Dirac live vs Acourate vs Audiolense

[Kal Rubinson]

Jesus told me there's a way to do it with an Oppo. Here's a thread:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/oppo-bdp-105-multi-channel-playback-from-pc.312762/

Maybe one day DLNA will grow up and become useful. I'll let the early adopters hit the barbed wire first.

Yeah. I know that thread. The Oppo will do a lot but I have not found it a good solution for mch streaming. Works but each of the possibly ways has issues.

I see no reason to do DLNA at all.

 

[mojave]

I have no reason to believe Jriver will have any DSP features in DLNA zone. Maybe there will be some way of doing it but I think DLNA presents technical limitations to real time DSP.

Today's release of JRiver Media Center (20.0.27) includes DSP for DLNA. The last few releases also include JRiver's WDM driver for routing all PC audio sound through JRiver for DSP including convolution.

 

[edorr]

Today's release of JRiver Media Center (20.0.27) includes DSP for DLNA. The last few releases also include JRiver's WDM driver for routing all PC audio sound through JRiver for DSP including convolution.

Interesting. Does it also stream DSD / DoP?

 

[mojave]

JRiver has already been able to stream DSD to DLNA devices such as the OPPO BDP-103/105.

You should now be able to convert DSD to DXD*, apply DSP, and re-encode to DSD in up to 4x DSD native format or in DoP format before streaming to a DLNA device.

*JRiver uses a higher quality than the spec for DXD. DXD is 24-bit/353.8 Khz. JRiver uses 64-bit for all DXD and higher sample rates than the spec for 2X or 4X DSD.

 

[edorr]

JRiver has already been able to stream DSD to DLNA devices such as the OPPO BDP-103/105.

You should now be able to convert DSD to DXD*, apply DSP, and re-encode to DSD in up to 4x DSD native format or in DoP format before streaming to a DLNA device.

*JRiver uses a higher quality than the spec for DXD. DXD is 24-bit/353.8 Khz. JRiver uses 64-bit for all DXD and higher sample rates than the spec for 2X or 4X DSD.

As long as I run Dirac on my server I still can't stream. I would need acourate and load filters in Jriver. Then get a "bridge" for my direcstream DAC. Quite a change in architecture. Not quite ready for this.

 

[dallasjustice]

Today's release of JRiver Media Center (20.0.27) includes DSP for DLNA. The last few releases also include JRiver's WDM driver for routing all PC audio sound through JRiver for DSP including convolution.

Jriver 20 is shaping up to be one of the most highly upgraded versions. This is awesome. If only there were any MCH capable DLNA devices now. I think only the HT gear can do MCH DLNA.

 

[Brucemck2]

Jriver 20 is shaping up to be one of the most highly upgraded versions. This is awesome. If only there were any MCH capable DLNA devices now. I think only the HT gear can do MCH DLNA.

Have you been able to make this work (or know anyone who has?) I'd like to stream to my MSB/Oppo and have J River apply convolution (which would mean I would not have to offline convolve and stream already convolved files).

 

[dallasjustice]

Have you been able to make this work (or know anyone who has?) I'd like to stream to my MSB/Oppo and have J River apply convolution (which would mean I would not have to offline convolve and stream already convolved files).

No. I can't becuase my system uses 4CH. There's isnt a MCH capable DLNA device other than the HT gear.

 

[mojave]

Have you been able to make this work (or know anyone who has?) I'd like to stream to my MSB/Oppo and have J River apply convolution (which would mean I would not have to offline convolve and stream already convolved files).

I'm not sure what you mean by "make this work." It works whether anyone uses the feature or not. I have seen several on the JRiver forums that have already tried the DSP with DLNA. Select the Oppo as your DLNA device in JRiver and apply the convolution filter in the DSP.

Offline convolution of files sounds like a lot of work - especially since I tend to tweak/change my convolution filter. That would mean redoing all the files again.

No. I can't because my system uses 4CH. There's isn't a MCH capable DLNA device other than the HT gear.

