Neumann MA1 vs. Dirac Live Bass Control (DLBC) - Dual KH750 subs

[Davide]

I think i could have done that by utilizing the surround speakers, but it is too late now.

Don't worry, it was just a curiosity.
However, the step response of the two systems is interesting. The proprietary system has that particular attack on both channels which I wonder what is causing it, after which it goes away cleaner.
Dirac, on the other hand, is complex to understand how acts in this sense. Many peaks after the fundamental, but I doubt that some are due to time non-alignment.
Can you measure the step response without correction?

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Don't worry, it was just a curiosity.
However, the step response of the two systems is interesting. The proprietary system has that particular attack on both channels which I wonder what is causing it, after which it goes away cleaner.
Dirac, on the other hand, is complex to understand how acts in this sense. Many peaks after the fundamental, but I doubt that some are due to time non-alignment.
Can you measure the step response without correction?

Yes, but only for a KH310 without sub. Here it is with an without FDW, left channel only.
The "pre-ringing" (is this the correct term?) happens only with the MA1.

Additionally with uncorrected subs:

And phase uncorrected vs. corrected:

 

[ernestcarl]

The "pre-ringing" (is this the correct term?) happens only with the MA1.

Some of that may be the result of pushing the sub's start time a bit early as opposed to the mains -- so it may not be all of it the result of excessive FIR phase linearization correction.

I prefer to use the % vertical scale in the step response view overlay window. If I want those type of looking plots, might as well use the ETC, IMO... Those two aforementioned are a lot less "busy" and may be easier to read.

Wavelet spectrogram could be an alternative here: use 1/2 or 1/3 resolution and Log (dB SPL) as your amplitude parameter to get a better visualization.



In the last graph, we see a bit of pre-echo and ripple that occurs early due to FIR phase correction but (in this case) it's not audibly significant.

 

[Davide]

Yes, but only for a KH310 without sub. Here it is with an without FDW, left channel only.
The "pre-ringing" (is this the correct term?) happens only with the MA1.

View attachment 273374
View attachment 273375

Additionally with uncorrected subs:
View attachment 273378


And phase uncorrected vs. corrected:
View attachment 273376

Thanks!
From step response graphs it seems to me that Dirac has a strong preference for frequency correction over excess phase, yet on the group delay graph Dirac has only that peak in the crossover region with respect to MA. Probably this result is due to the windowing of the group delay, which in fact I believe reflects the actual human perception. In this case it is a remarkable result compared to the presumably lower delay and computational power required (due to IIR filters).

Anyway, technicalities aside... do you perceive differences in the low freq between the two systems?

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Anyway, technicalities aside... do you perceive differences in the low freq between the two systems?

Unfortunately, I had misjudged my time when I started the trial period for DLBC and only managed to compare it with the measurements on the last day. Unfortunately, I had no time left for a listening comparison. When I was about to do that in the afternoon, the trial period had just expired.

 

[Davide]

Unfortunately, I had misjudged my time when I started the trial period for DLBC and only managed to compare it with the measurements on the last day. Unfortunately, I had no time left for a listening comparison. When I was about to do that in the afternoon, the trial period had just expired.

That's what I would have done too!

However you can start another trial with another email address... so to speak

 

[ernestcarl]

... on the group delay graph Dirac has only that peak in the crossover region with respect to MA. Probably this result is due to the windowing of the group delay, which in fact I believe reflects the actual human perception. In this case it is a remarkable result compared to the presumably lower delay and computational power required (due to IIR filters).

Even so, my suspicion and prior experience is that if we were to equalize either to have the exact same identical frequency magnitude response -- really, when done correctly with the right experimental controls -- the bass EQ and sub-mains xo alignment with better time-domain performance is going to likely sound more clearly loud/intense -- "coherent" even. But in this case, though, the difference in magnitude frequency may be enough to obfuscate and steer actual listening results in favor of Dirac.

