyway, good luck Phil and keep us posted on the results. Next time I read the thread I'll eat my ice cream at the same time.

Phil Leigh
2011-01-26, 12:11
After reading this tread, my brain now hurts too.

I should have gone to the frig, scooped out some Moose Tracks, and eaten it to fast. At least I would have enjoyed something before the brain freeze pain!

Anyway, good luck Phil and keep us posted on the results. Next time I read the thread I'll eat my ice cream at the same time.

Oh this thread is only a mild brain freeze - the real sub-zero stuff is on these threads:

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=603599&postcount=1

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=602139&postcount=1

Phil Leigh
2011-01-27, 03:29
So, now I have a working setup for recording Audiolense sweeps!

Does anyone know how to convert a TACT mic calibration file into Audiolense format? - it looks like it might be possible...

firedog
2011-01-27, 04:49
Phil -

Since I see that you are a TACT owner (and I used to be one)I'd be very interested in your opinion of the results of the Audiolense correction vs. TACT once you get it up and running.

Soulkeeper
2011-01-27, 06:08
Oh this thread is only a mild brain freeze - the real sub-zero stuff is on these threads:
[ --- Actually LINKING to the threads --- ]

You trolling troll, you. :D

Well, I'm up for some brain pain, and I think I'll actually make another go at getting Inguz to kick in and actually do something on my system one of these days. It's got to be possible!!!

Phil Leigh
2011-01-27, 06:26
Phil -

Since I see that you are a TACT owner (and I used to be one)I'd be very interested in your opinion of the results of the Audiolense correction vs. TACT once you get it up and running.

Sure - will do. I'm hopeful that I could retire the TACT, which is part of a larger gameplan to get a clock out of the DAC to drive the Touch...

Phil Leigh
2011-01-27, 06:27
You trolling troll, you. :D

Well, I'm up for some brain pain, and I think I'll actually make another go at getting Inguz to kick in and actually do something on my system one of these days. It's got to be possible!!!

:-) it's certainly been fun so far trying to get it to work!

Phil Leigh
2011-01-27, 11:59
I have just purchased Audiolense 3.3 (the 2.0 version - I may update to XO later...)

Waiting to hear how to convert my mic cal file...

I hope to be doing my first measurements tomorrow!

firedog
2011-01-28, 02:25
Phil-

Can't the audiolense support help you with this? They must have run into this request previously.

OGS
2011-02-06, 03:01
Hi Phil,

did you get the mic calibration working? I use Audiolense XO. Audiolense can read my Tact mic cal file without any changes apart from giving it a .cal name. This is a file for the old 2.0, but I beleive the format for 2.2 is similar? Audiolense 2.0 will do very nice amplitude domain correction. You may miss the time domain correction from your Tact though. I have not heard 2.2, but XO certainly improves the sound dramatically compared to my old RCS2.0.
I use the filter with BrutefirDRC on Vortexbox. Perfect for use with a squeezebox of course. Now I need to find a way to send other sources through the same path for room correction..

Olav

Phil Leigh
2011-02-06, 03:25
Hi Phil,

did you get the mic calibration working? I use Audiolense XO. Audiolense can read my Tact mic cal file without any changes apart from giving it a .cal name. This is a file for the old 2.0, but I beleive the format for 2.2 is similar? Audiolense 2.0 will do very nice amplitude domain correction. You may miss the time domain correction from your Tact though. I have not heard 2.2, but XO certainly improves the sound dramatically compared to my old RCS2.0.
I use the filter with BrutefirDRC on Vortexbox. Perfect for use with a squeezebox of course. Now I need to find a way to send other sources through the same path for room correction..

Olav

Hi Olav - yes I managed to get it all working - I'll write up my experiences later today.
cheers
Phil

Phil Leigh
2011-02-06, 05:10
So as promised here are my recent experiences with Inguz and Audiolense...


I purchased the latest version of Audiolense 2.0 (3.3) for 160 Euro's. Install under XP was very smooth.
I couldn't get my Tact 2.2x mic calibration file to load, so I spent a day writing a simple quickbasic program to convert the file into the same format as the sample file that came with Audiolense - a quick chat with Bernt of Audiolense confirmed that my cal file (from 2004) was fit for purpose (apparently some Tact files have spurious values in them, but mine was OK).

Once the cal file was loading OK I set up the recording rig.

Basically, the TACT mic was connected to a small mixing desk with phantom power for the mic and enough gain to drive the Tascam 122l USB interface properly via its line input.

Recording at 24/96 I was able to capture the sweeps via Audiolense after several trial runs to get the levels right.


I used a target curve which was flat down to 20Hz (near the bottom end of my subwoofer) and a gentle slope down from about 15kHZ).

Then I created the filter files using AL and exported them to the Inguz directory. I only generated a 24/96 correction file as my SBS is setup to resample everything to 96kHz regardless of its original rate.

I used the skew control in Inguz to compensate for my speaker setup whereby the right speaker is 3 inches further away from my listening position than the left one ( so a time delay of 18 samples on the left channel was used to even up the arrival times ).

I was now ready for some serious listening with the correction filter loaded in Inguz.

I disconnected the TACT and wired the Touch directly to my DAC using my standard Blue Jeans 1.5m Belden cable.

I wasn't really sure what to expect. I vaguely thought I would be in for lots of tweaking after some initial disappointment.

As any kind of conventional A/B would be near-impossible, I didn't bother.

I simply cued up a variety of tunes and settled down to listen over several days. A wide mixture of familiar and unfamiliar across many genres and time periods was chosen.

And the outcome was...

darrenyeats
2011-02-06, 05:49
Ooh you tease.

Phil Leigh
2011-02-10, 12:17
Ooh you tease.

Sorry...
the outcome is that the TACT is now in the loft.

