Mr Latte - Question?

[Mr Latte]

Hello, well they say encouraging others helps encourage oneself.

Get your ideas up to we see and discuss them.
Hopefully at some point others will get interested and involved in the discussion.

Worry nothing about crude sketches man, most of my own ideas are all scribbled on paper, I simply havn't the skills to do CAD like details that others do. Some of them blow me away that they have plans down to the last bolt/screw.

Actually not heard much lately from a few of the people I was helping via PM regards their builds.

Currently have had 3 others this last week or so just asking for some advice on things or solving some issues and a couple just getting started. So is always nice to have discussions with them but everyone has different preferences budgets or indeed ideas how far they want to take things.

Look forward to you next post and will be doing some more tinkering myself over the next few days.
I am basically out of clamps to go much further.

 

[Mr Latte]

Done some playing around with the "wheel deck section" mainly in working out the layout and spacing.
The lack of clamps making it rather difficult and I don't want to dismantle from other parts. So this below is just a partial temp build and basic ruff cut.

Really though loving how the tubing/clamps is so simple and while a little industrial looking offers lots of creativity to be applied for something a little different. I think my style is "crusader" and kinda like a kid playing with Lego running with the flow to see what comes about.

Hard to get a proper impression in this state...
Want to employ the same parallel uniformity to maintain the character of the build.
The section on the left is to be repeated on the right. A wooden platform may be used to connect the rails for movable wheel deck and also support the TV.

Notice that the main track is now upside down with the canted section wider at the bottom.
This connected better with the subs, less likely to trip on and will reduce the height of the uprights for the seat section.

Pedals used for illustration only. I may dismantle the T500 pedals and incorporate them into the new pedal base.

Goals & Ideas:
Wheel and Pedals (La Ferrari) style both on adjustable seat runners.
We discussed this before but with my seat fixed I think it is best to incorporate this and also to allow for different wheels with various heights.

The pedals are a bit more complicated because of how I want to do the tactile for them.
I looked at supports hanging from this main structure but feel it will be better placed on the floor for extra stability and easier adjustment.

Did some plans, that have the pedals on separate uprights which will not be in contact with the metal tracks. This will help isolate them from the "LFE Tactile" reserved more for the foot rest platforms. As discussed before in seeking to utilise direct tactile from L/R Clark TST239 for the pedal stems, (enabling potential for different tactile effects if desired).

Foot platforms could resemble something like found on "safety steps" with two individual pieces, and their own LFE L/R effects being maintained. These would be raised from the main tracks, not sure what height ratio to the seat is a good basis but large enough to accommodate the pedals being adjusted closer/further back. Additionally when pedals are not being used they can be pushed out of the way and having large footrests will be ideal for general gaming.

I am considering that the pedal upright section is connected to "Cobra Seat Mounts" matching the seat branding of course but mainly for a bit of extra cosmetic styling. These would be bolted to standard seat runners. The design of this frame section will allow for different pedals to be used and I'm still considering perhaps just running with Throttle/Brake only.

 

[RW65]

Nice… sweet to see how your build is coming along!

OK, having applied copious amounts of thought into the design of my pedal rig, the last thing I want to do is bore you with specifics, Mr Latte… I will attempt to keep this narrative user friendly & as always, welcome your feedback.

GOALS

1 – Two fabricated pedal rigs - one for the throttle & the other for brake, clutch & footrest

2 – Each pedal rig to accommodate the pedal(s) & T429 - Simvibe Chassis Mode tactile feedback to pedal/toes only & not to the pedal heel plate

3 – Pedal rigs to be isolated from each other & provide separate left & right tactile

4 – Each pedal rig to have isolation from the three LFE’s mounted to the wooden chassis floor via rubber damping - 5mm to 8mm

5 – Pedals to be “hung” & have forward, backward & lateral adjustability

6 – Pedal rigs to accommodate greater than 100Kg of braking force

7 – Final dimensions determined from wooden prototype(s) yet to be built

8 – Pedal rig construction material to facilitate optimal tactile feel & is not yet determined – either steel or aluminium alloy?

What are your thoughts for the type of material to use, Mr Latte?

Note, I was unable to get my scanner to work so had to take a photo, hope the sketch comes up OK?

Cheers

 

[Mr Latte]

Wanted to go into detail with one main part and give more of my updated thoughts regards the very best configs but generally covering most of your questions.
Do not see my own considerations as "Golden" they are merely for consideration my friend.

GOALS

1 – Two fabricated pedal rigs - one for the throttle & the other for brake, clutch & footrest

Pedal positioning may be a personal pref, some people like the brake a little closer to throttle. The alternative is having foot rest beside clutch and brake / throttle beside each other for 2/2 layout.

2 – Each pedal rig to accommodate the pedal(s) & T429 - Simvibe Chassis Mode tactile feedback to pedal/toes only & not to the pedal heel plate

I do believe separating the pedals from heel plate could bring an advantage of immersion, because it enables potential for separated individual effects for individual tactile units. Giving them each a key role/usage.

What is the best combination of effects, well this is only answered in testing a build and again very much user pref. It has been highlighted by users having "Engine" as an "Extension" produces good results rather than "Engine Effects mixed with Chassis Effects".

Having TST 429 @ $549 each just for pedal plates could be rather overkill in such a role as a user is not going to run with high wattages for toe/pedal effects and the benefits of such a high end tactile unit are likely to be limited in a small contact point, as a pedal stem/plate.

This is why I chose the much cheaper TST239 for such a role but Mini LFE could suit as well for the plates and rely on the TST 429 with LFE for the heel plate and main frame instead.

It is hard to know what configuration may be best and if "Dual Role" method works across heel/toe or is it better to apply extensions to toes only and keep the heel platform and main frame for Chassis "Dual Role".


Reflection:
In this thread we have discussed using "Dual Role" TST/LFE for detail/impact advantages with each having set frequencies to operate with. I ramble on enough about it (lol). Henk has highlighted how well his cockpit has worked with "Individual Roles" for his "Mini LFE" some as "Chassis" and others for "Engine" via extensions but not mixed effects. I can see the benefits of this clearly and partly to do with the performance limitations of the "Mini LFE" as a tactile unit trying to handle (all) several effects at once.

Is it a Vs scenario as one solution is presumed better than the other? I thought quite a deal over these points and believe that both can or should be incorporated into a high end build. Simvibe obviously can make great usage of "individual effect(s)" per channel output and should be utilised to its full potential for a high end build. The "Dual Role" concept make sense and such configuration has major advantages for "Chassis" with multiple effects being split over 2 rather than a single unit. So neither of these methods are a bad thing.

My own thoughts are that directional/chassis effects should take preference for total immersion. It is the very purpose of doing a unique build. Therefore these are what should be felt more over the engine tactile, yes/no?

Rather than have a monaural engine tone/tactile effect defeat the directional cues of immersion that Simvibe can provide! This by no means suggests that engine tactile should be feeble but it has to be incorporated in such a way that it blends and compliments the "Chassis" effects. Full size LFE feels great for engines with its huge amounts of power but how does one incorporate that with Chassis effects efficiently?

Perhaps a user could have "Engine Effects" incorporated into "Chassis" using a "Dual Role" configuration but with engine only represented at @ 25% for some residual influence. This way the TST 429 & LFE is being used to some degree for engine tactile.

The difference now being that we also utilise this in tandem with a discrete "Engine Extensions". I believe this could accomplish the blend I refer to achieving.

It means engine tactile does not have to be inferior to Chassis effects in quality but also benefit from using purposely positioned/located "engine extensions" too.

As a suggestion I would put forward that a potential best FRONT END pedals configuration for a build could be one that utilises the following hardware.

Engine / Brake / Gear
Used on PEDAL STEMS/PLATES
2x Mid range tactile unit TST 239 or alternative.
Potentially fully individual as "Extensions" these channels can be duplicated for seat and gear-sticks also.

* "Gear Change" effect could easily be combined in the extensions for "Brake" or "Engine".


Chassis Effects (FRONT FRAME / HEEL PLATE ONLY)
Dual Role combo:
2x TST 429 (detail frequencies @ 40Hz -90Hz)
BK LFE (sub frequencies @ 20-40Hz)

Covering suspension/tyre/road effects across two units per channel.
Taking advantage of the benefits the BK LFE & TST 429 provide.

* Option to enable "Engine Effects" into "Chassis Effects" mode tactile units but only at a limited signal strength. Important not to interfere/detrimental with main Chassis effects.

** Testing is required to determine what works best in how to apply extensions and incorporate possibly the "Dual Role" Chassis configuration.

I think a combination of hardware above is an excellent option to consider but in what delivery across the pedals/base is to be determined.

 

[Mr Latte]

4 – Each pedal rig to have isolation from the three LFE’s mounted to the wooden chassis floor via rubber damping - 5mm to 8mm

The more isolated possibly the better, so even if the pedal structure is built up from a separate base altogether that is beneath the main base frame and with its own isolators.

5 – Pedals to be “hung” & have forward, backward & lateral adjustability

Many cockpit companies do pedal base sections that allow angle to be applied. You could purchase one and modify into your frame. What pedals are you considering?

