# miniDSP nanoAVR DL HDMI / Dirac Live Audio Processor Review Discussion Thread



## AudiocRaver

*miniDSP nanoAVR DL HDMI / Dirac Live Audio Processor Review Discussion Thread*​

[img]http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=25417[/img]
nanoAVR DL MSRP: $549


*by Wayne Myers*


*Introduction*

The miniDSP nanoAVR DL is another digital signal processing offering from miniDSP, the Hong Kong based audio company that specializes in bringing affordable yet high-quality DSP into the hands of the home theater and two-channel masses. Dirac Live is a room correction technology that seems to have caught the attention of room tuners and chasers of sonic perfection in recent years, a market long dominated by Audyssey, with their AVR based products seen by many as the shortest line between speaker setup and great audio. As far as I can tell, Dirac Live is in the process of showing the audio world that said line can be much shorter and reach a more satisfying conclusion, too.

*miniDSP nanoAVR DL HDMI / Dirac Live Audio Processor Review.*​


----------



## AudiocRaver

Specs and Review Equipment were added to the review.

Also, the comments about gain and Master Volume (Output Volume) settings were amended.


----------



## AudiocRaver

A thought about setup mic pattern requirements for Dirac Live:

Just before running the calibrations following the prescribed method, in a little flood of clarity I suddenly saw how the algorithm SHOULD work. The first mic position needs to be at LP Center, and handles all the timing and frequency response _matching_ needs, and the other mic positions can be randomly spaced around the seat area (no symmetry or careful spacing required) because their "average" is mainly used to give the desired overall frequency response profile. That is probably an over-simplification, but it seemed that if those needs were somehow accomplished, they would satisfy the critical needs of the LP and help the user minimally compromise overall FR in accommodate other seat positions.

I was absolutely tickled to find that, at least in principle, that was the result.

What I wouldn't give for a peek under the hood of their technology.

Anyway, I am satisfied to see that it answers and resolves the needs of a lot of frustrated room correction users by simplifying the setup mic pattern, giving needed focus on the LP, and easily giving a good FR average, all at the same time.

A couple of additional comments have been made elsewhere, about the first measurement point of a calibration:
Here, in the Mic Setup Pattern section.
Here.


----------



## NBPk402

Is there a way to loop the HDMI so you can use it for all your sources from an AVR instead of having to buy the MiniDSP DDRC-88A?


----------



## |Tch0rT|

I don't know of a way to loop the HDMI. If all of your sources are HDMI (what isn't really these days...) one could use an HDMI switch, it also has two HDMI inputs anyhow. Good to know Dirac Live works well with ESL's, I've been kind of hesitant to drop money on some of the Dirac products since ESL's negate a lot of the room interaction by nature anyhow.


----------



## AU26

Very good Wayne.
Very tempting to jump in but $549.oo is not an easy ask.
Would be very happy to use it on Yamaha AVR Aventage RX-A1030 as its YPAO auto calibration of ML ESL and SVS SB1000 Sub is giving some unusual results.
Was almost ready to place order for UMIK-1 USB microphone alone to be used with REW.
Thanks to your review I am going back to do some more thinking (hoping headache will leave me alone).

Cheers from Australia


----------



## AudiocRaver

ellisr63 said:


> Is there a way to loop the HDMI so you can use it for all your sources from an AVR instead of having to buy the MiniDSP DDRC-88A?


There is no way to loop-back HDMI, quite sure of it. Getting it to work _straight_ is tricky enough at times.

That is a potential system configuration downside for some users. I will update the review accordingly.


----------



## AudiocRaver

A few paragraphs have been added to the System Configuration section, covering REW measurement issues and the basic "are two inputs enough?" question.

And the Two Little Wishes in the Bass Management and Other Complexities section have both been addressed. A recent Dirac Live program update includes the Output Volume gain readout I was hoping for. And a further look at Output Volume gain settings and internal headroom has shown that the nanoAVR DL's internal headroom seems quite plentiful, so there is really no issue after all.


----------



## John Stewart

Wayne, thanks for another great review. The info you provide in your reviews is tremendously useful and instructive. And much appreciated.

On the wish list for this product I would add:

- A clipping indicator light for the DSP hardware. Dirac Audio Processor for PCs has this feature, so hopefully its doable. 

- Indicate in the PC software Filter Design Screen the project being worked on. Currently this is only available on the export screen.

- For the export screen slots indicate both the name of the project and filter as opposed to just the project name. (I'm easily confused). The workaround is saving the project with a new name, but it sometimes requires closing and re-opening the Calibration Tool using the new project name so that when exported the new project name is available to load to a slot.

- A field for Notes that are saved with the project just like the REW notes that can be saved for a measurement.

No deal breakers here and except for the clipping indicator not useful after the unit is calibrated to final taste. Convenient while dialing in or experimenting though and the software suggestions should be easy enough.

A word of advice... don't sample the PC version if you don't want to spend the $$$. Once you've heard the difference and seen the flexibility it can be hard to part with. Too hard for me anyway.


----------



## AudiocRaver

John Stewart said:


> Wayne, thanks for another great review. The info you provide in your reviews is tremendously useful and instructive. And much appreciated.
> 
> On the wish list for this product I would add:
> 
> - A clipping indicator light for the DSP hardware. Dirac Audio Processor for PCs has this feature, so hopefully its doable.
> 
> - Indicate in the PC software Filter Design Screen the project being worked on. Currently this is only available on the export screen.
> 
> - For the export screen slots indicate both the name of the project and filter as opposed to just the project name. (I'm easily confused). The workaround is saving the project with a new name, but it sometimes requires closing and re-opening the Calibration Tool using the new project name so that when exported the new project name is available to load to a slot.
> 
> - A field for Notes that are saved with the project just like the REW notes that can be saved for a measurement.
> 
> No deal breakers here and except for the clipping indicator not useful after the unit is calibrated to final taste. Convenient while dialing in or experimenting though and the software suggestions should be easy enough.
> 
> A word of advice... don't sample the PC version if you don't want to spend the $$$. Once you've heard the difference and seen the flexibility it can be hard to part with. Too hard for me anyway.


John,

Great notes. I ran across most of what you mentioned, and agree they would be welcome conveniences. I saved each project with the filter set description as part of the file name. Then the name gets too long to read anywhere. So I used an abbreviated name at the beginning of the file name so it would always be readable. A little convoluted.

I am just starting to work with the PC full version, intend a review of it some time soon. Comparing the sound will be important. You are hinting that the PC version is a sonic improvement. Do you mean better filter generation or higher sample rate / no resampling?


----------



## bkeeler10

Another fantastic review, Wayne. Seems to me that the folks at Dirac have sorted this room correction thing out rather well.