I think you can attach the JRiver Id via USB to a multi-channel DAC like the Lynx Hilo and you instantly have a DLNA MCH DAC. I say "I think" because I'm not sure how Linux works with MCH. JRiver brought an Id to RMAF, but I didn't get a chance to try it with the Steinberg UR824 8 channel DAC that I had brought along.

 

[dallasjustice]

Interesting. I wonder if I could still use the Acourate convolver and loopback into a DLNA zone. It would be a bit painful to setup the config file for 4CH Convolver in Jriver.

EDIT:
The wiki page says: "Multichannel and DSD are supported over HDMI."

I'm not sure what you mean by "make this work." It works whether anyone uses the feature or not. I have seen several on the JRiver forums that have already tried the DSP with DLNA. Select the Oppo as your DLNA device in JRiver and apply the convolution filter in the DSP.

Offline convolution of files sounds like a lot of work - especially since I tend to tweak/change my convolution filter. That would mean redoing all the files again.


I think you can attach the JRiver Id via USB to a multi-channel DAC like the Lynx Hilo and you instantly have a DLNA MCH DAC. I say "I think" because I'm not sure how Linux works with MCH. JRiver brought an Id to RMAF, but I didn't get a chance to try it with the Steinberg UR824 8 channel DAC that I had brought along.

 

[Brucemck2]

The functionality is almost there, but not quite ...

I've confirmed that several of the dsp functions work ok under dlna (e.g., the peq), but, sample rate conversions and convolution do not yet work properly. At this point you can either stream the original sample rate, in which case convolution won't work properly, or, you have to fix the sample rate and use a convolution filter that matches it.

It'll take awhile to hammer the bugs out.

 

[Brucemck2]

I have been able to confirm that in the latest build convolution works for alternative (varying) sample rates.

I created convolution filters for 44k, 88k, 176k, and 192k. Each had a unique shape so that I could use an RTA to see which filter was actually being used.

The settings that worked were:
(1) Setting "Sample Rate Same As Source" on the Advanced page of the DLNA Servers Page
(2) Setting Output Format to 44.1 for all input sample rates on the DSP Studio Page, OR, setting each input sample rate to have an identical output sample rate (and checking the Output Format box) ... note using "no change" also worked, but only after using one of the prior settings
(3) Setting Convolution to "on" on the DSP Studio Page and loading all the convolution files one by one and after each one playing a file with the corresponding sample rate of the filter just loaded

This is a huge step forward for users of JRiver. Now if we can just get the audio path to display what's going on so that convoluted test routines aren't required.

 

[Hest]

You can take a measurement of your room and send it to uli along with a couple of tracks, he will then return the convolved versions for you to listen to. Details here - http://www.audiovero.de/en/acourate-test-for-free--.html

This offer is rubbish.

- You cannot expect anyone without prior experience to make a good meassurement. You need the right microphone, a stand, something stable to place the stand on, the right spot to meassure, the right playback and recording levels, and you need to make sure objects in the room does not play along. Expect the first meassurement to be far from optimal and have a negative effect on the result.

- Even if the meassurement turns out well, two tracks are not enough. We can probably easily tell that there is a difference between corrected and uncorrected sound. But most people will need a little time to get used to the corrected sound before making any buying decision. And what is the chance of Uli choosing a target curve that is great for your system/room? Surely a proper trial involves the user fiddling with the target himself.

- The offer is plain stereo only. As I have a software crossover in combination with room correction, I wrote to Uli for a special XO trial. I did not get one, but he agreed to prepare two tracks for me. I was to load a special crossover file into the meassurement software and send the meassurement to him. After spending hours tring to figure out how to do a multi-channel meassurement I gave up and wrote back to him. Turns out I could not use the meassurement software after all and needed a special version of Acourate. Great, the author does not know his own software!

Maybe I would have gotten back to him again if the experience with the meassurement software had been a good one. Unfortunately it was rather fustrating: The software tells me not to use excessive loudness and then shows some strange values without any explanation when meassurement is done. I am left behind with one big question: Is my meassurement useable, it is good or bad?
Compare this to the meassurement module in Audiolense: It will tell you three things: a) Average/Good/Excellent Dynamic Range, b) a value for dynamic range i dB, and c) a graph showing the loudest part to check for clipping. Easy to understand and easy to tweak the meassurement.

