Easy Delay Math in v7?

[dpatridge]

I am all but CERTAIN that this will be a stupid question and of course I'm missing something...

There was a feature in Smaart v5 which made processor delay setting quick and painless. On the Impulse Response page there were a series of "captures" or "registers" to store IR times. By pressing the "Compare" button, you could quickly get a number to stick into the XTA, BSS, Galileo... whatever. Is there something similar in v7? Did it really go away in v6 and never come back?

Thanks for your patience if this has been covered in the forum before. I'm a newbie to this forum so go easy on me. :o

[Adam Black]

I am all but CERTAIN that this will be a stupid question and of course I'm missing something...

There was a feature in Smaart v5 which made processor delay setting quick and painless. On the Impulse Response page there were a series of "captures" or "registers" to store IR times. By pressing the "Compare" button, you could quickly get a number to stick into the XTA, BSS, Galileo... whatever. Is there something similar in v7? Did it really go away in v6 and never come back?

Thanks for your patience if this has been covered in the forum before. I'm a newbie to this forum so go easy on me. :o

The delay compare feature is not yet in v7. This feature is dependent upon locked cursors which is also not yet in v7. When we add locked cursors we will also add a delay compare. Not sure when these features are going in but I can say that they are not slated for v7.1.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

For the life of me I have yet to figure out the benefit (time savings) of the "Compare Delays" feature in version 5. While it's a cool feature to have, there is a faster way to get there. What I really need is a way to compare 2 delays instantly in the delay finder. Compare the latest delay with the numbers currently entered. I have found most of the folks that speak of the delay compare feature (as the holy grail) are placing a mic at FOH, measuring the IR of every zone in the system from that position and comparing delays so that all zones converge on FOH. There is little chance your front fills are going to be as loud as your mains at the FOH position. Your out fills more than likely won't be either. It doesn't work at all for Subs, so you have to go to the phase trace for that anyway. Equal Level:Equal Time. I would love to get rid of my calculator but it's much faster than switching over to impulse response mode just to find the difference between the delay I have already set and captured for one system, which we now have to re-measure and place markers on, and the current but not future delay time of the system I want to add delay to in my processor, which I'll also have to mark, then go to a different screen to see the differences. This feature request is almost always wrapped up in DOGMA! I don't take issue with the feature being there, as I spend a great deal of time explaining why it's absense isn't a big deal (and it would save me a lot of time if people stopped asking me about it). The upside to those questions, is they become more aware of the goals they perhaps didn't know they had.

[Arthur Skudra]

For the life of me I have yet to figure out the benefit (time savings) of the "Compare Delays" feature in version 5.It comes in really handy when you're doing complex delay systems (eg. matrixed LCR in delays), or in my case, doing studies of different reflections in rooms.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

It comes in really handy when you're doing complex delay systems (eg. matrixed LCR in delays), or in my case, doing studies of different reflections in rooms.

Of course Arthur. It's a fun feature, just not necessarily a time saver for quick PA installs where you put in and take out in the same day with some truck loading and unloading thrown in for good measure. Like I said, I do not wish to see it go away, but rather the addition of the other feature.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

Hey Arthur, could you give an example how you use it with LCR systems?

[Arthur Skudra]

Hey Arthur, could you give an example how you use it with LCR systems?
In one case, I had an installation with LCR mains and a matrixed underbalcony fill system that had a sum of LCR in each speaker in a different combination. The compare delays feature in Smaart came in handy to see each channel in relation to each other in the delay fills, being careful not to create problems with timing between LCR channels in shadowed areas (I generally don't like to see more than 20-25 ms difference between channels, the less the better). A matrix mixer block with delay settings for each crosspoint proved invaluable for this exercise, along with individually fed fill speakers. Once I got one side right, the other was a mirror image of settings since the room was symmetrical.

[dpatridge]

Uh... no... I am a little more informed than a person who would "converge" everything to FOH as feared. I would be fine with a comparison of the 2 times that Harry is talking about that. That is all I use it for... to look at the system that I am using as a time reference and to look at the arrival time of the system that is under measure and doing the quick math so that I can set the delay time in the processor.

[Joseph Pearce]

Frankly, for me it is about usability...

all the same information is on the screen in V7, but in V5 you could quickly assign cursors and then compare them- that's practical.

We all have our own workflows or techniques for "signal" or "time" aligning a system. For me, it was a useful feature.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

Uh... no... I am a little more informed than a person who would "converge" everything to FOH as feared. I would be fine with a comparison of the 2 times that Harry is talking about that. That is all I use it for... to look at the system that I am using as a time reference and to look at the arrival time of the system that is under measure and doing the quick math so that I can set the delay time in the processor.