I am hoping that a full Atmos system is in my near future (but looking to move so that has to come first). When that occurs, what I am hoping to be able to do is have an HTPC with a program that can decode the Atmos stream (not currently available AFAIK - come on JRiver!). Then I would apply Dirac Live to each decoded "channel" in the HTPC and send the result to a DAC box (already available fortunately). I would be able to have a reasonably priced 9.1.6 system calibrated by Dirac. I would then expect virtual sonic nirvana. :TT (I realize I could use a pair of DDRc-88A devices, but that ain't cheap when you still need an AVR, and you still can't get a 16 channel AVR anyway).

Anyway, staying a bit more on topic, it is encouraging to see Dirac Live working so well for you. I have been living with Audyssey XT Pro for several years now. While it works fairly well for movies, frankly I'm not terribly happy with it for two-channel music performance. And I've calibrated dozens of times . . . Dirac is the direction I think I want to head from here.

I do hope at some point you'll get the chance to put Anthem's ARC through its paces. I think I heard rumors that somebody at HTS was getting one of their AVRs in for review. If so, it should be passed on to you when the review is done so you can dive into ARC.

Thanks again Wayne. Great work as always.


----------



## John Stewart

AudiocRaver said:


> John,
> 
> I am just starting to work with the PC full version, intend a review of it some time soon. Comparing the sound will be important. You are hinting that the PC version is a sonic improvement. Do you mean better filter generation or higher sample rate / no resampling?


I didn't mean to hint that, but since you asked...
At first I thought there was a difference between the two platforms because the filters from each sounded different and measured differently. To prove the point I made a stereo project from each using the same single mic position only, knowing that there was no way I had or could get all the mic positions exact without taking more time than I wanted. I then accepted the default filter for each project, pc and minidsp, listened and then measured the spl with REW. The measured response curves overlayed perfectly so no difference there. I'm not good enough with REW and have a UMIK mic so no way to check timing differences so far as I know. But I learned two things. 1) I was wrong and 2) multiple measurements produce better filters. 

I had started a ticket with MiniDSP customer service about my initial perceived differences between the platforms and part of their response included a statement that the algorithms for the two platforms are exactly the same. They were super helpful and offered to analyze a project from each for feedback and any differences. Not wanting to waste their time I set up the test above and concluded it was user error, case closed. I mention this just so you know they have this capability if you think it may be helpful with your further analysis of the products.

For higher sample rates downsampled through the Nano AVR, the Nano AVR easily sounded better to me with the filters than bypassed without. With the limited listening I did with SACDs (Both DSD 5.1 mixes, Pink Floyd's DSOM and Wish You Were Here) the tonality of the various brand speakers I have has never matched so well and very easily noticed as a playing instrument moves throughout the soundfield. So for me the minidsp is a keeper no matter because all of my sources can be played through it if I choose to.

I haven't tried this but perhaps a fair test would be to set up two projects on the pc platform, identical mic positions and identical filter curves, but one set up for 192 or 96/24 and the other for max sample rate of 44/16. The two filters are easily be switched between and its instant on the PC platform unlike the minidsp which has what seems a 2 to 3 second delay when switching filters. I'll see if it works later this week and let you know. If it does I'll have to leave any judgements in perceived differences to you. I'm just not on the same level for critical listening skills as you and many others on this forum.


----------



## AudiocRaver

bkeeler10 said:


> Another fantastic review, Wayne. Seems to me that the folks at Dirac have sorted this room correction thing out rather well.
> 
> I am hoping that a full Atmos system is in my near future (but looking to move so that has to come first). When that occurs, what I am hoping to be able to do is have an HTPC with a program that can decode the Atmos stream (not currently available AFAIK - come on JRiver!). Then I would apply Dirac Live to each decoded "channel" in the HTPC and send the result to a DAC box (already available fortunately). I would be able to have a reasonably priced 9.1.6 system calibrated by Dirac. I would then expect virtual sonic nirvana. :TT (I realize I could use a pair of DDRc-88A devices, but that ain't cheap when you still need an AVR, and you still can't get a 16 channel AVR anyway).
> 
> Anyway, staying a bit more on topic, it is encouraging to see Dirac Live working so well for you. I have been living with Audyssey XT Pro for several years now. While it works fairly well for movies, frankly I'm not terribly happy with it for two-channel music performance. And I've calibrated dozens of times . . . Dirac is the direction I think I want to head from here.
> 
> I do hope at some point you'll get the chance to put Anthem's ARC through its paces. I think I heard rumors that somebody at HTS was getting one of their AVRs in for review. If so, it should be passed on to you when the review is done so you can dive into ARC.
> 
> Thanks again Wayne. Great work as always.


Thanks Brian, always good to hear from you.

Hmmm, yes, a PC-based Atmos decoder for jRiver, that would be a dream come true, wouldn't it? Probably not going to hold my breath on that one, though. Seems like Dolby would keep a pretty tight rein on licensing and would enforce like crazy, too.

And getting to 16 channels with any kind of room correction could be a challenge. You do like to push the envelope, don't you?

There are so many technologies for room correction and more showing up all the time. Peter and I corresponded at one time about collaborating on a review-based comparison database, with him concentrating on AVR technologies and me more on PC-based and outboard-processor-based, like miniDSP, and using Dirac Live as our common reference. But we have not actually started that up yet. Bandwidth is always a problem, so many projects...


----------



## bkeeler10

AudiocRaver said:


> Hmmm, yes, a PC-based Atmos decoder for jRiver, that would be a dream come true, wouldn't it? Probably not going to hold my breath on that one, though. Seems like Dolby would keep a pretty tight rein on licensing and would enforce like crazy, too.


Well, JRiver can already decode every other codec out there, including Dolby TrueHD and DTS:HD-MA. Perhaps they're not licensed and it's an open source solution? I think the bigger issue will be getting JRiver to pay licensing fees or get open-source solutions for Atmos, since it would be hard to justify the cost until Atmos becomes widely adopted. Since JRiver is really quite inexpensive, however, IMO they should issue a paid upgrade that would decode Atmos. Those that want it pay, and those that don't are unaffected. The only other sub-five-figure unit on the horizon with 16 channels is the rumored Emotiva XMR-1 (which, to stay on topic :bigsmile:, should have Dirac Live onboard). Rumored price is $5k, and since Emotiva has not exactly been prompt on delivery of pre-pros, _I'm_ not holding my breath on that one.



> And getting to 16 channels with any kind of room correction could be a challenge.


It would seem like it would be a fairly simple programming change to get the current PC version of Dirac Live to support any number of channels desired. Perhaps not simple, but I have to imagine doable.



> You do like to push the envelope, don't you?


