Dirac Live's impact on soundstage & imaging

[wgb113]

Thanks for your thoughts on this everyone. I’ll get the other measurements up today but to clarify, I want to hear what’s on the recording as accurately as possible, getting the gear and room as much out of the equation as I can. I want the level of detail my headphones have with the imaging I know these speakers are capable of and the visceral impact that headphones can’t provide.

FWIW the headphone rig consists of an RME ADI-2 DAC fed from each source directly and a pair of AKG K872 headphones.

Bill

 

[QMuse]

I want the level of detail my headphones have with the imaging I know these speakers are capable of and the visceral impact that headphones can’t provide.

Level of detail that good headphones provide is one thing but I don't think it is possible to compare imaging/soundstage of headphones vs speakers.

 

[wgb113]

Level of detail that good headphones provide is one thing but I don't think it is possible to compare imaging/soundstage of headphones vs speakers.

Agreed! I was explaining what type of sound I want out of my speakers. The level of detail that headphones have is one aspect, the imaging/soundstage that these speakers naturally produce being the other.

One more thing regarding phase. The active version of the LS50 that I have has a setting for Phase Correction. I’ve always had it on. Could that be influencing anything Dirac might be doing? KEF’s explanation: LS50W Phase Corection

 

[QMuse]

Agreed! I was explaining what type of sound I want out of my speakers. The level of detail that headphones have is one aspect, the imaging/soundstage that these speakers naturally produce being the other.

One more thing regarding phase. The active version of the LS50 that I have has a setting for Phase Correction. I’ve always had it on. Could that be influencing anything Dirac might be doing? KEF’s explanation: LS50W Phase Corection

Dirac made a phase correction on your LS50 as well but without REW measurement it is hard to discuss how well it did it. Can you post a picture of your speakers so their in-room position is shown?

 

[wgb113]

Here are the Dirac Live 2.0 screen shots and the default curve:

Here are the room pics (excuse the mess - preparing for a new equipment rack this weekend.):

I'm beginning to think it might be due to that flattening from 200Hz - 1kHz is playing a part as well.

Bill

 

[QMuse]

Those are good positions for speakers and they are symmetrical so I doubt it is phase related. LS50 have nice factory curve which is easy to correct further so I doubt Dirac screwed that - it probably made it better.

 

[wgb113]

@QMuse what would be the best way to measure with & without Dirac engaged in REW? The standard tone sweep from a central mic position? The MMM using pink noise?

 

[QMuse]

@QMuse what would be the best way to measure with & without Dirac engaged in REW? The standard tone sweep from a central mic position? The MMM using pink noise?

For frequency response I recommend MMM RTA pink noise from LP, covering the same area you did when doing Dirac measurements. For phase response use 1M sine sweep of left and rght speaker, also from LP, after which you apply FDW of 4-6 cycles to avoid phase roll.

And yes, do those measurements with and without Dirac as from them it should be clear what is happening.

 

[QMuse]

Oh, @wgb113 I forgot to say, your room looks very nicely!

 

[QMuse]

I'm beginning to think it might be due to that flattening from 200Hz - 1kHz is playing a part as well.

Bill

That is my primary suspect as well.

 

[QMuse]

I think you simply like how range 200-1000Hz sounds right now and your ears were offended with correction which attenuated this range. @mitchco , @thewas_ , what are your thoughts on this?

That was the reason I suggested you try correction only with 20-200Hz range.

 

[QMuse]

Something like this, so try correcting 30-230Hz range with the blue line target:

 

[thewas]

Or maybe trying to correct up to 500 Hz as there your room influence is higher as it can be seen also from both L and R plots.

 

[QMuse]

Or maybe trying to correct up to 500 Hz as there your room influence is higher as it can be seen also from both L and R plots.

Sure, that would also make sense. In which case blue target line should of course be extended to 500Hz.

I think actual target line has too little slope for his taste.

 

[thewas]

Yes, the approx. 4-5dB default target of Dirac can often sound a bit too light, I use 8dB currently for my LS50 setup.

 

[wgb113]

The other thought I've had is that maybe I just need to become accustomed to it if it indeed is more accurate.

 

[QMuse]

The other thought I've had is that maybe I just need to become accustomed to it if it indeed is more accurate.

No need to accustome to something you don't prefere - target curve with higher slope would be equally accurate.

 

[QMuse]

Yes, the approx. 4-5dB default target of Dirac can often sound a bit too light, I use 8dB currently for my LS50 setup.

Same here.

 

[thewas]

The other thought I've had is that maybe I just need to become accustomed to it if it indeed is more accurate.

Unfortunately there are still no standards at stereo recordings, so its good to find a target that works best with most of your listened music or otherwise even use more than one target. Or like Dr. Toole says, use a neutral basis and the "good ol' tone controls" of your amplifier per recording, although unfortunately most modern "highend" amps don't have such...

I also like from this article Bass -- How Much Is Enough? following incident:

In an e-mail exchange about this article, fellow SoundStage! writer Brent Butterworth told me about something that happened in 2001, when he worked at Dolby Labs. An audio journalist had asked him for some information about setting subwoofer levels, so Brent talked to a Dolby engineer who could recall all of the significant research that had ever been done on the subject, and who then proceeded to describe it all to him. When he was done, Brent asked, “So what should I tell the journalist?” The wise engineer replied, “Just set it by ear.”



I have the feeling we hifi guys often hunt a perfection that actually doesn't exist.

 

[mitchco]

Bill, I would agree with @QMuse and @thewas_ to go for a partial correction to 500 Hz.

Btw, it would be great to see a screen shot of both channels at the same time. You can CTRL click the 2nd channel to get both to display. No big deal, but looking at the response, 500 Hz looks like a good start for a partial correction.

And yes, the default target of 4 to 5 dB slope sounds too bright for me as well. Finally, to your comment, it may be the first time you are hearing a smooth bass/lower mids and may not sound as "exciting" especially with that 200 Hz to 400 Hz warm bump