On-line room correction services

[jamesg11]

These 2 room correction ‘services’ have started up within the last year or so.

You measure, & they supply correction files for use in software like HQPlayer etc.

 

Anyone had any experience of them, or maybe other similar offerings?

 

http://www.homeaudiofidelity.com/

 

https://accuratesound.ca

 

[Guest rmpfyf]

On 15/04/2020 at 4:09 PM, jamesg11 said:

These 2 room correction ‘services’ have started up within the last year or so.

You measure, & they supply correction files for use in software like HQPlayer etc.

 

Anyone had any experience of them, or maybe other similar offerings?

 

http://www.homeaudiofidelity.com/

 

https://accuratesound.ca

 

No, but not hard to do - much of the software behind this sort of stuff is freeware, or easy enough to make.

[Snoopy8]

Folks on Audiophile Style seem to like it

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/32123-new-loudspeakers-room-digital-correction-service/

 

If your setup is relatively static and learning room correction is a challenge, then the service can be useful. However, in a changing environment, an easy to use package like Dirac Live will be more cost effective.

 

Personally, it will cost me a fortune to use such a service because I like to tinker and experiment!  

[sir sanders zingmore]

On 15/04/2020 at 4:09 PM, jamesg11 said:

https://accuratesound.ca

These guys seem to take an interesting approach. Just had a quick glance at their website and it looks like its DRC only up to 600Hz and they advise on room-treatment and speaker positioning as well.

Not cheap though

[Red Spade Audio]

DEQX have been doing this for a long time. At one stage you had to pay for it but last I heard they offer this as backup support.

 

We've been doing it for around 6 years although more people ask about room analysis and bass integration.

 

1 hour ago, Snoopy8 said:

Personally, it will cost me a fortune to use such a service because I like to tinker and experiment!  

 

I know this urge very well!

 

As I see it, there are two basic categories here:

 

A: Fundemental things you want to get right the first time - set and forget

B: Things you can fiddle with forever without messing up the fundamentals

 

If you engage someone then you might have them to do A and then tinker with B. There are many ways you can do that, without having to get them back over and over.

 

If you have a way to tweak the overall shape of the response, that's probably the best thing to adjust to your own taste. I will often show clients how to do this on their own in a way that would mean there is no need for me to come back.

[jamesg11]

Thanks for responses ... extra food for thought.

 

I’m regional, central Vic, so that complicates any in-situ service.

I’ve got a Umik-1 mic, intending to do the learning curve & then implement DRC. But increasingly noticed many people not just tweaking their initial efforts but basically frustrated with where they wound up. Plenty of success stories of course.

 

My current setup (in sig), with no DRC,  has improved mids & highs with the transfer of bottom end duties to the 2 subs, but lost low freq heft & definition. Changes with the music played & location of subs - just random mucking around. Until DRC is sorted I won’t know if there are issues with the gear etc.

 

So first up I might try the HAF trial, which gives you a single file. I’ll see if that gives a significant uptick ... then consider the options above from there.

[Guest rmpfyf]

1 hour ago, jamesg11 said:

Thanks for responses ... extra food for thought.

 

I’m regional, central Vic, so that complicates any in-situ service.

I’ve got a Umik-1 mic, intending to do the learning curve & then implement DRC. But increasingly noticed many people not just tweaking their initial efforts but basically frustrated with where they wound up. Plenty of success stories of course.

 

My current setup (in sig), with no DRC,  has improved mids & highs with the transfer of bottom end duties to the 2 subs, but lost low freq heft & definition. Changes with the music played & location of subs - just random mucking around. Until DRC is sorted I won’t know if there are issues with the gear etc.

 

So first up I might try the HAF trial, which gives you a single file. I’ll see if that gives a significant uptick ... then consider the options above from there.

 

Try this. Bit of a learning curve but free http://www.alanjordan.org/DRCDesigner/DrcDesignerHelp.html. and no less good than anything costing thousands.