6 – Pedal rigs to accommodate greater than 100Kg of braking force

One reason I am putting my pedal section onto seat runners. Makes them adjustable easily for positioning but also as long as the main upright is solid enough they should not budge or flex too much. I do have a Gamepod pedal section that enables adjustable angle positioning which I may incorporate.

8 – Pedal rig construction material to facilitate optimal tactile feel & is not yet determined – either steel or aluminium alloy?

Not sure the exact benefits or properties of each. Bicycles I believe are made of both and perhaps one would be a better conductor for tactile. Although really if the tactile/mounting position is close proximity to the pedal frame structure it hasn't far to travel and will be quite direct in the pedals themselves. So perhaps the material used isn't such a big factor if the tactile is installed in the appropriate position. Similar to what I have done on positions of my seat. The tactile has almost direct contact to the relevant body area.

What are your thoughts for the type of material to use, Mr Latte?

I have been getting asked quite a bit about this tubing/components I am using. Though it does not seem to be that widespread outside of UK/EUROPE. Personally I think 80/20 offers a lot of advantages with so many fittings/components but then again if you know a good fabricator then steel or the aluminium alloy may be options. I would still incorporate a dedicated wooden base section the full area size underneath with materials to maintain the tactile like a resonance sponge. Even if you are on concrete you may not need the levels of excessive isolators that I have to employ but believe it will have a benefit than just an isolator connected to a metal frame.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Do take into account the TST range make audible sound so their is a degree of resonance that could be utilised to help increase positional perception of the chassis directional effects. So some form of material that will help the acoustics may be a small benefit.

While I highlight this it may not be such a factor with Simvibe tactile Vs audio tactile as your game audio will likely be louder of course than Simvibe effects or you may even be wearing headphones but the TST do have an extra element of immersion from their acoustics resonating off or into materials.

My own current SEAT build spoils this factor to a certain degree if using all 4x TST in a "Chassis Mode" / "Quad Surround" as they are too close together on the seat itself to separate the audio. However I do have options to run the seat in:


SEAT MODES: What is the optimal tactile layout?

*Note: Berney made reference long ago (Simvibe Thread) that "Chassis" tactile direct on a seat or close proximity platform may not represent the best realism. Referring at the time to it feeling "too pointed" regards feedback from users tests during beta stage. Some time has passed since then but I do not know if updates within Simvibe now give control for this within the software settings to generate/manage the effects in accordance to a users installed tactile positions.

If not the inuke DSP amplifiers can alter this if desired as LogiForce in the (Simvibe Thread) has highlighted by altering the timing/delay. This can help expand the sensation of the "virtual represented positioning" differently to that of the tactile units actual physical placement.

In english, basically to represent more accurately the distance/time required for the tactile effect to travel from the simulated point (tyres/wheels) to the drivers position (seat). Having a good setting would increase the immersion adding to the potential realism.

LogiForce even discussed the possibility to utilise this to generate a sensation of a Left or Right handed car by increasing the timing/delay factor for the relevant side. It caught my attention at the time but have never read of anyone else trying to recreate or develop this idea further.


Thoughts are welcome but I believe one of the below modes with such a configuration should give extremely good results within Simvibe both in chassis detail/directional positioning but also a very satisfying engine rumble effect.

It certainly goes way beyond a standard configuration with the recommended Mini LFE SE.
Certainly even beyond the sole performance using ANY single model of tactile unit regardless of price.

Seeking to increase directional effects by combining the performance benefits of using the best two models on the market for both detail and slam in the "Dual Role" mode for "Chassis Effects".

Now including "Extensions" to utilise the advantage of highlighting a specific effect within a specified location. Producing ANY available set role of effects possible, "Engine Extensions", "Gear Extensions" etc placed where the user wants them.


"Quad / Rear Chassis Mode"
All 4x TST 429 into seat with 2x LFE for potentially very effective rear effects.
Working in tandem with the front pedal section as discussed above.


"All Chassis / Stereo Front & Rear Mode"
All 4x TST 429 with Front/Rear Chassis split with 2x LFE
Working in tandem with the front pedal section as discussed above.


"Stereo / Rear Chassis Mode"
Using 2x TST 429 with 2x LFE for excellent rear effects.
Working in tandem with the front pedal section as discussed above.

.
"Mix Mode"
2x TST 429 as "Engine Ext" 2x TST 429 for "Rear Chassis" inc 2x LFE for enhanced rear effects.
Working in tandem with the front pedal section as discussed above.

* All above configs could enable "Engine Effects" into "Chassis" mode but at a limited strength only as previously discussed.

** Previously shown TST 329 at the back of my seat (for spine) could be used as an independent "Extension" possibly for dedicated "engine effects". Effects in spine are felt better than butt cheeks!

*** Extensions could of course utilise both "Gear Change" with "Engine Effects" on single channel.



* How could I determine what out of those options above for the seat will be best without testing? So testing itself is paramount to determining the best solution. The key perhaps is being prepared with more than one solution for your tactile configuration.

So do perhaps allow for OPTIONS within your build as you may find when doing actual testing you prefer a certain configuration.

I want to benefit both Audio/Simvibe tactile so it is possible that not all the tactile on the cockpit may be utilised together or utilised in the same way depending on Console/PC/Music usages.


Remember your first build should not be your final build!

(edits done for corrections)

 

[RW65]

Sorry, forgot to include the attachment!
Getting ready for work so quickly logged in to add the sketch & looking forward to reading your reply later today!
Cheers

 

[RW65]

Whoops, still sleep groggy!

 

[Mr Latte]

Had a look over your plan most seems fine, not sure if I am understanding it properly but with one concern. The fullsize LFE having 10x the force of the standard Mini LFE it's vibrations have lots of impact and will travel into any connected support or material.

Isolation methods used between any connected surfaces would have to be very effective to eliminate most vibrations if this is what you aim to do. I doubt a couple layers of foam material would be sufficient enough between the base and pedal uprights. Am I misunderstanding the drawing?

Here is a basic drawing of my own ideas thus far for the "Cockpit Base" isolation. Not sure if it will be of any help to others. Previously established that the build uses separate Left/|Right sections to maintain proper Stereo tactile and avoid bleed/crossover of tactile.

Likewise my aim is to try and eliminate the "toe/pedal stems" from the "foot/heel" section as best possible.

(Black) Cut out section from 1st tier flooring
(Green) Pedal Section connected to frame below.
(Blue) Adjustable/Sliding frame for pedals bolted to a secondary floor.
(Purple) Raised footrest with LFE attached for front "Chassis" effects.


It is very basic (my art skills aint so great) just done in MS Paint
(1 Pedal & Footrest illustrated / 1 Cut Section illustrated)

* Possible Tactile Configuration Only

(edits done for corrections)

 

[RW65]

Excellent posts Mr Latte… now things are getting really interesting!

There is a lot of info to go over here & perhaps too much for one post so will explore your comments, insights & questions over the next few weeks… struggling to keep this post short so let’s start from the top & see how we go?

1 – Which pedal to “pedal rig” configuration is best… 1 & 3 or 2 & 2?

If one were to take a plan view of my (yet to be built) wooden chassis floor, north being the pedal end & imagine a vertical line through the centre of the chassis floor, north to south, the width of each pedal rig will measure 300mm… the separation or isolation for the pedal rigs from centre is 10mm or 5mm either side of the vertical line.

For ease of fabrication, each pedal rig is identical to the other, so a mirror image occurs if the chassis floor were to be folded in half along the vertical north to south line. A dedicated first pedal-setup for left foot braking is easily achievable (approximately 150mm from pedal centre to pedal centre, throttle & brake, to my comfort) & a dedicated second pedal-setup of “heel & toe braking” is also achievable by moving both pedals closer to each other (along with the clutch) with additional slots available to facilitate this.

2 – Directional tactile feedback from T429 to the pedals & toes only… which Simvibe effects to use… why the T429?

OK, this is where numerous options, opinions & user preferences can be discussed in great depth, hoping to keep this post short, would love to continue this dialogue in later posts.

Having said this, how about I provide a simple answer to which effects I plan to use?

My initial interest lies in On-Track effects only, Chassis Mode, to the pedals & toes, two effects maximum, one constant & the other effect occasional (but overbearing to drown out the constant effect) to ensure a clean tactile feed. Without Simvibe installed & a transducer to test, I am in the dark here & only have my current “readings” of what others have posted themselves… leaning towards Road Texture as a constant & either Road Bumps or possibly Suspension Bumps as occasional effects… the reality is that I have no idea, Mr Latte, only through my own testing will I realise an ideal setup for me… but now you understand my thinking & goals for the toes.

I am intrigued with the new Brake effect as I haven’t heard of this before?

Regarding which transducer model to deploy for the pedals, silver, gold or platinum… here are my thoughts, please correct me if I am wrong. There is a significant price jump between the three models above & I believe this price jump to be so much more than just Jeremy Clarkson…. my reason for choosing one over the other is based upon my belief that range, tighter control & purity of tactile feedback... plus Jeremy… is on offer & I want it all.

