or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Chu Gai

Onkyo bites a big one too.
If a company is going to sell a product and one of its selling points is automated room correction then it is foolish to cripple it with such a microphone. While one can say the mic is inexpensive, a more honest assessment is that it's a cheap POS. using it gives the end user a false sense of security as to its efficacy and is literally guaranteed to provide doubtful improvement.Rather than looking to rationalize their choice of a substandard mic, every owner should...
I don't know if I specifically said that you can't compare an AVR to an amp or integrated. A fair comparison for just two amps requires some effort although not insurmountable. With a modern AVR, with its multitude of settings, it's quite easy to overlook something and folks get lulled into a false sense of security by thinking that a direct or pure direct mode makes the comparison easier.
Even then it's a complete unknown if you're getting an honest FR. The real troubling part is what person or group was responsible for its selection? Could they be related to the engineer that signed off on GM's ignition switch?
Wow, looks like one of the first microphones from when people were starting to do voice overPC's! Must've cost near 50ยข to make. How this hasn't resulted in an uproar from users is beyond me.
I've found precious little in the way of cirrus documentation that sheds light on the aspect of room correction, Kal. As you pointed out in that Rotel link, they have 10 filters and their approach if I read it right, is strictly manual. They've eschewed the use of auto equalization. This raises some questions in my mind WRT to Cirrus. Since they've been marketing this Level 2 for quite a few years, has the number of filters and the capabilities been constant across the...
According to an older Cirrus publication, http://www.cirrus.com/en/pubs/proBulletin/IRC_PB.pdf, their room correction utilizes a 7 band parametric equalizer. Judging by the graphs posted at the end, the lowest frequency is centered around 160Hz, give or take. Not much more than that.
In the graphs that were run by you, Kal, it appeas that little was done to address the LF area assuming that the raw response of the 'room' is similar. If so, might this be attributable to the supplied microphone? Also, since you've had different products with RC before, how have they fared with this type of a test?
But not 100% Be.
IMHO, what piques my curiousity is just how upgradable this thing is going to be? Is the architecture such that it'll be able to support future HDMI incarnations, Atmos, and other things? While I haven't done a recent perusal of their forum, I would hope that someone has wondered out loud over there.
New Posts  All Forums: