TOPIC:

Hi all!

I'm looking for some pointers on how I might improve the results I'm getting with Dirac.

My speakers are a pair of self-made full range rear-loaded horns (Frugal-Horn XL). They work quite wonderfully, but really benefit from some EQ correction, as the bass is a bit boomy and the overall sound is a bit nasal, with the lack of a better word. On the other hand, the space of sound they create is unlike anything I have experienced in a stereo system. It really feels like the music is all around me to the extent that on some recordings this can be even a bit distracting.

Anyway, using Dirac has worked wonderfully in correcting the bass, it is much cleaner and tighter after the correction. The midrange imbalance is also eliminated. You can hear more nuances.

However, what also happens is that feeling of space is almost completely eliminated. With the remote it is easy to toggle the filter ON and OFF, and while the sound objectively gets better when the filter gets turned on, it also effectively sucks the sound out of the room around me and places it neatly between the speakers. Some folks might disagree with me, but I feel like I'm almost losing more than I'm gaining.

Is it possible to achieve a corrected response without taking away the sense of space? I would think that microphone placement might be the key here, but I wanted to ask for some guidance before starting to randomly experiment. The way I performed the measurements now was with the 17-point regime, sofa setting with wide imaging. I pointed the microphone towards the ceiling.

Any advice will be greatly appreciated!

You could perhaps try limiting the correction frequency range and see if that makes a difference?

Thanks, I will definitely try that!

I wonder if the 'loss' in envelopment is due to some resonance being removed from the room - what does the initial curve look like before correction? post up a photo.

Hello!

Sorry for abandoning the subject! Life sort of got in the way... Anyway, let's see if we could get to the bottom of it this time around.

I'm attaching my room measurement curve from Dirac. I must admit, I am not very familiar in reading these, and can't really offer much of a commentary on it myself. I'll be very interested to hear any insights you might have!

Try doing a curve like this and see how it goes for you.

The nasal sound will be the 3,4,5k roller coaster you have going on there.
Otherwise it is a reasonably good measurement to start with I think.

Dirac should have no issue with the roller coaster you have at the top end.

You are going to have to tune it by ear really and remember it is most important that you don't move the mic during a measurement. I would go with the small sofa option and i would also use the directly facing speaker orientation as this seems to work well for me. (and the correct mic calibration for that)

Also Dirac 3 is out now, you may as well use that. Spend the time getting a good measurement and then you can load up all four slots with experimenting and see what you like - i tune mine in and then have -1,0,+1 and +2 variations on that in the bass region...

Nikodemus wrote:

The series of peaks in the high frequency response from 5 kHz upwards there looks very odd to me. This is a measurement with just a single speaker playing, right? Assuming it is, is there a reflective surface very close to the microphone position?

WerTicus wrote:

Try doing a curve like this and see how it goes for you.

The nasal sound will be the 3,4,5k roller coaster you have going on there.
Otherwise it is a reasonably good measurement to start with I think.

Dirac should have no issue with the roller coaster you have at the top end.

You are going to have to tune it by ear really and remember it is most important that you don't move the mic during a measurement. I would go with the small sofa option and i would also use the directly facing speaker orientation as this seems to work well for me. (and the correct mic calibration for that)

Also Dirac 3 is out now, you may as well use that. Spend the time getting a good measurement and then you can load up all four slots with experimenting and see what you like - i tune mine in and then have -1,0,+1 and +2 variations on that in the bass region...

Thank you for the reply! I understand the slight bass boost you suggest in the target curve, but what is the 3K hump for?

By "directly facing speaker orientation" do you mean pointing the microphone at the speakers instead of the ceiling?

Yeah, I noticed that Dirac has updated, I'll use the new one from now on.

Ultrasonic wrote:

Nikodemus wrote:

The series of peaks in the high frequency response from 5 kHz upwards there looks very odd to me. This is a measurement with just a single speaker playing, right? Assuming it is, is there a reflective surface very close to the microphone position?

That was the "master curve" that Dirac generates from all of your measurements, and on top of which you put your target curve. I suppose it would have made more sense for me to present an individual measurement. Here is the one from the listening position.

That still looks a bit odd. What is the answer to my question about a source of reflected sound very close to the microphone?

Ultrasonic wrote:

That still looks a bit odd. What is the answer to my question about a source of reflected sound very close to the microphone?

Sorry that I overlooked that one! I placed the microphone where my head would be when sitting on the sofa. The sofa headrest is quite close (15cm) and behind the sofa there is a wall.

Nikodemus wrote:

I placed the microphone where my head would be when sitting on the sofa. The sofa headrest is quite close (15cm) and behind the sofa there is a wall.

My ears are about 24cm from the back wall. I got early reflections until I placed two cushions on the back of the sofa behind my head. Simple but it worked. Give it a try and rerun.