• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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 Reviews

To use the Sonarworks program, you do not need the Internet at all. That’s why I wrote that being tied to a permanent Internet connection is Dirac’s big drawbackak
Make sure that Dirac Live Processor is running and your audio interface is selected as a source. Then open Dirac Live application.
Dirac-processor.jpg
 
Make sure that Dirac Live Processor is running and your audio interface is selected as a source. Then open Dirac Live application.
Hahahaha. Dude, you are wrong to think that you are the only one who knows how to use the program.

My verdict remains the same - Dirac's studio version DOES NOT WORK

Dirac sees only the built-in speakers of the MacBook, he does not notice other interfaces
 
Try to be more polite and not arrogant.
"Hahahaha. Dude, you are wrong to think that you are the only one who knows how to use the program."
DUDE, you have a problem not me, so good luck
Hi all,
this reminds me a little bit of the IT crowd persiflage with "have you tried to turn your PC off and on again" and the rage of frustrated end users...

As an engineer with a master degree in electrical engineering that ended up to work a long time in a server software company in the major accounts support team with the mid of the nineties economic crisis i learned a lot to deal with frustrated IT administrators that often lack of a deeper knowledge of the software they are trying to administer.

My son worked in school to support frustrated Apple Mac <whatever> classmates, a lot of them had not the foggiest idea of the function of a PC at all.

I am quite sure that what the frustrated end user @landco is reporting is quoted correctly like the Dirac studio version "DO NOT WORK" for "HIM" - and not "IN GENERAL"

So far - so good, Stefano
 
Last edited:
Hi all, this reminds me a little bit of the IT crowd persiflage with "have you tried to turn your PC off and on again" and the rage of frustrated end users...

As an engineer with a master degree in electrical engineering that ended up to work a long time in a server software company in the major accounts support team with the mid of the nineties economic crisis i learned a lot to deal with frustrated IT administrators that often lack of a deeper knowledge of the software they are trying to administer.

My son worked in school to support frustrated Apple Mac <whatever> classmates, a lot of them had not the foggiest idea of the function of a PC at all.

I am quite sure that what the frustrated end user @landco is reporting is quoted correctly like the Dirac studio version "DO NOT WORK" for him - and not in general

So far - so good, Stefano

Suddenly, people came into the topic who seriously believe that MacBook users are something like the blonde from the joke about blondes.

In the studio version of Dirac for Mac OS it is impossible to select an interface other than the built-in speakers of the MacBook

And a guy who believes that only he can find an item in a program submenu does not deserve attention.
 
Thread Warning. Obviously tempers are flaring and egos are getting out of hand. Maintain your composure and treat each other with respect and dignity. If you feel that you have been insulted. Don’t reply to this insult with your own. Report the post and let your friendly Moderator do the dirty work. If you reply with your own insult you may find yourself in as much trouble as the instigator. If you can’t be polite and sociable don’t post. ;)

No more free passes will be given to any further violations of the above request.
 
Hello! I must share my unpleasant experience of interacting with Dirac.



I installed the studio (Desktop) version of the program for PC.

Nothing works, Dirac only sees the built-in speakers of the MacBook, and it is impossible to force him to see another audio interface.



The program periodically glitches and crashes. A terrible uninstaller, or rather, the lack of one, so even after deleting the program, it, like a virus, continues to work in RAM, you have to find each folder and delete it manually.

The program is very dependent on having an Internet connection, which is very inconvenient at times.

In general, there is a lack of functionality and fewer settings compared to its competitor - Sonarworks.

This is not what you expect to get by paying $500-800 for a license.
A few years ago I tried for several weeks to get it to run on my MacBook Pro, but never could get through the measurement process without error.

Ended up having to buy a really cheap windows machine to get it to work, which was not ideal.
 
On a Mac, I had to give the program permission for some things in settings due to security. I forget the exact procedure.
 
I have Dirac Live in a SHD (MiniDSP) 4 channels out to poweramp/speakers and two subs. I find it outstanding compared to Audessy on a Denon receiver.

This is an "apples to apples" comparison as the speakers/subs are the front of my Atmos system. I switch line out to change system type, as other people here do.

Dirac Live plus adding a second sub solved my base management problems. I now have big appropriate bass without room reflection issues.

Another improvement I particularly hear is more instrument separation with Dirac. But I also hear problems in recording I know well that were as much revealed in my Denon/Audessy system. In particular the sound stage can be unrealistically big with Dirac. I assume this comes from the recording being enginnered to sound big on lesser systems.

I also think the SHD may contribute by being an excellent crossover between my stereo bookshelf main speakers and the subs. While it is now pricey for four channels I don't regret the purchase.
It's an old thread, but maybe you can still help me out. I have a similar 2.2 setup with a 2x4HD plus KEF LS50 Metas MD two diy 10"subs. How did you do bass management with the minidsp in combination with Dirac?

