The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Your thoughts on digital room correction?
Old 11th March 2015
  #1
Lives for gear
 
6 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Your thoughts on digital room correction?

I have acoustic treatment in my room (4" bass traps on corners, and one directly behind me centered on the wall. There are also some 2" absorbers (6 total). While the treatment has helped, I still feel like there is some problem areas, so I got a hold of a software from Mathaudio called RoomEQ and did some measurements. While I don't have a dedicated measurement mic I used an AKG C414XLS, which is relatively flat. According to what I got from the plugin, there is some bad stuff going on. Not only that but a sine sweep revealed a rattle in my right monitor (Yamaha MSP7) at 270hz . After the correction using the plugin I did another sine sweep with it on and it seemed to have improved drastically.

Should I use this digital software to do my room correction? Maybe go with something like the IK Multimedia ARC 2?

What do you guys think?
Attached Thumbnails
Your thoughts on digital room correction?-screen-shot-2015-03-10-5.04.31-pm.png  
Old 11th March 2015
  #2
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
DRC

More treatment will help more. Generally 4 inch traps straddling all four vertical corners floor to ceiling, say two more per side and four overhead, would be a minimum. The more inadequate the treatment, the more useful DRC becomes. They are 'friends' in that respect.
There are plenty of posts here showing good improvements with ARC2, but fwiw I reckon Dirac Live is the best out there. It does work on a somewhat different principle.

DD
Old 11th March 2015
  #3
Lives for gear
 
lematrix's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I have a Trinnov Room correction system and I really like it. Find a dealer near you and get a demo in your room.
Old 11th March 2015 | Show parent
  #4
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan ➑️
More treatment will help more. Generally 4 inch traps straddling all four vertical corners floor to ceiling, say two more per side and four overhead, would be a minimum. The more inadequate the treatment, the more useful DRC becomes. They are 'friends' in that respect.
There are plenty of posts here showing good improvements with ARC2, but fwiw I reckon Dirac Live is the best out there. It does work on a somewhat different principle.

DD

Dirac was the best. I bug tested for them and really love the software, but sonarworks reference is better. I'm pretty impressed by it's measurement process. I found that I liked the sound of sonarworks better. Latency is also much lower as dirac doesn't use asio. I thought arc 1 and 2 sounded awful.

I find the fewer treatments you have the more off sounding DRC becomes.
Old 11th March 2015 | Show parent
  #5
Lives for gear
 
6 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoundationsAudio ➑️
Dirac was the best. I bug tested for them and really love the software, but sonarworks reference is better. I'm pretty impressed by it's measurement process. I found that I liked the sound of sonarworks better. Latency is also much lower as dirac doesn't use asio. I thought arc 1 and 2 sounded awful.

I find the fewer treatments you have the more off sounding DRC becomes.
Went off your suggestion and ordered the sonarworks package with the cal mic.

Thank you
Old 11th March 2015
  #6
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Room correction is for whimps!

Just joking. But if you listen to records in your room as well ,like me, you got no choice but to get the room right. I do use DIRAC for mixing and reckon its great. Thanks to Dan for the recommendation.
Old 11th March 2015
  #7
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Competition

Trinnov of course, if the money ls available.
I hadn't noticed Sonarworks, thanks for the recommendation Foundations. I will try a demo.

There is plenty of ARC data here showing significant improvements. https://gearspace.com/board/8353318-post522.html IMO, no digital equaliser worth putting on the market should have a 'sound'.
Having said that, I have seen measured comparisons where regular filters, afaik actually ARC2 were compared to Dirac's Mixed Phase ones. Same settings.
Dirac affects the Impulse Response, Timing, the other does not. I would love to know what Sonarworks are doing. Or to see tested comparisons.

DD

Last edited by DanDan; 11th March 2015 at 05:46 PM..
Old 12th March 2015
  #8
Lives for gear
 
junya-eskimo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
.

Yeah, Like anything, there is no one fix for a problem.. Simply adding a few notches up and down along the freq range might just do the trick in a well balanced room or even a half decent room.... Makes sense right? Not enough 350Hrts just turn it up.. Simples!

BUT, The reality is, sound aside, your/mine/everyone's room is a big pot of calculations and equations.. Throwing in more numbers into that pot might not be the best thing hehehe.. But again.. Try, Test & take every advice you get with a pinch of salt ( unless it involved an equation that you need to read a few times until it makes sense, That one prob is bang on! )

...
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #9
Lives for gear
 
6 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by junya-eskimo ➑️
.

