Active Room Treatment (ART) by Dirac

[Oddball]

The sooner the better IMHO unless soms bugs need to be ironed out first.

November sounds good, not that many bugs in the air .

I hope they are taking their time and trying to match or exceed Storm implementation.

The most important conceptual comment (IMO) I made is that there is only one intensity support slider for both cancelations and additions. That makes no sense on its face as cancelation sounds should be much more quiet than addition sounds. Providing separate controls would be the a much better solution.

Then there is this whole thing about single LFE subwoofer and Storm's workaround around that. That is obviously a must.

 

[dlaloum]

The sooner the better IMHO unless soms bugs need to be ironed out first.

They've had 18months + to iron out bugs with Storm....

 

[Oddball]

They had a bit more time given the timeline - if "announced" in Jan 2023, they have been probably working on it for a while before that.

But apparently it will still end up with D&M sorting things out if they feel like it. Like the single LFE sub "workaround" at least?

 

[dlaloum]

They had a bit more time given the timeline - if "announced" in Jan 2023, they have been probably working on it for a while before that.

But apparently it will still end up with D&M sorting things out if they feel like it. Like the single LFE sub "workaround" at least?

Based on frequent reading of the Storm/Dirac ART forums/threads, there is substantial scope for the processor manufacturer to decide where and how they want the bass integrated...

Do they allow full range mains?
If they do where does the LFE channel go?
If there are multiple subs, how are they allocated/divided between the LFE channel, and the main channel bass, and now that ART is in the picture which speaker/sub provides a "support" function (and which don't) - i'm not sure whether one can specify which support speakers support specific other speakers - but that might also be a factor.
Also how any loudness perception processing is implemented... not up to Dirac...up to the AVR manufacturer.

So what I am reading into this, is that yes Dirac ART can do what it says on its label.... but how that ingredient is then used in the overall setup, can substantially be varied depending on the options exposed by the AVR manufacturer... and those do not, strictly speaking, relate to Dirac ART... but Dirac may well get blamed for them (or lauded...)

Looking at what Storm (and Trinnov) are capable of, it becomes clear that most AVR manufacturers/designers, have massively simplified the options and possibilities, to reduce user confusion. - Dirac ART won't change this.... most mass market users would not appreciate the complexity! - On the other hand, the desired user interface simplification may well result in differing implementations which will work well in differing setups.

Prime example is full range speakers - defaults on most AVR's are NOT designed for full range capable speakers... and how well a current AVR takes advantage of those capabilities, varies widely! (many users are crossing over their full range speakers at 80Hz or even 120Hz, and totally wasting their capabilities... but for many AVR's that ends up being optimal)

 

[Frank207be]

Based on frequent reading of the Storm/Dirac ART forums/threads, there is substantial scope for the processor manufacturer to decide where and how they want the bass integrated...

Do they allow full range mains?
If they do where does the LFE channel go?
If there are multiple subs, how are they allocated/divided between the LFE channel, and the main channel bass, and now that ART is in the picture which speaker/sub provides a "support" function (and which don't) - i'm not sure whether one can specify which support speakers support specific other speakers - but that might also be a factor.
Also how any loudness perception processing is implemented... not up to Dirac...up to the AVR manufacturer.

So what I am reading into this, is that yes Dirac ART can do what it says on its label.... but how that ingredient is then used in the overall setup, can substantially be varied depending on the options exposed by the AVR manufacturer... and those do not, strictly speaking, relate to Dirac ART... but Dirac may well get blamed for them (or lauded...)

Looking at what Storm (and Trinnov) are capable of, it becomes clear that most AVR manufacturers/designers, have massively simplified the options and possibilities, to reduce user confusion. - Dirac ART won't change this.... most mass market users would not appreciate the complexity! - On the other hand, the desired user interface simplification may well result in differing implementations which will work well in differing setups.

Prime example is full range speakers - defaults on most AVR's are NOT designed for full range capable speakers... and how well a current AVR takes advantage of those capabilities, varies widely! (many users are crossing over their full range speakers at 80Hz or even 120Hz, and totally wasting their capabilities... but for many AVR's that ends up being optimal)

I'm pretty sure that most of us considering ART have done their research by now and have improved their speaker and subwoofer layout to unleash it's full potential?

IMHO the teaser shows that they're 100% ready.

 

[abdo123]

The most important conceptual comment (IMO) I made is that there is only one intensity support slider for both cancelations and additions. That makes no sense on its face as cancelation sounds should be much more quiet than addition sounds. Providing separate controls would be the a much better solution.

I'm honestly shocked that there is an intensity slider at all. as this is not the case with other Dirac licenses.

Also i don't believe cancellations and additions are functionally different with ART.

The support speaker either plays a frequency or it does not. the absolute amplitude might decrease (cancellation) but you're vibrating more air particles overall to achieve it.

 

[Jost Buergi]

German retailer Grobi asked Masimo about ART and read the Masimo announcement here yesterday:
All Dirac Live devices from Denon + Marantz will be ART enabled which are the devices with 4 subwoofer outs. ART upgrade is expected for September, maybe October 2025. Upgrade is not free of charge, prices to be announced.

 

[Oddball]

I'm honestly shocked that there is an intensity slider at all. as this is not the case with other Dirac licenses.

Also i don't believe cancellations and additions are functionally different with ART.

The support speaker either plays a frequency or it does not. the absolute amplitude might decrease (cancellation) but you're vibrating more air particles overall to achieve it.

I am shocked that you are shocked. Cancelations should be at lower volumes than additions. If they are not functionally different in ART than that is serious issue. Not sure what you are referring to at all.

