ttocs
Global Moderator 
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,113
|
Post by ttocs on Aug 4, 2021 15:01:14 GMT -5
marcl when you were saying that "something" was different with Dirac, I think it was last week or just before, were you using Saved and Restored settings? I posted in the BMbug thread about a weird corruption that occurred only when using Dirac, but I can only come up with that it is related to Restored settings. I did a Factory Reset, manually entered all settings, then ran Dirac and it's back to normal, well, except for the BMbug. But at least it seems that Levels are back to being more useful. One thing I hadn't considered until writing this is that I've only run Dirac once since the Factory Reset, and everything is still fresh. Might change after some reboots and more Dirac stuff, who knows? Interesting. Since getting the XMC-2 a year and a half ago I have always restored settings after doing a factory reset. What I noticed with Dirac is specific to setting levels in Dirac and then the actual measurement levels of each channel during calibration. I assumed it had to do with how loud Dirac was telling the processor to play the calibration sweeps. I know that I had done a Dirac calibration after installing 2.3 and it behaved as it had before. Then a week or so later the behavior changed and I had not changed anything ... same Dirac 3.0.14 and FW2.3, and no factory reset or restore. When I ran Dirac over the weekend I was getting some weird Volume Calibration screen settings, with the Center speaker being the one with the lowest output, and not being able to lower the subwoofer channels enough. But today I found that something had been corrupted, but I don't know exactly what or how. I had done all that testing for the BMbug using User EQ on Preset-2, then switched over to Dirac EQ on Preset-1 and was getting those "different" results which drove me nuts. And it wasn't even that User and Dirac had been mixed in the same Preset. I doubt I'll be able to find the cause, but it would be nice if I could. Maybe I should do another Restore Settings? |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,246
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 4, 2021 16:58:45 GMT -5
You may be surprised to know that many people just run it, and it works, and they like the results. And, for some others, they aren't all that impressed with the results, and they turn it off again. The purpose of room correction is to correct various flaws and imperfections in your room acoustics and your speakers.
a) if your room and speakers are perfect, or near perfect, to begin with, then there may be nothing to correct, and so no audible improvement
b) not all flaws can be corrected using electronic room correction c) all room correction involves compromises so, depending on the situation, there is a slight chance that the net result will be worse rather than better
All of this is IN ADDITION to any flaws in the specific room correction solution you're using. HOWEVER, when all is said and done, it can't hurt to try, and you can always turn it off, or reset your processor to factory defaults, if you are unhappy with the results you get. (But then, if you're happy with how everything sounds now, maybe you don't need room correction.)
|
|
|
|
Post by hsamwel on Aug 4, 2021 17:11:51 GMT -5
A great video about Dirac calibration.. youtu.be/ZwCmMY9j6AANote the mic position used. Also the comment about the different seating modes. One strange thing though.. StormAudio seems to recommend using different curves for different speaker groups. This would be a big NO from most experts.. Don’t know how the curves differ though. |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,113
|
Post by ttocs on Aug 4, 2021 18:47:05 GMT -5
A great video about Dirac calibration.. youtu.be/ZwCmMY9j6AANote the speaker position used. Also the comment about the different seating modes. One strange thing though.. StormAudio seems to recommend using different curves for different speaker groups. This would be a big NO from most experts.. Don’t how the curves differ though. Yes, that's a great video! Thanks for sharing. Based on what I saw in the video, I changed up the settings so the Master Output is higher and each channel starts out at the very bottom, because unlike in the video I cannot get away with using -10dB on each channel slider as the arbitrary starting point, it's just "too darn loud" as Huey Lewis famously said. But I used this method, mostly, and made the volume louder than I normally do to be more like the video. In the video they show their target to be about -18.7dB, so I settled at -20dB. Normally I choose about -26dB for my happy medium. The reason they chose what they did is to be 30dB higher than ambient room noise level, which makes sense if you can do it that loud. My room was about 44dB at the time, so my Dirac run was +26dB higher. This resulted in a 87dB SPL during the measurement sweeps. If I were in a multi-family dwelling this would probably be too loud for the neighbors who may not like the tune of the sweeps playing for 10 minutes. I've always done sort of the opposite of what the video showed, where I leave the channel sliders as high as possible and the Master Output is much lower instead of being close to or at the maximum. So my question is, does this matter? I don't think it does. My belief is that the Master Output and Channel sliders are like seesaws, raise one & lower the other, the SPL remains the same. To me, it's just two volume controls, with the extra one being there to allow more adjustment for channels that are too loud like my subs, or too quiet. So does it matter which one is near maximum? Is there a sweet spot? So far, the measurements in REW don't reveal anything that stands out. One thing which works great that Dirac designed into the app is that I can play pink noise on every channel at a very low volume level to get the app to "record" the noise for each channel, then pick the highest level or lowest level channel and set that one to the loudness I want, then, without playing noise anymore, go through every other channel and adjust each one to match the first. The amazing thing is how accurate this is, and it's quick to do. |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Aug 5, 2021 7:01:25 GMT -5
