Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
miniDSP has just released two new processors (analog or digital in/outs) that offer a complete solution inclusive of Dirac Live and calibrated mic:
http://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series

You will use a computer for making the measurements but you can then disconnect it.
Four different correction sets can be instantly switched i.e may be one for a single listening chair, one for a wider audience and listening area, a third one for low volume listening and may be a fourth one if you want to move the speakers in a position that is more acceptable to your consort (I do not mention WAF to avoid discrimination :innocent: )

Flavio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Great news! A bit out of my price range but still reasonable given the results I got with the 2ch trial. Hopefully miniDSP could release a cheaper Kit version :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,869 Posts
Hello NirreFirre and welcome to the forum.

I look forward to the upcoming products from MiniDSP using the Dirac software. I would need at least 8 channels or more so I will have to wait. BUT very happy to see this 2 channel version out now. :T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Looking at the DDRC-22A and the DDRC-22D. My digital sources are both capable of 24/192 processing. Am I going down the wrong path to achieve DRC? My sources are the Sim Moon Audio Supernova CD player and the Bryston BDP 2 both wired into the new Benchmark DAC2. Does putting the DDRC-22D in the digital signal path make sense? My room is equipped with several GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. I am looking for that extra refinement I've read so much about offered by DRC.:wave::scratch:

Help, please?

Rich
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Looking at the DDRC-22A and the DDRC-22D. My digital sources are both capable of 24/192 processing. Am I going down the wrong path to achieve DRC? My sources are the Sim Moon Audio Supernova CD player and the Bryston BDP 2 both wired into the new Benchmark DAC2. Does putting the DDRC-22D in the digital signal path make sense? My room is equipped with several GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. I am looking for that extra refinement I've read so much about offered by DRC.:wave::scratch:

Help, please?

Rich
Hi Rich,

if you have access to a personal computer and you have (or can borrow) a calibrated measurement microphone you can initially judge by yourself by downloading the two weeks free trial of Dirac Live:
http://www.dirac.se/en/consumer-products/dirac-rcs.aspx

You will then be able to purchase the DDRC-22D without doubts because of your good knowledge about its performance in your specific case.

Ciao :) Flavio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Flavio, consider this. I'll buy the mic from your site. Download the software for a free trial. Run it through it's paces. If it's not for me I'll return the mic for a refund. If I buy the processor you can deduct the cost of the mic from my balance.

Your thoughts?

Rich:help:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Flavio, consider this. I'll buy the mic from your site. Download the software for a free trial. Run it through it's paces. If it's not for me I'll return the mic for a refund. If I buy the processor you can deduct the cost of the mic from my balance.

Your thoughts?

Rich:help:
Hi Rich,

sorry :) we do not sell microphones, we used to do it as a service to our customers but as you can see we now only have a link to the miniDSP site which is a separate company.
(we do not sell the miniDSP DDRC-22D either)

Flavio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Flavio, I can purchase the Behringer ECM8000 Microphone for $59.00 at my local Guitar Center. Will this do the trick?:ponder:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
59 Posts
We have a mic promo here for our Microphone Pro system.

Check it out. Only $79. I can guarantee it works for the Dirac software. Been collaborating with Dirac for years. I am not sure how it works wih the miniDSP DDRC-22D.

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/xtz-sound/72637-xtz-microphone-pro-measurement-mic-promo.html

After playing around with different room correction options, such as Dirac and Room Perfect from Lyngdorf Audio I am sure that it gives me more audible improvements than beeing able to play the highest bit and sample rate.

I can see that the miniDSP Dirac Series operates at 96kHz, but it can receive up to 216 kHz. So it will probably just down sample if you have higher sample rate. You will still be able to play it.

I would not hesitate if I were you. If it works as great as the software does, this is a bang for the buck product. Especially now when you can keep it in the digital domain with the D-version. Using the A-version (eg. between pre amplifier and power amplifier) will add some noise in the A/D-D/A conversion process. But again the room correction improvements are greater.

