Dirac ART on Marantz AV10

[Oddball]

Not sure what BC would do in your case.

ART would for sure use your large speakers, but then have not been following ART "stereo" setups aka sans subs. With subs, ART latches on the "main" sub and then rest of the subs and speakers support that sub. Usually a good idea to have such sub in good shape - so it can play loud an clear, but it will get meaningful contribution and reinforcement from the rest of the gang.

My main sub has some pretty nasty holes in the FQ response, but they all get filled by the supporting subs and speakers so that I end up with pretty flat (+/- 1.5 dB) response and decay generally lower than 70ms.

 

[davidc]

Not sure what BC would do in your case.

ART would for sure use your large speakers, but then have not been following ART "stereo" setups aka sans subs. With subs, ART latches on the "main" sub and then rest of the subs and speakers support that sub. Usually a good idea to have such sub in good shape - so it can play loud an clear, but it will get meaningful contribution and reinforcement from the rest of the gang.

My main sub has some pretty nasty holes in the FQ response, but they all get filled by the supporting subs and speakers so that I end up with pretty flat (+/- 1.5 dB) response and decay generally lower than 70ms.

BC wouldn't work with just my main L/R speakers and without subs. Dirac did have plans on making BC work with just main speakers (after all, you can just think of the woofers in my main speakers as subs, there really is no differerence), but for whaterver reason, they decided not to do that. BC would work only if I added subs.

I just want to make sure that if I added subs, and switched to Dirac Live, BC and ART, that the main bass and LFE would still get distributed to my main speakers. I have heard that BC would restrict via a crossover the bass that is sent to my main speakers, even though they are capable of -3dB at 16Hz.

 

[Oddball]

BC does operate on crossover basis so probably not ideal for your setup.

ART operates differently. You can set the support range for your front speakers to 20-150hz and ART should acknowledge that i.e. use them in that range. I did support subs with my fronts at 35hz but later on turned out that not needed as have plenty of sub power that is more adequate in that range so no need to stress the LR.

Also can set the high dB support to those which is -24dB. Not really sure if it would work better with or without the subs in your setup, but you can try. Will depend on the quality of the subs. But one way or the other, think will be pleased with ART.

 

[kawauso]

BC wouldn't work with just my main L/R speakers and without subs. Dirac did have plans on making BC work with just main speakers (after all, you can just think of the woofers in my main speakers as subs, there really is no differerence), but for whaterver reason, they decided not to do that. BC would work only if I added subs.

I just want to make sure that if I added subs, and switched to Dirac Live, BC and ART, that the main bass and LFE would still get distributed to my main speakers. I have heard that BC would restrict via a crossover the bass that is sent to my main speakers, even though they are capable of -3dB at 16Hz.

ART sounds like a perfect fit for your setup. Welcome to ART !

 

[Sal1950]

Covering the window glass with rockwool is a smart move. Having alternating hard surfaces and absorption usually works well.
But I don’t think the idea that “Oddball’s room had insufficient acoustic treatment, so ART had an unusually strong effect” is correct.

ART mainly operates below roughly 150 Hz, and unless someone is willing to do major construction and install full-scale bass-range treatment, the difference in wall treatment won’t matter much.
And realistically, most of us can’t rebuild our rooms like that, right?

"But I don’t think the idea that “Oddball’s room had insufficient acoustic treatment, so ART had an unusually strong effect” is correct."

Why not, it only make common sense that the worse performing the room, the more obvious the software correction should be. That's what Dirac claims for it.

I can not agree that the acceptable approach is to do nothing about room treatment and then depend on some DRC software to correct all problems for you. That's like buying any cheap, non-linear speaker system and depending on DRC to correct all it's issues.

I don't get it, if ART operates mainly below 150hz why does it STILL require the DLBC package also?
Sounding more and more like the ponzi scheme of Hi-Fi.
I'm not saying ART isn't a good DRC, but there are others that don't cost the price of a cars down payment.
In D-M we can start with the FREE Audyssey XT32 + $20 Editor app, MultiEQ-X, A1 EVO, more.
I've gotten great results from just the base programs for years now, combining them with common sense room treatments.

 

[kawauso]

"But I don’t think the idea that “Oddball’s room had insufficient acoustic treatment, so ART had an unusually strong effect” is correct."

Why not, it only make common sense that the worse performing the room, the more obvious the software correction should be. That's what Dirac claims for it.

I can not agree that the acceptable approach is to do nothing about room treatment and then depend on some DRC software to correct all problems for you. That's like buying any cheap, non-linear speaker system and depending on DRC to correct all it's issues.