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

Hi,
I read you rcomment in the "How not to set up speakers"-thread and there may be an important psychological thing, you may want to consider:
What is the base of happyness? Being satisfied with what you have.
You can have a yacht, but there surely is someone with a bigger yacht.
You can have the car of your dreams, but there surely is a newer and better one.

And we humans are creatures of habit. That means we tend to take what we have as normal. And the ONLY way to escape that trap, is by actively and consciously remind oneself, what we have got.

Why may that be important for you:
People start to optimize their setups, without knowing what they really want to achieve.
They measure and tweak, but they have no clear picture, of their goal. Then you are on a path of entrapment. You wil end up buying a Porsche and still want more.
While I don't want another car not even as gift. Why? Because I am aware, every time I sit in my car, that I am sitting, my luggage is carried for me, and I will reach my destination dry, warm or cool, independently of the weather.
I am aware, all the time, of what I have. That's the foundation to be happy with my car.

That means, before you do any more tweaking, you must find out, what kind of sound you want to have exactly.
And by that I mean be specific.
For example: I always wanted a warm, wooden sounding room. That was the base. And the woodenpanels gave me the sound, I wanted.

Maybe you a missing the warmth? I only see hard walls in you rroom. I wouldn't feel comfortable in it.
I think that rooms with hard walls sound cold. And putting absorrbers into it, does not create the warm reverb I like.
Maybe that's something you may want to consider. But to do that, you must KNOW, if you miss the warmth of a wooden, diffuse reverb tail.

Or maybe it's something else. You must find out, what specifically you are missing.

Think of the car: I want to move from A to B, independently of any wheather and I don't want to carry my luggage. Give me a 20 year old car, and I am more happy, than anyone with a Porsche, who doesn't know, what he really wants.

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Hi,
I read you rcomment in the "How not to set up speakers"-thread and there may be an important psychological thing, you may want to consider:
What is the base of happyness? Being satisfied with what you have.
You can have a yacht, but there surely is someone with a bigger yacht.
You can have the car of your dreams, but there surely is a newer and better one.

And we humans are creatures of habit. That means we tend to take what we have as normal. And the ONLY way to escape that trap, is by actively and consciously remind oneself, what we have got.

Why may that be important for you:
People start to optimize their setups, without knowing what they really want to achieve.
They measure and tweak, but they have no clear picture, of their goal. Then you are on a path of entrapment. You wil end up buying a Porsche and still want more.
While I don't want another car not even as gift. Why? Because I am aware, every time I sit in my car, that I am sitting, my luggage is carried for me, and I will reach my destination dry, warm or cool, independently of the weather.
I am aware, all the time, of what I have. That's the foundation to be happy with my car.

That means, before you do any more tweaking, you must find out, what kind of sound you want to have exactly.
And by that I mean be specific.
For example: I always wanted a warm, wooden sounding room. That was the base. And the woodenpanels gave me the sound, I wanted.

Maybe you a missing the warmth? I only see hard walls in you rroom. I wouldn't feel comfortable in it.
I think that rooms with hard walls sound cold. And putting absorrbers into it, does not create the warm reverb I like.
Maybe that's something you may want to consider. But to do that, you must KNOW, if you miss the warmth of a wooden, diffuse reverb tail.

Or maybe it's something else. You must find out, what specifically you are missing.

Think of the car: I want to move from A to B, independently of any wheather and I don't want to carry my luggage. Give me a 20 year old car, and I am more happy, than anyone with a Porsche, who doesn't know, what he really wants.

Yes, i think the best thing i could do is visiting a good studio somewhere and just listen how it sounds to get a reference point.
A very interesting experience was listening to the 50.000 EUR Sennheiser HE-1 and realising it is just a headphone. With less flaws than others, but not in a different "magical" category.

 

[Drengur]

Listening to multiple 100.000$+ speakers in a weekend cured my father from audiophile anxiety. He has been very happy with his ca. 10.000$ setup since.

 

[Hexspa]

From what I understand of the REW manual, phase doesn’t directly tell you anything useful regarding applying room correction EQ. You want to look at Excess Phase after generating a minimum phase comparison. This compares your measurement to a theoretical minimum phase response and shows you where applied EQ will be effective. Besides that, I understand phase shift to be inaudible.