Yeah, Like anything, there is no one fix for a problem.. Simply adding a few notches up and down along the freq range might just do the trick in a well balanced room or even a half decent room.... Makes sense right? Not enough 350Hrts just turn it up.. Simples!

BUT, The reality is, sound aside, your/mine/everyone's room is a big pot of calculations and equations.. Throwing in more numbers into that pot might not be the best thing hehehe.. But again.. Try, Test & take every advice you get with a pinch of salt ( unless it involved an equation that you need to read a few times until it makes sense, That one prob is bang on! )

...
In audio there is no simple fix for anything. There is always way too many variables. I'm not expecting this to be the complete cure for my room, just a improvement, even a slight one at that.
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
 
junya-eskimo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by auralart ➑️
In audio there is no simple fix for anything. There is always way too many variables. I'm not expecting this to be the complete cure for my room, just a improvement, even a slight one at that.
Yo,

Well there are 'some' simple fixes in a room that is already sounding pretty top. That way the small tweeks are noticed.. But the point I was trying to make was without a pretty good sounding room, the slight tweeks will become BIG tweeks and the results of those tweeks could worsen a room..

For all I know your room sounds great, thus the EQ will compliment it... Have you measured it?

..
Old 12th March 2015
  #11
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Research

There is quite a lot of work going on in the field of DRC, and Research.
A study, Harman I think, found some worked well, others not at all.
Another IoA study found it to be most beneficial in the worst performing rooms and vice versa. This is in keeping with my own experiences. i.e. A god send when things are out of whack, e.g. a speaker which is too bright and has no onboard controls.
In a well treated room, the difference when engaging DRC is much smaller, subtle, icing on the cake.

DD
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #12
Lives for gear
 
6 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by junya-eskimo ➑️
Yo,

Well there are 'some' simple fixes in a room that is already sounding pretty top. That way the small tweeks are noticed.. But the point I was trying to make was without a pretty good sounding room, the slight tweeks will become BIG tweeks and the results of those tweeks could worsen a room..

For all I know your room sounds great, thus the EQ will compliment it... Have you measured it?

..
I did measure it, but I had no measurement mic so I used a 414. There is a screenshot of the results on my first post in this thread. I'm not sure how accurate the measurement is. I do have bass traps in my corners and 2" treatments on walls. I'm going to measure again once my package from Sonarworks arrives with their measurement mic and software.
Old 12th March 2015
  #13
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
In a well treated room, the difference when engaging DRC is much smaller, subtle, icing on the cake.
Plus one. You really need to start out with a well treated room before putting any kind of EQ into the chain. In a lot of cases, if you are set up correctly in the room and have it treated properly you don't even need it. There is much more to the room "sound" then just frequency response, which all of the those programs mostly deal with.
Old 12th March 2015
  #14
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
IMHO ,

The digital room correction is a myth. The word "Room" is an abuse.

No reverberation correction.
No reflexions correction.
No flutter echo reflexion.
No deep correction.

Only delay for some product (but in pro world i suppose setup speak is good) amplitude, phase shift (but who had succeed a double blind test). Amplitude with average on a virtual acoustic field with generic algorithm in a particular room.

A parametriq EQ do the job to fixe the bump.

Last edited by dinococcus; 12th March 2015 at 03:46 PM..
Old 12th March 2015
  #15
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Correction

Well there seems to be plenty of room for abuse here on GS lately.....;-)

IMO DRC raises hackles because of it's very badly chosen name.
Obviously an algorithm cannot 'Correct' an overly boomy live/drum room.
But it can manipulate the chain of events from speaker to ear, including the room. The transfer function.
Both FR and Impulse Response (Time issues including Decay) can and are affected.
Furthermore this effect is thoughout the room, not in just one spot.
It appears Mixed Phase and other judicious Filter choices greatly enhance the effect on the IR over simply Linear or Minimum Phase.
Take a good look at the test result below. It appears Sonarworks also uses Mixed Phase.


So lets substitute some more suitable worlds.
DSP instead of Digital.
Eq and Time Manipulation instead of Room Correction.
= DSP Transfer Function Manipulation.

Let's just cut to the chase, it's DSP.
It's in our Speakers, Crossover, Amps, Signal Processors, even Microphones.
Let's not waste time denying it.

DD
Attached Thumbnails
Your thoughts on digital room correction?-diraclivedifference2.jpg  
Old 12th March 2015
  #16
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
the 1/4 wavelenght at 80hz is 1 meter.
the 1/4 wavelenght at 160hz is 0,5 meter.
the 1/4 wavelenght at 320hz is 0,25 meter.
the 1/4 wavelenght at 640hz is 0,12 meter.

