Official DataSat RS20i thread. (Setup Tips, Questions,General Info, etc) - Page 135 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

Forum Jump: 
 514Likes
Reply
Thread Tools
post #4021 of 4038 Unread 11-21-2016, 10:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,479
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1731 Post(s)
Liked: 1101
Dirac Measurement Mic Positions

I have been experimenting with different mic positions than those specified in the manual. Has anyone else tried any measurement positions other than those as described in the manual? Have you done any comparisons of the individual chair vs the couch? How do you deal with the fact that in a HT, the back of the seats can block the rear channels if the mic is too low - which is one of the shown positions.

Just curious!!
audioguy is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4022 of 4038 Unread 11-22-2016, 03:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
stephenbr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
I have been experimenting with different mic positions than those specified in the manual. Has anyone else tried any measurement positions other than those as described in the manual? Have you done any comparisons of the individual chair vs the couch? How do you deal with the fact that in a HT, the back of the seats can block the rear channels if the mic is too low - which is one of the shown positions.

Just curious!!
Have always used the 'coach' positions but have been thinking of running a calibration using 'chair' to use when I am on my lonesome. I have never had the mic position below direct line of sight from the speakers. Perhaps I have been doing it wrong but just didn't seem right to place the mic lower for the reasons you have noted.
stephenbr is offline  
post #4023 of 4038 Unread 11-22-2016, 09:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
Carl_Huff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
I have been experimenting with different mic positions than those specified in the manual. Has anyone else tried any measurement positions other than those as described in the manual? Have you done any comparisons of the individual chair vs the couch? How do you deal with the fact that in a HT, the back of the seats can block the rear channels if the mic is too low - which is one of the shown positions.

Just curious!!
My habit that I have developed over the years is to always take measurements at 'ear height'. I take half of the measurements in those areas where people might stand near the listening area and the balance at 'ear height while sitting' with the measurement mic in the seats. Those measurements in the seats tend to be physically closer together making for a subtle weighting in the resulting filters for the money seats.

Best Regards,
Carl Huff

Last edited by Carl_Huff; 11-22-2016 at 10:07 AM.
Carl_Huff is online now  
post #4024 of 4038 Unread 11-23-2016, 07:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 877 Post(s)
Liked: 255
This is an interesting topic. Recently I have tried to follow the positions suggested within the Dirac 2 software (though at times its difficult to decipher their diagrams). I have always wondered how reliable these are though given that many of them block direct line of sight to the speaker as Chuck points out, and also means that several of them are very close to the surface of the seat (6" or less sometimes). I always cover the seat with a thick blanket in an attempt to minimise any reflections off the leather seat material - though I don't know how effective that really is.

Back when I started using Dirac 1, the recommendation was a wider spread of measurement positions, beyond the boundry of the seat(s), and at least 1ft away from any surface.

Its interesting to read that you take some measurements at standing ear height Carl - what is the reasoning for that? Also how far do you spread the measurement points around the seat (assuming, say, a single 2-3 seat sofa) - again the Dirac software suggested positions all seem to be within the boundry of the physical seat itself.

Its a confusing topic for sure, and one that is probably critical to getting the best results from the Dirac software.
Wookii is offline  
post #4025 of 4038 Unread 11-23-2016, 11:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
Carl_Huff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
... Its interesting to read that you take some measurements at standing ear height Carl - what is the reasoning for that? Also how far do you spread the measurement points around the seat (assuming, say, a single 2-3 seat sofa) - again the Dirac software suggested positions all seem to be within the boundry of the physical seat itself.

Its a confusing topic for sure, and one that is probably critical to getting the best results from the Dirac software.
Dirac Live instructions manuals are all describing the same process. The measurements required are identical whether it be v1 or v2 and simply scale with the size of listening room and number of prime listening positions. The Dirac Live algorithm averages the samples taken to derive the resulting filter set. Your goal is to capture major anomalies in the listening sphere (for lack to better words). That sphere not only includes the prime listening positions but also the space immediately about them.

Reality is, if you limit your measurements to a small area you are probably undervaluing the anomalies that are dominant in the overall listening area or sphere as I called it. That is why I take half of my measurements as standing measurements spaced roughly 4 feet apart along the back side of your described sofa and the balance roughly a foot apart ear height on the couch seat cushions.

