Compare & contrast: Dirac and ARC

[Mike-48]

Is anyone here who's used recent versions of both Dirac and Anthem Room Correction (ARC) and who would care to compare them? I'm specifically interested in ease of use and quality of final results, especially when using multiple subwoofers.

I've been using ARC for several years on an Anthem STR preamp, and it has been easy to use. It has pretty good flexibility and has produced good results. At the same time, there have been a few cases where results have been inexplicable or inconsistent and a few where I wish I could tweak something that Anthem doesn't allow tweaking.

I've used Dirac in a much simpler system with a miniDSP SHD and found it more cumbersome to use, but with more flexibility than ARC for user tweaks. I understand that ease of use depends on the manufacturer, and that many Dirac implementations are easier to use than miniDSP's.

I can't compare the two DRC systems very well because the audio systems and rooms are so different, it would be pointless. And I can't take the miniDSP out of our TV system, even temporarily, or the rest of the family would kill me.

So I'll appreciate comments from those familiar with both.

 

[JStewart]

I'm specifically interested in ease of use and quality of final results, especially when using multiple subwoofers.

I have no personal experience with ARC, but Matthew Poes does and he just answered your same question wrt subwoofers.

I understand that ease of use depends on the manufacturer, and that many Dirac implementations are easier to use than miniDSP's.

My experience with Dirac on PC, MiniDSP, a NAD AVR and Monolith HTP-1 is the user interface and ease of use is the same.

 

[Mike-48]

@JStewart - Thanks for the link to that video. It is helpful. It's interesting to hear Poes state that all these algorithms sometimes give really terrible results. That's surely been my experience in using DRC for 20 years, but I've never heard anyone else say it so plainly.

The comments on Dirac ART are also interesting (that it often doesn't work). Multi-sub optimization is a tricky problem, and we are just at the beginning of trying to figure it out. I hope it gets a lot better in my lifetime.

 

[JStewart]

I hope it’s not long before DRC can learn from it’s results and improve on them.
It would also be very helpful to express the results as differences from standards, much like color calibrations are for a display, so that “good” would be objectively determined.

 

[Sonnie Parker]

I had ARC in one system, but it was years ago... and it was not as good as Audyssey at that time. Dirac ART is phenomenal in my setup. I'm about 3/4 done with my StormAudio MK3 review, which will include ART setup. It is quirky, with a few settings you have to get right, but after countless runs, it gets easier to figure out what to do. I've undergone three changes in my setup since I received the unit. I got a bad unit initially, and when I had to reconnect my HTP-1, it made me realize just how good ART is over Bass Control. From all I've heard though, I would echo what Matthew says... all depends on your room and setup as to whether it will work for you.

 

[Mike-48]

all depends on your room and setup as to whether it will work for you.

Thanks, Sonnie. I find ARC pretty good with 2 subs, less good with 4 unless I gang them to mono and do a lot of manual work beforehand. (The shortcomings are what I mention in the next paragraph.)

I'm glad to hear you've had good results from ART. In my view, DRC (by which I mean digital room correction in general) has been stuck in a simplistic paradigm for far too long, in which it has paid little or no attention to speaker interactions (including subs). That's not because anything thinks interactions are unimportant, but because the problem is far more difficult to solve than flattening each speaker individually.

Would you care to comment on the type of room and setup in which you would expect ART to be successful?

 

[Travis Ballstadt]

I went from the barebones version of Dirac on an XMC-1 to ARC on an AVM60 and I found ARC to be far superior. They've both seen many updates since I've used Dirac, so take that for what it is.

 

[Mike-48]

I hope it’s not long before DRC can learn from it’s results and improve on them.
It would also be very helpful to express the results as differences from standards, much like color calibrations are for a display, so that “good” would be objectively determined.

Yes, a learning algorithm might have promise. It's an interesting idea.

Regarding standards, I like more objectivity, but I wonder how that would be possible. The difference between monitor calibration and sound is that monitor calibration takes place at the monitor -- we care only that it is producing the correct tones. Sound calibration has a more difficult objective, to get good sound in some sense at the listening chair. That opens the question of what "good" is and over what area one wants to correct. Is it better to use as little DSP as possible, to avoid odd effects at other seats? To optimize for one seat only? To optimize across space, which necessarily involves compromise at the center seat? How much attention should be paid to phase? How about the balance between flat measured FR and decay time? Those are the questions that come to mind immediately. I imagine people can come up with others.

I do hope that we will be able to get to a more objective place soon, one that is objectively excellent on a system basis, not just a speaker-by-speaker basis. The programs that seem to promise this are Dirac's ART and Trinnov's Waveforming. Do you agree, or maybe I've missed something? (I expect Anthem to come up with something similar before long.)

The urgent need is to move beyond the single-speaker model of optimization. I am constantly frustrated (e.g.) by ARC Genesis's inability to use speaker A to fill a dip in speaker B's response, instead of trying to flatten an unfillable dip in speaker B.

