Jump to content
IGNORED

New second generation Dirac Live


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, dziemian said:

Because of lack if certain features I need to use full dirac version with minidsp (crossovers and channel matrix) plus jriver (bass management downstream) and multisub optimizer software for my 4 subs. So yes, dirac lack some features, and some if them are basic. For the same reason I am looking for a software which can do this all and I dont think I demand too much.

I feel your pain in PC Dirac not having specific features you would like.  But, you are myopically only considering your own personal needs and desires, not those of others.  Those ideas are just not necessary or of interest to me and many others.  You are a rarity, a fringe user in having 4 subs, but what about a guy with 6, 8, etc.?  How many users even have 2 subs?  So, calling these "basic" is disingenuous, to put it mildly.

 

What about the added development and support cost involved in adding your feature set which would be borne through higher pricing affecting all new users, no matter how many subs they have?  That is not free.  Somebody has to pay for it.  You might be happy, but what about everybody else?  Do you want to see Dirac start charging forced annual maintenance fees to support your new features, when overwhelmingly most users just have no use for them?  I don't.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

Luckily guys at video software dont ask these question. They listen to clients and add necessary features. And this world is much more demanding with rapid change from hd to uhd, hdr, new projectors, tv, color spaces etc etc. In audio we dont see that much progress and idea of multisubs come from harman/jbl/ ravel development departament, a major player here. By basic I mean crossover capability and bass management. Maybe you dont need these features but there is a vast group of people who would appreciate them.

Macmini/ Jriver MC26 - Audiofire 12 - MSB-MVC-1 volume control - Cinepro 2k6 amp - Geddes Abbey speakers plus 4 x 10" Aurasound subs

Link to comment

I am waiting for a new version and if I dont like I will switch to other software. Simple as that. I am not a banker or have not robbed the bank to buy a Datasat unit. Funny that you guys are happy as it is. So why do you care at all about a new version. The recent one works.

Macmini/ Jriver MC26 - Audiofire 12 - MSB-MVC-1 volume control - Cinepro 2k6 amp - Geddes Abbey speakers plus 4 x 10" Aurasound subs

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

I feel your pain in PC Dirac not having specific features you would like.  But, you are myopically only considering your own personal needs and desires, not those of others.  Those ideas are just not necessary or of interest to me and many others.  You are a rarity, a fringe user in having 4 subs, but what about a guy with 6, 8, etc.?  How many users even have 2 subs?  So, calling these "basic" is disingenuous, to put it mildly.

 

What about the added development and support cost involved in adding your feature set which would be borne through higher pricing affecting all new users, no matter how many subs they have?  That is not free.  Somebody has to pay for it.  You might be happy, but what about everybody else?  Do you want to see Dirac start charging forced annual maintenance fees to support your new features, when overwhelmingly most users just have no use for them?  I don't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm also a PC user with only one Sub and the lack of Bass Management feature is making Dirac cumbersome to the point of ridicule and daily pain for anyone wanting to integrate a subwoofer. 

 

Perhaps you would consider listening to your own judgment when calling someone "myopic" and "not considering needs of others". 

Link to comment
21 hours ago, michael123 said:

If you want features, buy Emotiva or DataSAT

 

 

Sometimes I wonder if I'm interpreting the essence of "computeraudiophile" wrongly or why other ppl here just forget about the "computer" stuff and so quick to bash computer guys?

 

Why would you want a computer audiophile evangelist to buy a high-end & locked down receiver for all those features we already get (mostly better) in flexible software? 

Link to comment

Thats a good point. I used to use Deqx (hardware only), then I switched for Dirac Live pc (dsp)/ jriver (bass mgt) plus minidsp (crossovers) and in the end I would like to have a software only solution plus studio interface. Am I asking too much?

 

35 minutes ago, ronkuper said:

 

Sometimes I wonder if I'm interpreting the essence of "computeraudiophile" wrongly or why other ppl here just forget about the "computer" stuff and so quick to bash computer guys?

 

Why would you want a computer audiophile evangelist to buy a high-end & locked down receiver for all those features we already get (mostly better) in flexible software? 

 

Macmini/ Jriver MC26 - Audiofire 12 - MSB-MVC-1 volume control - Cinepro 2k6 amp - Geddes Abbey speakers plus 4 x 10" Aurasound subs

Link to comment
21 hours ago, dziemian said:

Luckily guys at video software dont ask these question. They listen to clients and add necessary features. And this world is much more demanding with rapid change from hd to uhd, hdr, new projectors, tv, color spaces etc etc. In audio we dont see that much progress and idea of multisubs come from harman/jbl/ ravel development departament, a major player here. By basic I mean crossover capability and bass management. Maybe you dont need these features but there is a vast group of people who would appreciate them.