BR,
Joel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Flavio, I can purchase the Behringer ECM8000 Microphone for $59.00 at my local Guitar Center. Will this do the trick?:ponder:
The Behr ECM8000 would be OK but I imagine that at that price no calibration file is provided... that is necessary so if an individual cal file IS provided than that's the lowest cost good option (the generic cal file would not be a good choice because there are significant variations in FR between different units)

The XTZ mic at the promotion price is a good option, the provided calibration file is not an individual one but because they guarantee that the actual individual mic will stay within +-1 dB I think it's ok, and I like (if confirmed) that it is a 90° calibration (in other words it is targeted at using the mic vertically)

Another option at a similar price is the miniDSP UMIK-1, the calibration is individual and it is a 0° calibration, so the mic has to be used orizontally.
By the way if you want to use it vertically you will find a utility to convert the UMIK-1 0° cal file into a 90° one here: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f...degree-calibration-file-90-degree-file-20505/

At a slightly higher price you can buy it at Cross Spectrum Labs with both horizontal and vertical individual calibration files.

In my opinion you will not go wrong with any of the above choices :)
Flavio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
Hello Rich (and thread posters):

I listen to both analog and digital front-ends, including a NAS over ethernet. All sources are highly resolving and musical. So I, too, question insertion of another A/D-D/A conversion in the audio chain, not to mention an extra set of interconnects. From the technical literature, it seems the needs of the many (DIRAC settings & corrections) outweigh the needs of the few (pristine audio path). :joke:

Most audiophiles eschew any form of equalization. Until recently, I belonged in that camp. I've spent a lifetime assembling and tuning a high-end system in conjunction with acoustic treatment to enhance musicians' artistic intent in the home. I've achieved a very high satisfaction rating with most all the usual audiophile suspects; yet my horrible room needs something more.

My research has given me proverbial knowledge sufficient to be dangerous, but I conclude that analog EQ and/or digital correction are key to elevating music's emotional message through 2ch reproduction in the home. But alas, I too have no practical experience to support such claims.

I'm in REW training using a laptop with external audio interface and calibrated mic to interpret and compensate for errant time & frequency domain behavior. But REW is designed to generate filter parameters to be loaded into DRC-equipped equalizers.

Attempts to correct a hi-end, pristine analog signal for frequency & phase errors in the analog domain would be excruciatingly iterative, and ultimately futile in terms of accuracy. But analog EQ (whether graphic or parametric), could successfully be used by ear in conjunction with REW to compensate for the worst offenders.

As far as digital correction in general, and DIRAC correction in particular, I would hazard a guess that it's ultimately up to the individual listener to decide whether or not the trade-offs are justified. I'm left apprehensive about sinking hard-earned dollars :spend: into the minDSP hardware--as all sales are final. Also, I'm not yet quite sure the free trial version of DIRAC live for the PC compares apples-with-apples, because I'm under the impression that all audio must then be piped through the computer.

Signed,
Confused-as-Ever :huh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
...........................
I'm left apprehensive about sinking hard-earned dollars :spend: into the minDSP hardware--as all sales are final. Also, I'm not yet quite sure the free trial version of DIRAC live for the PC compares apples-with-apples, because I'm under the impression that all audio must then be piped through the computer.

Signed,
Confused-as-Ever :huh:
I understand your apprehension and that's the reason why I'm suggesting to download the free trial version of Dirac Live.
When you use that application the PC serves a double purpose, it is used as a source and also as a DSP processor for Dirac Live correction, when you use a mini DSP instead the DSP tasks are served by an external DSP processor... the miniDSP unit.

As a result if you will use the digital DDRC-22D unit you will always remain in the digital domain and you will be able to commutate different digital sources... there is no doubt that there are no trade-offs, if you use the analog DDRC-22A instead there are no trade offs either caused by the AD/DA conversion, but if you think differently you can use the former.

On the other side there is no way of successfully correcting an analog signal without handling it in the digital domain if we want to be able to correct it in the time domain.
And this is important, so as you say you have to balance the advantages with the trade offs of an AD/DA conversion (if any... I think it is not possible to distinguish the signal through a straight wire and the same through the AD/DA conversion if no correction is applied)

:) Flavio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Is the software loaded on the miniDSP box identical to the PC stereo software?

Do you have diagrams posted somewhere describing connection options? I know that many people were using a 2x4 miniDSP box for EQing 2.1 or 2.2 systems. How is it done with the new Dirac box with just 2 outputs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Hello Toosteep,
a specific Dirac Live Calibration Tool Stereo for miniDSP had to be implemented.