I have the Beta for the next update and there is a very cool feature that will take care of your need. I'm also very certain they are still going to put the old delay compare feature back in at some point in the future. I'd still like to know how people are using this. Arthur's example is very interesting. I tend to avoid such designs altogether as 20-25ms offset is detrimental to intelligibility which is something I am sensitive to. For music, it's less an issue. Arthur and I have many offline debates about various approaches and learn from the discussion. I've found defending a POV is a great way to learn.

[Harry Brill Jr.]

Frankly, for me it is about usability...

all the same information is on the screen in V7, but in V5 you could quickly assign cursors and then compare them- that's practical.

We all have our own workflows or techniques for "signal" or "time" aligning a system. For me, it was a useful feature.


Joseph, I'd love to get any idea of your workflow and where this feature comes in. We can take it offline if you like.

[Joseph Pearce]

Hey Harry, my "workflow" as it applies to this is not interesting. I am usually only comparing arrival times from two sources.

I understand, from your post, that I could take the reference delay for one source and then measure same for the second, all without leaving the transfer function screen...but, for me, I want to see the peaks. It is usually nothing more complicated than a lip-fill to flown mains alignment or similar but sometimes measurement conditions are not great and sometimes the microphone is a long way away from my ears and there may be more than one sub-system involved...

It may be unjustifiable but the impulse response measurement gives me greater confidence, in some cases polarity-information, and I can use the locked cursors, compare function etc to do the calculation. It has also been educational for me. My preference.

It's probably just experience with making measurements.

As an aside, Systune handles "locked cursors" really well, can be used in the magnitude response as well.

[gluis]

What I normally do is to alternatively turn on and off my main system and the next to align one (could be outfills, or near fills, or any other subsystem pertinent to the case) until I find the sweet spot where bot are in the same level, assuming you already set proper levels, put the measurement mike there and do impulse response on both, one at a time. Assign a locked cursor for each and then compare them to know how much delay I have to add to align them. After adding the delay, I will do again an impulse on both for comfirmation, and then TF on both separately, and then together. I'll compare the TF to the Main system TF in order to make subsystem's coverage zones have the same timbre as the main zone, with both open.

This is kind of a simplification of what I do, but you get the idea. The trick for me is to use the main system spill (usually LF) and add what's necessary from the subsyatem, especially on things like near fills.

So yes, it is very useful to me. It is easier than writing down the delays and using a calculator.

Hope this was useful.

Best regards,

GS

[Dangw]

I just installed Smaart 7.1, and I followed the getting started guide. I have a small Alesis 6ch mixer that I'm running the main console send and RTA mic into. I'm panning each of them opposite and then taking the LR mixer out to the laptop line input. I have setup as required in spectrum and in transfer. While both the console and RTA inputs are showing more noise than I expected (in the spectrum windows), the software is still registering input from the RTA mic and console that is considerably higher than the floor. The input to the software appears to be functioning properly.

I've tried running finding delay under several different scenarios, but cannot get consistent results, or results that make sense. Yesterday I tested with the console back about 75' from the stacks, and the mic about 25' back. Results were all over the map and nothing I could reference or associate to.

Can anyone offer some suggestions? I'm running the older JBL 4850 concert series tops with dlb 18" subs and I would like to maximize the alignment for the mains, and well as mains to stage...

Thanks, Dan

[Adam Black]

I just installed Smaart 7.1, and I followed the getting started guide. I have a small Alesis 6ch mixer that I'm running the main console send and RTA mic into. I'm panning each of them opposite and then taking the LR mixer out to the laptop line input. I have setup as required in spectrum and in transfer. While both the console and RTA inputs are showing more noise than I expected (in the spectrum windows), the software is still registering input from the RTA mic and console that is considerably higher than the floor. The input to the software appears to be functioning properly.

I've tried running finding delay under several different scenarios, but cannot get consistent results, or results that make sense. Yesterday I tested with the console back about 75' from the stacks, and the mic about 25' back. Results were all over the map and nothing I could reference or associate to.

Can anyone offer some suggestions? I'm running the older JBL 4850 concert series tops with dlb 18" subs and I would like to maximize the alignment for the mains, and well as mains to stage...

Thanks, Dan

Dan,

Any chance your reference and measurement signals are swapped?

[Arthur Skudra]

Are you running a demo version of Smaart 7.1 by any chance?

[Adam Black]

Are you running a demo version of Smaart 7.1 by any chance?

