|
|
Post by socketman on Mar 3, 2015 23:32:54 GMT -5
Tony is there really that much audible difference being able to do it the way you are presently equalizing your subs. What would the difference sound like to the average person. The two main rules on this would be that we can hear a difference between 3db sound changes and that we average roughly 1/3 of an octave worth of sound (some will argue 1/6 of an octave). At lower frequencies, an octave will not span much of the frequency range. In my measurement above from 30 to 60hz, a 10hz block (40 - 50hz) being higher or lower then 3db will result in something that you can hear. In describing what you would hear, it is more of what doesn't exist when its configured properly. With an appropriate house curve you can achieve predictable and repeatable results where your attention is not drawn to a certain frequency range. I have been in a lot of rooms (like my upstairs) where a particular frequency range is just out of control. Like an out of control room, multiple subs can create the same effect when some frequencies are combining and others are canceling. Tony Understood , tks |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 3, 2015 23:42:01 GMT -5
Is this feature you are asking available on other pre pros? I never heard of this array of subs management by a pre pro. The only one I know of is the datasat, but that is an unfair comparison. Audyssey's xt32 offers some multi sub integration, (time align each sub then eq them as one sub) but is still not quite there. I have achieved what I need using a minidsp + Dirac, but I was able to achieve better results using the tools in the XMC and PEQ that what I could get with Dirac. At this stage in the game, I honestly am not sure if I would give up the miniDSP even if I could eliminate it, but it would allow for more options. Tony I agree that comparing the XMC-1 to the Datasat feature by feature is extremely unfair. Which begs the question why people have their orders on hold expecting this to change? If the Datasat is the only option for some, they'll be $20,000 poorer.  and btw, Dirac isn't included, it's another $3,500...no joke. And if you want one of their trained guys to set it up for you, it's another $5,000. But I heard its a game changer and an incredible piece of equipment. Don't want to sound snotty - just quoting what I heard  . I thought maybe the Marantz 7702 had this feature...of course most of us have yet to hear Audyssey that actually sounded good for 2 channel music. I'll be getting a 2nd sub sometime in the future but not 3 or 4 so fortunately for me, this won't be an issue. Whew! |
|
|
|
Post by lbrown105 on Mar 4, 2015 0:39:41 GMT -5
Level, time align, and phase seperately and EQ the summed response. Ping each sub seperately to determine time delay, phase and level, then combine sub ping for eq.
Dirac Live on the PC allowed for delay control of each channel seperately and for channel grouping for filter creation. Do we not think the full version for XMC-1 will also allow the same. That is all that is missing here.
|
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Mar 4, 2015 8:05:59 GMT -5
The only one I know of is the datasat, but that is an unfair comparison. Audyssey's xt32 offers some multi sub integration, (time align each sub then eq them as one sub) but is still not quite there. I have achieved what I need using a minidsp + Dirac, but I was able to achieve better results using the tools in the XMC and PEQ that what I could get with Dirac. At this stage in the game, I honestly am not sure if I would give up the miniDSP even if I could eliminate it, but it would allow for more options. Tony I agree that comparing the XMC-1 to the Datasat feature by feature is extremely unfair. Which begs the question why people have their orders on hold expecting this to change? If the Datasat is the only option for some, they'll be $20,000 poorer. and btw, Dirac isn't included, it's another $3,500...no joke. And if you want one of their trained guys to set it up for you, it's another $5,000. But I heard its a game changer and an incredible piece of equipment. Don't want to sound snotty - just quoting what I heard . I thought maybe the Marantz 7702 had this feature...of course most of us have yet to hear Audyssey that actually sounded good for 2 channel music. I'll be getting a 2nd sub sometime in the future but not 3 or 4 so fortunately for me, this won't be an issue. Whew! I have access to a 7702, I will see what options exist hopefully this weekend (hopefully). Tony |
|
|
|
Post by ausman on Mar 4, 2015 11:13:11 GMT -5
I would say if you wanted to use above 2 subs you would need a secondary preamp with delay sequencing and you would likely need 7-21 channel mixing processing board if you wanted to a 21.4-8 setup.
Unless you have a reinforced room going past 2 subs are going to be a pointless option in the first place..
And Dirac to work properly you would also need to some form of it put into the sub.. Or create a complete sub processing unit to cater for more subs.