 

If you want to convolve one file to try, can help you there.

[dan_b]

I recently worked with Mitch from accuratesound to develop some filters for my setup. I’ve tried myself a number of times but have never been totally happy with the results. I’m thrilled with what Mitch did and have never been happier with the sound of my system. 

[davewantsmoore]

On 17/04/2020 at 9:42 AM, sir sanders zingmore said:

These guys seem to take an interesting approach.

To be very general and very blunt, they do it the right way (so shoudln't really be considered "interested", ie, "unusual").   In short, anyone doing anything different is doing it wrong.

 

You can read quite a lot of detail on their site (or in their book) about what they do and why behind it.

 

It isn't "easy to do", and the tools (mostly) aren't free, or usable by the average person.

 

I favour the Dirac Live option too.... although the more extensive approach used by Accurate Sound is very likely to get a superior result.

[sir sanders zingmore]

5 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

To be very general and very blunt, they do it the right way (so shoudln't really be considered "interested", ie, "unusual").   In short, anyone doing anything different is doing it wrong.

agree.

My worry is that they do it remotely. Do you think its possible to do it well without them actually physically being in the room?

[betty boop]

its good some online corrections services are there, a word of caution surely. in that room correction of the EQ variety should always only be as last resort - final step. Room correction of EQ variety doesnt actually deal with problem at source instead acts as a band aid. Its actually wrong in my opinion to call it room correction. it doesnt actually correct the room. it does its best to make do.... which could be best of a very bad situation, and in many most cases be some very simple things to do first id suggest be far more effective vs someone  just taking some measurements and sending to someone for a EQ curve wont fix.

 

Also keeping in mind with EQ, measurement technique is very important, something i myself have learnt last 16 years been using measuring and EQ. Especially where  sometimes a measurement can show a problem, but its more related to how take measurement or where.

 

surely where ever you are there is someone that can actually visit ?. or go beyond just the measurements and providing a correction curve to counter. One is taking measurements, interpret them with keeping in mind context. then applying vs firstly actual room changes. it could be treatments, and positioning of speakers and listening position within the room ... this is far more valuable a step and measurements are invaluable for this. ie make best of speakers and room with positioning and treatments. EQ it should be only final step when done all can with the room, positioning of speakers and listening position that use EQ. 

 

I can think of about 4-5 people do this service in australia, perhaps in this time of covid-19 in room visit and service might be a challenge and maybe why considering online. but these services do exist.

[davewantsmoore]

10 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

Try this. Bit of a learning curve but free http://www.alanjordan.org/DRCDesigner/DrcDesignerHelp.html. and no less good than anything costing thousands.

DRC designer includes no tools to evaluate or optimise the result..... it barely includes any options to control the result.   It's those tools which are what costs thousands.

 

So I think "no less good" could really mislead people.

 

 

Calculating some EQ and applying it.... is a simple commodity.    The trick is getting it right/optimised....  as the wrong correction can easily sound wrong / bad / unnatural, etc.  (deep topic)

Edited April 18, 2020 by davewantsmoore
DRC designer

[davewantsmoore]

28 minutes ago, sir sanders zingmore said:

My worry is that they do it remotely. Do you think its possible to do it well without them actually physically being in the room?

Yes.   This microphone doesn't lie.

 

The obvious issues is capturing good data .... so they'll naturally have to work closely with the user to make sure that is done right, but aside from "technical issues", or "gross incompetence" there's not as much to it as you might expect.

[davewantsmoore]

 

Quote

I can think of about 4-5 people do this service in australia

Can you name some?

I don't know of any which focus on what these two do.... but if "buy local" is an option, the many <thumbup>

Quote

 

its good some online corrections services are there, a word of caution surely. in that room correction of the EQ variety should always

 

only be as last resort

Deinitely, speakers should be positioned as best as possible...

