Fun ELX Demo Today

[msound]

Based on your profile, you have ELX Towers and Horizon so definitely NFS optimized.

Do you hear a big difference if you limit Dirac to < 300hz with those speakers?

Emotiva has a built-in 11 band parametric which I also tried but Dirac was just superior. I did try to limit Dirac to 100hz, 200hz, 300hz, etc. With months of fiddling but nothing sounds better than letting Dirac eq to 20khz. Yes I have read a lot of forums, papers, research, etc about not eq ing above 500hz and I was very hardheaded not to. But with Dirac it just sounds better.

When you have the funds, you should make the leap to Dirac. You won't regret it

[curtis]

I have had Trinnov, Dirac, and currently Anthem room correct systems in my setup...all great, but I still only correct below 300-500hz in my room. Doing the higher frequencies just sounds artificial/un-natural to me.

[davef]

Not sure this is the best place for this question but almost all review sites put such an emphasis on EQ now. Erin is probably more realistic than others about using EQ to "fix" any speaker.

I used to believe EQ was this magic method to dramatically improve sound quality. I would always use the Audyssey on my Denon x4400h the moment I do anything to a system.

That is until I upgraded my speakers to the Sierra-2EX V2. Based on Dave's advice to limit EQ only to a room's transition frequency (i.e. < 300 hz), I found out the speakers sound so much smoother and cleaner without most of the EQ. To me ears, there was like an edge or harshness to the sound with the EQ running full frequency.

Without the EQ above 300 hz, the sound is just so much cleaner and "pure" as if the performer was there playing in the room. I'm not sure the reason for this but I'm curious why.

With this experience, I think there's way to much hype with the different EQ types such as Dirac, Ymao (or whatever that is), etc. going around now but I guess to each their own. IMO, all you need is below 300 hz and that's it.

Good post and extremely worthy of discussion.

It is important to distinguish between the EQ Erin discusses and auto room equalization systems. These are not the same.

Erin offers suggested equalization frequency ranges and amplitude amounts that are designed to correct frequency response issues in the specific speaker itself

Auto room equalization systems are designed to measure the overall response of your room + speakers, and then apply equalization to try and achieve a target response curve.

It is critical to understand the differences.

With our NFS optimized line of speakers, the speakers are already specifically designed to achieve an in-room response that current research has determined to be the most accurate, most preferred. We have found that using auto room EQ with speakers already designed to achieve an ideal in-room response only leads to sound degradation.

Now, that is from the Schroeder Frequency on up, but from the Schroeder Frequency on down, where the modal response of the room dominates, room equalization is most beneficial.

[filmgeek47]

I just stumbled onto this thread after playing with Dirac settings for a couple of days. I’m glad to hear my ears weren’t deceiving me. Prior to getting my Sierra Towers I always preferred the sound of full range correction (probably because it was modifying my speaker’s response).

With my Ascends it sounds so much more natural with only the bass corrected. Love these speakers so much. Can’t wait to do the ELX upgrade when my budget allows (still need to upgrade my surrounds first!) Enjoying hearing others impressions of the ELX line in the mean time (I got a chance to demo them last time I was down there and they truly are something special).