• 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!

Dirac Art worth it after downsizing from 8351b/GLM?

Mort

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 12, 2024
Messages
2,272
Likes
3,392
I have a small 2.1 system with BMR monitors and a Rythmik 12" closed sub in a 4.5m x 10m attic. It's used mostly for TV and background music. It's a guest suite and my wife's craft room.

I actually have genelec 8351b/7370a with GLM there now and it's great but overkill. I'm gonna downsize.

I already own a buckeye/minidsp flex with Dirac and/or a Wiim Amp pro. Either would suffice for power and DSP. I'm not at impressed with them as GLM but again, good enough.

I am however always curious and could get an x3800h and add ART. Would 2.1 with a single sub at modest volumes be worth the $1300? I'm not so concerned about the cost but it's not worth it if the improvement will be small.
 
I have a small 2.1 system with BMR monitors and a Rythmik 12" closed sub in a 4.5m x 10m attic. It's used mostly for TV and background music. It's a guest suite and my wife's craft room.

I actually have genelec 8351b/7370a with GLM there now and it's great but overkill. I'm gonna downsize.

I already own a buckeye/minidsp flex with Dirac and/or a Wiim Amp pro. Either would suffice for power and DSP. I'm not at impressed with them as GLM but again, good enough.

I am however always curious and could get an x3800h and add ART. Would 2.1 with a single sub at modest volumes be worth the $1300? I'm not so concerned about the cost but it's not worth it if the improvement will be small.
I think the benefit of dirac comes in when you have multiple subs, seems like a massive waste.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EJ3
Also, it is another $800 for the ART bundle.
My, albeit basic, understanding of the benefits of ART, is that it benefits from having multiple full range (or able to go down to around 50hz) speakers and multiple subs.
I don't even think DLBC would be a meaningful upgrade with just the one sub.
 
Also, it is another $800 for the ART bundle.
My, albeit basic, understanding of the benefits of ART, is that it benefits from having multiple full range (or able to go down to around 50hz) speakers and multiple subs.
I don't even think DLBC would be a meaningful upgrade with just the one sub.
thank you. that makes sense about the full range speaker, hadn't considered that.
 
I jumped on a D3800 and ART during black friday sales. But i have a 5.4.2 setup with all speakers except atmos able to go <50Hz. Best money I have spent in yrs. Playing stereo with my cheap front speakers sounds as good, if not better!, than my GLM 8361a setup.

If you dig around there are people getting good results with pure 2 channel setups, but it gets lost in the multichannel noise. I am waiting for ART to become available on PC as then at least dont need to spend money on extra hardware.

Now if you combine your BMR/Rhythmik and 8351a/7370a speakers - that would be one hellava ART immersive setup!!!
 
Now if you combine your BMR/Rhythmik and 8351a/7370a speakers - that would be one hellava ART immersive setup!!!

RAWR that would be a monster. A franken-system perhaps.
 
I think the benefit of dirac comes in when you have multiple subs, seems like a massive waste.
More like multiple speakers within the required frequency range (20hz-150Hz)

Using full range speakers (response down to below 60Hz) has advantages - the 50 year old B&O Beovox Penta's that I use for my surround channel cost me AU$500 (circa US$300) and have F/R spec down to 35Hz - with those and a subwoofer, ART can provide remarkably good results - using effectively 3 subs...

Also Subs with a more limited low end, but greater high end extension, are more advantageous to ART than subs that dig well below 20Hz, but run out of steam at 80Hz... Yes you might sacrifice a little between 20Hz and 30Hz - but you gain in the far more critical 80Hz to 150Hz range... where improvements are a heck of a lot more audible.

I run Gallo TR1 subs - which cost me around AU$1100 about 20 years ago, and can now be found used for around AU$500... - their spec reads as 26Hz to 180Hz... which is almost perfect for ART (sure I would like it if they went down to 20Hz... but I would not be happy trading off performance in the 80 to 150Hz area...) - they are a sealed design with low distortion

So Yeah - you don't have to have heaps of subs - every speaker within that key bass frequency range contributes to the end result - more is better, but there are definite diminishing returns.

If you look at my posting above, you will see measurements with 1 sub vs with 2 subs... the differences are marginal! - But this is in a system with 4 full range speakers.

I have not done further testing to work out when diminishing returns kick in... might be interesting to experiment with a 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 configurations (when I have the time and inclination!)

There are however plenty of reports out there of noticeable, audible, improvements applying ART to 2.1 setups. - However I have yet to see waterfall charts of the results.
 