Do you work or listen music with the head at the same position attach to a stake ?

How these automatics softwares works with an average when at the listen position i have 0 db at 35 hz and 50 cm behind i have -15 db ?
Old 12th March 2015
  #17
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Hear Ear

Indeed, how do they? There is a Dirac White paper on the matter which explains how and why the Mixed Phase Filters apply over a wide area. I recommend taking a good look at the graphic in my last test. Those images show considerable alteration of the IR, at NINE locations spread throughout the space. Note also that Nyal later qualified this article to include the fact that he tested all seats in this HT and all showed improvement. http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/201...om-modes-html/
This matter engenders disbelief, which I once shared. I would encourage a little opening of minds here. Many if not most of the speaker manufactures are now using DSP, within, and affecting outside, their systems. They are not simply being market led into a huge waste of time.

Now, mind boggling time. When one includes the speaker system under DSP control it is possible to radically alter the time response of a space. Overly dead auditoria have had multi speaker decay and tonal enhancement. But can the opposite apply? Can speakers, under DSP control, grab the room by the collar and tame resonances?

No? Take a look at the graph below. 14.2 rig grabbing the collar.

DD
Attached Files
File Type: pdf PastedGraphic-1.pdf (21.4 KB, 230 views) File Type: pdf PastedGraphic-2.pdf (19.8 KB, 228 views)

Last edited by DanDan; 12th March 2015 at 05:49 PM..
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #18
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan ➑️
Take a good look at the test result below.
A great soft : rePhase does the same thing for 0 €. With speaker that have good factory measurment, it's easy.

rePhase | SourceForge.net
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #19
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan ➑️
Indeed, how do they? There is a Dirac White paper on the matter which explains how and why the Mixed Phase Filters apply over a wide area. I recommend taking a good look at the graphic in my last test. Those images show considerable alteration of the IR, at NINE locations spread throughout the space.
DD
That you show is a speaker correction, no room correction. Dirac doesn't suppress the reflexions.


A room is under the reflexions domination. No software can change it.
Old 12th March 2015
  #20
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Belief

That is incorrect. Please do take a look at the Impulse Responses. They are not speaker corrections, but Impulse responses of a speaker in a room. These are simply put a graph of an initial impulse spike with subsequent reflections. The reflections are being altered, diminished by the software.
Now take a look at the pdf images. This removal of much of the resonance was accomplished by algorithms and a 14.2 speaker rig.

DD
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #21
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan ➑️
That is incorrect. Please do take a look at the Impulse Responses. They are not speaker corrections, but Impulse responses of a speaker in a room. These are simply put a graph of an initial impulse spike with subsequent reflections. The reflections are being altered, diminished by the software.
Now take a look at the pdf images. This removal of much of the resonance was accomplished by algorithms and a 14.2 speaker rig.

DD
before 5 ms ?

Without vertical scale, without showing after the 20 ms. When i'll see a graph in real situation with the a serious protocol, i would become a believer.

A serious protocol, it's easy. Without change the amplitude like DRC de D Strabion.
Old 12th March 2015
  #22
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Serious

I did say it would become a matter of belief.
I don't have more details of those tests dino, but I could get most likely get them for you. I will set about that if you will agree to try a demo of Dirac or Sonarworks.....deal?

But consider these points, the speaker was in the room, the mic somewhat distant presumably.
There is considerable interaction between the speaker (which has it's own IR) and the room. Note Filters also have IRs. We can consider the mitigation of those reflections to be in the speaker alone or in the Transfer Function, perhaps even the mic is ringing.....LOL
But one way or the other the reflections are being reduced. Just as the Modes are in the other posted data.

DD
Old 12th March 2015
  #23
Lives for gear
 
jim1961's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
My thoughts are do everything possible in the form of room treatment before considering digital room correction.
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #24
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Lightbulb

Oh geez, not this again. My feelings on the usefulness of EQ (= very little) are well known, but I persist anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Kuras ➑️
In a lot of cases, if you are set up correctly in the room and have it treated properly you don't even need it. There is much more to the room "sound" then just frequency response, which all of the those programs mostly deal with.
Yes, with a proper amount of acoustic treatment, and especially bass traps, room EQ is not needed. Maybe in a cube or square room you can nudge a ringing peak down a few dB, but the notion that room "correction" does anything beyond EQ is simply untrue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinococcus ➑️
No reverberation correction.
No reflexions correction.
No flutter echo reflexion.
No deep correction.
Yes to all of those. I assume by "deep correction" you mean the fact that EQ can't do much to improve nulls. In most small rooms, nulls are the biggest problem!

