But when is ART coming, if at all?
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Active Room Treatment (ART) by Dirac
- Thread starter Flak
- Start date
This happened to me too when I tried to switch to another slot WHILE the software was loading a new filter. Haven't had any problems once I learned not to do that.
We are now in Q4....
But it's still almost 3 months before it ends...
ThELiZ
Member
I just wanted to share my experiences with ART so far.
My setup (for Dirac ART) consists of 4 sealed subs (2 groups of 2 - one group at the front left & right and one group at the rear left & right), LCR, side surrounds, rear surrounds, 4 height channels. All surround speakers are KEF in wall coaxials. The surrounds don't have much output <80Hz, and at my MLP the sides and heights don't show any decent bass response until 100Hz.
My room is very small - 4.7m x 2.7m x 2.2m - but I have had a good response previously with A1 Evo & MSO and subjectively enjoyed the sound. Which begs the question as to why I'm bothering with ART?! I think the reason is that for certain frequencies, I had what I perceived as boomy bass, which I can only hazard a guess at being caused by decay times at certain frequencies. This is where I believe ART shines.
Here are the plots for my C channel with A1 Evo & MSO:
I have run Dirac ART with the default settings and I could tell right away that the decay times had improved. Everything was that bit tighter. The only problem to me is that it sounded harsh. It was uncomfortable to listen loud. It didn't have the same natural feeling as before. It sounded overly processed. It was almost like I was getting too much pressure in my ears and it also sounded bright without actually being bright! It is similar to what I experience with noise cancelling headphones (I don't like the pressure it creates).
Here are the measurements with default Dirac ART:
All channels with Dirac correction up to 500Hz (except height):
I would really appreciate some opinions from you more knowledgeable folk on why I might not be enjoying this sound. The measurements, to me, look good.
I tried a quick listen to some changes I made with ART (not using C channel for any support, limit surrounds to 100Hz support). It didn't sound better. Maybe less of that pressure feeling, but I didn't feel any great impact. I haven't measured that yet.
My setup (for Dirac ART) consists of 4 sealed subs (2 groups of 2 - one group at the front left & right and one group at the rear left & right), LCR, side surrounds, rear surrounds, 4 height channels. All surround speakers are KEF in wall coaxials. The surrounds don't have much output <80Hz, and at my MLP the sides and heights don't show any decent bass response until 100Hz.
My room is very small - 4.7m x 2.7m x 2.2m - but I have had a good response previously with A1 Evo & MSO and subjectively enjoyed the sound. Which begs the question as to why I'm bothering with ART?! I think the reason is that for certain frequencies, I had what I perceived as boomy bass, which I can only hazard a guess at being caused by decay times at certain frequencies. This is where I believe ART shines.
Here are the plots for my C channel with A1 Evo & MSO:
I have run Dirac ART with the default settings and I could tell right away that the decay times had improved. Everything was that bit tighter. The only problem to me is that it sounded harsh. It was uncomfortable to listen loud. It didn't have the same natural feeling as before. It sounded overly processed. It was almost like I was getting too much pressure in my ears and it also sounded bright without actually being bright! It is similar to what I experience with noise cancelling headphones (I don't like the pressure it creates).
Here are the measurements with default Dirac ART:
All channels with Dirac correction up to 500Hz (except height):
I would really appreciate some opinions from you more knowledgeable folk on why I might not be enjoying this sound. The measurements, to me, look good.
I tried a quick listen to some changes I made with ART (not using C channel for any support, limit surrounds to 100Hz support). It didn't sound better. Maybe less of that pressure feeling, but I didn't feel any great impact. I haven't measured that yet.
If you are finding the treble harsh how about trying with Dirac applied up to 16 khz or so? It applies a natural roll off in treble that can be less fatiguing. I have been doing that and aiming for 3db down in the higher frequencies. If you like the color of your speakers and that's why you don't want to go full range, consider adjusting using curtains instead of points.
ThELiZ
Member
I'm not sure that I am finding the treble harsh. It's just the only thing I can point to as to what I'm experiencing. It just sounds really odd/harsh, but not necessarily bright through elevated treble.
At the moment, I far preferred the sound from my previous setup.
I will try applying a roll off and see if that helps.
At the moment, I far preferred the sound from my previous setup.
I will try applying a roll off and see if that helps.
Tanquen
Member
I did center everything as best I could, the only thing that's not ideal is the couch depth. It's not centered front to back but at least it's not against the back wall. The speakers are at listening level (when setting up right on the couch, and that's rare) with the rear speakers a tad higher to help get over the back of the couch. The left and right sides are as far apart as they can go without pushing them up against the wall or having the front door hit the front right speaker.
