Mix,

Yuo said -"The meters have omnidirectional mics so pointing them at the ceiling while sitting in your listening position is a good compromise."
A good compromise of what? Accuracy? Yes it is a compromise. IMO a big one, and one of many.

And I know that the mic is omnidirectional (well actually it isn't but you're already sick of be being technical), but your ears aren't omnidirectional so the readings taken aimed up wouldn't set the surrounds loud enough for your ears that (facing forward) muffle the rear output.

That's why some hold the SPL meter directly forward. That's why some others point it directly at each individual speaker.

Just one of the many variables you're sick of me mentioning. It certainly would give you very very diff. results though in each position.

Show me how you're right and I'll eliminate it as a variable. I'd be happy to.

You added -"As far as other listening positions, you are going to have those very same variables whether you use a meter or not."
Yeah... That's the exact point I made!

Adding -"The meter is a tool. It gives you physical representation of what you are just 'guessing at' by not using it. The variables remain the same with or without the meter. The thinking man uses all tools at this disposal."

A knowledgable man doesn't bother to use a flawed tool. Maybe you don't understand that the processor inside your skull and microphones attached to the side of your head haven't been proven to be less accurate a judging the speaker levels than the proven flawed SPL meter.

Lastly stating -"Do what you will, but can we move on to something else now? See you on the next topic."

Who's stopping you from moving on? What of weird thing to say.
You don't have to post or even look at the thread, and I'm not stopping the existance of other topics from being discussed. Not that there's anything really 'happenin' anywhere on the Outlaw forum right now.

Lena,

My question about 'how do you know your reading is accurate' in NOT a fault with you. It's the many faults in the method.

I guess I mentioned you 'meter pointing' question when I posted to Mix. See he rec. pointing it up. You didn't. That means if he calibrated your system with the same meter he'd set if diff. than you.

My point being that neither of you could prove you're right or more right.

Personally I think pointed forward would be more correct (kinda-sorta), so I would change it if I were you.

You're really open about being a newbie, but I think your willingness to 'look deeper' will quickly expand your knowledge beyond many here (forums in general) who "heard it one way" (whateverthe subject) and lock that into thier brains as the absolute truth.

The sick thing is the more you learn about the infinite variable of audio, the more you find that damn near anything 'might' be true... or false.
And nobody ever really knows for sure just what they just heard. You, me, anyone. It's crazy.

Az- I don't see what the big deal is. You argue from never having tried one.

I 1st tried without one. My system sounded "good" to me at that point.

I then got one, and *much preferred* the results after I had calibrated. Better imaging between any 2 speakers, better panning of effects between speakers etc.

I then used it to do such things are properly set the phase between my subs and mains. You can't argue with that one, because it's a simple comparison of the level of the sub alone, the mains alone, then the sub + mains. The latter must be higher than either of the former. I tried many time to do this by ear with the signals on Avia, VE, S&V, and I was always wrong.

Also got a BFD parametric EQ to mellow out some of the room induced peaks with my sub. Again, it sounds better to me with these changes than without. But you have never compared so you are arguing with theory that in theory (!) does matter, but in the real world, your "variables" don't influence the measurements enough to give you a *worse* answer with an SPL meter than without.

And as far as the SPL meter getting worse results at lower freq, that is true. However, the sub signals that are on test DVDs or even most pre/pro-receivers are still random white (or pink) noise (can't remember which) just at lower freq. So because of the *range* of freq that is included, the error is still less than 5 dB or so. That is *still* way better than most people can do by ear. Especially since the ear is less senstive to low freqs than higher.

You can still say, phooey on yooey, I've adjusted my sub by listening to a mix of movies and music to get the level I like. That would *still* be the last step I would suggest. Just that you'd be changing from a known reference point.

SLL,
In answer to your questions above:

1) the real question is not whether toilet paper rolls grow on the holder, but whether the natural state of the universe is to have the paper roll over the top or fall from the bottom.

2) the man must have the remote. always. otherwise we explode (and i understand it's a real mess to clean up).

3) yes. (some answers don't require a complex explanation.)

4) i have no doubt that a lobotomy would be beneficial for me. when can i sign up for the class?