More like multiple speakers within the required frequency range (20hz-150Hz)

Using full range speakers (response down to below 60Hz) has advantages - the 50 year old B&O Beovox Penta's that I use for my surround channel cost me AU$500 (circa US$300) and have F/R spec down to 35Hz - with those and a subwoofer, ART can provide remarkably good results - using effectively 3 subs...

Also Subs with a more limited low end, but greater high end extension, are more advantageous to ART than subs that dig well below 20Hz, but run out of steam at 80Hz... Yes you might sacrifice a little between 20Hz and 30Hz - but you gain in the far more critical 80Hz to 150Hz range... where improvements are a heck of a lot more audible.

I run Gallo TR1 subs - which cost me around AU$1100 about 20 years ago, and can now be found used for around AU$500... - their spec reads as 26Hz to 180Hz... which is almost perfect for ART (sure I would like it if they went down to 20Hz... but I would not be happy trading off performance in the 80 to 150Hz area...) - they are a sealed design with low distortion

So Yeah - you don't have to have heaps of subs - every speaker within that key bass frequency range contributes to the end result - more is better, but there are definite diminishing returns.

If you look at my posting above, you will see measurements with 1 sub vs with 2 subs... the differences are marginal! - But this is in a system with 4 full range speakers.

I have not done further testing to work out when diminishing returns kick in... might be interesting to experiment with a 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 configurations (when I have the time and inclination!)

There are however plenty of reports out there of noticeable, audible, improvements applying ART to 2.1 setups. - However I have yet to see waterfall charts of the results.
I'm running a 2.2 setup. But my subs FR (raw speaker before installed into it's 29 HZ tuned box is 20 Hz-80 Hz). My mains are +-2 DB 26 Hz-20 KHz.
But from what is now coming out about ART, I need more subs with a higher frequency response. More subs, I can make sense of.
Ones with a higher frequency response befuddles my mind.
 
I'm running a 2.2 setup. But my subs FR (raw speaker before installed into it's 29 HZ tuned box is 20 Hz-80 Hz). My mains are +-2 DB 26 Hz-20 KHz.
But from what is now coming out about ART, I need more subs with a higher frequency response. More subs, I can make sense of.
Ones with a higher frequency response befuddles my mind.
Yeah lots of assumptions need to be reviewed when we consider ART - it is a full blown paradigm shift!!

ART will reduce decay in the room within the frequency range of your speakers - and will do a better job with more speakers .... within limits, more speakers adds processor load, and the number of filters a processor has are limited by its processing capabilities, so the D&M AVR/AVP's are limited to 98 filters - it seems to handle 7 speakers on support duty with around 60 filters in use... trying with 11 speakers for support duty maxed out the 98 filters and started degrading the results (!). I assume that were I using a HTP1 or StormAudio AVP, this would not be an issue (more DSP bandwidth, more filters!).

However with the economical alternatives - the D&M range - you probably are limited to around 9 speakers at a guess (and by speakers I include subs)

The most critical and audible frequencies are going to be 50Hz to 150Hz - the more speakers you have that are capable in that range, the better the setup will sound! Having subs that can extend down to below 20Hz, will provide extension down to 20Hz... but I would probably exercise caution in sacrificing the critical 50 to 150Hz range in exchange for the 20-30Hz zone... Like many other things in audio, there is a balancing act there!

With your mains going down to 26Hz ( is that theoretical/spec, or actual in room measured?) - and 2 subs, you probably have the 30Hz to 80Hz range nailed (and possibly a pretty decent 20Hz to 30Hz range too)- it would be interesting to see your waterfall charts...
 
Yeah lots of assumptions need to be reviewed when we consider ART - it is a full blown paradigm shift!!

ART will reduce decay in the room within the frequency range of your speakers - and will do a better job with more speakers .... within limits, more speakers adds processor load, and the number of filters a processor has are limited by its processing capabilities, so the D&M AVR/AVP's are limited to 98 filters - it seems to handle 7 speakers on support duty with around 60 filters in use... trying with 11 speakers for support duty maxed out the 98 filters and started degrading the results (!). I assume that were I using a HTP1 or StormAudio AVP, this would not be an issue (more DSP bandwidth, more filters!).

However with the economical alternatives - the D&M range - you probably are limited to around 9 speakers at a guess (and by speakers I include subs)

The most critical and audible frequencies are going to be 50Hz to 150Hz - the more speakers you have that are capable in that range, the better the setup will sound! Having subs that can extend down to below 20Hz, will provide extension down to 20Hz... but I would probably exercise caution in sacrificing the critical 50 to 150Hz range in exchange for the 20-30Hz zone... Like many other things in audio, there is a balancing act there!

