Please back away from issuing personal insults. A member with over 2600 posts and 3200 likes could hardly be a troll. You know better and I’m going to leave it there. We all have bad days.you must be trolling
Please back away from issuing personal insults. A member with over 2600 posts and 3200 likes could hardly be a troll. You know better and I’m going to leave it there. We all have bad days.you must be trolling
And that's why I said the listening tests that showed those methods are preferred would likely valid for ART as well. They "occupy the same space." Not complicated.So what? Your first self-quote above is still referring to techniques that involve subwoofers without ART processing and without metres of absorption. Yet, as per your words, they do the same thing as ART.
It was there originally. You should not have omitted it.Your second self-quote conveniently adds the term ‘traditionally-implemented’ in order to exclude the techniques I am talking about.
The fact something exists doesn't make it relevant to the market place. I'd be surprised if a single member of this board has used either of them. I don't know of any well known room EQ that uses them.Makes you look good in your own eyes, but it’s irrelevant to my points, because my point is that these ‘non-traditionally-implemented’ techniques exist and, as per your words, do the same thing.
Specifically you were asking for:Which has been my entire point from the start. All the way from post #180.
You were provided with it. It should have ended there. If you choose not to accept it (without offering any contrary evidence), I can't help you.I was asking about experimental psychoacoustic evidence (not by Dirac of course), relating to the audibility (and preference) of reducing the room reverb decay time at bass frequencies, to the degree that ART achieves, compared to multiple subs crossing to main drivers and all expertly equalized up to 300-500 hz.
Could you elaborate?... certain subwoofer implementations that DO deliver reduced room reverb delay...
The marketing has officially won!It's a game changer even if you remove the "Active Room Treatment" part out of it. The level of control it gives over bass management to the user is on the level one could only obtain previously with a Trinnov. Bringing that level of control to processors/AVRs that cost a fraction of that is, by itself, a game changer in my opinion.
Then you add in the "ART" part, and it can make a $5K Denon do things even a Trinnov can't do.
So you've never heard of "Room Treatment" consisting of absorbers several feet thick, "bass traps" active and passive, Helmholtz resonators, etc? Clearly, anybody with a brain realizes for any system that only works up to 150 Hz, that's the type of treatment they're talking about replacing. Nobody has ever suggested this system is a replacement for 2" thick absorbers for mid-high frequencies. The mid and high frequencies are quite easy to "treat" in comparison, so they're much less of an issue for most users.
Yeah, no. GLM doesn't do anything similar to what ART does. Maybe you need to read the "marketing material" a little more closely.
No, the measurements have.The marketing has officially won!
That's precisely the point. Very few people have treatments effective enough in the low bass to obtain similar results. Because they are so impractical. In other words, most people will never get similar results from common treatments and EQ. Therefore, a tool which allows them to even take a step in that direction without the impractical treatments may be a useful tool indeed.If this system reduces the need for room treatment, that's fine. But then you list room treatment systems that are extremely atypical, and you say it like you think you are winning your argument, while simultaneously unaware that these things are not "typical room treatment"?
Not for long. You do realize there's an expiration date on that, right? Afterward the "joke will be on" who?Well, I guess the joke is on you! According to Dirac's website, "Dirac ART" is currently only available on Storm Audio processors.
If that's what you really wanted, you could have just said something about the 8381As, instead of dredging up a comment nearly three weeks old to restart the same argument everybody else had let die.Can we go back to talking about the 8381As now?
No, the measurements have.
That's precisely the point. Very few people have treatments effective enough in the low bass to obtain similar results. Because they are so impractical. In other words, most people will never get similar results from common treatments and EQ. Therefore, a tool which allows them to even take a step in that direction without the impractical treatments may be a useful tool indeed.
Not for long. You do realize there's an expiration date on that, right? Afterward the "joke will be on" who?
If that's what you really wanted, you could have just said something about the 8381As, instead of dredging up a comment nearly three weeks old to restart the same argument everybody else had let die.
