Advanced Room EQ, Acoustics and Optimization - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 303 Old 02-05-2014, 08:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,428
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
However, that one discussion about a 2-channel device shouldn't be seen as limiting the scope of the entire thread.

OK.  Just a misunderstanding.


Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 303 Old 02-06-2014, 12:53 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Yes - it is a drawback that the 500 has only one sub outlet. ..................................

....................................Of course, all of the above is self-defeating for people who expect ARC to be an automated REQ system, but that doesn't include me any more fortunately and I now have enough basic skills to be able to set levels and distances for two subs (if I get a miniDSP). They will, of course, be EQd as one anyone regardless of how the levels and delays are set.

Of course, Anthem would expect you to use multiple Paradigm subs with their individual EQs much the same way you would use miniDSP or similar.

 

I guess they would. But I won't be giving up my Submersives any time soon. Probably never in fact ;)  If I go the Anthem route I can see a miniDSP in my future though...

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #93 of 303 Old 02-06-2014, 01:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
D Bone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 1,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 180
New thread, I'm in cool.gif

Samsung UN60D6420 ~ DirecTV HR-44 ~ Sony S5100 ~ Roku 3 ~ Denon X-2000 ~ HTD Level TWO Towers ~ HTD Level TWO Surrounds ~ Power Sound Audio XV15
D Bone is offline  
post #94 of 303 Old 02-06-2014, 02:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 4,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 190
I can't post AES papers here, but believe these non AES Audyssey related ones are ok to post
NonAESAudyssey_1.zip 3635k .zip file
NonAESAudyssey_2.zip 1875k .zip file
mtbdudex is offline  
post #95 of 303 Old 02-06-2014, 09:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,028
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 700 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I am about to buy the Anthem MRX 500 on closeout if the UK dealer I just emailed confirms they have one in stock still. I will be paying little more than what my Audyssey Pro kit alone cost me, so if ARC can do as well as XT32+Pro, let alone better, it will represent a substantial bargain. My Onkyo 5509 lists at £2,500 here ($4,076) and Pro cost me, with shipping and UK tax close to $1,000. The MRX 500 is costing me £799 ($1,300). So the Onk + Pro is about $5,076 here and the MRX 500 $1,300. It will be interesting to see how XT32+Pro compares with ARC.  I am waiting for the dealer to get back to me and will update when I hear.

EDIT: the MRX 500 is about half price on the basis of it now being disco.
The Anthem AVRs have HDMI compatibility issues. You may be OK with your set up or maybe not smile.gif. My company used to be a dealer for them and had to take all the units back and replace them with other brands.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #96 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 11:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Seaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 6,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I am about to buy the Anthem MRX 500 on closeout if the UK dealer I just emailed confirms they have one in stock still. I will be paying little more than what my Audyssey Pro kit alone cost me, so if ARC can do as well as XT32+Pro, let alone better, it will represent a substantial bargain. My Onkyo 5509 lists at £2,500 here ($4,076) and Pro cost me, with shipping and UK tax close to $1,000. The MRX 500 is costing me £799 ($1,300). So the Onk + Pro is about $5,076 here and the MRX 500 $1,300. It will be interesting to see how XT32+Pro compares with ARC.  I am waiting for the dealer to get back to me and will update when I hear.


EDIT: the MRX 500 is about half price on the basis of it now being disco.


I have no idea what the 510 would do vs. the 500 in how ARC is implemented, but the manual you linked certainly describes some interesting features for traditional Audyssey users:
  • Ability to adjust the maximum frequency EQ'd (default is 5 kHz)
  • Selectable low levels to allow subwoofer EQ (e.g. you can choose to only EQ above 20 Hz, for example), a high pass frequency, and high pass order adjustment. That could be useful for getting the most out of your Submersives, Keith smile.gif
  • "Room gain" adjustment, which apparently controls the shape of the main curve in some way
  • Settings for two configurations


That's aside from the convenience of save/load and having a PC-based algorithm.


One thing I would find very annoying is that the Anthem's AVR implementation of ARC doesn't set distances automatically, but they must be set manually. And wouldn't you still need a Behringer or a MiniDSP to control multiple subs, especially if they're not equidistant? Also, from a look at the manual it's not clear if there's anything that can specifically be done to adjust the target curves in an editor other than to use the settings I mentioned to shape a house curve.


