|
|
Post by ansat on Apr 27, 2015 21:21:36 GMT -5
If anyone is doing any more testing could they check present 1 or 2? Im wondering if the PEQ has the same behavior. Tony, did you by any chance test those during your measurements yesterday? I did not. But I don't expect it to be treated the same way that the Dirac filter would be. (see above post) |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Laufman on Apr 27, 2015 21:34:52 GMT -5
Sorry Nick,
I misunderstood the comment and context. Probably should go back to bed, I've got a raging sinus infection and I'm foggy and crabby. (more so than usual!)
Apologies.
Dan
|
|
edrummereasye
Sensei
"This aggression will not stand, man!"
Posts: 438
|
Post by edrummereasye on Apr 27, 2015 23:27:56 GMT -5
nickwin Don't purchase the XMC-1 if you feel pressured. We wan't you to be happy with us and I don't think you are. Maybe another brand would be a better fit. We can't be all things to all people. Maybe next time. Cheers. Dan Hey Dan, are you sure that was suppose to be directed at me? I already own the XMC1 and am happy with it. I think its a fantastic product overall. Ive said that numerous times in this very thread. I actually just PM'ed someone earlier today about why the they should buy an XMC1. That said what I and others have documented in this thread seems to be somewhat of a flaw. I only bring it up because Im looking for a work around, honestly I wasn't expecting such a negative response. Ive been waiting to hear back from Emotiva support since last Friday, I understand you guys were busy at Axpona... that said Im not sure how Im suppose to feel about the response to my legitimate inquiry being essentially "go elsewhere", from the CEO no less  Nickwin...just a guess, but I'd bet Dan was responding more to what markc posted, rather than to anything you've said. My tAke, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by petes on Apr 28, 2015 7:27:29 GMT -5
But one key point in my original post to remember is that by setting the curtain to the crossover, this can be bypassed. This would place no corrections below the crossover and would not get summed into what is sent to the sub. This would be the equivalent of Dirac knowing what the crossover is. Tony Hi tony Yep - agree completley on that, and it probably makes sense to align the curtains and the crossovers in any case - having filters created well below the cross over point probably doesn't make sense anyway. I did experiment last night with actually letting Dirac tell me where to set the crossovers - looking at where Dirac thought it could match the response to the target curve and then setting the cross over a little above this - quite like the results, but more playing later. My only question - and forgive me if this can be worked out from your charts - is, if you pull the curtains up so that the mains filters aren't applied, so the sub filters get applied to the cross'ed over material. If the path just went source-dirac-crossover-output, this wouldn't mean that the sub filters got applied to the main signal that gets redirected to the sub - it would just stop the main filters from being applied. Wouldn't this mean that you're basically getting uncorrected signals for the material below the crossover point which is redirected to the sub? So, a partial solution only? pete S |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 8:18:03 GMT -5
But one key point in my original post to remember is that by setting the curtain to the crossover, this can be bypassed. This would place no corrections below the crossover and would not get summed into what is sent to the sub. This would be the equivalent of Dirac knowing what the crossover is. Tony Hi tony Yep - agree completley on that, and it probably makes sense to align the curtains and the crossovers in any case - having filters created well below the cross over point probably doesn't make sense anyway. I did experiment last night with actually letting Dirac tell me where to set the crossovers - looking at where Dirac thought it could match the response to the target curve and then setting the cross over a little above this - quite like the results, but more playing later. My only question - and forgive me if this can be worked out from your charts - is, if you pull the curtains up so that the mains filters aren't applied, so the sub filters get applied to the cross'ed over material. If the path just went source-dirac-crossover-output, this wouldn't mean that the sub filters got applied to the main signal that gets redirected to the sub - it would just stop the main filters from being applied. Wouldn't this mean that you're basically getting uncorrected signals for the material below the crossover point which is redirected to the sub? So, a partial solution only? pete S As far as I know no signal is routed back to the mains from the sub. Mains signal below the xover is routed to the sub, there is no "LFE crossover" that routes LFE info back to the mains. This is standard. I said in a previous post why in general you do want to eq below the crossover point. Someone posted a white paper on why this is in another thread, and Ray said he agreed. The general gist is a peak or dip below the xover will still show up in the summed response. Two flat responsees sum to a flat response and that inlcludes the response below the crossover point. Now this is general best practice, but I'm sure it's not going to be a huge deal if we can't do that in the case of Dirac on he xmc. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 8:38:27 GMT -5
