|
|
Post by fbczar on Mar 30, 2015 14:21:49 GMT -5
Let's talk about the differences those of you who have upgraded from Dirac LE to Dirac Full hear in your systems. Please indicate whether you only changed the curve parameters or if you left the original curve alone and just took advantage of Dirac Full's greater flexibility, or both, in measuring each speaker individually. |
|
geebo
Emo VIPs 
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
|
Post by geebo on Mar 30, 2015 14:37:56 GMT -5
Let's talk about the differences those of you who have upgraded from Dirac LE to Dirac Full hear in your systems. Please indicate whether you only changed the curve parameters or if you left the original curve alone and just took advantage of Dirac Full's greater flexibility, or both, in measuring each speaker individually. I changed the target curve and love the results. For me, it was the main reason to get the full version. I no longer have to fiddle with the bass response to get the results I was looking for. I did nothing as far a changing the speaker groupings. |
|
|
|
Post by hifiaudio2 on Mar 30, 2015 15:48:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by JNieves on Mar 30, 2015 16:13:19 GMT -5
I loaded up my LE measurements (taken using Ansat's cal file) and fiddled with the curve, created new filters and began blissfully listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by fbczar on Mar 30, 2015 16:25:43 GMT -5
Let's talk about the differences those of you who have upgraded from Dirac LE to Dirac Full hear in your systems. Please indicate whether you only changed the curve parameters or if you left the original curve alone and just took advantage of Dirac Full's greater flexibility, or both, in measuring each speaker individually. I changed the target curve and love the results. For me, it was the main reason to get the full version. I no longer have to fiddle with the bass response to get the results I was looking for. I did nothing as far a changing the speaker groupings. When I use LE I must turn down the Sub levels significantly for the levels of all speakers to match closely enough to get a measurement. Am I correct that I would not need to do that in Full because the levels are set individually rather than one large group? |
|
|
|
Post by fbczar on Mar 30, 2015 16:56:03 GMT -5
I have read a number of reviews of Anthem's ARC software. Apparently it is designed so users can vary the frequency spectrum that is equalized. Most reviewers preferred a setting or curve that covered from 20Hz to 250 as opposed to equalizing the entire sonic spectrum. Have any of you who own Dirac Full attempted to do something similar and leave the high end alone?
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,188
|
Post by geebo on Mar 30, 2015 16:57:10 GMT -5
I changed the target curve and love the results. For me, it was the main reason to get the full version. I no longer have to fiddle with the bass response to get the results I was looking for. I did nothing as far a changing the speaker groupings. When I use LE I must turn down the Sub levels significantly for the levels of all speakers to match closely enough to get a measurement. Am I correct that I would not need to do that in Full because the levels are set individually rather than one large group? You have the ability to adjust individual speaker levels down. I haven't tried that and I think Dirac still recommends for the sub to use it's controls. Nonetheless, the ability to turn it down is there. |
|
|
|
Post by michaelhifi on Apr 1, 2015 17:13:09 GMT -5
I have read a number of reviews of Anthem's ARC software. Apparently it is designed so users can vary the frequency spectrum that is equalized. Most reviewers preferred a setting or curve that covered from 20Hz to 250 as opposed to equalizing the entire sonic spectrum. Have any of you who own Dirac Full attempted to do something similar and leave the high end alone? That is the way I prefer using DSP software. I don't want my upper frequency spectrum touched, mostly the area below 250Hz where most room problems occur.
Still need to load an earlier version of Windows to play with Dirac full. I assumed that I can select what frequency DIRAC alters 
|
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 1, 2015 18:08:36 GMT -5
I have read a number of reviews of Anthem's ARC software. Apparently it is designed so users can vary the frequency spectrum that is equalized. Most reviewers preferred a setting or curve that covered from 20Hz to 250 as opposed to equalizing the entire sonic spectrum. Have any of you who own Dirac Full attempted to do something similar and leave the high end alone? That is the way I prefer using DSP software. I don't want my upper frequency spectrum touched, mostly the area below 250Hz where most room problems occur.
Still need to load an earlier version of Windows to play with Dirac full. I assumed that I can select what frequency DIRAC alters
Funny, I feel like Dirac is doing a better job with my mids and treble than my bass. I'm sure its very room and speaker dependent. What Im discovering right now is you can adjust the target curve to change the tonality in the mids and treble to whatever you want or keep the tonality you already have if you really like that, while still smoothing out the response and making it more linear in general. On this last set of filters I made I tried to keep the overall response a little closer to what my speakers naturally do and so far Im liking it a little better than the default curve. |
|
|
|
Post by fbczar on Apr 1, 2015 19:07:49 GMT -5
That is the way I prefer using DSP software. I don't want my upper frequency spectrum touched, mostly the area below 250Hz where most room problems occur.