I am sure there will be those that will take me to task and discount my practice. My only response is to say my practice has evolved out of years of experience crafting Dirac Live filter sets and many thoughtful conversations with the brilliant creators of the underlying algorithms.

Best Regards,
Carl Huff
Carl_Huff is online now  
post #4026 of 4038 Unread 11-23-2016, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,479
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1731 Post(s)
Liked: 1101
What prompted my question was a thread on Emotiva's site where some guy was suggesting the it was important to have 1 measurement at the MLP and then the other 8 below (approximately 9 inches) and above (also approximately 9 inches) that point in various positions around the MLP. That won't work for surround since just a few inches below my ears block the rear channels and low behind the seats .

What I did find out through a few trials was two things (not doing what the Emotiva guy suggested but my version of it so as not to block any
channels: (1) the measured response of the LFE channels was a good bit worse doing it this way BUT sound good and (2) the occasional[/LIST]edginess that could be heard (primarily in vocals) was greatly reduced or eliminated !!

I will try Carl's approach next the see what it sounds (and measures) like.

Maybe we should start a whole new thread on this topic since Dirac Live now exists on the the Dataset products as well as Theta, and now Arcam, miniDSP, Audio Control and Emotiva. We can't be the only folks who have had questions on this particular subject. While the platforms all may be different, it is still the same filter calculation algorithms that are being utilized.

I looked on the Dirac web site hoping to find something but did not. That would be the ideal place to have these discussions.

Last edited by audioguy; 11-23-2016 at 02:25 PM.
audioguy is online now  
post #4027 of 4038 Unread 11-26-2016, 10:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Seaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 6,552
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 468 Post(s)
Liked: 1237
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
What prompted my question was a thread on Emotiva's site where some guy was suggesting the it was important to have 1 measurement at the MLP and then the other 8 below (approximately 9 inches) and above (also approximately 9 inches) that point in various positions around the MLP. That won't work for surround since just a few inches below my ears block the rear channels and low behind the seats .

What I did find out through a few trials was two things (not doing what the Emotiva guy suggested but my version of it so as not to block any
channels: (1) the measured response of the LFE channels was a good bit worse doing it this way BUT sound good and (2) the occasional[/LIST]edginess that could be heard (primarily in vocals) was greatly reduced or eliminated !!

I will try Carl's approach next the see what it sounds (and measures) like.

Maybe we should start a whole new thread on this topic since Dirac Live now exists on the the Dataset products as well as Theta, and now Arcam, miniDSP, Audio Control and Emotiva. We can't be the only folks who have had questions on this particular subject. While the platforms all may be different, it is still the same filter calculation algorithms that are being utilized.

I looked on the Dirac web site hoping to find something but did not. That would be the ideal place to have these discussions.
The issue comes down to having a good recommended practice for most to get decent results vs. finding the best option or different techniques for the best result in your system. One will rarely perfectly align with the other.

We have to first consider if we are correcting the entire range or just below some frequency which Dirac does allow. When we include the full range of high frequencies we have to always consider the dispersion of the speakers and make sure our measurement locations are not too far out of the coverage window of the speakers. If you get too far out of the high frequency window, Dirac will see the response drooping at some locations which could cause the primary positions to be overly boosted in this range. IF the high frequency loss off axis is relatively smooth, you can ultimately compensate for this by ear with the target curve, but it's important to understand why you might want to. This can be useful if you are interested in correcting the mid-lower frequencies for a wider listening area.

My recommendation is to pipe some pink noise into each speaker individually while quickly moving your head around the potential listening/measurement window. You will quickly hear if going too high, low, left, right or backward gets into a dramatically different speaker response. This is also the stage at which you may find you want to adjust aiming of speakers, realizing that there will be some balance and compromise between the best imaging/soundstaging vs coverage.

I find having multiple measurement locations vertically and fore-aft very useful so any correction effort doesn't over-correct for problems that only exist at one listening height. That height difference might only be +/-4" to 12", but that's important to make the listening bubble much more comfortable and natural. In many rooms you will have seats with greatly elevated bass response near the back of the room. In such cases that subwoofer placement and quantity isn't optimal for the rear rows, I will take a few measurements over the front row but in line of sight with the rear seats. This gives you a general correction of the direct arriving upper frequencies, while not mucking up the mid-lower frequencies at the main seats.

