My first attempt at Dirac this morning (on the 3800)

[OCA]

Still not understanding why Dirac exists!

Dirac Live applies some phase corrections and although I doubt the accuracy of these, Audyssey cannot do that at all. All its filters are in the frequency domain. Also Dirac Live can crossover subwoofer at any frequency (unlike the fixed frequencies of Audyssey) and has higher speaker distance (delay) level limits than Audyssey for the same receiver (I heard that from a trusted friend who tested both but did not yet confirm myself!)

If you don't want to put ANY effort and completely leave the system calibration to these automated systems, Dirac Live will almost always sound better than Audyssey.

Audyssey is infinitely more configurable than Dirac though and if you want to dedicate the time and effort and use MultEQ Editor ($20) or MultEQ-X ($200) apps, you can even completely bypass Audyssey and force it to use its FIR filters for your own calibration. Lastly, Audyssey has Dynamic EQ which adjusts correction for different volume levels according to equal loudness contours and Dirac lacks that. You will need multiple Dirac presets for different volume levels.

Dirac ART however, is in a totally different league and a game changer, nothing in the market other than Trinnov Waveform can match its MIMO capability.

 

[OCA]

if you spend a lot if time tweaking with the app and Ratbuddyssey

You can use my automation scripts now which are a lot faster and easier to implement:

AudysseyX_OCA.zip

Scripts and XL file used in the Audyssey ART video

drive.google.com

 

[ban25]

In my experience, Dirac is more effective in getting smoother bass with much less effort. You can achieve the same or eveb better in some ways if you spend a lot if time tweaking with the app and Ratbuddyssey or use the $200 MultEQ X.

Dirac also does a better job in the high frequencies for me too. It is a 3 minutes job to implement the sort of "Harman curve" using the 6 dB shelf filter. Actually I thought that's done by default, or selectable by one simple click, but I guess it depends on the version. I am confident you will like the result.

It defaults to neutral/flat, but like you said, you drag the left blue shelf up +6 dB and you are done...

 

[peng]

It defaults to neutral/flat, but like you said, you drag the left blue shelf up +6 dB and you are done...

I only have the PC version. This version would default to flat, but in the last couple updates, they changed it to default with the tilt. It probably does depend on the versions, and that may vary among different platforms, i.e. Onkyo/Integra/Pioneer, NAD, Arcam, Monolith, Storm, and now Denon/Marantz etc.

Default to the tilted curve is a smart move because most HT users likely would felt they were robbed with the bass when they use RC, that's what really gave Audyssey the bad name in the pass, especially with the MRC that was blown out of proportion by people who only knew half the story and then they convinced others the MRC is reason enough to avoid using Audyssey. Anthem did the smart thing not with a tilted/Harman curve, but it kept some of the room gain, that helped, except for those who cared to check with REW and saw the truth. If Dirac is smarter, they would have updated everyone to the tilted curve by now and more people would have been a lot happier. Harman did them a big favor, it has taken them too long to pay attention to Harman's finding.

 

[peng]

You can use my automation scripts now which are a lot faster and easier to implement:

AudysseyX_OCA.zip

Scripts and XL file used in the Audyssey ART video

drive.google.com

I appreciate it, but by the time you publish that, I have already traded in all my Denon that could have benefited from it.

 

[peng]

Dirac Live applies some phase corrections and although I doubt the accuracy of these, Audyssey cannot do that at all. All its filters are in the frequency domain. Also Dirac Live can crossover subwoofer at any frequency (unlike the fixed frequencies of Audyssey) and has higher speaker distance (delay) level limits than Audyssey for the same receiver (I heard that from a trusted friend who tested both but did not yet confirm myself!)

I think it is difficult to quantify its accuracy without a definition and/or reference point. In terms of effectiveness, based on my experience using the PC standalone version, with one subwoofer so far, it is quite good though it could not achieve the same flatness I managed to obtain using Audyssey with Ratbuddyssey, and two subs. Until I acquire a 4 channel DAC I cannot try DLBC to do two subs, because windows/Mac cannot really do 2.2.

The graph below shows with bass control, the curve is smoother, though I doubt there is audible difference. Also, in terms of "accuracy" based on flatness of the range from 20 to 300 Hz, Audyssey, if tweaked well, actually did better even without bass control.

Audyssey vs DLBC, both tweaked to the best I could:
Note: Note exactly apples-apples because with DLBC, I could only do it with Sub1, with Sub2 turned off

Dirac's impulse response was a little better.