A great video about Dirac calibration.. youtu.be/ZwCmMY9j6AANote the speaker position used. Also the comment about the different seating modes. One strange thing though.. StormAudio seems to recommend using different curves for different speaker groups. This would be a big NO from most experts.. Don’t how the curves differ though. Yes, that's a great video! Thanks for sharing. Based on what I saw in the video, I changed up the settings so the Master Output is higher and each channel starts out at the very bottom, because unlike in the video I cannot get away with using -10dB on each channel slider as the arbitrary starting point, it's just "too darn loud" as Huey Lewis famously said. But I used this method, mostly, and made the volume louder than I normally do to be more like the video. In the video they show their target to be about -18.7dB, so I settled at -20dB. Normally I choose about -26dB for my happy medium. The reason they chose what they did is to be 30dB higher than ambient room noise level, which makes sense if you can do it that loud. My room was about 44dB at the time, so my Dirac run was +26dB higher. This resulted in a 87dB SPL during the measurement sweeps. If I were in a multi-family dwelling this would probably be too loud for the neighbors who may not like the tune of the sweeps playing for 10 minutes. I've always done sort of the opposite of what the video showed, where I leave the channel sliders as high as possible and the Master Output is much lower instead of being close to or at the maximum. So my question is, does this matter? I don't think it does. My belief is that the Master Output and Channel sliders are like seesaws, raise one & lower the other, the SPL remains the same. To me, it's just two volume controls, with the extra one being there to allow more adjustment for channels that are too loud like my subs, or too quiet. So does it matter which one is near maximum? Is there a sweet spot? So far, the measurements in REW don't reveal anything that stands out. One thing which works great that Dirac designed into the app is that I can play pink noise on every channel at a very low volume level to get the app to "record" the noise for each channel, then pick the highest level or lowest level channel and set that one to the loudness I want, then, without playing noise anymore, go through every other channel and adjust each one to match the first. The amazing thing is how accurate this is, and it's quick to do. Measuring high above the noise floor makes sense. And agreed on the master/slider seesaw. I have two challenges: my top rears are a lot more efficient than my surrounds, so I end up with top rear slider all the way down and surround slider all the way up; and, I have a BIG peak at 40Hz that will clip if the level is too high, and that peak gets a little higher in a couple locations away from the MLP. I can measure the subs at -20 and the rest at -27, but I can't measure all at -20. Measuring -20/-26 used to work well, resulting in the subs actually being measured at the same level as the rest ... but that changed sometime between end of June and early July. If I measure all the same, it has to be at -26 to avoid clipping. This works well, except all the levels are pulled down about 6db. I think situations like this are why some people struggle with the calibration, and why Dirac and manufacturers struggle to give simple instructions that work for everyone. |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,113
|
Post by ttocs on Aug 5, 2021 7:25:07 GMT -5
Measuring high above the noise floor makes sense. And agreed on the master/slider seesaw. I have two challenges: my top rears are a lot more efficient than my surrounds, so I end up with top rear slider all the way down and surround slider all the way up; and, I have a BIG peak at 40Hz that will clip if the level is too high, and that peak gets a little higher in a couple locations away from the MLP. I can measure the subs at -20 and the rest at -27, but I can't measure all at -20. Measuring -20/-26 used to work well, resulting in the subs actually being measured at the same level as the rest ... but that changed sometime between end of June and early July. If I measure all the same, it has to be at -26 to avoid clipping. This works well, except all the levels are pulled down about 6db. I think situations like this are why some people struggle with the calibration, and why Dirac and manufacturers struggle to give simple instructions that work for everyone. The video linked above is for another manufacturer, and like you say, settings for one may not work for another exactly the same way. Although, I think it's really good advice to consider the noise floor when deciding how the Volume Calibration sliders should be set. With that said, I'll continue to use "loud enough", which for my setup is around -26dB for speaker channels and about -20dB-ish for subs. |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Aug 5, 2021 8:07:43 GMT -5