 

But the reality with room treatment, is that it can only solve gross room issues.... and it's only effective up to a point .....  and not without possible side effects, that paradoxically increase as the strength of the correction increases.   (ie. the more you need it, the more the side effects).

 

Quote

EQ variety doesnt actually deal with problem at source instead acts as a band aid.

This is a bit misleading.

 

Yes, the best solution to a acoustic problem, is an acoustic solution ..... but this isn't always possible.... and it can never be complete (you are ALWAYS still inside a room).

 

Calling it a "band aid" makes it sound like something which should be avoided ......  where as the key is that it is just something which shouldn't be misused.

 

Not "doing EQ wrong" is the whole point of such a professional service.

Quote

Also keeping in mind with EQ, measurement technique is very important, something i myself have learnt last 16 years been using measuring and EQ. Especially where  sometimes a measurement can show a problem, but its more related to how take measurement or where.

When (like these services do) you take a measurement from the listening position..... there is a whole host of things to be understood about how relevant the data is for making a correction.

 

This is why, the whole "capture data, create inverse => perfect response" paradigm is completely flawed.

 

Said another way.....   "what I will chose to correct, and how I will correct it.... is very dependant on my knowing that the data I have is ONLY showing me the listening position".

 

It may be tempting to argue that "taking a bunch of measurements from different locations" will be better ...... for some types of analysis, yes .....  but if you are making a correction which knows and respects the data it is working with..... then, not really.

Quote

surely where ever you are there is someone that can actually visit ?. or go beyond just the measurements and providing a correction curve to counter. One is taking measurements, interpret them with keeping in mind context. then applying to first actual room changes. it could be treatments

That is what the service from acuratesound does.

 

You don't ned to be in the room, because a photo, and the data tells you everything you (initially) need to know.   The room problems are there to be seen in the data.

Quote

and positioning of speakers and listening position within the room

This is part of the initial report.    If there's gross problems caused by the room/position ... then these are called out.

Quote

EQ it should be only final step

That's what they say too....

Edited April 18, 2020 by davewantsmoore

[davewantsmoore]

On 15/04/2020 at 4:09 PM, jamesg11 said:

Anyone had any experience of them

No .... you can see the difference in price .....  based on what they say the will do, I think that difference is fair.

[Guest rmpfyf]

6 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

DRC includes no tools to evaluate or optimise the result..... it barely includes any options to control the result.   It's those tools which are what costs thousands.

 

So I think "no less good" could really mislead people.

 

 

Calculating some EQ and applying it.... is a simple commodity.    The trick is getting it right/optimised....  as the wrong correction can easily sound wrong / bad / unnatural, etc.  (deep topic)

 

You can adjust for target curve, though the intent is to do so programmatically (at to be honest the DRC targets are pretty good).

 

It's the usual inverse Fourier transform... The tools might cost thousand but it's an interesting market, they're certainly not worth as much - the s/ware to control the curve is very, very elementary. I could probably knock up a compiled version of something with curve shaping and a GUI in a few hours (I'm lacking a compiler tho). I've not seen anything in e.g. DEQX that's impressive enough to justify price from a technical PoV - the support they give is worth the $, however. 

 

At any rate, DRC no less good. You'll want to know what you're doing if you want to play with the output of any of these tools. 

 

Would suggest anyone wanting to get into the space try DRC Designer first. It's free and pretty good. If you can manage that and like the result, you might want to save your biscuits for something else, or go deeper down the rabbit hole. 

 

I've assed about with a ton of DRC work - professionally and for a hobby - DRC (the program) is pretty good functionally and very free. Aside from a steep learning curve - somewhat abated by DRC Designer (a second author's GUI for DRC) - the audiophile community might do well to avoid the usual 'it must be better if it costs more'. There's nothing functionally different in any of them.

[davewantsmoore]

13 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

You can adjust for target curve

Sure, that's a trivial.....  but it's not just about the target and ifft to get your response to match.

 

It's about how to window the response so it takes into account the timing (ie. the reflections / room).

