Debating switching from Yamaha to NAD

S

sakete

Audioholic
Well whatever the case with YPAO, Dirac, Audyssey, etc. Currently on my Yamaha at -20, I'm rocking out to the new TOOL album!! :D And it sounds fantastic in combination with my Revel F206 speakers (though it's probably mainly the speakers, haha :) )
 
D

D Murphy

Junior Audioholic
With the curves which you provided, the passive crossover design seems to be adequate as we can't see any gross deviation or out of phase issue that would indicate where about is or are the filter frequency(ies). Good work!
Peng was nice enough to keep his speakers anonymous pending my approval to identify them. I'll save him the trouble --they're my BMR's, although an earlier version that had offset drivers, a little larger cabinet volume, and a slightly different crossover. . I've really got to get DIRAC software or something comparable so I can offer more informed opinions on whether or where to apply EQ. Right now my philosophy is to get most of the EQ from a properly designed crossover and solid drivers and not risk screwy results by trying to flatten out response in the midrange and highs. I certainly agree that some form of EQ can be very beneficial in the bass where room modes cause real problems that can't be solved by a passive crossover. But I can't be sure of anything until I have first hand experience. So--is there a way to get, say, Dirac without having to buy a receiver that has it built in? I do not need anymore amplifiers or tuners.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Peng was nice enough to keep his speakers anonymous pending my approval to identify them. I'll save him the trouble --they're my BMR's, although an earlier version that had offset drivers, a little larger cabinet volume, and a slightly different crossover. . I've really got to get DIRAC software or something comparable so I can offer more informed opinions on whether or where to apply EQ. Right now my philosophy is to get most of the EQ from a properly designed crossover and solid drivers and not risk screwy results by trying to flatten out response in the midrange and highs. I certainly agree that some form of EQ can be very beneficial in the bass where room modes cause real problems that can't be solved by a passive crossover. But I can't be sure of anything until I have first hand experience. So--is there a way to get, say, Dirac without having to buy a receiver that has it built in? I do not need anymore amplifiers or tuners.
Thank you very much for helping me out, again..:) I plan on trying to use Dirac to EQ up to 300 Hz only. You can get the standalone version, but Dirac is still beta testing so the official version is not ready for purchase yet. To run the standalone version, you need a PC, desktop or laptop, a compatible/Dirac approved mic (e.g. the Umik-1 that I happen to have already for REW), and a media center software such as JRiver.
https://jriver.com/

I was going to test out Dirac Live on my LS50 or R900 because as you know, the BMRs are really not completed to the point they are ready for prime time yet, with wires dangling out the ports, and the backs are just tight fit by friction. The beta version of Dirac I am going to use will expire soon so I may as well use it on them all while it lasts, being OCD/crazy as I am.:D
 
Verdinut

Verdinut

Audioholic Samurai
Right now my philosophy is to get most of the EQ from a properly designed crossover and solid drivers and not risk screwy results by trying to flatten out response in the midrange and highs.
I entirely agree with you. When I decide to build a speaker system, I look for drivers having a rather smooth frequency response. Then, the passive crossover is easier to design and to fine tune if necessary. :)
By the way, did you have the opportunity to try some of the Jantzen P-Core inductors?
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
not risk screwy results by trying to flatten out response in the midrange and highs....some form of EQ can be very beneficial in the bass...
I plan on trying to use Dirac to EQ up to 300 Hz only.
1st, I don’t like messing with EQ above 200Hz.

2nd, that sounds like spending a lot of time and money with Dirac just for messing around with such a narrow frequency range 20Hz-300Hz. :D

Can you just use manual EQ + REW to fine tune 20-300Hz, if that’s all you need to do? :D
 
Last edited:
D

D Murphy

Junior Audioholic
1st, I don’t like messing with EQ above 200Hz.

2nd, that sounds like spending a lot of time and money with Dirac just for messing around with such a narrow frequency range 20Hz-300Hz. :D

Can you just use manual EQ + REW to fine tune 20-300Hz, if that’s all you need to do? :D
I'm not sure whether you're addressing Peng, me, or both. But my main reason for fiddling with Dirac was to see whether it helped or made matters worse above 200 Hz. I would like to be in a position to give good advice to my clients (or Jim Salk's clients). My curiosity isn't unbounded, however. The only mnDSP unit that's anywhere near my price range is the DDRC-24. If my intended use is limited to 2-channel room correction for dedicated music listening, is the 24 adequate?
 
S

sakete

Audioholic
I'm not sure whether you're addressing Peng, me, or both. But my main reason for fiddling with Dirac was to see whether it helped or made matters worse above 200 Hz. I would like to be in a position to give good advice to my clients (or Jim Salk's clients). My curiosity isn't unbounded, however. The only mnDSP unit that's anywhere near my price range is the DDRC-24. If my intended use is limited to 2-channel room correction for dedicated music listening, is the 24 adequate?
The 24 should be adequate for that.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I'm not sure whether you're addressing Peng, me, or both. But my main reason for fiddling with Dirac was to see whether it helped or made matters worse above 200 Hz. I would like to be in a position to give good advice to my clients (or Jim Salk's clients). My curiosity isn't unbounded, however. The only mnDSP unit that's anywhere near my price range is the DDRC-24. If my intended use is limited to 2-channel room correction for dedicated music listening, is the 24 adequate?
It was just a general thought.

