**miniDSP DDRC-88A Official Thread**8-channel AI/AO Dirac Live in a box - Page 44 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3868Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1291 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 04:28 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7013
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyrelx View Post
I'm very much waiting to hear about your experiences. I too am a "regular Joe" and I've been more than a bit daunted by the recent conversations on this thread. Will my little 5.1 set up require heroic efforts similar to AustinJerry? I hope not!
I admit that a lot of the current discussion is above my pay grade, and while I probably/possibly/maybe have enough tech smarts to decipher it all, it is only of academic interest to me, mostly, so I haven't worked up a sweat on getting to the bottom of all of it. I won't be using a 2x4, I won't be using XLR, I won't be changing any of the 88A's defaults, so it really should be much easier here.

HST, I admire Jerry's heroic efforts in getting to the bottom of his issues and I applaud Markus for taking things up with miniDSP and bringing about promised changes in the software. This thread will be a valuable resource for those with more complex setups.

I have chased Kalibrate here in the UK and they are trying their hardest to expedite delivery of my unit, so soon I will know just how right, or not, I am about a 'standard/simplified' setup.
kbarnes701 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1292 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 04:36 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7013
Quote:
Originally Posted by artur9 View Post

I'm really waiting for some subjective analysis of the Dirac. The graphs posted all look pretty amazing and AustinJerry's dropped some tantalizing hints but no one's said more than that, subjectively.
I suspect that Jerry will soon be in a position to give his subjective comments on what Dirac is doing/not doing in his system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by artur9 View Post
One thing seems clear is that the device and its software offer a lot of power and flexibility akin to that of Audyssey Pro. Or did I misunderstand that point?
More than Audyssey Pro, and then some. Pro has a very limited target curve editor for example. And Pro is not a mixed phase solution either (it uses the 'underlying' version of MultEQ found in the AVR - XT32 for the higher end units). Neither does Pro allow the user to select the cutoff points for correction. Nor does Pro allow for the saving and immediate retrieval of 4 different curves.

I have found Pro offers no significant sonic benefits for the considerable cost, and my Kit is up for sale. There are some benefits to Pro: the target curve editor, limited and crude as it is, is better than no curve editor at all. And Pro allows for the saving and reloading of as many calibrations as one has storage capacity for, although it is a cumbersome process taking 15 or more minutes and is therefore useless for comparing one cal against another.

But overall, I would venture that Dirac/88A is considerably more capable than Pro. And it doesn't cost all that much more. And it will serve you through as many AVR or AVP changes as you wish, also allowing you to opt for Yamaha or Pioneer or whatever blows your frock up.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1293 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 05:03 AM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
I suspect that Jerry will soon be in a position to give his subjective comments on what Dirac is doing/not doing in his system.



More than Audyssey Pro, and then some. Pro has a very limited target curve editor for example. And Pro is not a mixed phase solution either (it uses the 'underlying' version of MultEQ found in the AVR - XT32 for the higher end units). Neither does Pro allow the user to select the cutoff points for correction. Nor does Pro allow for the saving and immediate retrieval of 4 different curves.

I have found Pro offers no significant sonic benefits for the considerable cost, and my Kit is up for sale. There are some benefits to Pro: the target curve editor, limited and crude as it is, is better than no curve editor at all. And Pro allows for the saving and reloading of as many calibrations as one has storage capacity for, although it is a cumbersome process taking 15 or more minutes and is therefore useless for comparing one cal against another.

But overall, I would venture that Dirac/88A is considerably more capable than Pro. And it doesn't cost all that much more. And it will serve you through as many AVR or AVP changes as you wish, also allowing you to opt for Yamaha or Pioneer or whatever blows your frock up.
I fully agree with what Keith has said. I have used the Pro kit extensively for 3-4 years, and the power and flexibility of Dirac far exceeds anything Pro can do.
AustinJerry is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1294 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 05:10 AM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Here are som impressions and comments I shared recently with a group of friends. Perhaps they will be useful here as well.

