Well like I said, you're not asking how to go about this in possibly a better way both with effects and installation and the hardware your using,.
You are forging ahead, doing it the way you want to and possibly purchased an additional unit you could of not necessarily needed.
What I would say is, that's certainly a big platform for the bass to freely flow over for a pedal region.
Then you might again, wonder why your front BK units are less strong than the seat?
How you mount the pedals and connect the TST could greatly improve the energy without even needing the second unit.
It was pretty clear what to try after testing the stuff that did not work
, so I asked specific question, I had in my mind.
It's like 1 hour to test it, then I will see, if it makes sense or not and decide later whether to go this way or not.
If you are willing to offer your insights, these will be more than welcome.
I'm not sure you noticed, but the top part of the platform is on isolators.
This is the top part of the platform.
It's definitely much lighter / smaller structure than seat. Before I had pedals inverted with much bigger frame out of steel and tactile feeling was good.
I never said the tactile in pedals is weak compared to the seat, it is actually stronger, as it is not as heavy as the seat. I'm just looking to boost one certain effect frequency, so it is better felt, that's all.
If you have some recommendation how to mount the pedals / tactile, let me know. There are lot of constraints however - it must fit on the rig - with future inside surge platform and future height adjustment for the pedals platform, so there is not / if any other clear options I can do regarding the mounting / positioning of the tactile units.
Pedals are load cell, so brake is very stiff so the isolation must be solid.
This isolation allows for vertical movement, but is very stiff in front to back direction.
I have came to this design after long period of testing and it works very well for me.
Smarter Effects?
You also within the effects could easily have the TST use the frequencies you want and the central BK use an octave lower for each unit to work combined. That way you would have the BK adding energy that is in sync but also naturally generating its own harmonics to tie in with the TST.
In that you already would have a secondary unit bringing the additional energy,
While this is not using two units duplicated on a channel, it is still using units (by specific effect settings/layers) that operate to complement each other. I don't know if its the correct term but I call this "Harmonically Matched" effect layers.
Man, you also have 2x L/R BK Concert and as the RPM is a mono effect you could actually if you wanted to focus more energy for RPM using those for key effect layers operation. As a simple example, imagine you have an effect layer at 8K peak RPM become active now over the 3x BK Concerts all harmonically matched to the TST unit for that sensation you want at peak RPM. Would that not be sufficient?
You will get the best detail and energy if you have these units working together but that also has to happen at an effects level as well as how/where they are installed. The concept I am promoting works in this basis and I know for effects creation, it takes things further forward than the typical approach.
I use 1x TST + central BK for engine effect. The BK is using your engine effect, I think it's peak is around 60 Hz (around the same as TST unit - 73 Hz), but the BK is struggling to deliver anything useful at these frequencies - it does help, but not that much compared to TST, also I had to tune the BK at higher frequencies lower, because it was overheating. BKs are clearly not designed for continuous delivery of such high frequency and the effect is not very well felt anyway.
The high RPM effect is constant almost all the time in racing, so if I would use another L / R BKs, I would be bogging them down constantly and they probably wouldn't deliver what I'm seeking anyway. I use L / R for G-Effects so these are continuous effects as well, if I would be using them for engine as well, they wouldn't be able to handle that and it would compromise these effects as well.
Additionally I use L / R units for wheel slip / braking / ABS, so no way to put engine there.
The TST feeling I have now is great, but I just would like to have it stronger, and I think second unit might get me exactly what I seek (how it will be configured / wired and used with effects will be subject to testing). Maybe it won't work, maybe it will, I just need to test it.
I already tried some solutions you are mentioning and there were many compromises I didn't like - but maybe I can't set it up properly, who knows
Theory With Motion & Tactile
I would submit that because you have motion now and that trying to get good stereo in tactile to operate well in pedals and seat with issues of crosstalk being a factor for most people. You actually have the ability to improve the stereo greatly with exciters on the paddles of the G seat in direct contact with your body, yet you ignore/brush off this idea as have in fairness most G-Seat owners on these forums. They won't experiment or look past CM/EM effects usage or installations. I see very little attempts at joint efforts for creativity (not in builds adding multi motion, like yours or others) but with tactile and tactile being implemented to work with those.
As I said multiple times, I will try exciters in the future, I'm just not up for 100+ hours project right now - reading through this thread to find what amps / exciters to use, ordering, disassembling g-seat, redesigning the mounts for paddles to accommodate room for exciters etc. It might seem easy for you to do, but it's really not that simple.
