It is currently Sun Oct 25, 2020 3:15 pm


Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

Speakers, amplifiers, headphones, multi-channel audio, reverb units, mixers, wiring, ...
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Doug S.

Member

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:17 pm
  • Location: Massachusetts USA

Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostMon Sep 07, 2020 12:40 pm

I have a large dry sample set loaded into 8 stereo speaker pairs that gets muddy at full organ. Would I do better loading single ranks into 16 single mono speakers?
Thanks,
Doug
Doug
Offline

larason2

Member

  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:32 pm

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostMon Sep 07, 2020 1:26 pm

There’s many ways to approach this, but my recommendation would be to have four of the stereo pairs by the organ, and route channels 1 and 2 to those with “cyclic within octaves.” Then, I would do the same for one of the rear channels somewhere behind the organ. For a six channel set, you could divide the other two channels between the four rear speakers, also with cyclic between octaves.

Edit: just wanted to clarify:
-2 channel set: only 8 speakers needed, 4 stereo pairs. Channel 1 to the left set of 4, distributed by the cyclic within octaves system, channel 2 to the right 4, distributed by cyclic within octaves. This gives the spatial distribution of Stereo while avoiding the intermodulation distortion (which is probably what you experience as Muddiness). Adding more than 4 speakers doesn’t really improve the distortion much more.
-4 channel set: same as before, but you could have an identical setup behind as well for channels 3 and 4.
-6+ channel sets: you could either only use 4 channels as above, or 2 pairs of two with the sounds distributed by cyclic within octaves. This reduces the intermodulation distortion, but not as well as if you had 4 speakers in each channel.
Offline
User avatar

Doug S.

Member

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:17 pm
  • Location: Massachusetts USA

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostMon Sep 07, 2020 7:19 pm

I don't understand how you route one channel into two stereo pairs which would be driven by interface channels 1,2 - 3,4
Doug
Offline

larason2

Member

  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:32 pm

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostMon Sep 07, 2020 11:47 pm

It would be helpful to know if you are running Hauptwerk IV or V, since the advanced audio routing changed a lot between versions. Also, there is a difference between the Advance and Lite version of V. It would be a good idea for you to download the Hauptwerk V user guide, since it goes through the audio setup in detail (https://www.hauptwerk.com/documentation/). On page 184, the topic is "Audio routing and impulse response reverb part 2 (Advanced Edition only): multi-channel audio, multi-channel virtual acoustics, and routing concepts for advanced use" (though the chapter recommends reading the previous chapter first).

It seems as though currently you are using a 2 channel set, where the left channel is going to every left speaker, and the R channel is going to every R speaker. That means that you have 8 identical Left channels speakers, and 8 identical right channel speakers. Hauptwerk sees this as 16 speakers, 8 of which are getting an identical signal from channel 1, and 8 of which are getting an identical signal from channel 2.

For the advanced audio routing in Hauptwerk V advanced, for a 2 channel set, you would route all of the ranks to one of the primary busses, which would then divide the notes among different busses, then send it to the mixer where you can assign the same channel to multiple different speakers. By default, all audio goes to Primary bus 1, which is then sent to the Master Mixer bus 1. However, in the mixer screen, you can see that there is the "perspective mix: output perspective... options for the Master mixer bus 1. Each one of those options (Front1/main, Front2/upper, Rear1/main, and Rear2/upper) can be assigned to a separate speaker pair. Now, on the "Rank Routing to Audio Mixer Bus Groups" screen, you can assign each rank to feed the four perspective presets in a "Static: Cyclic within octaves, Octaves cycled, ranks cycled" manner, which means, for instance, when you play a 3 note chord, a different speaker will play each note, with the L stereo samples being played on the left 4 speakers, and the R stereo samples divided among the R 4 speakers.

This should significantly cut down on intermodulation distortion (making it sound less muddy), while preserving the quality of the 2 channel stereo image. Basically, instead of sending all three notes to all 8 speakers in stereo at the same time, it sends one left note to 3 different left speakers, and one right note to 3 different right speakers at the same time.

It is quite confusing when you first start out, but it gets easier with time. The manual takes a long time to get through, but it makes sense when you get the hang of it. Another forum user posted a nice tutorial on a separate topic, but I am having trouble finding it again. Let me know if you have any further questions.
Offline
User avatar

Doug S.

