Does digital room correction and equalization make all speakers sound the same?

JackD201

[WBF Founding Member]
Apr 21, 2010
10,986
1
38
Manila, Philippines
#2
Nope :) There's more to it than FR at a mic's position. No doubt DRC can help, just not THAT much.
 

YashN

New Member
Jun 29, 2015
963
0
0
Canada
#4
No, won't happen because music reproduction and SQ don't rely solely on the Frequency Response profile.

They rely a lot also on how transients, especially attack transients are reproduced. EQ cannot correct deficiencies there (but can introduce more). Furthermore, how attack transients are reproduced are also a function of the hardware limitations in the speaker sets.

I'd also strongly recommend people work on organic, acoustic isolation rather than head for DSP processing straight away.
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,070
1
38
#5
maybe it will make those speakers sound the same....

but how 10 sets of likely decent bang-for-the-buck, but none-the-less mid fi, speakers and electronics sound is just not telling us much about anything.

no one pushing for ultimate sound is getting near that gear. but as a way to make particular price points a step better (or less confused) this is relevant. you are more likely to find 'gross' levels of challenging room conditions with more entry level gear and systems. and it might be more cost efficient to throw DRC at these situations than higher cost gear.
 
May 30, 2010
13,901
3
38
Portugal
#6
The few spectra shown without Dirac evidence a general wide prominent large peak excess of 10-15 dB between 100 and 200 Hz - probably due to room interaction. Such excess will probably affect speaker performance significantly - in such poor circumstances I can easily admit that Dirac can improve sound quality.
 
Jan 29, 2014
983
0
0
Cape Town South Africa
#7
considering that DRC generally works on a target curve that is taste inspired .. no .....even if you use the same target curve on different speakers , their flavour comes thru anyway.
 
#8
A study that I put on my forum concluded that the thing that makes speakers most desirable for most people is have great off-axis response as well as flat frequency response. Different speakers behave differently depending on their placement and toe-in. Optimizing one and putting another in its place will likely not be optimum for the second one. Polar responses vary as back-waves are different. Diffraction due to cabinet shape is also an issue making one different from another. Crossover points and the quality of crossover components (inductors, caps, resistors) will make a huge difference in the SQ. Another thing is dynamic response. None of these things are addressed by room/speaker correction. It's useful IMO to eliminate bad room resonances, but there are other equally effective ways to do this, such as aiming the listener into a corner.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Feb 8, 2011
18,730
0
36
Vancouver Island, B.C. Canada
#9
An evaluation of ten different speakers of ten different brands, with and without Dirac Live, by a panel of three different trained listeners is in progress here:
https://www.avnirvana.com/threads/a...ent-tower-speakers-1200-or-less-results.1640/

Flavio :)
Hey cool link there; I recognize few distributors/contributors/sellers/posters.

Timbre matching is obviously best performed by having identical speakers all around. If absolutely impossible, THX over imposed with Dirac Live could be an alternative. Not 100% sure though.

We all know that each loudspeaker's position produce a different acoustic sound.
And what we hear @ the main listening sweet spot is relative to those speaker's position in that acoustic environment. Other listening positions have variable bass content and high frequencies' differentiations.

EQ is also time arrival from each speaker @ the listener(s) ears on cue (equal time) and coherence.
Can Dirac Live do that? That's the goal.

I've read some from some other sites, regarding Dirac Live implementation in some of them audio products that espoused it. ...With more or less success.

Different mid-range and tweeter drivers have different sound properties, characteristics, acoustical propagation. Can magic make them sound equally the same? If DSP can do that then the future might look just a little brighter. Short of that we simply buy eleven the same speakers (7.1.4) ... maybe not the ones on/in the ceiling. ...Not if the seven ones @ ear level are from the full range tower variety. And then we let the magic of DSP performs its stuff; EQuing in time and frequency domain in tandem with room's acoustics...digital filters.

I just had a brief look to your link...I will observe the rest of it; you never know...they probably omitted important parameters in that Dirac Live comparison business analysis.

Good question and good link sharing Flavio. I'm looking forward to learn more, with good exchanges and common sharing. It's good to be biased, that way we know we are not perfect. :b

Cheers,
Bob

* I'm here to learn, from the best.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2017
496
0
16
USA
#10
Said differently, two speakers that measure extremely flat in anechoic chamber can sound, image and engage very differently from each other (even very expensive speakers) for many of the reasons stated.
 