Haha, you're one to talk!  You may stick to two-channel, but your efforts in that arena are definitely on the fringe, which I totally applaud btw. :T My desire to push the envelope is unfortunately vastly greater than the size of my bank account. :yikes:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Some new information and recommendations for calibration mic patterns was just added to the thread Data Supporting a Single Setup Mic Position for Audyssey or Dirac Live. Some of the work involved listening tests comparing Dirac Live with the nanoAVR DL vs. Audyssey XT. Audyssey XT did very well with its soundstage and imaging performance, but Dirac Live was noticeably sharper and more precise. XT32 might have done a better job, but this can not be automatically assumed.


----------



## Flak

miniDSP is now running Dirac Live on Mac platform also...
those owners of nanoAVR DL who are interested in beta testing the new version can contact them by creating a tech support ticket with miniDSP (minidsp.desk.com)

Ciao, Flavio


----------



## AudiocRaver

John Stewart said:


> A word of advice... don't sample the PC version if you don't want to spend the $$$. Once you've heard the difference and seen the flexibility it can be hard to part with. Too hard for me anyway.


When you made that comment, I assumed you must be exaggerating. I have just started serious work with the full PC version of Dirac Live for future review and have to report that my first impressions are like yours, there is clearly an improvement in the audible results over the nanoAVR DL. Explainable, of course, by the fact the PC version runs with unlimited memory resource and processor bandwidth compared to the nanoAVR DL, which does a fantastic job for the resources it is designed to work with.

Just thought I would add my confirmation of what you already contributed. Configuration wise, the nanoAVR DL is great for a lot of situations, and I use it without hesitation and still enjoy it, but I feel like the extra level of polish to the sound from the full PC version will clearly be addictive.

I know that the difference is purely between the versions because I started with a nanoAVR DL measurement set and imported it into the full PC version, only re-running the optimization to create new filters. Was not looking for a sonic difference at all, but it only took a few seconds to tell it was there.


----------



## John Stewart

Thanks for the confirmation, Wayne. 
I agree with your comments on the NanoDL too. It's been a great addition to my system. Very happy to have it.


----------



## robsong

I'm looking into getting one but have a question. What about the new audio formats will this work or do I need a different one thanks.:dontknow:


----------



## Skylinestar

AudiocRaver said:


> I started with a nanoAVR DL





John Stewart said:


> It's been a great addition to my system.


Since bass management is after Dirac (nanoAVR > AVR > speaker), do you guys feel the audio presentation is wrong? There's a huge debate in avsforum which makes me sitting on the fence.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Skylinestar said:


> Since bass management is after Dirac (nanoAVR > AVR > speaker), do you guys feel the audio presentation is wrong? There's a huge debate in avsforum which makes me sitting on the fence.


I have been thinking about this a bit. Absolutely nothing sounds wrong, but let me dig through the theory a bit and get back to you.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Skylinestar said:


> Since bass management is after Dirac (nanoAVR > AVR > speaker), do you guys feel the audio presentation is wrong? There's a huge debate in avsforum which makes me sitting on the fence.


No, I do not, but it is possible to use it in ways that stretch its capabilities to the point where it might not be the best tool for the job. Looking at some of the discussions "out there," it seems that the more extreme configurations are where most of those questions come up. Or about extremely detailed theoretical topics that have little or no real world effect - no offense intended, I like those discussions sometimes too, but they can go overboard and become a distraction.

I view a product like Dirac as a polishing tool, not as a 21-in-1 fix-everything tool. My recommended approach is to use careful speaker setup, accurate AVR settings, and acoustical treatment to get good to very-good results and use Dirac Live to tighten it all up, which it does _beautifully._ My setups are simple, from Dirac's viewpoint, with sub and mains distance about the same, minimal reflections to deal with. Dirac has it easy in my room, so it can focus on extreme detail, not have to try to fix big problems.

Remember also that bass management itself is a falsification of the audio presentation, with the best of intentions. Done well, it can be very effective, and Dirac can help with the integration. Done poorly pre-DRC, integration can be a near impossible task for anything but a custom set of integration tools, well beyond Dirac's scope on its own.


----------



## Flak

AudiocRaver said:


> Remember also that bass management itself is a falsification of the audio presentation, with the best of intentions.


Yes, I agree with you but I'm surprised to read somebody clearly saying it 
with appreciation, Flavio


----------



## AudiocRaver

Skylinestar said:


> Since bass management is after Dirac (nanoAVR > AVR > speaker), do you guys feel the audio presentation is wrong? There's a huge debate in avsforum which makes me sitting on the fence.


I will add to my previous comments that different listeners have different listening priorities. My own is in soundstage and imaging, where I have become extremely picky, and Dirac Live excels in its ability to present laser-sharp imaging in a natural, cohesive soundstage.

The wording of your question has been bothering me - not in your asking it, but in the fact that it is a question being discussed in the community. What bothers me is that bass management is being considered normal and the accuracy of Dirac Live's "audio presentation" is being referenced to that context. I know I am blowing at the wind here, but that is just WRONG. Bass management is NOT NATURAL. I understand why we do it and have no problem with it at all, that it is well accepted and deeply ingrained in technology offerings, but it is often assumed to be the norm that the rest of the audio universe revolves around, and that, _in my opinion,_ is erroneous thinking.

The more meaningful question would be: How helpful is Dirac Live at resolving bass management issues? And the answer is, depending on the issues and the goal, I would say _good_ to _superb._ As I have said previously, as a polishing tool, it can give _superb_ results, including integration of sub where setup is already close pre-DRC. As a tool to help with everyday minor sub integration issues, it works _very well._ Handling multiple subs with big distance and timing issues - not its thing, a custom solution is probably called for. In all cases, Dirac's presentation is "right," it simply might not be the best tool for the job in some more complex bass management situations.

Please pardon the minor tirade, it is not aimed at you personally, you are just the lucky bypasser who accidentally kicked the hidden trip wire and got unloaded on. All in good fun, eh?:sn:


----------



## dziemian

Flavio, Since you work for Dirac I have a question for you. Do you think Bass Management is not necessary while using Dirac Live for multichannel music? Is it better to use multi full-range speakers instead separate subwoofers for low content? What about Dirac Unison. Is it going to improve overall low bass content and deal with described problem when using all possible speakers at hand? The answer is important to me since I am divided between buying three subs and setting them up with nanoAVR HDA or using just 5 channels full range.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Allow me to clarify my stance. I have nothing against subwoofers and nothing against bass management. It has been pointed out to me privately that Audyssey might still be a better choice for some users where complex subwoofer and bass management situations are involved and soundstage and imaging (SS&I) are only of moderate importance, as with many all-cinema applications. As I stated before my own applications are primarily two-channel with simple subwoofer setup and minimal if any timing challenges to resolve.

Here is how I suggest approaching a Digital Room Correction (DRC) / subwoofer decision.