 

[peng]

@peng and @Dj7675, appreciate the suggestion! I was hoping to not have to tinker too much since I spent so much money. Despite my best efforts, it looks like I'll have to "get with the program", especially since I invested in the UMIK-1.

Just as a confirmation: what you are asking me to do will simply bring me back to what I appreciated w/near-free Audyssey, right? Still not understanding why Dirac exists!

Question: Have you read the user's manual:

In my opinion, it is a must read manual as I found it written so well that probably most if not all users can benefit from it. I wish Audyssey has something like that, they do now if you spend $200 buying Mult EQ X. Anthem's not bad either, but can't touch Dirac's.

https://www.dirac.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/DiracLiveUserManual-1.pdf

At the minimum, read page 27:

 

[EWL5]

Question: Have you read the user's manual:

In my opinion, it is a must read manual as I found it written so well that probably most if not all users can benefit from it. I wish Audyssey has something like that, they do now if you spend $200 buying Mult EQ X. Anthem's not bad either, but can't touch Dirac's.

https://www.dirac.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/DiracLiveUserManual-1.pdf

At the minimum, read page 27:

View attachment 338213
View attachment 338214

View attachment 338216

No, I haven't read the manual. Thanks for the link! I hope to update my review of Dirac Live once I'm done!

 

[EWL5]

Dirac Live applies some phase corrections and although I doubt the accuracy of these, Audyssey cannot do that at all. All its filters are in the frequency domain. Also Dirac Live can crossover subwoofer at any frequency (unlike the fixed frequencies of Audyssey) and has higher speaker distance (delay) level limits than Audyssey for the same receiver (I heard that from a trusted friend who tested both but did not yet confirm myself!)

If you don't want to put ANY effort and completely leave the system calibration to these automated systems, Dirac Live will almost always sound better than Audyssey.

Audyssey is infinitely more configurable than Dirac though and if you want to dedicate the time and effort and use MultEQ Editor ($20) or MultEQ-X ($200) apps, you can even completely bypass Audyssey and force it to use its FIR filters for your own calibration. Lastly, Audyssey has Dynamic EQ which adjusts correction for different volume levels according to equal loudness contours and Dirac lacks that. You will need multiple Dirac presets for different volume levels.

Dirac ART however, is in a totally different league and a game changer, nothing in the market other than Trinnov Waveform can match its MIMO capability.

Speaking of phase, I do have a dial on the back of my SuperCube 1 that allows me to adjust the phase from 0-180 degrees. I have it on 90° right now but I'm sure it can be dialed in better. Could someone look at my SW curve and see if it could possibly be improved based on this setting alone? How do I figure the sweet spot?

 

[OCA]

Speaking of phase, I do have a dial on the back of my SuperCube 1 that allows me to adjust the phase from 0-180 degrees. I have it on 90° right now but I'm sure it can be dialed in better. Could someone look at my SW curve and see if it could possibly be improved based on this setting alone? How do I figure the sweet spot?

That dial is certainly useful but it's difficult to calculate the correct setting. It will depend on the crossover frequency, the phase responses of the other speakers, how flat do you want the bass frequency response to be (or else you can minimize group delay for more clarity but at a cost of more peaks and dips in the response). I guess the easiest practical way would be making an RTA measurement with REW and watch the combined response shape on screen while rotating the phase knob.

 

[EWL5]

That dial is certainly useful but it's difficult to calculate the correct setting. It will depend on the crossover frequency, the phase responses of the other speakers, how flat do you want the bass frequency response to be (or else you can minimize group delay for more clarity but at a cost of more peaks and dips in the response). I guess the easiest practical way would be making an RTA measurement with REW and watch the combined response shape on screen while rotating the phase knob.

RTA measurement and REW are beyond my current capabilities.

In the old days, I used a calibration disc like Avia and could almost swear that an in-phase SW would have the highest measured SPL. Any truth to this or am I misremembering?

 

[peng]

RTA measurement and REW are beyond my current capabilities.

In the old days, I used a calibration disc like Avia and could almost swear that an in-phase SW would have the highest measured SPL. Any truth to this or am I misremembering?

I believe Phil Jones said on Gene's Youtube channel that Denon/Marantz has updated (or will, have to watch that video again to catch what he actually said), such that even without the DLBC license, the basic DL will still do bass management such as setting crossovers and do time alignment. If that's true, it would be like Audyssey, the speakers and subs would be time aligned. That being the case, I don't recommend you touch the phase know at the back of the subwoofer, wherever it was prior to you running Audyssey, or DL, would be fine, though in general, Audyssey would suggest you leave the know at 0 degree.

