dan50
Minor Hero
Posts: 12
|
Post by dan50 on Mar 24, 2014 18:57:06 GMT -5
Yes, it will correct each sub independently and in stereo on the XMC-1. Dave. That is not how Audyssey in a pre-pro or a receiver works. Audyssey adjusts trim and distance of the two subs and THEN does the correction of both subs combined. That is a much preferred solution than what the XMC is going to do. I have spent hours getting the combined output of my subs to be as flat (pre EQ) as possible. They are not individually in the best position but they are in the best position collectively. Doing what the XMC will be doing takes away most of the advantages of using multiple subs. For example ( this is the situation I have): my front subs have a broad range dip (if measured by themselves) that would require a huge amount of amp power to correct (which is what the XMC will try to do). My rear sub has a peak in approximately the same range of the front sub dip so when corrected together, the amps do almost no work as the correction filters are very flat. The original Audyssey SubEQ provided both options but Audyssey (the company, not the product) were adamant that the way I described (which is how Audyssey x32 works) was by far the preferred approach. Is that how Dirac works in general for the subs or is it just like this in the xmc1.
|
|
|
Post by audioguy123 on Mar 25, 2014 10:52:22 GMT -5
[/quote]Is that how Dirac works in general for the subs or is it just like this in the xmc1.[/quote]
I don't correct my subs individually with Dirac on my PC. I correct them along with the mains as I have them and the mains crossed over thru a preamp and Dirac only "sees" one speaker.
If you look on the site "www.WhatsBestForum.com" (careful, these people believe that spending a years income on speaker wire is a good idea) there is a thread on Dirac and you may be able to find your answer there.
My guess would be that it does it as Emotiva is planning but I hope I'm wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2014 22:33:54 GMT -5
A lot of us will be interested to see how Dirac compares to Trinnov. I'm now using a Sherwood R972 as my AV processor, since I found Trinnov makes the speakers as individual sound sources disappear in a way Audyssey never did. I have my speakers properly positioned so I don't need Trinnov's steering function and hope the time domain corrections shared by both Trinnov and Dirac account for the benefits of Tirnnov I really like. The R972 is extremely quirky and I'd love to have a modern processor that gives me the same sound quality. I have been very lucky as my R-972 has been quirk free. I also use it as a pre/pro. I intend to get the XMC-1 to see what it, and Dirac is all about, and do some comparisons. The one thing that I might miss is Trinnov's 3-D “Spatial Remapping” feature. It not only measures and corrects in the time, distance, frequency, and delay domains, etc., but also measures each speaker in +/- degrees in a vertical and horizontal axis, and shifts that axis “of sound” in such a way that the positioning of your speakers doesn't matter. In live concert DVD's you are on the stage, and with movies you are in the scene. It's all talk until you have experienced it. Pretty unreal though. Trinnov does not flatten the life out of the music like some of the Audyssey RC that I have heard. Hopefully, Dirac will be better there. In researching about Dirac Live I found it's maximum processing capability is 24/96. Is that of any concern? What if you were playing 24/192 files from your laptop? Does it just down sample the resolution? Will the XMC-1's Dirac also be at 24/96? What are the implications here? Excuse me if this has already been covered. I'm just on page 2, and there looks like a number of more pages to read. Just wanted to ask while I was thinking about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2014 22:47:48 GMT -5
Another question about Dirac. Trinnov (R-972) can take readings from three different seating positions. Not for the purpose to get an EQ sum for the room, but to work for 3 different locations in your room. For example, (couch) Poistion 1, (love seat) Position 2, (recliner) Position 3. Going to the set up menu and selecting your seating position instantly balances, and EQ's your speakers for that location. I have not read enough about Dirac to know if it has some kind of flexibility like this. Just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Apr 4, 2014 4:25:39 GMT -5