I need to finish this project first, then I see, when I will have time / mood to expand tactile, I'm quite fed up with doing everything as DYI lately, I need some break from this and enjoy racing again to build up motivation for next project, so I will be able to enjoy it building.
Combined Senses
Your senses with the motion can be easier tricked with your body feeling the G-Seat and now SFX motion with its tilting to each side. That combined with VR with an enclosed view of only the 3D world. I have to say I would have reconsidered or at least discussed how the tactile onto your new rig could be implemented before moving forward. But as we saw on these forums SFX followers were either not interested in how to combine motion or tactile and the outcast SFX/Tactile thread that was created nobody hardly bothered with or used to discuss share or challenge ideas.
Honestly, part of this is curiosity but based on self-tests as well. I would of focused on your new rig, using primarily a mono configuration concentrating the immersion on increased energy with the impressive collection of tactile you own. Certainly still using the exciters on the G-Seat for stereo detection (if applied) but I would estimate the motion will help disguise mono bumps to feel like stereo bumps. This due to, the reality that your brain is detecting the dip in motion/audio/visual aspects happening in the sim. If this is indeed the case for you, Then could have dual units used for bumps/impacts on seat/pedals but also more dedicated units for speed/rpm and g-loads.
Still need to finish the rig and start testing, so I don't have much to share on this topic, except that bumps / heave from motion feel completely different to tactile road effects.
Maybe some kerb like tactile effects (higher frequency, medium power) might still be worth it to use, but medium / bigger bumps are just better handled by motion.
I have some base for effects I like, so I will see if that changes with motion.
Personal Thoughts
Just an opinion that you should have then looked at this more from an effects perspective and your own preferences in effects or what might work best with the additional hardware you now are using.
I can only base my views on what I know or expect to happen but I think it could of been possible to achieve improvements for the excitement and energy potential in the immersion over what your planned effects usage or installation will offer. Stereo or CM type configuration is not always the best solution and this makes more sense if the stereo is not going to perform that well on the user's rig or installation anyways. This does not mean that "mono effects" based installations can or must only use a single unit in the seat/pedals, no not at all.
What I would say is, I have experimented looking at both potential options, these are not just passing ideas but to me, it appears regards tactile few people will try to think outside the box.
I would recommend you try a few different effects profiles that use stereo compared to combined units working in mono and separate RPM/SPEED to different channels. Having spent months messing around. I would say with confidence the best engine effects are accomplished when we use both but these are quite constant in operation and in different ways. So due to this they vary a lot in the outputs of Hz used and can have some conflicts/drawbacks if both are on the same unit. Again I know this based on months of trials and monitoring the effects, whilst trying to be creative in building more engrossing sensations for effects.
I'm not sure what you mean, I'm doing exactly this - trying to get best effects with the setup I have.
I have came to the list of effects I like, that I use, and now I'm seeking to further improve it.
Still need to finish the rig to start testing full, maybe I'll change it quite a bit. I tried the engine approach you are suggesting (speed on different units), but I didn't like it, because it was continuous effect and it was compromising L / R effects I'm running too much.
Maybe with motion / g-seat, I'll ditch tactile g-forces which might open more space for other effects to use on L / R units.
Effects Progression = Experimenting = Learning
Low-frequency bass is not all about "whack factor" it can be utilized differently depending on the dB that is applied to it and for the role/nature of the effect sensations we may seek. It is crucial to use suitable dB for the Hz to achieve the desired sensation, as otherwise, you may get a big knocking/thumping response from the tactile. Its using layers to combine with each other over more than one transducer.
I have been discovering with effects that low bass, if used appropriately can enable us to use subharmonics with overtones. So on a low bass-centric unit like a BK using it to work with the fundamental frequency for an effect layer that's being used on a secondary unit like a TST or Thruster/Exciter. This is my attempt to think "outside the box" that felt sensations for effects do not necessarily have to be created or directed to operate on individual channels or indeed generated from only individual units and the performance limitations individual units have.
The potential is quite interesting...
I have been using your dual approach for effects for a long time - just engine basically (BK + TST), so I think I understand the concept. However I don't know how to create fundamental frequency / subharmonics etc. I'm using you engine effect and it feels nice in BK on lower / mid, but it struggles to deliver higher frequencies for me, that's why I'm seeking to boost them with additional TST, which is much better suited for the job. I'll try to mount it directly to the stem of the pedals and will see how it works.
