2. digital
  3. 194452-88656

Digital Room Correction vs Room Treatments

I finally got a mic and used REW to analyze my room.  Attached is the freq response for 3 different speakers (Monitor Audio Gold Reference 20, Sonus Faber Electa Amator II, and Sonus Faber Concerto Domus).

They all show similar characteristics - at least the most prominent ones.  I did play around with the Amators trying them closer together and more forward in the room, but the major characteristics you see were mostly unchanged.

With this magnitude and number of deviations from a more ideal frequency response curve, am I better off biting the bullet and just doing digital room correction, or can these issues be addressed with room treatments without going crazy and having the room look like Frankenstein’s lab.

Cost is a consideration, but doing it right/better is the most important factor.

If digital room correction is a viable way to address this, what are the best solutions today?  My system is largely analog (80’s/90’s Mcintosh preamp/amp, tube phono stage), and streaming isn’t a priority (though I’m not against it).

 If the better digital correction solutions come in the form of a streaming HW solution, that’s fine, I’d do that.  

Just looking for guidance on the best way to deal with the room, as both serious room treatments and digital EQ room correction are both areas I haven’t delved into before.


Thanks all.  If more info is needed, let me know.  My room is 11.5’ wide and 15.5’ long with the speakers on the short wall.  Backs of speakers are 3-3.5’ off the front wall and they’re at least 2ft from either side wall.  Some placement flexibility is there, but not a huge amount.

captouch

Showing 2 responses by atp001

atp001
23 posts
 

In my experience, room correction with DSP (MiniDSP+DiracLive) made a huge difference.  In terms of sound, it went from fatiguing to blissful.  The bass became more coherent, the mids and highs less muddy, more clear.  Instruments and voices became separated, imaging dramatically improved.  DSP is not simply about correcting issues with frequency response.  As previously mentioned, time domain problems can also be corrected, which I assume is why the imaging has improved so much.  

Below is my frequency response, measured with REW.  Yellow is with DiracLive turned on.

And here are the impulse responses as measured with REW, before and after correction with DIracLive.

My perception is that the magic comes with both the frequency and phase corrections that come with DiracLive implementation.

Before MiniDSP, my room was treated with some absorption panels, mostly to reduce some of the reflective wall surfaces to improve reverb.  The room includes a 77" TV, couch, furniture, large and dense wool carpet, and sits in the basement where two of my walls are concrete covered in sheetrock and insulation.  Speakers ('bookshelf') are 5 feet from the front wall, about 3 feet from the side wall (right, concrete, a little more open on the left side).

atp001
23 posts
 

I have implemented DiracLive three times, on both sides of my basement, and in my living room.  The sound improved in all cases.  But, I think optimizing the speaker placement and/or LP (and possibly room treatment?) before using DiracLive will get the best results.  

One element that should be considered is bias towards your current (non-corrected) sound.  I would live and test the room corrected EQ for a little while before making any conclusions.  

The cost of MiniDSP + DiracLive is not large relative to your total system cost or cost of room treatments.  IMHO, best bang for buck I could ever spend.  True, tactile improvements in sound that could not be achieved with upgrades to components, cables, or recording type.  One could argue that DSP also corrects defects in speaker response (frequency and phase).  Sorry for sounding like a salesman, but this stuff has really changed my perception of what good sound is and how to achieve it.

Just curious, what elements of sound reproduction can DSP not correct?  We often hear that room modes cannot be corrected since they are a function of how the sound interacts with the room after leaving the speakers.  I would not be so fast in making that assertion.  By modulating the phase of the individual channels separately, should it not be possible to also correct, at least to some degree, constructive and destructive interference?  I believe this is what DiracLive is capable of, but to be honest I am not sure since they are a little vague in describing how it works exactly.  I would love to hear from someone with more technical knowledge on how DiracLive works.

More to discover