Still need to load an earlier version of Windows to play with Dirac full. I assumed that I can select what frequency DIRAC alters
Funny, I feel like Dirac is doing a better job with my mids and treble than my bass. I'm sure its very room and speaker dependent. What Im discovering right now is you can adjust the target curve to change the tonality in the mids and treble to whatever you want or keep the tonality you already have if you really like that, while still smoothing out the response and making it more linear in general. On this last set of filters I made I tried to keep the overall response a little closer to what my speakers naturally do and so far Im liking it a little better than the default curve. Can you give a little more detail relative to keeping the overall response closer to what your your speakers naturally do? With Dirac LE I had to turn down the subwoofer levels by 6db to keep the levels in line with the rest of my speakers for measurement purposes. After measuring I had to turn the subwoofer levels back up by 6db. I hope Dirac Full can handle my subwoofers without all the subwoofer level adjustments. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 1, 2015 19:31:50 GMT -5
Funny, I feel like Dirac is doing a better job with my mids and treble than my bass. I'm sure its very room and speaker dependent. What Im discovering right now is you can adjust the target curve to change the tonality in the mids and treble to whatever you want or keep the tonality you already have if you really like that, while still smoothing out the response and making it more linear in general. On this last set of filters I made I tried to keep the overall response a little closer to what my speakers naturally do and so far Im liking it a little better than the default curve. Can you give a little more detail relative to keeping the overall response closer to what your your speakers naturally do? With Dirac LE I had to turn down the subwoofer levels by 6db to keep the levels in line with the rest of my speakers for measurement purposes. After measuring I had to turn the subwoofer levels back up by 6db. I hope Dirac Full can handle my subwoofers without all the subwoofer level adjustments. Tonality is basically the overall shape of your frequency response. With full you have the ability to shape it anyway you want. In my case my speakers are more neutral than most, meaning the treble is pretty much in line with the mids and bass, in my room they are actually a little bright, or accented in the treble. The default target curve that Dirac gives is a downward slope, tipped down in the treble. For me this resulted in a fairly aggressive filter set that had a lot of boost and gain applied and it totally changed the tone of the speaker. In my case I basically went for a slightly more neutral response that only drops maybe 3-4db between 80-20,000hz instead of the 6-8db drop that the default target curve has. I still have a more aggressive rise in the bass, up 6db between 80-20hz, simply because I like how that sounds. Others may like a different sound signature, like the "Brittish Sound" B&Ws have and you could potentially preserve that tonality if you really liked it. In headphones Iv generally really liked responses that were relatively flat from bass through mids than start to tapper off at the treble around 1000hz so I might experiment with that next. This is where being able to store more than one filter set would be really nice as I think many people will find that they actually like a pretty flat response for movies but not for music. Dirac Full will certainly help with gain matching for the measurements. I had to set my sub much lower and my center and surrounds higher than my mains. Im not sure exactly whats happening in your case, no matter where you set you sub gain before you run Dirac, its suppose to do the level matching so you shouldn't have to change anything afterword it it worked properly. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 2, 2015 9:12:44 GMT -5
I have read a number of reviews of Anthem's ARC software. Apparently it is designed so users can vary the frequency spectrum that is equalized. Most reviewers preferred a setting or curve that covered from 20Hz to 250 as opposed to equalizing the entire sonic spectrum. Have any of you who own Dirac Full attempted to do something similar and leave the high end alone? That is the way I prefer using DSP software. I don't want my upper frequency spectrum touched, mostly the area below 250Hz where most room problems occur.
Still need to load an earlier version of Windows to play with Dirac full. I assumed that I can select what frequency DIRAC alters
I can see doing only the bass being appealing to many people, unfortunately, once you add a crossover on top of Dirac and get some summing going on, it doesn't do as well as I hoped in the bass. Honestly the bass response is pretty easy to do manually with the PEQ in the XMC1 if you have REW or something similar and thats all you want to fix. Its not hard to do better in the crossover area than Dirac as it is now. We need user adjustable delays in order to reap everything Dirac has to offer when crossovers are used. Please Emotiva, FW4.0  |
|
|
|
Post by michaelhifi on Apr 2, 2015 10:26:13 GMT -5
That is the way I prefer using DSP software. I don't want my upper frequency spectrum touched, mostly the area below 250Hz where most room problems occur.