 

If you don't.... then a simple "response from the measurement position" won't give a good result (as Al alluded to).    These are the "high frequency correction" and "low frequency correction" sliders in DRC.....  this is about a rudimentary as saying that an amp with a Bass and Treble knob on it, has "EQ".

Quote

It's the usual inverse Fourier transform... The tools might cost thousand but it's an interesting market, they're certainly not worth as much - the s/ware to control the curve is very, very elementary.

Perhaps you shoud read Mitch's book? ... or even just what he's posted on his site.   

Quote

There's nothing functionally different in any of them.

Wut?     

 

Just look at the "generate custom filters" tab in DRC..... and the look at what Acourate does.    Acourate gives you all the TOOLS you need to figure out where to set all the sliders in DRC "custom filters" tab......  but, also doesn't just limit you to some sandboxed sliders.... the options are essentially infinite.

Edited April 18, 2020 by davewantsmoore

[Guest rmpfyf]

15 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

Sure, that's a trivial.....  but it's not just about the target and ifft to get your response to match.

 

This is not what's suggested as an absolute, but it is a good place to start if you're starting from zero. Which many here are.

 

15 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

It's about how to window the response so it takes into account the timing (ie. the reflections / room).

 

If you don't.... then a simple "response from the measurement position" won't give a good result (as Al alluded to).    These are the "high frequency correction" and "low frequency correction" sliders in DRC.....  this is about a rudimentary as saying that an amp with a Bass and Treble knob on it, has "EQ".

 

Sure, and if you know what you're doing / programming appropriately you can use DRC to do as much. Or any mathematical utility that can compute an IFT / has a DSP library. 

 

Not suggesting for a second it's all about amplitude response correction (which you well know is not what DRC is about, even if DRC designer does allow some amplitude target adjustment). Again - where do you want to start?

 

15 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

Perhaps you shoud read Mitch's book? ... or even just what he's posted on his site.   

Been/done

 

15 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

Wut?     

 

Just look at the "generate custom filters" tab in DRC..... and the look at what Accourate does.    Accourate gives you all the TOOLS you need to figure out where to set all the sliders in DRC "custom filters" tab......  but, also doesn't just limit you to some sandboxed sliders.... the options are essentially infinite.

 

Let's be mindful of how this started (and let's not conflate DRC Designer, which is a GUI attempting to make some of the functionality of DRC simple, with DRC - which has no GUI and can do a great deal more, and has an excellent psychoacoustic model):

 

On 15/04/2020 at 4:09 PM, jamesg11 said:

These 2 room correction ‘services’ have started up within the last year or so.

You measure, & they supply correction files for use in software like HQPlayer etc.

 

Anyone had any experience of them, or maybe other similar offerings?

 

If you're in the market for a blind service you're probably not in the market for what Acourate can do. If you want to generate a filter with relative ease, very low cost and not much input then sure, web services work. And DRC will likely not give you a significantly different result, save that it's free.

 

Had the OP stated 'I'm after a solution that allows me to sit and tinker through a usable GUI with many possibilities around filter generation, and can also do convolution - and if I get stuck has support' then sure, Acourate is a good answer.  There are other questions that have other answers (DEQX etc). I'm not suggesting to sh*t on any of them - if anyone's willing to try a blind online service at cost, try a program that's free and does much the same whilst you're at it.

Edited April 18, 2020 by rmpfyf

[davewantsmoore]

 

Quote

let's not conflate DRC Designer, which is a GUI attempting to make some of the functionality of DRC simple, with DRC

 

No.....  we're talking about DRC designer ..... vs a "thousand dollar alternative".

 

 

I'm not suggesting the OP use Acourate (he wouldn't know where to start, I'd expect) .....  I'm saying that Acourate (used competently) is going to produe a (potentially dramatically) better result than DRC Designer.

 

DRC Designer isn't "no less good" than Acourate, as (at th risk of apples to oranges) accourate is a tool to analyse and optimse the result.    Yes, sure it's "DRC" bits (convolver/recorder/etc) are just as capable/good.