You will find info about connections of the two different units here:
http://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/Product Brief-DDRC-22D.pdf
http://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/Product Brief-DDRC-22A.pdf
while addtional details can be found in the manual:
http://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/Dirac Series - DDRC-22 User Manual.pdf

While Dirac Live will compensate for delays when a separate subwoofer/s is used if crossovering is necessary you will still need one of the possible solutions, so using a 2x4 miniDSP box is a good one.

:) Flavio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Hello Rich (and thread posters):

I listen to both analog and digital front-ends, including a NAS over ethernet. All sources are highly resolving and musical. So I, too, question insertion of another A/D-D/A conversion in the audio chain, not to mention an extra set of interconnects. From the technical literature, it seems the needs of the many (DIRAC settings & corrections) outweigh the needs of the few (pristine audio path). :joke:
Well, both digital and analog versions are available... and I hear that "analog listeners" are quite satisfied with the analog version, i.e. here:
http://www.minidsp.com/forum/dirac-series-support/10161-my-new-dirac-ddrc#14732

:) Flavio
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,838 Posts
...So I, too, question insertion of another A/D-D/A conversion in the audio chain, not to mention an extra set of interconnects. From the technical literature, it seems the needs of the many (DIRAC settings & corrections) outweigh the needs of the few (pristine audio path). :joke
Agreed. In principle, one would not add a A-D/D-A stage if it was not needed. If it is going to give a big benefit, though, and is implemented with high quality parts and design, then the upside outweighs the downside and principal bows to practicality. One can stick with principle and have a mediocre sounding system, or allow for some practicality and have much better sound. I have found myself on both sides of the argument, and am happy to say that in the end I allowed better sound to win. I have never regretted it.

Most audiophiles eschew any form of equalization.
Another one of those principal things. It is probably rooted in the fact that at one time the only ways to EQ speakers had as much if not more downside than upside. Audible amounts of noise and distortion were added while the correction was imprecise and of questionable benefit.

The world of digital audio, in the hands of companies like Dirac Research and miniDSP, has come a long way, and is quite mature. As has already been stated, the type of and quality level of equipment we are talking about would be impossible for most discriminating listeners to tell from a cable in a truly objective comparison. It is just that good, and the reasons not to EQ basically no longer exist.

yet my horrible room needs something more.
You are letting your hunger for good sound overtake the need to stand by principle. That is your decision, of course. I think you will be happier for it.

...I conclude that analog EQ and/or digital correction are key to elevating music's emotional message through 2ch reproduction in the home. But alas, I too have no practical experience to support such claims.
Many a discriminating listener has follow the path you suggest and been so delighted by the improvements and they never looked back. It takes an open mind. If one has decided ahead of time that a certain change will sound bad, the mind will make it so. An open mind has so much to look forward to!

Attempts to correct a hi-end, pristine analog signal for frequency & phase errors in the analog domain would be excruciatingly iterative, and ultimately futile in terms of accuracy. But analog EQ (whether graphic or parametric), could successfully be used by ear in conjunction with REW to compensate for the worst offenders.
No argument, but doing it all in the digital realm is ssssooooooooo much easier. Take the plunge.

I totally agree with letting the ear help make those choices. "Compensate for the worst offenders." Why use 20 bands of EQ if 3 will do?

As far as digital correction in general, and DIRAC correction in particular, I would hazard a guess that it's ultimately up to the individual listener to decide whether or not the trade-offs are justified. I'm left apprehensive about sinking hard-earned dollars :spend: into the minDSP hardware--as all sales are final. Also, I'm not yet quite sure the free trial version of DIRAC live for the PC compares apples-with-apples, because I'm under the impression that all audio must then be piped through the computer
Any downside of running the sound through your computer is far outweighed by the upside of being able to hear the Dirac Live software in action. It is all just an inexpensive demo mode, anyway. The big swinger in this decision is the Direct Live technology, not the miniDSP hardware. Figure out if you like the way Dirac Live works, and then choose the hardware approach that is best for your system to implement it.

Signed,
Confused-as-Ever :huh:
You are not alone. Cheers.:bigsmile:
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top