#11
I've read the full short thread, and beyond.
I like the cordialité, jovialité and expertise in the sound measurements and in the positive subjective taste towards Dirac Live digital equalization. ...Hi-Fi stereo sound...two front channels with one sweet spot.

It's a good bunch of audio enthusiasts there since they were kids. ...Just like here.

They are certainly Dirac Live oriented after their extensive experiment...and still going on. It is a constant process in order to improve, upgrade and energise the sound field.
Ears don't lie, rooms don't lie, audio gear don't lie, measurements don't lie, Live don't lie. The only thing to keep in check is . . . distortion and listening fatigue that we became unawared off till we hear pure unaltered sound from the best electronics and loudspeakers in a perfectly acoustically treated room.

There was no fatigue analysis, just pleasant sound provided by direct Dirac...Pure Audio mode from natural Yamaha AVENTAGE.

The 88 I believe is good for eight channels, but stereo only requires two of them. The other six are for home theater...7.1
° https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series/ddrc-88a

Dirac Live has a dedicated stereo unit I believe, so for stereo audiophiles who desire and aspire to the best sound, that unit is all you need. ...For the purists, because the other six channels aren't necessary, or unless with your stereo speakers you are using six subwoofers, one in each corner and two more right behind you...for a good dose of Black Sabbath.

I enjoyed reading their comments. They look like a friendly bunch who want no pressure and no argument from the social world of audio nirvana. It is what it is with a door sealed tight so that no sound can escape.
That's my kind of place...I am registering so that I can learn from the pros on audio, music, films, Dirac Live, all that jazz.

Thank you again Flavio for sharing an educative link that we can all use to learn more about what drives us all insane in this very sane world we all live in today. ;-)

Cheers,
___

* Bonus (humor touch):

 
Last edited:

Flak

New Member
Nov 16, 2013
49
0
0
#12
A few notations...
- passive treatment and digital room correction cohesist well... actually I read that "corner bass traps and absorptive panels at critical first-reflection points, including on the ceiling" are present in that listening room
- impulse response (that affects transients) is corrected together with frequency response by Dirac Live even if they don't show the Dirac's IR graphs
https://www.dirac.com/dirac-blog/2016/7/1/4-types-of-distortion

:) Flavio
 
#13
I am reading Markus analyses of Dirac Live implementation in the new Arcam receivers, and in the newest NAD receiver...@ AVS. Plus, Jerry's thread on the Dirac Live 8-channel unit, with Markus and Roger contributions. Emotiva also has implemented Dirac Live in its two multichannel pre/pros, one with eight and the latest with sixteen DL equalization.

We are learning about proper bass management, proper channel levels, and how to optimize everything with each receiver and SSP under use; as implemented or separated.

Markus is the audio guru to go to, on Dirac Live, bass management, and much more. ...One of the top audio scientist contributors alive today.
I also keep track with AVF, from the UK side...on Dirac Live. There are few smart contributors there too.

Trinnov, Steinway Lyngdorf — Datasat, Acurate, and DSP speakers from B&O.
Ask those guys @ avnirvana (Sonnie) to check the Beolab 90 loudspeakers.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2017
496
0
16
USA
#14
A few notations...
- passive treatment and digital room correction cohesist well... actually I read that "corner bass traps and absorptive panels at critical first-reflection points, including on the ceiling" are present in that listening room
- impulse response (that affects transients) is corrected together with frequency response by Dirac Live even if they don't show the Dirac's IR graphs
https://www.dirac.com/dirac-blog/2016/7/1/4-types-of-distortion

:) Flavio
Ya but the tough part is they can't coexist well in an analog only system. Can't have all of those 000's and 111's getting in front of my TT. I love the concept of DSP on paper but completely avoided it and went 100% toward room optimization.
 
#15
Some TTs have a USB port.
Analog with DSP is the future ...
DSP in the speakers.

Bryston, Canada, is not into room EQ with their SSPs, Classe, but they do have some digital bass management.

For stereo analog purists, we have analog planet.
For stereo digital sinners, we have filters, compression, volume limiter, dynamic range expansion, lossy res audio files, MQA, and lossless too, Tidal.

The avnirvana experiment used an Oppo 205 as the digital source...stereo.
Now, what they need to do is to compare with an analog rig containing a say $2,500 turntable/arm/cart/phono preamp combination.
The digital rig being Dirac Live equed, and the analog one not.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2017
496
0
16
USA
#16
May 30, 2010
13,901
3
38
Portugal
#17