|
|
Post by PaulBe on Dec 7, 2023 22:05:54 GMT -5
I have a number of concerts on disc. Could you mention some of your concerts with LFE issues? I might have a copy to examine this problem. In a very quick look, I took some concert recordings and played the LFE channel into the RTA of REW for 200 averages (32K FFT). The levels are adjusted for clarity. They will all be compromised by the XMC-2 LFE filter. Godsmack will be affected the least. What is on that Slayer LFE? It's some of the tracks from the drum kit. Sounds great if you can play it. Pink Floyd has the synth on there. John Mayall has the bass guitar on LFE. The others have a strong low pass filter in play.  I have the Pulse Blu-ray discs. I will check it out. I'm still trying to figure out what is so important about the battery operated red LED as part of the box. I know - Pulse. Pink Floyd and Roger Waters impress me as folks who don't do many sound mixing mistakes. I say they knew what they were doing and mean't it. The problem is Emotiva's LFE filter. A lot of strange artistic things are done with recordings. Most people never experience them because of system limitations - and some expensive systems are just as limited as cheap mediocre ones. These things are kind of like 'easter eggs' to be surprised by and found on a hunt. Not problems. Emotiva needs to remove their LFE filter. Your test work is impressive. Thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Dec 7, 2023 23:06:00 GMT -5
Because it's by design. Most of the recordings in the world are still 2-channel stereo. A lot of classical recordings are done with a spaced pair of omnis or a coincident pair of cardioids. There are a lot of marvelous stereo recordings and they don't need to be fixed. Altering a good stereo recording will not fix anything, though you may like the alteration. If the stereo recording uses phasing effects in L&R you may harm more than help. I don't find it to be lame, or an issue, or in need of repair. There is only one good seat in the house... any house... with any number of channels. A movie theater has only a few ideal seats. Most times I listen to stereo and multi-channel music in a non-ideal location and I don't feel the poorer for it. I can hear the qualities of good and bad recordings from various listening locations. The sweet spot is the best, with any recording. A proper center channel can be phantom or real. In the end, they are both illusions of reality. Some people prefer a phantom center. I'll take both. You and I are fortunate that our respective LCR are the same speakers. A great stable soundstage can be had by cross aiming the L&R. I shared your opinion until I found a good solid working improvement to the issue. If you try the center channel fix, you and your guests sitting off center will be amazed. CenterOne does not alter the sound stage as perceived from a center seat. It is not confused by phasing effects. Its main purpose is to provide a three channel feed for further processing in a recording studio or mastering lab. Enough on that. I have a different philosophy. I don’t care what my guests will be amazed by. I care that their visit will enrich both our lives and relationship. All this AV stuff is secondary, and most people who visit me could care less about any of it. If they ask anything about it I will offer what they seek. I try to offer good hospitality by not pushing any of it. Perhaps your guests are more audiophile oriented. |
|
|
|
Post by hulkss on Dec 7, 2023 23:47:58 GMT -5
Pink Floyd and Roger Waters impress me as folks who don't do many sound mixing mistakes. I say they knew what they were doing and mean't it. The problem is Emotiva's LFE filter. A lot of strange artistic things are done with recordings. Most people never experience them because of system limitations - and some expensive systems are just as limited as cheap mediocre ones. These things are kind of like 'easter eggs' to be surprised by and found on a hunt. Not problems. Emotiva needs to remove their LFE filter. Your test work is impressive. Thank you. LFE content that extends into the mid-bass or higher frequencies can't be reproduced by most subwoofers. If they do, the high frequencies will be totally localized. Depending on location, that can be a distraction. An option to redirect the LFE above a selected frequency to the center channel would be welcome. There are endless solutions to home theater. I hope the options discussed here help people to enjoy this great hobby. |
|
|
|
Post by hulkss on Dec 8, 2023 0:00:40 GMT -5
I shared your opinion until I found a good solid working improvement to the issue. If you try the center channel fix, you and your guests sitting off center will be amazed. CenterOne does not alter the sound stage as perceived from a center seat. It is not confused by phasing effects. Its main purpose is to provide a three channel feed for further processing in a recording studio or mastering lab. Enough on that. I have a different philosophy. I don’t care what my guests will be amazed by. I care that their visit will enrich both our lives and relationship. All this AV stuff is secondary, and most people who visit me could care less about any of it. If they ask anything about it I will offer what they seek. I try to offer good hospitality by not pushing any of it. Perhaps your guests are more audiophile oriented. You have the right approach. I also only turn on the home theater if requested. |
|
|
|
Post by hulkss on Dec 11, 2023 17:32:43 GMT -5
