RoomFit Moving Mic Measurement (beta) - improvements

[Wiimer]

Did I read somewhere that you could turn off the rotation of the phone when using a USB microphone? I just tried MMM and couldn't find a way to turn it off.

Yeah, I just checked and the button was gone...

 

[Bismarck]

Today I tried RoomFit Moving Mic Measurement (beta) with the latest improvements on my Amp Ultra, using an iPhone 17 with an external UMIK-1 microphone.
The instructions in WHA say to point the microphone upward.
I’m wondering whether I should use the normal calibration file or the 90-degree one?

 

[canard]

90
(Just for that reason...with calibrated microphones without a 90-degree angle, stick to "low frequency" measurements in this situation)

 

[slartibartfast]

Today I tried RoomFit Moving Mic Measurement (beta) with the latest improvements on my Amp Ultra, using an iPhone 17 with an external UMIK-1 microphone.
The instructions in WHA say to point the microphone upward.
I’m wondering whether I should use the normal calibration file or the 90-degree one?

I just pointed the mic towards the speakers. If you do point it upwards use the 90 degree cal file.

 

[Bismarck]

I just pointed the mic towards the speakers. If you do point it upwards use the 90 degree cal file.

I wonder why WiiM advice to point it upwards... Why did you point instead the mic towards the speakers?

 

[slartibartfast]

I wonder why WiiM advice to point it upwards... Why did you point instead the mic towards the speakers?

I always point the mic towards the speakers. I suppose it depends on the area you want to cover with the moving microphone. I just moved a metre sideways between the speakers.

 

[dominikz]

Today I tried RoomFit Moving Mic Measurement (beta) with the latest improvements on my Amp Ultra, using an iPhone 17 with an external UMIK-1 microphone.
The instructions in WHA say to point the microphone upward.
I’m wondering whether I should use the normal calibration file or the 90-degree one?

Have a look at this post:

Have a look at this explanation, and these examples.

But note that either orientation is actually equally OK in room correction context - as long as you use the correct calibration file (90° cal for vertical orientation, 0° cal for horizontal orientation).

 

[canard]

Hey... I'd be curious to know how the Dayton behaves at 90 degrees...?
Could you make a precise observation from 70cm center of the tweeter and then again at 90 degrees, fairly accurately, in the same spot?
And what about its behavior above 2kHz in particular?
;-)
(one of my omnidirectional devices dedicated to measuring the drop from 3.5kHz to 90, another one of the 6kHz classical...Staying below 1kHz seems relevant and reasonable.)

 

[Fletcher Munson]

I’ve been using the new moving mic option today with my umik-1 microphone today and results are much better than the sweep and internal phone mic

 

[harkpabst]

Hey... I'd be curious to know how the Dayton behaves at 90 degrees...?
Could you make a precise observation from 70cm center of the tweeter and then again at 90 degrees, fairly accurately, in the same spot?
And what about its behavior above 2kHz in particular?

Dayton Audio says they don't need a 90 deg calibration file because the mic is "omnidirectional". At least that's what they want us to believe.

I'll be testing this shortly. And I bet there will be a difference above 2 kHz.

 

[Bismarck]

Have a look at this post:

I therefore infer that, by taking measurements with the microphone pointing upward (using the 90-degree calibration) and positioned at a listening point approximately 250 cm from each speaker, the high-frequency portion of the spectrum will likely measure a couple of decibels higher than a measurement taken from the same point with the microphone aimed at the center of the speakers (using the 0-degree calibration). Is that correct?
You argue that this is irrelevant, since you take it for granted that RoomFit should be used only to equalize low frequencies. But if the equalization were instead extended to the high frequencies as well (which you consider incorrect), the difference could be relevant. Is that right?

 

[dominikz]

I therefore infer that, by taking measurements with the microphone pointing upward (using the 90-degree calibration) and positioned at a listening point approximately 250 cm from each speaker, the high-frequency portion of the spectrum will likely measure a couple of decibels higher than a measurement taken from the same point with the microphone aimed at the center of the speakers (using the 0-degree calibration). Is that correct?

That is correct.

You argue that this is irrelevant, since you take it for granted that RoomFit should be used only to equalize low frequencies. But if the equalization were instead extended to the high frequencies as well (which you consider incorrect), the difference could be relevant. Is that right?

Correct again, yes.