Kevin,
Your post makes far too much sense for Az. I made some of the same points earlier, but to no avail. Az would rather listen to himself (herself?) talk than try the meter and know for sure either way.
Az.-Talk all you want. Until you try it yourself, all of your arguments are baseless conjecture and hot air. RAMBLE ON!
Y'all have a nice evening. See you on another topic. This one is used.
Mix

I don't like broccoli.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

Ah ha! Now we are getting somewhere. Matthew, I have never tried broccoli but I am going to tell you why you actually like it. You see, I used to be like you and all of you other uninformed plebeians. After hanging out at some very gourmet, probably too intelligent for most of you, forums I have come to the conclusion that you do like broccoli. I can't really dumb it down for you but chew on this (no pun intended) for a while. When you eat broccoli there could be millions of factors messing it up. For instance, have you ever tried changing the mouthwash or toothpaste you use to another brand? Do you live in a salty air state, polluted state, high elevation...? Are you positive you are eating fresh broccoli or non spoiled broccoli? What about the fork you use to eat it? Have you tried a different metal or perhaps a different dishwasher detergent? If you use your hands maybe you should ask to have someone who likes broccoli to hand feed you since their skin flavor may be better to handle broccoli. Have you ever done a DBT with broccoli and another food? I mean a real one, with scientists conducting it in an airtight, germ free, soundproof room? Another thing to think about is where are the planets aligned when you eat broccoli? Astrology and Astronomy changes our mood and taste patterns you know. I find it preposterous to make such outrageous claims and not even tell us under what type of sky you are eating it. I think you see the point I am trying to make, which is you do in fact like broccoli.

Alright, I've been gone for 10 days and I had to get all of my smartassness out of my system. Its good to be back. SPL Meters Rule!

Jed, you rule!

Everyone who keeps telling me 'I don't know what I'm talking about because I have never used an SPL meter' clearly are unable to grasp the points I continue to make about how the USE of said meter it wildly flawed -therefore by even the most rudemetary scientific methods of testing -totally pointless and invalid as it's results could NEVER be accepted as anything close to accurate.

And NONE of you have shown anything yet to contradict this F-A-C-T.
You all use diff. methods using the same exact meter, and in the end trust you ears that it sounds better, but you didn't trust your ears to find through 'by ear' experimentaion those exact same levels 'where is sounds the best to you'.

Kevin,

"I then used it to do such things are (as)properly set the phase between my subs and mains. You can't argue with that one, because it's a simple comparison of the level of the sub alone, the mains alone, then the sub + mains.

Sorry, but adjusting the phase of your sub is not that simple as taking sound pressure readings. You don't understand this subject if you think it is that simple.

In addition -the readings which are taken from the summed bass pink noise read by a meter that's progressivly more inaccurate as it reads lower and lower bass (all at the same time so you have to 'guess' at the average SPL), and also varied by the position of the meter being pointed up, forward, or at the sub (all giving ADDITIONAL varied readings), in addition to having diff. levels from your pre/pro and diff. test discs (MORE variations), in addition to you admitting to after all this ('technical' method) you still alter the final setting whenever you heck you feel like.

How can you possibly believe that this method's anything close to accurate?
How can you prove that your own previous 'guess' at a proper bass level is more wrong?

You said yourself you 'know you're right now' because it "sounds better".

Well, then you should have done more experimentation by ear till your original 'guess' sounded better and better till you reached the same point.

I'm not saying I have some golden ear. To be more clear (anf friendly), I'm saying that I bet YOU could calibrate my surrounds to my mains and integrate my subs by your own ear, and I bet it would sound very close to how I've done it myself.

Just can't possibly prove that your method of using the SPL meter in more exact since THERE IS NO TRUE REFERENCE POINT when actually listening to CD's and DVD's.

You can only prove you got "different" results than 'by ear' which I totally believe you did.

Beyond that I think you're just trusting that what you did 'looked more technical' than a 'by ear' (no matter how in depth and carefully concluded) result, so you just take it on faith that you're now right and before you were wrong.

Kevin writes -"I then got one, and *much preferred* the results after I had calibrated. Better imaging between any 2 speakers, better panning of effects between speakers etc."

I have 4 surround speakers in a symetrical room. The only 2 settings to calculate by ear or meter is L/R surround level and sub level.

If my surrounds and sub are 'wrong' (not that there actually is a 'wrong') there's now way I'm off more than slightly (+/-Xdb).

Based on the wide array of methods diff. people here use with their SPL meters (which MUST result in just as large +/- variations as 'by ear'), how do I choose ONE method and know that the final result is 'more correct' than any other?

I've been asking for someone to tell me how over and over again.
None of the people who are sick of me have been able to answer this, and after giving everyone more than plenty of time I'm sure no one here is able to.

My search for a method to more accuratly calibrate my system continues. It has NOT been found here.

I hope some of you bother to 'think' about the details of why you do a lot of the stuff you do. This 'lack of thought'is what leads to all the wacky 'snake oil' crackpot audioproducts that suckers buy because they don't look deeper in to 'how' it works... or doesn't.
Open your minds.