ttocs
Global Moderator 
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Jul 27, 2021 7:35:03 GMT -5
In the communications with Emotiva the last few days, I've not been given a sense of when "they" think this will be available as a fix. I just don't know how it couldn't be something which needs addressing immediately. I know they need to get their heads wrapped around the issue because they haven't been thinking about it like I have for the last year. I understand very well what causes what to act a certain way, and which firmwares do it worse, which unfortunately is the current one which is why I had to do something more proactive. FW2.3 is really good at a lot of things, but not at Levels. We cannot use the built-in Levels to level the channels properly, we gotta use REW and pick the sound field we want it to use. Pick your poison.
I mean, just take the initial bump of +4dB of BM when all channels are small. How does this get passed by Dolby? Is there a tolerance here which allows some plus sized bass?
Then we get to when there is only one subwoofer channel used for LFE, the Center Sub Output, and no other subwoofers, so all the BM must be sent to the Large Channels, usually the LCR, and these get the whopping +8dB of BM. I tested this last weekend and I had to do it several times because just like Tom Cruise in Rain Man, "I couldn't believe my ******* ears!". (The scene where he learns of his inheritance of the car, but not the money.) I only used one Large Speaker from one amp channel, one Small Speaker from one amp channel, the LCR from the XMC-2 out to miniDSP so it was 3 to 1 (inputs to output), and SL channel from the XMC-2. I did it this way so there wouldn't be any summing issues or speaker response curve differences so the traces are really easy to read and to see what's going on.
All of this is when just using Surround, so, it all should be by the book, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jul 27, 2021 9:54:58 GMT -5
In the communications with Emotiva the last few days, I've not been given a sense of when "they" think this will be available as a fix. I just don't know how it couldn't be something which needs addressing immediately. I know they need to get their heads wrapped around the issue because they haven't been thinking about it like I have for the last year. I understand very well what causes what to act a certain way, and which firmwares do it worse, which unfortunately is the current one which is why I had to do something more proactive. FW2.3 is really good at a lot of things, but not at Levels. We cannot use the built-in Levels to level the channels properly, we gotta use REW and pick the sound field we want it to use. Pick your poison. I mean, just take the initial bump of +4dB of BM when all channels are small. How does this get passed by Dolby? Is there a tolerance here which allows some plus sized bass? Then we get to when there is only one subwoofer channel used for LFE, the Center Sub Output, and no other subwoofers, so all the BM must be sent to the Large Channels, usually the LCR, and these get the whopping +8dB of BM. I tested this last weekend and I had to do it several times because just like Tom Cruise in Rain Man, "I couldn't believe my ******* ears!". (The scene where he learns of his inheritance of the car, but not the money.) I only used one Large Speaker from one amp channel, one Small Speaker from one amp channel, the LCR from the XMC-2 out to miniDSP so it was 3 to 1 (inputs to output), and SL channel from the XMC-2. I did it this way so there wouldn't be any summing issues or speaker response curve differences so the traces are really easy to read and to see what's going on. All of this is when just using Surround, so, it all should be by the book, right? I would like to suggest something to you at this point ttocs, I do believe it’s a very good thing (and necessary) for end users to identify problem issues, whatever they are, in order to affect change. I had done this with several issues on the XMC1 during the first few years. It was very rewarding indeed to identify and see those glitches resolved as a consequence. So anyway, my suggestion is that your continuing efforts be shared directly with EMOTIVA and then fill us in on the forum with your progress rather than trying to solve it here. After all, their end is where the fix comes from if indeed there is one. |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Jul 27, 2021 10:49:51 GMT -5
I began to post this stuff to get Emotiva to respond, find others with similar experiences, and then also for clarification of this confusing bug. There’s quite a bit that hasn’t been shown publicly.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Jul 27, 2021 12:13:11 GMT -5
In the communications with Emotiva the last few days, I've not been given a sense of when "they" think this will be available as a fix. I just don't know how it couldn't be something which needs addressing immediately. I know they need to get their heads wrapped around the issue because they haven't been thinking about it like I have for the last year. I understand very well what causes what to act a certain way, and which firmwares do it worse, which unfortunately is the current one which is why I had to do something more proactive. FW2.3 is really good at a lot of things, but not at Levels. We cannot use the built-in Levels to level the channels properly, we gotta use REW and pick the sound field we want it to use. Pick your poison. I mean, just take the initial bump of +4dB of BM when all channels are small. How does this get passed by Dolby? Is there a tolerance here which allows some plus sized bass? Then we get to when there is only one subwoofer channel used for LFE, the Center Sub Output, and no other subwoofers, so all the BM must be sent to the Large Channels, usually the LCR, and these get the whopping +8dB of BM. I tested this last weekend and I had to do it several times because just like Tom Cruise in Rain Man, "I couldn't believe my ******* ears!". (The scene where he learns of his inheritance of the car, but not the money.) I only used one Large Speaker from one amp channel, one Small Speaker from one amp channel, the LCR from the XMC-2 out to miniDSP so it was 3 to 1 (inputs to output), and SL channel from the XMC-2. I did it this way so there wouldn't be any summing issues or speaker response curve differences so the traces are really easy to read and to see what's going on. All of this is when just using Surround, so, it all should be by the book, right? Well you need to understand that software development is done in the quantum realm where time doesn’t flow the same as in the real world. Seconds for them could be years for us. |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Jul 27, 2021 12:30:40 GMT -5
