Tactile Immersion - General Discussion - Hardware & Software

[Mr Latte]

An example was made in how Andrew referred to using 25Hz for curbs and enjoyed what it offered.
I presented that much more is possible.

"Canned" effects were also mentioned, and yes I believe the vast majority of people have rather simple effects. They also do not look that deeply into combining different effects to develop more what sensations can be felt.

The truth is with budget/entry-level hardware they are limited anyway so it's not something a lot of people may have ventured into. Likewise, the point raised is that many sim racing fans do not want to spend hours and hours trying to learn how to develop or make effects that work better.

This is one area I have spent a lot of time and invested over 3K on hardware/software tools to help in comparing the output different effects/settings within Simhub applies. I am keen to get back into more testing and development but I see a lot of potential still.

User Preferences / Simhub Controls
How can we make more detailed bumps/curbs with tactile to perhaps a motion system, to the point that some users will rely more on the tactile and turn down the motion?

We can submerge the user's torso in particular with specifically placed units and apply with purposely selected and configured hardware a way to offer the full dynamics of bass.
To my understanding, a motion system does not do this nor does it allow the level of tuning or effects creation to how the felt sensation will be represented as can be achieved with audio.

Audio/vibration can greatly stir emotion, helping to connect the person's sensory attachment with the sim creating a link with our other senses and the user's input devices. The question is how far can we take tactile felt activity of various sensations being generated from the sims physics/telemetry and have these applied or combined at once?

I raised the point that several effects can be active in specific scenarios like "curbs"
So my approach on this is not to take a single effect and apply to that just a basic or limited tone response to represent that effect's range or operation. This is the norm perhaps but I have highlighted for some time the advantages Simhub has brought over other tactile software solutions.

Multiple Effects Combined
We can represent different speed/loads the car's chassis may be under or present felt differences in curb size or shape, from fast responses in saw edge curbs or more rounded or slight curb surfaces up to a large sausage curb? To also apply a different felt sensation for off-track elements such as grass or sand.

How can we do this, we discover how to apply effects that are active at the same time during such scenarios and give these their own unique feel. The physics/telemetry that is constantly varying then represents different felt sensations based on the combination of effects that are active. So this brings much more room for possible felt variations.

Not relying on one primary effect component to represent a scenario. These effects each have multiple layers to help represent their own small-high telemetry values. So we give them a range of felt sensations. With this, we then bypass the old approach of setting out "frequency boxes" to apply only limited/key Hz for different effects, like it appears most people still do.

Tony, ideas are being worked on with others, to offer yes, potentially bespoke solutions for certain clientele but also solutions for the d.i.y community. I need to create a place to give RACEBASS an identity and cover my own blog or experimentation with tactile and my own build in what it will offer. If you or others have ideas, can give guidance or want to share something then please send me a private message in DM.


Bottom Line
Much better tactile is possible than what any current solution on the market provides.
If some here want to challenge the progress being made or want to downplay the initial feedback, then well that is up to them.

For many motion owners, it's still missing something and they still want more...

 

[cnhoff]

Once both transducers magnitude responses are nominally equalized,
a next step is managing phase responses in the crossover region.
If crossover response rolloffs are too shallow,
then combined response is liable to multiple cancellation and reinforcement nodes.
Supposing some flexibility in a crossover frequency
at which transducer output magnitudes are equal,
it is generally best for that frequency to be in the middle of an octave
where both transducers show relatively small phase changes.
Evaluate phase responses using an X-Y oscilloscope display,
with paired piezo outputs from transducers to either input axis.
Matching phase responses yield lines at 45 degrees.

Beyond transducers' inherent responses,
phase relationships in the crossover region depend on filters being applied, e.g. FIR vs IIR.

One should start by verifying matching piezo pair phase responses in the crossover octave,
by x-y display of both attached to one transducer.

Taking care about the phase response in the transition region would obviously be a next step, but as I said I have a day job and kids I did some quick sweeps in the 40-50 Hz region single units vs. combined and did not detect any severe cancellation/reinforcement issues, so I am working with that for now.