Nothing against Dirac though what can it do opposed to what variation we see imiplemented within xmc-1
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 4, 2015 11:53:28 GMT -5
If what you guys are asking is currently available for Dirac Live on the PC - 2 subs, then I would imagine the Dirac Live Full version on the XMC-1 should support that but I'm not 100% sure.
I recall that when I set the crossover on my old UMC-200, Dirac (trial version) on the PC would behave as follows:
For each of the speakers set to "small", the test tone generated from the computer would play thru the subwoofer, then the speaker.
The XMC-1's Dirac implementation uses the test tones triggered out of the XMC-1 and those are independent of the crossover.
So, I wonder if it would have been better to just leave the existing functionality of how Dirac Live on the computer generates the test tone since the Left speaker signal coming from the computer to the XMC-1 would factor in the crossover.
Just thinking out loud...
|
|
|
|
Post by wilburthegoose on Mar 4, 2015 12:59:33 GMT -5
Regarding Audyssey XT32 and that Marantz. I moved away from a Denon AVR-4311, and Dirac blows Audyssey XT32 away, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by lbrown105 on Mar 4, 2015 14:15:39 GMT -5
If what you guys are asking is currently available for Dirac Live on the PC - 2 subs, then I would imagine the Dirac Live Full version on the XMC-1 should support that but I'm not 100% sure. I recall that when I set the crossover on my old UMC-200, Dirac (trial version) on the PC would behave as follows: For each of the speakers set to "small", the test tone generated from the computer would play thru the subwoofer, then the speaker. The XMC-1's Dirac implementation uses the test tones triggered out of the XMC-1 and those are independent of the crossover. So, I wonder if it would have been better to just leave the existing functionality of how Dirac Live on the computer generates the test tone since the Left speaker signal coming from the computer to the XMC-1 would factor in the crossover. Just thinking out loud... I did find out from someone that is still running Dirac Live that although it does group channels it does not do it for filter creation but rather averaging FR. It does still have delay control by channel (in the two channel version for sure) |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 4, 2015 14:19:28 GMT -5
I think the key is in the generation of the test tones. The full version needs to generate the test tones from the computer which is standard fare for Dirac. Personally, I thought even with the LE version the test tones could have just originated from the computer. I'm not sure why the test tone had to be triggered for the XMC-1 to play the test tones etc. Perhaps it was trying to make it appear very seamless and have Dirac appear to be "an integrated part" of the XMC-1. IMHO, it would have been fine if Dirac was all done on the computer and the filter metadata copied to a USB drive then uploaded on the XMC-1 (choice of 4 slots please  . It probably would have been a little cheaper in terms of development cost and people didn't have to worry about internet connection to the XMC-1 either since it doesn't support wifi. It's personal preference but I'd much rather do the USB drive thing and have the upload take 1 minute vs. 10+ min via the Wifi and 5 min via the Ethernet. Again, I don't have all the technical details and am just thinking out loud. The level setting could have been an additional step prior to running Dirac to set all the speakers to 75 dB or whatever. And this means the Mac version along with the PC version would have needed no special DLL work. Just needed work in getting the data to output to a format that can be uploaded to the XMC-1 (via USB like the firmware or I guess via Ethernet) |
|
|
|
Post by snafujg on Mar 4, 2015 16:55:00 GMT -5
It would be nice if Emotiva could confirm if the test tones in the full Dirac version will be from the XMC-1 like the LE version or from the PC like the Dirac Trial/Full version.
