JRiver DSP Room Correction Function

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Thanks DJ, this is exactly what I'm curious about. Could you describe what are the basic EQ parameters in JRiver?

Also, do you have any experience with third-party EQ software that could be added to work in conjunction with the JRiver engine?

Thanks so much!
Ken

I pretty much agree with dallasjustice up to a point. What JRiver calls Room Correction is basically bass management for a subwoofer and speaker distance correction, both primarily for Mch systems.

They do have a built-in multiband graphic equalizer, but that is kid stuff, not really useful at all for room correction.

Using the JRiver convolution engine gets quite complex. So, I do not recommend that approach unless you want to spend a whole lot of time going down that rabbit hole. You could easily get carried away and spin your wheels in pursuit of idealized degrees of perfection, which might not be obtainable, while missing some practical, achievable alternatives.

I do recommend Dirac Live software in conjunction with JRiver. Dirac Live is reasonably comprehensive, and it is one of the easiest room correction tools to learn and use. Kal Rubinson in Stereophile quite agrees, and he uses Dirac with JRiver, as do I, with considerable satisfaction. Flip back through his reviews and you will find his opinions on it:

http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

 

[amirm]

Looking to embed Dirac in Jriver as you've done -- could you point me to this plugin? An admittedly quick web search didn't yield anything useful. Thanks

You don't need a plug-in. WHen you install Dirac, it creates a "virtual" sound driver that wraps your existing sound driver. So in any audio app, you now select the Dirac Sound interface and you are golden. With this mechanism, anything that produces sound can go through Dirac and then to your real/current audio hardware. There is no app dependency.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

o in any audio app, you now select the Dirac Sound interface and you are golden. With this mechanism, anything that produces sound can go through Dirac and then to your real/current audio hardware.

Have you tried it with a NADAC?

 

[dallasjustice]

Why do you feel the Jriver convolution engine is complicated?

I pretty much agree with dallasjustice up to a point. What JRiver calls Room Correction is basically bass management for a subwoofer and speaker distance correction, both primarily for Mch systems.

They do have a built-in multiband graphic equalizer, but that is kid stuff, not really useful at all for room correction.

Using the JRiver convolution engine gets quite complex. So, I do not recommend that approach unless you want to spend a whole lot of time going down that rabbit hole. You could easily get carried away and spin your wheels in pursuit of idealized degrees of perfection, which might not be obtainable, while missing some practical, achievable alternatives.

I do recommend Dirac Live software in conjunction with JRiver. Dirac Live is reasonably comprehensive, and it is one of the easiest room correction tools to learn and use. Kal Rubinson in Stereophile quite agrees, and he uses Dirac with JRiver, as do I, with considerable satisfaction. Flip back through his reviews and you will find his opinions on it:

http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

 

[rblnr]

It is unofficial and you will have to inquire from DIRAC to pursue it.

Thanks Kal.

 

[rblnr]

You don't need a plug-in. WHen you install Dirac, it creates a "virtual" sound driver that wraps your existing sound driver. So in any audio app, you now select the Dirac Sound interface and you are golden. With this mechanism, anything that produces sound can go through Dirac and then to your real/current audio hardware. There is no app dependency.

Thanks for the info Amir. Planning on experimenting with this route soon.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Why do you feel the Jriver convolution engine is complicated?

Perhaps I oversimplified my wording. JRiver's convolution engine in itself might not be that complex, but the tools necessary to generate the filters for use with it are more complex, such as Acourate, as you agreed. Acourate might indeed offer greater control and precision, however, as you have found. I have avoided Acourate myself because it appeared to require a much longer learning curve plus I am quite happy with the results provided by Dirac Live. I also think it is really pretty good just on a plug and play basis, and it might be a good tool from which to learn the basics of room EQ - a stepping stone, if you will. And, the mike you need to buy for it is perfectly compatible with other tools.

I have not found it necessary or desirable to tweak or adjust Dirac's target curve, although I have experimented with that. A 75-year old friend, who is a compulsive tweaker, has mastered Dirac fairly quickly and completely. I do not think he would have succeeded, certainly not nearly as quickly, with most other tools available.

Also, connection from JRiver to the Dirac Audio Processor to the DAC (or HT processor) has not been a significant issue for me or for my friend. I will be interested to try Dirac's plugin for JRiver at some point. But, I do not have a lip synch issue on video material with JRiver.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Perhaps I oversimplified my wording. JRiver's convolution engine in itself might not be that complex, but the tools necessary to generate the filters for use with it are more complex, such as Acourate, as you agreed. Acourate might indeed offer greater control and precision, however, as you have found. I have avoided Acourate myself because it appeared to require a much longer learning curve plus I am quite happy with the results provided by Dirac Live. I also think it is really pretty good just on a plug and play basis, and it might be a good tool from which to learn the basics of room EQ - a stepping stone, if you will. And, the mike you need to buy for it is perfectly compatible with other tools.

I have not found it necessary or desirable to tweak or adjust Dirac's target curve, although I have experimented with that. A 75-year old friend, who is a compulsive tweaker, has mastered Dirac fairly quickly and completely. I do not think he would have succeeded, certainly not nearly as quickly, with most other tools available.

Also, connection from JRiver to the Dirac Audio Processor to the DAC (or HT processor) has not been a significant issue for me or for my friend. I will be interested to try Dirac's plugin for JRiver at some point. But, I do not have a lip synch issue on video material with JRiver.

Seriously - Acourate took me 30 mins from new to generate all the filters that I wanted. It is very easy.