 

DRC Designer isn't "no less good" than the "Accurate Sound" online service (which happens to use Acourate as part of their toolbox).... as any pro who's looking at and optimising the result (rather than picking the limited ootb options in DRC designer) will get a superior result.

 

 

Sure.  The underlying DRC software can do anything Acourate can..... but that's not relvant to the discussion...... Although it does illustrate why Acourate costs $ (and DRC is free) ...... Acourates "features" is the tools to display and evaluate the data...... the convolver/recorder/math parts are commodity.

Edited April 18, 2020 by davewantsmoore

[Guest rmpfyf]

40 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

 

 

No.....  we're talking about DRC designer ..... vs a "thousand dollar alternative".

 

 

I'm not suggesting the OP use Accourate (he wouldn't know where to start, I'd expect) .....  I'm saying that Accourate (used competently) is going to produe a (potentially dramatically) better result than DRC Designer.

 

DRC Designer isn't "no less good" than Accourate, as (at th risk of apples to oranges) accourate is a tool to analyse and optimse the result.    Yes, sure it's "DRC" bits (convolver/recorder/etc) are just as capable/good.

 

DRC Designer isn't "no less good" than the "Accurate Sound" online service (which happens to use Accourate as part of their toolbox).... as any pro who's looking at and optimising the result (rather than picking the limited ootb options in DRC designer) will get a superior result.

 

 

Sure.  The underlying DRC software can do anything Accourate can..... but that's not relvant to the discussion...... Although it does illustrate why Accourate costs $ (and DRC is free) ...... Accourates "features" is the tools to display and evaluate the data...... the convolver/recorder/math parts are commodity.

 

Dave, it's simple -

 

What are the paid SaaS online options like? Decent! Basic! Costs a little, costly if you want to tweak continually. 

 

What's the free DRC Designer option like? Decent! Basic! FREE! Somewhat tweakable, prolly just as good. Wouldn't go past if you're about to pay the basics online.

 

Free is good! Start with free!!

 

If someone wants to sit down with Acourate and play, they'll probably get a superior result given time, knowledge and application. 

 

If someone wants to sit down with DRC (not Designer)/MATLAB/<insert dev environment w/DSP toolbox> and play, they'll probably get a superior result given time, knowledge and application, if less accessible for most people than Acourate.

 

There is no magic in either product. The science involved is old but not elementary, application requires some skill.

 

I don't think anyone behind DRC Designer is arguing that Acourate isn't a superior product. It's hard to argue that it's not free is all, and probably a worthwhile first step before paying anyone anything.

[davewantsmoore]

10 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

Free is good! Start with free!!

Agreed...   It's somewhere to start.

 

As mentioned, I'd choose Dirac Live (although not free) for a number of reasons, for the average person who isn't in it for the tinker.

Quote

If someone wants to sit down with Acourate and play, they'll probably get a superior result given time, knowledge and application. 

I think you're missing my point.

 

Paying $1000 for a professional to create corrections ..... is going to handily beat DRC Designer.

 

Paying $1000 for software (eg. Acourate) ..... assuming the user can drive it (eg. knowledge of small room accoustics) ..... is going to handily beat DRC Designer.

 

Saying otherwise will mislead people. in to thinking there's no point paying, cos DRC Designer is "no less good".

 

 

 

If you mean, DRC (not Designer) + other tools .... is capable of the same result..... then sure.....  but that's a learning curve an order of magitude higher than Acourate ........ and it's irrelevant.  You were talking about DRC Designer.

Edited April 18, 2020 by davewantsmoore

[Steffen]

I’ve dabbled in room EQ for a few short months myself now, after solely focusing on measurement, room treatment and speaker placement before.
 