Still, it sounds like a nice toy to experiment with.

Yes - it is a drawback that the 500 has only one sub outlet. I'm not too bothered about the distances - I know them anyway from Audyssey's setup, and how hard can it be to use a tape measure anyway? 

My subs are almost equidistant - about 12 inches different from each other so I am not sure if that is all that significant. If it is then a MiniDSP will fix it for me won't it?

Of course, all of the above is self-defeating for people who expect ARC to be an automated REQ system, but that doesn't include me any more fortunately and I now have enough basic skills to be able to set levels and distances for two subs (if I get a miniDSP). They will, of course, be EQd as one anyone regardless of how the levels and delays are set.

I am hopeful that the other benefits of ARC outweigh the drawbacks mentioned. My biggest nightmare is still getting the access required to the back of the rack. Installing the 500 would take me a full day because of the problems. Not setting it up - physically removing the 5509 and replacing it with the Anthem I mean. Too boring to explain why, but trust me, I've done it before!

One other often overlooked limitation/quirk of ARC I only became aware of after Roger Dressler & I were tinkering with Kris Deering's system is that once you run/engage ARC, the subwoofer low pass is fixed for all channels. In other words, regardless of if you set the crossover for your mains at 40 Hz and your surrounds at 100 Hz, if you left the LFE/sub channel correction and low pass at 120Hz in the software, the low bass info from every channel will get routed through a 120Hz low pass. This can create a lot of overlap with the speakers and muddied sound if you don't know how it is behaving.

If you turn off ARC, bass management behaves as we would expect, where the low pass from each channel is routed through a low pass corresponding to the crossover setting.

The result is that you mostly need to choose a global subwoofer low pass for all bass content in the system. With this understood the results can sound very good. Hopefully Anthem will decide to make the software fix to this bizarre, unexpected, and undocumented behavior, but be sure to understand this before trying to make a comparison to Audyssey.

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 #97 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 11:18 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

One other often overlooked limitation/quirk of ARC I only became aware of after Roger Dressler & I were tinkering with Kris Deering's system is that once you run/engage ARC, the subwoofer low pass is fixed for all channels. In other words, regardless of if you set the crossover for your mains at 40 Hz and your surrounds at 100 Hz, if you left the LFE/sub channel correction and low pass at 120Hz in the software, the low bass info from every channel will get routed through a 120Hz low pass. This can create a lot of overlap with the speakers and muddied sound if you don't know how it is behaving.

If you turn off ARC, bass management behaves as we would expect, where the low pass from each channel is routed through a low pass corresponding to the crossover setting.

The result is that you mostly need to choose a global subwoofer low pass for all bass content in the system. With this understood the results can sound very good. Hopefully Anthem will decide to make the software fix to this bizarre, unexpected, and undocumented behavior, but be sure to understand this before trying to make a comparison to Audyssey.

Ouch. YMMV but that would be a dealbreaker for me if that's still the case, having Mythos ST fronts and Gem XL surrounds from DefTech.

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #98 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 11:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Seaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 6,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

One other often overlooked limitation/quirk of ARC I only became aware of after Roger Dressler & I were tinkering with Kris Deering's system is that once you run/engage ARC, the subwoofer low pass is fixed for all channels. In other words, regardless of if you set the crossover for your mains at 40 Hz and your surrounds at 100 Hz, if you left the LFE/sub channel correction and low pass at 120Hz in the software, the low bass info from every channel will get routed through a 120Hz low pass. This can create a lot of overlap with the speakers and muddied sound if you don't know how it is behaving.

If you turn off ARC, bass management behaves as we would expect, where the low pass from each channel is routed through a low pass corresponding to the crossover setting.

The result is that you mostly need to choose a global subwoofer low pass for all bass content in the system. With this understood the results can sound very good. Hopefully Anthem will decide to make the software fix to this bizarre, unexpected, and undocumented behavior, but be sure to understand this before trying to make a comparison to Audyssey.

Ouch. YMMV but that would be a dealbreaker for me if that's still the case, having Mythos ST fronts and Gem XL surrounds from DefTech.

I look forward to someone showing me/confirming it is no longer the case, but it was the case as of July and Anthem didn't really see it as a problem to be fixed. Roger & I were scratching our heads for hours as none of my actual testing matched the behavior I was expecting... until Kris got a hold of Bob from the Anthem threads who confirmed this mode of operation. In its core function ARC gives very pleasing results IMO.

