Digital Room Correction (DRC) Audio Filter?

sorry, but my english is not very well...if i understand what you say:

I think your Arcam make Digital Room Correction:

Quote:but it also determined the correct crossover points based on how the sound propagated through my listening room.

i don't think DRC is real time, only at start use microphone, after that the filter is "static".

Quote:The cost of the reciever would be so much lower than the cost of the software development (I value dev time, even if it's free), that it would be hard to justify the work.

This is a solution desired by a limited number of people and already available through a hardware solution for them.

RE-READ my post:

Quote:I must only understand how to use: DRC, BruteFIR, jack and pulseaudio...google...some help...shake...and hope

DRC on linux is just supported, but i don't find a guide or someone for help me

Ahh, my mistake. I pictured what little I read as being a real time solution. That not being the case, yes I do see some application for this. The DIY amplifier community. There are a number of high end amplifier kits out on the market that would either require a "commercially available" preamp in order to decode digital streams or a d/a converter. In the latter of the two there would be no on board room calibration included so yes this would be a solution to some who also have the hardware option.

quotaholic Wrote:Ahh, my mistake. I pictured what little I read as being a real time solution. That not being the case, yes I do see some application for this. The DIY amplifier community. There are a number of high end amplifier kits out on the market that would either require a "commercially available" preamp in order to decode digital streams or a d/a converter. In the latter of the two there would be no on board room calibration included so yes this would be a solution to some who also have the hardware option.

thanks for your understand!

I also add that with DRC implemented in "software mode", the user have more flexible system and i think also better. This because for DRC Hardware there is low-end system (cheap) and high-end (very expensive) that don't make the same DRC .

however i would remark only that this feature is not to be implemented by xbmc, but i think only "supported". And maybe xbmc can just support it

for mplayer (after drc, jack, brutefir) just start it with:
mplayer -ao jack:brutefir

...and i think can be the same on xbmc

One cheap option: http://www.minidsp.com/

BoxFreak Wrote:One cheap option: http://www.minidsp.com/

interesting object, but...

It's not the same of a DRC: http://www.minidsp.com/forum/3-suggestio...ver-plugin

...and is not so cheap, about 170 $ for a similar DRC!

The pro is that with this object you can switch off the pc...but xbmc work on the pc

There are a lot of things that correction software can do, for example, "The Ultimate Equalizer" from Bodzio, that you just can't do in Audyssey, at least not the version of Audyssey that's included in the $400-600 receiver category. You could probably do better with MultEQ32 or whatever the fancypants version of Audyssey is, but be prepared to spend a couple thousand dollars on the receiver.

The miniDSP unit is geared more toward designing active crossovers. If you wanted to go the whole nine yards and use separate amplifier channels for all the drivers in all your speakers, it's a great solution, but when you start talking about 7 channel setups, you could be into nearly 20 amplifier channels, depending on how many drivers are in all your speakers.

Now, the thought of having a room correction / eq built in a plugin for xbmc that merely sets EQ parameters and phase relationships would be pretty cool and something that I'd probably have many hours of fun tinkering with

Putting something like this in XBMC is a very little bang for the buck (dev time)... there is a very small % of XBMC users that would actually use it (0.01% by my completely scientific methods) and the benefit would be little to none since "EQing" is only part of the story for room correction - and most people have no clue what any of it means, nor the ear for it. I think most people would prefer to use their system instead of spending hours messing with it.

Much better options...
a) buying software made to do this where the people that developed it have years of expertise and refined the software already
b) buying a receiver with it built-in - these can be had starting at as low as $200 ** BEST OPTION FOR THE MASSES **

(2011-05-26 18:12)Livin Wrote:  I'll take the $400 receiver that has a chip & algorythms in it with 10+ years of maturity, tweaking, and the best minds in A/V contributing, over a software version with little to no maturity -- Any day!

Bang on. Audessey and it's brothers has years of dedicated phD work behind it, and actually measures the room you're trying to correct. And it's obviously not realtime, but it's the best they can do.

Giving tons of variables for someone to play with is not likely to get them anywhere good. Most people have no idea what's involved/required, and it requires cost outlay for measurements to "correct for the room". I don't care how good your ear is - you can't "see" room modes and reflections without gear.

The same folks that want to run on a $100 box want $100,000 worth of programming time to end up with a bad result. Beyond the "neat, let's tweak" factor, the best solution for good audio is a pure input signal (XBMC with AE & an all-digital stream) and good audio equipment.

Besides, you can use XBMC w/DSPlayer and FFDShow and do all the convolving, delaying, reverbing you want today. Tell me how much fun you've had and how much better it sounds once you've tweaked all that off-kilter!