If the application is primarily home cinema, with a multi-subwoofer system and/or challenging timing and integration issues to deal with, *and* SS&I are of low to moderate importance to you, then Audyssey is probably the better choice for you as an all-in-one, fairly easy to implement solution.

If SS&I are a high priority for you, meaning the SS&I bug has bitten you and you can't get enough of it, and you find yourself feverishly pursuing a better and better SS&I setup, then you need Dirac Live. If in addition to that your system has a multi-subwoofer system and/or challenging timing and integration issues to deal with, then my recommendation would be to use Dirac Live with an additional unit like the miniDSP 2x4 to help deal with those timing and integration issues.

For a primarily two-channel application, where there might be no subwoofers or a simple subwoofer setup with little or no timing issues to deal with, and AVR settings or phase control settings on the subwoofer(s) are able to give desired results, then you probably only need Dirac Live.


----------



## dziemian

I already have DDRC-22A with Dirac Live for stereo and it is working excellently. The problem is I own Geddes Abbey speakers and Dr Geddes recommends using subwoofers for his speakers (> 3 subs). Plus I like the idea of multisub setup (vide Dr Toole, Dr Geddes approach) for dealing with room modes. At the moment I want to maintain the same high quality I am getting from Dirac while building multichannel system, i.e. 5.0 or 5.3 setup. I have already bought minidsp nanoavr HDA to deal with routing, bass managment and crossovers. I need only nanoavr DL with Dirac algorithm but there are famous scientificaly unexplained issues with BM. Therefore my question. Maybe I dont need multisubs at all if I can use Dirac Live or upcoming Dirac Unison to deal with low content.


----------



## John Stewart

robsong said:


> I'm looking into getting one but have a question. What about the new audio formats will this work or do I need a different one thanks.:dontknow:


For the NanoDL and I think for all the MiniDSP Dirac products there is no decoding done by the unit. A decoded signal must be sent to the device. For me its a blu-ray player set to decode and output PCM instead of bitstream. Also use a laptop top for streaming Tidal and playing FLAC files.


----------



## AudiocRaver

dziemian said:


> I already have DDRC-22A with Dirac Live for stereo and it is working excellently. The problem is I own Geddes Abbey speakers and Dr Geddes recommends using subwoofers for his speakers (> 3 subs). Plus I like the idea of multisub setup (vide Dr Toole, Dr Geddes approach) for dealing with room modes. At the moment I want to maintain the same high quality I am getting from Dirac while building multichannel system, i.e. 5.0 or 5.3 setup. I have already bought minidsp nanoavr HDA to deal with routing, bass managment and crossovers. I need only nanoavr DL with Dirac algorithm but there are famous scientificaly unexplained issues with BM. Therefore my question. Maybe I dont need multisubs at all if I can use Dirac Live or upcoming Dirac Unison to deal with low content.


I, too, would like to hear Flavio's take on this.

The first question would be: Are you going to be happy with the amount of bass you would get with a full-range speaker setup handling all LF and LFE duties? If you were thinking about 3+ subs before, then I am guessing _probably not._

But for the sake of discussion, let's say you went that way. The next question would be: Can Dirac Live handle control of room modes with full-range speakers? My understanding is that the minimum phase filters used for room mode control can be very high Q and would be very good for this (mainly attenuation, not boosting). So I think the answer here is a conditional _yes._

Would it be a _better_ system? Back to the first question above, it really depends on your LF and LFE expectation level. Remember that LFE content will be routed to other speakers if there is no subwoofer. Even the full-range speakers I have heard with built-in powered subwoofers are not made to handle the kind of powerful LF delivery that is typically expected at reference level in a home cinema. Remember also that the best locations for mains and surrounds are usually not (rarely?) (ever?) the best locations for subwoofers for good LF coverage - where room mode peaks might be handled well by Dirac's filters, null elimination is more a matter of location, location, location, as I understand it (plus delay and phase controls, beyond the scope of Dirac and usually with minimal control available for an integrated sub).

Flavio? Others?


----------



## AudiocRaver

John Stewart said:


> For the NanoDL and I think for all the MiniDSP Dirac products there is no decoding done by the unit. A decoded signal must be sent to the device. For me its a blu-ray player set to decode and output PCM instead of bitstream. Also use a laptop top for streaming Tidal and playing FLAC files.


Thanks, John, correct, the player/source must do any and all decoding, pretty routine for FLAC and ALAC. DSD will have to be looked at more closely. PC-based players can usually be set to convert DSD to DoP (DSD over PCM), which would be necessary.


----------



## dziemian

I am using macmini HTPC and Playstation so no problem with decoding to LPCM. As for the main question. The point of using multisubs is to place them across the room in diffrent locations. That way you are filling the nulls created by one sub with others. At the end you attenuate the peaks. It is suppose to be very effective with flattening the lows. It is the must for stereo in my opinion. Multichannel is diffrent beast. If you are using 5 channels full-range it would mean you have 5 sources to deal with room modes. My question to Flavio was meant to ask if Dirac Live could handle that. If not what about Dirac Unison which uses all speakers available that work together to create a listening space.


----------



## AudiocRaver

dziemian said:


> I am using macmini HTPC and Playstation so no problem with decoding to LPCM. As for the main question. The point of using multisubs is to place them across the room in diffrent locations. That way you are filling the nulls created by one sub with others. At the end you attenuate the peaks. It is suppose to be very effective with flattening the lows. It is the must for stereo in my opinion. Multichannel is diffrent beast. If you are using 5 channels full-range it would mean you have 5 sources to deal with room modes. My question to Flavio was meant to ask if Dirac Live could handle that. If not what about Dirac Unison which uses all speakers available that work together to create a listening space.


I follow your logic. I also would like to hear Flavio’s response.

My own answer, concerning Dirac Live, with far less understanding than Flavio's of course, would be No. Each of the 5 sources would be flattened as well as Dirac Live could flatten them throughout its frequency response range. But that is different from having multiple sources actually working together in unison to synergistically accomplish flat response at those lowest frequencies. Dirac Live makes no attempt to do that. I know nothing about Dirac Unison, although the name hints at exactly what you're talking about.

In fact, it is conceivable that 5 full-range speakers in a room, all with flat low frequency response at the LP, could actually end up working together in a way to give poor combined low frequency response.

A big difference though, and perhaps a flaw in trying to accomplish what you wish with full-range speakers, is that they do not necessarily - probably do not - all end up receiving the same signal at those frequencies (without some custom bass cross-mix scheme, which DL would not know what to make of). With subwoofers and bass management you know that they do. And there is still the optimal placement question. Hmmm, looks like subwoofers were invented for a reason...

Flavio?


