Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Sim VS Smaart
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Merlijn van Veen" data-source="post: 96407" data-attributes="member: 4708"><p>I don't question the frequency resolution of SMAART, so maybe accuracy is a poor choice of words. I wonder about the tradeoff between frequency resolution and time constants in relation to "room" influence or maybe even contamination. The difference I'm trying to explain, to the best of my abilities, is very minute and arguably of no interest to the average user. I'm a very content SMAART user for a decade now, and it's the only difference, by design, I can think of, in reply to the OP. Both Meyer and Rational chose their TC's with great care. I'm only trying to debate the difference. But maybe that doesn't belong in this post.</p><p></p><p>As for the values in the screenshot of my Excel spreadsheet. Those of SIM3 come from Bob's book. The values for SMAART I reasoned from the smallest frequency increment for each frequency span in MTW in relation to sample rate, smoothing turned off 48 kHz. Since SMAART appearantly uses fewer TC's and in result fewer and different crossovers points between frequency spans, I fashioned the data in a way that IMHO allows for some comparison.</p><p></p><p>If my assumptions are correct, which I can't prove because AFAIK Rational refuses to disclose these values, SMAART evidently has higher frequency resolution, read detail, but also longer TC's.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Merlijn van Veen, post: 96407, member: 4708"] I don't question the frequency resolution of SMAART, so maybe accuracy is a poor choice of words. I wonder about the tradeoff between frequency resolution and time constants in relation to "room" influence or maybe even contamination. The difference I'm trying to explain, to the best of my abilities, is very minute and arguably of no interest to the average user. I'm a very content SMAART user for a decade now, and it's the only difference, by design, I can think of, in reply to the OP. Both Meyer and Rational chose their TC's with great care. I'm only trying to debate the difference. But maybe that doesn't belong in this post. As for the values in the screenshot of my Excel spreadsheet. Those of SIM3 come from Bob's book. The values for SMAART I reasoned from the smallest frequency increment for each frequency span in MTW in relation to sample rate, smoothing turned off 48 kHz. Since SMAART appearantly uses fewer TC's and in result fewer and different crossovers points between frequency spans, I fashioned the data in a way that IMHO allows for some comparison. If my assumptions are correct, which I can't prove because AFAIK Rational refuses to disclose these values, SMAART evidently has higher frequency resolution, read detail, but also longer TC's. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Sim VS Smaart
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!