Active Room Treatment (ART) by Dirac

[Oddball]

I have a question about this video, why does he need to take 7 different measurements when setting the device as he only need to have the sound corrected for a single position for his single listening position in his chair?

That is what Dirac recommends even for a single position and is consistent with experience people had for other room EQ systems. You spread the measurements tight around your head and probably at least +/- 20 cm up/down and L/R. After all you don't want to be missing on anything if you just happen to move your head.

Than there is this moving microphone method that many rave about...But it reminds me too much of a shaman doing their ritual so have never tried it, apparently at my own peril.

 

[Keith_W]

I have a question about this video, why does he need to take 7 different measurements when setting the device as he only need to have the sound corrected for a single position for his single listening position in his chair?

So that it can average the sound over a listening area. If you were doing manual correction, you could choose to do an MMM instead.

 

[Cote Dazur]

you don't want to be missing on anything if you just happen to move your head.

That is exactly what I do not understand, what you want is a optimized sound at one point, except if the device could see and follow your head and adjust accordingly in real time, which it does not.
How can the sound not be different when moving your head, it always is.
Taking one measurement or 15 measurements will always result in one and only one setting affecting what you hear.

 

[Cote Dazur]

So that it can average the sound over a listening area. If you were doing manual correction, you could choose to do an MMM instead.

But this guy does not use a listening area, he seats at one spot.

 

[Oddball]

That is exactly what I do not understand, what you want is a optimized sound at one point, except if the device could see and follow your head and adjust accordingly in real time, which it does not.
How can the sound not be different when moving your head, it always is.
Taking one measurement or 15 measurements will always result in one and only one setting affecting what you hear.

Not sure why you assume that your head will always be in the same position within let's say +/- 1cm tolerance up/down and LR. I also calibrate for single position (oh gosh I am bad , I know), but want to be able to move a bit around the dead center of the MLP.

First sweep will be to determine levels so it is important to keep it as dead centered as possible. Next sweeps will give ART more information about the room acoustics around the dead center and provide a better averaging of what needs to be corrected. You can't really correct only one spot, it still needs to be a certain area. Never tried one measurement only, but based on years of experience that would not really end up well. Even correcting for a sweet spot, you will likely get better results with 15 measurements than 7 across the same narrow area.

 

[levimax]

That is exactly what I do not understand, what you want is a optimized sound at one point, except if the device could see and follow your head and adjust accordingly in real time, which it does not.
How can the sound not be different when moving your head, it always is.
Taking one measurement or 15 measurements will always result in one and only one setting affecting what you hear.

You don't hear like a microphone, you hear with your brain and 2 ears. The brain has sophisticated processing allowing it to "hear through the room" amoung other things. The best approximation you can do with a microphone is averaging over multiple points or MMM.

 

[JRowland]

Many thanks - this covers lots of it, and do get the point about having more direction/envelopment with FS Low being set lower. I just keep it high for convenience. Only 6 presets (5 of which I really use as that's the max on recall presets button) all of which are filled with same FS low/high and grouping, but from +2dB low shelf to +12dB low shelf. If there was more, would have more variety.

Just additional question is if you have any upmixer active or ART does its usual thing even if they are not engaged? One way or another it is probably safe to say that in your setup (and similar D&M ART setups) there is no mono summoning.

I did ask what happens in 2.x setup (aka dedicated setup for 2-channel uploaded on one of the slots), but I guess did not ask precisely enough. In that scenario there would be no other channels to support the LR but subs, but I would imagine result would be the same, i.e. ART supporting LR with subs without mono summoning.

I do agree with you that with ART it is probably better to rely on all ART resources one has than just forcing directionality. I recall early on with ART I tried 2-channel setup with just 2 front subs (that are symmetrically located bening LR speakers), but did not sound nearly as convincing or smooth as with full 9.4.4 setup. I made a note in the Envelopment threat that having fully directional setup with LR and 2 or 4 co-located is a real PITA as it would have to be either one in a million room or some really heavy room treatment to deal with FQ response and decay. But at the end this is really depending on the room.

I didn't mean to imply anything about your settings, I only brought up the FS Low because in my system the difference it is very noticeable in regards to envelopment using that song just as an example. I never knew about envelopment until I read about it here, I never listened to Billie Eillish before either. I gave it a shot (this was before ART was available to me) and eventually tried (and settled for a bit) on just using my mains full size to see what I could hear/feel in my music now that I had an idea of what I was "looking" for. I felt it right away the first time I listened to that song with full range stereo speakers, then I tried an 80Hz crossover and poof it was gone just like he said would happen. I've been using that song to tune (specifically just to make sure it (envelopment) is there in my tune) ever since.

I use upmixers and listen to a lot of Apple Dolby Atmos mixes as well but I was speaking solely 2 channel settings in my previous post. ART still uses all my speakers for just 2 channel, but not like an upmixer or Dolby Atmos where you get highs and mids as well. Unless I get close to the speaker in 2 channel and either touch it or get my face near the woofs can I tell they are active.