 

[JStewart]

Regarding standards, I like more objectivity, but I wonder how that would be possible. The difference between monitor calibration and sound is that monitor calibration takes place at the monitor -- we care only that it is producing the correct tones. Sound calibration has a more difficult objective, to get good sound in some sense at the listening chair.

In the context of what could better DRC do wrt subwoofer management, the CEDIA RP-22 standards are a good start. Section 7 on bass response.

That opens the question of what "good" is and over what area one wants to correct. Is it better to use as little DSP as possible, to avoid odd effects at other seats? To optimize for one seat only? To optimize across space, which necessarily involves compromise at the center seat? How much attention should be paid to phase? How about the balance between flat measured FR and decay time?

There’s certainly room for a boat load of study to objectively determine what is psycho-acoustically meaningful.

The programs that seem to promise this are Dirac's ART and Trinnov's Waveforming. Do you agree, or maybe I've missed something?

I would agree, but it’s in the absence of having heard either.

I have expressed a concern about ART. Will it reduce decay times too much so that listening in a room seems a bit unnatural and should the decay time be adjustable so that it matches the mains? From any user comments I’ve read so far my concern seems unfounded.

 

[Sonnie Parker]

Thanks, Sonnie. I find ARC pretty good with 2 subs, less good with 4 unless I gang them to mono and do a lot of manual work beforehand. (The shortcomings are what I mention in the next paragraph.)

I'm glad to hear you've had good results from ART. In my view, DRC (by which I mean digital room correction in general) has been stuck in a simplistic paradigm for far too long, in which it has paid little or no attention to speaker interactions (including subs). That's not because anything thinks interactions are unimportant, but because the problem is far more difficult to solve than flattening each speaker individually.

Would you care to comment on the type of room and setup in which you would expect ART to be successful?

My room is 19.5' wide by 23.5' deep by 8.5' high. I have a full JTR/RTJ system... 9.8.6. I'm using the latest update with sub-coupling. I have my front two corner subs (JTR 4000ULF-TL Caps) running the LFE, then six of the 2400 Caps for support speakers, two in front at about the 1/3 location on each side, then two on the sides at about the 1/3 sidewall location, and two on the rear wall.

I don't think I'd be qualified to say what would work best short of suggesting I know it sounds better than DLBC in my room, which has always sounded very good.

Not that it is easy to measure since I'm moving the mic around where my head would be during the 9 measurements I take, but what I have measured does not seem to be a very drastic reduction in decay.

Pre-Dirac x 8 subs...

Post-Dirac LFE response with two main subs and the 6 support subs.I did not have time at the time I was doing this to look at correcting the area below 20Hz with the LF adjustment on the JTR subs, but I'm thinking bumping that up slightly would fix it, not that it really needs fixing.

 

[Mike-48]

it [ART] sounds better than DLBC in my room, which has always sounded very good.

Thanks, again, Sonnie. Good info. I hope to be able to try at least DLBC and possibly ART soon.

 

[Jesperr84]

Haven't try Dirac but i do know that arc genesis doesn't handle multiple subs good. Even if you have a minidsp as pre eq you need knowledge how to set everything up or you will loose low end bass with arc.

 

[Sonnie Parker]

Haven't try Dirac but i do know that arc genesis doesn't handle multiple subs good. Even if you have a minidsp as pre eq you need knowledge how to set everything up or you will loose low end bass with arc.

Yep... I remember back when I used to have to get all my subs timed just right with my miniDSP, and fed as one sub into my AVR or proessor.

 

[Jesperr84]

Yep... I remember back when I used to have to get all my subs timed just right with my miniDSP, and fed as one sub into my AVR or proessor.

Yup that's what's need to be done. Also there is a lot other things to do before getting perfect bass with arc

 

[ddude003]

I haven't seen the video and I am thinking it would be difficult to do a proper A/B comparison of the two room correction systems...

 

[Sonnie Parker]

I haven't seen the video and I am thinking it would be difficult to do a proper A/B comparison of the two room correction systems...

There is no doubt, considering you can't have all the speakers and subs connected to two different systems simultaneously. However, you could measure both and compare. I realize measurements may not always tell the whole story, but it's possible they could help you identify what differences you believe you may have heard.

 

[ddude003]

One of things I really like about using the Hang Loose Convolver for DRC is that you can load up to 6 different FIR filter sets into the Convolver's FilterBanks and switch between them seamlessly in realtime... True A/Bing...

 

[Sonnie Parker]

I currently have eight different filter sets in my StormAudio (seven are Dirac Live variations), allowing me to A/B them as well.

 

[ddude003]

That's pretty cool... Can you do that from your central listening position with a laptop or a remote?

 

[Sonnie Parker]

Yes... both. On the remote I can only scroll through the presets, but with my laptop I can select them individually.