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan ➑️
Take a look at the graph below. 14.2 rig grabbing the collar.
Those graphs are not compelling because they're so fuzzy, and they show too little of the vertical dB range. So we can't see if the slope of the ringing decays are improved. Even when EQ is critically applied to improve the decay time, it all falls apart just a few inches away. I see that Nyal still hasn't updated his blog post with measurements at other seats. This is very telling!

--Ethan

The Acoustic Treatment Experts
Old 12th March 2015
  #25
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Vs

Quote:
My thoughts are do everything possible in the form of room treatment before considering digital room correction.
+ well, Everybody, methinks....;-)
DD
Old 12th March 2015
  #26
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Crux

Hi Ethan. I will make the same offer to you. I am willing to attempt to get more details on those tests if it is worth our while. i.e. If you and dino are willing and actually do try a demo of Dirac. I don't know Sonarworks yet. For now though, I see no rational reason to disbelieve the Dirac graphs. 'Not compelling', sure it would be great if the pictures were bigger too. Come on. You may remember Ethan that I identified the worst converter in your famous test and assured you I could identify the mid priced Motu (My preferred), and the Lavry, now that I had connected the names with the sounds. My point? using ears alone, it is entirely possible to prove to at least one person at at time, sonic phenomena.
It's a pity you didn't accept my offer to test your alleged science then. Using your rhetoric, I could vaguely suggest that too is 'very telling' but I wouldn't....;-) Now you have the ball, an opportunity to see if your ears and (IMO incomplete) science agree. Remember Dirac is using different types of Filters to your tested software. Fuzzy kinda corroborates your results AND my listening and testing (and Harman's) don't you think?
Remember those graphs are not advertising material.
Also I see no comments on the pdf waterfalls, are those visible to you all?


DD

Last edited by DanDan; 12th March 2015 at 08:30 PM..
Old 12th March 2015
  #27
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
You may remember Ethan that I identified the worst converter in your famous test and assured you I could identify the mid priced Motu (My preferred), and the Lavry, now that I had connected the names with the sounds.
Maybe you should play the lotto. You are pretty good at guessing. ha ha
Old 12th March 2015
  #28
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Guesstimates

Naw Glenn, I have TESTED that....;-)


My offers shall all remain open including a repeat of the Converter Test.
We're all in audio here, how about we trust our ears?

LOL, apparently this is a true story:-

UK Lotto. Man goes to pub every saturday afternoon for a few pints, watching sports etc. Buys a Lotto ticket on the way home. Small concession to Wifey, he uses her suggested 'lucky numbers'. Back home he expects and gets the dinner on the table, TV on.

Well Wifey gets a bit miffed at being left at him cooking the dinner etc. So she videotaped the Lotto. The following Saturday she gives hubby her lucky numbers. He comes home, TV on.....But of course it's the Video not Live.........

In real life apparently there was a bad ending so I will leave that at funny.

DD

Last edited by DanDan; 12th March 2015 at 08:49 PM..
Old 12th March 2015 | Show parent
  #29
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDan ➑️
I see no rational reason to disbelieve the Dirac graphs.
I sure do! heh

Quote:
You may remember Ethan that I identified the worst converter in your famous test and assured you I could identify the mid priced Motu (My preferred), and the Lavry, now that I had connected the names with the sounds.
How is that related to whether room EQ can reduce ringing over an area larger than a few cm? Also, one of the problem with my Converter Comparison is it's too easy to guess correctly by chance. My more recent Converter Loop-Back Tests requires identifying four files in three groups, which is much more difficult to get by chance than one out of three.

I'm glad to change my opinion in the face of hard evidence. But the burden of proof is clearly on those who make the claims. I'm willing to participate in some capacity! But I'm not willing to spend a full day (or longer) installing, learning, and testing software that claims to do something I doubt is possible. I'm sure I've posted here many times that I'm willing to drive up to two hours to visit someone who has any brand of room EQ, to verify the claim that it reduces ringing in a meaningful way. Surely someone in Connecticut, or nearby New York or Massachusetts or New Jersey, has room "correction" software?

--Ethan
Old 12th March 2015
  #30
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Are we not all forgetting one thing here? Damn things only work in the digital domain!
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 90 views: 9338
Avatar for Plush
Plush 8th February 2006
replies: 1005 views: 130399
Avatar for MogwaiBoy
MogwaiBoy 28th April 2021
replies: 77 views: 16971
Avatar for Skol303
Skol303 16th January 2019
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump