How did you configure your 2.2 system did you create two independent channels to be corrected by Dirac Live: L channel and R channel ? Other combinations would be possible.įurthermore, in any case, the initial measurement position in Dirac Live needs to be at the (theoretical) sweet-spot as accurately as possible since Dirac Live will use this information for timing reference. Dirac Live Bass Control might provide an option, in the future. Therefore, it is important to understand the 'Signal Flow' and more specifically, the 'Matrix mixer 2x4'. miniDSP do recommend this procedure for best results in certain cases *. It is quite common to use the PEQs and on top of that, Dirac Live. Wonder if PEQ to do the 'heavy lifting' means that Dirac has less to do and, therefore, works better? Combination D (PEQ and Dirac using single point measurement) is probably the best - slightly better on transient response than B and C - but need to do some measurement to see if that's confirmed. Initial testing and listening suggests only small differences between B, C and D - with all 3 being much better than A. PEQ with Dirac using single-point measurement. Dirac only using single-point measurement.ĭ. Dirac only using multi-point measurements.ī. So, I then tried the following combinations:Ī. Listening tests (using Rebecca Pidgeon's track Spanish Harlem as a test) confirmed the measurement findings. Dirac over-corrected this (as shown by measurement of adjusted response using REW).
I think that this was because of a large peak at 60Hz on one channel. Using miniDSP SHD I found that Dirac was over-compensating in terms of bass correction. Initially I used SHD to do crossover and then Dirac using multi-point measurement (as recommended in SHD manual). I'm using a 2.2 system with crossover at 100Hz (I use 24dB/Octave for subs and 12dB/Octave for mains because mains have a natural 12dB/Octave roll off so this gives an effective acoustic filter of 24dB/Octave).