Sorry Nick, I misunderstood the comment and context. Probably should go back to bed, I've got a raging sinus infection and I'm foggy and crabby. (more so than usual!) Apologies. Dan Apology accepted Dan. I realized (even before your post) that in the wrong context this could all be seen in a very negative light, and because of this I made a point to post some positive things about XMC in an effort to balance that out. That said when it comes down to it, this thread is essentially problem solving and, well, that implies a problem. Is there any chance you could ask Lonnie or Ray to take a look at what were talking about here and let us know if this is the way it is, why, and if it could potentially ever change? Once we get some real answers this thread will just die on its own... If this the way it is going to be then so be it, the XMC is still a great pre/pro, but it would be nice to know. Oh, and I will get another brand's pre/pro when you pry the XMC from my cold dead hands!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 8:44:29 GMT -5
If anyone is doing any more testing could they check present 1 or 2? Im wondering if the PEQ has the same behavior. Tony, did you by any chance test those during your measurements yesterday? I did not. But I don't expect it to be treated the same way that the Dirac filter would be. (see above post) I wouldn't think so either, but I posted a graph earlier in this thread that appeared to show the same behavior with the PEQ in P1. That on top of the fact that in one iteration the UMC1 had the EQ filters (and delay in that instance) applied before the crossover. Unlikely yes, but it can, and does happen. If what your saying is correct it sounds like a HPF applied to a main in Dirac will either A) also get passed to the sub or B) just get eliminated below the curtain? In the Dirac filter creation screen it shows that the HPF is working below the curtain but maybe thats not really the case. Here is the graph in question. Red is a signal fed to the LFE channel, purple is bass routed from FL with 80hz crossover. This is in preset 1. As usual my graphs are all speaker measurements, so unlike your line level measurements, there may be other variables at play in mine. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by millst on Apr 28, 2015 11:01:42 GMT -5
If you set the mains to large and subwoofer to none, then LFE might be sent to the mains. As far as I know no signal is routed back to the mains from the sub. Mains signal below the xover is routed to the sub, there is no "LFE crossover" that routes LFE info back to the mains. This is standard. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 12:42:45 GMT -5
If you set the mains to large and subwoofer to none, then LFE might be sent to the mains. If you had no sub there would be no sub filters to send to the mains  |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 12:48:37 GMT -5
Pete, I think I misunderstood your last post regarding what filters the subwoofer gets. From what I saw in my own speaker measurements, the routed bass looked like it was getting the LFE AND mains filter applied to it, but you may be right, logically if the filters are tied to a input channel and not to a speaker, the routed bass would only get the filters from the main and not the lfe at all. Good observation.
|
|
|
|
Post by unsound on Apr 28, 2015 12:54:33 GMT -5
Pete, I might have misunderstood your last post regarding what filters the subwoofer gets. It looks like to me that the routed bass is getting the LFE AND mains filter applied to it, but you may be right, maybe the routed bass is only getting the filters from the main and not the lfe at all. Based on the way it seems to be working, I wouldn't expect any Subwoofer filters to be applied to non-LFE sources. If Dirac doesn't know about crossovers and the filters are applied as the first step, I don't see how the Sub filters would get applied to the routed bass. |
|
|
|
Post by millst on Apr 28, 2015 12:55:53 GMT -5
True, I was just pointing out one situation where LFE can be sent to mains. I think there may be others, e.g. turning on the enhanced bass feature. -tm If you had no sub there would be no sub filters to send to the mains |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 13:09:15 GMT -5
Pete, I might have misunderstood your last post regarding what filters the subwoofer gets. It looks like to me that the routed bass is getting the LFE AND mains filter applied to it, but you may be right, maybe the routed bass is only getting the filters from the main and not the lfe at all. Based on the way it seems to be working, I wouldn't expect any Subwoofer filters to be applied to non-LFE sources. If Dirac doesn't know about crossovers and the filters are applied as the first step, I don't see how the Sub filters would get applied to the routed bass. I'm realizing that now. Thanks for pointing this out. Its odd though, even in ansats line level measurement (second graph), the LFE and routed bass look like they both have the LFE filters applied. |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 13:11:24 GMT -5