Still need to load an earlier version of Windows to play with Dirac full. I assumed that I can select what frequency DIRAC alters
I can see doing only the bass being appealing to many people, unfortunately, once you add a crossover on top of Dirac and get some summing going on, it doesn't do as well as I hoped in the bass. Honestly the bass response is pretty easy to do manually with the PEQ in the XMC1 if you have REW or something similar and thats all you want to fix. Its not hard to do better in the crossover area than Dirac as it is now. We need user adjustable delays in order to reap everything Dirac has to offer when crossovers are used. Please Emotiva, FW4.0 I was using the Dspeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 before taking ownership of the XMC. It worked brilliantly as a DSP processor for adjusting frequency responses up to 500Hz via its calibrated mic. I'm hopeful to at least get the quality and functionality out of the XMC. The XMC won't have on the fly room correction that the anti-mode has but I can say it sure is transparent as a pre. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 2, 2015 11:06:23 GMT -5
I can see doing only the bass being appealing to many people, unfortunately, once you add a crossover on top of Dirac and get some summing going on, it doesn't do as well as I hoped in the bass. Honestly the bass response is pretty easy to do manually with the PEQ in the XMC1 if you have REW or something similar and thats all you want to fix. Its not hard to do better in the crossover area than Dirac as it is now. We need user adjustable delays in order to reap everything Dirac has to offer when crossovers are used. Please Emotiva, FW4.0 I was using the Dspeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 before taking ownership of the XMC. It worked brilliantly as a DSP processor for adjusting frequency responses up to 500Hz via its calibrated mic. I'm hopeful to at least get the quality and functionality out of the XMC. The XMC won't have on the fly room correction that the anti-mode has but I can say it sure is transparent as a pre. Nice, I had a standard Anti-mode in use before I got the XMC as well. It was a great little device. That said Dirac should do as good of job or better. Dirac got my LFE channel much flatter than the anti-mode did in my system, frankly flatter than If ever had it (you can't get any flatter than flat!). My problem with Dirac in the XMC is when I use a crossover and get overlapping output from more than one speaker my response falls apart. If you didn't have any crossover problems with your anti-mode you shouldn't with Dirac as neither of them address phasing at the crossover. Now if you did have issues around the crossover and used the subwoofer delay settings in preset 1 or 2 to fix it, then in that case you very well could get better results that way than you would with Dirac. |
|
Morgan
Minor Hero
"Youth is Wasted on the Young"
Posts: 46
|
Post by Morgan on Feb 20, 2020 1:42:01 GMT -5
The only advantage I see to Live is that it allows you to make adjustments that you think are better than what the pros that wrote the program and analyzed all the data determined. Keep in mind that it's human nature to be thoroughly convinced that because of your "fine tuning" contributions it improved the sound quality and thus cost justifies the $99.IMHO!
|
|
|
|
Post by theswede on Feb 29, 2020 11:47:33 GMT -5
My curve is very similar to the std curve, only a bit more mid range for presence and clarity however also fully extended to cover 15hz to 21khz which made a difference but more importantly it allows me to change the automatic filter settings in Dirac which adds a HP and LP filter to all the speakers. These filters can interact negatively with your targets curve and the filters in the XMC creating problems in the overall response.
For example Dirac set my fronts HP filter at 37hz and 24db/octave which when summed up with the target curve and the XMC-1 80hz 24db filter created a overall and in-room out of phase response around the crossover frequency. Net effect was weak bass between 40 and 80hz with up to a -10db drop.
|
|
|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Feb 29, 2020 12:04:45 GMT -5
My curve is very similar to the std curve, only a bit more mid range for presence and clarity however also fully extended to cover 15hz to 21khz which made a difference but more importantly it allows me to change the automatic filter settings in Dirac which adds a HP and LP filter to all the speakers. These filters can interact negatively with your targets curve and the filters in the XMC creating problems in the overall response. For example Dirac set my fronts HP filter at 37hz and 24db/octave which when summed up with the target curve and the XMC-1 80hz 24db filter created a overall and in-room out of phase response around the crossover frequency. Net effect was weak bass between 40 and 80hz with up to a -10db drop. I thought Dirac took full range measurements across all speakers? |
|
|
|
Post by theswede on Feb 29, 2020 12:57:26 GMT -5
My curve is very similar to the std curve, only a bit more mid range for presence and clarity however also fully extended to cover 15hz to 21khz which made a difference but more importantly it allows me to change the automatic filter settings in Dirac which adds a HP and LP filter to all the speakers. These filters can interact negatively with your targets curve and the filters in the XMC creating problems in the overall response. For example Dirac set my fronts HP filter at 37hz and 24db/octave which when summed up with the target curve and the XMC-1 80hz 24db filter created a overall and in-room out of phase response around the crossover frequency. Net effect was weak bass between 40 and 80hz with up to a -10db drop. I thought Dirac took full range measurements across all speakers? It does on which upon it decides on how to apply these filters. Save your target response file and have a look at the details in the txt file, these are the filter settings on my fronts: HPCUTOFF 37 LPCUTOFF 19900 HPORDER 4 LPORDER 4 LOWLIMITHZ 24 HIGHLIMITHZ 19900 |
|
|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Feb 29, 2020 15:40:24 GMT -5
I thought Dirac took full range measurements across all speakers? It does on which upon it decides on how to apply these filters. Save your target response file and have a look at the details in the txt file, these are the filter settings on my fronts: HPCUTOFF 37 LPCUTOFF 19900 HPORDER 4 LPORDER 4 LOWLIMITHZ 24 HIGHLIMITHZ 19900 Interesting, breaking in new towers today and will run Dirac again tomorrow, I'll check |
|