If you don't use Audyssey or Dirac, then it may make sense to do what OCA suggested, if you do use Audyssey or DL, then I just don't see much point playing with that knob that only let you set it at one fixed position. I tried using it before, it never really worked well, mostly a waste of time.

 

[peng]

In the old days, I used a calibration disc like Avia and could almost swear that an in-phase SW would have the highest measured SPL. Any truth to this or am I misremembering?

True to some extent, but for reasons OCA cited, it is useful but difficult to find the best setting (he use the term "correct", I prefer "best", as wherever you put, it would be a compromise). That's why we need DLBC lol... Audyssey does warn you if you had your speakers connected out of phase.

 

[OCA]

Any truth to this or am I misremembering?

That's one way to adjust it. You will get the loudest overall bass response when speakers and the sub are in phase but it will probably have large peaks as well as many dips since phase will almost certainly be different at different frequencies. Still, I guess it will be an improvement and could make calibration software's job easier.

 

[tjcinnamon]

Thanks for the additonal Dirac reads! As I only have one SW and I know the reason for the missing midbass, I don't feel compelled to get DLBC. I can imagine some folks panicking and getting DLBC after what I just experienced w/o knowing the cause!

Bass control seems more trouble than it’s worth from what I’ve seen on the forums. Especially considering the cost.

 

[Dj7675]

[

Bass control seems more trouble than it’s worth from what I’ve seen on the forums. Especially considering the cost.

I guess it just depends on where you look… It is not hard to use, and results are quite good. There are other ways to achieve good results but it is a fairly point/click way to achieve very good results.

 

[Steve Dallas]

Bass control seems more trouble than it’s worth from what I’ve seen on the forums. Especially considering the cost.

This is the conclusion I am reaching. I can't even say I find Dirac to be better than XT32 if you know what you are doing. I am tempted to create a comparison thread with tons of graphs, but that will be a LOT of work.

Here are the bass frequencies of my 4800 with Revel F206s and SVS SB2000s (2) with and without DLBC. Other than time alignment, what exactly did I pay $350 for?

Purple and brown are Dirac Live. Green and blue are Dirac Live with DLBC.

 

[tjcinnamon]

This is the conclusion I am reaching. I can't even say I find Dirac to be better than XT32 if you know what you are doing. I am tempted to create a comparison thread with tons of graphs, but that will be a LOT of work.

Here are the bass frequencies of my Revel F206s and SVS SB2000s (2) with and without DLBC. Other than time alignment, what exactly did I pay $350 for?

Purple and brown are Dirac Live. Green and blue are Dirac Live with DLBC.

View attachment 338381

That’s been my criticism of DLBC. It doesn’t seem to be an improvement over Dirac Live yet it’s significant cost.

I liked Dirac Live over XT32 but I like MQX over Dirac Live but that took extra work and I’m sure they are at least equals. MSO for the subs and then REW for the LCR to import into MQX.

I’m hoping ART is best yet.

 

[tjcinnamon]

Post in thread 'Active Room Treatment (ART) by Dirac'
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...oom-treatment-art-by-dirac.40743/post-1831416

 

[OCA]

That’s been my criticism of DLBC. It doesn’t seem to be an improvement over Dirac Live yet it’s significant cost.

Maybe an optimal bass calibration method is in there with DLBC (which I personally also doubt) but they are also severely limited by the number of FIR taps available in the processors. A MiniDSP 2x4 has 1024 FIR taps per channel. The frequency resolution of a 1024 taps filter @ 48 kHz sample rate is 48000/1024 = 46.875 Hz. That means below 100 Hz for example you have just 2 frequency bins at 46.875Hz and 93.75 Hz. There's no way you can fix low bass problems with that. Audyssey XT32 uses a patented frequency warping technique to focus the limited number of taps to the problematic area to partially handle this problem. Storm Audio uses the highest number of taps in their machines and even they're very limited compared to 131,072 taps (2.73Hz minimum resolution) I regularly need with a PC for proper bass correction. In that respect, I wouldn't expect same Dirac ART performance from Sound United gear compared to Storm Audio, either. An AVR also needs to deal with the FIR filter delays and buffer uncompressed video continuously to compensate for the increasing number of taps so I don't expect anyone to come up with very high tap count receivers any time soon, too. I hope I am wrong.