I don't get it, if ART operates mainly below 150hz why does it STILL require the DLBC package also?
Sounding more and more like the ponzi scheme of Hi-Fi.
I'm not saying ART isn't a good DRC, but there are others that don't cost the price of a cars down payment.
In D-M we can start with the FREE Audyssey XT32 + $20 Editor app, MultiEQ-X, A1 EVO, more.
I've gotten great results from just the base programs for years now, combining them with common sense room treatments.

Nobody is claiming that we should rely entirely on DRC software for all problems without room treatment. For mid and high frequencies, traditional passive treatments are still necessary. For low frequencies, without major construction, it's powerless. Sal's use of rockwool doesn't have much effect on low frequencies. Since the room treatment for Oddball’s room wasn’t particularly focused on low-end frequencies, that’s why ART worked the way it did. As for why DRC is necessary, consumers who see value in it are purchasing it and paying for all the associated costs, including the required DLBC licenses for ART. If Sal doesn’t see value in it, then he doesn't need to purchase it

 

[Sal1950]

Since the room treatment for Oddball’s room wasn’t particularly focused on low-end frequencies, that’s why ART worked the way it did. As for why DRC is necessary, consumers who see value in it are purchasing it and paying for all the associated costs, including the required DLBC licenses for ART. If Sal doesn’t see value in it, then he doesn't need to purchase it

It's just that a few folks here are sounding much more like a marketing arm of Dirac, swarming posts from end to end of ASR.
You still didn't address my question about the need for both ART and DLBC since your saying that ART mainly operates below roughly 150 Hz, ?
Don't mean to put you on the spot but you seem to be very well versed in ART.
Why do we need 2 expensive DRC applications to work in that limited base range? That's a $549 (on sale) bundle, and you still don't have Dirac Live room correction software?

 

[dlaloum]

It's just that a few folks here are sounding much more like a marketing arm of Dirac, swarming posts from end to end of ASR.
You still didn't address my question about the need for both ART and DLBC since your saying that ART mainly operates below roughly 150 Hz, ?
Don't mean to put you on the spot but you seem to be very well versed in ART.
Why do we need 2 expensive DRC applications to work in that limited base range? That's a $549 (on sale) bundle, and you still don't have Dirac Live room correction software?

I believe Dirac explained it in one of the interviews... DLBC provides the technological basis - the filters that ART calculates are effectively loaded onto/into DLBC... hence they pointed out very early on, that any platform that supported DLBC was theoretically capable of supporting ART. (but it still requires integration by the platform manufacturer!)
So ART brings a whole new paradigm for room correction, but uses primarily pre-existing technology to implement it.

In theory you could create a piece of software that calculates the required MIMO filters for Audyssey, and then leverages that platform - but as we know, the software development and integration is where the real cost is...

 

[kawauso]

I believe Dirac explained it in one of the interviews... DLBC provides the technological basis - the filters that ART calculates are effectively loaded onto/into DLBC... hence they pointed out very early on, that any platform that supported DLBC was theoretically capable of supporting ART. (but it still requires integration by the platform manufacturer!)
So ART brings a whole new paradigm for room correction, but uses primarily pre-existing technology to implement it.

In theory you could create a piece of software that calculates the required MIMO filters for Audyssey, and then leverages that platform - but as we know, the software development and integration is where the real cost is...

Haha, looks like dlaroom is just itching to throw money at ART! But hey, if people see the value and are willing to pay for it, more power to them. At the end of the day, it’s all about what works for each person, right?

 

[dlaloum]

Haha, looks like dlaroom is just itching to throw money at ART! But hey, if people see the value and are willing to pay for it, more power to them. At the end of the day, it’s all about what works for each person, right?

I absolutely am!

But my preference would be to have it on my preferred Onkyo/Integra platform... however if that manufacturer (PAC) cannot get their act together, my impatience will fling me into the arms of an alternate manufacturer... (most likely Denon... but Monoprice, maybe Tonewinner...)

 

[OverTheAir]

There are likely to be many consumers who will not entertain any physical sound treatment because they are using multi-purpose living spaces where such treatments would not be acceptable in the decor, either by them and/or significant others. Especially if trying to address room modes between 80-150Hz with physical sound treatments. That includes people who buy an AV10 and who live in apartments for example. For them a software solution like Dirac ART, that can help address room modes all the way up to 150Hz, even in the absence of subwoofers, provides a means to improve their experience.

Even those who possess speaker systems up to 9.4.6, a perhaps more expected AV10 system configuration, with conventional bass cross-overs around 80Hz, operating in dedicated rooms, will still have to effectively address room modes from 80Hz up to the current 150Hz limit of ART. That can require a lot of absorption treatment since subwoofers can't be leveraged in this range due to the conventional cross-over and associated high attenuation. Again ART can help with this.