It is more complicated if you are wanting to create a multi-driver active, driver linearised and room corrected cross over.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Seriously - Acourate took me 30 mins from new to generate all the filters that I wanted. It is very easy.

It is more complicated if you are wanting to create a multi-driver active, driver linearised and room corrected cross over.

That's impressive, Bill. Perhaps Acourate has been improved in ease of learning since the online reviews and opinions I read. Did you have prior experience with other DSP EQ software previously?

Dallasjustice has tried them all, and he was happy with Dirac for awhile sonically. Then he switched to Acourate/Audiolense, which he finds to be better. I have been following his posts for some time, and it is clear his needs and interests are on the ultra-sophisticated end of things. I am not sure that we all need or want that degree of sophistication. I doubt that I do.

I think any sort of definitive "shoot out" as to which does the best job sonically is near impossible. I think it comes down more to features of the EQ package. There is no question that Acourate or Audiolense has the more sophisticated features, if that is what you feel you need. But, I am quite happy where I am and quite comfortable that Dirac is considerably better sonically than the Audyssey Pro package I had been using for a number of years. So, I am not motivated to seek something beyond Dirac at the moment.

BTW, and I am not sure we are in the right thread to debate it, but I have a strong leaning from my readings toward EQ packages that do spatially averaged, multipoint mike measurement positions during calibration. I have read Uli's (Acourate) arguments to the contrary, and I believe Audiolense uses the same single point idea. But, I am unconvinced about single point, although I can see where it sure makes calibration easier to do.

 

[amirm]

That's impressive, Bill. Perhaps Acourate has been improved in ease of learning since the online reviews and opinions I read.

Dirac doesn't work in my system so went out and surveyed all the others. As you, I found them light years behind Dirac in ease of use. Worse yet, not allow a full trial like Dirac does. They have crippled versions that did not allow proper and easy testing in my setup.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

That's impressive, Bill. Perhaps Acourate has been improved in ease of learning since the online reviews and opinions I read. Did you have prior experience with other DSP EQ software previously?

Dallasjustice has tried them all, and he was happy with Dirac for awhile sonically. Then he switched to Acourate/Audiolense, which he finds to be better. I have been following his posts for some time, and it is clear his needs and interests are on the ultra-sophisticated end of things. I am not sure that we all need or want that degree of sophistication. I doubt that I do.

I think any sort of definitive "shoot out" as to which does the best job sonically is near impossible. I think it comes down more to features of the EQ package. There is no question that Acourate or Audiolense has the more sophisticated features, if that is what you feel you need. But, I am quite happy where I am and quite comfortable that Dirac is considerably better sonically than the Audyssey Pro package I had been using for a number of years. So, I am not motivated to seek something beyond Dirac at the moment.

BTW, and I am not sure we are in the right thread to debate it, but I have a strong leaning from my readings toward EQ packages that do spatially averaged, multipoint mike measurement positions during calibration. I have read Uli's (Acourate) arguments to the contrary, and I believe Audiolense uses the same single point idea. But, I am unconvinced about single point, although I can see where it sure makes calibration easier to do.

I actually spent a couple of days reading up on the fantastic articles posted by Mitchco on computer audiophile and the online manual and that was enough. I am used to using a horrendous Bayesian statistical package called Winbugs so nothing feels painful after that

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Dirac doesn't work in my system so went out and surveyed all the others. As you, I found them light years behind Dirac in ease of use. Worse yet, not allow a full trial like Dirac does. They have crippled versions that did not allow proper and easy testing in my setup.

Have you tried getting hold of the Dirac Live AU/VST plugins from Flavio? Installed in JRiver, it finesses the Dirac compatibility issue.

 

[amirm]

Have you tried getting hold of the Dirac Live AU/VST plugins from Flavio? Installed in JRiver, it finesses the Dirac compatibility issue.

I don't use Jriver but Roon. The compatibility issue is an odd one in that it literally slows down the tempo of any music going to my Berkeley Alpha USB bridge. Yet, on the same system it works with my audiophilleo USB bridge. I sent them some feedback on this problem but have not heard back. Been too busy to reach out to Flavio.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I don't use Jriver but Roon. The compatibility issue is an odd one in that it literally slows down the tempo of any music going to my Berkeley Alpha USB bridge. Yet, on the same system it works with my audiophilleo USB bridge. I sent them some feedback on this problem but have not heard back. Been too busy to reach out to Flavio.

Ah, Roon. AFAIK, it does not support plugins. I have not yet played with it myself because it also does not support multichannel yet.

 

[Alpinist]

I pretty much agree with dallasjustice up to a point. What JRiver calls Room Correction is basically bass management for a subwoofer and speaker distance correction, both primarily for Mch systems.

They do have a built-in multiband graphic equalizer, but that is kid stuff, not really useful at all for room correction.

Using the JRiver convolution engine gets quite complex. So, I do not recommend that approach unless you want to spend a whole lot of time going down that rabbit hole. You could easily get carried away and spin your wheels in pursuit of idealized degrees of perfection, which might not be obtainable, while missing some practical, achievable alternatives.

I do recommend Dirac Live software in conjunction with JRiver. Dirac Live is reasonably comprehensive, and it is one of the easiest room correction tools to learn and use. Kal Rubinson in Stereophile quite agrees, and he uses Dirac with JRiver, as do I, with considerable satisfaction. Flip back through his reviews and you will find his opinions on it:

http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Excellent feedback. Thanks so much!

Ken