Sound radiates but at the same time I know high frequencies are more directional but it's difficult to imagine that making that much of a difference at these distances and angles. I even tried playing some test tones and walking a radius around a speaker and could not tell any difference. It's difficult to imagine having the speaker face you but turning it 15-20° and noticing any difference. I spoke about this a little bit with somebody that's I think was fairly knowledgeable and then they just say oh well some speakers are designed for a larger spread so that's why they can be mounted in wall or surface mounted without the ability to adjust the angle. This hurts my brain a little bit as sound radiates, I'm sure there's ways to do it and to record a difference with super sensitive equipment or something. It's just difficult to understand how turning a tweeter a few degrees is it going to make that much a difference. That's kind of how Dolby Atmos give some guidance on placement but depending on who you talk to they'll tell you that it's not that big a deal because they know most people don't have an ideal room set up, but they want to sell Dolby Atmos and more speakers. So then bouncing it off the wall becomes workable versus having a speaker pointed directly at you and so on.
Esthetically I think it would look bad and it would take a lot of work to make some kind of wedges or something to angle all the speakers in. It just seems like distance and timing are way more important. I made sure all the speakers are as best I can, the same distance from the main listening position and I put all the values in correctly into the AVR. I've used the built in room correction with the max number of mic locations and then... I sit in the left chair in the sofa because it reclines and I change my position numerous times during the evening and never notice any difference.
I installed a pioneer head unit in one of my cars years ago that had some kind of balancing with a mic and everything couldn't tell any difference after doing it but I can tell a huge difference when messing with the fade, balance, treble, and bass. The biggest difference was when changing the paper one way speakers with some two or three way speakers. I've had a few different cars with different number of built in speakers and the one I have now has tweeters on the A pillars pointing towards the driver and I can totally tell that something's different when I get in it vs other cars but I've never accomplished this by tilting or moving my head ever so slightly to the left or right. The different cars have different speakers, different number of speakers and different materials inside the car. Balancing the fade from the back speakers and the balance of left and right speakers to center definitely makes you feel balanced but you're just changing the volume level not the angle of any of the tweeters or any delays between the speakers.
I don't know if you had done this on A1 EVO but it may be worthwhile to apply a Harman targe curve that slopes down from left to right to deal w/the treble.
ThELiZ
Member
I’ve now got a much better (subjective) result from not going with the defaults from Dirac. I’ve taken away centre channel from supporting other speakers, changed my surrounds to only support from 100Hz. I don’t get a problem with it feeling like too much pressure in my head and harsh now.
I am fairly savvy with this stuff and still find it a bit tricky. How would a ‘normal’ user who doesn’t frequent forums get on, I wonder? Looks like I have a bit to play around with.
What I can’t say yet is if it’s worth having over my previous setup… It’s definitely tighter with less bass bloat at certain frequencies… But I’m not sure I had it that bad to begin with…
I am fairly savvy with this stuff and still find it a bit tricky. How would a ‘normal’ user who doesn’t frequent forums get on, I wonder? Looks like I have a bit to play around with.
What I can’t say yet is if it’s worth having over my previous setup… It’s definitely tighter with less bass bloat at certain frequencies… But I’m not sure I had it that bad to begin with…
ThELiZ
Member
Thanks. I’m already applying a Harman curve to all groups
ThELiZ
Member
I may try correcting up to 15kHz or so and see how that sounds.
For reference, I also changed my surrounds to -12dB. They were at -18dB before. My mains have stayed at -18dB.
Here are the plots from my latest... I'm not sure if there's anything in here that would explain why I'm preferring this.
For reference, I also changed my surrounds to -12dB. They were at -18dB before. My mains have stayed at -18dB.
Here are the plots from my latest... I'm not sure if there's anything in here that would explain why I'm preferring this.
Last edited:
scotchrocks
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2024
- Messages
- 48
- Likes
- 101
My feeling after tweaking ART settings was similar. I felt that lowering support from non-subwoofer groups and limiting the frequency range sliders helped maintain sound quality while reducing any pressurized feeling from cancellation signals. Kind of a less is more approach. Redoing and expanding my reference measurements across a wider space also helped to make things sound more natural and less susceptible to tonal changes and phase issues when moving around the listening position (leaning forward/backward/side-to-side, etc.). I don't think DLBC benefitted as much with a wider set of measurements.
I had quite the opposite- I could finally listen at 5-10dB higher than usual. My partner the same and she is super sensitive to loudness, more than I am. Art took of all harshness prevalent before and blends all channels like I’ve never heard before
If the only speaker you’re using to support your L&R mains is your subwoofer, why would you expect any other speakers to be playing in support? You decide which speakers will support other speakers in your ART calibration. I have excellent stereo playback with ART in my system, but I have several support speakers for my L&R mains and they all play when running in stereo.
Everything looks nicer in 10dB increments. Change the Y axis to 5dB increments. Thank you for posting your measurements. That is very helpful.
Better yet, I strongly recommend trying Magic Beans True Target to find the right target curve for your room and equipment. No more guesswork.
Similar threads