With your mains going down to 26Hz ( is that theoretical/spec, or actual in room measured?) - and 2 subs, you probably have the 30Hz to 80Hz range nailed (and possibly a pretty decent 20Hz to 30Hz range too)- it would be interesting to see your waterfall charts...
Mains measurement:
Preliminary listening tests of the Dahlquist M-905 speakers—installed on the ST-9 stands, as recommended—revealed:

The close-miked woofer (and port) response was also considerably flatter than we have measured from most speakers, with a very small bass-resonance peak. At the system resonance of 60 Hz, the output was only about 2 dB above its average level in the upper part of the woofer’s range, and even that minor output variation was spread over almost two octaves. When the bass curve was spliced to the room-response measurement, the resulting composite frequency response was flat within about ±2 dB from 26 to 20,000 Hz. The horizontal directivity of the tweeter was only discernible in the room measurement above 10,000 Hz.

We measured the sensitivity of the M-905 as 87 dB SPL, which was lower than the rated 91 dB but still about average for speakers of its size. The difference may have been a result of different test conditions since we used a full-range pink-noise signal while Dahlquist’s rating was made at 1,000 Hz. The system’s minimum impedance was about 4.8 ohms in the 8,000- to 10,000-Hz region, and it measured 7 ohms at 150 to 200 Hz. Its maximum impedance was 28 ohms at 60 Hz, and there was a broad peak of 18 ohms in the vicinity of 1,500 Hz.

We measured the woofer’s distortion with a 4-volt drive level, corresponding to a 90-dB SPL at 1 meter. The distortion was less than 1 percent from 100 Hz down to almost 60 Hz, the effective crossover to the port. Below that crossover the distortion rose to 5 percent at 45 Hz and 9 percent at 35 Hz. In high-power tests with single-cycle tone bursts, the woofer began to sound “hard” at about 350 watts into its 8.5-ohm impedance at 100 Hz. At higher frequencies the amplifier clipped—at outputs of 490 watts at 1,000 Hz and 1,380 watts at 10,000 Hz—before distortion became visible on the acoustic waveform.

Quasi-anechoic FFT measurements showed an overall group-delay variation of about 0.1 millisecond between 4,000 and 20,000 Hz and 0.5 ms between 1,000 and 20.000 Hz, convincing evidence of the attention paid to the phase characteristics of the M-905

I'm calling them better than I can hear.

The sub's I do not have any actual measurements in the box or the room on. Only on the raw 12" Pioneer Automotive dual 4 Ohm voice coil (converted to a single 4 Ohm circuit within the box) raw speaker 20-80 HZ FR 96 DB 1 WATT 2000+ watt handling capacity. Each one is floor firing (speaker & port) and the mains sit on top of them, at the pre-subscribed 3.5 degree angle at the original stand height (so, therefore 'should' be in phase with the main) and the subs are powered by a PROTON D-1200 stereo amp but in blended mono configuration. The mains are powered by a NAD 2200.
The plan was: add 2 more subs (same sub setup) in other locations of the room. But now: I'm befuddled?
 
Last edited:
Mains measurement:
Preliminary listening tests of the Dahlquist M-905 speakers—installed on the ST-9 stands, as recommended—revealed:

The close-miked woofer (and port) response was also considerably flatter than we have measured from most speakers, with a very small bass-resonance peak. At the system resonance of 60 Hz, the output was only about 2 dB above its average level in the upper part of the woofer’s range, and even that minor output variation was spread over almost two octaves. When the bass curve was spliced to the room-response measurement, the resulting composite frequency response was flat within about ±2 dB from 26 to 20,000 Hz. The horizontal directivity of the tweeter was only discernible in the room measurement above 10,000 Hz.

We measured the sensitivity of the M-905 as 87 dB SPL, which was lower than the rated 91 dB but still about average for speakers of its size. The difference may have been a result of different test conditions since we used a full-range pink-noise signal while Dahlquist’s rating was made at 1,000 Hz. The system’s minimum impedance was about 4.8 ohms in the 8,000- to 10,000-Hz region, and it measured 7 ohms at 150 to 200 Hz. Its maximum impedance was 28 ohms at 60 Hz, and there was a broad peak of 18 ohms in the vicinity of 1,500 Hz.

