Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am about to buy a new processor. Dirac is a major consideration for me so I have been looking at the Emotiva XMC-1. However, I am concerned with the 48Khz sampling rate of the version of Dirac used in the XMC-1. Would Dirac in the Mini DSP, with its 96Khz sample rate, be a superior choice? If it was my choice of processors might be different. In fact, I could still get the XMC-1 and use the Mini DSP if that was the best way to go. Any advice?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I run it on my server at 192kHz.
I thought the nanoAVR DL & HD could both accept 192Khz, but The literature seems to show the HD version actually samples at 48Khz and the DL version samples at 96KHz. Am I interpreting that correctly?
Kal, Am I correct that it is your opinion that the Mini DSP does not degrade the source input even though it adds a conversion to the process? If that is true, do you think EQ results equal to or better than the Emotiva's Dirac implementation with any processor? I am interested in the Marantz AV7702, because of ATMOS, but I do not want Audyssey XT32. What do you think the pro and cons of the Mini DSP nanoAVR DL relative to a built in application like Emotiva's?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Personally I would look at the Dirac Minidsp reason why is if you ever change your processor again you have got versatility to purchase whatever you like and add the Minidsp.
I agree is seems much more flexible. I know I could run my Oppo 93 through the Mini DSP, but I assume I could not use my AppleTV or DVR through it, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
I thought the nanoAVR DL & HD could both accept 192Khz, but The literature seems to show the HD version actually samples at 48Khz and the DL version samples at 96KHz. Am I interpreting that correctly?
Kal, Am I correct that it is your opinion that the Mini DSP does not degrade the source input even though it adds a conversion to the process? If that is true, do you think EQ results equal to or better than the Emotiva's Dirac implementation with any processor? I am interested in the Marantz AV7702, because of ATMOS, but I do not want Audyssey XT32. What do you think the pro and cons of the Mini DSP nanoAVR DL relative to a built in application like Emotiva's?
nanoAVR HD (no Dirac) is 96kHz.
nanoAVR DL (Dirac) is 48kHz.
They both accept inputs up to 192kHz.

FWIW you won't be able to use the nanoAVR's (either version) with Atmos since the nanoAVR's doesn't do any decoding. Input to the nanoAVR must be LPCM so it eliminates being able to use it with Atmos content. Also I don't know for certain but I'd bet that there aren't really any end user differences between the Dirac Live in the XMC-1 and nanoAVR DL.

I agree is seems much more flexible. I know I could run my Oppo 93 through the Mini DSP, but I assume I could not use my AppleTV or DVR through it, right?
There's 2 inputs on the nanoAVR's and you would always get an HDMI switch and hook up as many inputs as you'd like to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,919 Posts
I thought the nanoAVR DL & HD could both accept 192Khz, but The literature seems to show the HD version actually samples at 48Khz and the DL version samples at 96KHz. Am I interpreting that correctly?
Yup. I am running it on my server, not on the nanoAVR.

(1)Kal, Am I correct that it is your opinion that the Mini DSP does not degrade the source input even though it adds a conversion to the process?
(2)If that is true, do you think EQ results equal to or better than the Emotiva's Dirac implementation with any processor?
(3)I am interested in the Marantz AV7702, because of ATMOS, but I do not want Audyssey XT32. What do you think the pro and cons of the Mini DSP nanoAVR DL relative to a built in application like Emotiva's?
(1)Not quite. As I have said before, the A/D/A conversion is very good and the improvements wrought by the EQ greatly exceed any loss via the A/D/A.
(2)Not true but, in any case, I have no experience with Dirac on the Emotiva.
(3)There are some inconveniences in using the nanoAVR with more than 2 HDMI sources and it will not work for any non-HDMI sources. Still, I know nothing about the Emotiva.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,838 Posts
My understanding, as others have already stated, is that the interface and fundamental workings of Dirac Live itself will be product independent, assuming the same version of Dirac Live. HOWEVER, in the process of putting Dirac, or any other such processor, into an AVR or Preamp or gizmo like a miniDSP processor, there area processor MIPs budgets and memory limits to be dealt with, and the Dirac Live engineers have to make tradeoff decisions in the implementation of their technology into each target product. That can result in fewer filter taps, limits on filter Q, quality level of re-sampling (there are lots of algorithms to choose from), many decisions that affect the end results, usually in subtle ways, sometimes in bigger ways. Those decisions end up being proprietary and there is no way of finding out what they are without huge bribes (kidding!) or being related to the right person (might actually work). So it is conceivable that two such implementations will perform slightly different.