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 #99 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 11:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post
 
 
One other often overlooked limitation/quirk of ARC I only became aware of after Roger Dressler & I were tinkering with Kris Deering's system is that once you run/engage ARC, the subwoofer low pass is fixed for all channels. In other words, regardless of if you set the crossover for your mains at 40 Hz and your surrounds at 100 Hz, if you left the LFE/sub channel correction and low pass at 120Hz in the software, the low bass info from every channel will get routed through a 120Hz low pass. This can create a lot of overlap with the speakers and muddied sound if you don't know how it is behaving.

If you turn off ARC, bass management behaves as we would expect, where the low pass from each channel is routed through a low pass corresponding to the crossover setting.

The result is that you mostly need to choose a global subwoofer low pass for all bass content in the system. With this understood the results can sound very good. Hopefully Anthem will decide to make the software fix to this bizarre, unexpected, and undocumented behavior, but be sure to understand this before trying to make a comparison to Audyssey.

 

Thanks Mark - great to see you in this thread. I think the point you make here is going to influence me away from ARC. I already have some doubts as to how much better I can make the bass here - it is substantially very, very flat from below 20Hz to above the XO. That is using XT32+Pro + 2 x PEQ filters via a Behringer DSP1124P. And it sounds tight, deep, punchy and generally smile-inducing. I was already a little concerned that ARC can't handle two subs independently, so I'd have to use a miniDSP or something to set levels and delays before EQing them as one. 

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #100 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 11:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
 
Ouch. YMMV but that would be a dealbreaker for me if that's still the case, having Mythos ST fronts and Gem XL surrounds from DefTech.

 

I think Mark's comment has sealed it for me. I was doubtful anyway if I could achieve much more than what I already have. I think if I go anywhere at all now it will be with a miniDSP so I can replicate my BFD filters but also enjoy the additional functionality of the miniDSP as well.  So the thread can claim it's first totally practical result!  It's saved me some money and some time.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #101 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Yes - it is a drawback that the 500 has only one sub outlet. ..................................

....................................Of course, all of the above is self-defeating for people who expect ARC to be an automated REQ system, but that doesn't include me any more fortunately and I now have enough basic skills to be able to set levels and distances for two subs (if I get a miniDSP). They will, of course, be EQd as one anyone regardless of how the levels and delays are set.

Of course, Anthem would expect you to use multiple Paradigm subs with their individual EQs much the same way you would use miniDSP or similar.

 

Kal, when you reviewed the miniDSP 10x10, did you use it to EQ more than the bass frequencies?  The reason I ask is that Nyal remarks in his blog that something superior would be needed for the higher ranges (I think he mentioned a DEQ-X if I have remembered that right). I am now stuck between gurus, so I'd appreciate your take on it. Thanks.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #102 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:06 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I think Mark's comment has sealed it for me. I was doubtful anyway if I could achieve much more than what I already have. I think if I go anywhere at all now it will be with a miniDSP so I can replicate my BFD filters but also enjoy the additional functionality of the miniDSP as well.  So the thread can claim it's first totally practical result!  It's saved me some money and some time.

That's a good choice for you IMO. Unless you were somehow unhappy with Audyssey above Schroeder, I don't see anything in your bass response where I'd want to try a different automated REQ except for research's sake. Not with the price tag and labor needed with your gear, anyway. A MiniDSP HD unit would be at least as useful, if not more, with REW and its tool kit for less time and money.

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #103 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
dougri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Kal, when you reviewed the miniDSP 10x10, did you use it to EQ more than the bass frequencies?  The reason I ask is that Nyal remarks in his blog that something superior would be needed for the higher ranges (I think he mentioned a DEQ-X if I have remembered that right). I am now stuck between gurus, so I'd appreciate your take on it. Thanks.

Nyal thought the 24/48 DA/AD conversion was not transparent enough for main channel use, but has not tried the higher resolution minidsp units… he uses 24/96 Xilica DSPs instead for a variety of reasons (resolution, form factor, interface, etc.).