You can anyway get obsessed with the whole matter. I have been enjoying a couple of races again yesterday, after a 3 weeks break, updating my rig and working on frequency responses and effects.

 

[Mr Latte]

Taking care about the phase response in the transition region would obviously be a next step, but as I said I have a day job and kids I did some quick sweeps in the 40-50 Hz region single units vs. combined and did not detect any severe cancellation/reinforcement issues, so I am working with that for now.

You can anyway get obsessed with the whole matter. I have been enjoying a couple of races again yesterday, after a 3 weeks break, updating my rig and working on frequency responses and effects.

A user will generally not need to go to these quite OTT depths of using software like this or care to even learn about it?

You or other people showing readings from their own test scenarios will not necessarily be accurate with other users installations. Also with so many factors that will alter such readings or indeed things beyond the user's control, tell me lads what exactly is the point of all the inner depth science?

Serious question, what has came from shared measurements in this thread or others for exciters, that has brought to light new findings or let the average person here with tactile achieve better results?

An image was shared recently (this post) showing the curve of BK TST EXC and from what you said from your own measurements. To what these curves offer, we see a pattern and settings that highlight the points you made.

We can get a general idea of what Hz to apply to specific units for improved performance based on how it performs and feels. Measured readings give us more information but are we lead by readings of measurements or by how things feel? What is it we are trying to do here? Science experiments and discussion of materials, or just helping people to improve tactile immersion?

When people install tactile, there is not much they can do to alter how its distributed over the materials, or how frequencies transfer over that object. We have had people fight and downplay the benefits of DSP on these forums for years. Now more are showing interest but it's about the limits most will go to use settings that offer at least some control of the operation of the unit and its response on whatever object it is installed to.

Having the ability to control individual frequencies amplitude is clearly not a bad thing.
However much less focus is put on what the tone generation is doing and what is the point in taking measurements or applying DSP if we do not take into account how/what we do to generate improved effects sensations.

If anything that is the most key or critical action combined with the hardware used to best present the 1-200Hz dynamic range and how to best control it and best to sustain it with isolation.

 

[cnhoff]

A user will generally not need to go to these quite OTT depths of using software like this or care to even learn about it?

You or other people showing readings from their own test scenarios will not necessarily be accurate with other users installations. Also with so many factors that will alter such readings or indeed things beyond the user's control, tell me lads what exactly is the point of all the inner depth science?

Serious question, what has came from shared measurements in this thread or others for exciters, that has brought to light new findings or let the average person here with tactile achieve better results?

An image was shared recently (this post) showing the curve of BK TST EXC and from what you said from your own measurements. To what these curves offer, we see a pattern and settings that highlight the points you made.

We can get a general idea of what Hz to apply to specific units for improved performance based on how it performs and feels. Measured readings give us more information but are we lead by readings of measurements or by how things feel? What is it we are trying to do here? science experiments and discussion of materials, or just helping people to improve tactile immersion?

When people install tactile, there is not much they can do to alter how its distributed over the materials, or how frequencies transfer over that object. We have had people fight and downplay the benefits of DSP on these forums for years. Now more are showing interest but it's about the limits most will go to use settings that offer at least some control of the operation of the unit and its response on whatever object it is installed to.

Having the ability to control individual frequencies amplitude is clearly not a bad thing.
However much less focus is put on what the tone generation is doing and what is the point in taking measurements or applying DSP if we do not take into account how/what we do to generate effects sensations.

If anything that is the most key or critical action combined with the hardware used to best present the 1-200Hz dynamic range.

I am not interested in going down that road of discussion once again...

...but there is different people with different approaches/backgrounds/needs etc. and ultimately forums are for people to share what they are interested in. I merely presented what I felt like doing for my own system without any interest in challenging any other approach or persuading people to do this or that. I for sure will not be offended if people ignore my posts.

But regarding science...I have met a lot of people in my live that through methodical experiments and curiosity for what is going on have come to outstanding results, but honestly, I would not challenge the idea, that a better understanding of the science behind mechanics and oscillations and wave propagation would tremendously help with the tasks we are talking about.

