More > Media Center 17

Audio "Camp B"

(1/3) > >>

drmimosa:

--- Quote from: Matt on November 13, 2011, 08:24:24 am ---There are two camps with regards to audio quality:
A) The original is perfect, and all processing is bad processing
B) Good sound is the goal, and sometimes processing can help
[edit -- after thinking more, there's also a C) Processing can be good, but I want to do it in my external hardware because, well, it was expensive]

--- End quote ---

Great audio discussion threads today, very interesting reading with tons of new information.

In regards to the audio quality camps, I think a lot of people start "Camp A" and move to "Camp B" (spending a lot of money in Camp C in the process.

I'd love to use the current feature set of Media Center to reach a "better campsite" for Camp B. If there was a way to use active software room correction with the parametric EQ, I think a lot more audiophiles and audio nuts would use the DSP features of MC. I'm a two channel user, so I don't have Audessy Room Correction or other hardware equalizers in my integrated amp. But still, there is a lot of room for improvement in getting flat response out of my speakers.

Jmone wrote about his big subwoofer blowout  competition that utilized a third-party microphone software that could measure room response with an SPL meter. Could this work for 2-channel as well?

In any case, I'd love to learn how to use the parametric EQ better and what has worked for others in terms of room acoustic correction. Right now I just stab in the dark, running from couch to MC and back playing with settings!

mark_h:
Camp D)

The original is perfect but external processing WILL help :)

By which I mean it's important to start with the original stream (not compressed or altered in any way) but that the room needs to be "treated" in order to hear that perfect recording.

I use TacT digital room correction in my main hi-fi and Meridian Room Correction in my multichannel cinema. 

Most of my MC listening is via headphones so I don't need room correction there :D

flac.rules:
I am also in camp B), I think it would help a bit when it comes to camp B) with a bit more information about the processing. I don't mean trade-secrets, or algorithms, but just a bit information on what acoustical principals are used. For instance for upmixing. Now not even rudimentary information is available.

Blaine78:
Camp A here, and no chance of moving. With Ayre and ATC equipment, any processing done, will sound through like nails down a blackboard.

jmone:
To me MC is the whole camp ground, and should be able to cater for Camp A, B, C, or D.  To enable this we could have various DSP and selectable DSP settings that can be assigned by MC's Media Type, Sub Type or even by track (eg via the existing Playback Info field).  In such a scenario you could config various DSP settings including "Pure Direct" and then as the user decide when and how you want it applied.  

I'm a "Camp B" by my nature but I do appreciate that it would be good to wander over and see how Camp A (etc) do it from time to time.  I could imagine sitting with Blane78, sharing a beer/wine (or worse) listening to the purity on unmolested RedBook Audio outputted over his 10watt tube amp in my Tie Died tee shirt then back to the technos in Camp B with their Linkwitz Tansform Parametric Equalizer (this is already an MC Option!) and discussing the merits of their high tech ferrofluid-cooled beryllium tweeters.  Next on the trip is Mark_H's pad with a media room that looks like a professional Anechoic Chamber (see pic), or whacking on a pair of electrostatic headphones.

Ever noticed that the most memorable bottles of wine is that with good company?  I think music is the same where you need to be comfortable with the entire environment.....just please don't try to convince me to spend $21K for 3 metres of “Counter Spiralling Geometry” and “Spread Spectrum Technology” speaker cables but I'm happy to kick back and enjoy the experience if you provide the drinks!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page