ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Denon AVR-X6800H Xpress Review Audyssey and Dirac Calibrations Compared
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ม.ค. 2024
- Denon AVR-X6800H Xpress Review Audyssey and Dirac Calibrations Compared
In this video we compare Audyssey, Dirac Live, Dirac Live Bass Managed and Dirac Live Bass Control calibrations using REW to measure the actual results.
The full version on this video is here:
Part 4 - Denon AVR-X6800H - Inhouse Review Measuring Audyssey and Dirac Calibrations
h • Part 4 - Denon AVR-X68...
Our channels:
Ripewave Xpress - / @ripewavexpress
Ripewave Audio - / @ripewave
#denon #ripewave #marantz #dirac #hometheater
Good video. Can you perhaps add a link in the description for the Harman curve file you imported into Dirac (?) I really like the idea for this new channel BTW
Youthman has these posted on his website: youthmanreviews.com/harman-target-curves-for-dirac-live/
Jon,
Perfect! I really appreciate your objective approach for the evaluation.
My subjective view is the same as yours. There is a remarkable difference between Audyssey and Dirac Live. Dirac Live wins hands down. I have not done any testing with REW but may consider spending the time to do it. I’m not sure why one needs to make any adjustments to the Dirac Live results. It seems like most folks like to tweak the settings. I have not. I used the Audessey MultEQ app to set up my AVR-6700H and did not run it for the 6800H. Instead, I used the settings from my 6700H and applied them to the 6800H. I can’t imagine why that approach wouldn’t be OK. I have posted this response to both of your TH-cam channels.
If you where me would you sell my 8500HA and get a Dirac unit? If so what unit would you look into? Thanks
cheers for the info but i think you need to focus on the sound and not the graphs--- recievers are for the ears not the eyes--- we really dont care about graphs--- we want to know how it sounds, all the graphs and charts in the world mean diddly squat if it sounds bad, dirac, audyssey etc are all just marketing gymocks for the easily led, they make money from you--- it only changes distance and db, easier to do manually and a better result as your ears are the Oscilloscope, 😀
My aim is focus on both sound and measurements. I was producing videos which did not include measurements, and this audience asked for the measurements to be brought back. I agree. We need both. The measurements should always come last. I make my listening assessment first and then see if my observations can be explained using measurements. What the measurements is able to do is pinpoint where the problem is, then I can try to correct for it. My ears often just know it isn't right, not what is wrong.
I agree that it is possible to achieve better result through manual calibrations rather then costly auto-correction tools. However, I find only a niche group of enthusiasts have the technical know-how and willingness to learn that skill and execute. Distance and loudness are important starting points and can be adjusted by ear. The more speakers and subwoofers you add, the harder it gets. I don't think I would be able to correctly select cross-over points and phase correction without a measurement tool (either manual or automatic).
I do think you point is fair as I have experienced auto-corrections that fail to produce good results despite paying extra for them. In the case with my recent experience, I feel that the tools made improvements. I will attempt full manual corrections later this year, but that will be measurement assisted settings using REW.
Jon