In summary, we are agreed upon separate tactile feeds to the toes via the pedals… & to the heels via a heel plate or similar. I plan on using T429’s in CM for the pedals & an LFE chassis floor mounted in EM for the heels. My intentions upon which effects I will use here can be debated later.

4 – Pedal Rig rubber damping – specialized rating for commercial application, not shop bought… http://www.industrialgaskets.com.au/

Is 5mm enough? By having 8mm I have increased the damping effect by another 50% & this is definitely doable…

“a pedal structure built up from a separate base altogether that is beneath the main base frame & with its own isolators” is definitely the best solution to solve this problem Mr latte, agreed… but this would just pose so many conflicts with the rest of my build that my brain hurts just thinking about it!

(Just received your latest post & drawings a few minutes ago, this looks the way to go in regards to the above)

5 – Pedal hang angles… solved

I was fortunate to acquire a set of HE Ultimates released late September… I understand that this batch barely lasted a day before selling out. At the rear of these pedals there is the option to tilt the pedals forward thus solving the hang angles issue.

6 – Greater than 100Kg of braking force

Yes, I have considered the sliding seat runners but I don’t want to take any chances… plan to make my build Hulk proof for peace of mind.

8 – Material to be used

This one is still open for discussion… my preference is for steel but the weight factor is nagging me with the option of aluminium alloy available. I can’t see any disadvantage if I were to use steel in regards to receiving clean tactile vibrations but with aluminium alloy this could be a step down? May play the safe card here & cop the weight disadvantage?

OK, all finished for now but I still need to re-read your last posts several times to take in all the info you have generously provided. I hope to talk more soon.

Cheers for now

 

[Mr Latte]

We both are after similar goals, we both have pretty much nailed down the best performing tactile devices to use.
Preferences in builds and ideas will differ and I like that. Actually I prefer someone to challenge my own ideas I bring to the table and offer alternatives rather than just sit idle or co-operate with my ramblings. So by all means feel free to indeed have a difference in opinion or conflict with points raised and highlight why or question them.

Its all good man...


I did edit the posts a few times and deleted the "Simvibe Brake" as not sure if I got mixed up on that.
What I can tell you is that if you wanted a "Tactile" operated brake effect then it is possible to build one. I have mentioned this 2-3 years ago and while not seeing such done by someone (maybe someone has by now) it is doable.

Actually their could be several ways such is possible in converting pedal movement into 0db / +db / -db and using a suitable sound sample to activate upon depression. Although this does not represent "in game" wheel lock-ups it could be possible to configure a set "db value" to be at the pedal depression point wheel lock-up may occur. So in realism value not so much a great thing but for added immersion factor possibly a good option.


Questions:
I still have reason to believe the "Seat Sliders" are fine.
If such are industry tested to support the weight of a seat, the actual driver and the forces applied when a driver is pushing the brake etc. Then why would they not be suitable in your case for supporting a 100KG brake force? Interested to see your own solution however.

Pedal Platforms
Seems we have "industrial dampening" vs "independent platform uprights"

Interestingly I was studying my seat again last night and now going to disconnect the back section uprights used for the TST 329 for engine effects. I feel another isolated upright like the pedals under the seat may work well for engine tactile right down the middle underside of the seat and also having a contact point with the back of the seat like before. This method ensures it is not on the same metal tubing structure as my CM effects tactile and will only combine with them directly in the seat itself.

Using the LFE via EM as you mention may have drawbacks?
What is the consistent effect(s) you plan on using for this role?

Sure you know already but do take note that effects vary regards Game Support / Chassis Mode / Extension Mode. Not all games have the same effects of course and EM does not offer all those found in CM unless this has changed?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This below still to cover more later:

Excellent posts Mr Latte… now things are getting really interesting!

2 – Directional tactile feedback from T429 to the pedals & toes only… which Simvibe effects to use… why the T429?

OK, this is where numerous options, opinions & user preferences can be discussed in great depth, hoping to keep this post short, would love to continue this dialogue in later posts.

Having said this, how about I provide a simple answer to which effects I plan to use?

My initial interest lies in On-Track effects only, Chassis Mode, to the pedals & toes, two effects maximum, one constant & the other effect occasional (but overbearing to drown out the constant effect) to ensure a clean tactile feed. Without Simvibe installed & a transducer to test, I am in the dark here & only have my current “readings” of what others have posted themselves… leaning towards Road Texture as a constant & either Road Bumps or possibly Suspension Bumps as occasional effects… the reality is that I have no idea, Mr Latte, only through my own testing will I realise an ideal setup for me… but now you understand my thinking & goals for the toes.

Regarding which transducer model to deploy for the pedals, silver, gold or platinum… here are my thoughts, please correct me if I am wrong. There is a significant price jump between the three models above & I believe this price jump to be so much more than just Jeremy Clarkson…. my reason for choosing one over the other is based upon my belief that range, tighter control & purity of tactile feedback... plus Jeremy… is on offer & I want it all.

Having a new diagram of your "Tactile Config" would be handy and I will do some as well.
I think simple diagrams will also be a benefit to others following. Also instant to understand not like our waffling.

 

[Mr Latte]

We need to discuss more about Simvibe too.

The "Constant Effects" begin to tally up for "Chassis Mode" and seem more of an issue.
Re-reading over a couple of guides again today and getting better understanding of

• Road Textures
• Road Bumps
• Vertical Surges

I submit my opinion here for preferred configuration and you are welcome to bring forward constructive criticism with your own potential best solution. The below needs to be properly conversed.

Chassis Effects
So upon reading some reports it looks like often users begin to make a comprise in some of the available settings. This in regards to CM and in particular to bumps & textures as clearly with so many it can overwhelm a single tactile unit and mask the distinct detail of some applied. This potentially a bigger problem for those also combining engine and gear grind too.

Okay the number of effects will vary in different games. For the best supported titles I am REALLY STRUGGLING to see how people running several effects into individual units are getting the max potential possible from the software.
I am not saying they do not achieve a good result or pleasing one.

Nor that it is a flaw of Simvibe but when you delve into how many effects can be applied. How their timing / their tones and individual signature conflicts with other effects. Man it is a heck of a lot to ask from a single unit.

Understanding The Frequencies
Forgive my own understanding/research if this is inaccurate. To me most effects are going to commonly use the (tactile productive) ranges of 20Hz-65Hz with the lower 20Hz-45Hz very frequently the 45Hz-65Hz as upper ranges of certain effects also and 65Hz-95Hz potentially less so?

Again to me this relates to discovering which effects are more productive to select, in the end having a finalised output from Simvibe. Then duplicating the "finalised output" for CM and splitting it over the 2 most suitable units.

I cannot see a valid reason regards performance in why NOT to do this or a better proposition. However welcome one to be considered.

Is it not better for a tactile unit to be restricted in its working response range, to effectively half the required work it has to do? Therefore improving efficiency of what it is doing and losing less tactile detail in the process?

The Slam
Are the 20-45Hz range likely to be the most used, I believe so but also amongst the most important.
Can a better unit than the LFE be recommended for such for each corner?

The Detail
For the rest of the "finalised output" of 45Hz-95Hz it may be a bigger operating range so the tactile unit doing this has more ground to cover but it potentially at times is not going to be utilised as consistently. Now is their a better unit available for speed response detail and still with good slam than the TST 429?

2 As 1
As covered many times in this role the two units are not duplicating Simvibes "finalised output" identically but instead 1/2 it by operating both as one unit. Some fail to grasp the difference when looking at number of units being used/installed. Having 2 instead of 1 for each of the 4 corners should also in my understanding increase the potential to be more effective at the position of installation on a cockpit than a single unit.

Going Up / Going Down
An idea in the seat was that having the LFE below the physical height level of the TST 429 to help represent "Vertical Surges" better. Also some effects that transition through the lowest to upper Hz will seem to transfer from one unit to the other. Dependent of course on their "Tone Range" and the high-pass filter being used.

Notice on my seat the TST 429 are being utilised mainly for the upper regions thighs/sides/spine of the seat leaving the lowest slams/impacts to be felt more from underneath my butt by the dual LFE. Even if it does nothing to the immersion of "Vertical Surges" having the effects originating from more than one place is certainly beneficial for their flow.

A similar effect could be applied to the pedals/footrest if this works well.
For pedals I would prefer the lower slam/directional cues again to be lower in the footrest and have engine with higher Hz tactile more so in the toes. As mentioned earlier testing will determine the best option and how well effects transition from one unit to the other across the frequency range.

I am highlighting all this as I personally after much thought do not have a better solution. Not that this is the true ultimate. Yes as a configuration it is heck of an expensive one but if seeking CHASSIS MAXIMUM regards hardware to use I believe this cannot be bettered currently. Even if the appropriate installation positions/methods is more user specific and subjective to individual preference.


Extension Effects
Personal thoughts, Engine RPM & Gear Grind make sense to apply mainly to the extensions. Generally reducing one of the "Constant" effects away from the chassis tactile and if anything the main "non directional one". Having such in both pedal and seat (shifter too if desired) with option to utilise as isolated to try and maintain their delivery as best possible and least tactile overflow.