Another question about Dirac. Trinnov (R-972) can take readings from three different seating positions. Not for the purpose to get an EQ sum for the room, but to work for 3 different locations in your room. For example, (couch) Poistion 1, (love seat) Position 2, (recliner) Position 3. Going to the set up menu and selecting your seating position instantly balances, and EQ's your speakers for that location. I have not read enough about Dirac to know if it has some kind of flexibility like this. Just wondering. The latest info alluded to a single modifiable target curve islandman [and an optional expansion package ?] and Mark posted these emofest notes ; As to the 24/96 processing ;thats the same rate as anthems ARC [the dearer non avr versions that is ] and better than the 24/48 in audyssey ; though it's a furphy imo as most bd's are 24/48 max and many are happy with audyssey xt32 .You'll appreciate this when you see the trinnov rate .. www.hometheaterhifi.com/audio-calibration/audio-calibration-reviews/anthem-room-correction-arc-system-part-1/page-9-room-gain.htmlIt's nice to know that the xmc1 has buckets of processing power and will appreciate any trinnov comparison you can supply
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 17:29:59 GMT -5
Hey cwt, in researching about Dirac it seems that only Trinnov has this Spatial 3D Technology thing. Again, Spatial Remapping is a technology to adapt multichannel sound to the "ideal" on any loudspeaker layout. It seems that THX, and others, say that optimal reproduction of multichannel sound is obtained only if the loudspeakers are arranged in the listening room according the ITU recommendations. Unfortunately, this recommendation is incompatible with many listening situations found in many homes because of where speakers must be placed in the living space. The Spatial Remapping technology overcomes this limitation of the "ideal" in multichannel by providing correct imaging on any physical speaker arrangement.
Unfortunately, with the R-972 now history, so comparing Trinnov, which is now only available on only $8,000+ pre/pros, is a moot endeavor for the most part. It's too far out of reach dollar wise for most of us to even matter comparing to Dirac. Anyway, the only place of comparing that interested me was in this 3D technology. But it seems exclusive to Trinnov.
Trinnov, at least in the level it was at in the R-972, was a fixed medium, and not tweakable. No updates. This is what is exciting about Dirac. Tweakability, updates! Music is what matters the most to me. If Dirac sounds that much better, the R-972 may have to go. We will see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 17:31:59 GMT -5
Oh yeah, I forgot. 24/48 or 24/96 seems to only refer to what is necessary for data transfer in the RC systems, and not sound quality.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Apr 5, 2014 11:21:23 GMT -5
Unfortunately, with the R-972 now history, so comparing Trinnov, which is now only available on only $8,000+ pre/pros, is a moot endeavor for the most part. It's too far out of reach dollar wise for most of us to even matter comparing to Dirac. Anyway, the only place of comparing that interested me was in this 3D technology. But it seems exclusive to Trinnov. Trinnov, at least in the level it was at in the R-972, was a fixed medium, and not tweakable. No updates. This is what is exciting about Dirac. Tweakability, updates! Music is what matters the most to me. If Dirac sounds that much better, the R-972 may have to go. We will see. Yes good point about availability ; I think the cheapest trinnov solution would be a modded 4xsp/dif bluray player feeding a trinnov mc optimizer [as the bland suggested ] or even a custom configured input/output magnitude [ this has analog input /outputs no digital but is still pricey ] As for the altitude 32 pre pro ; they got the name right Down here in aus the datasat rs20.1 is roughly double the cost of the trinnov standalone so the only viable option is maybe a htpc with all the trimmings ; doesn't appeal with uhdtv and object audio around the bend..
|
|
|
Post by Topend on Apr 14, 2014 22:01:36 GMT -5
Yes, it will correct each sub independently and in stereo on the XMC-1. Dave. That is not how Audyssey in a pre-pro or a receiver works. Audyssey adjusts trim and distance of the two subs and THEN does the correction of both subs combined. That is a much preferred solution than what the XMC is going to do. I have spent hours getting the combined output of my subs to be as flat (pre EQ) as possible. They are not individually in the best position but they are in the best position collectively. Doing what the XMC will be doing takes away most of the advantages of using multiple subs. For example ( this is the situation I have): my front subs have a broad range dip (if measured by themselves) that would require a huge amount of amp power to correct (which is what the XMC will try to do). My rear sub has a peak in approximately the same range of the front sub dip so when corrected together, the amps do almost no work as the correction filters are very flat. The original Audyssey SubEQ provided both options but Audyssey (the company, not the product) were adamant that the way I described (which is how Audyssey x32 works) was by far the preferred approach. I'm a little late with my reply, I've been on holiday. You make an interesting point and one that I can't disagree on. There is always the option to PEQ the subs with REW to get the result you are after. Cheers, Dave.
