Originally Posted by dgage
Good...DD and rochen are present. Any comments or experience comparing Dirac Live to Audiolense? I was at one point thinking of setting up Jriver with Aidiolense but may upgrade my NanoAVR to the Dirac version.
I have used Audiolense for a couple years now. I used the Dirac demo at RMAF on the 215HT's. However, the filters wouldn't load correctly and I didn't hear back from customer service until after the weekend. So, I haven't been able to actually compare filters for sound quality.
Both are easy to install. Dirac is easier to license and get the license code installed.
Dirac is easier to get up and running and is fairly intuitive. For a basic setup, Audiolense is almost as easy. Dirac can only handle 8 channels.
Dirac has no advanced setup and no routing options. With Audiolense, your options are limited by your imagination.
Crossovers and Bass Management:
Dirac has no crossovers or bass management. This is an important element of room correction since the speaker/subwoofer integration is so crucial to getting good sound. Audiolense has extremely flexible crossovers and bass management with phase correction.
Dirac uses a fixed impulse response window. Audiolense lets you change the response window to exclude most reflected sound and only make corrections primarily to the direct sound.
Both let you easily create targets. Dirac's are for the entire system - all speakers get the same target. Audiolense gives you the option of speaker dependent targets. For example, you might need a different target for surrounds vs mains.
Ability to route all computer audio through filters:
Dirac has its own "soundcard" that lets you route all PC audio through the filters for playback. JRiver also has its own "soundcard" that routes everything through JRiver's DSP. If you load the Audiolense filters in JRiver, you can use them for gaming, etc. However, you need to create low latency filters for PC audio so that the lip sync isn't off.