I struggle to understand this. I've seen some discussions of this on other hifi forums, but they quickly become very heated, and attract people who have vested interests in the issue. And they quickly become so technical that I end up being more confused than I was.
Here on the forum there are some different approaches. Cosmik thinks that room correction is "fundamentally not valid". Amir uses Dirac Live only in the bass region, but not higher up. While quite a lot of other forum members are using stuff like Acourate to correct for the room response all the way up. As for me, I'm using Dirac in the bass region when I'm listening in the near-field, as I find that it introduces something artifical higher up. In the far-field however, I find that it's a net improvement to correct everything.
Alrighty, then. What are the theoretical and objective arguments for and against different types of room corection? Hope I'll end up being more enlightened as a result of this discussion
Here on the forum there are some different approaches. Cosmik thinks that room correction is "fundamentally not valid". Amir uses Dirac Live only in the bass region, but not higher up. While quite a lot of other forum members are using stuff like Acourate to correct for the room response all the way up. As for me, I'm using Dirac in the bass region when I'm listening in the near-field, as I find that it introduces something artifical higher up. In the far-field however, I find that it's a net improvement to correct everything.
Alrighty, then. What are the theoretical and objective arguments for and against different types of room corection? Hope I'll end up being more enlightened as a result of this discussion