Originally Posted by SherazNJ
Many might take it lightly but one of the hardest challenge is to make sure the cross-over area b/w Subs and main has no nulls/peaks. I have spent a lot of time to make sure my mains integrate nicely with subs. I have been using Dirac for over a year and a big fan of it. It corrects each speaker individually (including EQ, distance, level) but doesn't do anything to make sure mains are integrated with subs nicely. This is where REW comes in handly. I had to tweak subs distance to make them work properly with mains.
Yes Sir I sure do and its kinda fun too. :-)
Yes, in my case, I get a null at 70-80hz, unless I direct those frequencies to my subs in the 4 corners. This forces me to push the crossovers up to the 100hz range to get good results. Surprisingly, my subs handle that well and don't give me significant localization issues with the higher crossover. I've found that some subs, particularly ported ones, produce distortion harmonics that make them easy to localize without a crossover at 80hz or below. Another benefit of a higher crossover is that I can have matching crossover points for all speakers, and my surrounds have the same bass impact as my LCRs.
There have been some who complained about midbass in the older 212s. I couldn't say whether that was due to a weakness in the 212s, similar null problems, poorly executed crossover, or simply a need for EQ. Those complaints seem to be gone with the latest models. After setting the crossover to 100hz, I can't complain.
Some have said that the older 212s with the metal horns have a bit more sparkle than the current ones. Since you like treble, you might actually prefer that. With Dirac & 212s, you can shape the treble to suit your tastes, and without running intro trouble with boosting distortion. Those tweeters have exceptionally low distortion, even at 20khz. So, with Dirac, I suspect that this difference doesn't matter, since you dial it in how you like it.
One thing to watch out for, though, is that the Dirac curve editor had some issues for me with the 212s, until I figured out that by zooming into the right of the graph. After doing that, I could drag the right curtain out further and avoid a spike before the Nyquist.
I also found that I preferred my A51 amp over my previous NC400 amps with the 212s. I found it was sweeter and less fatiguing, even with the same Dirac target curve. I suspect that has something to do with the 212s' revealing treble and the NC400's low switching frequency, but you know how controversial amp differences are. FWIW, nobody else has reported similar issues with amps, and this wasn't a double blind test.