 

[EWL5]

German retailer Grobi asked Masimo about ART and read the Masimo announcement here yesterday:
All Dirac Live devices from Denon + Marantz will be ART enabled which are the devices with 4 subwoofer outs. ART upgrade is expected for September, maybe October 2025. Upgrade is not free of charge, prices to be announced.

This is old news but I believe there should be some clarification:

1) Doesn't Harman now own Denon/Marantz and not Masimo?
2) The functionality for ART is already in the AVRs. The additional cost is going to be for the ART and/or DLBC license to get to ART. I don't think D&M will charge current owners to make their AVRs ART-capable.

 

[Jost Buergi]

1) Doesn't Harman now own Denon/Marantz and not Masimo?

We know about the Harman deal but he mentiones Masimo and even his source person there. IMO Grobi proved to be very reliable and having first hand information from manufacturers.

The Harman deal is signed but maybe not carried out yet. Anyway, most of the staff will probably continue working there. And we all know about the Dirac functionality and licencing model for D+M.

 

[Curvature]

I am shocked that you are shocked. Cancelations should be at lower volumes than additions. If they are not functionally different in ART than that is serious issue. Not sure what you are referring to at all.

@abdo123 is your reaction about the lack of full automation? I don't think there is a way to know in advance if the cancellation signal will be audible separately from the source signal. You would have to apply a complex perceptual model, and I don't think Dirac wants to wade into that.

 

[abdo123]

I am shocked that you are shocked. Cancelations should be at lower volumes than additions. If they are not functionally different in ART than that is serious issue. Not sure what you are referring to at all.

I don’t think you really understand how ART works, ART is not there to fix the additions or cancellations in the amplitude response, it’s about reducing the decay time.

Amplitude response errors are fixed by Dirac Live and Bass Control.

 

[Oddball]

I don’t think you really understand how ART works, ART is not there to fix the additions or cancellations in the amplitude response, it’s about reducing the decay time.

Amplitude response errors are fixed by Dirac Live and Bass Control.

So then please enlighten me how it works to fix decay while at the same time and without crossovers bass control will fix amplitude response. Also who will the do phase alignment?

 

[TimoJ]

Amplitude response errors are fixed by Dirac Live and Bass Control.

When using ART, speaker's own bass response is not properly fixed/flattened (like with normal Dirac), instead ART signals from the support speakers are used to do that.

This can cause certain issues and doing some PEQ before Dirac can be helpful.

 

[smile nya]

When using ART, speaker's own bass response is not properly fixed/flattened (like with normal Dirac), instead ART signals from the support speakers are used to do that.

This can cause certain issues and doing some PEQ before Dirac can be helpful.

Hello. I always appreciate your information on art.

Based on my limited knowledge and imagination, I've been thinking about Art. I'm curious if my idea is similar to your description.

I thought Art's approach was to simultaneously output individual speakers and a subwoofer, acting as a single, massive subwoofer. I thought this might be a different approach than using precise phase cancellation.

For example, my surround speakers have a large dip around 80Hz.
I place a small 8-inch subwoofer (or maybe it's hard to call it that) near these speakers and output it simultaneously. I adjust the distance, height, and output level between the surround speakers and the 8-inch subwoofer, and measure the reverb to find the appropriate level.
(At this point, I launch Dirac to smooth things out.)

Depending on the placement and level of the speakers and subwoofer, the responses of the two speakers can combine to cancel out the dip and create a better combination, or create a larger dip.

Is Art's approach similar to this concept? Rather than outputting the exact opposite phase, is it correct to sum the sounds from the most appropriate auxiliary speakers? (Dirac's AI calculation selects the most appropriate one.)

 

[dlaloum]

When using ART, speaker's own bass response is not properly fixed/flattened (like with normal Dirac), instead ART signals from the support speakers are used to do that.

This can cause certain issues and doing some PEQ before Dirac can be helpful.

Given that, what is the optimal target for PEQ before Dirac - clearly there is the risk that pre-Dirac PEQ knobbles Dirac's own abilities?

 

[TimoJ]

Depending on the placement and level of the speakers and subwoofer, the responses of the two speakers can combine to cancel out the dip and create a better combination, or create a larger dip.

Is Art's approach similar to this concept? Rather than outputting the exact opposite phase, is it correct to sum the sounds from the most appropriate auxiliary speakers? (Dirac's AI calculation selects the most appropriate one.)

I think it's similar, sum of sounds. Some speakers may be used to cancel and some to add.

 

[TimoJ]

Given that, what is the optimal target for PEQ before Dirac - clearly there is the risk that pre-Dirac PEQ knobbles Dirac's own abilities?

I have used PEQ only for my diy subs and there adding low shelf boost made things better for ART.

I will test PEQ with my main L/R-speakers, I have noticed that ART doesn't fully use them, instead it uses subs and other speakers. This causes missing of certain bass "impact" that should come from my front speakers. I'm talking about stereo music.

I don't think adjusting ART support levels will fix this since they do need response correction. So I'll try to gently flatten their response and add some low boost before running Dirac calibration. Those are with 2x15" woofers, so they can handle it.

Certainly pre Dirac PEQ could confuse Dirac, but I think mostly with ART support range detection.

 

[jtatknox]

Interesting - are you using target curves? I am getting good results using target curves with DLBC.

 

[TimoJ]

Interesting - are you using target curves? I am getting good results using target curves with DLBC.

Yes, I'm using a target curve. Same curve for all speakers and subs.