TOPIC:

John,

Assuming the signal flow given the previous post is correct, wouldn't it be a better for MiniDSP to have the 10x10 HD with Dirac?

The idea is to put the 10x10 HD between the pre-outs of the AVR (or pre/pro) and external amps. The reason I say this is that most users have an AVR (or pre/pro) with pre-outs. All the up-stream stuff is taken care of and the room equalization is done before power to the amps/speakers. I.e. the final part of the signal flow. This seems a more logical approach.

There would an A/D then D/A conversion with more DSP power needed. Not sure if the 10x10 HD platform has processing power to carry this out.

Just a thought for consideration to MiniDSP.

Hi Stephen, the nanoAVR uses the SHARC processor which is more powerful than the one in the 10x10. But who knows, perhaps they will make something like that in future.

stephenting99 wrote:

gigone wrote:

Hi guys,

I've got a question regarding the DL trial version.

I would like to buy the new NanoAVR DL, but I can't understand how the DL trial version policy works.

If I buy the NanoAVR DL with the DL trial version I assume I can calculate the convolution filters and I can consequently feed them to the NanoAVR DL.

But after the trial period exprires, what is going to happen?

Will my NanoAVR DL still work?

What if I have to make a new measurement, let's say, one month after?

In a nutshell: in which case I can be happy with the trial versione and which case I have to buy the 250 USD license for DL?

Thanks in advance

Luigi

Lungi,

The NanoAVR-DL hardware would still be working, just that Dirac REQ won't be. You can purchase the standard plugin that will give the same features as the NanoAVR-HD. You would the work done in Dirac and It would mean using REW and carrying out new set of measurements and applying PEQ filters.

That is indeed exactly what it does. Well answered.

Dear All

Sorry for the repeat post but here is what Tony wrote on avsforum...hoping this add to the discussion point.. A good topic though..

"Just about to fly to Denver and quickly read through the thread. I hope I didn't miss the core argument going on. I'll try for now with a prelim answer and some comments later.

Bass management + Dirac: A very interesting and lively topic! Glad to see all this brainstorming going on
OPTION1: Source - > Dirac Live -> Bass management (BM) - > AVR (nanoAVR DL structure)
OPTION2: Source - > Bass management(BM) -> Dirac Live - > AVR (proposed as the ultimate solution by some of you)

Knowing Bass Management is just a glorified Matrix + Crossover network, OPTION 1 or OPTION2 is similar to EQ in a multiway active system . Say a 3way stereo system where you have EQ at the input side(for L&R) but also have EQ at the output side (for each specific driver: Low/Mid/High). Would you agree? My point being, this EQ argument isn't new! it's been there for many years. There will be 2 sides of the argument, both with very valid arguments, both with Pro's & Con's… The perfect system (to my mind) is actually a combination of both worlds, this way everybody is happy!

OPTION1: Source - > Dirac Live -> Bass management - > AVR (nanoAVR DL as of now)
This is similar to doing EQ at the input section of an active system (i.e. L&R overall EQ). When we run 8 measurements at 9 positions = 72 measurements, we're building a "model" of the system. In other words, we play a sweep on Front Left (as your bluray player will when content is played), it will indeed start sweeps @ Low Freq inside the SUB (routed thanks to BM) and then move to the Front left pass cut off frequency.
PRO's: That's the true response of the system (i.e. extended bass response inc potential crossover effect). Dirac will not only fix the speaker but also the transition to the SUB. It's easiest way to fix your content (i.e. 7.1 or Stereo) no matter the configuration you have.
CON's: The impulse responses may be hard to work with however as the sound is arriving at different time for different frequencies in different positions (the sound is not coming from roughly one point in the room) and if the delay and level differences between a sub and a "main" speaker is very large, it may be difficult to handle within a "combined" Dirac Live filter. Now, if you run Dirac Live trial on your PC/HTPC, you're most likely running under that configuration (AVR doing the BM). So have a trial at it. It's free to test and you'll see the results..