Good question. The max delay in the demo build is 50ms.

[Dangw]

Yes I am. I didn't want to make the purchase until I was comfortable with the way it worked.

[Dangw]

Don't see how. I did have the problem at first, but changed it. Have check, double checked, and triple check the hookup and tested them several times to insure everything was right. Mic is registering on the measurement meter and console is registering on the reference meter.

[Arthur Skudra]

The demo version of the software will not allow you to do a delay time greater than 50 ms. Move the mic closer to your speaker. When you buy the full version, then you can do longer delay times.

[Dangw]

Ok, I'll try that. Thanks...

[Dangw]

OK, I’m at a loss. Running the 7.1 demo. I previously posted about having problems with finding delays, and was told to move my mic closer because of limitation of demo software. Here’s where I am now.

Solved the noise floor issue. It was the laptop power supply. Now the screens look normal.

However, still have delay issues. I setup last night with mic at approx 19’ from stack to check transducer delays. With HF only on, after a couple “find delays” it came back at 19.21’ – problem solved (I thought). Then I tested mids and the continued to come back at either 0.00 or 0.02. same for lows.

So I went back to hi’s and could not get it to give me same 19.21 reading, more 0.00 and 0.02. So I moved mic to 25’. It came back at 21.45’. but still the same problem with m/l, and same problem when I went back to hi’s.

Both mic and console are registering properly in spectrum view. Everything looks to be setup properly. Where am I going wrong?

Thanks, Dan

[Arthur Skudra]

Dan,

Despite your efforts to keep the signals separate prior to it going into your laptop, I'm beginning to suspect that the line input on your laptop is mono, not stereo. Could you do some tests to verify whether or not this is the case? Verify that if you only have left channel going in, it appears on the appropriate channel in the software only, to the same for the right channel.

If indeed you have a laptop with a mono line input (many out there do), then your only solution is to get a USB or Firewire interface to test things out.

Arthur

[Dangw]

Hey Author, I've gone through it several times. When I talk into the RTA mic, only that channel responds on the approriate channel in Smaart. Same when I raise program in console, only opposie channel. I will check it again tomorrow, but certian that part is working right. This is the demo, so are there any other options I might need to set when I start Smaart, or is there anything else you can think of? Thanks... Dan

[Harry Brill Jr.]

...but, for me, I want to see the peaks. ....... the impulse response measurement gives me greater confidence, in some cases polarity-information, and I can use the locked cursors, compare function etc to do the calculation. It has also been educational for me. My preference.

All your polarity info is right there in the phase trace. I like the comment about confidence. If the phase trace looks terrible, I'll jump to IR to verify I'm looking at the source and not a strong reflection.


I'll compare the TF to the Main system TF in order to make subsystem's coverage zones have the same timbre as the main zone, with both open.

Best regards,

GS

This is the way to make fill/main systems seamless.




So yes, it is very useful to me. It is easier than writing down the delays and using a calculator.
Best regards,

GS
Incidentally, I do exactly the same thing as you, but use the magnitude and phase trace to get the results. Relative level and time are all right there. 7.1 adds the feature request to the delay finder that eliminates the need for the calculator, but I never wrote anything down, even before.

[Arthur Skudra]

Hey Dan,

Very strange! I know I'm asking the obvious, but are you sure everything is routed/panned correctly in your mixer?

Can you post a screenshot that includes the transfer function window including magnitude, phase, and IR (click on the "Live IR" button) in one screen showing a measurement you're having difficulty getting the correct time delay?
Also, can you post a screenshot of your group manager settings windows for each pair?

Arthur

[gluis]

All your polarity info is right there in the phase trace. I like the comment about confidence. If the phase trace looks terrible, I'll jump to IR to verify I'm looking at the source and not a strong reflection.



This is the way to make fill/main systems seamless.


Incidentally, I do exactly the same thing as you, but use the magnitude and phase trace to get the results. Relative level and time are all right there. 7.1 adds the feature request to the delay finder that eliminates the need for the calculator, but I never wrote anything down, even before.

I always have a look afterwards in TF (magnitude and phase traces) and correct as necessary. More so, if I have the luxury of All Pass filters at my disposal, I try to correct any strong phase differences between my mains and the measured subsystem, always correcting the later. I find delay values and have a look at the impulse on IR mode to make sure I´m having coherent data, and not locking on a strong reflection. Of course I do it there to use locked cursors and compare feature. They take me there quickly and painlessly. I use my 5.4 just because of it, and then continue on V7. That's one of the perks of having all of them ;-)