Measuring high above the noise floor makes sense. And agreed on the master/slider seesaw. I have two challenges: my top rears are a lot more efficient than my surrounds, so I end up with top rear slider all the way down and surround slider all the way up; and, I have a BIG peak at 40Hz that will clip if the level is too high, and that peak gets a little higher in a couple locations away from the MLP. I can measure the subs at -20 and the rest at -27, but I can't measure all at -20. Measuring -20/-26 used to work well, resulting in the subs actually being measured at the same level as the rest ... but that changed sometime between end of June and early July. If I measure all the same, it has to be at -26 to avoid clipping. This works well, except all the levels are pulled down about 6db. I think situations like this are why some people struggle with the calibration, and why Dirac and manufacturers struggle to give simple instructions that work for everyone. The video linked above is for another manufacturer, and like you say, settings for one may not work for another exactly the same way. Although, I think it's really good advice to consider the noise floor when deciding how the Volume Calibration sliders should be set. With that said, I'll continue to use "loud enough", which for my setup is around -26dB for speaker channels and about -20dB-ish for subs. I think I’ll give the Storm Audio’s speaker positions a try. I’ve always done the picture of the 9 point so far. Even though I got a great result last night it’s worth giving it a shot. |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Aug 5, 2021 8:58:24 GMT -5
Measuring high above the noise floor makes sense. And agreed on the master/slider seesaw. I have two challenges: my top rears are a lot more efficient than my surrounds, so I end up with top rear slider all the way down and surround slider all the way up; and, I have a BIG peak at 40Hz that will clip if the level is too high, and that peak gets a little higher in a couple locations away from the MLP. I can measure the subs at -20 and the rest at -27, but I can't measure all at -20. Measuring -20/-26 used to work well, resulting in the subs actually being measured at the same level as the rest ... but that changed sometime between end of June and early July. If I measure all the same, it has to be at -26 to avoid clipping. This works well, except all the levels are pulled down about 6db. I think situations like this are why some people struggle with the calibration, and why Dirac and manufacturers struggle to give simple instructions that work for everyone. The video linked above is for another manufacturer, and like you say, settings for one may not work for another exactly the same way. Although, I think it's really good advice to consider the noise floor when deciding how the Volume Calibration sliders should be set. With that said, I'll continue to use "loud enough", which for my setup is around -26dB for speaker channels and about -20dB-ish for subs. Interesting how you and I - with totally different gear - ended up empirically at 20/26. |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,113
|
Post by ttocs on Aug 5, 2021 9:07:56 GMT -5
The video linked above is for another manufacturer, and like you say, settings for one may not work for another exactly the same way. Although, I think it's really good advice to consider the noise floor when deciding how the Volume Calibration sliders should be set. With that said, I'll continue to use "loud enough", which for my setup is around -26dB for speaker channels and about -20dB-ish for subs. Interesting how you and I - with totally different gear - ended up empirically at 20/26. Well, . . . that "is" a bit weird. I did it simply because my sub channels were measuring a bit low and I wanted more ooooomph! -20dB gives enough ooooomph without it being too much. I was using -18dB for the subs, but now it seems like that is too much so I backed off. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Aug 5, 2021 10:03:29 GMT -5
Quick question. Do you guys equalize the volume for all speakers prior to running the measurements? Also, if you are not running Dirac and don’t plan to…thank you for that information. This is also in the 3rd Post FAQ |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Aug 5, 2021 10:43:39 GMT -5
Interesting how you and I - with totally different gear - ended up empirically at 20/26. Well, . . . that "is" a bit weird. I did it simply because my sub channels were measuring a bit low and I wanted more ooooomph! -20dB gives enough ooooomph without it being too much. I was using -18dB for the subs, but now it seems like that is too much so I backed off. That too! I had pushed my subs up to -18 and the rest to -24-25. But that now results in clipping. That was not the case before July 8. |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Aug 5, 2021 13:45:44 GMT -5