OPTION2: Source -> Bass management -> Dirac Live @ each output- > AVR
This is similar to doing EQ at the output section of an active system (i.e. each speaker/ each driver / so speaker EQ). You'll build the best response for each speaker. There are 2 possible locations where we could run the sweep signal for Dirac measurements in this configuration:
a) Sweep before the BM module to give the true color of where the signal is routed to = > i.e. sweep will go through Sub + Left speaker (thanks to BM) PRO's you do see the true colors of the entire system. CON's: you're now planning to apply correction to only one output since Dirac is "post BM" (i.e. DSP block at the end of the chain). It will not solve your problem in your room. (measurement and filters are not in sync of what's to fix). This solution isn't right
b) Sweep after the BM module to give the true color of how each speaker sound =>i.e. Sweep will only go through the speaker.
PRO you will do GREAT at solving your speaker. Produces the best possible speakers for the bass management to work with.
CON's. what about all the filters you may have in your BM section? They are not taken into account. i.e. once you do have BM enabled, the sound will change so your measurement isn't a representation of the system. Possible your bass management crossovers will create a dip/bump at the LFE transition. Dirac will unfortunately not be able to fix that. (post BM, can't see it).
The way we see it, Option2 will work very well if you know really well what you're doing upstream (i.e. at the BM level). Call it an "advanced mode". The flexibility of our BM module as shown by Kal's extensive review on Stereophile is a testimony of what you can do once in the right hand. With this said, we've got to be realistic that it's not as plug&play. REW, filter and acoustic interpretation of results will take time. That was the bottleneck which we evaluated at length, and with our objective of putting Dirac Live in the hands of the largest crowd (Affordable/Simple/easy to use), we tried to make it an accessory to an existing system that is most important plug&play. Don't get me wrong, Option2 can be a great fit too for complex setup and I'm sure that a lot of tinkerers with complex system would love that. I just hope that it makes sense to you that it's maybe for a different crowd. Maybe a different product. Different philosophy.

That's all for my "little" addition to this topic and sorry for the wordy reply... Tried to include all my thought in one shot, most likely missing some but hopefully showing that each argument has merits.

Tony

Tony,

Would like your thoughts on pairing up the 10x10HD with the NanoAVR-DL so that Dirac can be implemented further down the signal chain. I.e. after the AVR?

There are some enthusiasts who have pre-outs for the AVR and pre/pro that can directly connect up to the 10x10HD then out to amps. The ability to apply Dirac room correction at this stage of the signal chain makes a lot of sense to me.

I believe there's sufficient space in the 10x10HD for the SHARC processor?

@ Stephen,

Good idea which was already suggested to us, unfortunately we don't publicize any product roadmap until they are very close to be ready to ship. A very simple reason behind it. Talking about a "future" product very early on is a great to set expectations, get some buzz but that may bite you in the end.. You may not be able to meet expectations as these products involving Hardware + Software + Firmware which aren't exactly easy to build. Lots of work going behind these gizmos. Even if we've got more than 40products under our belt, I don't think we would say anything for the simple reason that we'd be asked every day what's the progress. We prefer the "When it's ready, it's ready" method.

Sorry for the long answer and maybe not what you expect. That's just our philosophy to keep a sane dev cycle and most important ship products we have confidence in.

DevTeam

The nanoAVRDL appears to be "orderable" through the store. Is it shipping now? If not, what is the ETA for it?

@ Matted,

That's indeed correct. It's indeed shipping now.

DevTeam

Am I correct that there is NO bass management in nanoAVR DL ? I assume my AVR has to do the bass management ?
My signal chain will be DunePlayer > nanoAVR DL > Denon 3312 AVR > 7.1 speakers

@ Skylinestar,

You're indeed correct. The Bass management will happen downstream in your AVR. We're taking a Room EQ approach from the content/input side. i.e. applying EQ on the actual system (i.e. LFE signal being tuned overall rather than just a speaker). It's working out well best on our tests, most important it's very simple to tune.

DevTeam

Can I use the Dirac to eq just the front LCR (3-channels), leaving the surrounds untouched?

Skylinestar wrote:

Can I use the Dirac to eq just the front LCR (3-channels), leaving the surrounds untouched?

Interesting question... I wonder what would happen if you use a custom configuration set to three channels - do the other channels simply get a pass-through? Someone would have to try it...

I'm curious as to why you want to do that though (EQ just the front three channels)?

Skylinestar wrote:

Can I use the Dirac to eq just the front LCR (3-channels), leaving the surrounds untouched?

As per John's comment, not sure what would be the application here. Can you clarify? If you plan to do an hybrid system (i.e. some channels not processed), the DDRC-88A would be the easiest way to go. You'l still need to deal with timealignment thought. (i.e. DIrac processed vs non Dirac Processed).

DevTeam