Did you first set x-over and just adjust the overall volume of the subs according to the level of the main speakers and then run Dirac overall? Could you use any manual EQ for the subs and also delay for mains before running Dirac? I mean, can you combine manual EQ/delay and Dirac?

I stopped using Dirac 2 years ago and went fully manual with REW and rePhase for FIR filtering, but I want to give Dirac another try as I'm also mire experienced in measuring audio systems.

Thanks in advance!
Andreas
 
I have a similar 2.2 setup with a 2x4HD plus KEF LS50 Metas MD two diy 10"subs. How did you do bass management with the minidsp in combination with Dirac?
I'm sorry, but I'm wondering why people go to the trouble of buying unnecessary bass management devices?

Connect your subwoofer at high level (to the speaker output terminals), and then adjust the subwoofer's own crossover to match the natural low-frequency roll-off of your main front stereo pair. And then apply Dirac to this assembly. I use a similar setup and am quite pleased.
 
I'm sorry, but I'm wondering why people go to the trouble of buying unnecessary bass management devices?
There's at least 3 technical reasons why people might decide to implement bass management:
1) High-passing mains allows them to play somewhat cleaner (less IMD) and louder.
2) With the common 80Hz crossover point (and clever but realistic placement of mains and sub) the main SBIR dip (common cause of "bass suckout") can be avoided in the summed system response.
3) If using multiple subs, bass management (+DSP) allows you to optimize summed bass response up to the selected crossover point.

These 3 considerations might not be important to everyone, but it shows how it can be useful when tackling some common problems with audio reproduction.
 
I'm sorry, but I'm wondering why people go to the trouble of buying unnecessary bass management devices?

Connect your subwoofer at high level (to the speaker output terminals), and then adjust the subwoofer's own crossover to match the natural low-frequency roll-off of your main front stereo pair. And then apply Dirac to this assembly. I use a similar setup and am quite pleased.
Because high-level connection is the worst way to integrate subs. No proper time alignment and no proper bass management. You should consider that also your mains might play much better when they don't have to play below a certain frequency. That's especially valid for smaller bookshelf speakers.

With a high-level connection of your sub you will mist probably (depending on placement of speakers and sub) get quite some bad cancellations around the "x-over" frequency. Try and measure and you'll see. Maybe some of that is taken care of by Dirac, but that would not be the best way to do it.
 
No proper time alignment and no proper bass management.
The importance of phase distortion has been greatly exaggerated by audiophiles; tests show that its audible effect on sound is minimal

Apart from this argument, I don’t see a single argument against in your answer
 
You should consider that also your mains might play much better when they don't have to play below a certain frequency
This is another audiophile myth. Properly made speakers perform adequately at their possible frequencies, regardless of whether you cut the bass or not. There is no single blind test that proves your point.
 
This is another audiophile myth. Properly made speakers perform adequately at their possible frequencies, regardless of whether you cut the bass or not. There is no single blind test that proves your point.
Unless using a high pass filter (e.g. crossover), a speaker will attempt to play all frequencies being passed to it, including ones it cannot play without significant distortion. You're also using amplifier power to play frequencies that should be handled by the sub, and low frequencies require the most energy.
 
Unless using a high pass filter (e.g. crossover), a speaker will attempt to play all frequencies being passed to it, including ones it cannot play without significant distortion.

99% of speakers are built without a highpass filter on lf-driver and work great

You are just repeating audiophile stereotypes that have no relation to reality
 
No, you're spouting nonsense. 99% of speakers cannot play full range to the lowest bass frequencies without issue, and passing them to a dedicated subwoofer is common practice.

Amir has also noted improvements in the sound of speakers in his reviews when they implement a high pass filter because they cannot handle bass frequencies.

It's also a fact that low frequencies need the most energy to reproduce, hence why they are COMMONLY handed off to a dedicated subwoofer with its own dedicated amplification.
 
Last edited:
The importance of phase distortion has been greatly exaggerated by audiophiles; tests show that its audible effect on sound is minimal

Apart from this argument, I don’t see a single argument against in your answer

It is important to align the phase of your subwoofer to your mains. If not, you will get phase cancellation at the crossover band. If you are using a high level connection and not high passing your main speakers, your area of overlap will be huge. Because both mains and subs have variable group delay at low freqs, your potential for phase cancellation will be very high.
 
If you are using a high level connection and not high passing your main speakers, your area of overlap will be huge
You didn't read my comment carefully. The subwoofer's own crossover is adjusted to the natural roll-off of low frequencies in the main stereo pair; the rise in frequency response in the overlap area is not a problem for leveling with an equalizer.

Therefore, for stereo setups, I don’t see the point in paying $300/$500 for miniDSP + another $350 for a separate bass correction program from Dirac
 
Back
Top Bottom