Knowing how good/realism the LFE highlights the raw power of engine sensation. I do feel potentially adding some of the lower "Engine Tones" across the 4x LFE used on CM would be possible with no major issues. Of course as many do by applying more front/rear engine to the front/rear LFE units depending on car.

At some point later will do an illustration to highlight this.
Look forward to what your own preference is sir and put forward your areas of concern or differing opinion.

 

[Mr Latte]

This ain't final but represents what I have discussed regards my own best solution for cockpit front end.
I have not seen anyone so far show a cockpit that maintains L/R separation and does this in both pedals/seat regions.
It is one of the main goals of my own build and look to fully maximise CHASSIS tactile immersion.

1 installation layout 3 completely different feeling Simvibe configurations

Easily adapted to offer:
Emphasis on increased "Engine" OR increased "Chassis" immersion. (varying profiles)
No need to alter or change Simvibe CHASSIS/EXT software set-up.

Solution to debate of what effects for where regards Toes/Heels.

Simple 3 Step Process:
*Load new suitable car pre-set / speaker switch / load new inuke amp profile

Diagrams / So much better than all my dire rambling



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Research:

Looking at many other peoples builds generally for pedals you find they mostly go with two options.

Option 1: Chassis Tactile

L/R connected tactile to each side of the pedals.
Some people do this almost directly onto or beside the pedals.

You can understand the reasoning for doing this but sometimes I wonder how well does it REALLY work?
Assuming most users add "Engine" into each unit with various CM effects. This is not to say such configs fail in what they set out to do but I question if it does it best?

Even a high end set of pedals is not a big surface area.
Would this not be limited in the scale of the independent L/R immersion it can generate? Is it unwise to assume the tactile effects very easily could bleed into each other and become a mash of both vibrations?

Possible Scenario?
The (L chassis detail) could easily be felt in (Throttle Pedal) and (R chassis detail) could be felt in (Clutch Pedal) actually reversing and to some extent crippling the immersion the user is trying to achieve.

Take note this as example is with more common tactile like the $50 range or BK Mini SE.
So as a reasonable question, how would the "tactile bleed" in pedals be represented with even more upmarket powerful models in such a small area or one that all pedals are connected together?

The pedals own construction itself will become a bridge to some extent like a seat will for L/R.
However with pedals would they not operate best if fully separated for each foot? This is what I desire.

Of course SimXperience own cockpits have the front L/R further away from the pedals themselves in a location that more represents the wheel placements. It may help increase the L/R separation perception due to the distance/time associated for the effect to travel and being a greater distance apart.

I would expect/assume that Simvibe software already adds a pre-set delay to help generate this for either their own builds or average cockpit size. You could ask around if "channel delay" was ever added as an option but I doubt Berney would want Simvibe to become even more difficult or confusing. As I highlighted previously with the i-nuke DSP it is possible to have close proximity tactile feel that they are further apart. (To be experimented/tested) LogiForce had experimented with this I believe but does not seem to bother much with such topics anymore.

To give an example in audio terms people can relate to.
Listening to music on ear buds can sound very direct / closed in soundstage.
Listening to music on quality open back headphones can sound much wider and bigger soundstage.
Yet the source is untouched in both situation


Option 2: Extension Tactile

Single mounted tactile unit.
Does using engine/gear effects as EM suit "typical pedal installs" better?
They are non directional, monaural so a single unit suffers from no issues such as tactile bleeding between channels. It also for most may be operating with reduced number of effects enabling the used tactile unit to potentially work more efficiently.


The questions:
How or what layout/design configurations:

• Would tackle the above possible issues?
• Would perform best?
• Would be ale to switch between both "Engine" or "Directional" performance emphasis?

My solution is the one above but curious to see and await what you come up with and your opinions.

You got plenty to keep you going now...

 

[RW65]

Yes, well envelopes need to be pushed & boxes need to be trashed otherwise a man’s’ inspiration will look elsewhere for sustenance.

Thanks for the open invitation to challenge your own ideas with my alternatives, still looking for that wedge to chock open the door.

Thanks also for clearing up the “Simvibe Brake” comment, if utilised, this effect would be extremely useful in pre-empting the announcement of brake lockups… but I have no fear in this regards, so I don’t think this will ever be an issue for me… I plan on inviting the Hulk over to calibrate my brake pedal before I go on track.

Your second post needs to be explored alright! Perhaps not in this post as I have other commentary for now, but if I were to visit your second post briefly (I confess I haven’t yet fully read it), this subject matter is crucially important, as I am designing my build “around” already pre-conceived ideas of what I want to achieve from this software.

Yes, a modified seat slider in lieu of my pedal rig design for pedals adjustability would work satisfactory & is probably the best option on most days & I have no problem with this per se… but incorporating this concept with the rest of my chassis design build would throw several monkey wrenches into mix… without going into greater details (I wouldn’t even know how to start) my pedal rig concept absolutely nails it in the direction I am moving.

Fully isolated pedal platform versus, versus, versus… you are without a doubt, to my way of thinking Mr Latte, on the correct path… absolute isolation your way is best, fully agreed… & although I happen to be taking a slight detour from this concept I believe mine to have its own advantages, in the respect that, although total pedal isolation is the goal I have in mind (also) & that I would welcome this with open arms, however, should any bleeding effects occur from the chassis floor mounted LFE(s) they would also be welcome… this may sound contradictory to what I have written above & it is, but let me explain below how I am covering both outcomes in a positive light.

The first matter to discuss is what effects in EM is the front chassis floor mounted LFE going to provide? What I am calling the front LFE is actually mounted to the chassis floor between the heel pedal plate & the seat (this placement has been revised from an earlier post, sorry for any confusion this may have caused).

The front LFE effects, discussed shortly, will (hopefully) travel to the heel plate, the side legs of the cockpit that the steering wheel is clamped to… & also have a direct feed (via a widget still under development) to the underside of the seat… the front of the underside of the seat below the knees… the rear chassis floor mounted LFE (behind the seat hence rear) will apply similar near identical effects (with widget) to the rear of the underside of the seat. A third centre chassis floor mounted LFE will be mounted directly underneath the seat position & is exclusive to engine RPM only (idle & 25% to 35% of RPM redline) & have partial isolation from the front & rear LFE’s via chassis floor slotting… the feed from the centre LFE will travel up through the seats side “legs” which are mounted to the chassis floor. The front & rear LFE feed (via two widgets) is applied directly to the underside of the seat, although some effects will travel around the chassis floor slotting to eventually travel up through the seats side legs as well. This I don’t see as a problem because of the nature of the effects that are applied to the front & rear LFE’s, again these planned EM effects will be discussed below. Confused? Hell, I’m just getting warmed up.

Next is the EM chassis floor mounted centre LFE (idle & 35% engine only, for this particular reason which follows)… although this engine effect is fed along the chassis floor (partially isolated from the front & rear EM chassis floor mounted LFE’s via slotting) the feed must travel up through the seats side legs into the sides of the seat (unlike the front LFE, widget connected beween the chassis floor to the underside of the seats base, feeding the undersides of knees… & the rear LFE, via the widget, feeding tactile to underneath the seats base to feed the anus), where upon, this centre LFE engine effect must have a cut-off as there will be two T429’s (independent from each other, very similar to the pedal rigs design) connected to the top of the seats side legs (not the bottom of the seats side legs, mounted to the chassis floor) & these two T429’s play an exact similar role in CM like the pedal T429’s… as the two seat’s T429’s are independent from each other, the feed contact point from each is directly connected to the top of the seats side legs (actually mounted between the underneath of the seats sides & above the seats side legs themselves, which are mounted to the chassis floor). This is the reason why the EM centre LFE (engine) must cut-out early so that the two seat CM T429’s can provide a clean & continuous feed.

On top of this, a fifth EM T429 will be mounted to a “roll bar” type of design (mounted to, but rubber isolated from the chassis floor) & have direct contact with the shoulders area of the seat via the “roll bar”… providing an engine effect as well (planned engine effect only), but more of pleasant tingling vibration of higher RPM, rather than an LFE thump.

So, the front LFE & the rear LFE will operate in EM, have partial separation from the centre LFE via slotting, each have a widget to deliver a direct feed to the underside of the seat uninterrupted (knees front & butt rear), have partial isolation from each other via the same chassis floor slotting that provides partial separation from the centre LFE… then, to also add this into the mix, the front LFE via its mounting location, also provides a direct feed to the heel plate & cockpit.

So, what are the EM effects proposed for the two front & rear LFE’s?

Nothing continuous is the plan, just occasional effects… impacts from front, rear & sides, vertical surges, gear-shifts & perhaps some other one-off effects that I have failed to recall here… & also most probably, the most ballistic effect(s) that I can successfully manage to dial in whilst going off-track only, intended to overpower all other effects… al la Pavlov Dog scolding.