But the most fustrating part of the meassurement software is the asio channel remapping. Instead of just remapping the channels for itself, the meassurement software remapped everything, so my foobar2000 sent bass out through the €1200 tweeters. Luckily the volume was very low so they survived, but really, what kind of moron messes with the channel mapping for other software without displaying a CLEAR WARNING!


I have been using Audiolense for five years, last three years in XO mode. The software is fairly easy to use and there is good support from the author. The sound quality is absolutely fantastic, but it took quite a long time to tweak it to my preferences. I have nothing bad to say about the sound quality, but it would be interesting to compare with Acourate and see if it can be improved. I have read several positive reviews of Acourate after all.

The Audiolense demo offers unlimited 30 secs trials in stereo mode.
For XO you can buy the product and get a full refund if not satisfied after some weeks.
Does not get much fairer than that.

 

[dallasjustice]

I agree that the trial isnt as DIY as other software. Uli does know his software. He helped me set up a 3 way stereo system. You need a way to matrix the sweep into your desired channels. That's what Acourate Convolver is for and the channel mapping matrix is consistent with my Lynx Hilo as long as one is familiar with the mixer. Which DAC/ADC are you using?

All of the limitations you mentioned in your first paragraph are the same with all software. There's a mic meter in the acourate log sweep recorder. It's easy to read. I don't understand how taking more than one sweep or moving obstructions from your room is a limitation. DIRAC Live, for example, requires you take 9 measurements before you can build a filter.

If one is unfamiliar with DSP software and more linear playback, I totally agree that it can take some time to get accustomed to more accurate music.

This offer is rubbish.

- You cannot expect anyone without prior experience to make a good meassurement. You need the right microphone, a stand, something stable to place the stand on, the right spot to meassure, the right playback and recording levels, and you need to make sure objects in the room does not play along. Expect the first meassurement to be far from optimal and have a negative effect on the result.

- Even if the meassurement turns out well, two tracks are not enough. We can probably easily tell that there is a difference between corrected and uncorrected sound. But most people will need a little time to get used to the corrected sound before making any buying decision. And what is the chance of Uli choosing a target curve that is great for your system/room? Surely a proper trial involves the user fiddling with the target himself.

- The offer is plain stereo only. As I have a software crossover in combination with room correction, I wrote to Uli for a special XO trial. I did not get one, but he agreed to prepare two tracks for me. I was to load a special crossover file into the meassurement software and send the meassurement to him. After spending hours tring to figure out how to do a multi-channel meassurement I gave up and wrote back to him. Turns out I could not use the meassurement software after all and needed a special version of Acourate. Great, the author does not know his own software!

Maybe I would have gotten back to him again if the experience with the meassurement software had been a good one. Unfortunately it was rather fustrating: The software tells me not to use excessive loudness and then shows some strange values without any explanation when meassurement is done. I am left behind with one big question: Is my meassurement useable, it is good or bad?
Compare this to the meassurement module in Audiolense: It will tell you three things: a) Average/Good/Excellent Dynamic Range, b) a value for dynamic range i dB, and c) a graph showing the loudest part to check for clipping. Easy to understand and easy to tweak the meassurement.

But the most fustrating part of the meassurement software is the asio channel remapping. Instead of just remapping the channels for itself, the meassurement software remapped everything, so my foobar2000 sent bass out through the €1200 tweeters. Luckily the volume was very low so they survived, but really, what kind of moron messes with the channel mapping for other software without displaying a CLEAR WARNING!


I have been using Audiolense for five years, last three years in XO mode. The software is fairly easy to use and there is good support from the author. The sound quality is absolutely fantastic, but it took quite a long time to tweak it to my preferences. I have nothing bad to say about the sound quality, but it would be interesting to compare with Acourate and see if it can be improved. I have read several positive reviews of Acourate after all.

The Audiolense demo offers unlimited 30 secs trials in stereo mode.
For XO you can buy the product and get a full refund if not satisfied after some weeks.
Does not get much fairer than that.