For a recording space, you want your impulse response envelope peaks -10 to -15dB within 20 to 40ms with a regular pattern and be spectrally similar. It looks like you have loud reflections around 30ms which would happen from a rear wall ~14’ away. If your rear wall is not absorbed, I would try damping it.

Regarding nulls, windows and doors can have an effect on symmetry but so can unseen hidden elements inside the walls. Your primary destructive interference will come at 1/4 wavelength distances so find the null frequency’s wavelength, divide by 4, and use a tape measure from either your speaker or microphone and see which boundary you hit. It doesn’t need to be between the mic and speaker - it can be 360 degrees. You might also check 3/4 wavelength.

MA1 probably rolls off 20Hz for a few reasons: most signals have little information there, sonically it may be more pleasing and they know what subs you’re using so they might be tailoring the FR to match the sub’s rolloff, lowering distortion.

Overall, your SPL response is good and it’s my opinion people fixate on it out of proportion. You also need to observe your decay at various locations and determine whether you’re meeting your target. If you don’t have a target, you can use -20dB within 150ms above 63Hz with a smooth taper. Interestingly, decay is not the same at every point in the room and you can’t determine it via averaging afaik so take measurements at several points.

 

[Digital_Thor]

I avoided most nulls between subs and mains, by having mains that play bass as a first or second order slope below around 80Hz. Then let the subs overlap, but with a much sharper slope.
I merely do 'kinda' what Earl Geddes does.
The low order filter on the mains and the overlap, leaves way less phase problems to deal with

 

[dziemian]

The more subs you use the bigger diffrence there will be. Dirac treats all the subs simultanously.

 

[DJBonoBobo]

The more subs you use the bigger diffrence there will be. Dirac treats all the subs simultanously.

The new multichannel extension for MA1 supports up to 4 subs, but with additional cost. I wonder how this and the whole multichannel thing compares to DLBC.
Hopefully someone will try it.

 

[dziemian]

The new multichannel extension for MA1 supports up to 4 subs, but with additional cost. I wonder how this and the whole multichannel thing compares to DLBC.
Hopefully someone will try it.

Yes, but all these 4 subs are treated separately. The same does Acourate and Audiolense while Dirac's DLBC treats them all at once. The free software Multisub Optimizer is the closest in approach if you want to deal with multisubs.

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Yes, but all these 4 subs are treated separately. The same does Acourate and Audiolense while Dirac's DLBC treats them all at once. The free software Multisub Optimizer is the closest in approach if you want to deal with multisubs.

How do you know and what do you mean with "separately" vs. "all at once"?

 

[dziemian]

How do you know and what do you mean with "separately" vs. "all at once"?

Dirac and multi sub takes into account all the subs available and how they interact with each other. Acourate, audiolense,deqx,neumann measure aech sub channel individually.

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Dirac and multi sub takes into account all the subs available and how they interact with each other. Acourate, audiolense,deqx,neumann measure aech sub channel individually.

How do you know Neumann does not take into account how subs interact? I think my measurements show the opposite.

 

[dziemian]

How do you know Neumann does not take into account how subs interact? I think my measurements show the opposite.

Well, just ask Neumann technixal support. Here is how Dirac DLBC works.

Dirac Live Bass Control

Dirac Live Bass Control. Automate subwoofer optimization for a strong, smooth, and refined bass response in all listening positions.

www.dirac.com

And multisub optimizer

Multiple Subwoofers: Optimize Them With Multi-Sub Optimizer Software

The benefits of multiple subwoofers are maximized using Multi-Sub Optimizer software for lowest seat-to-seat frequency response variation and highest SPL.

www.andyc.diy-audio-engineering.org

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Well, just ask Neumann technixal support. Here is how Dirac DLBC works.

Dirac Live Bass Control

Dirac Live Bass Control. Automate subwoofer optimization for a strong, smooth, and refined bass response in all listening positions.

www.dirac.com

You are avoiding my question.