A great video about Dirac calibration.. youtu.be/ZwCmMY9j6AANote the speaker position used. Also the comment about the different seating modes. One strange thing though.. StormAudio seems to recommend using different curves for different speaker groups. This would be a big NO from most experts.. Don’t how the curves differ though. Pretty good video, though a lot of it applies only to the Storm processor and would not be relevant to Emotiva processors. Most notably, Dirac calibration for our processors can't be applied on top of User PEQ, and we can't adjust delays after they have been set by Dirac. And of course we have no DLBC. The section on setting speaker volume is okay, but the actual levels will not work for everyone. They would definitely be too loud for my system and I have to set the Master level much lower or some of the measurements will fail with a clipping error in the bass frequencies. So everyone still needs to be careful and attentive to the different efficiencies of their speakers as well as large bass peaks. The 9 point measurement pattern that they recommend is actually the original pattern that Dirac used in version 1, when the most you could do was 9 points. It's a staggered pattern and makes sense. I actually use the 13 point pattern but I stagger the positions somewhat and usually only do 11 positions. The recommendations of keeping the measurements 8-10" away from each other and a few inches from furniture make sense. Just remember that Dirac doesn't need these measurements literally to cover your seating area ... it needs them to determine which parts of the response can be corrected with each type of filter. As for the recommended target curves .... pardon me for the sadistic masochistic hippophilic necrophelia .... but Storm and others have taken curves that originated with Harman research and applied them in ways for which they were never intended. So as always ... everyone is free to boost their bass and cut their treble any way they want, just don't say that Toole or Olive told you to  |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Aug 5, 2021 14:10:09 GMT -5
I have a 10+ dB peak at 25 Hz for my main speakers while other speakers have less of a boost.
This means for me, I can use the 10 dB Harman curve for my main speakers but for the center and sub I use 6 dB, otherwise the curve is too high.
For the surrounds, because Emotiva grouped the surrounds and surround back in the same group, I can only apply 1 Harman curve. This is a bummer because I’m using full range surrounds while surround backs are bookshelf speakers.
This has resulted in good results for both movies and music.
Seems like Storm Audio has a better integration with Dirac but Emotiva’s is still pretty good. I wish I can decouple my surround and surround backs though.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Aug 5, 2021 14:26:28 GMT -5
A great video about Dirac calibration.. youtu.be/ZwCmMY9j6AANote the speaker position used. Also the comment about the different seating modes. One strange thing though.. StormAudio seems to recommend using different curves for different speaker groups. This would be a big NO from most experts.. Don’t how the curves differ though. Good resource, I added it to the 2nd Post links |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Aug 5, 2021 15:20:47 GMT -5
I have a 10+ dB peak at 25 Hz for my main speakers while other speakers have less of a boost. This means for me, I can use the 10 dB Harman curve for my main speakers but for the center and sub I use 6 dB, otherwise the curve is too high. For the surrounds, because Emotiva grouped the surrounds and surround back in the same group, I can only apply 1 Harman curve. This is a bummer because I’m using full range surrounds while surround backs are bookshelf speakers. This has resulted in good results for both movies and music. Seems like Storm Audio has a better integration with Dirac but Emotiva’s is still pretty good. I wish I can decouple my surround and surround backs though. You can change the speaker groups. In your example, just drag the surround backs out of the group with the surrounds and they will have their own group. Either drag them all the way to the top or bottom of the stack and Dirac will create a new group for them. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,246
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 5, 2021 15:35:35 GMT -5
There is also another thing to consider when discussing microphones.
All calibrated microphones are calibrated for their response from a certain direction - so, for example, from 90 degrees. That way, if you measure the same speaker with different calibrated microphones, each from its calibrated direction, IN AN ANECHOIC CHAMBER, you should get very similar results. And, in fact, some calibrated microphones do include calibration curves for multiple directions, like 90 degrees and 0 degrees. But no calibrated microphone I know is specified to have an identical response from multiple directions.
The catch is that, when you take those Dirac measurements (or measurements for REW), you do NOT have an anechoic chamber. Therefore, while the measurements of the speaker, WHICH ARE TAKEN AT THE CALIBRATED ANGLE, should produce similar results. (Assuming that some sort of windowing is used to exclude room response and yield a "quasi-anechoic" response.) However, the contributions from room acoustics, WHICH ARE NOT REACHING THE MICROPHONE AT THE CALIBRATED ANGLE, may vary between microphones. (I could have two carefully calibrated microphones, which produce identical results at 90 degrees, but very different results at 0 degrees.)
Therefore the exact contribution the room makes, as measured with with different calibrated microphones, or even with different measurement methods, may NOT be the same... (And, of course, we don't actually know how Dirac is calculating or weighting those various parts of the result data.)
