Performance Comparison of Graphic Equalisation and Active Loudspeaker Room Response Controls

Goldberg A, Makivirta A. Performance Comparison of Graphic Equalisation and Active Loudspeaker Room Response Controls. In: AES Convention 116. Audio Engineering Society; 2004. Paper 6108. Available from: https://aes.org/publications/elibrary-page/?id=12624

@inproceedings{Goldberg2004_12624,
  author = {Goldberg, Andrew and Makivirta, Aki},
  title = {{Performance Comparison of Graphic Equalisation and Active Loudspeaker Room Response Controls}},
  booktitle = {AES Convention 116},
  note = {Paper 6108},
  year = {2004},
  month = may,
  publisher = {Audio Engineering Society},
  url = {https://aes.org/publications/elibrary-page/?id=12624}
}

TY  - CPAPER
TI  - Performance Comparison of Graphic Equalisation and Active Loudspeaker Room Response Controls
AU  - Goldberg, Andrew
AU  - Makivirta, Aki
T2  - AES Convention 116
M1  - Paper 6108
PY  - 2004
DA  - 2004/05/06
UR  - https://aes.org/publications/elibrary-page/?id=12624
PB  - Audio Engineering Society
LA  - en
AB  - We compare the room response controls available in active loudspeakers to a third-octave graphical equaliser. The room response controls are set using an automated optimisation method presented in earlier AES publications. A third-octave ISO frequency constant-Q graphic equaliser is set to minimise the least squares deviation from linear within the passband in a smoothed acoustical response. The resulting equalisation performance of the two methods is compared using objective metrics, to show how these standard room response equalising methods perform. For all loudspeaker models pooled together, the room response controls improve the RMS deviation from a linear response from 6.1 dB to 4.7 dB (improvement 22%), whereas graphic equalisation improves the RMS deviation to 1.8 dB (improvement 70%). Both equalisation techniques achieve a similar improvement in the broadband balance, which has been shown to affect a subjective lack of colouration in sound systems. The optimisation time for a graphic equaliser is up to 48 times longer compared to that for active loudspeaker room response controls.
ER  -