----------



## Skylinestar

dziemian said:


> I have already bought minidsp nanoavr HDA to deal with routing, bass managment and crossovers. I need only nanoavr DL with Dirac algorithm but there are famous scientificaly unexplained issues with BM.


Source > nanoavr HDA (bass management + signal routing) > nanoavr DL (eq) + minidsp2x4 (multisub delay)
^ problem solved


----------



## Flak

It's difficult for me to make a general statement as conditions/results from five speakers do vary... Dirac Live does not do bass management (this has to be done by a DSP or AVR) so at the current state of the art I agree with AudiocRaver that a manual solution using a miniDSP unit and multiple subwoofers is a safe bet if properly set up, but it's not that easy as it requires time/measurements/know-how.

Luckily I've seen for example a detailed guide by AustinJerry:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78476446/MiniDSP 4x2 Set-Up Guide Rev 1.1.pdf
and I know that Wayne (and Sonnie) have great knowledge and hands on experience to give valuable advice to those who have the dedication.

As mentioned by Dziemian Dirac Unison will be an automatic solution and will have a new approach to digital room correction (we define it as active room treatment).
Unison aims not just to correct average room behaviour but also changes the whole wave pattern in the room while some speakers may start acting as bass traps... but it's not going to be available in 2015.

 Flavio


----------



## AudiocRaver

Skylinestar said:


> Source > nanoavr HDA (bass management + signal routing) > nanoavr DL (eq) + minidsp2x4 (multisub delay)
> ^ problem solved


Yes, those pieces, in the appropriate order (might also be S > DL > HD > 2x4, pros & cons either way), plus timing/FR/impulse measurement capability, plus a BUNCH of know-how... ^ problem solved. Sounds so simple!:rolleyesno:


----------



## dziemian

Flavio. What do you think about the solution mentioned above?

Source > nanoavr HD(A) (bass management + signal routing) > nanoavr DL(A) (eq) + minidsp2x4 (multisub delay)
or S > DL(A) > HD(A) > 2x4

Fo me it is strange that there is so little support on the subject from Dirac. This BM issue is being discussed on various forums and it seems there is no clear answer nor manual written by Dirac itself. What is the problem?


----------



## Flak

dziemian said:


> Flavio. What do you think about the solution mentioned above?
> 
> Source > nanoavr HD(A) (bass management + signal routing) > nanoavr DL(A) (eq) + minidsp2x4 (multisub delay)
> or S > DL(A) > HD(A) > 2x4
> 
> Fo me it is strange that there is so little support on the subject from Dirac. This BM issue is being discussed on various forums and it seems there is no clear answer nor manual written by Dirac itself. What is the problem?


Hi Dziemian,

there is no problem, as mentioned before Dirac Live does not do bass management and BM is handled by the AVR or DSP... there are different solutions and miniDSP units are an option that I think I can endorse but I believe that the best source for detailed advice is miniDSP itself or knowledgeable reviewers/forumers who have an extensive hands on experience (that I don't have).

Needless to say if and when we will offer a Dirac solution will be more than pleased to give as much support as possible 

Flavio


----------



## AudiocRaver

There have been a couple of PMed additional questions a bout Dirac Live setup concerning midrange bloat and distortion. There is one thing I do differently from the Dirac Research instructions that might be of benefit. I use a board in the LP for the first calibration measurement sweeps.

The logic is simple, and points back to a study about taking measurements when the LP is in a high-backed sofa or chair.

It is referred in the posts linked to below. Use a board propped up on the chair at the LP, and point the mic down, with its tip just touching the board at the center of the LP. What this accomplishes is using the board as a hard boundary, which smooths the FR taken for that measurement. My measurements have shown that when we are seated, our skull bones act as a boundary, which naturally flattens the FR at that point. When that first point is taken without the board in place, there is a reflection from the chair back. and a midrange cancellation and a lot of messiness to the impulse response that result. If Dirac responds to those parts of the signal, it will boost the midrange and might not be able pull the imaging in tight. I have done it for all my recent Dirac calibrations with excellent results.

Don't be afraid to spread out the mic measurement points and randomize them a bit, Dirac does not seem to mind that. Let me know it that helps.

Here. in the Setup Mic Pattern section.
Here.


----------



## asere

I have a few questions.
Can you do plug and play or do you need to make adjustments?
Can you use it with Windows 10?

Thank you!


----------



## asere

I just read that the Nano AVR DL only works with audio set to PCM. How is that in affecting the audio quality?
I know it's uncompressed but it won't appear as DTS Master or DD.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## Kal Rubinson

asere said:


> I just read that the Nano AVR DL only works with audio set to PCM. How is that in affecting the audio quality?


Not significantly since it is decoded to PCM anyway.


> I know it's uncompressed but it won't appear as DTS Master or DD.


Just have the player decode ddts/DD to PCM before it gets to the nanoAVR.


----------



## asere

Kal Rubinson said:


> Not significantly since it is decoded to PCM anyway.
> Just have the player decode ddts/DD to PCM before it gets to the nanoAVR.


The receiver is always going to display PCM if I set the bluray to PCM. And PCM is the only way for nano avr to work, yes?


----------



## willis7469

I've always set my PS3 to pcm. Audio quality is the same. Unless it's changed, bitstream won't produce menu button beeps and clicks and sound effects. Iirc, it won't allow commentary over the film(director, actors commentating). 
In pcm, your display should show:
"Multichannel" when playing 5.1/7.1(native track)
"PLIIx, or PLIIz, when expanding from 5.1 to 7.1 
You might have to double check the "listening mode" if it doesn't show one of these.


----------



## asere

willis7469 said:


> I've always set my PS3 to pcm. Audio quality is the same. Unless it's changed, bitstream won't produce menu button beeps and clicks and sound effects. Iirc, it won't allow commentary over the film(director, actors commentating).
> In pcm, your display should show:
> "Multichannel" when playing 5.1/7.1(native track)
> "PLIIx, or PLIIz, when expanding from 5.1 to 7.1
> You might have to double check the "listening mode" if it doesn't show one of these.


what happens with Atmos over multichannel?


----------



## bkeeler10

asere said:


> what happens with Atmos over multichannel?


You will lose the Atmos metadata. And then you will have the standard 7.1 track as if your AVR was not an Atmos AVR. For the time being, Atmos has to be bitstreamed from player to AVR.

Edit: But for all other codecs, sound quality should not be affected whether the player or the AVR does the decoding to PCM.


----------



## willis7469

asere said:


> what happens with Atmos over multichannel?


 doh!!!
+bkeeler.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

asere said:


> The receiver is always going to display PCM if I set the bluray to PCM. And PCM is the only way for nano avr to work, yes?


Of course. The avr will only see the program after it is converted.