"A wide screen just makes a bad film twice as bad. "
-Samuel Goldwyn

I wonder what he'd think about 3D IMAX?
dougri is offline  
post #104 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
Nyal Mellor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougri View Post

Nyal thought the 24/48 DA/AD conversion was not transparent enough for main channel use, but has not tried the higher resolution minidsp units… he uses 24/96 Xilica DSPs instead for a variety of reasons (resolution, form factor, interface, etc.).

I have not evaluated the 10x10 only the 2x4 MiniDSP units so YMMV. I think the 10x10 has a different architecture, chipset, etc.

Master of Minions, Acoustic Frontiers. We specialize in the design and creation of high performance listening rooms, home theaters and project studios for discerning audio/video enthusiasts.
Nyal Mellor is offline  
post #105 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:31 PM
Senior Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Does anyone else use PC based DRC here? I am now using acourate, with jriver to host the filters, and it is a lot of work to get it going but it is markedly better than anything I have used before. For music at any rate, I haven't had time to do the setup for 5.1 yet.

Some links on how to use it and qualitative feedback

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/556-advanced-acourate-digital-xo-time-alignment-driver-linearization-walkthrough/

http://digitalroomcorrection.hk/http___www.digitalroomcorrection.hk_/Welcome.html

There is also a minidsp/opendrc version

http://www.minidsp.com/applications/digital-room-correction/acouratedrc
3ll3d00d is online now  
post #106 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
Nyal Mellor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post

Does anyone else use PC based DRC here? I am now using acourate, with jriver to host the filters, and it is a lot of work to get it going but it is markedly better than anything I have used before. For music at any rate, I haven't had time to do the setup for 5.1 yet.

Some links on how to use it and qualitative feedback

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/556-advanced-acourate-digital-xo-time-alignment-driver-linearization-walkthrough/

http://digitalroomcorrection.hk/http___www.digitalroomcorrection.hk_/Welcome.html

There is also a minidsp/opendrc version

http://www.minidsp.com/applications/digital-room-correction/acouratedrc

Yes, HTPC as Pre-Pro, 12 channels of output. Works great.

Master of Minions, Acoustic Frontiers. We specialize in the design and creation of high performance listening rooms, home theaters and project studios for discerning audio/video enthusiasts.
Nyal Mellor is offline  
post #107 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
dougri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyal Mellor View Post

I have not evaluated the 10x10 only the 2x4 MiniDSP units so YMMV. I think the 10x10 has a different architecture, chipset, etc.

the nanoAVR (pending release) is LPCM over HDMI in & out… might that be an improvement? According to the data sheet it uses a SHARC ADSP214749, states 24bit (32bit internal) I/O resolution, 192kHz max input sampling rate and 96kHz internal DSP processing. Of course, you still need a pre pro or receiver.

"A wide screen just makes a bad film twice as bad. "
-Samuel Goldwyn

I wonder what he'd think about 3D IMAX?
dougri is offline  
post #108 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 12:41 PM
Senior Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Very nice. I completely agree about the flexibility of jriver, it really covers practically everything you can think of. I am using a more budget audio device at moment (focusrite saffire pro 24) but still v nice sound.
3ll3d00d is online now  
post #109 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 01:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I think Mark's comment has sealed it for me. I was doubtful anyway if I could achieve much more than what I already have. I think if I go anywhere at all now it will be with a miniDSP so I can replicate my BFD filters but also enjoy the additional functionality of the miniDSP as well.  So the thread can claim it's first totally practical result!  It's saved me some money and some time.

That's a good choice for you IMO. Unless you were somehow unhappy with Audyssey above Schroeder, I don't see anything in your bass response where I'd want to try a different automated REQ except for research's sake. Not with the price tag and labor needed with your gear, anyway. A MiniDSP HD unit would be at least as useful, if not more, with REW and its tool kit for less time and money.

 

I agree. I am going to explore miniDSP instead. Which unit would you say would be best for me?

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #110 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 01:50 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougri View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Kal, when you reviewed the miniDSP 10x10, did you use it to EQ more than the bass frequencies?  The reason I ask is that Nyal remarks in his blog that something superior would be needed for the higher ranges (I think he mentioned a DEQ-X if I have remembered that right). I am now stuck between gurus, so I'd appreciate your take on it. Thanks.

Nyal thought the 24/48 DA/AD conversion was not transparent enough for main channel use, but has not tried the higher resolution minidsp units… he uses 24/96 Xilica DSPs instead for a variety of reasons (resolution, form factor, interface, etc.).