Listening tests:

The good:

- Incredible resolution, sharp level of detail
- Good soundstage, extending well beyond the left and right speakers
- Surround speakers seem to be less emphasized (than with Audyssey's DEQ), I hardly know they are there listening to PLII Music, but I am still hearing a pleasant amount of ambiance. For 5.1 content, the surrounds are indeed there, but never over-emphasized.
- Pin-point center channel focus. Phantom image is perfectly centered.
- Very good dialog intelligibility on talking-head TV shows
- Very good bass extension using default Dirac targets without any bass enhancement; tight bass with no evidence of ringing

The deltas:

- Hearing some over-emphasized high frequency response on some recordings, need to investigate toning down the high end, or even adding a mid-range dip (!).
- Still struggling with the lower overall output level (psychological issue only-I'll get over it)

Using Dirac:

- One you get the hang of it, the software is easy to use
- The curve editor is very powerful, and works as designed
- Having four target curves to compare at the press of a remote control button is very powerful
- Struggling with output control. The volume knob has no indicator. The output needs to be set to unity, but it isn't easy knowing where it is set.
- There seems to be some inconsistency with results. For example, loading the same project, re-calculating the filters, saving them, and then measuring the results in REW sometimes produced different results. No cause for alarm, but needs to be researched.
- I have a growing list of nit-pick user interface enhancement requests that I will eventually submit to MiniDSP.

Am I returning to Audyssey anytime soon? No, no desire to right now. However, several weeks from now, after I am perfectly comfortable with Dirac, I probably will switch back to Audyssey just to solidify my final impressions.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #1295 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 05:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BCRSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: TX
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 490 Post(s)
Liked: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
I admit that a lot of the current discussion is above my pay grade, and while I probably/possibly/maybe have enough tech smarts to decipher it all, it is only of academic interest to me, mostly, so I haven't worked up a sweat on getting to the bottom of all of it. I won't be using a 2x4, I won't be using XLR, I won't be changing any of the 88A's defaults, so it really should be much easier here.

From all my reading (lurking), my understanding was you have 4 SubMersive's. If that is the case what are your intentions for the them with the 88a, if you won't be using a 2x4?


On a side note I think there are a lot of people interested in this product but are on the wait and see how the pioneers feel about it first stage before pulling the trigger on it, myself included. Things I see as what is holding me back is multiple subs and the limit to the 7.1 unless I get multiple units. As I have a 9.4 system now going to a 11.8, with multiple 88A's, I could set all sub channels (4, four sets of 2) on 1 unit with the extra channels picking up the rest of the speaker channels. I am just thinking outside the box and how I could see the 88A working for myself.


I have followed this thread from the start and honestly can say I feel so little compare to all of you that have made this thread such a learning experience. Thanks
Curt


BCRSS is online now  
post #1296 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 05:39 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7013
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCRSS View Post
From all my reading (lurking), my understanding was you have 4 SubMersive's. If that is the case what are your intentions for the them with the 88a, if you won't be using a 2x4?
No, I only have two Submersive F2s. And they are in a master/slave arrangement, both driven by one 6,000 watt amp housed in the 'master' F2. This means that they are driven from just one sub output on the AVR, which 'thinks' there is only one sub connected. As the subs are identical and equidistant from MLP, there are no downsides to this method. It should also greatly simplify the setup of the DDRC-88A. For those with 4 subs I can do no better than recommend Jerry's brilliant Guide, linked in his sig.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCRSS View Post
On a side note I think there are a lot of people interested in this product but are on the wait and see how the pioneers feel about it first stage before pulling the trigger on it, myself included. Things I see as what is holding me back is multiple subs and the limit to the 7.1 unless I get multiple units. As I have a 9.4 system now going to a 11.8, with multiple 88A's, I could set all sub channels (4, four sets of 2) on 1 unit with the extra channels picking up the rest of the speaker channels. I am just thinking outside the box and how I could see the 88A working for myself.
Yes, I agree that people are, sensibly, holding fire until the pioneers have reported. I intended to be a pioneer myself but the arrival of my unit has been delayed. When it does arrive, maybe I will be able to offer a useful perspective to those with simpler setups like my own.

WRT to multiple subs, I think Jerry's Guide nails it and should simplify the setting up of the 2x4 and the 88A in tandem.