But I do think it’s good if you, PENG, and others try out Dirac and compare with manual DSP/EQ and other software.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
1st, I don’t like messing with EQ above 200Hz.

2nd, that sounds like spending a lot of time and money with Dirac just for messing around with such a narrow frequency range 20Hz-300Hz. :D

Can you just use manual EQ + REW to fine tune 20-300Hz, if that’s all you need to do? :D
In that room, no. I did try using a minidsp 2XHD and REW some time back. It helped quite a bit, and it was much better when combined with Audyssey using the AV8801. It is a relatively small room with two pairs of speakers on either side of a piano so it looks really strange with the gigantic A21, AV8801, DVD3310, and other nearly as big preamps/ampss jam-packed in there.:D The BMR will replace the LS50 and they are 4X as big! If Dirac Live works, then the AV8801 can go, and I may replace the A21 with something much smaller. Then all I need there will be just a couple of DACs and a laptop, aside from the amp/preamps. I made a mistake buying the big R900. They really don't fit that room, now they occupied the best location for acoustic, with them there I really don't feel I need any EQ.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
In that room, no. I did try using a minidsp 2XHD and REW some time back. It helped quite a bit, and it was much better when combined with Audyssey using the AV8801. It is a relatively small room with two pairs of speakers on either side of a piano so it looks really strange with the gigantic A21, AV8801, DVD3310, and other nearly as big preamps/ampss jam-packed in there.:D The BMR will replace the LS50 and they are 4X as big! If Dirac Live works, then the AV8801 can go, and I may replace the A21 with something much smaller. Then all I need there will be just a couple of DACs and a laptop, aside from the amp/preamps. I made a mistake buying the big R900. They really don't fit that room, now they occupied the best location for acoustic, with them there I really don't feel I need any EQ.
Well, we are interested in seeing what Dirac can/can't do for both your systems and Dennis' systems. :D
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Here is a comparison between YPAO FLAT (blue) vs THROUGH (red).

FLAT (blue) looks much better. But THROUGH (red) sounds much better to me.

Here is MANUAL with NO EQ from 80Hz-20kHz, but manual bass boost from 15Hz-80Hz. It doesn’t look the best (big 40Hz bass peak),but it sure sounds the best to me. :D

 
Last edited:
D

Deckard71

Audioholic Intern
]Here is a comparison between YPAO FLAT (blue) vs THROUGH (red).

FLAT (blue) looks much better. But THROUGH (red) sounds much better to me.



Here is MANUAL with NO EQ from 80Hz-20kHz, but manual bass boost from 15Hz-80Hz. It doesn’t look the best (big 40Hz bass peak),but it sure sounds the best to me. :D

Thanks for sharing. One important point, did you copy FLAT or NATURAL to MANUAL and then remove the freq gains or did you make MANUAL from scratch?

With the first method you are exporting the IFR filters from YPAO, although they are not visible. I find the IFR to make bigger difference that adjusting the gains in the EQ
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Well, we are interested in seeing what Dirac can/can't do for both your systems and Dennis' systems. :D
Hopefully soon, if I can figure out how to use standalone Dirac quickly. Still time permitting..
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Thanks for sharing. One important point, did you copy FLAT or NATURAL to MANUAL and then remove the freq gains or did you make MANUAL from scratch?

With the first method you are exporting the IFR filters from YPAO, although they are not visible. I find the IFR to make bigger difference that adjusting the gains in the EQ
I tried both ways: 1. Used Manual from scratch and 2. Copied Flat to Manual and changed all frequency gains to 0.0dB.

The graphs weren’t identical, but they were close. So I decided to just clear everything and went with plain MANUAL (no YPAO copy).

I think the more interesting point was that although both FLAT and NATURAL measured flatter, THROUGH and MANUAL still sounded better.
 
S

sakete

Audioholic
Measurements are not your own ears though are they?
No, but it shows you're paying a lot for something that should at best be a fifth of its retail price, given the objective performance. There is much cheaper gear that measures much better, and thus in theory will also sound better. Again glad I didn't get the NAD.

And otherwise, measurements remove subjectivity from the equation, which we know is very unreliable when comparing gear.
 
Topmetom2

Topmetom2

Audiophyte
I had mine professionally set up, and the guy , whos done thousands , said it sounded pretty damn good? Have you got the nad?
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
No, but it shows you're paying a lot for something that should at best be a fifth of its retail price, given the objective performance. There is much cheaper gear that measures much better, and thus in theory will also sound better. Again glad I didn't get the NAD.

And otherwise, measurements remove subjectivity from the equation, which we know is very unreliable when comparing gear.
I have never, at least don't recall seeing any of their AVRs measured as good as comparable Denon, Marantz, or Yamaha's so no surprise there. Their integrated amps and separats seemed a lot more competitive.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top