 

[Mr Latte]

I am not interested in going down that road of discussion once again...

...but there is different people with different approaches/backgrounds/needs etc. and ultimately forums are for people to share what they are interested in. I merely presented what I felt like doing for my own system without any interest in challenging any other approach or persuading people to do this or that. I for sure will not be offended if people ignore my posts...

I am asking what is there to be learned from what you did with measurements that we did not already know? You essentially confirmed things that we already have been doing or are aware of.

Its not an attack, my point is some of you are just going too far with the science or educated theories.

Example: So how do I control "oscillations and wave propagation" going into my seat from multiple tactile units, each representing different variations of frequencies operating at different times with their individual outputs combining with other units and within the user's body?

Should I wear certain clothing or materials as well or maintain a strict temperature within the room?

 

[cnhoff]

Should I wear certain clothing or materials as well or maintain a strict temperature within the room?

I don't think that would help.

 

[D0hne]

Does the below look right?

View attachment 507967

So after some more reading, Simvibe only supports 4 channels per sound card. So I need two sound cards.

Does this mean I need to use 4 outputs per card or can I still use 2 stereo outputs per card, with 4 split cables to the amps for total 8 shakers?

 

[Deleted member 1451080]

Deleted

 

[D0hne]

why do you want to use Simvibe and not Simhub?

I only start building my rig from scratch in a few weeks. So I have never used any of these software packages.
After all the recent research I now have too many terms and software names floating in my head.

looking at my notes it is actually Simhub that I was looking at originally. Not Simvibe.
Can Simhub manage 8 shakers from one sound card then?

 

[Deleted member 1451080]

Deleted

 

[ltnordb]

Have you guys looked into crowson transducers? Highly regarded in the home theater community. Seems like they would be close to ideal under a profile rig.

Shadow-8 Dual Motion Actuator (T108SS) - Crowson Technology

crowsontech.com

They are $$$$ though

 

[D0hne]

Yes that's why I asked....Simhub supports 8 channels per sound card. And as many sound cards as you want ;-)

Simhub is free but with a donation you get the licence (and also 60 FPS IIRC).

Ah. You just saved me some money there, thank you.

Now hoping the cables I want to get do the trick. Think I'm good there.

 

[metalnwood]

A user will generally not need to go to these quite OTT depths of using software like this or care to even learn about it?

Mark it in your diary, Ithought I would never see it. Mr Latte saying something in tactile is over the top

Was it $5000 worth of amps and transducers? Was is expensive professional software? No, it was $10 worth of sensors and free software to see what was happening with the vibration on the rig

 

[Mr Latte]

Mark it in your diary, Ithought I would never see it. Mr Latte saying something in tactile is over the top

Was it $5000 worth of amps and transducers? Was is expensive professional software? No, it was $10 worth of sensors and free software to see what was happening with the vibration on the rig

Clearly we have well-educated people with intelligence and understanding of science or mechanics.
Yet they use questionable apparatus, as professional accelerometers cost quite large sums of money.

You can get reasonably affordable options but, well why would we spend the money on them, as how will the data they give us help us improve the tactile? I did at one point consider this but it is expensive however, it was compatible with iPad and various software solutions.

Intelligence is not the same thing as experience.....

This method they use, now is it any better than what people can already do with an iPad or a phone they may already own? Personally, I have found measurements only help confirm values for a peak/drop that I may have already been aware of or understood just from deep testing the unit's operation.

It can be of some interest to know from a data perspective how a large BK compares to a Q10B or other competing models. Yet really the data isn't what matters, as what matters is how each of those feel when they are thoroughly tested within Simhub and effects applied. My decision of what or how to use either would be based on the "feel alone" they generate not by data from measurements.

I do not see it as beneficial to try to determine the vibration of the transducer on the installed object or attempt to discuss how multidimensional vibrations may travel through that object. Because there are many, many factors that will alter the outcome of that. So nobody from behind their keyboard is going to tell you or me how or where to position transducers in relation to the seat or pedals you have. Nor are they going to be able to calculate how multiple layer effects outputting over multiple units each with varying dB will interact with the materials.