So, when the RPM hits 35% & above, all should go quiet… I should now hopefully have access to tactile from the CM pedals (2xT429), CM seat (2xT429) & a minor EM engine buzz within the seat to the shoulders area (1xT429)… accompanied by chassis floor mounted LFE’s in EM providing occasional or one-off effects whilst on-track & doing what they do best when off-track.

Mr Latte, I have wanted to express all that I have written above for more than several months now & never knew how best to start… with what words & terminology could I use? Well, I think I have finally gotten it all out in one enormous hit & I have done the best that I can do in the short time allotted as I was planning you a quick reply to your first post that I received earlier tonight.

It’s late, I need sleep & I haven’t yet read your second post, which I really wanted to do but haven’t yet… perhaps it’s best that I don’t edit what I have written above & that you reply/post me back with your confusion, which I am sure has been created with this post… hopefully, with your wanting precise specifics, I can clarify what is most important to you with further editing & explaination?

Hey, I’m sure you know how it is when on a roll? Much of what I have written above can be done much better, I know. Perhaps my best editing is yet to come with your next post on my above commentary that requires a simpler arrangement of words? So here it is… my latest post, like it not, in the raw & Full Monty, good luck!

I will read, digest & respond to your second post shortly… a brief scan of this looks like a fascinating read, something I can get my teeth into & further develop my knowledge of this art/science.

In summary, I believe it best to first consider what software effects are desired or required… then to where these effects will be body targeted & from which mounting locations or positions are best suited to accomplish said goals… before determining which products are best suited for the job… then build a chassis or rig to accommodate all of the above?

Cheers

 

[RW65]

Hey, wish I could stay up & chat but its 12.30am here, just posted mine as you posted your third! You're a machine. Talk later...

 

[Mr Latte]

Sorry you got a post in between my continuation, it is now added to my above post.
Grrrrrrr you've had me up to 3Am+ some mornings going over all this mumbo jumbo lol.

Need diagrams from you to make things more understandable.
Look forward to your responses!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


* Have done my own rough drawings on paper of your described config and evaluating whilst researching more possibilities within Simvibe.

PM me if the below needs corrected and I will edit accordingly...

RW65 Cockpit
4x TST 429 CM (2x2 F/R)
1x TST 429 EM (Engine/Gear - Back Of Seat *Frequency Limited)
1x BK EM (Front Chassis)
1x BK EM (Rear Chassis)
1x BK EM (Engine/Gear)

I believe you would have to duplicate the "Engine" LFE for the TST429 at back of seat.
Reason being only 3 EM are possible. This isn't an issue as the signal can be the same output for both from Simvibe but then altered within the i-nuke DSP to your requirement.

Not certain if all games/cars enable Front/Rear Chassis option as Extensions but I assume you already have researched this.


Quick Analysis
Your proposed configuration currently deploys:
4 Wheel Independent CM via TST429 providing for full chassis potential *by the lesser units
2 Chassis dual mono EM front & rear via LFE *by the more powerful units
1x Dedicated engine via LFE * by the more powerful units
1x Dedicated engine via TST429 * by the lesser units

NOTE * Unit factor used for simple power comparison not indicator of performance


Breakdown:
All 4 Wheels are represented equal as independent FL/FR/RL/RR by strong effects
Chassis represented only as FF/RR wheels by much stronger effects
Engine represented very well in seat by 2 dedicated units
Engine represented in pedals/footrest have less potential than seat

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My own understanding here may not be fully accurate but I will share it.

We have to acknowledge that Simvibe not only produces 3D positional effects representing on-track data/off-track data for suspension travel/chassis movement/bumps/road surface textures etc. (Yes most of these are quite obvious).

It also produces internal cockpit based elements. I refer to these as fixed non motion effects such as engine/gear/wind-noise. These can have "3D Virtual Positioning" within the CM/EM tactile configuration and having them placed proportionally or fully within the front and rear.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To benefit all these factors I seek in having a configuration/layout that is "easily adaptable" to highlight both of the above in creating very different "immersion aspects" from the same installed tactile hardware and I believe is possible.

I will do future diagrams better to represent and to compare your current proposed layout and my own for further discussion. You should be commended thus far if you are for investing so much money but also the amount of thought and consideration being put into your build.

Not only does your configuration utilise the two best tactile units with no compromises but it also maximises the standard Simvibe 4x Chassis 3x Extensions potential the software supports.

I have not seen anyones cockpit anywhere use this level of hardware for Simvibe performance. Yet not surprised as with amplification, YOUR configuration is close to $4500 (US)

 

[RW65]

Mr Latte, I really appreciate your enthusiasm in relation to exploring the quantum-mechanics & super-string-worm-hole-theory of my posts… I only wish I could make them simpler to explain! Agreed, a sketch or multiple sketches are best to understanding all this confusion of words. I will be working on these shortly & post soon, time permitting.

From the copious scrawl of my previous post I have attempted to construct a concise summary of what I am attempting to accomplish… sweet few posts by yourself over last few days, by the way… I see so many similarities in our approaches to this endeavour.


Designated Letter
A

Product
T429

Location of Product
LHS Pedal Rig

Mode
CM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Road Texture

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
Road Bumps

Body Target Area
LHS Toes

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
NO (hopefully)


Designated Letter
B

Product
T429

Location of Product
RHS Pedal Rig

Mode
CM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Road Texture

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
Road Bumps

Body Target Area
RHS Toes

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
NO (hopefully)


Designated Letter
C

Product
T429

Location of Product
LHS Seat Rig (see future sketch forthcoming)

Mode
CM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Road Texture

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
Road Bumps

Body Target Area
Seat LHS Thigh

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
YES & unavoidable but also required - although minimisation during build construction is applied


Designated Letter
D

Product
T429

Location of Product
RHS Seat Rig (see future sketch forthcoming)

Mode
CM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Road Texture

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
Road Bumps

Body Target Area
Seat RHS Thigh

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
YES & unavoidable but also required - although minimisation during build construction is applied


Designated Letter
E

Product
LFE

Location of Product
Chassis Floor Mounted – Between Heel Plate & Front of Seat

Mode
EM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Off-Track Only - Suspension Effects

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
Front Impacts, Gear Shifts, Vertical Surges

Body Target Area
Cockpit Hands, Heel Plate & Front of Seat Base Underside – (Widget)

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
YES & unavoidable but also required - although minimisation during build construction is applied


Designated Letter
F

Product
LFE

Location of Product
Chassis Floor Mounted – Rear of Chassis Floor behind the Seat

Mode
EM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Off-Track Only – Suspension Effects

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
Rear Impacts, Gear Shifts, Vertical Surges

Body Target Area
Rear of Seat Base Underside – (Widget)

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
YES & unavoidable but also required - although minimisation during build construction is applied


Designated Letter
G

Product
LFE

Location of Product
Chassis Floor Mounted – Directly Underneath the Seat

Mode
EM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Engine RPM - Idle Engine & 35% of RPM Red-Line Limit – DSP Intensity Slope Cut-Off

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
NONE

Body Target Area
Entire Seat – Feed is through the Seats Side Legs Mounted to Chassis Floor

Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
YES – Intention of Overpowering ALL Other Effects until RPM 35% Cut-Off


Designated Letter
H

Product
T429

Location of Product
Shoulders Of seat

Mode
EM

Effect – Continuous… (Not yet determined - test effect before finalisation)
Engine RPM – Above 35% - Intended for Light Tingling or Buzz - DSP Intensity Slope Testing

Effect – One-Off or Occasional… (As above – testing before finalisation)
NONE

Body Target Area
Shoulders & Lower Back – Feed is Through the “Roll Cage” Touching the Seat’s Back


Bleeding of Tactile Information with Other Tactile Unit(s)
YES – Intention is for this Effect to be overpowered by the Other Effects... but still felt


I hope the above helps as it will be a useful guide for the forthcoming sketches.

Cheers for now

 

[Mr Latte]

Thanks for the reply, though read these next couple of posts before consider sketches and your planned roles for each tactile. I think your off a bit on what effects may be constant and those that are event based. Yet these are fundamental issues we should appropriately address.

I can see partly what you are doing "in your approach" and look, talking frankly I am the first that would relate to having big ideas and changing them, time and time again finding supposed better hardware solutions or new ideas.
Putting hours and hours into plans, scribbles and potential performance analysis. Yes passion is their and for me still is since my first tactile unit experience with PS3 way back with GT5 Prologue. I want something really special to come out of it all.

You are talking with probably the biggest joke on the subject with a history of big ideas that seemingly got nowhere.
What is more I am likely one of the few that has owned so much tactile hardware and done little positive with it. Having at one point ownership of 18 varying units and differing amplifiers, it was just so crazy.

Yes I gained good understanding on how each performs, their performance differences and advantages/disadvantages having a lot of fun as a tactile immersion hobbyist from it. The most recent being the inuke dsp giving additional benefits and control for tactile.

Regards Simvibe however I really needed to do some research.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UNDERSTANDING SIMVIBE
I think this is very relevant to were you and I both are because I would like to highlight that getting the best out of Simvibe may come not from just the "Best Hardware" but the best utilisation and distribution of its settings within the long list of effects.