While I have a system that has 9 speakers (Atmos 5.1.4 setup) I am intending to EQ all but the rear pair of overheads. For those I will just set levels and delays and they will have to do without EQ initially at least. I don't think this will be a problem but if it is I have a 2ch PEQ that I can use to EQ the remaining overhead pair, in conjunction with REW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCRSS View Post
I have followed this thread from the start and honestly can say I feel so little compare to all of you that have made this thread such a learning experience. Thanks
Curt
We all have to begin somewhere - the joy of AVS is that so many people share their knowledge so freely, for all of us to benefit from. On that score, we are all deeply indebted to the guys who have been the first pioneers with this exciting new unit and I join you in raising my hat to all of them.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1297 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 06:15 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 483
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 566 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Here are som impressions and comments I shared recently with a group of friends. Perhaps they will be useful here as well.

Listening tests:

The good:

- Incredible resolution, sharp level of detail
- Good soundstage, extending well beyond the left and right speakers
- Surround speakers seem to be less emphasized (than with Audyssey's DEQ), I hardly know they are there listening to PLII Music, but I am still hearing a pleasant amount of ambiance. For 5.1 content, the surrounds are indeed there, but never over-emphasized.
- Pin-point center channel focus. Phantom image is perfectly centered.
- Very good dialog intelligibility on talking-head TV shows
- Very good bass extension using default Dirac targets without any bass enhancement; tight bass with no evidence of ringing

The deltas:

- Hearing some over-emphasized high frequency response on some recordings, need to investigate toning down the high end, or even adding a mid-range dip (!).
- Still struggling with the lower overall output level (psychological issue only-I'll get over it)

Using Dirac:

- One you get the hang of it, the software is easy to use
- The curve editor is very powerful, and works as designed
- Having four target curves to compare at the press of a remote control button is very powerful
- Struggling with output control. The volume knob has no indicator. The output needs to be set to unity, but it isn't easy knowing where it is set.
- There seems to be some inconsistency with results. For example, loading the same project, re-calculating the filters, saving them, and then measuring the results in REW sometimes produced different results. No cause for alarm, but needs to be researched.
- I have a growing list of nit-pick user interface enhancement requests that I will eventually submit to MiniDSP.

Am I returning to Audyssey anytime soon? No, no desire to right now. However, several weeks from now, after I am perfectly comfortable with Dirac, I probably will switch back to Audyssey just to solidify my final impressions.
Thank you so much for your impressions. Were your subjective results based on full frequency correction?

Would you say the biggest improvement you heard was at the lower end of the spectrum?

In my flat, I'm positioned almost right up against the back wall and the low frequencies are booming A LOT, despite the fact I have 8 GIK bass traps (broad band panels) in the room.

So the biggest issues for me in my room are the lower frequencies, which is why I'm so excited about Dirac. It seems to be doing the job and then some, but since you're a guru of sorts, I just wonder how long it will take me to come to grips with the hardware/software.
Stephan Mire is offline  
post #1298 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 06:36 AM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan Mire View Post
Thank you so much for your impressions. Were your subjective results based on full frequency correction?

Would you say the biggest improvement you heard was at the lower end of the spectrum?

In my flat, I'm positioned almost right up against the back wall and the low frequencies are booming A LOT, despite the fact I have 8 GIK bass traps (broad band panels) in the room.

So the biggest issues for me in my room are the lower frequencies, which is why I'm so excited about Dirac. It seems to be doing the job and then some, but since you're a guru of sorts, I just wonder how long it will take me to come to grips with the hardware/software.
Don't know about the guru accusation , but I had already spent a considerable amount of time optimizing bass response before installing the 88A, both with Audyssey SubEQ HT, and then with a MiniDSP 2x4. There is a description of the sub efforts in My Setup, and the 2x4 configuration, in the links in my sig. So, with Dirac, the bass is still very good, so I didn't lose any ground.

I think the most noticeable improvement with Dirac is with the impression of more detail being revealed, most audible when listening to music. I am guessing this improvement is associated with the reduction in reflections, which was shown in an earlier post.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #1299 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 06:53 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,391
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11706 Post(s)
Liked: 9253
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan Mire View Post
So have the improvements in the measurements reflected any significant improvements in terms of sound quality? I don't hear many people discussing subjective impressions, but I think it would be nice to know what people think of this.
As of right now, subjective is all I have. I do think it is a clear improvement over Audyssey XT32. I notice this on the upper end and even more so on the lower end. The bass is much tighter, no ringing. Gives the bass more impact.

