Active Room Treatment (ART) by Dirac

[pogo]

Differences between potent and less potent speakers in stereo, i.e. also in a 2.0 or 4.0 configuration.

 

[abdo123]

Differences between potent and less potent speakers in stereo, i.e. also in a 2.0 or 4.0 configuration.

what does potent means?

 

[pogo]

Loudspeakers that can support the co-optimization without compression and without degrading their own channel signal, e.g. Dali Kore.

 

[Axo1989]

I just uploaded it to youtube (with unlisted status), but youtube will take about 80min left to process it (since it's almost 2hrs long, with 1080p quality).

Here's the link:

That was great, thank you.

In the video it looks like they have the Dirac software suite running on macOS with the bass control and active room treatment functions.

I realise active room treatment is still coming, but when I look at their online store it isn't clear where the bass control comes in as a software product. Do people have bass control running on their Macs currently and if so where/how exactly do I purchase it?

Of course one would want active room treatment too as it becomes available, but first things first.

Edit: don't worry, I see it now (didn't scroll down far enough): $349 stereo or $499 multichannel plus $499 bass control. Also, slightly cheaper bundles. Hopefully a similar add-on for active room treatment in due course.

 

[Axo1989]

what does potent means?

It's in the dictionary.

 

[abdo123]

It's in the dictionary.

I don’t see how any of them apply to a speaker.

1) having great power, influence, or effect.
"thrones were potent symbols of authority"

2) (of a male) able to achieve an erection or to reach an orgasm.

 

[dlaloum]

what does potent means?

How much viagra has been consumed?

 

[Axo1989]

I don’t see how any of them apply to a speaker.

1) having great power, influence, or effect.
"thrones were potent symbols of authority"

2) (of a male) able to achieve an erection or to reach an orgasm.

You can't relate power or effect to a loudspeaker?

Ok, that isn't my problem.

 

[ban25]

As I understand it, ART functions similarly to active noise cancellation in that it uses drivers to produce inverted waves that cancel out nulls, thereby reducing or eliminating room modes. If my understanding is correct, I'd imagine it's necessary to have more than just the two primary drivers for this to work effectively -- because you're actively cancelling some portion of the reflected sound produced by those drivers.

So I don't think a stereo ART setup will be as effective as a 9/13/15 channel one, regardless of "potency."

 

[Vacceo]

As I understand it, ART functions similarly to active noise cancellation in that it uses drivers to produce inverted waves that cancel out nulls, thereby reducing or eliminating room modes. If my understanding is correct, I'd imagine it's necessary to have more than just the two primary drivers for this to work effectively -- because you're actively cancelling some portion of the reflected sound produced by those drivers.

So I don't think a stereo ART setup will be as effective as a 9/13/15 channel one, regardless of "potency."

From that, we can infeer that the closer speakers get to point source and the larger the frequency range of those spekars, the better ART will work.

 

[ban25]

From that, we can infeer that the closer speakers get to point source and the larger the frequency range of those spekars, the better ART will work.

Yes one of the potential "end-game configurations" for ART seems to be to run full-range speakers all around the bed layer.

 

[Vacceo]

Yes one of the potential "end-game configurations" for ART seems to be to run full-range speakers all around the bed layer.

Well, I guess a couple subwoofers may play well too.

I'd really love to see practical applications and measurements. Probably Audioholics will be among the first to provide them.

Gene provides the numbers, so he'll be a good source.

 

[Axo1989]

Well, I guess a couple subwoofers may play well too.

I'd really love to see practical applications and measurements. Probably Audioholics will be among the first to provide them.

Gene provides the numbers, so he'll be a good source.

Active room treatment is described as working up to 150 Hz so adding a sub or three to a stereo setup would be be effective. Maybe with a higher-than-usual crossover frequency?

 

[Davide]

Do you think it may make sense to think that for a 2.2 system DLBC is sufficient and ART superfluous? (considering that ART produces better results with more speakers)

 

[Axo1989]

Do you think it may make sense to think that for a 2.2 system DLBC is sufficient and ART superfluous? (considering that ART produces better results with more speakers)

Don't know yet.

The reflection cancelling and mitigation of room resonance that's a function of the active room treatment goes a step further than simply controlling the crossover and listening position levels (per bass control) so there's additional potential for sure. How much you'd notice the difference (and see it in measurements like the waterfalls shown in the Dirac/Storm video) in a basically stereo setup is probably a case of wait and see.

I'm certainly interested enough to follow along for now, but I currently use room correction on full-range stereo speakers and don't use subs so I'm a couple of steps behind.

 

[dlaloum]

Active room treatment is described as working up to 150 Hz so adding a sub or three to a stereo setup would be be effective. Maybe with a higher-than-usual crossover frequency?

Yes, many subs extend up to 150Hz or even 200Hz... (arguably they should be called "external woofers" but that's a whole different debate!_

 

[dlaloum]

Do you think it may make sense to think that for a 2.2 system DLBC is sufficient and ART superfluous? (considering that ART produces better results with more speakers)

Optimal positioning for DLBC and for ART may well be different for the subs...

Having two subs and two full range speakers with ART, and the subs well positioned for ART cancellation - I would expect would be a much better setup than DLBC can provide...

You would effectively have 4 active speakers in the listening space with 3 corrective speakers for each them (ie every speaker acts as a corrective speaker for the other 3)

Whether theory and practice align - is yet to be seen - but it is exciting!

 

[pogo]

I'd imagine it's necessary to have more than just the two primary drivers for this to work effectively

Source Webinar Dirac/Storm:
Works without subwoofer if capable speakers are used.
Works already with two speakers - reciprocal support.

 

[TimoJ]

Do you think it may make sense to think that for a 2.2 system DLBC is sufficient and ART superfluous? (considering that ART produces better results with more speakers)

No, even with 2.2 the result with ART was much better than with DLBC. Subs were placed besides the mains, no placement "optimizations". Subs played to 150Hz, subs low pass was disabled.
But of course not all rooms and speaker placements are similar. I just know that in my room/setup the difference was big. Currently testing with 7.0. setup.

 

[Ciobi69]

Is there any info in which product will be implemented? I only know storm audio, and their processor cost like a car. What the hell