• 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!

Big news coming from Sound United in 2023!

And how exactly does the step response optimization of Dirac work? And does it have disadavantages?
Nobody really knows the details of how Dirac or Audyssey work because they're both proprietary solutions.

A few people have shown that Dirac seems to do full-range phase correction better than Audyssey, I don't have links right now but it's been measured. Whether or not this is a good idea, or produces audible benefit, is another story. That part has never been tested. Personally, I don't think Dirac by itself is much of an upgrade over Audyssey.

Other people might disagree, so it's very cool to have the option. In fact, now that we have both in one simple hardware platform, it will make comparison reviews much much easier! So we should actually see some pretty interesting data come out of this. We might even be able to get Amir to do a comparison review. It will be SO much easier and faster to do it with one piece of hardware rather than two separate signal chains.

For me, Dirac Live Bass Control is really the big upgrade, as it promises an MSO-like optimization performed automatically, WITH the additional capability of being able to algorithmically optimize every single speaker-subwoofer crossover independently. But so far, it doesn't seem like that's coming to Denon processors. And without that, Dirac is meh. Especially since it's very unlikely platforms that don't support DLBC will be capable of their forthcoming spatial correction.
 
@Sancus I never considered Dirac because of their pricing and missing features. For the longest time they didn't have proper bass management which is the most important thing in RoomEQ. Now they do have DLBC but it is very expensive.
And based on neutral measurements and impressions i never considered Dirac superior to Audyssey XT32 when both are properly set up.

I'm very interested in like for like comparisons since we finally get devices which have both systems coming soon.
I guess the Sound United devices do get DLBC because it doesn't make sense without it. Additionally they have upgraded to 4 individual Sub-Outs even with XLR out on the A1H flagship so it makes even more sense to include DLBC.
I'm also interested in the changes they did to Audysseys bass management because it could only do 2 subs so far. Maybe Sound United or Audyssey actually put in a little more work than just supporting 4 subs...
We have to wait and see.
 
USB 4 2.0 can do 80Gbps.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. With Apple's silicone, you would think they would want a non-intel solution. Thunderbolt 5 is (over) due and that will surely carry 80Gbps as well.
 
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. With Apple's silicone, you would think they would want a non-intel solution. Thunderbolt 5 is (over) due and that will surely carry 80Gbps as well.
Thunderbolt and USB collided they're the same thing now.
 
Thunderbolt and USB collided they're the same thing now.

Won't Thunderbolt 5 still require some type of Intel licensing/compatibility?

USB 4 2.0 is based on a royalty free donation by Intel of their Thunderbolt 3 patent.
 
I guess the Sound United devices do get DLBC because it doesn't make sense without it. Additionally they have upgraded to 4 individual Sub-Outs even with XLR out on the A1H flagship so it makes even more sense to include DLBC.
Well, let me put it this way. I'll buy an X3800H(or whatever the minimum is) when they announce it, but if you buy one now assuming that this will be coming you're taking a very big risk. DLBC is a big selling point for HT enthusiasts so if they ARE bringing it, it's strange not to make sure it's included in the initial announcement.
 
That's interesting because when I had Dirac it didn't do delays at all - the user had to do that before running Dirac!

Is a correction for "Impulse response" the same as a correction for "Time delay"? Do the Dirac graphs In my post #483 show anything relevant in terms of correction correlation?

Dirac claims in marketing literature to correct Impulse response, which I had thought was the same/similar however may be just my cloudy understanding of the distinction.

Why would Denon contemplate offering a Dirac "upgrade" if it was the same as all the others? Genuine question that I can't answer.
 
@Sancus They didn't announce details about Dirac yet. The official news just states that a Dirac Live upgrade will be offered. It will be a paid upgrade via a future software update.
 
Well, let me put it this way. I'll buy an X3800H(or whatever the minimum is) when they announce it, but if you buy one now assuming that this will be coming you're taking a very big risk. DLBC is a big selling point for HT enthusiasts so if they ARE bringing it, it's strange not to make sure it's included in the initial announcement.
I agree. They need to specifically call it out that it will be implemented and offered as well. I might be the minority, but if using sub(s), Dirac is an incomplete solution without DLBC.
 