 

Thanks. So would you say that the latest miniDSP would be suitable for main channel use, and if so, which would you choose (question I also just asked Stuart). I am new to miniDSP hence all the questions.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #111 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 01:51 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,376
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1085 Post(s)
Liked: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyal Mellor View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougri View Post

Nyal thought the 24/48 DA/AD conversion was not transparent enough for main channel use, but has not tried the higher resolution minidsp units… he uses 24/96 Xilica DSPs instead for a variety of reasons (resolution, form factor, interface, etc.).

I have not evaluated the 10x10 only the 2x4 MiniDSP units so YMMV. I think the 10x10 has a different architecture, chipset, etc.

 

Thanks Nyal. Kal did a review of the 10x10 and seemed to like it. It seems like a very versatile tool but I wouldn’t want to use it if it was going to color the sound. Transparency to source is important to me.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #112 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 02:11 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Thanks. So would you say that the latest miniDSP would be suitable for main channel use, and if so, which would you choose (question I also just asked Stuart). I am new to miniDSP hence all the questions.

Not Doug, but if you're planning on using the MiniDSP on top of Audyssey to tweak the results, I think I'd get the 4x10 or 10x10 HD. The 2x4 units to me would be too limited except for straight sub work (in essence, replacing your Behringer), and the NanoAVR IMO is for use as a replacement for pre/pro-based correction, via the HDMI I/O between a source and your pre/pro. That's unless you aim to wind up with the Audyssey Reference curve as your end point and want it to "prime the pump" before Audyssey (or you plan to keep the Behringer in the mix to just do post-Audyssey tweaks for your subs). The 10x10 has eight analog inputs/outputs, and six PEQ filters per channel, but operates at 48 kHz. The 4 x 10 has four analog inputs and eight analog outputs, and five PEQ filters per channel, but also operates at 96 kHz.

My thinking is that with the 10x10, you'll have eight analog I/O channels to connect between your Onkyo and amp, which should cover at least a 7.1 setup, the matrix router (if needed) if you go beyond 1:1 channel setup for either sub management or active crossovers, and that way you're not interfering with your pre/pro's ability to set the surrounds, as Audyssey can do 7.1, 9.1 or 11.1 configurations along with 5.1 or less. The only downside is that if you want separate inputs for each of your Seaton's, you'd have to sacrifice a channel to get that if you also wanted the MiniDSP to manage your mains. You could do that by simply having two of your surrounds on one channel in/out and use a Y-splitter, or just use the MiniDSP for your L/C/R and Seatons, which leaves you some spare channels to use if you have the need.

For the record, I haven't hooked up main channels to the MiniDSP yet, but I plan to very soon, as a box between my R-972 running its version of Trinnov, and the Denon 4311 I'm using on EXT. IN to amplify the sources that I'm running Trinnov on with the Sherwood R-972 (namely a TiVo, Apple TV, and the goodies on my Oppo 103, all switched from the Oppo thanks to its capabilities and HDMI inputs).

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #113 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 02:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
beastaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Western NC
Posts: 7,253
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked: 655
Keith, guess with that little info from Mark, it looks as if you are making a good decision. I on the other hand use the same XO's on all mains and surrounds at this point of 100hz so I will likely still give the Anthem a shot, I just have a few other things to bankroll first before I get that going biggrin.gif It will be fun to see all the different findings of all these different systems everyone is exploring at this point. Very cool smile.gif

(European models do not accept banana plugs.)

 

"If you done it, it ain't bragging." ~ Walt Whitman

 

AE TD12x SEOS12 Build

Beast's DIY Master Measurement Thread

DIY Emminence Coaxial Surround Thread

beastaudio is offline  
post #114 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 02:50 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 125
That actually brings up a point: since we've got at least three people here looking at exploring alternate or complimentary REQs (you, me, and Keith's addition to Audyssey with Behringer and/or MiniDSP), all in different directions, do we want to keep the discussion of what we do as an ongoing project here, or maybe set up separate "build" threads linked to our signatures, and only present "major" findings here? The only downside to the separate builder's threads is that we'd have to post notifications of when changes were made so that those looking to comment know that they've got something to react to.