Of course it can. I have considered this and looked into it. I'm guessing you have not.It can't possibly anything to do with hardware limitations and signal processing limitations!
First, I've never said a single bad word about GLM (other than the fact it does not reduce decay time in bass frequencies, but recommends bass traps for that--that wasn't a bad word, just a statement of fact). All different room correction systems have strengths and weaknesses, one should be able to discuss them without getting defensive and taking it as an attack on their favored brand. Heck, even Audyssey has some capabilities I like that Dirac does not have.I can explain why Genelec's GLM is vastly superior to Dirac.
Are you under the impression that if one has say, a pair of 8320A's that GLM will mess with the crossover between the tweeter and midwoofer? If so, I don't think you're correct about that. Yes, for the 8381A it is adjusting more than one crossover in the bass in that speaker, but my understanding is this is a new capability specific to that speaker alone.In particular, it allows Genelec to adjust crossover points and slopes based on measurements.
Dirac is used with active speakers all the time. No, it doesn't redesign your speakers or crossovers (not really something one should expect from room correction) but it does attempt to phase/time align each individual driver in each speaker--active or passive.In comparison, Dirac is inferior because it will be used with passive speakers, so they have no control over the speaker design or the crossovers.
Which is why some of us are happy to see new products enter the market which have the potential to do so. I guess this doesn't apply to everybody, specifically the fervently brand loyal.I already said it would be great for a consumer level system to provide better low frequency control for multiple subs.
OK, you're going to need to back that up with something very specific if you want to be taken seriously.But it is clear that your expectations far outpace what is physically possible.
LOL! I'm glad you found your new religion! ..... Which is why you gotta settle down! ..... But please, continue to preach....
I believe those 4 drivers are 5” they are not tweeters. That would give you a sense of the size of these.Appears to me that a lot of companies are using that "tweeter surrounded by other tweeters (that serve as a giant mid-range driver)" a great big coaxial speaker if you will. Shocked me to see Genelec use this configuration....I've others use it before.
Thank you, didn't realize that they were 5 inch drivers. However, that brings them into a configuration of several speakers that I'm familiar with (that would be the Legacy Whispers and the Helix). It's not a"beautiful" speaker, but I've heard Channa's immersive mix over on YouTube coming out of the 8381's. Pretty impressive - and as far as the listeners reaction - everyone seemed to be impressed.I believe those 4 drivers are 5” they are not tweeters. That would give you a sense of the size of these.
Wow I’ve never heard them. Did you go to Natick? I bet they sound glorious. The entire ones series will just blow your mind. It was like VR for audio.Thank you, didn't realize that they were 5 inch drivers. However, that brings them into a configuration of several speakers that I'm familiar with (that would be the Legacy Whispers and the Helix). It's not a"beautiful" speaker, but I've heard Channa's immersive mix over on YouTube coming out of the 8381's. Pretty impressive - and as far as the listeners reaction - everyone seemed to be impressed.
No, I didn't attend, Channa's video popped up on my feed last night....impressed indeed!Wow I’ve never heard them. Did you go to Natick? I bet they sound glorious. The entire ones series will just blow your mind. It was like VR for audio.
Have I got this right? You've listened to your system playing a YT video of the Genelecs playing something and felt able to judge the Genelecs? Hmm.No, I didn't attend, Channa's video popped up on my feed last night....impressed indeed!
Who is Channa?No, I didn't attend, Channa's video popped up on my feed last night....impressed indeed!
He's an immersive sound mixer that does shows with "Joe N Tell" and with Erin ...he's known as Channa D. The demo I saw was from the NAMM show.Who is Channa?
No...no...and...no. I listened to a YT video and I judged Channa's immersive mix as presented by the Genelecs...through my own speakers. It was quite convincing, especially if you can throw a persay 270 degree image when I'm only using stereo speakers. It was quite wild!Have I got this right? You've listened to your system playing a YT video of the Genelecs playing something and felt able to judge the Genelecs? Hmm.