If you read Dirac's announcement about the new release or discussions earlier in this thread, bass management is a major part of it.  So, be patient.  They may not implement it exactly as you would like, but any claim that your specific needs are typical or widespread in high demand is beyond greatly exaggerated.  What evidence do you have of some "vast group of people" needing or wanting this?  Sounds to me that you are the tail trying to wag the dog to do things your way, and you want it for free just by making a lot of noise.

 

Personally, I don't really need bass management in Dirac. I do my bass management in JRiver, which works perfectly fine for me.  But, I am nonetheless looking forward to the new release for that and other goodies.  And, it is a free gift to existing licensees like you and me, don't forget.

 

Right, progress in audio technology is way, way slower than in video.  So, why would Dirac want  to emulate their ways at their pace in new features?  You keep bringing that comparison up, but how is it in any way relevant?  The video guys gotta do what they gotta do to keep pace with their market.  Dirac does what its sense tells them of what its clients need and want.  If that includes your views, fine.  If not, you have alternatives.

 

Link to comment

I dont mind paying extra for features I need. I dont mind paying frequently for updates as a lot of us do with Jriver if they are resonably priced. You can stick to the old version if you like it and never update, your choice. Every software is being developed because people are asking for new features. Otherwise there would be a status quo. I am not forcing Dirac or other software to implement those. The first company which does that will get my money and free promo. 

Macmini/ Jriver MC26 - Audiofire 12 - MSB-MVC-1 volume control - Cinepro 2k6 amp - Geddes Abbey speakers plus 4 x 10" Aurasound subs

Link to comment
1 hour ago, ronkuper said:

 

Sometimes I wonder if I'm interpreting the essence of "computeraudiophile" wrongly or why other ppl here just forget about the "computer" stuff and so quick to bash computer guys?

 

Why would you want a computer audiophile evangelist to buy a high-end & locked down receiver for all those features we already get (mostly better) in flexible software? 

 

I doubt that Dirac will introduce lots of features, audiophile community is small, computer audiophile even smaller, and these who use room correction is a fraction (sadly)

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, ronkuper said:

 

I'm also a PC user with only one Sub and the lack of Bass Management feature is making Dirac cumbersome to the point of ridicule and daily pain for anyone wanting to integrate a subwoofer. 

 

Perhaps you would consider listening to your own judgment when calling someone "myopic" and "not considering needs of others". 

You have misinterpreted what I am saying.  I am all in favor of Dirac including bass management.  I welcome it.  And, it is on the way in the next release, hopefully soon.

 

But, have you looked carefully at @dziemian's Multisub Optimizer and what it has to go through?  Please check it out:

 

https://www.minidsp.com/applications/home-theater-tuning/ddrc-88a-multi-sub-optimizer

 

I think you will agree that it is pretty complex.  I don't see how adding that feature to Dirac could be done without considerably increasing  Dirac's complexity for all users, whether they need it or not.  For example, it would more than double the size of Dirac's now simple and concise instruction leaflet.  That is my point.  

 

And, is this Dirac's job at all?  It seems beyond quite clear to me that it is miniDSP's responsibility to include this with their system, not burdening all Dirac users with it.  I think @dziemianis barking up the wrong tree.

 

Sorry if Dirac's lack of bass management has caused you grief.  I did my homework and I was aware of that when I bought it. But, I had no trouble whatsoever setting up or using Dirac with bass management in JRiver.

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, dziemian said:

I dont mind paying extra for features I need. I dont mind paying frequently for updates as a lot of us do with Jriver if they are resonably priced. You can stick to the old version if you like it and never update, your choice. Every software is being developed because people are asking for new features. Otherwise there would be a status quo. I am not forcing Dirac or other software to implement those. The first company which does that will get my money and free promo. 

Ok, good.  So, you want Dirac to change their whole business model affecting all users just so you can get the specific, esoteric features you personally want?  What else can I say?  

 

 

Link to comment
On 6/24/2018 at 7:52 PM, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

I did my homework and I was aware of that when I bought it. But, I had no trouble whatsoever setting up or using Dirac with bass management in JRiver.

 

Same here, then I wanted to use Roon :P

 

I am very much aware that BM is coming (?? ) and that it is even stated to be "better" (look up @flak's posts) although apparently not in the coming version. I'm waiting.  

 

 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

BM in ROON is even easier than in JRiver.

 

Hi Kal :)

 

Are you referring to this - https://community.roonlabs.com/t/roon-dirac-integration-again/20433/57?u=ron_kuper ? 

