Thanks again for the video. If I may add, that if you anybody is using a MiniDSP or any other DSP that makes the AVR or processor see only 1 sub , then it is a must to do the aligning at least, (and preferrably the eq-ing to a flat response at least, as the DLBC can only do a global EQ-ing and levelling that way) before using DLBC. In any other cases, DLBC should be let to do it's thing (as long as all the subs are being controlled individually by the AVR or processor. Also, if there is a DSP between the AVR/Processor and subs, it may not worth it to buy DLBC, as DLBM should be enough (except if DLBC is using your fronts to help the bass in a certain way).
This is an interesting topic and one I have been wondering about myself. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you may be saying that for DLBC to take a MiniDSP out of the equation and plug all subwoofers into the receiver/processor since there would be no way for Dirac to time align each sub if they were all connected to say Input 1 on the MiniDSP. When I get time I will try a DLBC run on my Denon 6800H with my 3 subs hooked only to the receiver instead of MiniDSP so I can compare the results.
Thanks for dressing up to answer my question Matt. 😊 So I would have to add another MiniDSP as I currently only have one, to get each subwoofer calibrated by DLBC. Might try to use MSO in the meantime.
Great video and professional look too - Educated professional, sitting in his own high-end HT is a good look for you, young man. The rest of us who live in True Classic shirts and jean shorts can relate to comfort, but the polished look make you look professorial when discussing technical subjects. A new interest here in things Dirac-related, since I just upgraded to a processor that has DLBC. Any in-depth discussions of DIRAC is much appreciated.
Looking sharp Matt! Thanks very much for this interesting video. I have always been running MSO then Audyssey...will try the other way to see how that works out.
Audyssey is different. Its bass management isn’t as sophisticated. Dirac bass control is basically equivalent to MSO. Doesn’t mean you won’t get potentially better results with MSO, but I’ve found them to be similar. Audyssey has never yielded equal results to either in the bass.
@MichaelSlaughter-h5p Same for me. Currently changing AVR so not using any right now. But I will try Audyssey and maybe OCA's latest script. DLBC would be awesome if only it could keep timing right.
I have sealed subs so my method is to add a linkwitz transform first as Dirac can't add more than 10db of boost. Then run dirac, then correct anything below 10Hz after.
I have three theater seats that have high backs for head and neck support. How much of an issues is line of sight with the microphone going to be when using Dirac Live? In hindsight I would have not gotten the Valencia seats in my 9.4 setup. Really, the only line of sight issue are my two rear speakers which are towers behind the MLP. Thanks for the great videos.
It impacts the high frequency accuracy and can add some diffraction effects and comb filtering. But don’t over react. It’s also not the death nell of a good calibration. I would probably close the window down so it’s not correcting above 10khz. I would also have some mic measurements above the sweat height.
I use the PEQ functionality in my active speakers and subwoofers PRIOR to calibrating with Dirac Live and Bass Control. This prevents such easy clipping of the signal with the large bass peaks in my room and at the same time gives Dirac less work to do. I'm interested in others opinion on this.
There are so many misconceptions about room correction out there. Unfortunately, quite a few of them recently showed up in Audioholics room correction measurements tutorial. What you are doing when you are taking measurements with a microphone is simply statistical sampling from a population. Hence, ONLY measure where your (or someone else's) ears will be, take as many measurements as possible and keep the microphone positions as close to random as possible within the relevant listening space (= the target population). Why? Because you are trying to estimate the parameters of the underlying population (the sound that hits ears). In other words, of course a tight set of measurements within the RSP will yield the best results for the RSP. Perhaps is misunderstood you Matt, but I got the impression that you said that a wider set of measurements (i.e. both within and outside of the RSP) would be beneficial if using ART, even if you're only concerned with the RSP. If this is what you meant, please explain why that would be the case.
For both ART and Waveforming, you aren’t just sampling the wavefront that hits the ears. You are trying to sample the entire wavefront at low frequencies to gain the right information needed to be able to cancel reflections. The statistical sampling now needs to be a larger area to yield better results at low frequencies. I’ve suggested to Dirac that they consider adding some low frequency only measurements for this purpose. Waveforming does this for exactly this reason. At the moment Dirac doesn’t allow this with ART.
@@PoesAcoustics Thank you for responding. What would that "right information" be that exists outside of the RSP that cannot be sampled at the RSP but still be used to correct the sound that arrives at the RSP? And how would you define the target population, i.e. the microphone positions in 3D space that contain that "right information"?
Well the question then comes, Dirac doesn't have access to doing anything to the mini DSP. That creates further confusion. Are you suggesting to this guy , not to use his external mini DSP and run the subs straight of the back of the AVR?!. If you are suggesting not to tinker with his mini DSP prior to Dirac, naturally you also would advise not to tinker the mini DSP after the Dirac calibration is done and uploaded to the AVR. So , in summary , throw the external DSP out of the equation.
Mannn I just wanted to say excellent Channel especially explaining acoustics.. 💯💯..
Well said Matt!
Great video, looking sharp too!
Thanks again for the video. If I may add, that if you anybody is using a MiniDSP or any other DSP that makes the AVR or processor see only 1 sub , then it is a must to do the aligning at least, (and preferrably the eq-ing to a flat response at least, as the DLBC can only do a global EQ-ing and levelling that way) before using DLBC. In any other cases, DLBC should be let to do it's thing (as long as all the subs are being controlled individually by the AVR or processor. Also, if there is a DSP between the AVR/Processor and subs, it may not worth it to buy DLBC, as DLBM should be enough (except if DLBC is using your fronts to help the bass in a certain way).