Reflecting back several years upon the release of Simvibe. A comment "Berney" made has stuck with me.
He recommended using "Chassis Mode" over using both. Was this beyond a side-step to avoid problems, being less complicated to set-up and operate or potential user problems with additional sound-card issues? I am not suggesting this was the case at all but at the time it was hard to understand his own reasoning.

I think even now it is easy to look past his own understanding of the software and of how a 7 unit based CM & EM configuration may not necessarily outperform "Chassis Mode" with just 4. Think about that for a moment how can a 4 way config possible be better than a config that contains the same 4 any-ways but also 3 more units for effects?

Could having more have a detrimental effect on the performance of them all together, even if this has many variables attached/involved could it be the case that its not just what you use but how you use it is an important factor.

It made me curious recently to try and grasp more understanding of how Simvibe can be operated and tailored.
What the differences are in ALL its effects, textures, various bumps, vertical surges, white noise etc. Yet to do such research from the perspective I currently am in (not currently using it) though I admit to still got more to learn but will share more later on what my understanding is to date.

Suggestion
We both continue in this path before discerning too much what effects you/me "ASSUME" are being placed to the relevant tactile and when they operate in conjunction to others? Also the importance in how texture based and tone based effects operate different. The limitations of such within Simvibe, how I propose outside of Simvibe settings, things can be further exploited if desired.

I will place an update soon to keep momentum and see this actually as a fun thing. Also a learning process in determining if my own ideas are worthwhile/justified.

While you are happy to go ALL "Clarkson" I think we need a bit of "May" and touch of humour inspired "Hammond"

 

[Mr Latte]

This post will contain Simvibe relevant info and can be updated and corrected.
I do not expect do be fully accurate on these points so they do need confirmed or challenged, any help or input is welcomed.

Listing some things, they can be delved into more detail at a later stage.
​

Limiting Factors
For many part of the limitation will come from the ability of their chosen tactile unit(s). In how well they can perform, the number of effects including their similar frequencies they can sufficiently manage. As I alluded to previously with the number of possible effects including those that are constant is evident to how much work/load is being expected.

What effects do most users of the most common $50 / $100 range of tactile end up not using or limiting? Seeking instead detail of fewer than more of less detail?

The question also is how much better do the best hardware models raise the bar, not just in performance quality but in the detail they can sustain with multiple effects accordingly.


POSITIONAL EFFECTS UTILISING "USER SET LOCATIONS"

Placement = FRONT / REAR / ALL 4
Effect Type = CONSTANT (TBC)

• Speed based white noise
• Engine
• Road Bumps
• Vertical Surges
• Wheel Slip * (few games only)

My understanding, these are all TONE BASED and use actual Hz displayed. They I assume are what we refer to as "Constant" operating.

Layers can also be applied to these effects and have multiple instances with several possible within an effect. Individual layers can have their own individual tones, values and even location.

I see great potential for location changeable effects within layers and filters to utilise them best. In some regards going beyond the normal thinking of "effect A" for "unit 1" or "effect E" for "unit 3". Effects do not have to be single layered or tied to a single placement.


Example:
Small & Big Bumps with different set values in how they utilise a tactile unit accordingly. Does a user want less response from Big Bumps and more from Small Bumps but more power to Big Bumps only? Okay do you want to use a single unit for this, rear, front or all 4?


Example 2:
Engine Rev could start on a seat based LFE for extra power in depth for the low revs. Then at a user controlled "Hz range" in association with RPM value continue its upper Revs and associated frequencies by transitioning over to a different (TST 429) tactile unit. This transition process could even be applied to ALL 4 CHASSIS TST if desired.

Really its about deploying more of the presence as the depth sensation of the engine tactile effect reduces. This way TST 429 Chassis low range frequencies can also be reserved for suspension/bumps/vertical surges etc.

While not limited to engine alone. I see some thought needed to discern how and what is the best way to utilise effects across the configuration used. Also for the user to determine which effects to them take more preference. Doing this, and making it work well within the constraints of both CM & EM tactile units.

Location can also be RATIO based so an engine may have a 30/70 power split for front - rear.
Wind Noise could also be contributed in the same manner, or to transition from front to back at increased speed, or indeed both, or just be used at a static front or rear single position.

More to follow on (TONES FILTERS LAYERS TEXTURES) but it seems rather deep with the possibilities.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPACTS & COLLISIONS
Are TONE BASED but do not seem to be Location Selectable.
They are it seems OUTPUT MIXER based.
So when applied to CHASSIS are directional to ALL 4 but via SEAT/PEDALS/SHIFTER would not be.

Both have different effects so scrapes against a wall feel different to contact with a car in front/behind.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FRONT SUSPENSION BUMPS
REAR SUSPENSION BUMPS

These do not utilise ALL 4 but only it seems as front and back.
Need to confirm if they operate in STEREO or by combining L/R as a MONO single vibration?

While referred to as "OFF TRACK" they apparently do operate "ON TRACK" for some instances such as rumble strips. Also for "OFF TRACK" events these are not the sole specific application as they operate with tone based, suspension, vertical surges and road bumps.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SINGLE EVENT = NON CONSTANT

• Impacts
• Gear Change
• Gear Grind (few games only)
• Front Suspension Bumps (TBC)
  
• Rear Suspension Bumps (TBC)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEXTURE BASED EFFECTS

• Road Texture
• Suspension Texture
• Vertical Texture
• Front Suspension Texture L/R
• Rear Suspension Texture L/R

These seem to be more for "Rapid Detail" and possibly utilise higher frequencies.
TST models in my view have more potential with these than BK due to their speaker based type application and faster response compared to moving piston.

They are not however TONE BASED and seem to be more of an element for additional detail or presence being a good description.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JARGON


False Clue Elimination
IMPACTS
This is used to eliminate game data
Seems to suggest increasing efficiency of discarding non relevant data


Dynamic Tone Sensitivity
IMPACTS / BUMPS / VERTICAL SURGES
Used for changing the scale values of BIG/SML bumps and their occurrences


Signal Conditioning
TEXTURES
Filter for reducing noise on texture based effects


Dynamic Volume Sensitivity
IMPACTS / BUMPS / VERTICAL SURGES
Changes volume increase/decrease for BIG/SML bumps, the max will be in accordance to setting of the intensity slider value. Main adjustment for suspension bumps


Output Mixer
CHASSIS / SEAT / PEDALS / GEAR
Used to show effects created
Select the Simvibe channel you want to edit/adjust


Intensity
Reacts like a master volume
Effects can have individual strengths including for various layers
This increases volume of all together

More answers/research on all of these required.
Will update but seek proper clarification.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To Investigate:

• Confirm ALL Constant Effects & Event Effects are accurate?
• Front & Rear Bumps L/R are they Stereo or combined Mono?
  
• Detailed understanding in differences with various Suspension/Bumps/Vertical Surges
• Texture Effects, understanding the regular frequencies used with popular settings?

 

[Mr Latte]

Hey RW

I will follow with an update on possible options for the effects distribution. We can discuss each others ideas and what you think is more to your own cockpit preference.

Appreciate your thoughts on the above material, as it took quite a bit of time and hope you are willing to follow on with additional research.

Want to simplify things more for easier deciphering.
I will use these in future diagrams to help represent CM & EM units.

Colours will represent position/channel for both TST & LFE
Chassis Mode:
Blue = Front Left
Red = Front Right
Green = Rear Left
Yellow = Rear Right

Extensions Mode:
White

 

[Mr Latte]

Okay hope you dont mind I had spare time and took the liberty of doing a plan layout.
By my understanding this represents your current ideas.

* This can be altered if needs be

*Click these for larger



RW65 Cockpit

Chassis Mode:

Separated Pedal Section for improved stereo effects
4x TST 429 (2x2 F/R)

Extensions Mode:

1x BK EM (Front Chassis)
1x BK EM (Engine/Gear)
1x BK EM (Rear Chassis)
1x TST 429 EM (Engine/Gear - Back Of Seat) *

 

[Mr Latte]

Here is my own current / favourite layout.
Yes it is extreme but you want me to share so I share....

All Tactile & Subs Purchased



Chassis Mode:
My preferred Dual Role method includes sub-woofer bass too.
Creates 3 channels for each yet still maintains a Simvibe 4 Channel Chassis configuration.
Inuke DSP used to direct what frequencies/effects go to each required device.

Cockpit build importantly maintains complete Stereo Tactile separation.

Front Chassis / Pedal Section
2x TST 239
2x LFE (L/R)
2x Pioneer Subs TS-WX304T

Rear Chassis / Seat Section
4x TST 429
2x LFE (L/R)
2x Pioneer Subs TS-WX304T


Extensions Mode:

1x TST 329 EM (Engine/Gear - Back Of Seat)

 

[Mr Latte]

Just for easier comparison, so far this seems to represent what is being discussed:
Could be interesting discovering the possibilities or differences of each configuration.

 

[Mr Latte]

Using this post to highlight what I think may be a good way to distribute the effects.
Things may have to change but from current research I have done this is my target approach.

SO HOW DO YOU GET ALL THAT TO WORK THEN?