So here's the thing right, I already put it to these guys, I will say it again....
Show me, highlight for me what benefit the measurements can give us, that we should continue with that approach to improve tactile.

@blekenbleu went to a lot of bother for exciters, what did he discover from the readings that we could apply? I questioned this from the beginning as for the various models we can already see the manufacturer's specification sheet. The only similar unit that does not have a spec sheet is the Puc model, yet we know it clearly lacks in its higher frequency/harmonic abilities, is larger, and uses fewer watts. So it's not as good a choice if we are seeking to combine specific models to form a basis of what lets the user experience the best tactile for the full dynamic range of bass.

Prior to his tests, 1-1 operational comparisons from within Simhub had already been done and others did as well, it became evident two of the models seemed to perform best, one more on the upper frequencies *(what we want) and one more with the mid-lower range (what we don't need) for their intended roles.

We can take measurements all day long, I and I am sure some others have a clear understanding of what the benefits/weaknesses are with certain transducers on the market. You learn that from user experience and just testing them or doing lots of effects tests from within Simhub.

My gripe is that the focus should not be on readings from installed units, a producer for creating music, tailors his instruments/vocals within the mix so that it can be enjoyed with capable hardware. That's my focus, it's to develop the effects sensations/operations and we already understand the abilities of the hardware that can best apply the appropriate frequencies these use.

 

[metalnwood]

You shouldnt have a gripe, you have professed to spend thousands of hours tinkering away and now you take exception on how other people spend their time doing things on their own rig in their own time and doing nothing more than sharing what they are doing.

I just dont see what your problem is. You behave like everyone here should only be here to satisfy you.

Their focus may not be your focus and that somehow annoys you and surprises you.

 

[Mr Latte]

You shouldnt have a gripe, you have professed to spend thousands of hours tinkering away and now you take exception on how other people spend their time doing things on their own rig in their own time and doing nothing more than sharing what they are doing.

I just dont see what your problem is. You behave like everyone here should only be here to satisfy you.

Their focus may not be your focus and that somehow annoys you and surprises you.

I suppose it depends on what the target goals are with what I'm seeking to do or what I see as ways to accomplish it compared to others.

So let me help with that then, I will place "my own focus" somewhere else.

 

[metalnwood]

I suppose it depends on what the target goals are with what I'm seeking to do or what I see as ways to accomplish it compared to others.

So let me help with that then, I will place "my own focus" somewhere else.

No one is asking you to go, on the contrary contribute what you want and others will contribute what they want.

Its all relevant in the general tactile thread. If you don't view it as the general tactile thread but more specifically your thread for your focus then yes I see your point. If thats the case then you are right, you should start a thread specifically dealing with what you want to deal with and fair enough then to tell people if what they post there is useful to you.

 

[D0hne]

The NL2 MP

connector does not accept the 4 pole Neutrik connector.

Does anybody know what the connector on the NX3000D/NX1000D/EPQ304 is? Does it accept the 2 pole Neutrik?

And in the manual I see switches for Mode and Crossover.

On the image in the Thomann store they are not present. Is it a new version that is software toggled?

 

[cnhoff]

Clearly we have well-educated people with intelligence and understanding of science or mechanics.
Yet they use questionable apparatus, as professional accelerometers cost quite large sums of money.

You can get reasonably affordable options but, well why would we spend the money on them, as how will the data they give us help us improve the tactile? I did at one point consider this but it is expensive however, it was compatible with iPad and various software solutions.

Intelligence is not the same thing as experience.....

This method they use, now is it any better than what people can already do with an iPad or a phone they may already own? Personally, I have found measurements only help confirm values for a peak/drop that I may have already been aware of or understood just from deep testing the unit's operation.

It can be of some interest to know from a data perspective how a large BK compares to a Q10B or other competing models. Yet really the data isn't what matters, as what matters is how each of those feel when they are thoroughly tested within Simhub and effects applied. My decision of what or how to use either would be based on the "feel alone" they generate not by data from measurements.