Whoa very interesting 🧐 brilliant info to the insights of bass 👏🏼👍🏼✌🏼💯🏴🇬🇧
This is an interesting topic and one I have been wondering about myself. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you may be saying that for DLBC to take a MiniDSP out of the equation and plug all subwoofers into the receiver/processor since there would be no way for Dirac to time align each sub if they were all connected to say Input 1 on the MiniDSP. When I get time I will try a DLBC run on my Denon 6800H with my 3 subs hooked only to the receiver instead of MiniDSP so I can compare the results.
Thanks for dressing up to answer my question Matt. 😊
So I would have to add another MiniDSP as I currently only have one, to get each subwoofer calibrated by DLBC. Might try to use MSO in the meantime.
Great video and professional look too - Educated professional, sitting in his own high-end HT is a good look for you, young man. The rest of us who live in True Classic shirts and jean shorts can relate to comfort, but the polished look make you look professorial when discussing technical subjects. A new interest here in things Dirac-related, since I just upgraded to a processor that has DLBC. Any in-depth discussions of DIRAC is much appreciated.
Looking sharp Matt! Thanks very much for this interesting video. I have always been running MSO then Audyssey...will try the other way to see how that works out.
Audyssey is different. Its bass management isn’t as sophisticated. Dirac bass control is basically equivalent to MSO. Doesn’t mean you won’t get potentially better results with MSO, but I’ve found them to be similar. Audyssey has never yielded equal results to either in the bass.
Love to know your thoughts and maybe a review on theory audio/ pro audio??
Great video !
I hope you would take a look of DLBC excessive GD in multisub configuration. Unusable. I'm happy to provide more info if needed.
I had this exact experience using DLBC, substantial increase in GD, ended up using MSO instead
@MichaelSlaughter-h5p Same for me. Currently changing AVR so not using any right now. But I will try Audyssey and maybe OCA's latest script.
DLBC would be awesome if only it could keep timing right.
I have sealed subs so my method is to add a linkwitz transform first as Dirac can't add more than 10db of boost. Then run dirac, then correct anything below 10Hz after.
great video, thank you
You are very welcome!
Hello Mr Bond
I have three theater seats that have high backs for head and neck support. How much of an issues is line of sight with the microphone going to be when using Dirac Live? In hindsight I would have not gotten the Valencia seats in my 9.4 setup. Really, the only line of sight issue are my two rear speakers which are towers behind the MLP. Thanks for the great videos.
It impacts the high frequency accuracy and can add some diffraction effects and comb filtering. But don’t over react. It’s also not the death nell of a good calibration. I would probably close the window down so it’s not correcting above 10khz. I would also have some mic measurements above the sweat height.
@@PoesAcoustics Thanks. I defintely how a few measurements above so should be good. Tomorrow will be a fun day as two new SVS PB17R subs arrive.
I use the PEQ functionality in my active speakers and subwoofers PRIOR to calibrating with Dirac Live and Bass Control. This prevents such easy clipping of the signal with the large bass peaks in my room and at the same time gives Dirac less work to do. I'm interested in others opinion on this.
Does this apply for audyssey too then? Run audyssey first then eq? I’ve always eq’d first then ran audyssey, have I been doing it wrong?
I’ll give you a hand 🖐️ how may I help? 🙂 at least edit a few broll might help for sure.
There are so many misconceptions about room correction out there. Unfortunately, quite a few of them recently showed up in Audioholics room correction measurements tutorial.
What you are doing when you are taking measurements with a microphone is simply statistical sampling from a population. Hence, ONLY measure where your (or someone else's) ears will be, take as many measurements as possible and keep the microphone positions as close to random as possible within the relevant listening space (= the target population). Why? Because you are trying to estimate the parameters of the underlying population (the sound that hits ears). In other words, of course a tight set of measurements within the RSP will yield the best results for the RSP.
Perhaps is misunderstood you Matt, but I got the impression that you said that a wider set of measurements (i.e. both within and outside of the RSP) would be beneficial if using ART, even if you're only concerned with the RSP. If this is what you meant, please explain why that would be the case.
For both ART and Waveforming, you aren’t just sampling the wavefront that hits the ears. You are trying to sample the entire wavefront at low frequencies to gain the right information needed to be able to cancel reflections. The statistical sampling now needs to be a larger area to yield better results at low frequencies.
I’ve suggested to Dirac that they consider adding some low frequency only measurements for this purpose. Waveforming does this for exactly this reason. At the moment Dirac doesn’t allow this with ART.
@@PoesAcoustics Thank you for responding. What would that "right information" be that exists outside of the RSP that cannot be sampled at the RSP but still be used to correct the sound that arrives at the RSP? And how would you define the target population, i.e. the microphone positions in 3D space that contain that "right information"?
Well the question then comes, Dirac doesn't have access to doing anything to the mini DSP. That creates further confusion. Are you suggesting to this guy , not to use his external mini DSP and run the subs straight of the back of the AVR?!. If you are suggesting not to tinker with his mini DSP prior to Dirac, naturally you also would advise not to tinker the mini DSP after the Dirac calibration is done and uploaded to the AVR. So , in summary , throw the external DSP out of the equation.