According to Simvibe OUTPUT MIXER everything will be working like a normal Chassis "ALL 4"
and actually with only 1 Extension being used.

Duplicating the actual individual outputs by a powered distribution box is easy to do.
Converting each output for Chassis into 3 for LFE/TST/SUB amplification.

Using my inuke DSP amplifiers.
I simply set a High Pass/Low Pass Filter accordingly for each LFE/TST/SUB unit to be used.
This determines the Hz start and stop range for LOW & HIGH.

The aim is to match created effects in Simvibe software to work accordingly and operate within the High Pass Filter / Low Pass Filter settings for the amplifiers.

It is actually rather simple, yet rather clever approach.

WHY DO ALL THAT / WHAT IS THE POINT?

• Each tactile unit is being attributed effects that suit its own performance better.
• Their is no perfect, single tactile unit that can do both low/high Hz with slam/speed desired
• Maintain best performance from ALL effects with 2 units doing what is normally expected of 1
• Avoid any loss of detail from multiple effects to absolute minimum
• Additional features/control also possible with the inuke DSP that Simvibe does not offer

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My understanding is this will work okay.

Example:
Separating the TONE based effects into multiple layers, rather than just a single based layer effect that covers both very low, mid and high Hz range of frequencies to a single parameter.

Divide into segments of low/high and have smaller values between their lowest-highest TONE
These then have their own adjusted parameters.

OUTPUT MIXER used to determine the desired effect/layers to the desired locations
ALL 4 / FRONT / REAR

Dividing such effects "LOWEST TONE" - "HIGHEST TONE" values is commonly being done for effects like SML/BIG bumps and altering how the engine revs effect the tactile.

Example: Engine Revs -
Layer 1
Potentially a 20Hz - 40Hz range for LOW TONE - HIGH TONE

Layer 2
Potentially a 40Hz - 90Hz range for LOW TONE - HIGH TONE


Layer 1 will be utilised by LFE only as it contains the strongest effects.
Layer 2 will be utilised by TST429 only as it contains mid to weaker effects.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHASSIS MODE / TST 429 /239

TEXTURES
My understanding is that in most events these are mainly fast/small detail responses with mid-high frequencies.
These will be distrusted to TST units utilising their mid-high capacity range.

SPEED BASED WHITE NOISE
This works in relation to the acceleration of the car
The effect will best suit the TST models

SUSPENSION BUMPS F/R
If these are used LESS than the TONE based (road suspension/bump/vertical surges)
I will distribute them to utilise the low capacity of FRONT L/R TST239 & REAR L/R TST429
Values may have to differ between F/R sets.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LFE
ENGINE / VERTICAL SURGES / ROAD BUMPS / IMPACTS

All these will use the lowest Hz TONE for their effects with the ABSOLUTE most wallop.
No compromise approach, up-to 1500 watts per corner/wheel, both suspension and engine tones WILL be immense
The LFE tactile will be specifically reserved for these and these only with their HIGHEST TONES set to @ 40Hz
No higher frequency effects will be required enabling the unit to perform at its maximum potential in the low end.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXTENSION MODE / TST 329

Use on the back of the seat this will be used for limited role.
Adding extra detail for specific effects, just whatever feels best really.

Potentially:
Gear change / Engine / Impacts

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4x SUBWOOFER
Roles yet to be determined. Considered to influence immersion of :
BIG BUMPS / VERTICAL SURGES / IMPACT events to highlight their power and directionality

They do not have to be used for frequent effects but highlight a specific set.
Also can be used with console/music or other audio based tactile sources.

 

[Mr Latte]

(WIP Subjective only)


TST UNITS - HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

Road Texture
Vertical Texture
Engine High Revs
Suspension Texture
Speed Base White Noise
Front Suspension Texture L/R
Rear Suspension Texture L/R

Suspension Bumps F/R Textures

*(Some of above may have low-mid Hz)


TST UNITS - LOW Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

Suspension Bumps F/R​

LFE HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

(*)


LFE - LOW Hz TONE EFFECTS ONLY

Impacts
Road Bumps
Vertical Surges
Engine Idle & Low Revs


EXTENSION MODE
LOW & HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

(TBC)

(TBC)​

 

[RW65]

Sweet JC… Holy Mackerel… OMG… you’ve nailed some great posts Mr Latte, surprisingly I am finding these quite easy to follow & understand… but am wondering if I am the only one left on this planet who does? If there should happen to be other readers of this thread who follow this, please let me know as I would appreciate some company… hello, anyone out there?

Satire aside, great stuff ML… so if I am correct, your Tactile Unit (TU) setup is as follows.


CM

Pedals LHS – TST / LFE / SUBW

Pedals RHS – TST / LFE / SUBW

Each UNIT to handle differing Hz frequency & tones

Is there separation between the Toes & Heels or are ALL feeds to the whole of the Foot?

CM

Seat LHS – Front & Rear – TST x 2

Seat LHS – Centre – LFE

Seat LHS – SUBW

Seat RHS – Front & Rear – TST x 2

Seat RHS – Centre – LFE

Seat RHS – SUBW

Each UNIT to handle differing Hz frequency & tones


EM

Seat Back or Shoulders Area – TST


I need to re-read much of what you have written again to grasp the finer details when time permits plus include some sketches… YES, you have pretty much nailed it with your diagram of MY configuration alongside YOURS… the only update here requires a similar separation of the seat LHS / RHS… my intention is to have a similar (fabricated metal) setup for the seat as I have done for the pedals.

Interesting in regards to IMPACTS… if not deployable in EM then obviously these effects will be directed to TST’s in CM… if I read your post correctly? Impact effects, front, rear & sides, I believe are a game changer & must be considered… yes, it makes perfect sense to have impacts in CM.

More posts to follow shortly.

Cheers

 

[RW65]

ML, my apologies for the poor rendering of these sketches… they are simple photos as I am unable to get my scanner working. The three sketches show the three locations of Chassis Floor mounted LFE’s in EM.

The “Seat’s Rail Positioning on Chassis Floor” is just a visual guide to where the seat’s rails are positioned, without showing the seat’s side legs’ (metal rigs I intend fabricating) that will “house” the 2 x TSTs in CM to insure left & right separation, similar to the pedal rig setup. The sketch for the seats’ metal fabricated side legs will hopefully follow shortly, along with the TST in EM mounted to the seat’s back at shoulder height.

Although not shown clearly with these renderings, the two widgets are placed either side of the Chassis Floor’s routed “slotting” to help provide a little separation for ALL 3 x LFE’s… the widgets are mounted to the Chassis Floor & have direct contact to the underside of the seat’s base… ultimately, this probably won’t make too much difference & the “slotting” could be eliminated altogether, as the Tactile Feed for all 3 x LFE’s in EM will eventually reach the seating position via the seat’s side legs being mounted to the Chassis Floor.

As a footnote to the above, the 2 x LFE’s (Front & Rear) are for “One-Off-Effects” or “Off-Track”… the Centre LFE for Engine RPM will have a 35% cut-off… the reasoning behind this is that I want to “feel” the 2 x TST’s mounted underneath the seat in CM… my priority is to “feel” the tracks condition or bump/texture irregularities. I hope this makes sense?

Although poor reproductions in themselves, I hope that these sketches will help facilitate an easier understanding of my build design.

Cheers for now

 

[Mr Latte]

You’ve nailed some great posts Mr Latte, surprisingly I am finding these quite easy to follow & understand… but am wondering if I am the only one left on this planet who does? If there should happen to be other readers of this thread who follow this, please let me know as I would appreciate some company… hello, anyone out there?

Satire aside, great stuff ML… so if I am correct, your Tactile Unit (TU) setup is as follows.

Much welcomed thanks...
A great deal of time and effort has been put into it.
Hope it is help or at least interest to others also, although so much more to come man..

"The Others" are indeed welcome to put forward, experiences from Simvibe or info on settings. Regards satire, well I wasn't sure if it was just you viewing this thread about 600 times in the past week. So we are amusing a few it seems, lol.

I do hope some, inc those I have had PM with in recent past regards tactile will help contribute with real-time testing. Will ask but not putting anyone on the spot. 2 Years after its release I am a bit miffed their has not been more such threads/guides done that go deep into breaking it all down and how to achieve the very best from it. Not that this is a guide but has the workings that could one day be put into one.

Trust me, we have still far to go but step by step is every bit closer.

Will take in your recent posts and come back with more.
I have many more things I want to highlight with my own build/configurations too.

* Updated and corrected

 

[Mr Latte]

Is there separation between the Toes & Heels or are ALL feeds to the whole of the Foot?

Thank you for evaluating...
Other points were correct but these below will be answered for clearer understanding.

I still have plans to keep the pedal section separated from the foot rest and front regions of the frame. With the nature of this tubing I could if needed very easily create a metal bridge between both.

From past experience my concern is that the LFE will easily overpower the TST used on the pedal upright sections. Big bumps/vertical surges etc are going to drown out mid-high engine revs and other textures of the TST.