The reason why I argue against using RoomFit (or any other room correction tool) at higher frequencies is because in-room measurements don't seem to fully describe what we hear in this part of the spectrum (you can read more on this in "Sound Reproduction:
The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms" book by dr. Floyd E. Toole). So if you apply RoomFit to higher frequencies, microphone orientation won't be the only (or the largest) source of error.

That all being said, I personally always use vertical mic orientation for in-room measurements.

EDIT: Perhaps I should clarify that EQ above about 500Hz classifies as loudspeaker correction, not room correction anymore. As such, a much more effective strategy for this is to EQ based on a full suite of anechoic loudspeaker measurements. I.e. use RoomFit below 300Hz, and apply anechoic loudspeaker correction EQ above 300Hz. You can find ready-made anechoic loudspeaker correction EQ profiles on spinorama.org for many loudspeaker models.

 

[canard]

It seems to me that you could try an explicit approach... just a roomfit with your Unik or a small Dayton USB calibrated micro at 600Hz/20kHz, and 70cm ( clio mode), rather focused on the tweeter, Medium/tweeter etc at 0 degrees...
will give a good idea of the response "Spinorama-style" ... ;-)
It might even help with some manual corrections if "bigs accidents" ,if there are major issues due to the design of your speakers...
In any case, a fun and accessible observations exercises... In any case, it could help to clarify "who does what".
;-)
(and if the microphone position is more than 70/80cm ,1m better, from the ground as well)

 

[canard]

WiiM Amp Ultra Streaming Amplifier

Regarding the high frequency distortion, between age-related hearing loss and the actual spectrum of music where there's not much energy past 10 kHz anyway, I think it's much ado about nothing...

www.audiosciencereview.com

20/300hz ;-)
(At 90 degrees, under 500Hz, there shouldn't be any problems using your 0-degree file.)

 

[slartibartfast]

Yeah, I just checked and the button was gone...

It is now back for me

 

[Bismarck]

The reason why I argue against using RoomFit (or any other room correction tool) at higher frequencies is because in-room measurements don't seem to fully describe what we hear in this part of the spectrum (you can read more on this in "Sound Reproduction:
The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms" book by dr. Floyd E. Toole). So if you apply RoomFit to higher frequencies, microphone orientation won't be the only (or the largest) source of error.

That all being said, I personally always use vertical mic orientation for in-room measurements.

EDIT: Perhaps I should clarify that EQ above about 500Hz classifies as loudspeaker correction, not room correction anymore. As such, a much more effective strategy for this is to EQ based on a full suite of anechoic loudspeaker measurements. I.e. use RoomFit below 300Hz, and apply anechoic loudspeaker correction EQ above 300Hz. You can find ready-made anechoic loudspeaker correction EQ profiles on spinorama.org for many loudspeaker models.

All very clear. Thank you very much!

 

[slartibartfast]

That all being said, I personally always use vertical mic orientation for in-room measurements.

I don't remember you ever mentioning this before. Anyway I tried it with the moving microphone method and prefer the results. I haven't done a measurement with REW yet but I will (using both orientations )

 

[dominikz]

I don't remember you ever mentioning this before. Anyway I tried it with the moving microphone method and prefer the results. I haven't done a measurement with REW yet but I will (using both orientations )

I try not to advocate either mic orientation strongly as it truly doesn't make much of a practical difference at low frequencies:

I.e. if you only apply RoomFit below 500Hz you should get a very similar correction regardless of mic orientation (assuming the appropriate cal file was used).

I use the vertical mic orientation mainly because I'm used to it, and because I like to have measurements that match anechoic PIR more closely - just in case I need to do some additional analysis or comparison.

 

[slartibartfast]

I try not to advocate either mic orientation strongly as it truly doesn't make much of a practical difference at low frequencies:

I.e. if you only apply RoomFit below 500Hz you should get a very similar correction regardless of mic orientation (assuming the appropriate cal file was used).

I use the vertical mic orientation mainly because I'm used to it, and because I like to have measurements that match anechoic PIR more closely - just in case I need to do some additional analysis or comparison.

I wonder if it affects how RoomFit chooses the target level.

 

[canard]

I wonder if it affects how RoomFit chooses the target level.

Below 300/500Hz, using your 0-degree calibration should be sufficient... but for those who want to have some fun, there are quite a few "RoomFit hack" methods to verify it... whether in the low frequencies or above 1kHz. For observe cal 0at 90degres..
;-)

""Comparatives approachs in proximity"""
(by reversing the methods, with the necessary precautions, of measuring speakers...no "room"...It's worth a try... ;-))