|
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Mar 4, 2015 17:51:11 GMT -5
It would be nice if Emotiva could confirm if the test tones in the full Dirac version will be from the XMC-1 like the LE version or from the PC like the Dirac Trial/Full version. Test tones from the computer would require a physical connection to the XMC. I don't think they'd do that. |
|
|
|
Post by htguy on Mar 4, 2015 18:15:59 GMT -5
Wondering if the only thing that is off is the summed two sub channels then could one not just measure the summed sub channels and then using DIRAC FULL create a filter to off set any humps or dips created by the two subs so that you end up with a flat frequency response
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 4, 2015 19:59:46 GMT -5
It would be nice if Emotiva could confirm if the test tones in the full Dirac version will be from the XMC-1 like the LE version or from the PC like the Dirac Trial/Full version. Test tones from the computer would require a physical connection to the XMC. I don't think they'd do that. The test tone would indeed be generated from the computer and the connection to the XMC-1 would be via HDMI. Just like if you bought Dirac Live for the PC. The key here is that the XMC-1 implementation should be the same as Dirac Live PC version's behavior except for having the filters stored on the XMC-1. And it should store 4 Dirac filters like mini-DSP and Dirac on the PC. Simplicity is better. |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Mar 4, 2015 20:08:46 GMT -5
Test tones from the computer would require a physical connection to the XMC. I don't think they'd do that. The test tone would indeed be generated from the computer and the connection to the XMC-1 would be via HDMI. Just like if you bought Dirac Live for the PC. The key here is that the XMC-1 implementation should be the same as Dirac Live PC version behaves except for having the filters stored on the XMC-1. And it should store 4 Dirac filters like mini-DSP and Dirac on the PC. Simplicity is better. Simplicity is indeed better. And it's much simpler to not have to tether your computer to the XMC. Having one cable for a mic and another for the computer/XMC connection is much more troublesome. I used the trial version of Dirac with the mic cable going off in one direction and the signal cable running off in some other direction. The Emo version is much easier. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 4, 2015 20:36:02 GMT -5
The test tone would indeed be generated from the computer and the connection to the XMC-1 would be via HDMI. Just like if you bought Dirac Live for the PC. The key here is that the XMC-1 implementation should be the same as Dirac Live PC version behaves except for having the filters stored on the XMC-1. And it should store 4 Dirac filters like mini-DSP and Dirac on the PC. Simplicity is better. Simplicity is indeed better. And it's much simpler to not have to tether your computer to the XMC. Having one cable for a mic and another for the computer/XMC connection is much more troublesome. I disagree. The process you are calling much more troublesome is the exact process that's already in place for the Dirac software. How troublesome is it to plug in the HDMI from your blu-Ray player to the XMC-1? All of Dirac's customers needed to use this method unless I'm missing something. No offense to Emotiva since it's their money, but all the development hours getting the DLL to work for both the PC and the Mac to connect to the XMC-1 and the generation of an instance to have the XMC-1 to produce the test tone, I feel was not the best approach. Don't forget about the small fact that the XMC-1 is not a wireless device, it has to be plugged into the router via an Ethernet cable. I had to rearrange my cabling in the basement to get my cable modem downstairs to get this working. It was far more troublesome than plugging an HDMI cable from my laptop to the XMC-1. And for people where their router is not close to the xmc-1, this is hands down far more troublesome. So now we have this fancy process of having Dirac communicate with the XMC-1 via a wireless connection. The problem is that the tone that is run by the XMC-1 doesn't factor in the crossover. Why would it you ask? You are right normally you wouldn't when you run the test tone on the XMC-1 for the purposes of setting levels. But the room correction software probably needs to know the frequency response of the sub + mains for calibration purposes. Stop me if I'm wrong bc I'm not too sure as an end user. Therefore, this fancy process that took at least 3 months (for the Mac version at least), doesn't even generate the correct test tone for the LE version. So how is it that my suggested alternate approach of simply using Dirac as it was intended with zero programming changes, which would mean both PC and Mac versions are supported right out of the gate....and simply produce a Dirac filter file to upload via USB stick to the XMC-1...how is this more troublesome? The upload will be much quicker too. Like I said simpler is better...and cheaper too . |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Mar 4, 2015 21:04:27 GMT -5