The take away from the rambling above is to check with your ears or a microphone the information you are giving the correction system to work with and adjust accordingly. Inevitably you will get hit with a dose of reality that no system/room is as ideal as we'd like it to be, and that's where some creativity comes in.
maikeldepotter likes this.

Mark Seaton
Seaton Sound, Inc.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood..." Daniel H. Burnham
Mark Seaton is offline  
post #4028 of 4038 Unread 11-26-2016, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,479
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1731 Post(s)
Liked: 1101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post
The issue comes down to having a good recommended practice for most to get decent results vs. finding the best option or different techniques for the best result in your system. One will rarely perfectly align with the other.

We have to first consider if we are correcting the entire range or just below some frequency which Dirac does allow. When we include the full range of high frequencies we have to always consider the dispersion of the speakers and make sure our measurement locations are not too far out of the coverage window of the speakers. If you get too far out of the high frequency window, Dirac will see the response drooping at some locations which could cause the primary positions to be overly boosted in this range. IF the high frequency loss off axis is relatively smooth, you can ultimately compensate for this by ear with the target curve, but it's important to understand why you might want to. This can be useful if you are interested in correcting the mid-lower frequencies for a wider listening area.

My recommendation is to pipe some pink noise into each speaker individually while quickly moving your head around the potential listening/measurement window. You will quickly hear if going too high, low, left, right or backward gets into a dramatically different speaker response. This is also the stage at which you may find you want to adjust aiming of speakers, realizing that there will be some balance and compromise between the best imaging/soundstaging vs coverage.

I find having multiple measurement locations vertically and fore-aft very useful so any correction effort doesn't over-correct for problems that only exist at one listening height. That height difference might only be +/-4" to 12", but that's important to make the listening bubble much more comfortable and natural. In many rooms you will have seats with greatly elevated bass response near the back of the room. In such cases that subwoofer placement and quantity isn't optimal for the rear rows, I will take a few measurements over the front row but in line of sight with the rear seats. This gives you a general correction of the direct arriving upper frequencies, while not mucking up the mid-lower frequencies at the main seats.

The take away from the rambling above is to check with your ears or a microphone the information you are giving the correction system to work with and adjust accordingly. Inevitably you will get hit with a dose of reality that no system/room is as ideal as we'd like it to be, and that's where some creativity comes in.
Thanks Mark. You gave me a great idea. Instead of pink noise through the individual speakers, I am going to try a full range frequency sweep. I will put the mic in the appropriate position in the horizontal plane and then measure with the speaker (tweeter) visible to the mic and then in the lower position that I would want to use. That will allow me to see what the real negative (if any) effect utilizing that position will be.

Oh if only I was not so OCD analytical!! That really is a downside of a product like the RS20i. There must be 99 bazillion combinations and permutations of pre Dirac PEQ's, Dirac target curves, measurement positions, etc
audioguy is online now  
post #4029 of 4038 Unread 12-02-2016, 06:22 PM
Member
 
farsider3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Houston area
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Datasat LS10 with Dirac vs. Audiocontrol M9 with Dirac

Hi all. I am seeking input regarding Datasat with Dirac vs. Audiocontrol M9 with Dirac. Has anyone compared these processors? I am in the process of purchasing a demo LS10 but the cost is about double that of the Audiocontrol M9.

I believe I am a fairly critical listener. I can certainly hear differences in amps for two channel listening, I can differences in male and female vocals between equipment. I know the LS10 gives the ability to have front wides and a single height/top channel with Atmos.

Are we at a point where "mid fi" components like the M9 can sound 99% as good as a Datasat due to Dirac?

Thanks in advance.

Edit: I'm going for the LS-10 with slight to moderate jealousy of the RS20i owners.
grtuck likes this.

