tradershasem.blogg.se

1. SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 UPDATE
2. SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 DRIVER
3. SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 MANUAL
4. SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 PRO
5. SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 TRIAL

SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 DRIVER

Fixed issue where switching driver modes would invoke SoundID Reference (Windows).

SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 UPDATE

SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 MANUAL

Note that I use only 3-band PEQ in the desktop setup, as that's what I have in RME built-in DSP, whereas DRCs use many filters and in some cases also do additional phase / time-domain corrections.Īlso, note that this is a non-blind subjective experience without any objective data to back it up - so please take it with a grain of salt.Ĭertainly someone more experienced with manual room EQ, with some patience and more EQ bands could get it far better than I have!Īnyway, I will probably stick to manual EQ for the most part on my desk, due to convenience it offers in my setup through RME TotalMixFX interface. still some peaks and dips ), whereas with DRC I perceive notes in the bassline to be similar in loudness. My impulse got a lot cleaner even with manual correction but I really wanted to see what Dirac would have done.įor my nearfield setup, I still feel I get better results with both Dirac and ARC System 3 (didn't test Reference 4 there yet) than I get with manual EQ - with simple manual EQ there's still some variation in loudness depending on which note is played in the bassline (i.e.

SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 TRIAL

I actually just wanted to do Dirac instead of manual correction, but I couldn't get the plugin to work at all and my trial expired without me ever getting a chance to try it.

SONARWORKS REFERENCE 4 VS ARC 2.5 PRO

This way I've got system wide correction with no added latency except for what the EQ is adding (~27ms) but you can only use this with pro audio interfaces with lots of outputs.īefore that I was trying "VoiceMeeter Banana" which is as hacky as the name sounds, required admin privileges to run and never once recovered from sleep properly - but that would work even without a pro interface. Output of one of those route to analog 1/2 out (monitors) the other analog 3 out (subwoofer) so I could do manual correction. Then I set up Element to use those inputs, split them into two separate linear phase EQs. I route all my system sound to an unused output on my RME Fireface (ADAT 7/8), enable the loopback which then makes the ADAT 7/8 output available on the ADAT 7/8 input. If you have a quality soundcard with loopback, I'd recommend Element. My current feeling is that Dirac gives a 80-90% "good" solution, and you could spend a very long time messing about with tweaking filter generation in REW to get the last 10-20%.įWIW here's the uncorrected and final Dirac result from my room: One advantage of REW is that you can see directly what the filters are, which you can't with Dirac. I've also tried doing the process manually using REW, and trying to avoid boosting at all, but it's just not possible in my room to get a good result that way. I found it worked well just doing room correction for the bass response below 210Hz, and then I modified the target curve to give more of a "Harman" shape, so Dirac is actually operating up to much higher frequencies as well, and the overall balance is much nicer. There's one fairly significant dip that it doesn't seem to try to address, so either it's too deep, or somehow it's worked out that it's a cancellation that can't actually be boosted.

You are obviously a lot more patient ! Dirac definitely does apply some boost in places for my setup, but it lowers the level overall so has headroom to do that. I did find taking the calibration measurements a bit of a faff though, even though I used the 9-point version only. I recently bought a MiniDSP SHD box and have found that Dirac seems to get pretty good results, subjectively and from REW measurements afterwards. Thanks for doing this comparison, it's very interesting indeed.