Room Correction vs Digital Signal Processors - Page 2

Noah,

I'm not fully aware of all miniDSP has to offer, but the Jupiter has multi-band parametric down to 20hz. It's got 10hz functionality associated with it's high pass/low pass filters. It'd be squirrelly, and I've never filtered like this, but theoretically you could get creative and low pass @10hz, & raise the subsequent level, ....thus boosting 10hz. I'm not even sure this works, and even if it does what happens.

Anyway, the Jupiter software is nice, and I've read the transparency is superb, if one ran their mains through it. The cool thing is that it's essentially future proof, with the "apps" approach.

As far as the I/O panel, a simple break-out connector solves that. There's only so much room on the back. I too would prefer an all XLR panel,..but can't win 'em all.

I'm still looking at other pieces for just the right piece of gear. No hurry here, but thanks for pointing out the 10hz control point of the miniDSP,...that's a great selling point IMO.



Thanks

I chose the DSP solution (BSS London Soundwebs, identical to the JBL SDEC 4500) because of the exact same reasons as Nyal Mellor. I had an XT32 processor with the Audyssey Pro kit, but could never get it to sound as good as I knew my system could sound. I then bought the BSS unit and 8 mics around the listening positions and calibrated everything myself. Much better result! The funny thing is, that the frequency response was almost identical with the Audyssey/BSS calibration, but it sounded very different. I dont know what, but Audyssey does something to the sound which makes it sound "Audyssey-like".

I drawback of auto routines like Audyssey, is that they never re-measure to verify. When I calibrated my system, the first filter calculation was not spot on. Re-measuring and applying again helped a lot! Audyssey and other room correction systems (except for the JBL Synthesys solution) is not able to do this, as they only use one microphone and re-measuring is not possible as it would be impossible to find the exact same microphone positions.
Edited by JonasHansen - 6/8/12 at 10:33am

Thanks Jonas, I appreciate the input.

Still looking around for more potential candidates.

Is anyone using the JBL Synthesis SDEC4500 with non-JBL (Harman) designed speakers? I am of the understanding that it was designed for use only within the Synthesis system and specific to their speakers.

You can select "other' and the system still does most of what it does. Instead of using the measured profiles of the (harman) speakers, it will resort to a statistical library of large number of speakers they have tested. As such you should be able to enjoy large amount of the system optimization.

Thanks Amir,

I wonder if my Aerial Acoustics LR5 speakers are in the SDEC 4500 's data-base? I sat through Todd Packer's demonstration of the unit at CEDIA yesterday and was quite impressed with the user interface. They used a complete Synthesis system including their speakers.

You are welcome. Just clarifying, when you tell it you have a different speaker, it uses the average of all the other speakers (or something like it), not the specific data for each. So you would not be selecting your speaker.

The interface is definitely a joy to use. One knows exactly what the system is doing and can fine tune it easily.

Thanks for the clarification. I would have to assume that this average data-set would allow the results to be nearly if not as good as using Harman speakers.

That's correct. Vast amount of the power of auto EQ goes to low frequencies (below transition frequency of 200-400 Hz). The speaker profiles are mostly used for frequencies above that to shape the overall response. You can apply the global filters yourself to your taste.

The only caveat is to be careful a bit that you don't overdrive your speakers.

He gave me a one on one software demo, and suggested I get a ticket and take in the full demo at the Westin. So, a bit later at my appointed time, I went on over to the Westin for the full blown Harman system demonstration, I felt it was decent, however nothing more. I sat front center, right where the individual that tuned the system (Todd Packer) told me to sit.

I took notes regarding all the demos I attended. The Harman demo had impressive visual capability, even showing The Lorax in 3D. But the audio side of things which is the focus, wasn't all that impressive on it's own merit. Compared to the other demos I listened to over the three day period at Cedia, it really was merely mid-pack.

My exact notes;
Dry, not sweet enough, not immersive, good midbass impact, just not sweet enough, no deep bass. To translate, at my recommended seat, there lacked adequate energy in the HF. Additionally, there was no immersive characteristic whatsoever. Midbass was ok, however there wasn't any deep bass and insufficient bass quality. This, I didn't expect. Harman's Kevin Voecks was there, I overheard him discussing the demo as I took pics after everyone had left the room. I expected more, ... with all the Mark Levinson power amps (system was $270,000 just speakers and amps), and the optimized use of their best room software, ...I don't know if it got better, or what. I intended to re-visit the demo to confirm my take on things, I was enjoying other much more enjoyable systems.

They used the Atlas LCRs, four vented single 18s, ...one in each corner, and their small column arrays for surrounds.

They were proud of it. I heard much, much better upstairs in the XTX room. I'll detail that for anyone interested.


I'll round up my pics if anyone's interested.
Thanks