Kal's approach is the ideal - use a computer and give the program all the resources it needs to sound its best. ATMOS is the Dirac stomper so far, though, unless it is implemented in a preamp or AVR along with ATMOS or you run pre outs (post ATMOS) through a bank of Dirac processors... it gets messy.

"Best," as always, is relative to the user's needs, wants, ears, and budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Any new information on this regarding Atmos integration? I'm in the same boat, in the market for a new processor (xmc-1) but i'm concerned about what atmos will do to this product... (It's being considered as a flagship model from emotiva but already dated in the hardware) no outputs for ceiling speakers... and the version of dirac included seems like it might be inferior to a minidsp solution...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,919 Posts
Any new information on this regarding Atmos integration? I'm in the same boat, in the market for a new processor (xmc-1) but i'm concerned about what atmos will do to this product... (It's being considered as a flagship model from emotiva but already dated in the hardware) no outputs for ceiling speakers... and the version of dirac included seems like it might be inferior to a minidsp solution...
You have to decide what your priorities are. You can have HD Dirac and ATMOS at a price. If you have to compromise, you have to choose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Any new information on this regarding Atmos integration? I'm in the same boat, in the market for a new processor (xmc-1) but i'm concerned about what atmos will do to this product... (It's being considered as a flagship model from emotiva but already dated in the hardware) no outputs for ceiling speakers... and the version of dirac included seems like it might be inferior to a minidsp solution...
I own an XMC-1 and have been impressed with Dirac. It's ability to integrate my Kreisel DXD12012 Subwoofer Duo is really exceptional. That said, Emotiva is supposed to have an upgraded version of Dirac with adjustable room curves, among other features, within the next few weeks. It might be worth your wait to see what the upgraded version of Dirac for the XMC-1 can do before you make a decision. By the way, the XMC-1 sounds fantastic. I doubt anything below a Marantz AV8802 can compete with it. Of course, Atmos is another consideration. If music is important to you I doubt anything at twice the price is as good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I own an XMC-1 and have been impressed with Dirac. It's ability to integrate my Kreisel DXD12012 Subwoofer Duo is really exceptional. That said, Emotiva is supposed to have an upgraded version of Dirac with adjustable room curves, among other features, within the next few weeks. It might be worth your wait to see what the upgraded version of Dirac for the XMC-1 can do before you make a decision. By the way, the XMC-1 sounds fantastic. I doubt anything below a Marantz AV8802 can compete with it. Of course, Atmos is another consideration. If music is important to you I doubt anything at twice the price is as good.
Good to know! Even though I'm currently not using any EQ at all I wouldn't mind trying DIRAC specifically for my KK DXD-12012 subwoofer (if possible?). After switching to a NAD processor the low-frequency presence from the sub in my room is quite substantial and I have slight issues in the 30-40 Hz region. Instead of bass traps DIRAC might be an alternative. Or maybe both?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Good to know! Even though I'm currently not using any EQ at all I wouldn't mind trying DIRAC specifically for my KK DXD-12012 subwoofer (if possible?). After switching to a NAD processor the low-frequency presence from the sub in my room is quite substantial and I have slight issues in the 30-40 Hz region. Instead of bass traps DIRAC might be an alternative. Or maybe both?
It is best practice to treat your room with bass traps and get the best sound you can before you use Dirac. However, Dirac will improve the sound either way. Emotiva offers an upgraded version of Dirac for $99.00 called Dirac full. I would recommend it because of its flexibility. You should check the new review for the XMC-1 on HometheaterHiFi.com. They really don't seem to have a good handle on Dirac, but the review is useful.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top