We measured the woofer’s distortion with a 4-volt drive level, corresponding to a 90-dB SPL at 1 meter. The distortion was less than 1 percent from 100 Hz down to almost 60 Hz, the effective crossover to the port. Below that crossover the distortion rose to 5 percent at 45 Hz and 9 percent at 35 Hz. In high-power tests with single-cycle tone bursts, the woofer began to sound “hard” at about 350 watts into its 8.5-ohm impedance at 100 Hz. At higher frequencies the amplifier clipped—at outputs of 490 watts at 1.000 Hz and 1,380 watts at 10,000 Hz—before distortion became visible on the acoustic waveform.

Quasi-anechoic FFT measurements showed an overall group-delay variation of about 0.1 millisecond between 4,000 and 20,000 Hz and 0.5 ms between 1,000 and 20.000 Hz, convincing evidence of the attention paid to the phase characteristics of the M-905

I'm calling them better than I can hear.

The sub's I do not have any actual measurements in the box or the room on. Only on the raw 12" Pioneer Automotive dual 4 Ohm voice coil (converted to a single 4 Ohm circuit within the box) raw speaker 20-80 HZ FR 96 DB 1 WATT 2000+ watt handling capacity. Each one is floor firing (speaker & port) and the mains sit on top of them, at the pre-subscribed 3.5 degree angle at the original stand height (so, therefore 'should' be in phase with the main) and are powered by a PROTON D-1200 stereo amp but in blended mono configuration.
The plan was: add 2 more subs (same sub setup) in other locations of the room. But now: I'm befuddled?
Hold off on anything more until you have ART, and can measure the results - then you will see what more is needed (if it is needed)...
 
I have a small 2.1 system with BMR monitors and a Rythmik 12" closed sub in a 4.5m x 10m attic. It's used mostly for TV and background music. It's a guest suite and my wife's craft room.

I actually have genelec 8351b/7370a with GLM there now and it's great but overkill. I'm gonna downsize.

I already own a buckeye/minidsp flex with Dirac and/or a Wiim Amp pro. Either would suffice for power and DSP. I'm not at impressed with them as GLM but again, good enough.

I am however always curious and could get an x3800h and add ART. Would 2.1 with a single sub at modest volumes be worth the $1300? I'm not so concerned about the cost but it's not worth it if the improvement will be small.
As noted, people are using ART in 2.1 systems and apparently it improves their systems. Looked up BMR monitors and looks like they could contribute meaningfully in 50-150hz range. You should also look into your REW charts and see if speakers could complement each other in dip areas as with ART that dip can be fixed by supporting speaker, not just EQ. The benefit of cleaning up the low end range also contributes to increased clarity in the entire spectrum.

Your room is definitively not small, and could probably use another sub (ops, I said it...). Lots of people are waiting for ART PC release as then they would not have to buy dedicated hardware (3800H). Or they can put that money towards the second/additional sub.

So it's really your call - but for sure ART will not be worse than you have it now. Value proposition is kind of individual thingy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EJ3
Hold off on anything more until you have ART, and can measure the results - then you will see what more is needed (if it is needed)...
Yes, I have been thinking part of what I don't currently like is the house, as it all sounded better in my previous, much different home.
I changed homes & ever since, have been chasing a level of (betterness???) that I feel that I had in the previous home (which is still in my family but is not where I live now).
It's quite possible that I change back in a few years. There, I felt that it was actually good enough (for me, anyway) and that possibly with one (or maybe 2) strategically spaced additional subs, all would be good. The room was large, with a cathedral slope ceiling & due to it's (unintentional for audio) design (1/4 length walls in different directions, a staircase going to another floor at one end & three feet nearer going 3 steps down to an entrance way, in the middle, on the low side, a curved bay window tat a couple could sit in & play a game of dominos): all this = few standing waves.
So, it's most likely this much smaller & more square/cube shaped space in this half the size home.
Thanks for giving me a dose of reality.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I have been thinking part of what I don't currently like is the house, as it all sounded better in my previous, much different home.
I changed homes & ever since, have been chasing a level of (betterness???) that I feel that I had in the previous home (which is still in my family but is not where I live now).
It's quite possible that I change back in a few years. There, I felt that it was actually good enough (for me, anyway) and that possibly with one (or maybe 2) strategically spaced additional subs, all would be good. The room was large, with a cathedral slope ceiling & due to it's (unintentional for audio) design (1/4 length walls in different directions, a staircase going to another floor at one end & three feet nearer going 3 steps down to an entrance way, in the middle, on the low side, a curved bay window tat a couple could sit in & play a game of dominos): all this = few standing waves.
So, it's most likely this much smaller & more square/cube shaped space in this half the size home.
Thanks for giving me a dose of reality.
ART works on fixing room related issues...
 
Back
Top Bottom