 

[Brucemck2]

Acourate's user interface isn't as intuitive as Dirac or AudioLens, but it's not horrible.

All DRC software, whether it be Trinnov or Acourate or Dirac, requires that you be thoughtful in where/how you measure so that's not unique to Uli's offering.

Uli was quite helpful in getting me over the issues I was having. In my case, I had an older usb preamp that wasn't playing nice with ASIO. Uli looked at several measurement files along the way, and, he helped with setting some of the more unique settings in the software, such as phase windows and pre-ringing settings. He also sent me a pretty decent target curve to start with. In the end, I ended up with great filters that sound terrific. I'm still tweaking to suit my preferences (and my obsessiveness) but I'm doing that off the original measurements, which have proven quite robust.

This "active hand holding" has been quite valuable, and is one reason I've stuck with Acourate (and Trinnov).

What I like best about Acourate is the AcouratNAS offering, where I can convolve offline. Until J River gets DRC working reliably under dlna, AccourateNAS provides a very compelling solution.

 

[RBFC]

If one is unfamiliar with DSP software and more linear playback, I totally agree that it can take some time to get accustomed to more accurate music.

This. Since we are intimately familiar with the sound of our system AND THAT OF DAILY LIFE SOUNDS in our room, we are conditioned to hearing everything through this "room filter". DSP, properly applied, does sound different, because nothing we've heard in the room has sounded like this before.

Lee

 

[microstrip]

(...)
But the most fustrating part of the meassurement software is the asio channel remapping. Instead of just remapping the channels for itself, the meassurement software remapped everything, so my foobar2000 sent bass out through the €1200 tweeters. Luckily the volume was very low so they survived, but really, what kind of moron messes with the channel mapping for other software without displaying a CLEAR WARNING!

(...)

This is a dangerous aspect of DIY active speakers - as you do not have passive crossovers that block DC and unwanted frequencies any mistake can destroy your tweeters and even mid-range speakers. I would suggest using a high quality capacitor around 47 microfarads in series with the tweeter while developing the system.

 

[dallasjustice]

This is a dangerous aspect of DIY active speakers - as you do not have passive crossovers that block DC and unwanted frequencies any mistake can destroy your tweeters and even mid-range speakers. I would suggest using a high quality capacitor around 47 microfarads in series with the tweeter while developing the system.

Computers don't kill tweeters, audiophools do.

 

[edorr]

Contemplating to jump on the DLNA streaming bandwagon when the new PS Audio Bridge II is released (for 2 channel only - MCH will run on different serverwith Dirac / Lynx).

However, I need to keep DSP functionality. I am currently using CAPS 3.0 -> JRiver -> Dirac ->USB. Can anyone confirm if I could redeploy the server as a DLNA streamer, running Acourate convolusion instead of Dirac? In addition to PEQ, the Jriver DSP should also do DSD to PCM conversion for my 2 channel SACD rips.

Am I correct in assuming this (DLNA streaming / acourate) should sound better because of (A) superior DSP from Acourate (B) inherent superiority to I2S bridge over USB input on the Directstream DAC?

 

[dallasjustice]

DLNA past, AES67 Future . . .

Contemplating to jump on the DLNA streaming bandwagon when the new PS Audio Bridge II is released (for 2 channel only - MCH will run on different serverwith Dirac / Lynx).

However, I need to keep DSP functionality. I am currently using CAPS 3.0 -> JRiver -> Dirac ->USB. Can anyone confirm if I could redeploy the server as a DLNA streamer, running Acourate convolusion instead of Dirac? In addition to PEQ, the Jriver DSP should also do DSD to PCM conversion for my 2 channel SACD rips.

Am I correct in assuming this (DLNA streaming / acourate) should sound better because of (A) superior DSP from Acourate (B) inherent superiority to I2S bridge over USB input on the Directstream DAC?

Do yourself a favor: Stop with the DLNA!! It's a joke standard.

AES67 IS THE STANDARD ethernet protocol for audio. You should be looking for devices that support AES67, like Ravenna. You can do everything you want to do with a Merging Hapi over ethernet.