TOPIC:

Ultrasonic wrote:

Personally I only like Dirac Live applied in the bass region (up to around 150-200 Hz

I generally agree. There's a school of thought that automated room correction is best used only in the lower frequency range where the room response is dominant - typically about 200-300Hz downward, give or take - and should not be used on higher frequencies, where the speaker's own response is dominant. (In this vein, Genelec's GLM room-EQ software doesn't apply any correction above a few hundred Hz.)

My understanding is that the measurement microphone registers all the direct and reflected sound that reaches it. Our brains, by contrast, filter out some of the reflected sound information (or else we'd go insane living and working in enclosed spaces with constant reflected sound). 

So when Dirac does full-range correction, in the mids and highs there is a distinct possibility that it's correcting a frequency response that's not exactly what we actually hear - and therefore the corrected response can sometimes sound a little "off" to us.

Yes there is a big distinction between a microphone signal vs what we actually hear due to how our ears/brans process later arriving reflections vs the signal travelling direct from the speakers, for all but the low frequency range dominated by room modes. For this reason it is generally a bad idea to apply EQ across the whole frequency range based on measurement at a single point. Dirac Live is notably different in that it relies on measurements at multiple points though. Many like Dirac Live applied over the full frequency range whist others prefer it just used for low bass as I do. This is firmly in the 'try it and see what you prefer' category for me.