 

[Oddball]

I didn't mean to imply anything about your settings, I only brought up the FS Low because in my system the difference it is very noticeable in regards to envelopment using that song just as an example. I never knew about envelopment until I read about it here, I never listened to Billie Eillish before either. I gave it a shot (this was before ART was available to me) and eventually tried (and settled for a bit) on just using my mains full size to see what I could hear/feel in my music now that I had an idea of what I was "looking" for. I felt it right away the first time I listened to that song with full range stereo speakers, then I tried an 80Hz crossover and poof it was gone just like he said would happen. I've been using that song to tune (specifically just to make sure it (envelopment) is there in my tune) ever since.

I use upmixers and listen to a lot of Apple Dolby Atmos mixes as well but I was speaking solely 2 channel settings in my previous post. ART still uses all my speakers for just 2 channel, but not like an upmixer or Dolby Atmos where you get highs and mids as well. Unless I get close to the speaker in 2 channel and either touch it or get my face near the woofs can I tell they are active.

No worries. I am just not listening much 2ch material nowadays. I hope that will come back, had phases where that was my predominant use.

Once you go multi-channel it seems to be a different kind of envelopment. A whole thread about "What's wrong with Dolby Atmos" . And we all know how bad (or few) good mixes we have for the soundtracks/shows.

Many thanks again for your most helpful answers.

 

[Cote Dazur]

Next sweeps will give ART more information about the room acoustics around the dead center and provide a better averaging of what needs to be corrected.

Thank you, that, I understand. In that case more sampling than less, seems to be a better approach, even if only for a single, well established position.
In your experience, do they all work on the same principle, like Dirac, Audyssey?

You don't hear like a microphone, you hear with your brain and 2 ears. The brain has sophisticated processing allowing it to "hear through the room" amoung other things. The best approximation you can do with a microphone is averaging over multiple points or MMM.

Make sense, thank you.

 

[Keith_W]

That is exactly what I do not understand, what you want is a optimized sound at one point, except if the device could see and follow your head and adjust accordingly in real time, which it does not.
How can the sound not be different when moving your head, it always is.
Taking one measurement or 15 measurements will always result in one and only one setting affecting what you hear.

Here are some numbers for you:

- Diameter of a microphone capsule = typically 1/4" (about 6.4mm).
- Width of a human head = 6-8" (about 15-20cm)
- Typical area covered by a head when moving around a listening position: about 2-3 feet (60-90cm). Especially if you slouch in your chair like Holly Hunter in ST: Academy.
- Frequency of 60-90cm wavelength: 380Hz - 570Hz

This means, if you move around your listening position, you will transition through one entire wavelength of up to 380Hz depending on how much you move. Do you still think it is a good idea to correct from one very specific point in space which you will likely never be able to replicate with another measurement?

 

[EWL5]

Especially if you slouch in your chair like Holly Hunter in ST: Academy.

Easily the most inferior of all the ST. I treat it like Godfather 3 (it never happened).

 

[Oddball]

Thank you, that, I understand. In that case more sampling than less, seems to be a better approach, even if only for a single, well established position.
In your experience, do they all work on the same principle, like Dirac, Audyssey?

Make sense, thank you.

Yes - they do work quite the same on averaging principle, although the algo is obviously different. Another tip is do your calibration late at night where noise floor is low. That helps as EQ is better positioned to correct signal and disregard the noise.

As Keith noted - you need to take into account your listening habits for a single position. I am usually within 20cm +/- (up/down L/R) but as noted some people like HH would tend to need more room to wiggle. If I am more off then my standard, it means I dozed off so does not really matter (for me) that calibration is off either. But might for someone else.

 

[Oddball]

Easily the most inferior of all the ST. I treat it like Godfather 3 (it never happened).

Tell it to Sal . I did not like it either but then if they don't do flops they won't score the gold either. Just about the batting average in the entertainment industry.

 

[JRowland]

I kinda like having no clue what y'all are going on about. I did still watch things when the Godfather series was around so that helped me figure out what the heck ST was (something watched). That (ST) was a TV show I never enjoyed at all and those movies were sooooooo boring (to me), hated Star Wars as well. On Any Sunday though, that was/is pure gold to me. I'll see my way out now

 

[Oddball]

I kinda like having no clue what y'all are going on about. I did still watch things when the Godfather series was around so that helped me figure out what the heck ST was (something watched). That (ST) was a TV show I never enjoyed at all and those movies were sooooooo boring (to me), hated Star Wars as well. On Any Sunday though, that was/is pure gold to me. I'll see my way out now

You are right - we should probably not pull in the soundracks/movies in this thread unless relevant to ART. We all have different tastes and I don't even want to go in there about what are some of the low rated movies I enjoy .

 

[JRowland]

You are right - we should probably not pull in the soundracks/movies in this thread unless relevant to ART. We all have different tastes and I don't even want to go in there about what are some of the low rated movies I enjoy .

1984 Toxic Avenger, 1979 Phantasm, 1981 Stripes, 1980 Caddyshack, 1978 Faces Of Death for me. That's all I remember of movies as I never really liked them. Friends could watch them more than once, sometimes several times. I've seen Pink Floyd the Wall more than once, other than that never watched the same thing over again yet I can play the same song over and over at times. I'm an oddball myself

 

[OCA]

But this guy does not use a listening area, he seats at one spot.