Last edited by Mike Garrett; 01-22-2015 at 07:09 AM.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #1300 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 07:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
7channelfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North Houston
Posts: 1,017
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
As of right now, subjective is all I have. I do think it is a clear improvement over Audyssey XT32. I notice this on the upper end and even more so on the lower end. The bass is much tighter, no ringing. Gives the bass more impact.
I think that's what we all are hoping to hear
7channelfreak is offline  
post #1301 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 08:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dwaleke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,642
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1412 Post(s)
Liked: 719
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
dwaleke,

miniDSP asked me to ask you to open a support ticket at https://minidsp.desk.com/customer/portal/emails/new so they can better investigate the issue. Could you please do that?

Ticket submitted. Case #5369 .
dwaleke is offline  
post #1302 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 09:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
artur9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: near philly
Posts: 2,322
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 985 Post(s)
Liked: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Here are som impressions and comments I shared recently with a group of friends. Perhaps they will be useful here as well.

Listening tests:

The good:

...


The deltas:

...

Using Dirac:

...
Nothing fell into The bad bucket?

Was there any change in image placement? That is, did individual instruments change in placement or size or shape?
artur9 is offline  
post #1303 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 09:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,621
Mentioned: 179 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3656 Post(s)
Liked: 3243
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
As of right now, subjective is all I have. I do think it is a clear improvement over Audyssey XT32. I notice this on the upper end and even more so on the lower end. The bass is much tighter, no ringing. Gives the bass more impact.
Having done an initial full range calibration on my mains only, my initial impression is that I still prefer no EQ on the "top end". Not sure where I have to limit the correction, but it seems - at least initially - that I don't prefer full range correction.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #1304 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 09:40 AM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by artur9 View Post
Nothing fell into The bad bucket?

Was there any change in image placement? That is, did individual instruments change in placement or size or shape?
I would not place anything into the "bad bucket". I am somewhat concerned by consistency and repeatability of the results, but I don't think I have been using the product long enough to rule out procedural issues caused by the user.

Regarding changes in placement, etc., sorry that is too specific for me to have an opinion. To assess that, I suspect a quick A/B comparison would be required, and switching back to Audyssey is not quick.
RMK! likes this.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #1305 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 10:20 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
Having done an initial full range calibration on my mains only, my initial impression is that I still prefer no EQ on the "top end". Not sure where I have to limit the correction, but it seems - at least initially - that I don't prefer full range correction.
Great that you get a choice though isn't it! I think I would start with EQing Schroeder and below and then work 'up' from there, slowly, to see where the point comes at which you dislike the result. I may well do this myself, although I want to see the impact of Dirac on my ETCs first.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1306 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 10:41 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,197
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Liked: 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Great that you get a choice though isn't it! I think I would start with EQing Schroeder and below and then work 'up' from there, slowly, to see where the point comes at which you dislike the result. I may well do this myself, although I want to see the impact of Dirac on my ETCs first.

Speaking of ETCs, a question for Jerry. Did you do any bandwidth limiting of frequencies for generating the IR, or did you run a straight "full band" approach for the speaker, with the sub off as per your REW guide instructions?

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification
sdrucker is offline  
post #1307 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 11:05 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,621
Mentioned: 179 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3656 Post(s)
Liked: 3243
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Great that you get a choice though isn't it! I think I would start with EQing Schroeder and below and then work 'up' from there, slowly, to see where the point comes at which you dislike the result. I may well do this myself, although I want to see the impact of Dirac on my ETCs first.
That choice is the primary reason I moved from Audyssey.

Yeah, I'll be doing exactly that. Being able to a/b the different curves with the remote is huge too. Another big advantage over Audyssey.
Gooddoc is offline  
post #1308 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 11:16 AM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Speaking of ETCs, a question for Jerry. Did you do any bandwidth limiting of frequencies for generating the IR, or did you run a straight "full band" approach for the speaker, with the sub off as per your REW guide instructions?
I just used the measurements I normally take, which is left, right, and center, all including the subs. TBH, I don't recall why the recommendation to exclude the subs is in the guide. And no, I did no bandwidth limiting.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #1309 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 11:18 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post
That choice is the primary reason I moved from Audyssey.