Not only does Inguz do pretty much everything that the TACT did, it does it with noticeably (to my ears) less artefacts. In particular, a nasty upper-mid resonance on some material that I've been living with for over 5 years is gone.

Bass feels improved in clarity (and it was pretty damn good to begin with) but the big difference for me is in the midrange - everything sounds more "vital" but at the same time less "fraught".. hard to explain.


Anyway, Inguz (and Audiolense) are staying. I may upgrade later to the top version of AL to get the group delay feature. It's a shame that can't be "added" to the basic software.

krzys
2011-02-10, 12:35
Hi Phil, as you know I use Audiolense for filter generation and Inguz. To be honest Inguz is just a convolver here; the merit goes to Audiolense algorithms, isnít it?
Chris

BTW although the DRC corrects the alignment of the drivers, my experience is that it works even better if the drivers are aligned through a DCX first. The same is true for room acoustic treatments.

Phil Leigh
2011-02-10, 13:15
Hi Phil, as you know I use Audiolense for filter generation and Inguz. To be honest Inguz is just a convolver here; the merit goes to Audiolense algorithms, isnít it?
Chris

BTW although the DRC corrects the alignment of the drivers, my experience is that it works even better if the drivers are aligned through a DCX first. The same is true for room acoustic treatments.

Hi Chris - yes I guess you are correct, the AL filter generation algorithm is the key.


As for DCX - yes I agree, my active speakers already have a degree of driver alignment built into their active crossover modules.

firedog
2011-02-11, 01:43
Sorry...
the outcome is that the TACT is now in the loft.

Not only does Inguz do pretty much everything that the TACT did, it does it with noticeably (to my ears) less artefacts. In particular, a nasty upper-mid resonance on some material that I've been living with for over 5 years is gone.

Bass feels improved in clarity (and it was pretty damn good to begin with) but the big difference for me is in the midrange - everything sounds more "vital" but at the same time less "fraught".. hard to explain.


Anyway, Inguz (and Audiolense) are staying. I may upgrade later to the top version of AL to get the group delay feature. It's a shame that can't be "added" to the basic software.

So basically, even if you start from scratch (no mic, etc), a decently powered SB server and a few hundred bucks can get you something at least as good as a $6000 TACT RC pre. Amazing. Of course, you may also have to invest in a DAC to equal the SQ.

Definitely something for me to consider when I upgrade my server to something that will run Audiolense and Ignuz (presently ATOM based server, can't handle it).

Phil Leigh
2011-02-11, 08:49
So basically, even if you start from scratch (no mic, etc), a decently powered SB server and a few hundred bucks can get you something at least as good as a $6000 TACT RC pre. Amazing. Of course, you may also have to invest in a DAC to equal the SQ.

Definitely something for me to consider when I upgrade my server to something that will run Audiolense and Ignuz (presently ATOM based server, can't handle it).

yeah! - my TACT has no DAC in it, so it was a bit cheaper than that (and I got a great deal from the UK distributor at the time - I think mine cost me the equivalent of about $3.5k..

Still as you say, Inguz+AL is a bargain. A decent mic such as the Earthworks one would be a good investment.

milosz
2011-02-12, 03:29
What version of SB Server are you using with Inguz?

I tried Inguz a year ago but could not get it to work very well at all, never got to the DRC stage.

Is there anyone working on an SB Server plugin that would let you use Audiolense DRC filters without Inguz? I guess such a plugin would be a convolver and necessary wrappers to make it work with SB Server

Alternately maybe someone could write plugins that would let SB Server live in the VST world- a VST bridge plugin that would let you map SB Server audio to a VST device input and let you map a VST output into the SB Server for serving up to SB's and other players. I think you must be able to implement Audiolense FIR filters in some VST way- surely there is a suitable VST convolver.

Phil Leigh
2011-02-12, 04:28
What version of SB Server are you using with Inguz?

I tried Inguz a year ago but could not get it to work very well at all, never got to the DRC stage.

Is there anyone working on an SB Server plugin that would let you use Audiolense DRC filters without Inguz? I guess such a plugin would be a convolver and necessary wrappers to make it work with SB Server

Alternately maybe someone could write plugins that would let SB Server live in the VST world- a VST bridge plugin that would let you map SB Server audio to a VST device input and let you map a VST output into the SB Server for serving up to SB's and other players. I think you must be able to implement Audiolense FIR filters in some VST way- surely there is a suitable VST convolver.

I'm running Inguz with SBS 7.6 - it took a bit of work... I've modified plugin.pm... it's posted somewhere on here...

milosz
2011-02-12, 04:43
I'm running Inguz with SBS 7.6 - it took a bit of work... I've modified plugin.pm... it's posted somewhere on here...

OK, then it can actually be made to work with current stuff. Huh. Who'd a thought.

What platform are you using? Windows or Linux?

OGS
2011-02-12, 09:37
Is there anyone working on an SB Server plugin that would let you use Audiolense DRC filters without Inguz? I guess such a plugin would be a convolver and necessary wrappers to make it work with SB Server



I use Audiolense generated filters with BrutefirDRC. This is of course a plugin for the Linux version of Squeezeboxserver. Link: http://klaasreineke.tumblr.com/brutefirdrc

Phil Leigh
2011-02-12, 10:02
ok, then it can actually be made to work with current stuff. Huh. Who'd a thought.

What platform are you using? Windows or linux?

xp sp3.

milosz
2011-02-12, 15:17
OK, XP SP3. I'll see if I can get Inguz working on my Win 7 - 64 SB server

tonyptony
2011-02-19, 07:50
OK, XP SP3. I'll see if I can get Inguz working on my Win 7 - 64 SB server

I have it working on mine. SB Server version 7.5.1 - r30611.