Stuart

 

Denon 4311 with XT32 and Audyssey Pro

Oppo 93 and 103

Panasonic VT50

Sherwood R-972 with its version of the Trinnov Optimizer

MiniDSP 10x10 HD

PSB Imagine T2, Center, and Surrounds (as of 5/2014); HSU ULS-15 subs (2)

 

The Audyssey FAQ Guide can be found here:

http://www.avsforum.com/...

sdrucker is offline  
post #115 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
beastaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Western NC
Posts: 7,253
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

That actually brings up a point: since we've got at least three people here looking at exploring alternate or complimentary REQs (you, me, and Keith's addition to Audyssey with Behringer and/or MiniDSP), all in different directions, do we want to keep the discussion of what we do as an ongoing project here, or maybe set up separate "build" threads linked to our signatures, and only present "major" findings here? The only downside to the separate builder's threads is that we'd have to post notifications of when changes were made so that those looking to comment know that they've got something to react to.

I feel this is a fine place biggrin.gif I likely won't post anything more than perhaps some pre/post measurement graphs as well as overall impressions. That what the thread is for right? cool.gifwink.gif

(European models do not accept banana plugs.)

 

"If you done it, it ain't bragging." ~ Walt Whitman

 

AE TD12x SEOS12 Build

Beast's DIY Master Measurement Thread

DIY Emminence Coaxial Surround Thread

beastaudio is offline  
post #116 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 03:34 PM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California Republic
Posts: 2,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

As an aside, while not available for consumer use Dirac guys were demoing cool technology at CES where using additional speakers they could correct for room response errors. Surround channel for example could be used to correct the front channels when you are just listening to 2-channel audio. Their target and their main source of income is car audio so their interest is car OEMs right now.
Dirac Unity. Separate license, reportedly 2015-ish.
RUR is offline  
post #117 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 04:01 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 853 Post(s)
Liked: 784
For those in this thread that haven't heard of Dirac Unity, brief description and discussion here:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f23-dsp-room-correction-and-multi-channel-audio/dirac-unity-ces2014-18972/#post288806
Quote:
Well, Unity is a tentative name for this new technology because a number of speakers will work in unison...

While we believe that Dirac Live offers the best possible solution as a state of the art Digital Room Correction, our researchers have found that if no cost constraints are imposed we can even go beyond Digital Room Correction with a new radical approach we call Active Room Treatment.

At this time I cannot disclose any deep technical details but I can say that it is based on ideas from the fields of active noise control, sound field synthesis and room correction where our company has conducted research for many years.

You may rightfully ask why did we have a booth at the CES if we want to keep it "undisclosed"

This really radical approach has substantial hardware and processing requirements (several channels and speakers are involved even if reproducing a stereo signal) and will consequently have a substantial price tag.

As of now we offer Active Room Treatment to Dirac Live OEM licensees only, for them to be able to offer something on the absolute leading edge to their customers.

For example Datasat which is a current Dirac OEM licensee is indeed eligible to offer this to their customers. (it is however their decision if they would like to do so)

I anyhow expect that carefully weighted pages about this technology will be available soon in the Dirac site.

Ciao, Flavio

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #118 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 04:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,028
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 700 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Dirac Unity. Separate license, reportedly 2015-ish.
When I met them they said their target was only car OEMs. Nothing was mentioned about offering it separately. The implementation was clearly a prototype running on a PC. The hardware was simply a multi-channel sound card. Since PC is much faster than the target DSPs in CE devices, they would have to optimize it a lot to get it there. For the PC software playback they would have to do some work to stitch it into the audio pipeline. With the source being 2-channel and output multi, they have to be in the output pipeline and not the processing eq in music players. For multi-channel, there would need to be additional speakers beyond the ones needed for 5.1/7.1 for correction, again making the configuration a bit messy.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #119 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 06:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,428
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 126
The answer is Yes and No. smile.gifsmile.gif. See review on the Stereophile website.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is offline  
post #120 of 303 Old 02-07-2014, 06:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
dougri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

The answer is Yes and No. smile.gifsmile.gif. See review on the Stereophile website.

Why so cryptic? wink.gif You tried it and didn't like it above 400 Hz was it? Having said that, it was an excellent piece and well worth the read.

"A wide screen just makes a bad film twice as bad. "
-Samuel Goldwyn

I wonder what he'd think about 3D IMAX?
dougri is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

Tags
Room Equilizer Wizard Rew

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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