Thanks again, so either way REW would be creating the filters, so would it be IIR (peq/biquad..) filters end up being used? If I understood right REW can do FIR filters too but I don't know if it got used a lot.
-
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!
Denon AVR-X3800H Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Thanks again, so either way REW would be creating the filters, so would it be IIR (peq/biquad..) filters end up being used? If I understood right REW can do FIR filters too but I don't know if it got used a lot.
No idea, you'd have to ask @OCA
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2018
- Messages
- 418
- Likes
- 719
Yes, we are...
In your environment the question would be, how warm does it need to get to ensure no condensation.... and how cool does it need to stay to ensure long life.... a fine tight rope walk!
When you say "Dirac" are you referring to the base Dirac Live, Dirac Live-Bass Control, or Dirac Live - ART.... They are all Dirac, and they do layer on top of each other, but DL, and DLBC do slightly different things, and DL-ART does something completely different (which no other product on the market does).The "fan" epithet is , correct. I have both Audyssey paid Apps: the Smart device IOS App and the Windows-PC App, MultEQ-X. I also used MSO and after literally years of fiddling with these, REW and U-Mik-1, I obtained good results. I have been satisfied and posted about that.
Then, I tried @OCA Evo Express...
In less than 30 minutes, to my ears, (You cannot be more subjective than that), and using only the microphone that came with the AVR... the results were better than what I had with MultEQ-X + MSP + miniDSP 2x4 HD + UMik +hours of measurements.
It took me a bit more, about 2 hours, to reach better subjective results with Acoustica, I prefer the level of control of Acoustica.
And these scripts are free...
I have not experienced a Dirac application. I know these are not inexpensive, in general far more expensive than Audyssey's. I am yet to see a solid report that proves , not opine, that DIrac is superior to Audyssey MultEQ-X. It is usually a toss-up... In the meantime, the best I have gotten from my, albeit, modest system is from @OCA free Scripts. I am thus looking for his Dirac-ART- competitor scripts.
An aside: As an IT (Information Technology) professional and a long time audiophile, I can marvel and wonder about the level of knoweldge, In acoustics, psycho acoustics, Internal working of the some AVR, mastery of TCP/IP , Windows Shell commands and working, as well as the dedication and polish of @OCA scripts to achieve such consistently and increasingly good ( if I am to follow his scripts progression through the years). Let's not forget his Generosity. Those are free., as in: "you just download them" Nothing else required, except a PC which you can just ditch immediately after having run the scripts.
The difference to my ears are profound and unmistakable.
I plan one day to measure the before and after to "see" what is going on. I am currently too happy enjoying my system, to bother. The intellectual part of me, wants, needs some objective proofs.. but the music lover and audiophile are busy , just enjoying music and great sound... so these will come in a time of boredom or satiety.
to @OCA: I for one , am waiting for that Dirac competitor
@kawauso ... Once you have the Marantz, give Evo Express a try and report, It may not take more than 30 minutes, even with 2 subwoofers... We'll accepts your subjective, evaluations
My assumption is that you are referring to DL only.... not DLBC or DLART - but I could be wrong.
sahil fardeen
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2024
- Messages
- 322
- Likes
- 83
Mine barely gets even warm after hours of use (on monsoon). So i typically put a blanket on top of the avr blocking the vents for it to get warmer(so as the heat will prevent condensation). How the tables turn, most of them are fighting their way out for their avr to stay the coolest lol
yep and those of us further from the equator, are carefully positioning them for max airflow, adding fans to keep them cool, you name it! - while you are wrapping a blanket around it......!!!
If Dirac made their refund policy more openly visible, I believe it would encourage even more users to give it a try.
On the regular pages of the website, I couldn’t find any clear information about refunds, and it seems to be mentioned only in the EULA PDF.
The EULA states that refunds are limited to unused software within 30 days, so it appears that used licenses are not eligible.
However, in practice many users seem to have received refunds even after using the software.
Is this handled as a special case?
From what I’ve seen, OCA has several areas where it clearly does better than stock Dirac Live (RC).
One big advantage is that OCA seems to treat the mains and subs as one integrated system right from the start,
which helps reduce seat-to-seat variation across multiple measurement points.
OCA also appears to re-optimize the Audyssey XT32 FIR/IIR filters, and the phase alignment around the crossover can feel more natural than with RC.
RC sometimes leaves the mains/sub handoff a bit vague, so in that specific region OCA can actually come out ahead.
That said, when you compare it to Dirac Live Bass Control (BC),
there are still some areas where BC holds a clear advantage.
BC uses a MIMO-like multichannel optimization based on the MLP measurements,
which helps maintain more consistent FR across a wider listening area.
And because BC can apply independent EQ to each sub,
its bass integration and crossover flexibility are higher than what OCA can currently do.
In multi-sub setups, this difference tends to show up pretty obviously.
That being said, in terms of listening impressions, OCA gets surprisingly close.
It performs far better than you’d expect from being built on top of XT32.
But in terms of algorithmic freedom and overall capability,
BC still feels like it has a bit of an edge for now.
OCA is known to be very strict about the first microphone position.
People have reported that multi-point measurements get blocked if the correlation drops below about 99%,
so the system seems designed to enforce very high repeatability.
Because of that, users say the initial mic point needs to be placed very accurately.
According to those reports, if the first mic position is even slightly off,
the overall calibration may not maintain consistent results.
Most people recommend checking the impulse response or another reference to make sure the position is precise.
Dirac, on the other hand, is much more forgiving.
Even if the mic placement isn’t perfect, repeated measurements tend to produce similar results,
so it doesn’t have that “everything depends on the very first point” behavior that OCA has.
People have reported that multi-point measurements get blocked if the correlation drops below about 99%,
so the system seems designed to enforce very high repeatability.