To compensate for differences in tonal balance between recordings, there are very capable tone controls in the XMC-2. The problem is, we don't really know what they are doing. I measured the XMC-2 tone control performance with REW, through a range of +/- 6 dB. After some experimenting, I settled on turnover point settings of 60 and 1500 Hz. This results in an actual turnover center point of 300 Hz. This looks very good to me. A single set of PEQ filters should be all that is needed with these tone controls and the ability to change the subwoofer level. The LFE level is also adjustable separately.  |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Dec 11, 2023 22:13:23 GMT -5
To compensate for differences in tonal balance between recordings, there are very capable tone controls in the XMC-2. The problem is, we don't really know what they are doing. I measured the XMC-2 tone control performance with REW, through a range of +/- 6 dB. After some experimenting, I settled on turnover point settings of 60 and 1500 Hz. This results in an actual turnover center point of 300 Hz. This looks very good to me. A single set of PEQ filters should be all that is needed with these tone controls and the ability to change the subwoofer level. The LFE level is also adjustable separately. Thanks for the tone control graph. Perhaps Emotiva will let you publish a supplement to the XMC/RMC manuals. Then, we would all get some missing specifications many of us have been asking about for years. |
|
|
|
Post by hulkss on Dec 12, 2023 19:26:12 GMT -5
Thanks for the tone control graph. Perhaps Emotiva will let you publish a supplement to the XMC/RMC manuals. Then, we would all get some missing specifications many of us have been asking about for years. Yes, I have had to do a lot of test measurements in order to understand how the XMC-2 functions, how to best use it, and be confident that I am correct. |
|
|
|
Post by hulkss on Dec 14, 2023 15:08:25 GMT -5
As I listen more to my system, I really like how it sounds now with my new XMC-2 and REW generated filter set. REW provides measurement and filter design options that are not available with Dirac. The extent of filter digital processing with REW is much less. I have used Dirac Live with Bass Control many times in my HTPC. Results have been generally good but the sound I am getting now with REW is more pleasing to my ear. There's something else that I think is worth pointing out here... There are too many people who are convinced that Dirac Live is "a magic bullet" that "will always make things sound better". Well, I hate to disappoint some of you, but there is simply no such thing. Dirac Live is "automatic room and loudspeaker correction software"... It is NOT " automatically make whatever you have in your system sound better software"... And the Dirac Live software itself does impose more processing on your audio signal... My point here is that it is NOT just a matter of "some people like the way Dirac Live sounds and some don't"... The actual operation of Dirac Live may result in a huge improvement in your system... or none at all... And, in addition to that, having the software simply running may impose a small but potentially noticeable cost in terms of sound quality... Therefore the real question is of whether, IN YOUR SYSTEM, and BASED ON YOUR PERSONAL JUDGMENT, Dirac Live offers an IMPROVEMENT or not. And, if it does offer a net improvement, then you should use it (and, if not, then you shouldn't use it). It really is that simple. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,275
|
Post by KeithL on Dec 14, 2023 16:26:20 GMT -5
Not all that surprising... And, for those who don't know... - when you use REW, it is defining "normal" PEQ filter parameters, which are then entered into our DSP-based PEQ filters (so it's exactly as if you had manually configured the PEQ - except that REW has figured out how to set it for you) - when you use Dirac Live, it is creating their own special "mixed mode filters", which are used instead of our PEQ filters As I listen more to my system, I really like how it sounds now with my new XMC-2 and REW generated filter set. REW provides measurement and filter design options that are not available with Dirac. The extent of filter digital processing with REW is much less. I have used Dirac Live with Bass Control many times in my HTPC. Results have been generally good but the sound I am getting now with REW is more pleasing to my ear. There's something else that I think is worth pointing out here... There are too many people who are convinced that Dirac Live is "a magic bullet" that "will always make things sound better". Well, I hate to disappoint some of you, but there is simply no such thing. Dirac Live is "automatic room and loudspeaker correction software"... It is NOT " automatically make whatever you have in your system sound better software"... And the Dirac Live software itself does impose more processing on your audio signal... My point here is that it is NOT just a matter of "some people like the way Dirac Live sounds and some don't"... The actual operation of Dirac Live may result in a huge improvement in your system... or none at all... And, in addition to that, having the software simply running may impose a small but potentially noticeable cost in terms of sound quality... Therefore the real question is of whether, IN YOUR SYSTEM, and BASED ON YOUR PERSONAL JUDGMENT, Dirac Live offers an IMPROVEMENT or not. And, if it does offer a net improvement, then you should use it (and, if not, then you shouldn't use it). It really is that simple. |
|