Simplicity is indeed better. And it's much simpler to not have to tether your computer to the XMC. Having one cable for a mic and another for the computer/XMC connection is much more troublesome. I disagree. The process you are calling much more troublesome is the exact process that's already in place for the Dirac software. How troublesome is it to plug in the HDMI from your blu-Ray player to the XMC-1? All of Dirac's customers needed to use this method unless I'm missing something. No offense to Emotiva since it's their money, but all the development hours getting the DLL to work for both the PC and the Mac to connect to the XMC-1 and the generation of an instance to have the XMC-1 to produce the test tone, I feel was not the best approach. Don't forget about the small fact that the XMC-1 is not a wireless device, it has to be plugged into the router via an Ethernet cable. I had to rearrange my cabling in the basement to get my cable modem downstairs to get this working. It was far more troublesome than plugging an HDMI cable from my laptop to the XMC-1. And for people where their router is not close to the xmc-1, this is hands down far more troublesome. So now we have this fancy process of having Dirac communicate with the XMC-1 via a wireless connection. The problem is that the tone that is run by the XMC-1 doesn't factor in the crossover. Why would it you ask? You are right normally you wouldn't when you run the test tone on the XMC-1 for the purposes of setting levels. But the room correction software probably needs to know the frequency response of the sub + mains for calibration purposes. Stop me if I'm wrong bc I'm not too sure as an end user. Therefore, this fancy process that took at least 3 months (for the Mac version at least), doesn't even generate the correct test tone for the LE version. So how is it that my suggested alternate approach of simply using Dirac as it was intended with zero programming changes, which would mean both PC and Mac versions are supported right out of the gate....and simply produce a Dirac filter file to upload via USB stick to the XMC-1...how is this more troublesome? The upload will be much quicker too. Like I said simpler is better...and cheaper too . I disagree. How can it be easier and simpler to have two cables to connect versus one. With one I also have more freedom to place the laptop out of the listening area without messing with a 25 foot HDMI cable that I have to watch out for every time I go back into the listening area to adjust the mic position. This "fancy" process is WAY easier to setup and use than the trial ever was. |
|
|
|
Post by thompson12 on Mar 4, 2015 21:26:02 GMT -5
I could deal with wired or wireless as long as the sound is as good as it could possible be
Mitch
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 4, 2015 22:32:12 GMT -5
I disagree. How can it be easier and simpler to have two cables to connect versus one. With one I also have more freedom to place the laptop out of the listening area without messing with a 25 foot HDMI cable that I have to watch out for every time I go back into the listening area to adjust the mic position. This "fancy" process is WAY easier to setup and use than the trial ever was. It requires 2 cables both ways. The XMC-1 needs to be plugged in via Ethernet which may or may not be easy if you need a 50 feet Ethernet cable. Regardless, the LE version's test tones do not take the crossover into effect which is a bigger deal. |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Mar 4, 2015 22:43:42 GMT -5
I disagree. How can it be easier and simpler to have two cables to connect versus one. With one I also have more freedom to place the laptop out of the listening area without messing with a 25 foot HDMI cable that I have to watch out for every time I go back into the listening area to adjust the mic position. This "fancy" process is WAY easier to setup and use than the trial ever was. It requires 2 cables both ways. The XMC-1 needs to be plugged in via Ethernet which may or may not be easy if you need a 50 feet Ethernet cable. Regardless, the LE version's test tones do not take the crossover into effect which is a bigger deal.[/quote] That's a one time connection. I connect a three foot cat-5 cable from the XMC to the wireless bridge and its done and forgotten. A done deal. Not so with having to get out an HDMI cable and connect each and every time I want to use Dirac and I don't have to worry about tripping over it while making the 9 mic adjustments required. And why do you think that Emo could not do anything with internally generated tones as could be done with externally generated ones. Maybe the way they do it is a design choice and/or a Dirac licensing requirement. Nope, the wireless method is way easier. I've tried it both ways and it's no contest. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 5, 2015 0:14:21 GMT -5
They could. My point was they didn't. Why would that be a Dirac requirement to run the test tones out of the XMC-1? I'm not as clumsy as to trip on a wire that I know is already there. And the mic cable is just as easy to trip over. The laptop is in a stationary place away from the listening position which means the HDMI cable can be out of the way and you never have cross its path. For you it's a one time connection. For others with a 50 foot Ethernet cable it's not so easy. Not everyone is as technically savvy and use wireless bridges. I get your point. You are justifying Emotiva's decision to spend a thousand development hours (or whatever) to use this method which I am saying didn't really buy us much and caused delays in supporting the Mac version. Furthermore, it caused potential delays in the full version because they had to make additional potential code changes to get the correct test tones...if they didn't, the full version of Dirac on the XMC-1 still would not factor in the crossover when the mains and center are set to small.. Maybe I'm not correct in saying "correct" test tones. It's different than the Dirac Live PC version is what I'm saying which I think has been established here as correct. And seriously, why do I care either way? It's not my money and I'm prolly not going to get the full version since my 1 sub worked out ok with the LE version...it's close enough for me. I guess I care too much about Emotiva. |
|
and btw, Dirac isn't included, it's another $3,500...no joke. And if you want one of their trained guys to set it up for you, it's another $5,000. But I heard its a game changer and an incredible piece of equipment. Don't want to sound snotty - just quoting what I heard 
. 
.