There are multiple reasons to utilize spatial averaging (taking measurements in a bubble zone around the LP) even when you only care about a single listening position:

• The exact center of the LP might sit on or very close to a room mode boundary (a peak or a null). If you base your EQ on a single point, the software might over-correct, meaning the bass response will change audibly and negatively with even minor head movements.
• Even omni-directional measurement mics become directional at very high frequencies (above ~12-16kHz). When you move the mic to different positions around the LP, the angle of incidence relative to the tweeter inevitably changes, causing the upper treble measurements to shift up or down altogether. Multiple measurements help average out these mic tip angle induced HF level shifts so you don't over-EQ the top end.
• Some sophisticated room correction tools - like GSonic rely on the spatial variance between multiple microphone positions to calculate the room's transition frequency. By detecting these deviations, the software knows where to shift filter types over the frequency range.

 

[No_hair_left]

I'll be getting art within the next few days, having never used dirac anything before are there any good videos on how to set up support groups?

I'm using 3 arendal 1961 monitors so I'm guessing those will be ok to support at 80 hz and 2 1961 bookshelves which should also be 80hz?

Sb1000 pro's I have no idea.

My aperion audio a5 and only rated +/-3db at 120hz for the fronts but the rears only reach 140hz due to placement, do i keep those separate and is it safe to support them at 120hz without damaging anything?

 

[JRowland]

I'll be getting art within the next few days, having never used dirac anything before are there any good videos on how to set up support groups?

I'm using 3 arendal 1961 monitors so I'm guessing those will be ok to support at 80 hz and 2 1961 bookshelves which should also be 80hz?

Sb1000 pro's I have no idea.

My aperion audio a5 and only rated +/-3db at 120hz for the fronts but the rears only reach 140hz due to placement, do i keep those separate and is it safe to support them at 120hz without damaging anything?

These came in this order once ART hit Denon.

Here is the helpful guy from AVS guide

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fxp26c4oXgrr3rwLqL00Nb2iOc22-Eum/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=106136941681825762297&rtpof=true&sd=true

Here is @kawauso guide

『How to Set Up Dirac ART on Denon & Marantz』

Table of Contents Preparation Tuning Subwoofer Support Setup (Full-Range & LFE)…

ameblo.jp

I'd run the measurements and listen to the default set up for a minute then maybe come back with more of those specific questions that are just too vague right now.

 

[JeffH]

Hi guys, I have a question and wondering if anyone could help. I already took off for for extended Easter holiday trip and this question just keeps popping up in my head while can't really check anything in my system for like next 10 days. Wanted to check myself before the trip by unfortunately too many things had to take priority.

There is a another thread on the forum:

Does 'envelopment' exist? Can it be measured?

I hear trusted people use envelopment a lot. Can someone tell me what it is? How would I create more of it, assuming it's a good thing.

www.audiosciencereview.com

where there is active discussion about stereo bass being (much) better than mono - for 2 ch listening. In short, the way AVR/AVP would summon below crossover bass for LR for bass management with subs would alter the original signal and make it worse. There seem to be graphs to support that.

Now my question is how does that really work on D&M gear with ART engaged? Without ART it would seem that AVR would engage subs in 2ch mode if that option was checked in the audio menu, which would likely result is the mono summoning. But with ART, would ART do its usual thing in 2ch mode even if the option to use subs was not checked in AVR/AVP 2 channel bass management option (or even if checked would it just disregard it)? I.e. would it use ART settings and to the extent subs and other channels support LR, create a "virtual" LR channel spread between all these speakers?

I am not a big 2ch listener. Mostly movies/shows and multi-channel music, but from my recollection the second scenario is how ART handles 2ch signal, so there is no summoning to mono. However, I might be wrong, or there might be even a different scenario that I did not think of.

Many thanks for your help in advance.

On the D&M setup you can set the subs to "Directional Bass" but when I was having some problems getting ART to recognize my rear subs (I have 4, 2 in front and 2 rear) Dirac tech support said to set this in the non-directional setting. I still had problems after this so I ended up resetting my receiver and that fixed it but I didn't go back to see if the directional bass needs to be off to work, or if it matters in ART since it's doing the bass management. But I've also seen (I think Dirac mentions this) that if you want the bass to be more directional (stereo) you should group your subs with the speakers, meaning left sub with left speaker etc. I haven't had time to try this in my system but I can say that stereo subs do make a sometimes obvious difference in the reproduction of spaciousness on recordings that haven't summed the bass to mono. I would expect the same for multi channel recordings as well. I myself don't know how much "directionality" is affected with subs grouped together normally because I have't had time to try all this out. I listen to both multi channel and stereo recordings on my system. I haven't listened to the Billie Eilish recording mentioned in another reply but it's certainly helpful to have a recording that demonstrates the difference when you're experimenting. I'm also traveling but will spend some time on this when I get a chance.