What can I say, it’s a minefield. It is so easy to fix the graphs and kill the music. One thing I learned along the way is to keep EQ out of the higher frequencies, and to limit it to the lower few hundred Hz. Even so, I have not found a set of filters that fully satisfies me, and I keep going back to no EQ, modes and nulls be damned. But I’m learning, and I hope that one day I’ll master this art.

 

I think there is definitely a case to be made for professional room EQ services, because that stuff isn’t as easy as the tools make it seem, and takes a lot of experience. 

[Guest rmpfyf]

47 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

Paying $1000 for a professional to create corrections ..... is going to handily beat DRC Designer.

 

Paying $1000 for software (eg. Accourate) ..... assuming the user can drive it (eg. knowledge of small room accoustics) ..... is going to handily beat DRC Designer.

Sure.

 

48 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

If you mean, DRC (not Designer) + other tools .... is capable of the same result..... then sure.....  but that's a learning curve an order of magitude higher than Accourate ........ and it's irrelevant.  You were talking about DRC Designer.

You're picking semantics here. What's under DRC Designer? DRC. I'd think we essentially agree. 

 

I'd suggest DSP (whether room correction or whatever else) is a journey, and given the length involved - unless anyone's willing to start with a pro at cost - the free stuff is a good place to start. Not least as getting a solid result from (even) Acourate requires knowledge/experience.

 

With respect to the OP and said journey, as stated I'd go the free stuff before throwing money at anything.

 

Nothing incorrect in suggesting what underpins the free stuff is as good as any other. If the UI rivalled the best paid options, of course it'd not be free.

[davewantsmoore]

8 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

You're picking semantics here.

No, not at all.

 

You suggested DRC Desigener..... I'm talking about DRC Designer.

 

You pivoted to the underlying DRC.   Yes, it can do all the things.....  but so what?

8 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

unless anyone's willing to start with a pro at cost

Which is exactly what this thread is about.

 

You're suggesting an alternative to the "professional online service" is DRC designer.

 

My comment is that it WON'T give as result anywhere near as good as the pro-service (and quite a bit of tinkering for the average-man). 

 

So great ..... people should give DRC Designer a go if they want to ....   But you're implying to people they will get a "just as good result as paying thousands"  .....   That will confuse them into thinking they can get a result which as good as a pro using DRC Designer.     No, they won't.  Ever.

 

Once I pointed out the limits of  "DRC Designer" ....  you suggested they could use DRC (without designer) along with their DSP toolbox, matlab, and their knowledge of small room accoustics, etc. etc.    99.9% of people don't have the skills to even start that.... let alone get a good result.

8 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

I'd suggest DSP (whether room correction or whatever else) is a journey

Pretty short if you want it to be..... hence this thread.

 

Use one of the online services mentioned, or buy Dirac Live.

8 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

the free stuff is a good place to start.

Yes, if people want to invest the time.

 

DRC Designer will NOT give them a "no less good result than paying thousands"   (ie. you're wrong when you said it would)

DRC (without Designer) is for most people a lifetime of learning.    Not just a "slightly steep learning curve".

8 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

Not least as getting a solid result from (even) Acourate requires knowledge/experience.

Yes.

 

8 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

Nothing incorrect in suggesting what underpins the free stuff is as good as any other.

Correct..... but you will confuse people who do not understand what you are talking about.

 

Most people reading this will think they will get a better result with DRC designer.... than "paying thousands".

[dan_b]

I’ve taken countless measurements with REW over the years and used these to fine tune the position of my speakers and the integration of my sub.  I’ve also treated my room using vicoustic bass traps.   All this helped and agree with the point that eq comes last. 
 

I have used Dirac on and off. It always took too much away from the sound for me though. I tried tweaking the curve and only correcting low frequencies, but always ended up preferring the sound without it. 
 

The filters Mitch developed (which run in Roon) are much better than I could manage with Dirac. I feel like I’m getting the benefits (even bass response and better soundstage) without the disadvantages I had with Dirac (a general loss of dynamics). 
 

I paid well under AUD1000.  For me, it was great value.