Yeah, I'll be doing exactly that. Being able to a/b the different curves with the remote is huge too. Another big advantage over Audyssey.
Agreed. My main reason for trying Dirac over Audyssey is its flexibility - the ability to change the curve to suit me and my room. I am also intrigued by a mixed-phase solution as opposed to Audyssey's minimum-phase solution. And I like the idea of being able to a/b up to 4 curves too - that will be handy for experimenting, although I tend to go by my measurements a lot. I've not yet seen an improved graph that didn't also reflect itself as an improved listening experience. And I am 100% enamored with the idea of AVR agnosticism too. So lots of benefits over Audyssey, at some cost in money and learning effort.
Gooddoc likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1310 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 11:38 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,197
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Liked: 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
I just used the measurements I normally take, which is left, right, and center, all including the subs. TBH, I don't recall why the recommendation to exclude the subs is in the guide. And no, I did no bandwidth limiting.

Thanks - not to take the thread OT, but IIRC the recommendation came from the original founder of the REW/HDMI thread, Jevansoh. I don't know in practice what difference it makes, however. However, as many things on the REW thread have evolved, and I haven't followed it consistently in the last year, the current practices may now be quite different.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-aud...l#post23411080


Post #3409 if the link doesn't take you to the right place...

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification

Last edited by sdrucker; 01-22-2015 at 11:42 AM.
sdrucker is offline  
post #1311 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 12:04 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7013
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Thanks - not to take the thread OT, but IIRC the recommendation came from the original founder of the REW/HDMI thread, Jevansoh. I don't know in practice what difference it makes, however. However, as many things on the REW thread have evolved, and I haven't followed it consistently in the last year, the current practices may now be quite different.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-aud...l#post23411080


Post #3409 if the link doesn't take you to the right place...
Blimey, Stu - that takes me back
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1312 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 12:37 PM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Thanks - not to take the thread OT, but IIRC the recommendation came from the original founder of the REW/HDMI thread, Jevansoh. I don't know in practice what difference it makes, however. However, as many things on the REW thread have evolved, and I haven't followed it consistently in the last year, the current practices may now be quite different.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-aud...l#post23411080


Post #3409 if the link doesn't take you to the right place...
J recommends using band filtering "...in addition to looking at the full unfiltered ETC for each individual channel...". I believe the context in which to use the bandwidth filtered ETC is to make sure that the treatments you are using are effective for the targeted frequencies. I don't think this means the unfiltered ETC isn't a perfectly good general assessment of what is going on WRT reflections.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #1313 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 01:09 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,197
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Liked: 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
J recommends using band filtering "...in addition to looking at the full unfiltered ETC for each individual channel...". I believe the context in which to use the bandwidth filtered ETC is to make sure that the treatments you are using are effective for the targeted frequencies. I don't think this means the unfiltered ETC isn't a perfectly good general assessment of what is going on WRT reflections.
All of which certainly makes our life easier, so I'll go with your recommendation .

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification
sdrucker is offline  
post #1314 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 01:19 PM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Beershorn
Posts: 3,059
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
J recommends using band filtering "...in addition to looking at the full unfiltered ETC for each individual channel...". I believe the context in which to use the bandwidth filtered ETC is to make sure that the treatments you are using are effective for the targeted frequencies. I don't think this means the unfiltered ETC isn't a perfectly good general assessment of what is going on WRT reflections.
It's possible this harkens back to the Nellor/Hedbeck paper, wherein smoothed, band-limited ETC's are used to compare L to R, and adjacent bandwidths to one another.
RUR is offline  
post #1315 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 01:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
stef2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,271
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 482 Post(s)
Liked: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Someone asked about Dirac ETC measurements. Here is a comparison of the right channel, Audyssey vs. Dirac:





The improvements with Dirac seem to be quite significant. The other channels show similar improvements.
Thats a nice improvement! and even better, the difference seems to be audible...
stef2 is offline  
post #1316 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 02:16 PM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Reliability and Consistency--Issue?

Recall that in an earlier post, I expressed some concerns regarding consistency and repeatability. What follows is some evidence that this may be a real concern.