CM
Seat LHS – Front & Rear – TST x 2
Seat LHS – Centre – LFE
Seat LHS – SUBW
Seat RHS – Front & Rear – TST x 2
Seat RHS – Centre – LFE
Seat RHS – SUBW

Each UNIT to handle differing Hz frequency & tones

Some are tricky to answer....
.
Although shown previously as having different options for the seat.
The diagram is my 1st assumed pref.

Notice both TST 429 per side are the same colour to distinguish their channel.
Why 2x Per side on the same channel?

Same concern as with pedals.
The seat is the most important part however it is one piece that cannot be divide into two.
LFE are L/R dependant and work on the same channels as the double TST429.

Having 2x LFE onto a single seat platform again could create an overpowering issue of the mid/higher effects/textures represented by just 1 TST429 each side.

I found with 1x LFE centred underneath the seat. While amazing it also ruined the L/R immersion with heavy impacts or kerbs. *(this was done with console audio and different mounting positions for the TST at the time). I highlighted this previously but to be fair SIMVIBE gives control of each effect and its output so if power imbalance is an issue it likely can also be tackled within the settings to find a good overall. The drawback is perhaps limiting the full potential performance of the LFE to sway the balance.

Even with the shown method of mounting the TST429 to have direct contact with several parts of the seat as best possible. I feel that dual units per side will produce a better balance to highlight L/R directional effects. So its basically 2:1 odds rather than 1:1

This is why all my TST429 are on the same channel as the LFE also.
I feel it will be better to have each producing the same effects with split frequencies than have say an LFE doing one thing beside a TST 429 doing something else. It helps avoid tactile cancellation.

We have to look at this and discern it regards your own current layout/build.
Your approach is different which is fine and I would rather you look for possible drawbacks in my own so by all means be subjective .

Here however is something to factor...

This is not scientific of actual performance but just a general opinion as an owner on their MAX SLAM output potential. Perhaps even a 3.5 for the TST429. It is similar to the mid level "BK Advance" regards how hard/low it can feel to go. Oh it still hits hard and in this scale I'd suggest a Mini LFE is about a 1.5 (from memory) but the LFE is something else. Manufacturer specs may paint a different picture with varying methods to represent peak figures.

For sheer power this is why I am for using an LFE on each corner of Chassis.
Is it the right choice for a standard single unit. I cant say at this point as not in a position to do A/B comparison but deserves further analysis.

The LFE is a powerhouse it is designed for low end so is a bit slow/muddy at certain frequencies/power. Likely due to the weight of the piston and this can effect timing to a small degree if seeking flaws with it. Music and some movies would highlight this more possibly than Simvibe with having much more varying frequencies. Some research in the right places will show others commenting on the timing/detail aspect. You do not need to take my sole opinion on the matter.

Smaller Mini LFE with much smaller pistons are not so much at a loss in this regard but in general the design/technology used for TST is better for fast/detail effects.

The TST429 is a champion regards giving good all-round power with sharper precision and details (to me anyways). Yet you already know my feelings regard its price. Is it the best option for Chassis, this may depend if you want more detail or more potential impact.


The TST 429

EM
Seat Back or Shoulders Area – TST
Interesting in regards to IMPACTS… if not deployable in EM then obviously these effects will be directed to TST’s in CM… if I read your post correctly? Impact effects, front, rear & sides, I believe are a game changer & must be considered… yes, it makes perfect sense to have impacts in CM.
Cheers

Simvibe has to be scalable.
I will try to clarify my understanding but suggest again you do research also.

Not all but potentially several effects data incoming for 4 wheels or 2 wheels has to be possible in downmix as a combined MONO effect on say a EM output.

Regards IMPACTS these are a perfect example. In (set to mode) ALL 4 they are directional from 4 corners regards my research. However if selected only for FRONT or REAR they would be STEREO and if used as only in SEAT/PEDALS/SHIFTER selectable EM modes would only be MONO.
Im certain some other directional effects will also downmix like this.

 

[Mr Latte]

ML, my apologies for the poor rendering of these sketches… they are simple photos as I am unable to get my scanner working. The three sketches show the three locations of Chassis Floor mounted LFE’s in EM.

The “Seat’s Rail Positioning on Chassis Floor” is just a visual guide to where the seat’s rails are positioned, without showing the seat’s side legs’ (metal rigs I intend fabricating) that will “house” the 2 x TSTs in CM to insure left & right separation, similar to the pedal rig setup. The sketch for the seats’ metal fabricated side legs will hopefully follow shortly, along with the TST in EM mounted to the seat’s back at shoulder height.

Although not shown clearly with these renderings, the two widgets are placed either side of the Chassis Floor’s routed “slotting” to help provide a little separation for ALL 3 x LFE’s… the widgets are mounted to the Chassis Floor & have direct contact to the underside of the seat’s base… ultimately, this probably won’t make too much difference & the “slotting” could be eliminated altogether, as the Tactile Feed for all 3 x LFE’s in EM will eventually reach the seating position via the seat’s side legs being mounted to the Chassis Floor.

As a footnote to the above, the 2 x LFE’s (Front & Rear) are for “One-Off-Effects” or “Off-Track”… the Centre LFE for Engine RPM will have a 35% cut-off… the reasoning behind this is that I want to “feel” the 2 x TST’s mounted underneath the seat in CM… my priority is to “feel” the tracks condition or bump/texture irregularities. I hope this makes sense?

Although poor reproductions in themselves, I hope that these sketches will help facilitate an easier understanding of my build design.

Cheers for now

Please be advised, your post is important to us and our dedicated team will be at hand soon, to answer your queries.

This will get followed up on later/see below first​

 

[Mr Latte]

This can be used to better highlight YOUR planned distribution for effects.
Best to means test your build configuration with a realistic Simvibe (possible layout) expected to be implemented.

This is only my opinion but feel it wise to do this first before determining in greater detail how/where the tactile is going to be physically attached. That is important also but can be addressed in more detail later.

You have established you want to employ L/R separation also but currently plan to only implement TST for directional abilities. Your configurations also leans more towards different tactile units having set roles

The potential performance/immersion possible is first dependant on Simvibe itself being configured best to your tactile being used.

-----------------------------------
​

THINK IT / TEST IT
The test I found for me was a good way to determine if getting the best deployment using the hardware planned or if other configurations are worth considering. How to make the MOST of WHAT the SOFTWARE does and HOW it does it.

You will have to determine what you think are the most important effects for your personal pref during immersion. Yours may differ to mine.

-----------------------------------
​

You currently intend to run:
3x LFE with biggest/impact performance in non directional central config as EM.
1x TST429 as (4th EM via duplicating a channel / 3 only supported native)
4x TST 429 in typical Chassis ALL 4

* Simvibe Output Mixer EM (listed as Pedals / Seat /Gear) & as your FRONT/MIDDLE/REAR

I have laid out what may be representative to what you would consider.
We can edit these to your requirements/preference just let me know what your thinking.
Take note of high/low Hz listed separately

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​

RW65 Cockpit
WIP​

CHASSIS
TST UNITS - HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

(BELOW TBC)

Road Texture
Engine High Revs
Suspension Texture
Speed Base White Noise
Rear Suspension Texture L/R
Front Suspension Texture L/R
Suspension Bumps F/R Textures

*(Some of above may have low-mid Hz)


CHASSIS
TST UNITS - LOW Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

(BELOW TBC)​

Impacts
Road Bumps
Vertical Surges
Engine Idle & Low Revs
Suspension Bumps F/R​

​

------------------------------------------------------------



EXTENSION MODE
SEAT BACKREST
*DUPLICATE*
HIGH & LOW TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES

(BELOW TBC)

Gear Change
Road Bumps
Impacts Rear
Engine Idle & Low Revs


-------------------------------------------


EXTENSION MODE
FRONT = PEDALS*
LFE HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES
1ST

(BELOW TBC)

Road Bumps
Impacts Front
Vertical Surges
Vertical Texture
Engine Idle & Low Revs
Suspension Bumps Front



EXTENSION MODE
MIDDLE = SEAT*
LFE HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES
2ND

(TBC)
Engine Mid-High Revs


EXTENSION MODE
BACK = GEAR*
LFE HIGH Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES
3RD

(BELOW TBC)
Impacts
Road Bumps
Impacts Rear
Vertical Surges
Vertical Texture
Engine Idle & Low Revs
Suspension Bumps Rear

--------------------------------


EXTENSION MODE
FRONT/PEDALS
LFE LOW Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES
1ST

(BELOW TBC)

Road Bumps
Impacts Front
Vertical Surges
Vertical Texture
Engine Idle & Low Revs
Suspension Bumps Front

--------------------------------


EXTENSION MODE
MIDDLE/SEAT
LFE LOW Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES
2ND

(BELOW TBC)

Impacts
Road Bumps
Vertical Surges
Engine Idle & Low Revs


EXTENSION MODE
BACK/GEAR
LFE LOW Hz TONE EFFECTS & TEXTURES
3RD

(BELOW TBC)
Impacts
Road Bumps
Impacts Rear
Vertical Surges
Vertical Texture
Engine Idle & Low Revs
Suspension Bumps Rear

-----------------------------------------------
​

​

​