Well you need to understand that software development is done in the quantum realm where time doesn’t flow the same as in the real world. Seconds for them could be years for us. I thought it's the other way around. hmmmm, let's see, . . . quantum . . . realm . . . seconds are involved, divided by years, hmmmm . . . my construction calculator doesn't have quantum on it. I'm confident they'll get it fixed so it's like it was in FW1.10 (I'm pretty sure that's the one). It was after that FW that they began making "corrections", but somehow they went in the opposite direction, kind of like subtracting a negative number, which frankly is close to what I believe was happening. |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jul 27, 2021 12:37:59 GMT -5
I began to post this stuff to get Emotiva to respond, find others with similar experiences, and then also for clarification of this confusing bug. There’s quite a bit that hasn’t been shown publicly. I understand where you’re coming from and your heart is in the right place. You’ve put exhaustive effort into this…. If I were you I would channel that (and your results) directly into technical support (out there in Franklin) where it can be most effective. You may not like the “final” answers you get but you’ll at least better understand where they are coming from |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Jul 27, 2021 12:39:58 GMT -5
I began to post this stuff to get Emotiva to respond, find others with similar experiences, and then also for clarification of this confusing bug. There’s quite a bit that hasn’t been shown publicly. I understand where you’re coming from and your heart is in the right place. You’ve put exhaustive effort into this…. If I were you I would channel that (and your results) directly into technical support (out there in Franklin) where it can be most effective. You may not like the “final” answers you get but you’ll at least better understand where they are coming from I thought that was clear from my previous reply. Lots of stuff you haven't seen was sent to Emotiva parties. |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Jul 27, 2021 12:46:39 GMT -5
Well you need to understand that software development is done in the quantum realm where time doesn’t flow the same as in the real world. Seconds for them could be years for us. I thought it's the other way around. hmmmm, let's see, . . . quantum . . . realm . . . seconds are involved, divided by years, hmmmm . . . my construction calculator doesn't have quantum on it. oh yeah, that’s what I meant, not what I said  |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Jul 27, 2021 12:48:36 GMT -5
I thought it's the other way around. hmmmm, let's see, . . . quantum . . . realm . . . seconds are involved, divided by years, hmmmm . . . my construction calculator doesn't have quantum on it. oh yeah, that’s what I meant, not what I said Either way, it's funny! |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Jul 27, 2021 13:01:44 GMT -5
oh yeah, that’s what I meant, not what I said Either way, it's funny! But seriously folks  Estimating software development projects was something I dug deeply into for the last 20 years or so that I worked. And it turned out that the Agile software development community developed methods that were very reliable and produced working software that people actually used. I learned these methods well, and taught and coached others to use the methods. But not always with success. The unsuccessful times happened when fundamentally people just refused to follow the process. Either management or marketing or customers or sometimes the teams themselves just refused to follow a process that I and many other had proven would work. Many reasons why they refused that I won't go into, but they did. Another aspect to this is prioritization. Product companies really can't talk openly about their business priorities. For example, can a company say "we're not going to fix these bugs for like a year, because the software team is busy working on these new products that we need to sell to stay in business"? No, they can't say that. But believe me, if a company and a team are committed to get a piece of work done, there IS a way to get it done on time with a high degree of quality. It can be done! But I got tired of arguing with people, so I retired  |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Jul 27, 2021 13:03:08 GMT -5
oh yeah, that’s what I meant, not what I said Either way, it's funny! Full disclosure, in my career I have been a software developer, tester, architect and CTO, not of an audio related product, but of complex software. While this is a pessimistic perspective, it is rooted in some experience across companies and projects, years, and technology eras . In general, software developers rarely believe that a bug exists until it is proven to them beyond a shadow of doubt, they very often “fix” bugs that turn out in fact not to be fixed at all, or only partially fixed, or that break something else in the process. Testers may not follow all logic paths when testing, and often user testing is incomplete because users don’t have the time or inclination to thoroughly test. The only time that bugs don’t get reported is when the users haven’t actually used the software. Software that in theory runs identically on multiple platforms often doesn’t, and the more patches the software receives the harder it is to fix new bugs. Companies rarely have the financial resources to fix many bugs and are always under pressure to release new products to drive revenue vs fixing existing software, almost always over commit and under deliver. |
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,850
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jul 27, 2021 13:06:08 GMT -5
I tested this last weekend and I had to do it several times because just like Tom Cruise in Rain Man, "I couldn't believe my ******* ears!". (The scene where he learns of his inheritance of the car, but not the money.) .........but he did get the Rose Bushes.  |
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Jul 27, 2021 13:19:51 GMT -5
I tested this last weekend and I had to do it several times because just like Tom Cruise in Rain Man, "I couldn't believe my ******* ears!". (The scene where he learns of his inheritance of the car, but not the money.) .........but he did get the Rose Bushes. Very, Well, Played ! |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jul 27, 2021 13:48:41 GMT -5
I understand where you’re coming from and your heart is in the right place. You’ve put exhaustive effort into this…. If I were you I would channel that (and your results) directly into technical support (out there in Franklin) where it can be most effective. You may not like the “final” answers you get but you’ll at least better understand where they are coming from “I thought that was clear from my previous reply. Lots of stuff you haven't seen was sent to Emotiva parties.” AAAHHHH…..Now I get it  |
|
|
|
Post by markc on Jul 27, 2021 14:02:56 GMT -5
No. No. No. No. No!