 

If so then: 

1. I wouldn't call it easier

2. It doesn't allow to treat surround/stereo content differently, as required for correctness 

3. AFAIK it is not Linkwitz–Riley based, which I assume supposed to sound better to most

 

Not quite satisfactory IMO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, ronkuper said:

 

Hi Kal :)

 

Are you referring to this - https://community.roonlabs.com/t/roon-dirac-integration-again/20433/57?u=ron_kuper ? 

 

If so then: 

1. I wouldn't call it easier

2. It doesn't allow to treat surround/stereo content differently, as required for correctness 

3. AFAIK it is not Linkwitz–Riley based, which I assume supposed to sound better to most

 

Not quite satisfactory IMO.

Yup.  Just as easy but with better interface.  Of course, I use it only for 5.1 (turn it or off as needed) and never use for stereo.

Kal Rubinson

Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, ronkuper said:

 

Hi Kal :)

 

Are you referring to this - https://community.roonlabs.com/t/roon-dirac-integration-again/20433/57?u=ron_kuper ? 

 

If so then: 

1. I wouldn't call it easier

2. It doesn't allow to treat surround/stereo content differently, as required for correctness 

3. AFAIK it is not Linkwitz–Riley based, which I assume supposed to sound better to most

 

Not quite satisfactory IMO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do not use Roon or other sources, just JRiver.  But, I am not seeing an issue for #2. What is not correct about 2.1 playback using bass management in exactly the same way with identical parameters as in 5/7.1?  

 

If playback frequency response, dynamics, etc. are improved by a sub or subs in Mch, why is it incorrect to also use the sub(s) for stereo?  And, if you do, why would xovers or other settings be any different in stereo?   There is no reason I can think of.

 

I believe Kal uses his subs only for the LFE, since he has big B&Ws up front.  But, I distinctly prefer stereo as 2.1, myself, since my speakers/room do not go down as far as his with sufficient authority without a sub(s).  

Link to comment
On 6/26/2018 at 11:57 PM, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

What is not correct about 2.1 playback using bass management in exactly the same way with identical parameters as in 5/7.1?  

Summing formulas and LFE handling is different between 2.1 and 5.1... Read about it. 

 

As Kal stated he is using it for 5.1 only and still need to manually enable/disable it when moving between content types. 

 

Guys - I'm not complaining, just want to voice where stuff could be improved for us by the lovely software vendors of our field. Better sound and better user experience. 

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, ronkuper said:

As Kal stated he is using it for 5.1 only and still need to manually enable/disable it when moving between content types. 

More like when moving from one mood to another.  Generally, it is off but some specific music choices motivate me to turn it on.  

Kal Rubinson

Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, ronkuper said:

Summing formulas and LFE handling is different between 2.1 and 5.1... Read about it. 

 

As Kal stated he is using it for 5.1 only and still need to manually enable/disable it when moving between content types. 

 

Ron - I have read about it.  All I see is that 2.1 is a perfect subset of the more general 5.1, and of course there is no LFE in the 2.0 input to transfer to 2.1.  

 

There is no complex "summing formula" in bass management, except that the LFE input level is adjusted prior to summing, which does not affect 2.1 playback at all.  All other channels are merely a simple sum in the .1 channel of signal below their respective xover frequencies, nothing complicated. If a channel is not present in the input signal, it is not part of the resulting sum automatically, since its contribution to the sum is zero.  So, 2.1 works just as well as 5.1 with the same bass management setup. 

 

Have you perhaps overthought this?

Link to comment
On 6/28/2018 at 4:28 PM, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Ron - I have read about it.  All I see is that 2.1 is a perfect subset of the more general 5.1, and of course there is no LFE in the 2.0 input to transfer to 2.1.  

 

There is no complex "summing formula" in bass management, except that the LFE input level is adjusted prior to summing, which does not affect 2.1 playback at all.  All other channels are merely a simple sum in the .1 channel of signal below their respective xover frequencies, nothing complicated. If a channel is not present in the input signal, it is not part of the resulting sum automatically, since its contribution to the sum is zero.  So, 2.1 works just as well as 5.1 with the same bass management setup. 

 

Have you perhaps overthought this?

1

 

Perhaps.

 

Read this thread discussing internal deliberations of JRiver's Bass Management and tell me what you think - 

https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=58646.0

 

In any case this was only one out of three points I've made regarding the lack of proper BM features for Roon. 

 

And all in all it didn't stop me from using it and doing a screenshots guide for others in the community. 

No doubt there is room for improvement and I'm happy to voice my opinions and be active in this hobby of ours :)

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, ronkuper said:

 

Perhaps.