I do not see it as beneficial to try to determine the vibration of the transducer on the installed object or attempt to discuss how multidimensional vibrations may travel through that object. Because there are many, many factors that will alter the outcome of that. So nobody from behind their keyboard is going to tell you or me how or where to position transducers in relation to the seat or pedals you have. Nor are they going to be able to calculate how multiple layer effects outputting over multiple units each with varying dB will interact with the materials.

So here's the thing right, I already put it to these guys, I will say it again....
Show me, highlight for me what benefit the measurements can give us, that we should continue with that approach to improve tactile.

@blekenbleu went to a lot of bother for exciters, what did he discover from the readings that we could apply? I questioned this from the beginning as for the various models we can already see the manufacturer's specification sheet. The only similar unit that does not have a spec sheet is the Puc model, yet we know it clearly lacks in its higher frequency/harmonic abilities, is larger, and uses fewer watts. So it's not as good a choice if we are seeking to combine specific models to form a basis of what lets the user experience the best tactile for the full dynamic range of bass.

Prior to his tests, 1-1 operational comparisons from within Simhub had already been done and others did as well, it became evident two of the models seemed to perform best, one more on the upper frequencies *(what we want) and one more with the mid-lower range (what we don't need) for their intended roles.

We can take measurements all day long, I and I am sure some others have a clear understanding of what the benefits/weaknesses are with certain transducers on the market. You learn that from user experience and just testing them or doing lots of effects tests from within Simhub.

My gripe is that the focus should not be on readings from installed units, a producer for creating music, tailors his instruments/vocals within the mix so that it can be enjoyed with capable hardware. That's my focus, it's to develop the effects sensations/operations and we already understand the abilities of the hardware that can best apply the appropriate frequencies these use.

Really, i am pretty sure we will not come to a conclusion with this anyway, although i do not really see your point, as in my opinion we have the same goals, but maybe different tools.

As this also seems to have offended you on many occasions, i will spell it out loud and clear again: i am implementing, not inventing: using EQ to mitigate shortcomings of the setup, multi-layer effects using the suggested LFE/TST combo etc., all inspired by or taken from this thread. All hail to the king of tactile!

Quick recap of my approach, after that i will stay quiet on that matter, because i am not here to persuade or much less than that, impress anyone:

1.) Got new shakers in a new setup, noticed considerable dips and peaks in the perceived power -> did not trust my butt alone, wanted to work on the EQ more methodically

2.) Decided to take some of the tools over from what i am doing professionally in the radio-frequency domain and setup a measurement -> cost was 10 bucks for the probes

3.) Validated, that the measurement i took was fairly well correlated to my butt-feel; i have stated that more than once in my posts, ultimately the felt sensation is what really matters for me in the end

4.) EQ'ed the response to my liking to have what i think is a useable shaker setup across frequency for setting up effects, optimizing both performance and ease of use for me

5.) Setup the desired effects in Simhub, one sign that what i did before served my purpose is, that for the same perceived power, i can set basically the same volume in Simhub; makes your life quite easy imo

6.) Race!

(7. Probably in the future i will take this setup, that i trust now to measure the spectra of multiple effects/layers and to judge visually, whether i have any frequency overlap probably also with harmonics/mixing products that you mention for good reason, as the system is nonlinear; separating effects is imo one of the most challenging part of this whole business, we again might agree on that)

FOR ME, 1.)-6.) is a fairly straightforward and reasonable approach from a new setup with unknown performance to fairly well configured Simhub effects, but your opinion may vary.

Cheers!

 

[cnhoff]

The NL2 MP View attachment 508603connector does not accept the 4 pole Neutrik connector.

Does anybody know what the connector on the NX3000D/NX1000D/EPQ304 is? Does it accept the 2 pole Neutrik?

And in the manual I see switches for Mode and Crossover.View attachment 508616

On the image in the Thomann store they are not present. Is it a new version that is software toggled? View attachment 508620

I ordered this exact cable from Thomann twice, cut it and am using the 4 cables on NX1000D and NX3000D respectively. The NX1000D was bought only a couple of weeks ago, so this should be a recent version, if there are different.