|
|
|
Post by rcohen on Apr 18, 2014 8:31:55 GMT -5
Do we have confirmation that the XMC-1 is incapable of EQ'ing 2 sub outputs together, and simply adjusting delay and gain on the two outputs?
Or is it just that it provides the option of handling stereo subs?
|
|
|
Post by oppman99 on Apr 24, 2014 9:06:05 GMT -5
I finally got around to downloading and installing the trial version of Dirac this week. I have to say there are a lot of positives from my initial impressions. I am trying the two channel version with the gear listed in my sig. I haven't done any fine tuning, just a quick set up and run, but Dirac seems capable of hanging with the big dogs like Anthem's ARC and XT 32. I have used both in the same room. Listened with Dirac correction for about 5 hours yesterday and really like what I was hearing. Vocals seemed very realistic and the bass impact was still visceral and lively. The wife thought the vocals were more spot on than she has heard from my setup previously.
My only real complaint is I was hearing some hiss at the beginning of some tracks that was bugging me. I know it is part of the track on some recordings, but was hearing it on a few where I should not. Anyone else have this experience? If you figured out a solution, I would be very interested in the fix. Haven't tried contacting Dirac yet.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,211
|
Post by geebo on Apr 24, 2014 9:51:50 GMT -5
I finally got around to downloading and installing the trial version of Dirac this week. I have to say there are a lot of positives from my initial impressions. I am trying the two channel version with the gear listed in my sig. I haven't done any fine tuning, just a quick set up and run, but Dirac seems capable of hanging with the big dogs like Anthem's ARC and XT 32. I have used both in the same room. Listened with Dirac correction for about 5 hours yesterday and really like what I was hearing. Vocals seemed very realistic and the bass impact was still visceral and lively. The wife thought the vocals were more spot on than she has heard from my setup previously. My only real complaint is I was hearing some hiss at the beginning of some tracks that was bugging me. I know it is part of the track on some recordings, but was hearing it on a few where I should not. Anyone else have this experience? If you figured out a solution, I would be very interested in the fix. Haven't tried contacting Dirac yet. My trial expired long ago but I don't recall any kind of hissing during my tests. I was very impressed overall. I also used the two channel version and am very eager to try the full blown surround version.
|
|
|
Post by rcohen on Apr 24, 2014 17:36:58 GMT -5
I was testing Dirac Live for PC last weekend, and I didn't hear any hiss. It was more revealing for bad recordings. For example, I could hear the twinkling artifacts more clearly on mp3 tracks, but nothing like that for flac tracks.
Overall, I really liked it.
What kind of mic and curve did you use? Did you boost the treble too much?
|
|
|
Post by oppman99 on Apr 27, 2014 17:06:30 GMT -5
I use a UMIK. I had a 5 dB boost at 20 Hz sloping to 0 at 200 Hz. Flat up to 10k and then dropping to -5dB at 20k if I remember correctly. I will have to do some more listening. I didn't get a chance this weekend due to being at AXPONA.
|
|
|
Post by rcohen on Apr 27, 2014 21:07:08 GMT -5
I use a UMIK. I had a 5 dB boost at 20 Hz sloping to 0 at 200 Hz. Flat up to 10k and then dropping to -5dB at 20k if I remember correctly. I will have to do some more listening. I didn't get a chance this weekend due to being at AXPONA. What are you using for your DAC? I have certainly heard all kinds of hiss and whines from built-in PC DACs. I was using digital audio through my PC's HDMI out into my pre-amp, so it used my pre-amp's DACs. I would expect that external DAC of yours would also be good.