Let's start with my experiments today with the curve editor. While listening to one of my favorite albums (MC DVD-A, sounds breathtaking), I decided to fiddle around by adding a mid-range compensation dip in the 1K-3Khz range. So, here is what the revised target looks like:



Note the cute Audyssey-like MRC dip. I loaded the filter into one of the 88A's slots and sat back and listened to the album, toggling back and forth between the original filter and the new one. Almost immediately, I noticed the new filter had significantly bloated bass. Now what could be causing that? I didn't make any changes below 1Khz. So, I set up the REW measurement kit and measured, with these results:



The filter I have been using is in Blue, the filter with the MRC dip is in Red. Where did that bass boost come from??? Just to be clear, here is exactly what I did:

- Launch DLCT
- Load the project that I used yesterday (the one that created the Blue measurement above)
- Apply the MRC change
- Re-calculate the filters
- Store the results in slot #2
- Exited the DLCT
- Re-adjusted the 88A's output level to unity
- Measured using REW

To further test out the consistency/repeatability issue, I did the following:

- Launch DLCT
- Load the project that I used yesterday (the one that created the Blue measurement above)
- Click the "Auto Target" button to apply default filters (same as used for the Blue measurement above)
- Re-calculate the filters
- Store the results in a new slot
- Exited the DLCT
- Re-adjusted the 88A's output level to unity
- Measured using REW

I did this three times in succession, loading the same project each time, and applying the Auto Target each time. Results:



Please note that during this entire suite of tests, the REW mic did not move from its position at the MLP, and all other measurement settings remained the same.

This seems to indicate a variability in the algorithm that calculates Dirac's filters. I would expect the same results each time if the project data was the same.

Comments? Should this be reported to MiniDSP as a potential bug?
kbarnes701 likes this.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #1317 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 02:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dwaleke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,642
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1412 Post(s)
Liked: 719
Go ahead and report it. The more information that the team receives will help them look on their own for these issues. And then get them fixed.
dwaleke is offline  
post #1318 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 05:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
lbrown105's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 525 Post(s)
Liked: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Someone asked about Dirac ETC measurements. Here is a comparison of the right channel, Audyssey vs. Dirac:





The improvements with Dirac seem to be quite significant. The other channels show similar improvements.
thanks for posting this Jerry and I found similar improvements vs PEQ (and posted in other threads) and was very interested vs Audyssey. I think the improvements in IR are more compelling than the FR which is also very good but IMO easier to obtain via multiple methods including PEQ and other curve editable RC.
lbrown105 is offline  
post #1319 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 06:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
stef2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,271
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 482 Post(s)
Liked: 282
I am currently running an 11.2 setup. My 3 front speakers (FR, FL and CC) are powered by an Emotiva XPA-3 while the other channels are powered by my AVR, a Denon 4520-CI (I had to get the XPA-3 since my Denon couldn't power all 11 speakers).

I believe I can still use the DDRC-88A for the 3 speakers powered by my XPA-3 and my two subs?

If that is so, from my understanding, I must turn off any processing done by my AVR, (aside from adjust the distance and levels for all the other channels directly powered by the AVR), am I right?

Must Audyssey absolutely be off, or can I still use it in my AVR to correct the channels DiracLive doesn't address?
stef2 is offline  
post #1320 of 16616 Old 01-22-2015, 06:57 PM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 20,366
Mentioned: 374 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10930 Post(s)
Liked: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by stef2 View Post
I am currently running an 11.2 setup. My 3 front speakers (FR, FL and CC) are powered by an Emotiva XPA-3 while the other channels are powered by my AVR, a Denon 4520-CI (I had to get the XPA-3 since my Denon couldn't power all 11 speakers).

I believe I can still use the DDRC-88A for the 3 speakers powered by my XPA-3 and my two subs?

If that is so, from my understanding, I must turn off any processing done by my AVR, (aside from adjust the distance and levels for all the other channels directly powered by the AVR), am I right?

Must Audyssey absolutely be off, or can I still use it in my AVR to correct the channels DiracLive doesn't address?
I don't know of any way to disable Audyssey processing on left, right, center and subs. Interesting that I had exactly the same configuration as you, XPA-3 and 4520, and I chose to down-size to 7.1. I don't miss the heights or wides, and can do without DSX. I now have an XPA-7, and am enjoying Dirac Live.
AustinJerry is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
DDRC-88A , dirac live , minidsp , req

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