Member

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:17 pm
  • Location: Massachusetts USA

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostTue Sep 08, 2020 12:13 am

Sorry,
I'm running the latest full version in my hybrid pipe HW organ. All of my speakers are within the casework . There's some recordings and photos on Contrabombard. I've never considered a stand alone HW only samp.e set until V with its on board reverb. While delighted with my hybrid sound, I want to get my Laurenskerk Dry set from Sonus Paradisi optimally routed. It appears I've much more to learn.
http://www.contrebombarde.com/concerthall/user/251
Thanks,
Doug
Doug
Offline

josq

Member

  • Posts: 829
  • Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:11 pm

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostTue Sep 08, 2020 4:18 am

Room resonances are an important cause of muddy sound. Each room has its own resonances, resulting in for example "boomy" bass notes, which may become more noticable at louder registrations.

Resonances are present in any listening room, but also in any room in which reverb is recorded. If resonances from reverb & listening room overlap, the effect can be particularly nasty.

In the case of dry sample sets, the solution is EQ. In the voicing screen, you can decrease the amplitude of boomy notes and increase the brightness to restore the harmonics. You may need to readjust the voicing if you apply another reverb.

To me this is one of the reasons to prefer wet sample sets instead of dry+reverb. Nevertheless, an advantage of your approach is that you can voice the sample set exactly to your taste.
Offline
User avatar

Doug S.

Member

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:17 pm
  • Location: Massachusetts USA

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostWed Sep 09, 2020 12:48 pm

By "EQ", do you mean the "amplitude" and "brightness" voicing per rank?
Thanks,
Doug
Doug
Offline

josq

Member

  • Posts: 829
  • Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:11 pm

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostWed Sep 09, 2020 2:04 pm

Doug S. wrote:By "EQ", do you mean the "amplitude" and "brightness" voicing per rank?
Thanks,
Doug


Yes. "EQ" is shorthand for equalization. The basic idea is that when different pitches have equal loudness in the recording, they should also have equal loudness upon playback. Room resonances can make them unequal, with EQ you can correct for that.

Bass notes are most affected by room resonances. Therefore you typically only want to decrease the fundamental of a note and leave the harmonics the same. This can be achieved in the Hauptwerk voicing screen by decreasing the amplitude, and increasing the brightness by the same amount.
Offline
User avatar

Doug S.

Member

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:17 pm
  • Location: Massachusetts USA

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostWed Sep 09, 2020 2:50 pm

I've done this for most 8, 16 & 32 ft stops. I have 2+ stereo pairs per division. (3m-p) Things sound great until I couple divisions to gt. at sub unison pitch. I have subwoofers within two of my stereo pairs to which most of my 16 and 32 stops are routed regardless of divisions. Would it be better to just route the bass octaves instead of the whole stop?
Thanks,
Doug
Doug
Offline

josq

Member

  • Posts: 829
  • Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:11 pm

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostWed Sep 09, 2020 4:01 pm

Doug S. wrote:I've done this for most 8, 16 & 32 ft stops. I have 2+ stereo pairs per division. (3m-p) Things sound great until I couple divisions to gt. at sub unison pitch. I have subwoofers within two of my stereo pairs to which most of my 16 and 32 stops are routed regardless of divisions. Would it be better to just route the bass octaves instead of the whole stop?
Thanks,
Doug


Yes, I think so. Even for very low bass notes, the higher harmonics might be outside the range of a subwoofer. So routing higher notes to a subwoofer could be quite detrimental.

Ideally, use a crossover between the stereo pairs and the subwoofers.

If you have multiple subs, you can optimize their placement in the room, potentially you can get a vastly more even bass response.

Coupling at sub unison pitch can make the sound very bass heavy in large registrations, I'm not sure it would sound good on real organs but it depends.
Offline
User avatar

Doug S.

Member

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:17 pm
  • Location: Massachusetts USA

Re: Single Mono vs, Stereo Pairs

PostWed Sep 09, 2020 7:38 pm

My subs are the type that are daisy chains to their speaker pair with on board adjustable crossover and phase adjustments.
Doug

Return to Amplification

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests