The official Dirac Live thread - Page 19 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 495Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #541 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 12:55 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nonstopdoc1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,247
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 918 Post(s)
Liked: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipbtz View Post
I usually set the upper limit to max 300Hz, sometimes a bit lower.
Do you mean you only room correct from 0 to 300Hz?

HT - Seymour Centerstage XD 2.39:1 133" W| JVC X790R | JBL SDP-55 | Nord NC500 | ATI AT528NC | Procella P8/P5V | Revel C763L | Monolith 12" x4
Living Room - LG OLED 65" | Denon X4400H | Monolith 3x200 | KEF Q900 L/R | Paradigm Millenia 20 CC | Polk Surrounds | Rythmik FV15HP x2
nonstopdoc1 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #542 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 01:40 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Balbolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 506 Post(s)
Liked: 901
Always interested in Dirac although i own a Marantz 8805 (Audy XT32) , most people are saying that Dirac outperforms Audyssey but could they tell me in what way? Like with Audyssey's multeq app you could limit correction,create a house curve for any speaker,disable mid-range compensation, change levels, speaker size and other things. For full range correction does Dirac offer more control/features? maybe some who owns both or owned an Audyssey based unit could answer. Thanks in advance.
Balbolito is offline  
post #543 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 01:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
philipbtz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 609
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 413 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstopdoc1 View Post
Do you mean you only room correct from 0 to 300Hz?
Yes, exactly. I have room treatments for frequencies over that. And in reality it's quite difficult to correct above the room transition frequency. It might seem like a small frequency span but it has a major impact.
Soulburner likes this.

Room| Treated | Sound| Front: Ino Audio i32s, Center: Ino Audio i16s, Surrounds: 6 x Ino a2, 6 x Ino a1, Subs: 6 x Ino Infra-Y|
Picture | Epson TW9300, Center Stage UF 130.4" retractable 2.35:1 |
Electronics | Arcam AVR390(Dirac Live), 3x Ncore nc400 monoblocks, (soon)Apollon NCMP6350, (soon)Apollon NCMP6200, EP4000, Panasonic UB700, ATV 4K |
philipbtz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #544 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 02:57 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balbolito View Post
Always interested in Dirac although i own a Marantz 8805 (Audy XT32) , most people are saying that Dirac outperforms Audyssey but could they tell me in what way? Like with Audyssey's multeq app you could limit correction,create a house curve for any speaker,disable mid-range compensation, change levels, speaker size and other things. For full range correction does Dirac offer more control/features? maybe some who owns both or owned an Audyssey based unit could answer. Thanks in advance.
Midrange compensation is not available, because no such correction is applied by Dirac.
Everything else is pretty much same except, we can't change speaker levels (most Dirac enabled avr). The audyssey app also limits itself at 20hz (lower frequency), because of which it would not correct a peak at my place at 20hz, which Dirac was able to do, as it can go lower also.
Further, we can edit curve on our laptops bigger screen instead of mobile /tablet and editing curve is far easier in Dirac software and we get real time update on the filters applied instead of going back and forth in audyssey app.
siju uralath is offline  
post #545 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 03:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
clausdk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 790
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 101
So I bought the multi sub upgrade, how do I actually "install" into dirac? inside dirac it keeps sending me to the purchace page and I have recieved a code I guess has to be entered somewhere?

EDIT: Worked it out, go to your account at dirac and activate.

Last edited by clausdk; 06-02-2020 at 03:24 AM.
clausdk is offline  
post #546 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 04:02 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 12,962
Mentioned: 226 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6614 Post(s)
Liked: 3506
Quote:
Originally Posted by siju uralath View Post
Midrange compensation is not available, because no such correction is applied by Dirac.
"Midrange compensation" is just a "dent" in the target curve. You can have any "dent" in DL you like.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is offline  
post #547 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 04:04 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 12,962
Mentioned: 226 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6614 Post(s)
Liked: 3506
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balbolito View Post
Always interested in Dirac although i own a Marantz 8805 (Audy XT32) , most people are saying that Dirac outperforms Audyssey but could they tell me in what way? Like with Audyssey's multeq app you could limit correction,create a house curve for any speaker,disable mid-range compensation, change levels, speaker size and other things. For full range correction does Dirac offer more control/features? maybe some who owns both or owned an Audyssey based unit could answer. Thanks in advance.
Audyssey is minimum phase only. DL does a mixed-phase correction.
With DLBC you get multisub optimization and crossover splice optimization. Both not available in MultEQ.

For detailed information see post 1.
Balbolito likes this.

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is offline  
post #548 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 05:06 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,604
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipbtz View Post
Yes, exactly. I have room treatments for frequencies over that. And in reality it's quite difficult to correct above the room transition frequency. It might seem like a small frequency span but it has a major impact.
I guess you don't have much of a house curve then, or at least not one set by DL?

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room
Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Panasonic TX65EZ952B, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is online now  
post #549 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 08:07 AM
Senior Member
 
smbsocal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Statesville, NC
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balbolito View Post
Always interested in Dirac although i own a Marantz 8805 (Audy XT32) , most people are saying that Dirac outperforms Audyssey but could they tell me in what way? Like with Audyssey's multeq app you could limit correction,create a house curve for any speaker,disable mid-range compensation, change levels, speaker size and other things. For full range correction does Dirac offer more control/features? maybe some who owns both or owned an Audyssey based unit could answer. Thanks in advance.

It has been 2 years since I have used Audyssey and can't provide exact measurements but I can provide some basic personal opinions/feedback at least.



I have not used Audyssey for a couple of years but I used it over the years in the past and even purchased the Audyssey Pro kit to help fine tune things. Audyssey always made things sound 'clearer' but the change to the sound wasn't all positive, it sounded very anemic to me. To get the sound I wanted it required a lot of EQing after running Audyssey even more than what the Pro kit allowed you to do with adjusting their response curve. I actually purchased Behringer iNuke DSP amps for the LCR speakers so I could do extensive EQing after the fact. I know Audyssey now has an app that you allows you to modify the target curve as you could with the Pro kit but I have not used it.



I have the full Dirac license, running NAD T777 v3, and post processing Dirac sounds MUCH clearer and it sounds great without any adjustment to the response curve. Adjusting the response curve makes it that much better for my specific sound preference. The only thing I miss from Audyssey is the Dynamic EQ other than that I refuse to go back to a Audyssey solution.
smbsocal is offline  
post #550 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 08:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 5,156
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1412 Post(s)
Liked: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balbolito View Post
Always interested in Dirac although i own a Marantz 8805 (Audy XT32) , most people are saying that Dirac outperforms Audyssey but could they tell me in what way? Like with Audyssey's multeq app you could limit correction,create a house curve for any speaker,disable mid-range compensation, change levels, speaker size and other things. For full range correction does Dirac offer more control/features? maybe some who owns both or owned an Audyssey based unit could answer. Thanks in advance.

The main practical difference now is that drawing curves on Dirac is much easier. The Audyssey app inexplicable does not allow you to just make one curve and copy it to the other channels.

Maybe DBC will change that. Certainly being able to draw a global response curve and letting Dirac optimize the mains - sub splice is in theory an improvement.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
DS-21 is offline  
post #551 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 09:17 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,766
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2623 Post(s)
Liked: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipbtz View Post
It might seem like a small frequency span but it has a major impact.

It's actually almost half of the audible freq range in the number of octaves covered.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #552 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 09:53 AM
Senior Member
 
flax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 351
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Liked: 452
Hi @markus767


I notice that all posts focus on magnitude response as the only important aspect for "good sound" and somehow dismiss the importance of impulse response.
As you know well, we think differently and a link in Post 1 to the following video would be very useful in this "Official Dirac Live thread"



Don't you think the same?
Thanks, Flavio

Warning: My posts might be biased even if in good faith, I work for Dirac Research :-)
flax is offline  
post #553 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 10:02 AM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 22,625
Mentioned: 487 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12682 Post(s)
Liked: 7595
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstopdoc1 View Post
Do you guys set an upper frequency limit for the room correction or do you perform room correction on full frequency range?
This is always a good question, and in order to obtain an answer, you should experiment. And if you want a more objective answer than just the difference in how it sounds, you could try measuring the various options. Here are some examples. This was done with Dirac ver 1.0 (without DLBC of course), but the examples will be applicable to Dirac 2.0 as well.

First example is a typical custom target that attempts to boost the high frequencies (let's call this on Dirac Full Range). Not that my speaker has a natural roll-off above 4KHz, which Dirac is attempting to correct.



Second example is a custom target that follows the natural roll-off of the speaker in the high end (let's call this Dirac HF Roll-Off). Many Dirac users advocate this approach.



And the final example is a custom target with a correction cut-off at 4KHz, where the natural speaker roll-off begins (let's call this Dirac 5K Cut-Off).




Now, can we see a difference in REW measurements? First, compare Dirac off with Dirac Full-Range. In the high end, we can clearly see the boosted high frequencies. And the low end now reflects the 6dB bass boost in the custom target.



Now let's look at the Dirac Full-Range vs. Dirac 4K Cut-Off. No correction above 4K.



Finally, let's compare Dirac HF Roll-Off with Dirac 4K Cut-Off. Not much difference at all. Will it be audible?




So, now that we know the differences shown in the measurements, do our ears hear the same differences? TBH, since my hearing doesn't extend above 14KHz, I can't hear any difference. But with expectation bias, maybe you will hear a difference.

Finally, a quick example that reveals one of the key strengths of Dirac Live room correction, room reflections measured by the REW Impulse response (ETC) graph. Here is the ETC with Dirac off. A typical objective in a well-controlled listening room is to reduce all reflections below 20ms to -20dB or lower. Note several impulses extending above -20dB.



Here is the ETC with Dirac Full-Range. The overall level of reflections has been reduced considerably across the whole range. That is what Dirac does!

AustinJerry is online now  
post #554 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 10:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 6,179
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
Finally, a quick example that reveals one of the key strengths of Dirac Live room correction, room reflections measured by the REW Impulse response (ETC) graph. Here is the ETC with Dirac off. A typical objective in a well-controlled listening room is to reduce all reflections below 20ms to -20dB or lower. Note several impulses extending above -20dB.

Here is the ETC with Dirac Full-Range. The overall level of reflections has been reduced considerably across the whole range. That is what Dirac does!
I think this goes back to our discussion a few pages ago after Flavio posted that video the first time. EQ can not change how a room reverberates or reflects other than through changes in magnitude (same as increasing/decreasing the volume knob), so if sounds are played at the same level as before, they will ring at the same level as before, and for the same length of time. What must be happening is Dirac is altering how long a sound "rings" for from the speaker itself, which of course will translate to the room measurements. I am still unclear on how it does this. A clue may be in the video where he talks about "pre-ringing". If Dirac knows enough about a speaker, it could predict impulse at each frequency and apply a preemptive correction. The technical workings have not been explained in any of Dirac's videos or documentation that I am aware of, and that may be for business reasons. Another method could be that, instead of acting preemptively, damping signals could be used, putting the brakes on driver movement. I imagine this would require more from an amplifier. Either approach could, if not done carefully, make a good speaker sound terrible. Clearly Dirac has done their homework on this because that is not the case.

System 1: Samsung Plasma | Denon X4500H | Hypex Ncore NC252MP | Buchardt S400 | Polk LSiM 702 F/X | Heights TBD | Subs TBD Rythmik
System 2: Laptop | NAD T758 v3 | PSB Imagine B
System 3: PC | Micca OriGen G2 | Mackie MR624
Soulburner is offline  
post #555 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 11:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
philipbtz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 609
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 413 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
I guess you don't have much of a house curve then, or at least not one set by DL?
I do, but not much. I'm sure the tilt isn't optimal but it works. I run 3 of the subs near field so I don't need to have too much of a house curve. But I'll probably play around with it if I ever get Dirac BC. When I didn't run near field I felt the need to run a much more aggressive house curve.

Room| Treated | Sound| Front: Ino Audio i32s, Center: Ino Audio i16s, Surrounds: 6 x Ino a2, 6 x Ino a1, Subs: 6 x Ino Infra-Y|
Picture | Epson TW9300, Center Stage UF 130.4" retractable 2.35:1 |
Electronics | Arcam AVR390(Dirac Live), 3x Ncore nc400 monoblocks, (soon)Apollon NCMP6350, (soon)Apollon NCMP6200, EP4000, Panasonic UB700, ATV 4K |
philipbtz is offline  
post #556 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 11:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,914
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7876 Post(s)
Liked: 7069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
I am still unclear on how it does this.
The same measurement can be viewed different ways: e.g., magnitude response, impulse response, waterfall, etc. What appears as a peak in the magnitude response graph can be seen as long decay time in an impulse response or waterfall graph. The problem frequency is sticking around for a longer time than adjacent frequencies, so the additional sound in the room accumulates into a peak. Same problem, different view.

For ringing (long decay times) in the low frequencies, you can look at a peak on a magnitude response graph and use a PEQ filter to pull it down. On a waterfall graph, it will look like the long decay time just got buried in the noise floor, so the ringing won't be audible any more. Simple filter, does the same thing for infinitely long, without changing.

With higher frequencies, you can look at the up/down spikes (reflections) on the impulse response graph and target them with a different type of filter that changes over time (to follow the impulse response that is decaying over time). The filter can't keep doing this indefinitely because the latency would end up being ridiculous, so the filter has to do what it can over a finite period of time, addressing reflections soon after the direct sound (initial impulse).

Dirac uses both types of filters, the infinite kind that works on magnitude and the finite kind that works over time, to address different types of problems. EQ might not be able to change "how a room reverberates or reflects", but it can use a couple of methods to change what reaches your ears.

The more important and trickier part for any automated room correction program is deciding which reflections to address. Do you really want to minimize reflections that aid in intelligibility and spaciousness? The old Dirac white paper gets into that conundrum.
wl1 and ograma like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #557 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 11:42 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,766
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2623 Post(s)
Liked: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
EQ can not change how a room reverberates or reflects other than through changes in magnitude (same as increasing/decreasing the volume knob), so if sounds are played at the same level as before, they will ring at the same level as before, and for the same length of time.
Perhaps true for generalized ringing, but I believe Jakob alluded to the fact that a back wall reflection may have a similar delay for the whole listening area, so the RC can apply its inverse to reduce/cancel it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
Another method could be that, instead of acting preemptively, damping signals could be used, putting the brakes on driver movement.

That doesn't help when it's the room that's ringing.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #558 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 12:03 PM
Senior Member
 
flax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 351
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Liked: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
I believe Jakob alluded to the fact that a back wall reflection may have a similar delay for the whole listening area, so the RC can apply its inverse to reduce/cancel it.

Yes the different measurements will show that it doesn't significantly change with position and Dirac will correct it
noah katz and SteveC356 like this.

Warning: My posts might be biased even if in good faith, I work for Dirac Research :-)
flax is offline  
post #559 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 12:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 6,179
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The more important and trickier part for any automated room correction program is deciding which reflections to address. Do you really want to minimize reflections that aid in intelligibility and spaciousness? The old Dirac white paper gets into that conundrum.
You probably recall there was discussion on this topic in the Science thread with Dr. Toole. The Cliff's notes are that he is skeptical that EQ can know which reflections to correct and even still, the result of those corrections will change the speaker's direct and anechoic performance. The general recommendation was (critical disclaimer: if you have good-measuring speakers in a room that isn't too irregularly shaped or configured on each side) to limit corrections to the transition frequency.

Such a complex topic. I've enjoyed trying to wrap my head around it, even at a basic level.
ograma likes this.

System 1: Samsung Plasma | Denon X4500H | Hypex Ncore NC252MP | Buchardt S400 | Polk LSiM 702 F/X | Heights TBD | Subs TBD Rythmik
System 2: Laptop | NAD T758 v3 | PSB Imagine B
System 3: PC | Micca OriGen G2 | Mackie MR624

Last edited by Soulburner; 06-02-2020 at 02:20 PM.
Soulburner is offline  
post #560 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 12:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 6,179
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
Quote:
Originally Posted by flax View Post
Yes the different measurements will show that it doesn't significantly change with position and Dirac will correct it
Sounds smart to me. But how does it apply those corrections to the speaker without affecting how other sounds reach your ears? Direct sound and early reflections would also be affected by those changes.

System 1: Samsung Plasma | Denon X4500H | Hypex Ncore NC252MP | Buchardt S400 | Polk LSiM 702 F/X | Heights TBD | Subs TBD Rythmik
System 2: Laptop | NAD T758 v3 | PSB Imagine B
System 3: PC | Micca OriGen G2 | Mackie MR624
Soulburner is offline  
post #561 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 01:59 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,766
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2623 Post(s)
Liked: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The more important and trickier part for any automated room correction program is deciding which reflections to address. Do you really want to minimize reflections that aid in intelligibility and spaciousness? The old Dirac white paper gets into that conundrum.

Source? Reflections can add to spaciousness, but I've never heard that they increase intelligibility, and it seems counterintuitive.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #562 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 02:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Balbolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 506 Post(s)
Liked: 901
Quote:
Originally Posted by siju uralath View Post
Midrange compensation is not available, because no such correction is applied by Dirac.
Everything else is pretty much same except, we can't change speaker levels (most Dirac enabled avr). The audyssey app also limits itself at 20hz (lower frequency), because of which it would not correct a peak at my place at 20hz, which Dirac was able to do, as it can go lower also.
Further, we can edit curve on our laptops bigger screen instead of mobile /tablet and editing curve is far easier in Dirac software and we get real time update on the filters applied instead of going back and forth in audyssey app.
Thanks for letting me know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Audyssey is minimum phase only. DL does a mixed-phase correction.
With DLBC you get multisub optimization and crossover splice optimization. Both not available in MultEQ.

For detailed information see post 1.
Will do thanks. i currently use a mDSP 2x4HD which is way superior to what Audyssey does in the bass region. not sure yet how good in the new Dirac BC as it's new.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smbsocal View Post
It has been 2 years since I have used Audyssey and can't provide exact measurements but I can provide some basic personal opinions/feedback at least.


I have not used Audyssey for a couple of years but I used it over the years in the past and even purchased the Audyssey Pro kit to help fine tune things. Audyssey always made things sound 'clearer' but the change to the sound wasn't all positive, it sounded very anemic to me. To get the sound I wanted it required a lot of EQing after running Audyssey even more than what the Pro kit allowed you to do with adjusting their response curve. I actually purchased Behringer iNuke DSP amps for the LCR speakers so I could do extensive EQing after the fact. I know Audyssey now has an app that you allows you to modify the target curve as you could with the Pro kit but I have not used itI have the full Dirac license, running NAD T777 v3, and post processing Dirac sounds MUCH clearer and it sounds great without any adjustment to the response curve. Adjusting the response curve makes it that much better for my specific sound preference. The only thing I miss from Audyssey is the Dynamic EQ other than that I refuse to go back to a Audyssey solution.
That's good to know, i had the Audyssey pro kit too at one point but the new app is way better,faster and more convenient to use. So would be interesting if someone could compare the Audyssey App vs Dirac Live. measurements would be a good start and also actual listening tests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post
The main practical difference now is that drawing curves on Dirac is much easier. The Audyssey app inexplicable does not allow you to just make one curve and copy it to the other channels.

Maybe DBC will change that. Certainly being able to draw a global response curve and letting Dirac optimize the mains - sub splice is in theory an improvement.
Your are right, a curve with the Audyssey app has to be applied to every single speaker manually which isn't really convenient but once it's done you will forget about it.
Balbolito is offline  
post #563 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 02:50 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,914
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7876 Post(s)
Liked: 7069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
The Cliff's notes are that he is skeptical that EQ can know which reflections to correct and that the general recommendation was (critical disclaimer: if you have good-measuring speakers in a room that isn't too irregularly shaped or configured on each side) to limit corrections to the transition frequency.
I'm less definitive on both those points.

The research Toole cites makes it clear that listeners prefer reflections off the side walls but don't much care for reflections off the front & back walls. If you were to move the Dirac measurement mic across your couch, you would notice that the reflections off the front & back walls didn't vary as much as reflections off the side walls. Separating the measured impulse responses into those two broad categories will allow you to correct undesirable reflections while leaving desirable reflections alone. Not so complicated.

The same "good-measuring" speaker will sound different when placed at different locations in the room. EQing above the transition range doesn't mean correcting tiny peaks & dips but instead doing more of a gentle shaping (almost like tone control) towards a common target curve. This helps sounds remain consistent as they pan from speaker to speaker.
DS-21 and ograma like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #564 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 02:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,914
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7876 Post(s)
Liked: 7069
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Source? Reflections can add to spaciousness, but I've never heard that they increase intelligibility, and it seems counterintuitive.
Since this is the Dirac thread, I'll quote from the Dirac white paper:

"There seems to be consensus in the field that some early reflections actually help make speech more intelligible. However, it is also well documented that reflections within 5-10 ms of the main pulse in typical listening rooms are above the level where the primary source shifts or spreads (even when just listening to a single primary source). Reflections from the front and the rear (within ±40º) are perceived as detrimental to sound quality, whereas side reflections (within reasonable levels) often improve the perceived sound quality."

Aside from that, you can Google 'speech intelligibility' and 'early reflections'.
ograma and bmcn like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #565 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 03:16 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,766
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2623 Post(s)
Liked: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Aside from that, you can Google 'speech intelligibility' and 'early reflections'.

I did, and it seems that the conclusion is based on unamplified live speech in rooms, and the result is because the reflections add to volume and increase S/N ratio.

I'm not sure that applies for sound reproduction where speech intelligibility is a production priority, but I suppose it could.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #566 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 03:27 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,914
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7876 Post(s)
Liked: 7069
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
I did, and it seems that the conclusion is based on unamplified live speech in rooms, and the result is because the reflections add to volume and increase S/N ratio.

I'm not sure that applies for sound reproduction where speech intelligibility is a production priority, but I suppose it could.
Toole stated it bluntly: "Early reflections improve speech intelligibility." For context, the quote is from his paper titled 'Loudspeakers and Rooms for Sound Reproduction' (rather than 'Unamplified Live Speech in Rooms').

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #567 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 04:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,766
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2623 Post(s)
Liked: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Toole stated it bluntly: [I]"Early reflections improve speech intelligibility."

Now you tell me

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #568 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 05:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nonstopdoc1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,247
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 918 Post(s)
Liked: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
This is always a good question, and in order to obtain an answer, you should experiment. And if you want a more objective answer than just the difference in how it sounds, you could try measuring the various options. Here are some examples. This was done with Dirac ver 1.0 (without DLBC of course), but the examples will be applicable to Dirac 2.0 as well.
Thanks for the detailed and very informative response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flax View Post
Yes the different measurements will show that it doesn't significantly change with position and Dirac will correct it

I understand that a user can try and adjust the way he or she likes but from standpoint of Dirac, do you recommend full range room correction or a specific range for optimum results?

Thanks!

HT - Seymour Centerstage XD 2.39:1 133" W| JVC X790R | JBL SDP-55 | Nord NC500 | ATI AT528NC | Procella P8/P5V | Revel C763L | Monolith 12" x4
Living Room - LG OLED 65" | Denon X4400H | Monolith 3x200 | KEF Q900 L/R | Paradigm Millenia 20 CC | Polk Surrounds | Rythmik FV15HP x2
nonstopdoc1 is online now  
post #569 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 06:05 PM
** Man of Leisure **
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 22,625
Mentioned: 487 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12682 Post(s)
Liked: 7595
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstopdoc1 View Post
Thanks for the detailed and very informative response.




I understand that a user can try and adjust the way he or she likes but from standpoint of Dirac, do you recommend full range room correction or a specific range for optimum results?

Thanks!
Not sure if this is addressed to me or not, but “Optimum results” is highly subjective. Ultimately you need to experiment with the various options and choose the one that sounds best to you. If you don’t hear a difference among the options, does it really matter? No disrespect, but expecting someone to tell you the “right answer” is unrealistic.
Carbo likes this.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #570 of 1098 Old 06-02-2020, 10:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 6,179
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
If a specific range was the optimum, there would be no point to Dirac investing R&D into developing software that can correct up to 20 kHz. It's a tool, and it's up to you to use it to get the best results.

System 1: Samsung Plasma | Denon X4500H | Hypex Ncore NC252MP | Buchardt S400 | Polk LSiM 702 F/X | Heights TBD | Subs TBD Rythmik
System 2: Laptop | NAD T758 v3 | PSB Imagine B
System 3: PC | Micca OriGen G2 | Mackie MR624
Soulburner is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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