Because of this it's obvious that the Dirac Live software is making some assumptions... both about the acoustics of your room... and about the off-calibration-axis response of the microphone you're using. Some significant ASSUMPTIONS are being made about how the "off calibrated axis" response of the microphone you're using compare to its calibrated response. And, likewise, since a limited number of measurements are being taken, assumptions are being made about room acoustics as well.
Also, for the people who say "they took several measurements with the microphone in exactly the same spot...
At 20 Hz a single wavelength is about 50 feet... At 10 kHz a single wavelength is about one inch (so an error in placement of 1/8" is about 40 degrees of phase difference at 10 kHz). So, unless you're using a precision robotic microphone positioner, the best you can do is to put the microphone in "about the same spot as last time"...
I hear and understand about 'defined mic positions'.....other than the MLP. However, this should NOT prevent the individual user from defining his OWN positions, per DIRAC instructions and guidance. This would ensure consistency during REPEAT measures, where you may have changed some settings..... To this end? I URGE careful record keeping and use of a tape measure and even a 'map' of the room...... IF I were very familiar with DIRAC, usage and running it....I should be able to come to YOUR house, and useing YOUR directions / setup actually be able to DUPLICATE your results.....within a narrow margin of error. You could actually determine margin of error IN YOUR SYSTEM....by running DIRAC 1x Daily for a week, using the EXACT setup parameters each time... You should, by such means, be able to determine SYSTEM ERROR as opposted to OPERATOR ERROR......Both of which play into the final results. I do NOT know....Does the microphone come with a 'generic' correction file OR is does each mic come with its OWN dedicated correction file generated thru measureing the output OF THAT MIC? I suspect a fully NIST traceable and calibrated mic would be a LOT OF $$$ and should be recalibrated annually in regular use. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,246
|
Post by KeithL on Aug 5, 2021 15:48:27 GMT -5
The levels you set IN THE DIRAC LIVE SOFTWARE determine the level at which the tests are run. They are not supposed to have any effect whatsoever on the final gain set in the resulting filters. The TRIM LEVELS THAT YOU SET BEFORE RUNNING DIRAC (in the processor's Speaker Preset) are also supposed to be ignored by Dirac Live when it runs the tests and calculates its filters. So the Dirac Live software will set the gain for each channel as it sees fit, based on its measurements and calculations, and IGNORE any Trim Levels you had set before it ran the tests.
HOWEVER, in the current firmware, the Trim Levels you set before running Dirac Live will remain set and in effect after you run it. And, after running Dirac Live, those manual Trim Levels will be added to the results produced by Dirac Live, causing them to be incorrect. Another way of saying that is that:
"The filters produced by Dirac Live are calculated to produce the correct levels WITH THE MANUAL LEVEL TRIMS SET TO 0 dB - regardless of what the manual Trim Levels were set to before you ran Dirac Live." Therefore feel free to us the manual Level Trims to tweak Dirac's results... But, after running Dirac Live, you should initially set them all back to 0 dB, "to hear what Dirac thinks you should hear", and then go from there...
A great video about Dirac calibration.. youtu.be/ZwCmMY9j6AANote the speaker position used. Also the comment about the different seating modes. One strange thing though.. StormAudio seems to recommend using different curves for different speaker groups. This would be a big NO from most experts.. Don’t how the curves differ though. Yes, that's a great video! Thanks for sharing. Based on what I saw in the video, I changed up the settings so the Master Output is higher and each channel starts out at the very bottom, because unlike in the video I cannot get away with using -10dB on each channel slider as the arbitrary starting point, it's just "too darn loud" as Huey Lewis famously said. But I used this method, mostly, and made the volume louder than I normally do to be more like the video. In the video they show their target to be about -18.7dB, so I settled at -20dB. Normally I choose about -26dB for my happy medium. The reason they chose what they did is to be 30dB higher than ambient room noise level, which makes sense if you can do it that loud. My room was about 44dB at the time, so my Dirac run was +26dB higher. This resulted in a 87dB SPL during the measurement sweeps. If I were in a multi-family dwelling this would probably be too loud for the neighbors who may not like the tune of the sweeps playing for 10 minutes. I've always done sort of the opposite of what the video showed, where I leave the channel sliders as high as possible and the Master Output is much lower instead of being close to or at the maximum. So my question is, does this matter? I don't think it does. My belief is that the Master Output and Channel sliders are like seesaws, raise one & lower the other, the SPL remains the same. To me, it's just two volume controls, with the extra one being there to allow more adjustment for channels that are too loud like my subs, or too quiet. So does it matter which one is near maximum? Is there a sweet spot? So far, the measurements in REW don't reveal anything that stands out. One thing which works great that Dirac designed into the app is that I can play pink noise on every channel at a very low volume level to get the app to "record" the noise for each channel, then pick the highest level or lowest level channel and set that one to the loudness I want, then, without playing noise anymore, go through every other channel and adjust each one to match the first. The amazing thing is how accurate this is, and it's quick to do. |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,113
|
Post by ttocs on Aug 5, 2021 16:57:22 GMT -5
The levels you set IN THE DIRAC LIVE SOFTWARE determine the level at which the tests are run. They are not supposed to have any effect whatsoever on the final gain set in the resulting filters. The TRIM LEVELS THAT YOU SET BEFORE RUNNING DIRAC (in the processor's Speaker Preset) are also supposed to be ignored by Dirac Live when it runs the tests and calculates its filters. So the Dirac Live software will set the gain for each channel as it sees fit, based on its measurements and calculations, and IGNORE any Trim Levels you had set before it ran the tests.