Dolby Digital / AC3 5.1 was released in 1991 and bass management is an integral and essential part of that.
Essential.
For 30 years it has been a de facto requirement for any audio kit that outputs line level signals to an amplifier to perform bass management.
Emotiva - just get it sorted! This is making you a joke company not a serious contender!
I most certainly have been Rethinking High End Audio this last couple of days since I fudged my system to use all speakers set to Large and realised what the heck was happening!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Aug 1, 2021 22:35:20 GMT -5
Just to be clear.. if all I have hooked up fight now is 7.1(1).2... so one sub on LFE, then I should be setting everything large?
|
|
ttocs
Global Moderator
I always have a wonderful time, wherever I am, whomever I'm with. (Elwood P Dowd)
Posts: 8,154
|
Post by ttocs on Aug 1, 2021 23:24:48 GMT -5
Just to be clear.. if all I have hooked up fight now is 7.1(1).2... so one sub on LFE, then I should be setting everything large? I wouldn't. Unless the speakers can truly handle very low frequencies, or, if you've mitigated the possibility of damaging speakers which cannot handle low frequencies, I'd leave small speakers setup as Small in the channel settings. My Left & Right are capable of 20Hz at high volume, and my Center speaker has frequencies lower than 150Hz sent to a dedicated sub via an active XO. All the Surround and ATMOS speakers are truly Small so I make the adjustments to levels as shown above. I posted that to show how to cope with the issue until it's fixed. |
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Aug 3, 2021 7:43:31 GMT -5
5.1 with two subwoofers Left Sub Mono Center Sub LFE Large LCR Small SL and SR Surround sound field After running Dirac in a 5.1 config then leveling using XMC-2 Levels, I ran REW to check. The first plot is that result which shows that XMC-2 Levels don't work, so this showed me how much adjustment was still needed. XMC-2 Levels checked with REW View AttachmentAfter using REW to determine proper levels adjustments. View AttachmentAm I understanding correctly? After running Dirac, you used the pink noise source from the XMC-2 to check levels and adjusted them with an SPL meter (REW?). This produced the incorrect levels. After that you used REW as the pink noise source and adjusted levels using an SPL meter, producing the correct levels. Dirac calibration was done with the default Dirac target curve? This seems to indicate that maybe the pink noise source in Levels in the XMC-2 is played without any Dirac level processing and so it reflects the levels without the level alignment that Dirac does, but clearly with Dirac filter correction. When you use REW as the pink noise source, Dirac level adjustment is definitely applied and you add final level adjustments on top of that. |
|
|
|
Post by markc on Aug 3, 2021 8:51:10 GMT -5
I thought Dirac did it's own level matching based on the measurements taken while measuring and creating a filter set.
No additional user level adjustments "should" be needed if that process is correct. (I appreciate that people have found that it doesn't exactly match with Dirac default settings but after applying filters like Dirac to different frequencies of a pink noise signal, pink noise is no longer pink noise!)
(pink noise is characterised by each octave interval (halving or doubling in frequency) carrying an equal amount of noise energy, which the signal may be before parametric and other filters, but most definitely won't be after)
It is not impossible that the pink noise generation from the G3P level setting does not work when a Dirac filter set is enabled.
Is it the same result when a Blu-ray calibration disc pink noise is played through the G3P level matching adjustments instead of the internally generated ones?
|
|