True, I was just pointing out one situation where LFE can be sent to mains. I think there may be others, e.g. turning on the enhanced bass feature. -tm If you had no sub there would be no sub filters to send to the mains Yeah, your right. I misunderstood petes post, I thought he was talking about sub filters getting applied to the mains, but I realize now thats not what he said. |
|
|
|
Post by unsound on Apr 28, 2015 13:23:35 GMT -5
Based on the way it seems to be working, I wouldn't expect any Subwoofer filters to be applied to non-LFE sources. If Dirac doesn't know about crossovers and the filters are applied as the first step, I don't see how the Sub filters would get applied to the routed bass. I'm realizing that now. Thanks for pointing this out. I do hope we hear from Emotiva on what their take is on this. |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Apr 28, 2015 13:31:15 GMT -5
But one key point in my original post to remember is that by setting the curtain to the crossover, this can be bypassed. This would place no corrections below the crossover and would not get summed into what is sent to the sub. This would be the equivalent of Dirac knowing what the crossover is. Tony Hi tony Yep - agree completley on that, and it probably makes sense to align the curtains and the crossovers in any case - having filters created well below the cross over point probably doesn't make sense anyway. I did experiment last night with actually letting Dirac tell me where to set the crossovers - looking at where Dirac thought it could match the response to the target curve and then setting the cross over a little above this - quite like the results, but more playing later. My only question - and forgive me if this can be worked out from your charts - is, if you pull the curtains up so that the mains filters aren't applied, so the sub filters get applied to the cross'ed over material. If the path just went source-dirac-crossover-output, this wouldn't mean that the sub filters got applied to the main signal that gets redirected to the sub - it would just stop the main filters from being applied. Wouldn't this mean that you're basically getting uncorrected signals for the material below the crossover point which is redirected to the sub? So, a partial solution only? pete S Since only the curtains for the speakers are being moved and not the subwoofer, I do not believe that the lack of correction from the xover point and down. It does not look like the sub filter is applied to the mains, just the main filter to the sub. I would be more worried about filters summing as dirac can apply up to 10db gain per filter and if those were to sum.... Tony |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Apr 28, 2015 13:34:22 GMT -5
Based on the way it seems to be working, I wouldn't expect any Subwoofer filters to be applied to non-LFE sources. If Dirac doesn't know about crossovers and the filters are applied as the first step, I don't see how the Sub filters would get applied to the routed bass. I'm realizing that now. Thanks for pointing this out. not sure the order of operations -- But my testing shows that the sub filter is being applied. Tony |
|
|
|
Post by nickwin on Apr 28, 2015 13:37:03 GMT -5
I'm realizing that now. Thanks for pointing this out. not sure the order of operations -- But my testing shows that the sub filter is being applied. Tony I was just looking at your graphs and came to the same conclusion. Does it not seem logical that if the LFE filters can be applied to a mains signal, the mains filters should be able to be not applied to the sub? It just seems like if its an all or nothing thing where a filter is tied directly to an input, then how does the LFE filter get applied to the mains signal when routed through the crossover? |
|
|
|
Post by ansat on Apr 28, 2015 13:47:18 GMT -5
not sure the order of operations -- But my testing shows that the sub filter is being applied. Tony I was just looking at your graphs and came to the same conclusion. Does it not seem logical that if the LFE filters can be applied to a mains signal, the mains filters should be able to be not applied to the sub? I am thinking in terms that the full altered signal is sent to bass managment. How the subs get the filter from there is where I am at a loss. Tony |
|
|
|
Post by unsound on Apr 28, 2015 22:42:32 GMT -5
Not sure if you already covered this, Tony, but due to the routed bass getting the mains filter and not getting the LFE boost, the lower frequencies on 2-channel sources sounded weak (in my case as I have towers). My solution, that seems to work, is to lower the LFE level in Preferences (I think) and raise the sub by an equal amount. This maintains the output for LFE and adds bass to 2-channel.
|
|