|
|
|
Post by oppman99 on Apr 28, 2014 6:55:48 GMT -5
Using the w4s DAC in my sig.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,992
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 28, 2014 9:56:36 GMT -5
Yes, the XMC-1 does EQ the two subs individually..... But, here's a devious suggestion : If you really want your two subs to be EQed TOGETHER (like if you have already adjusted their relative levels and responses the way you like them using their own controls, or some other little EQ black box), then just connect them both to ONE of the sub outputs on the XMC-1 using a Y-adapter. It'll work just fine, and the XMC-1 will treat them as one sub - just like you want it to. Is that how Dirac works in general for the subs or is it just like this in the xmc1.[/quote] I don't correct my subs individually with Dirac on my PC. I correct them along with the mains as I have them and the mains crossed over thru a preamp and Dirac only "sees" one speaker. If you look on the site "www.WhatsBestForum.com" (careful, these people believe that spending a years income on speaker wire is a good idea) there is a thread on Dirac and you may be able to find your answer there. My guess would be that it does it as Emotiva is planning but I hope I'm wrong. [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by autocrat on Apr 28, 2014 18:46:09 GMT -5
Yes, the XMC-1 does EQ the two subs individually..... But, here's a devious suggestion : If you really want your two subs to be EQed TOGETHER (like if you have already adjusted their relative levels and responses the way you like them using their own controls, or some other little EQ black box), then just connect them both to ONE of the sub outputs on the XMC-1 using a Y-adapter. It'll work just fine, and the XMC-1 will treat them as one sub - just like you want it to. Yes but. What if the subs are at different locations (you may have one in the far corner and one as a nearfield)? I think the suggestion is that the distances/trim should be independent - which you will get by using both sub outputs - but that the EQ should *always* be based on the combined response. It doesn't seem to me that this is going to be possible unless you can fake it with some two-step process to get the settings you need.
|
|
|
Post by igorzep on Apr 29, 2014 2:57:42 GMT -5
What if the subs are at different locations (you may have one in the far corner and one as a nearfield)? I think the suggestion is that the distances/trim should be independent - which you will get by using both sub outputs - but that the EQ should *always* be based on the combined response. It doesn't seem to me that this is going to be possible unless you can fake it with some two-step process to get the settings you need. Moreover, what if "subs" are two arrays of the Double Bass Array. Then no room EQ can get the right delay/phase settings automatically and the relative delay/gain/phase should be set manually before automatics and then both "subs" EQed as one... Why not let the user do it and require external ADC/DSP/DAC if there are already two DACs in the unit... It is just a matter of one configuration screen with three fields on it, then Dirac sees just "one" sub.
|
|
|
Post by rcohen on Apr 29, 2014 8:29:16 GMT -5
With my Rhythmik subs, the delay knob is disabled when you use the LFE input to bypass the built-in low-pass filter. Using a Y-adapter would mean having to stack the low-pass filters of the subs and the preamp, and manually tuning delay on 4 subs.
Audyssey XT32 makes this much more convenient by auto-setting delay independently for my front and back subs. I do use Y-adapters for the front and back pairs, but they are equidistant to the MLP, so that's easy.
Using Dirac Live on the PC, I use my pre-amp to initially set delay and levels for all channels, then Dirac doesn't have to worry about multiple subs.
It would be possible to do a 4-way y-adapter split, although that's starting to push the impedance. In addition, manually tuning delay and stacking low-pass filters means more compromises. The benefits from using multiple subs to cancel out room modes and get a larger sweet spot are huge. On the other hand, since low distortion subs are non-directional below 80hz, the benefits of stereo subs are nil. (High distortion subs are easier to localize, though.)
Also, there are terrible nulls that show up with individual subs that disappear with multiples, so attempting to equalize individual subs would lead to terrible results with multiples playing.
|
|