Digital Room Correction: What are your thoughts?

Granted I have had a PHD mathematician argue how this can work, but I just don't see how a box can compensate for the nonlinear behavior of my speakers, and my room by effecting the 2 bus without messing it up !
Think about it, it's compensating the whole single for what your speaker is doing 45 degrees off axis and how it's bouncing off your walls !
Might sound interesting but I don't think I could trust it , and the few demos I have heard have suffered from extrem digital processing syndrome !

I had fairly good results with the 1K Multimedia ARC 2, but I wanted correction for everything, not just computer output. I received my miniDSP Dirac a week ago, but I haven't had a chance to calibrate it yet. Reviews indicated it was much higher quality than Audyssey, which is what ARC is based on, and which is used by many A/V receivers. Dirac software is apparently very high end.

I got it mainly for bass management, I have some bass mode problems in my relatively untreated room. I'll also try to correct higher frequencies, if it works great, if not I won't use it for that.

Also, I got the digital version of the box, so no extra AD-DA conversions. I've got my UFX AES output into the miniDSP, and the miniDSP AES output into my Dangerous Source.

Makes all the difference.

+1!

I don't think the K-system is "digital room correction"?
Bob Katz results speak for themselves, he's the best, the concepts he shares are dead on(google TC R128 loudness standardizations), and the parameters he suggests  are totally logical. Anyone who aspires to consistently great results, should abide by them IMO. 

Digital room correction?? If your room sucks, fix it, if not, turn your nearfields way down, and learn your favs at low, low, room eliminating volume is my suggestion.

Hey Bob

in a general sense, I agree.

I built my room.

I designed and built 22 bass traps, put the speakers in the room and did the whole shebang, myself.  I mention that so that you get the context I am describing right.

I am not an acousticians left armpit.  But I worked really tirelessly on my room, and got something that turns out (I think) good stuff, considering its in my back yard 8)

I had done TONS of work on my acoustics and listening position.

I was getting good and translatable (befre and after mastering) results and myself and clients were happy.

I decide to give ARC 2 a try.

I did the setup testing, diligently ( I think this is a big part of the result) and I was impressed.

You are right in that it makes ONE (you can do two spots) in the room corrected. But thats ok 99.9% of the time its just me here anyways.

It has given me I would say, 15 % better monitoring experience.  

Its not a panacea for turning your bedroom into Ocean Way. But neither is anything else.

As part of a well thought out, treated room it has worked for me, in my situation.

I also agree in general with the K System approach.

ARC s achillees heel is two fold. The headroom it takes, and the fact you have to manually remove it before exporting a mix.

I can guarantee anyone who came and sat at my mix position and listened with it on and off, would want it on. If I didn't tell you it was there
you would just use it. I get no surprises when I export mixes and check them in other places. 

I am not a fan boy, it works for me, in this room. Thats about as far as it goes.

I also set my 0VU point pretty damn low, and I generally keep this to myself because everyone gets their knickers in a twist and I am sick of typing my responses 8)

My 0VU point with ARC is -24dB FS  thats 6 dB for the ARC plug in adjustments, and -20dBFS for me.

Its a combination of ARC, the RME interface not having bucket loads of headroom etc and being a one man show a lot of the time gives me enough headroom

(puts flame suit on)

8)

Wiz

Wiz I think your point of view is great, and if it works for you great,
I do think one of the things that killed it for me is I physically can't stay in one place, this body is just to screwed up! Plus all to often their is somebody else with me during mix!
Doing more classical, I have to have that headroom!

I have also noticed guys using nearfields only seam to like it best, the inability to quickly switch between multiple monitors made the 3 systems I have tried a no go!
I did find one interesting " active room correction " interesting , but didn't spend enough time to say yeah or nay , the Bag End Active bass traps ! I will say they with ElF It was close to wow though!

tonycamphd I am gonna watch the Bob Katz video for sure.... 8)


cheers

Wiz

Most absorption removes the highs from the early reflections. That screws up what you hear because we can't separate early reflections from direct sound. All other room reflections are ignored and attempting to compensate them with speaker eq. only colors the direct sound.

We learned all this the hard way back in the '70s but a lot from that era has come back around to haunt us because it creates new product opportunities.

So is it best to make sure your speaker placement is correct and then just get used to/learn what the room sounds like ? Not worry about all the treatment ......703 panels all over the place.....

You don't learn room acoustics. You just don't hear them as part of the sound with the exception of standing waves which lite bass trapping can help with and early reflections. Ordinary non-isolated rooms don't have a big problem with this because the low frequencise just pass right through the walls instead of being reflected. I think I'm saying beware of too much room treatmeent.

I'm a fan of a mostly reflective, diffused environment and not a fan of LEDE because the lack of early reflection highs hypes up the perceived low end. The only "name" doing anything like this is Thomas Jouanjean. From experience I also like George Augspurger's rooms better than most.