HOWEVER, in the current firmware, the Trim Levels you set before running Dirac Live will remain set and in effect after you run it. And, after running Dirac Live, those manual Trim Levels will be added to the results produced by Dirac Live, causing them to be incorrect. Another way of saying that is that:
"The filters produced by Dirac Live are calculated to produce the correct levels WITH THE MANUAL LEVEL TRIMS SET TO 0 dB - regardless of what the manual Trim Levels were set to before you ran Dirac Live." Therefore feel free to us the manual Level Trims to tweak Dirac's results... But, after running Dirac Live, you should initially set them all back to 0 dB, "to hear what Dirac thinks you should hear", and then go from there...
I've always done sort of the opposite of what the video showed, where I leave the channel sliders as high as possible and the Master Output is much lower instead of being close to or at the maximum. So my question is, does this matter? I don't think it does. My belief is that the Master Output and Channel sliders are like seesaws, raise one & lower the other, the SPL remains the same. To me, it's just two volume controls, with the extra one being there to allow more adjustment for channels that are too loud like my subs, or too quiet. So does it matter which one is near maximum? Is there a sweet spot? So far, the measurements in REW don't reveal anything that stands out. I'm very clear on exactly how the Speaker Levels are applied after Dirac but not during Dirac calibration. With the current firmware, even when using a Dirac Filter, my subwoofer channels are adjusted to at or near the lowest level possible with the processor. Dirac vs User is different by only a little. However, the speaker channels are much more consistent with a Dirac Filter than with User. So, getting back to the seesaw issue. In regards to the Master Output Slider and Channel Sliders does it matter which one is higher if the resulting SPL is the same? If all the Channel Sliders are exactly at the same level, does it matter if they are as low as they can go so the Master Output can be all the way up? |
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,434
|
Post by Lsc on Aug 6, 2021 0:12:38 GMT -5
The storm audio recommended positions which I followed to the best of my abilities but wasn’t exact…this is the best Dirac calibration I’ve gotten to date.
Also thank you, I was able to decouple my surround speakers from my surround backs.
Who needs better equipment? Just rerun Dirac every 3-4 months 😎.
|
|
|
|
Post by hsamwel on Aug 6, 2021 4:12:53 GMT -5
The video linked above is for another manufacturer, and like you say, settings for one may not work for another exactly the same way. Although, I think it's really good advice to consider the noise floor when deciding how the Volume Calibration sliders should be set. With that said, I'll continue to use "loud enough", which for my setup is around -26dB for speaker channels and about -20dB-ish for subs. I think I’ll give the Storm Audio’s speaker positions a try. I’ve always done the picture of the 9 point so far. Even though I got a great result last night it’s worth giving it a shot. Yeah, it seems I was right.. All my measurements have gotten about the same result no matter where the extra positions have been.. Although I have always measured a cube around the head as Dirac shows in the picture. StormAudio says it doesn’t matter, with a disclaimer though. I think most that changes when moving the mic positions around is how Dirac calculates the bass.. Depending on room and seating position it can probably be good or bad. Which StormAudio says in the video as well. Always save the latest project and the one your satified with. This way you can always go back and use it if another experiment/change doesn’t work out. |
|