Datasat LS10
Procella P8 LCR, Procella P5V for Atmos speakers
2.39:1 Seymour XD, 116" wide & JVC 4910 projector
Parasound Halo A31, Parasound Zonemaster 1250
JTR Captivator S2 (1st to receive New 2017 version) and Dual Seaton Submersive HP+ up front, Dual JL Audio F112 in the rear

Last edited by farsider3000; 12-02-2016 at 10:44 PM.
farsider3000 is offline  
post #4030 of 4038 Unread 12-02-2016, 09:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,479
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1731 Post(s)
Liked: 1101
If you can hear a difference in amps then you will surely hear the difference between the LS10 and the Audio Control product . Only you get to decide how much difference and the value if that difference.
audioguy is online now  
post #4031 of 4038 Unread Yesterday, 07:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ganymed4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by farsider3000 View Post
Hi all. I am seeking input regarding Datasat with Dirac vs. Audiocontrol M9 with Dirac. Has anyone compared these processors? I am in the process of purchasing a demo LS10 but the cost is about double that of the Audiocontrol M9.

I believe I am a fairly critical listener. I can certainly hear differences in amps for two channel listening, I can differences in male and female vocals between equipment. I know the LS10 gives the ability to have front wides and a single height/top channel with Atmos.

Are we at a point where "mid fi" components like the M9 can sound 99% as good as a Datasat due to Dirac?

Thanks in advance.

Edit: I'm going for the LS-10 with slight to moderate jealousy of the RS20i owners.
What I can say about a comparison of Datasat with Dirac and other less expensive equipment is the lack of processing power in less expensive equipment. The RS20i has about nine SHARC DSPs inside which no other surround sound processor has - as far as I know. This really makes a difference regarding Dirac - as far as I know from Emotiva users of Dirac Live.
I honestly don't know what the LS10 is capable of, but the RS20i can do up to 10 Atmos speakers or six Atmos enabled speakers, if I am not mistaken here for the latter.
My guess regarding the 'mid fi' components is, that we are not at the point, that these kind of components can sound 99% as good as the Datasat due to lack of processing power.
In my understanding you need to have this processing power to have no negative influences on the overall sound.
Datasat was DTS and comes from the professional audio business for public theaters. This says everything to me.
Ganymed4 is online now  
post #4032 of 4038 Unread Yesterday, 07:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,479
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1731 Post(s)
Liked: 1101
Quote:
Originally Posted by farsider3000 View Post

Edit: I'm going for the LS-10 with slight to moderate jealousy of the RS20i owners.
If you have normal speakers (e.g. not bi-amped) and a typical Atmos configuration (e.g. 7.1.4 or equivalent) then the RS20i over the LS-10 will only provide you bragging rights with virtually no sonic differences. Save your money, and buy a better projector, or more movies or more wine.
llang269 likes this.
audioguy is online now  
post #4033 of 4038 Unread Today, 05:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhafner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4,842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Looks like 2016 ends with no DTS-X. What is the problem at Datasat??
mhafner is offline  
post #4034 of 4038 Unread Today, 05:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 877 Post(s)
Liked: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post
Looks like 2016 ends with no DTS-X. What is the problem at Datasat??
I don't know to be honest. They have been sitting on the money I paid for this upgrade for over a year now . . . don't get me started!
Wookii is offline  
post #4035 of 4038 Unread Today, 08:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 5,479
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1731 Post(s)
Liked: 1101
I talked to Datasat at CEDIA about this and the answer I was given had something to do with the DTS software and the Sony software residing in the same chip so Sony and/or DTS was doing the final certification. I have no clue. I paid for the upgrade as well and I am not worried about eventually getting it installed. Furthermore, given the dearth of DTS:X source material, not a big deal for me - yet!!
audioguy is online now  
post #4036 of 4038 Unread Today, 08:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
stephenbr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
I don't know to be honest. They have been sitting on the money I paid for this upgrade for over a year now . . . don't get me started!
Gareth - does this mean the DTS:X upgrade is going to be an additional cost over what we paid for the atmos card?
stephenbr is offline  
post #4037 of 4038 Unread Today, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 877 Post(s)
Liked: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephenbr View Post
Gareth - does this mean the DTS:X upgrade is going to be an additional cost over what we paid for the atmos card?
lol Stephen - don't give them any ideas - it better bloody not be! My invoice from 2015 quite clearly states Dolbly Atmos/DTS:X upgrade.
Wookii is offline  
post #4038 of 4038 Unread Today, 05:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ganymed4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 73
My answer about this from Datasat UK says, it will be free for everybody who owns the Atmos card.

Today I found the upgrade to 1.04.05 from the second server dated 11/21/2016 - presumably in the US. But it is not the DTS:X upgrade we are all waiting for scheduled end of 2016.
Ganymed4 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off