Because of that, users say the initial mic point needs to be placed very accurately.
According to those reports, if the first mic position is even slightly off,
the overall calibration may not maintain consistent results.
Most people recommend checking the impulse response or another reference to make sure the position is precise.
Dirac, on the other hand, is much more forgiving.
Even if the mic placement isn’t perfect, repeated measurements tend to produce similar results,
so it doesn’t have that “everything depends on the very first point” behavior that OCA has.
In his latest version, the EX, I need to watch his video on my large TV a couple more times, the font size of those REW screens are just too small and kind of a little blurry too for my eyes. Hopefully I can then understand a little more about how/what he utilizes REW's filter creation capabilities. As it is now I don't know if and how the Evo express would use phase alignment. It did seem clear enough to me that he no longer (if the original Audy One ever did..) uses Audyssey filters at all and seems to rely on REW (and his own manipulation if he does..). As to which one actually would come out ahead, that's hard to say as I don't care too much (obviously I do, to a very little extent) about people's subjective impressions, but I would value objective data, such as a bunch of REW graphs of before after comparison and on that, I know Audy's are good, and DLBC's excellent.
To me, the clear advantage of DLBC is the flexibility it offers to those who like to make their manual adjustments post calibration, without any programming skill, whereas OCA's would likely require some knowledge and skill in that area.
I think OCA's can do that too, but the users probably would need to be knowledgeable/skillful in terms of programming languages (Java script etc..). I am sure OCA is a very helpful guy, but he's offering his RC software of great value at no cost to users, it
I am not sure about the "built on top of XT32" any more, though that appeared to be the case regarding the original version. It seems that Evo Express is very much on its own now, doesn't even need the $20 app. It just needs REW, and then it could interact with the D+M device directly. Again, I am going re-watch some of his videos a few more times, as I don't want to keep bothering him by asking him questions directly. Experienced users such as @antcollinet answered some of my questions, but on the filter creation part, I would have ask @OCA directly, but...
Last edited:
I’ll upload the MDAT files for A1 Evo Express, BC, and ART in my 2.2-channel setup, so please wait a bit.In his latest version, the EX, I need to watch his video on my large TV a couple more times, the font size of those REW screens are just too small and kind of a little blurry too for my eyes. Hopefully I can then understand a little more about how/what he utilizes REW's filter creation capabilities. As it is now I don't know if and how the Evo express would use phase alignment. It did seem clear enough to me that he no longer (if the original Audy One ever did..) uses Audyssey filters at all and seems to rely on REW (and his own manipulation if he does..). As to which one actually would come out ahead, that's hard to say as I don't care too much (obviously I do, to a very little extent) about people's subjective impressions, but I would value objective data, such as a bunch of REW graphs of before after comparison and on that, I know Audy's are good, and DLBC's excellent.
To me, the clear advantage of DLBC is the flexibility it offers to those who like to make their manual adjustments post calibration, without any programming skill, whereas OCA's would likely require some knowledge and skill in that area.
I think OCA's can do that too, but the users probably would need to be knowledgeable/skillful in terms of programming languages (Java script etc..). I am sure OCA is a very helpful guy, but he's offering his RC software of great value at no cost to users, it would be fair to expect him to answer every questions on how to customize, on a timely basis.
I am not sure about the "built on top of XT32" any more, though that appeared to be the case regarding the original version. It seems that Evo Express is very much on its own now, doesn't even need the $20 app. It just needs REW, and then it could interact with the D+M device directly. Again, I am going re-watch some of his videos a few more times, as I don't want to keep bothering him by asking him questions directly. Experienced users such as @antcollinet answered some of my questions, but on the filter creation part, I would have ask @OCA directly, but...
I plan to test two positions: the MLP and another location far away from the MLP.
If the A1 delivers results comparable to BC, peng’s X4400H might be able to stay alive for a while.
The official EULA is refunds only on unused licenses as you said. However, in practice, most folks should be able to get their money back from Dirac once you talk to them.
That would be great, thank you so much.
I traded my X4400H for the AVM70 two years ago. As I said, I missed the opportunity to try OCA's and now have to wait for some irresistible discounted prices for an AVR-X3800H (my minimum threshold) or an AV30 (my maximum). If and when that could happen, I would just use the AVM70 in one of my two channel system, and sell one of my minidsp HT or HTx currently used there.
How about a new Evo version with every possible customization and without any prior REW knowledge
Last edited:
That looks fantastic!
@OCA – Just a quick question: will the MIMO processing be limited to the FL and FR channels, or will it also allow the subs to support each other?
I’m asking because I’m currently thinking about upgrading my Denon 3800 to the Dirac ART license in an attempt to reduce ringing in the bass region. However, I’d much prefer to keep using your A1 tools – not only because they’ve been free so far, but also because they’re open source and seem to offer superior time-alignment compared to Dirac.
Either way, I want to thank you so much for this invaluable work and for sharing it so generously. You're a truly outstanding contributor to the public good.
@OCA – Just a quick question: will the MIMO processing be limited to the FL and FR channels, or will it also allow the subs to support each other?
I’m asking because I’m currently thinking about upgrading my Denon 3800 to the Dirac ART license in an attempt to reduce ringing in the bass region. However, I’d much prefer to keep using your A1 tools – not only because they’ve been free so far, but also because they’re open source and seem to offer superior time-alignment compared to Dirac.
Either way, I want to thank you so much for this invaluable work and for sharing it so generously. You're a truly outstanding contributor to the public good.
How about a new Evo version with every possible customization possible without any prior REW knowledge
View attachment 493233
Amazing!!
By the way, sorry about a typo (actually by omission) in my last post, I meant to say it wouldn't be fair to expect you to answer every question (s).
FL+FR and each and every sub. Evo will always be free.
Similar threads