 

Read this thread discussing internal deliberations of JRiver's Bass Management and tell me what you think - 

https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=58646.0

 

In any case this was only one out of three points I've made regarding the lack of proper BM features for Roon. 

 

And all in all it didn't stop me from using it and doing a screenshots guide for others in the community. 

No doubt there is room for improvement and I'm happy to voice my opinions and be active in this hobby of ours :)

 

 

Ron - I would not pay too much attention to a 2010 thread when JR in Version 15 was still struggling somewhat to understand industry standard bass management.   I believe they have now implemented it correctly.  I am not about to search for more recent threads for you.  You can do that or post a new question about it to their forum if you are still concerned.
 
I regularly follow JR Forum and I have seen no complaints about bass management for years, other than occasional user issues with simple parameter setup. I have seen nothing at all about problems with  2.1 vs. Mch x.1
 
In my use of JR/Dirac, all channel output levels are set by mic in Dirac using test tones generated by Dirac.  JR is not involved in that.  It is not in the signal path except on file playback,, and I use no channel level trims inside JR whatsoever.  
 
The results with playback of 2.0 as 2.1,  or Mch as X.1 indicate no bass problems whatsoever via listening or via the channel level display in my Exasound driver.  That is also true in Mch whether the source is 5.0 or 5.1, CD, SACD, BD, etc.    The same singular, general 7.1 bass management parameter setup in JR works perfectly fine for any input.  
 
My sub is always on, unobtrusively unless the program material calls for it.     And, 2.1 sounds much better to me than 2.0 because of added bass frequency extension and dynamics, but naturally without any artificiality.  FWIW, classical music is my primary listening choice, and I go to many live concerts each year.
 
Good luck with Roon, though.
 
 
 
Link to comment
17 hours ago, Fitzcaraldo215 said:
 
I regularly follow JR Forum and I have seen no complaints about bass management for years, other than occasional user issues with simple parameter setup. I have seen nothing at all about problems with  2.1 vs. Mch x.1
 
 

I updated their wiki recently and included measurements of all the various DSP options (https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/DSP) as well as a guide on how to verify this yourself (https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/Verifying_DSP_Studio) using freely available tools (though I since notice REW has an offline measurement mode that makes that even easier to do).

 

There are a few things in there that don't look like they work or exhibit some unusual behaviour, one of which was bass management (as reported in https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,114602.msg792538.html#msg792538 and on the wiki in https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/Room_Correction#Bass_Management_In_Action)

 

FWIW I do my bass management manually (using a mix of PEQ and acourate filters) but I would be wary about using the built in function (i.e. make sure the end to end signal chain behaves as you expect)

Link to comment
5 hours ago, 3ll3d00d said:

I updated their wiki recently and included measurements of all the various DSP options (https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/DSP) as well as a guide on how to verify this yourself (https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/Verifying_DSP_Studio) using freely available tools (though I since notice REW has an offline measurement mode that makes that even easier to do).

 

There are a few things in there that don't look like they work or exhibit some unusual behaviour, one of which was bass management (as reported in https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,114602.msg792538.html#msg792538 and on the wiki in https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/Room_Correction#Bass_Management_In_Action)

 

FWIW I do my bass management manually (using a mix of PEQ and acourate filters) but I would be wary about using the built in function (i.e. make sure the end to end signal chain behaves as you expect)

Thank you.  The added detail and measurements shed some useful light on why I believe I am having no problems using JR bass management with Dirac.  

 

Your finding, please correct me if I am wrong,  is is that JR BM reduces the level of redirected bass from main and surround channels by 10 dB, therefore making it equal in level to an input LFE channel, whether or not it is present.  So, the entire summed .1 output sub channel is down by 10dB and summed bass from all channels including LFE use the same relative level

 

However, use of JRiver BM with Dirac in standard mode boosts the .1  input channel by 10dB on playback.  Dirac also has a custom mode to switch this boost off, but I do not use that.  I believe this is in Dirac's instruction booklet.

 

So, the truth is a bit more complicated and somewhat different in detail than I stated.  Don't you hate that when it occurs!  But, the result is still the same, meaning good in my case.

 

JR plays fine with Dirac, and I expect it does also using JR BM with HT processors which also apply the boost the input .1 channel.  The problem would be for others who do not use some mechanism after JR BM to boost the .1 sub  channel, but those are probably relatively in the minority.   The typical user should be fine.

 

Also, getting back to the issue of whether JR BM is somehow different for 2.1. vs. Mch X.1, the answer would appear to be No.  In all cases, Dirac playback will correct output bass levels to be equal to main/surround channels.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...