A1 Evo AcoustiX vs Dirac Live vs DLBC vs DIRAC ART in a 2.2 front setup (Denon X3800h, KEF R3 meta, SVS 2000 pro)

[Geertidow]

Dear fellow members,

I jumped the gun with buying DIRAC ART. I just had to know what it could do for my system.
In the attachment the REW mdat files.
Setup is KEF R3 meta with two SVS 2000 pro underneath the speakers.
Happy to hear your thoughts or some tips.

But most of all I hope this can help people to decide whether or not to make the upgrade.

Best regards,

Geert

 

[staticV3]

Frequency response looks really rough for supposedly being corrected.

Can't believe Dirac would leave a 10dB gap in the lower mids like that.

Also, ART may work better if you place the subs more distributed in the room, rather than directly underneath the Mains.

 

[Geertidow]

Frequency response looks really rough for supposedly being corrected.

Can't believe Dirac would leave a 10dB gap in the lower mids like that.

Also, ART may work better if you place the subs more distributed in the room, rather than directly underneath the Mains.

I only corrected up to 500 Hz.\
Sub placement elsewhere is difficult due to the other functions of the room

 

[staticV3]

I only corrected up to 500 Hz.\

The gap is below 500Hz. Weird

 

[just1n]

Something looks off. Curious about the placement of other furniture between mic position and speakers. Fortunately, the bass response below 100hz-ish was improved by ART, but I have to agree your R3s response above that in-room should be more consistent across different REQs. The peak >10k in ART is interesting to see.

Did you take measurements without EQ to use as a baseline?

 

[staticV3]

To improve run-to-run consistency, I would do all frequency response measurements using the Moving Microphone Method, with zero additional smoothing applied so as to not hide any modes.

Use the sweeps then just to collect phase/impulse/decay data.

 

[Geertidow]

Something looks off. Curious about the placement of other furniture between mic position and speakers. Fortunately, the bass response below 100hz-ish was improved by ART, but I have to agree your R3s response above that in-room should be more consistent across different REQs. The peak >10k in ART is interesting to see.

Did you take measurements without EQ to use as a baseline?

There is a table which has the laptop on it... in the middel between speakers and MLP, could that be it?
But I assume the sound above <300 hz and up is good, so I'm mostly happy with the bass response. I'll do some measurements again later without any furniture.

Frequency response looks really rough for supposedly being corrected.

Can't believe Dirac would leave a 10dB gap in the lower mids like that.

Also, ART may work better if you place the subs more distributed in the room, rather than directly underneath the Mains.

I could place the sub behind the couch but the natural FR of the sub there absolutely terrible, would that still be better?

 

[staticV3]

I could place the sub behind the couch but the natural FR of the sub there absolutely terrible, would that still be better?

Measurements will tell.

 

[Geertidow]

This is dirac ART without furniture.
Is this still wrong/off?

 

[Geertidow]

ART with sub behind the couch.
I have to remeasure the one without furnitiure, perhaps DIRECT mode was on. I'm not 100% sure

 

[Geertidow]

New measurements with sub in front position

 

[Geertidow]

It is absolutely ridiculous how good it sounds though

 

[AudioJester]

It is absolutely ridiculous how good it sounds though

Nice!
Do you mean with ART?

The worse our room, the greater the difference ART makes.

 

[Geertidow]

Nice!
Do you mean with ART?

The worse our room, the greater the difference ART makes.

Yes, even though not all measurements are perfect. It is really, really impressive. My room is U shaped and I'm in the middle of one the legs of the U (one leg is approximately 7 x 4 meters).
The room is untreated.

The measurements with 1 sub behind me are better. But for the life of me I don't like the feeling or sound with one sub behind instead of dual front. No idea why because I can't localize the sub at all.

 

[peng]

Yes, even though not all measurements are perfect. It is really, really impressive. My room is U shaped and I'm in the middle of one the legs of the U (one leg is approximately 7 x 4 meters).
The room is untreated.

The measurements with 1 sub behind me are better. But for the life of me I don't like the feeling or sound with one sub behind instead of dual front. No idea why because I can't localize the sub at all.

Did you run ART but not BC, or both?

 

[Oddball]

Yes, even though not all measurements are perfect. It is really, really impressive. My room is U shaped and I'm in the middle of one the legs of the U (one leg is approximately 7 x 4 meters).
The room is untreated.

The measurements with 1 sub behind me are better. But for the life of me I don't like the feeling or sound with one sub behind instead of dual front. No idea why because I can't localize the sub at all.

Not surprised that ART would sound the best amongst the bunch. Your initial graphs were a bit rough, hopefully they improved in later iterations. Lots of ART users are getting really tight FQ response, not unusual within 3dB band or even less (1/6 or so smoothing).

Sub in the back seems to work, and I am not surprised why it would, so probably worth getting used to it.

 

[90sNintendoKid]

Dear fellow members,

I jumped the gun with buying DIRAC ART. I just had to know what it could do for my system.
In the attachment the REW mdat files.
Setup is KEF R3 meta with two SVS 2000 pro underneath the speakers.
Happy to hear your thoughts or some tips.

But most of all I hope this can help people to decide whether or not to make the upgrade.

Best regards,

Geert

What target curve are you using?

I've just done a Dirac Live calibration with the Magic Beans 2 pass method and I am going to be doing some post EQ measurements soon, I'll upload them here so you can compare.

This is what Dirac Live did to my speakers using a Flat Target curve.

 

[Geertidow]

Did you run ART but not BC, or both?

Both, see the first MDAT file or graphs (opening post, 'DLBC').

 

[Geertidow]

Not surprised that ART would sound the best amongst the bunch. Your initial graphs were a bit rough, hopefully they improved in later iterations. Lots of ART users are getting really tight FQ response, not unusual within 3dB band or even less (1/6 or so smoothing).

Sub in the back seems to work, and I am not surprised why it would, so probably worth getting used to it.

Can you get used to it (for music purposes)?
I've read some similar stories on ASR. But perhaps because the subwoofer is placed behind me (on the open side of the U shaped room) that skews the percieved sound.
If anything, I'll buy an extra sub for that position and leave the 2 subs in front.
But I'm not entirely sure about the measurements, becuase of the phase and the high frequency responses (I usually ignore them).
This is ART up to 1000 Hz. With the sub behind graph the phase is normal, with the sub in front it's not. That shouldn't be.

So still a bit of searching to do with this program. But luckily it already sounds great.
I think in both graphs all the deviations from the freq response are at most 3 dB when looking at my scale.

Bonus question: should I unplug the ports of my R3 meta?

 

[peng]

Both, see the first MDAT file or graphs (opening post, 'DLBC').

Thanks, I missed that, since you did and the results looked not as good as one would expect, though not terrible either. I would suggest you go back to that project and try to do DLBC again following the instructions to the letter. For example, try to play with the crossover, if you had it left in the default 70 Hz, try 75, 80 Hz and each time be sure to press the "Calculate" button, and check with REW to see what happens before settle on the final cross over point. DLBC will likely always left those deep but sharp dips but yours look like it can be improved. It is also hard to see what's happening when it is smoothed to 1/6, it is better to go with no smoothing in the below 200 Hz, 1/24 or even 1/12 are good enough, but 1/6 hides a little too much. Good thing you included the mdat file. I have not used ART so will leave that part to experienced users such as Oddball.