Recent content by markus

Yes, "In the content creation process there is reproduction" involved but it's just a technical necessity and it's exactly the part that needs standardization. There are official standards and recommendations, e.g. this and that. They are just not as good as they would need to be. Again...

You have to differentiate between creation and reproduction. In creation anything is possible but when you now reproduce the art with reproduction devices in a reproduction environment that is different from the one in creation then you're ultimately NOT hearing what the artist intended you to...

As we're off-topic just a link worth following: http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/audios-circle-of-confusion.html

Well, I did :)

I beg to differ. Differences in sound reproduction (amp, speaker, room acoustics) should not become part of the art. It creates two issues: 1. You can never know what the artist wanted you to hear because you don't know and therefore can't recreate the acoustical environment in which he made his...

Unfortunately professional control rooms aren't as similar as one would hope. Here's some real world data: (Source: http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/10/audios-circle-of-confusion.html) It can also be observed that recordings from different decades or genres follow similar spectral...

Huh? You've used DL for all tests, no? Hope you don't assume that any EQ approach would be the same and the only difference is "full range" vs. "limited"? That would be a major misconception.

That's not the only way to do this. Anyway, the thread title is highly misleading as "EQ’ing Full Range" with digital room correction product A can be very different from "EQ’ing Full Range" with digital room correction product B. Depends what kind of processing is actually applied. Quite a good...

Thanks. The data suggests that the anechoic response did indeed improve. For more conclusive results the anechoic speaker response would need to be measured with and without Dirac Live.

Plenty of details at https://www.dirac.com/

DL = Dirac Live

You assume that DL would not be able to derive a useful quasi-anechoic speaker response from its multiple measurement points. That assumption might be wrong.

You need to compare the anechoic before/after responses not the steady-state responses. Can you please post the .mdat so we can look at the data ourselves?

Maybe @Erin is interested as he was talking about doing a follow up on Dirac anyway?

I did my measurements just to establish if DL is capable of improving the anechoic speaker response at all. Looks like it is. Now the question is if it does so under all conditions of interest. The procedure should always be ... a) run DL from MLP in-room b) measure anechoic response with and...