Audio_Guy_UofW
Member
Thread Starter
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2020
- Posts
- 49
More
- Preamp, Processor or Receiver
- Denon AVR-4700
- Main Amp
- Neurochrome Modulus 686 for music
- Additional Amp
- Topping Pre90 preamp for music
- DAC
- SMSL M500
- Computer Audio
- Roon
- Universal / Blu-ray / CD Player
- Panasonic DP UB-820; Oppo UDP-203
- Streaming Equipment
- Nvidia Shield Pro; Roopiee Raspberry Pi
- Streaming Subscriptions
- Tidal
- Front Speakers
- PSB Imagine X2T, Magnepan 1.7i (for music)
- Center Channel Speaker
- PSB Imagine XC
- Surround Speakers
- PSB Alpha
- Surround Back Speakers
- PSB Alpha Mini
- Front Height Speakers
- Totem KIN IC6 Slim (Front O/H)
- Rear Height Speakers
- Totem KIN IC6 Slim (Rear O/H))
- Subwoofers
- 4 sealed subs with 12" drivers custom built boxes
- Other Speakers
- Mini DSP 2x4 Balanced; HD Fury Diva; MSO sub tunin
- Screen
- EluneVision 96" Acoustically Transparent
- Video Display Device
- JVC DLA X500
- Remote Control
- Harmony Elite
- Other Equipment
- Thorens TD-160 Super, SME tonearm, Shure V15 IV with Jico SAS stylus, Arcam rPhono preamp
Hi,
I am sure there is a simple explanation, but I am trying to figure out why the CEA2010 peak value reported is so much higher than the RTA spectrum value at the peak. See attached chart. Based on the input levels, I actually would expect that the acoustic peak level would be around that reported by the CEA2010. Used the capture values for smoothing, FFT length, etc recommended in the help section.
See screen shot below.
Thanks
Thanks
I am sure there is a simple explanation, but I am trying to figure out why the CEA2010 peak value reported is so much higher than the RTA spectrum value at the peak. See attached chart. Based on the input levels, I actually would expect that the acoustic peak level would be around that reported by the CEA2010. Used the capture values for smoothing, FFT length, etc recommended in the help section.
See screen shot below.
Thanks
Thanks