@Chromatischism Sorry i thought we talk about Dirac. Please ignore my post. Maybe a moderator can delete it?
Ok. I see where the conversation has gone, and that's different altogether. I have had Dirac do a better job of compensating for a speaker crossover issue. The issue was a phase cancellation between a coaxial tweeter and woofer that reversing the polarity of the tweeter didn't solve and that Audyssey didn't attempt. So on that front Dirac was definitely better. However, with better speakers, I don't know that it has any clear advantages.
 
Last edited:
Is a correction for "Impulse response" the same as a correction for "Time delay"?
Depends. You could delay the impulse in time, sure. But there are many other things you can do.

Dirac claims in marketing literature to correct Impulse response
Indeed they have. What they don't let on is that it's not possible to correct frequency response without changing the impulse, which of course their competitors do as well.

If you read Toole, frequency response is the result of a fourier transform of the impulse. You can go between the two simply with math. In other words, they are two sides of the same coin.

Why would Denon contemplate offering a Dirac "upgrade" if it was the same as all the others? Genuine question that I can't answer.
It's all going to come down to implementation. I have questions about how Dirac would work on a D+M AVR considering the fact that Dirac doesn't do levels and delays for you, doesn't calibrate to THX reference level, and doesn't suggest or even consider subwoofer crossovers. All of that will be on the user unless there is a custom solution created to guide you through it.
 
It's all going to come down to implementation. I have questions about how Dirac would work on a D+M AVR considering the fact that Dirac doesn't do levels and delays for you, doesn't calibrate to THX reference level, and doesn't suggest or even consider subwoofer crossovers. All of that will be on the user unless there is a custom solution created to guide you through it.
I honestly don't remember anymore which bit is which team, but for example Audyssey doesn't do subwoofer crossovers either, that's implemented by Denon. My expectation would be that Denon will implement any missing pieces. I sincerely doubt they're going to launch an optional upgrade that is a worse experience than the baseline one.
 
I honestly don't remember anymore which bit is which team, but for example Audyssey doesn't do subwoofer crossovers either, that's implemented by Denon.
It is two pieces of a puzzle that work together. Audyssey cares about crossover values and its EQ is tailored around them. Dirac does not even care if you have them, and won't suggest values for them.

My expectation would be that Denon will implement any missing pieces.
That would be my expectation as well.
 
The top of the line Pioneer Elite AVRs have had class D amps for years, currently a 5 year old SC-LX801. (They call them Direct Energy HD Class D3 Switching Amplifiers) I've owned nothing but Pioneer Elite AVRs since I bought my first surround receiver in the late 90's. I'm still waiting for them to release a class D powered AVR with Dirac.

Martin
I agree! I love my SC LX904 but I'm hoping Pioneer releases a 905 with Dirac....fingers crossed.
 
I ordered an x3800 direct from Denon and got a follow-up email this morning that it’s ready to ship. Hopefully it’s here mid-week.

Edit: wanted to send it to @amirm but didn’t communicate with him. I’d be willing to but have to see what the shipping costs are.
 
Last edited:
Depends. You could delay the impulse in time, sure. But there are many other things you can do.


Indeed they have. What they don't let on is that it's not possible to correct frequency response without changing the impulse, which of course their competitors do as well.

If you read Toole, frequency response is the result of a fourier transform of the impulse. You can go between the two simply with math. In other words, they are two sides of the same coin.


It's all going to come down to implementation. I have questions about how Dirac would work on a D+M AVR considering the fact that Dirac doesn't do levels and delays for you, doesn't calibrate to THX reference level, and doesn't suggest or even consider subwoofer crossovers. All of that will be on the user unless there is a custom solution created to guide you through it.
Dirac does do delay and level matching.
 
My NAD did not, and I cannot imagine Dirac customizing it for each device.
It has been a long time since I had the NAD T758v3… but are you sure that the NAD doesn’t set speaker levels and distances during calibration?
 
It has been a long time since I had the NAD T758v3… but are you sure that the NAD doesn’t set speaker levels and distances during calibration?
It has been a while, but I remember having to enter in values before running it or the results weren't optimal.
 
Back
Top Bottom