Doing a good comparison between room corrections is hard as there's soooo many variables. You would need to use good/bad for speakers, room acoustics, and lastly room treatments. Then at the end of the day you might still be only choosing between which target curve you like best between brands. There's so many types of improvements that you would need categories like how consistent is the correction, which improves imaging, which is closest to the target curve, how well can it integrate subs to mains, how well is it integrating multiple subs and then on top of all that the user facing features. Doing a really well thought out comparison is why there's no definitive answer for how they all rank.
That's why I believe in my manual method. I can take all types of changes into account. In these odd rooms, I think the superiority of my method would be even more obvious than a "good" room.
Glad to finally catch up on the podcast. Unfortunately I was busy running the speaker comparison room so I didn't get an opportunity to hear the room correction comparison myself.
Just set up my new Onkyo RZ50 using the Dirac room correction. I was amazed at the change from before and after. Very happy with the results, especially with the Atmos feature. Much better than my previous Pioneer Elite with Odyssey, not that it sounded bad, just the Dirac made such an improvement.
joentell.com/booking/ Its a remote service that Joe provides for a fee to EQ and balance your system. Go to that link to learn more about what you will need.
The comment about "more bass" made me suspect they where using different target curves, probably the default ones, for each DRC. In that case the result is really not a comparison of DRC technology but of design decisions. Im personaly using Dirac and Audyssey: The Dirac default target is flat with a slope towards the treble. Didnt like it at all until adding a bass shelf and flattening the slope by ~1db. Audyssey uses a BBC dip at around 3.5kHz that i had to remove before liking the result. Using the default curves both DRCs results for me where inferior to "manual" EQ using REW and Peace. So in essence for being able to rate the abilities of the different systems each should be targeting the same curve.
From what I understand they used the default. Everone knows default Audyssey sounds like ass. You need to use a curve editor or Dynamic EQ to get it to sound better. Come on man!
Doing a good comparison between room corrections is hard as there's soooo many variables. You would need to use good/bad for speakers, room acoustics, and lastly room treatments. Then at the end of the day you might still be only choosing between which target curve you like best between brands. There's so many types of improvements that you would need categories like how consistent is the correction, which improves imaging, which is closest to the target curve, how well can it integrate subs to mains, how well is it integrating multiple subs and then on top of all that the user facing features. Doing a really well thought out comparison is why there's no definitive answer for how they all rank.
That's why I believe in my manual method. I can take all types of changes into account. In these odd rooms, I think the superiority of my method would be even more obvious than a "good" room.
Glad to finally catch up on the podcast. Unfortunately I was busy running the speaker comparison room so I didn't get an opportunity to hear the room correction comparison myself.
I like the insert of the footage from the show Tim! Really helpful to see the room.
Tim works hard BTS
@@AA-ws3vd I appreciate that!!!
Depends on your room
Just set up my new Onkyo RZ50 using the Dirac room correction. I was amazed at the change from before and after. Very happy with the results, especially with the Atmos feature. Much better than my previous Pioneer Elite with Odyssey, not that it sounded bad, just the Dirac made such an improvement.
Did I hear correctly that ARC was preferred over Dirac? Would love to see more details on that!
Sorry but Dirac blows away ARC
When Joe asked about ARC - deer in headlights. Were they all asleep for that one?
Have a good weekend fellas
Joe what are the magic beans? How can I reproduce the results?
joentell.com/booking/ Its a remote service that Joe provides for a fee to EQ and balance your system. Go to that link to learn more about what you will need.
Very interesting
The comment about "more bass" made me suspect they where using different target curves, probably the default ones, for each DRC.
In that case the result is really not a comparison of DRC technology but of design decisions.
Im personaly using Dirac and Audyssey:
The Dirac default target is flat with a slope towards the treble. Didnt like it at all until adding a bass shelf and flattening the slope by ~1db.
Audyssey uses a BBC dip at around 3.5kHz that i had to remove before liking the result.
Using the default curves both DRCs results for me where inferior to "manual" EQ using REW and Peace.
So in essence for being able to rate the abilities of the different systems each should be targeting the same curve.
From what I understand they used the default. Everone knows default Audyssey sounds like ass. You need to use a curve editor or Dynamic EQ to get it to sound better.
Come on man!
In that room, it was a pointless exercise really.