TOPIC: Why use REW ahead of Dirac?

Hi Everyone,
There are a few YouTube videos out there which suggest using REW before running Dirac. Why? If Dirac corrects as much, as it does, what are you supposed to do first with REW?

Thanks

REW can give you insight before doing Dirac calibration. While Dirac can correct room response, it is not able to correct large holes in the frequency. This is more relevant when integrating a subwoofer. This will give you a change to play with the crossover and subwoofer placement. If you get this closer to acceptable Dirac will do a better job correcting any anomalies

Ah ok. So use REW for large corrections / initial set-up, then run Dirac for “fine tuning”.

Well yes, but we have to be precise about what we mean by “corrections”. You don’t want to use REW for creating filters only for insight.

Ahhhh OK. So measure with REW and use it to help find the best physical location for speakers and sub to minimise dips and peaks and use it to help identify where to set crossovers. But you're saying don't add filters.

Exactly

Dirac Live is far from perfect and doesn't always end up doing exactly what you'd like when you go back and measure again with REW after applying room correction. I've tried both ways and have gotten much better results by fully integrating the subwoofers using the PEQ on the Minidsp, letting Dirac do it's thing, and then measuring again and make final adjustments with the PEQ. The EQ section of REW has a great prediction window that can show you what any custom filters should do in real time. It's the best way I've found to actually make everything measure just like the predicted response that Dirac shows.

I'm hoping a future iteration of Dirac Live lets you take measurements, run room correction, and then remeasure to see the actual effects and let Dirac adjust it's room correction again accordingly. Until then, the best method is to let Dirac Live do the heavy lifting, and then come behind it and smooth out the response with very specific filters with the Minidsp PEQ.

Hi,
Thanks for your thoughts also. I’m sure everyone who runs Dirac can’t help but run REW afterwards to see what Dirac has done. You don’t see many before and after REW plots which is a little telling and I fully expect the curve after Dirac to not be ideal. Especially when Dirac themselves say that it won’t be. But they justify this by saying this is the best average that can be achieved for all measured positions and that their correction has fixed driver alignment issues and power response.

So my question now would be that if you do your own PEQ fine tuning after Dirac, might you be messing up some of the improvements Dirac made to the response and power?

Thanks

I'm sure it slightly counteracts some of the good that Dirac does by adding filters after correction, and the debate if anything like that is actually audible is still raging on I'll bet. I for sure cannot hear any negative artifacts from the added corrections. The PEQ filters don't seem to negatively interact with any of the filters already applied by Dirac either when I was experimenting with trying to cause a phase issue by using a narrow Q filter in an area I knew Dirac already adjusted. Stacking filters like that with just the PEQ would definitely have some negative consequences show in the measurements.

I'm totally fine with Dirac getting things 90% of the way there and adding the last 10% myself. It still sounds better than just 90%. When adding PEQ filters before Dirac, if there were any improvements I wanted to make afterwards, I would have to stack PEQ filters on top of each other. I've also seen Dirac over or undercorrect areas that I had PEQ filters already set at. By running Dirac first, I can see what it did right or wrong and go back and correct any anomalies myself with far fewer negative consequences, if any.