----------



## RTS100x5

After finally getting this unit setup we are still having an issue with the unit locking up after we cycle the power in the media system...Today I will try to correct that issue with the XANTECH AC1 which will trigger a 110 outlet from the Marantz AVR...
Just another bump in the road with this unit... I really expected this to be an easy install but has been 1 problem after another getting it setup and calibrated...mainly because our Media room equipment is in an adjacent room being controlled with RF remote... and I had a hellava time geting the Dirac Utility to recognize the UMIK1 with a longer USB cable than supplied... Finally gave up on using the Media PC and used my laptop with a 20ft HDMI cable running to the MARANTZ for signal output... 
Initial cal. was really hot above 4k so made some curve adjustments there and now its really sounding good...

Aside from the obvious sound improvements here are some initial opinion/ gripes / shortcomings of this particular unit

1 No ON/OFF toggle available at this time - adding a Xantech AC1 to get passed this issue
2 Unit crashes if toggling Surround modes on AVR to quickly
3 Unit crashes when power cycling Media room system / must be unplugged and powered back on
4 Not enough HDMI ports - We now have a KINIVO 5port HDMI switch for source switching
5 NO Discrete HDMI switching - only toggle which is futile in any RF Macro scenario...thus the 5 port hdmi switch had to added...


----------



## AudiocRaver

RTS100x5 said:


> After finally getting this unit setup we are still having an issue with the unit locking up after we cycle the power in the media system...Today I will try to correct that issue with the XANTECH AC1 which will trigger a 110 outlet from the Marantz AVR...
> Just another bump in the road with this unit... I really expected this to be an easy install but has been 1 problem after another getting it setup and calibrated...mainly because our Media room equipment is in an adjacent room being controlled with RF remote... and I had a hellava time geting the Dirac Utility to recognize the UMIK1 with a longer USB cable than supplied... Finally gave up on using the Media PC and used my laptop with a 20ft HDMI cable running to the MARANTZ for signal output...
> Initial cal. was really hot above 4k so made some curve adjustments there and now its really sounding good...
> 
> Aside from the obvious sound improvements here are some initial opinion/ gripes / shortcomings of this particular unit
> 
> 1 No ON/OFF toggle available at this time - adding a Xantech AC1 to get passed this issue
> 2 Unit crashes if toggling Surround modes on AVR to quickly
> 3 Unit crashes when power cycling Media room system / must be unplugged and powered back on
> 4 Not enough HDMI ports - We now have a KINIVO 5port HDMI switch for source switching
> 5 NO Discrete HDMI switching - only toggle which is futile in any RF Macro scenario...thus the 5 port hdmi switch had to added...


Your install presents some challenges for the nanoAVR DL which are a step or two beyond what most "in home application" users run across. Thanks for feeding back your experience to us. i will link your recent posts in an email to the miniDSP team so they can consider them as they improve their products and design new ones.


----------



## RTS100x5

I assure you they are "aware" of my issues :R


----------



## RTS100x5

asere said:


> The receiver is always going to display PCM if I set the bluray to PCM. And PCM is the only way for nano avr to work, yes?


On the system I use the NANO Dl on is a Marantz SR5009 and the display reads " MULTI CH 7.1"

Obviously you can use DTS or Dolby surround modes post NANO DL processing with good result. But Audessy is and all EQ on the Marantz is now off...


----------



## AudiocRaver

RTS100x5 said:


> I assure you they are "aware" of my issues :R


So I hear.:bigsmile:

They are a good team to have in your corner, as i am sure you are finding.


----------



## RTS100x5

Yes without a doubt they have been very responsive to my emails - though Im not entirely confident that my HDMI issues (NANO DL crashing) will be solved any time soon.... In the meantime I have ordered the XANTECH AC1 to try and resolve the issue... which is the NANO crashing whenever my client turns off the Media room equipment via RF remote... The AC1 will cycle a 120v outlet to the NANO via 12v trigger...


----------



## AraiYuichi

Hi

I am using a DDRC-22D in my four channel speaker system which is my main system. Many of speakers are Horn type speakers. Each components including speakers and power amps are excellent one I think. However, my system did not orchestrate well. 
After I have implemented the Dirac Live and Dirac processor in the DDRC, the sound changed dramatically.
So, I fully agree with your opinion. I wrote the technical report many time to my readers regarding Dirac Live in Japan.

Yuichi Arai, Audio Writer


----------



## RTS100x5

I have incorporated a XANTECH AC1 into the system to cycle the power of the NANO DL to prevent it from crashing between system power cycles....
With the right delays in the macro programming its working as it should- they have sent me a firmware update in the mean time to address this issue but this was unexpected so I had all ready ordered the Xantech unit to solve this issue quickly .... will report further if we decide to update the firmware...:nerd:


----------



## robsong

Get my system calibrated by a Pro with Audyssey Pro or get a miniDSP nanoAVR DL and do it myself. Which one would give me the best bang for the buck thanks.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

robsong said:


> Get my system calibrated by a Pro with Audyssey Pro or get a miniDSP nanoAVR DL and do it my self. Which one would give me the best bang for the buck thanks.


Best bang would be to calibrate it yourself with Audyssey MultEQ XT32.


----------



## RTS100x5

robsong said:


> Get my system calibrated by a Pro with Audyssey Pro or get a miniDSP nanoAVR DL and do it my self. Which one would give me the best bang for the buck thanks.


Audessy XT32 doesn't hold a candle to DIRAC IMO. The Impulse Response correction is a major step towards what room correction should sound like... When we toggle back and forth between Dirac correction ON/OFF the difference is worth every penny we spent and even the trouble I had getting it setup with the rest of our media system... Its a very coherent type of sound...:T


----------



## AudiocRaver

If you already have Audyssey xt32, obviously it is cheaper to try to do it yourself with Audyssey. Problem is, you can fumble around a long time and not get really satisfying results. No guarantee that a Pro will do much better. My guess is that most of them have no concept how to get a good sound stage and imaging result with Audyssey.

With Dirac live, good results are almost a given, and the results are so much better in almost every way that it seems a shame not to go that way if you can afford it. My vote is for the Nano AVR DL.


----------



## robsong

My avr is 4311ci and the cost to do Audyssey pro will be the same if I buy NanoAVR DL. I already have the mic for Nanoavr DL. Looks like I need to do some more reading thanks guy's.


----------



## Talley

AudiocRaver said:


> If you already have Audyssey xt32, obviously it is cheaper to try to do it yourself with Audyssey. Problem is, you can fumble around a long time and not get really satisfying results. No guarantee that a Pro will do much better. My guess is that most of them have no concept how to get a good sound stage and imaging result with Audyssey.
> 
> With Dirac live, good results are almost a given, and the results are so much better in almost every way that it seems a shame not to go that way if you can afford it. My vote is for the Nano AVR DL.


Agreed 100%. I actually really hate the fact that with Dirac I tinker less. I set my system up move speakers around and retest ONCE... dial in my curves and presto... sounds great and REW charts mimic what I wanted my curves to look like.

The XMC-1 has been a real joy to use.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

robsong said:


> My avr is 4311ci and the cost to do Audyssey pro will be the same if I buy NanoAVR DL. I already have the mic for Nanoavr DL. Looks like I need to do some more reading thanks guy's.


Since you have an AVR with XT32, have you used it? What results have you gotten? I strongly suggest that you do that first and see if you are motivated to do more by spending more money. FWIW, I do agree that spending the money on Pro (with an installer or on your own) is not as good an idea as nanoAVRDL.


----------



## jjk43

Can anyone suggest how I should first begin to correct with DL on the XMC-1, reference the dual sub outs?
I have Def Tech Mythos ST mains and a DT Super Cube. STs full range w Super Cube on Sub 1? STs small w their 2 subs linked on Sub 1 and Super Cube on Sub 2? Or STs small and then mono-summed w Super Cube on Sub 1?
Def Tech center and surrounds as well. They will be crossed over and summed .
Thanks for the advice.


----------



## Dr. Niles Crane

I'm a bit confused on a configuration issue for my NanoAVR DL: 

I do not have a subwoofer. In my AVR, I have the fronts set to full-range and the center, sides and rears set to 80Hz. Test tones play fine and I have done a few trials to practice. At first, I thought I needed to use the custom configuration because I lacked a subwoofer. So, that set correction filters shouldn't include a 10db boost for LFE. I thought it sounded a bit thin, so I reconfigured for 7.1 and built another set of filters that should include a 10db boost for LFE. 

The generated filters do not look different to me, nor do the measurements. I am feeding the Nano from an Oppo 103D set to output PCM and into an Onkyo 876 set to Pure Audio mode. Do the codecs in the Oppo for TrueHD/Master Audio add a 10db compensation upon decoding to PCM or do I really need to have the NanoAVR DL set to 7.1 to provide the boost? In the Onkyo menus the LFE for all types is at 0db in the only menu I can find that seems relevant. TIA


----------



## RTS100x5

Dr. Niles Crane said:


> I'm a bit confused on a configuration issue for my NanoAVR DL:
> 
> I do not have a subwoofer. In my AVR, I have the fronts set to full-range and the center, sides and rears set to 80Hz. Test tones play fine and I have done a few trials to practice. At first, I thought I needed to use the custom configuration because I lacked a subwoofer. So, that set correction filters shouldn't include a 10db boost for LFE. I thought it sounded a bit thin, so I reconfigured for 7.1 and built another set of filters that should include a 10db boost for LFE.
> 
> The generated filters do not look different to me, nor do the measurements. I am feeding the Nano from an Oppo 103D set to output PCM and into an Onkyo 876 set to Pure Audio mode. Do the codecs in the Oppo for TrueHD/Master Audio add a 10db compensation upon decoding to PCM or do I really need to have the NanoAVR DL set to 7.1 to provide the boost? In the Onkyo menus the LFE for all types is at 0db in the only menu I can find that seems relevant. TIA


Hmmmmm:scratch: get a good subwoofer is my EZ button answer:dontknow:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Dirac does not address bass management specifically, meaning it does not do the 10 dB of bass boost that you are looking for, regardless of the configuration. That is a "bass management" function, and will happen in whatever device is performing the bass management for your system. If there is no bass management device (AVR?) then that 10 dB LFE boost will simply never show up. The subwoofer channel in the nanoAVR DL is equalizing the subwoofer, but the crossover, mixing, and LFE gain functions are all bass management functions which have to occur elsewhere.


----------



## Dr. Niles Crane

It is true that Dirac does not do the alignment. However, mini does. See page 26 of the owner's manual describing the reason for using the custom configuration. I guess we are all confused. Even mini had not tested a system without a subwoofer, and asked me to provide feedback. So, I guess I am going to be on my own here... I will take some REW measurements to see what things look like with each filter set. Thankfully, I am not a bass-head and all I want is even response without the resonance peaks. If I attain that much, I am going to be pleased.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Indeed, I was going to mention it in my post but did not want to confuse the issue. It is primarily a function of the plugin in use. The Nano AVR platform only has enough horsepower to do so much at a time. The Nano AVR can be used with the bass management capable plugin or with Dirac, with the appropriate upgrade fees but not both at the same time. It is a pretty safe bet that mini DSP is working on some kind of a product that will do Dirac live and have bass management on board too, but of course that is speculation. It would have to be in a bigger more powerful platform, though.


----------



## Dr. Niles Crane

Thanks for your responses, to be clear, my issue is not with bass management and I am aware that the NanoAVR does not do bass management. The NanoAVR DL is configured so that in the custom configuration, a 10db boost to the LFE channel is _not_ provided. In the 7.1 configuration it _is_ provided. At this point, I can't tell whether I should use custom or 7.1 in my system based on the bass management that I am employing in my AVR, because I am redirecting bass and LFE to the front mains since I do not use a discrete subwoofer. Some AVR's will apply the 10db boost to a PCM input over HDMI. My AVR is a 2007 vintage and I am not sure if it does or not, but I think I can configure it in a menu. I have not been able to ascertain whether the codec in the Oppo adds a 10db compensation or not to the LFE channel when it outputs PCM.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Beg pardon, I obviously did not read your post as thoroughly as I shoulld have. I will investigate further and try again.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Dr. Niles Crane said:


> Thanks for your responses, to be clear, my issue is not with bass management and I am aware that the NanoAVR does not do bass management. The NanoAVR DL is configured so that in the custom configuration, a 10db boost to the LFE channel is _not_ provided. In the 7.1 configuration it _is_ provided. At this point, I can't tell whether I should use custom or 7.1 in my system based on the bass management that I am employing in my AVR, because I am redirecting bass and LFE to the front mains since I do not use a discrete subwoofer. Some AVR's will apply the 10db boost to a PCM input over HDMI. My AVR is a 2007 vintage and I am not sure if it does or not, but I think I can configure it in a menu. I have not been able to ascertain whether the codec in the Oppo adds a 10db compensation or not to the LFE channel when it outputs PCM.


I can find no definitive answer to your question. My only suggestion is to find a way to test the LFE gain through the different configurations you mentioned. The 10 DB differences you are looking for are big enough that you should be able to hear them with the right signal source, pink noise. So actual measurement equipment is really not necessary, just the ability to get a test signal to the right place from your Oppo as the source. Do you have a 7.1 setup disk with pink noise? Or the ability to play a 7.1 FLAC? If I am not mistaken, the Oppo can play 7.1 FLAC files from an external hard drive or USB memory stick. If the approach sounds like it will give you the info you need, let us know, we'll see if we can come up with the right signal source for you.


----------



## jjk43

Wayne,
I am about to install Dirac Live on my windows media computer on which I run JRiver. I have a Def Tech 5.1 Mythos ST speaker configuration along with an Oppo 105D. I am considering a MiniDsp NanoAVR as well for bass management.
Question: would you recommend just employing bass management in JRiver which would then feed Dirac Live and on to Oppo, etc...
OR
JRiver to Dirac to Nano (BM) to Oppo?
It's a two part question I guess: where best to insert BM and will the Nano provide worthwhile BM vs. JRiver.
Thanks very much.


----------



## RTS100x5

my experience with Jriver is great for most every aspect of music and video management but bass management is lacking... Room correction in JR options is not a quality speaker management at all...
You would be much better off with the NANO AVR for bass management..

We found in setting up Dirac that the single measurement point sounds much better than a multi-point measurement..


----------



## FargateOne

A short question to be sure that I understand correctly the settings.
I am considering to get NanoAvr-DL and put it between the BD player and the receiver.
If I would like to measure with REW when I would want to double check the results that Dirac is producing - how to connect the hdmi from the laptop ? Straight through one input channel of the NanoAvr DL or in one input channel in the blu-ray player but not directly through the receiver?


----------



## AudiocRaver

jjk43 said:


> Wayne,
> I am about to install Dirac Live on my windows media computer on which I run JRiver. I have a Def Tech 5.1 Mythos ST speaker configuration along with an Oppo 105D. I am considering a MiniDsp NanoAVR as well for bass management.
> Question: would you recommend just employing bass management in JRiver which would then feed Dirac Live and on to Oppo, etc...
> OR
> JRiver to Dirac to Nano (BM) to Oppo?
> It's a two part question I guess: where best to insert BM and will the Nano provide worthwhile BM vs. JRiver.
> Thanks very much.


Sorry, still catching up.

The question is, is bass management best before or after Dirac? I believe most would agree that the ideal is bass management before Dirac so Dirac is equalizing individual drivers through the bass and LFE range. However, many people are running it the other way, self included, and it works just fine. I would go with whatever is easier. I doubt you will notice a difference in actual use unless you get extremely picky and even then you probably will not.

Edit: A little creative target curve management helps simplify the situation.


----------



## FargateOne

FargateOne said:


> A short question to be sure that I understand correctly the settings.
> I am considering to get NanoAvr-DL and put it between the BD player and the receiver.
> If I would like to measure with REW when I would want to double check the results that Dirac is producing - how to connect the hdmi from the laptop ? Straight through one input channel of the NanoAvr DL or in one input channel in the blu-ray player but not directly through the receiver?


someone ?


----------



## AudiocRaver

FargateOne said:


> someone ?


Sorry, I have some info on that. I will dig it up and get back to you.


----------



## jjk43

AcR,
Thanks for the advice.
I have installed DLRCS and have configured bass management prior to it in JRiver. 
My two week audition of that signal path is very positive.
Does anyone think that the JRiver BM setup, at least administratively, could use some improvement?
thanks again AcR


----------



## AudiocRaver

AudiocRaver said:


> Sorry, I have some info on that. I will dig it up and get back to you.


I had bookmarked an article, but the link is now dead.

With REW, the technique is fairly straightforward.

Take measurements
Create correction
With correction engaged, take measurements again to verify (some kind of averaging is suggested)

It is also possible to take measurements with Dirac with correction engaged so the Dirac measurements show the effects of the correction. There is a Dirac option that allows for that, I will see if I can figure out what it is.


----------



## FargateOne

AudiocRaver said:


> I had bookmarked an article, but the link is now dead.
> 
> With REW, the technique is fairly straightforward.
> 
> Take measurements
> Create correction
> With correction engaged, take measurements again to verify (some kind of averaging is suggested)
> 
> It is also possible to take measurements with Dirac with correction engaged so the Dirac measurements show the effects of the correction. There is a Dirac option that allows for that, I will see if I can figure out what it is.


To help you I might add this. For the moment, I use REW and Umik mic to try to use the 10 filters I can set for each channel in my ROTEL RSX-1562. The hdmi is connected in the receiver because it is ther that the filters are applied.
If I buy NanoAvr-DL, I would like to compare my current results vs Dirac results to see the differences and to get a chance to learn. Keeping in mind that any EQ in the receiver must be put off for Dirac uses, so I figured that with nanoAvr, I should connect the hdmi cable from the laptop to one of the hdmi input of the nano in order to get the sweep test tone treated by the Dirac filters before to be sent into the receiver. Then in REW I could see the curve equed by myself and the curve equed by Dirac. 
Just curious to see how wrong I am eventually without Dirac!!


----------



## RTS100x5

FargateOne said:


> A short question to be sure that I understand correctly the settings.
> I am considering to get NanoAvr-DL and put it between the BD player and the receiver.
> If I would like to measure with REW when I would want to double check the results that Dirac is producing - how to connect the hdmi from the laptop ? Straight through one input channel of the NanoAvr DL or in one input channel in the blu-ray player but not directly through the receiver?


With REW, use an HDMI input on the AVR / connect setup mic to your laptop.... Using your smart phone app to control the NANOavr , toggle Dirac correction ON > measure room acoustics using REW , Then turn Dirac OFF and measure again....


----------



## Ran

Hi.

Received the nano a few days ago and I'm running into some set-up issues. 

I'm running a 6.1 configuration (No center channel) with the Pioneer LX89
I choose the "Custom" setting on Dirac and picked 7 channels.
Having some trouble during the test tone phase , on the output page.

I press the little play button next to each channel but the test tones are coming out from different channels all together i.e press the little play button on the right surround and I get a test tone out of the Main Left etc.
Not only do I get a mis-match between the names of channels to the actual speaker playing the test tone, but I'm getting the test tone twice from the same speaker (Main Left) and not getting any test tone from one of the Back Surrounds.

Mini Dsp's Support suggested running the Dirac on 7.1 rather then custom, change the configuration on the Pioneer to 7.1
Use a cheap dumy speaker for the center channel.
After Dirac finishes. Take out the dummy speaker and re-configure the Pioneer to 6.1.

It does seem like a strange soultion

I learned from Wayne's excellent review that he is using a 6.1 configuration, so it would be great if Wayne, or others, which use a 6.1 configuration, can shed some light on this.



Thanks

Ran


----------



## FargateOne

...hum...

I take a little confort to see that I am not alone to get problem with nanoavr dl.
Searching for a solution about my problem (differnet than yours), I read in an other forum than someone have had the same problem that you have but, unfortunatly, I do not remember what was the solution for him because it was not what I was searching for.


----------

