DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner

121 - 140 of 222 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,117 Posts
There is a level setting menu within the software. The "window" of that level setting can't handle more than 10db difference without clipping. Basically, you just need to get the drivers to have less than a 10db difference between the top peak and the general average level. You can ignore dips.

Imagine if you had a driver you wanted to play 150hz to 2500hz and that driver played perfectly flat from 200hz to 2000hz except one giant peak at 1000hz that was 15db high. When you were setting levels within the software, you would either always end up clipping the input level, or you'd end up 5db lower than you needed to be and losing a lot of volume. So you'd want to eq that peak down a big.

Imo, Do as little eq as you need too. Let Dirac do as much as possible. It doesn't hurt to use the 10bands of peq for crossover correction though.

Really, the software is really intuitive once you get your hands on it.

Like a pro!

Haven’t hear much lately as the C dsp probably because everyone’s cars sound awesome and ran out of stuff to do (Except Erin he’s having all the fun right now and hoarding it to himself ..lol )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,117 Posts
Thanks, man. I realized I was referring to leveling out the EQ, meaning flattening the EQ response of each driver. :)
Let Dirac do your eq work.


Here’s why.

Dirac does a lot with the measurements, when you add EQ to a speaker before Dirac than it would not be able to differentiate which is room issues vs driver issues as well as it would if you would have just let it do the eq work.


I’m certain it gates the response and looks at what the speaker is doing without the room and compares the natural response of the measurements vs with the room. Than applies a correction based on what will sound the best for its relative diract vs reflected sound. You want it to see as much of the problems as possible, don’t hide those problems with eq , it would change the way it corrects things

If you add or remove energy from the drivers natural responce it may not turn out as good , that depends on a lot of things primarily the on and off axis responses throughout the measurement points. Another words how well the speaker is behaved ,


I only use peq to get into the 10db window on frequencies above 1k and use proper levels below 1k. Example my horns with no eq have 30db variations so I have no choice but to do some pre eq and even than I use a couple wide band frequencies and only turn down enough to get me into the game and let it do the rest.


Hope that helps some.

Also if you cut the target a little you can essentially get more than 10db by overall gain cutting. It sounds better doing that at the cost of headroom , but I never peg my volume so I’m fine with the added eq flexibility
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,994 Posts
Let Dirac do your eq work.


Here’s why.

Dirac does a lot with the measurements, when you add EQ to a speaker before Dirac than it would not be able to differentiate which is room issues vs driver issues as well as it would if you would have just let it do the eq work.


I’m certain it gates the response and looks at what the speaker is doing without the room and compares the natural response of the measurements vs with the room. Than applies a correction based on what will sound the best for its relative diract vs reflected sound. You want it to see as much of the problems as possible, don’t hide those problems with eq , it would change the way it corrects things

...
If one is producing an impulse response, then in the time domain is always the direct path near the peak... unless those reflections are right in the same timespan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,117 Posts
If one is producing an impulse response, then in the time domain is always the direct path near the peak... unless those reflections are right in the same timespan.

Fastest way somewhere is a straight line yes I getbwhat your saying.

Not sure how that relates to the argument tho, so yes I agree but not sure what your point is so I’ll try ,

If your reference is to when I said it “can’t differentiate as well””

Adding peq weather it be cuts or boost will make the responce change yes

However it could advance or retard the timing so to speak at that frequency as a result of the peq if it’s in a non minimum phase area and only not picked up by all measurements. That could actually move the time in line with a reflection and the reflection would/could be seen as direct sound.

It’s all about could, possibly, as well etc. so many variables. It’s best to just let the speaker play naturally under about 1k or so arguably higher as much as 2.5k
And let Dirac determine what is direct sound and reflections based on how the speaker actually behaves on its own in the passband with minimal or no eq ideally.

I realize it’s not always possible, and or it simply sounds better in some cars to do the opposite, but I wouldn’t arbitrarily do that without at least exploring and exhausting efforts to let Dirac do it’s thing on as much as possible
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,117 Posts
I think I get what your saying now.

Even if you add peq And the time is altered the physical distance would still be picked up by gating ....a resounding yes!

But that’s not what I meant. What I’m talking is the phase of the magnitude. You have to think of how reflections and echos operate and how harmonics play into those over tones and sound power as a result of the reflection.


If you are 10db high at 1300hz and use peq to pull back 10db of it to make it flat
The reflect in Dirac would still see the reflection either way. The timing difference between its harmonic and sub-harmonic would definitely be altered

To get the reflection to cooperate with the direct sound it requires altering the behavior of the speaker t targeted frequencies in the time and frequency domain
You change the time at one frequency the harmonic balance of the entire spectrum could easily be detrimentally changed, exactly why you don’t just start using all pass filters without knowing what your doing (unless it just sounds better but that’s another topic). And is why I argue that peq can be just as detrimental and urge ppl to try diffrent all pass arrangements with non Dirac systems to at least take a listen and explore what can happen for better or for worse.

If 600hz is wrong 1200, 2400 ,300,150 he won’t sound right . Etc etc. a complete loss of ambiance and spectral balance


You start changing the time domain in any fashion (peq or all passes) pre Dirac it will never know what true distances between reflections and source throughout the magnitude and it will calculate things differently. The less you change the more so it will know what is actually happening in the room. I would also like to suggest this could also be a cause of some crossover cancellations seen in the post Dirac, and as why their there. A linear phase crossover would a nice add on or if there was some way Dirac could take measurements of speakers in a multi-way with no crossovers turned on than with turned on. Maybe something they will add down the road, for now it’s just this way. Which is one thing the APl does as part of its calibration. But again it’s a room correction tool not a loudspeaker linearization tool. The hotness would be to have both, which is why I use rephase linear crossovers in 2x4hds and a Dirac upstream for the correction
It works better in some regards, it’s not miles ahead but eliminates crossover cancellations and has a little better ambiance that is noticeable when doing AB comparisons.


So that said with extra emphasis on “it will calculate things differently “ Dirac will still make the correction, however you run the risk of a correction that simply doesn’t have to be there as an added issue besides the possibility of timing issues. For example, if you have two EQs in series
And one you turn down let’s say 500hz by 10db and the next you turn up 500hz by 10db , will it sound the same as if there was no eq? I suggest it would not and would have artifacts that simply don’t need to be there as a result of processing. That’s is also another issue that can lead to not as good of a result.


There’s also this angle , in pro audio they often have multiple eqs in series because it gives certain effects to parts of the mix. So again I can’t say what I’m saying is absolute. It’s just a precaution


So to wrap it up a Dirac pre tune can be better, it can also suck. I would try to let Dirac do as much as possible and listen, than find what works Nd what doesn’t. If you start with multiple eqs going the rabbit hole will have too many forks in the road to lead you back to knowing what is going on what is doing what.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,994 Posts
Maybe it does do some gating...

You get an impulse response and you see the delayed comb of the reflections.
Say you cut them off to minimispze echos.

Then you do an inverse FFT of that response, and you get the FIR taps for Dirac.. without the reflections... phase and amplitude.
(Or maybe there is some normalisation to add in the house curve and account for the spectrum of the (pink?) noise?)

There is probably more happening, but at a kindergarten level it is close.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
Compatible with Mac OS?

I know initially the Dirac Live software was supposed to work with Mac OS, but when it was unveiled it only worked on PC’s.

Does anyone know if the MiniDSP C-DSP 8x12 with Dirac Live software currently works with Mac OS?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,414 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

I know initially the Dirac Live software was supposed to work with Mac OS, but when it was unveiled it only worked on PC’s.

Does anyone know if the MiniDSP C-DSP 8x12 with Dirac Live software currently works with Mac OS?


When I tried using it, it crashed every time. I have not attempted since. It might work now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

When I tried using it, it crashed every time. I have not attempted since. It might work now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for the reply. Maybe I’ll confirm with miniDSP tech support before I make my purchase. I only have access to Mac laptops so it is a bit of an issue. I know I could just buy a cheap windows laptop, but it’s an additional cost nonetheless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,586 Posts
I just posted on their forum so issues I’m having on my ASUS netbook - small annoyances - Macs are my other option - hopefully we will get some feedback on whether the Max OS issues have been corrected. The other option is to use to put Windows 7 on the Mac, but that didn’t work for me last time I tried (not great with loading software )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,414 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

Thanks for the reply. Maybe I’ll confirm with miniDSP tech support before I make my purchase. I only have access to Mac laptops so it is a bit of an issue. I know I could just buy a cheap windows laptop, but it’s an additional cost nonetheless.
You can run Windows on a Mac. I use bootcamp on my MacBook Pro for tuning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

You can run Windows on a Mac. I use bootcamp on my MacBook Pro for tuning.
Thanks for reminding me of this option. Do you recall what the total cost to get windows up and running on your Mac was?

I looked into this in the past and I recall being discouraged by the total cost vs. just buying a new cheap windows laptop..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,288 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

Thanks for the reply. Maybe I’ll confirm with miniDSP tech support before I make my purchase. I only have access to Mac laptops so it is a bit of an issue. I know I could just buy a cheap windows laptop, but it’s an additional cost nonetheless.
I have this laptop as a dedicated tuning laptop and I leave it in the car.
It's small, the battery lasts for hours and hours and it doesn't get hot. REW, MiniDSP and Helix programs work perfectly on it...

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07RHMBGCF/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_10?smid=A3TVJZN3NYXIXP&psc=1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

I have this laptop as a dedicated tuning laptop and I leave it in the car.
It's small, the battery lasts for hours and hours and it doesn't get hot. REW, MiniDSP and Helix programs work perfectly on it...

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07RHMBGCF/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_10?smid=A3TVJZN3NYXIXP&psc=1
Leaving it in the car is a good idea. That’d be one less hurdle when I consider having a tuning session.

I always cringe when I see a celeron processor, but less than $200 for a brand new computer makes up for it :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,288 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

Leaving it in the car is a good idea. That’d be one less hurdle when I consider having a tuning session.

I always cringe when I see a celeron processor, but less than $200 for a brand new computer makes up for it :D
Believe me, I am with you on the Celerons... All of my other laptops have i5s or i7s, but when you consider the only thing the Celeron needs to handle are 2-3 simple programs, it should be ok! Lol
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
265 Posts
It only took 5-6 phone calls to my bank, but I finally have one of these on the way. The purchase triggered my bank for fraud every time.

Now that that's out of the way, I'm really looking forward to getting things out of my tune beyond what I've been able to do on my own.

Just to see if there's some consensus...

Are we saying pre-EQ to fix any big dips or valleys, or no pre-EQ at all (let Dirac do all the work)?

Run Dirac with sub, or no sub?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,256 Posts
It only took 5-6 phone calls to my bank, but I finally have one of these on the way. The purchase triggered my bank for fraud every time.



Now that that's out of the way, I'm really looking forward to getting things out of my tune beyond what I've been able to do on my own.



Just to see if there's some consensus...



Are we saying pre-EQ to fix any big dips or valleys, or no pre-EQ at all (let Dirac do all the work)?



Run Dirac with sub, or no sub?
There is a level setting menu within the software. The "window" of that level setting can't handle more than 10db difference without clipping. Basically, you just need to get the drivers to have less than a 10db difference between the top peak and the general average level. You can ignore dips.

Imagine if you had a driver you wanted to play 150hz to 2500hz and that driver played perfectly flat from 200hz to 2000hz except one giant peak at 1000hz that was 15db high. When you were setting levels within the software, you would either always end up clipping the input level, or you'd end up 5db lower than you needed to be and losing a lot of volume. So you'd want to eq that peak down a big.

Imo, Do as little eq as you need too. Let Dirac do as much as possible. It doesn't hurt to use the 10bands of peq for crossover correction though.

Use sub with dirac

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,414 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

Thanks for reminding me of this option. Do you recall what the total cost to get windows up and running on your Mac was?

I looked into this in the past and I recall being discouraged by the total cost vs. just buying a new cheap windows laptop..


There is no cost for me to do Bootcamp because I have old Windows install CDs from years past.


If you do Parallels, there is a cost for that software. But I don't use Parallels for tuning. I just do bootcamp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,586 Posts
Re: Compatible with Mac OS?

There is no cost for me to do Bootcamp because I have old Windows install CDs from years past.





If you do Parallels, there is a cost for that software. But I don't use Parallels for tuning. I just do bootcamp.


I used to have problems with Parallels and VM Ware when trying to connect devices to the laptop. Reason I thought boot camp would be better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
There is no cost for me to do Bootcamp because I have old Windows install CDs from years past.





If you do Parallels, there is a cost for that software. But I don't use Parallels for tuning. I just do bootcamp.


I used to have problems with Parallels and VM Ware when trying to connect devices to the laptop. Reason I thought boot camp would be better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Vm Ware did need an dos code line added when mac updated software and disabled usb priorities on start up. It has been nails before and since then. It's easier and more fluid than bootcamp IMO.
 
121 - 140 of 222 Posts
Top