Sorry for the old thread but couldn't find anything more up to date...\n\nMatthew, if we "give up" on EQ of high frequencies, does Dirac still offer an advantage over Audyssey?\nIs there any consumer system (by which I mean not requiring hardware costing thousands of dollars) that has noticeably better ability to EQ bass and\/or integrate a subwoofer?\n\nWhat is the most budget-friendly option to get that done with reasonable results?\n\nAudyssey-based products don't even have an option for any manual EQ - What are my alternatives that allow manual EQ at the Audyssey price range (x3700h price area)?\n\nAssuming the manual EQ is done right, what is the difference in result between good manual EQ and Audyssey? I thought manual EQ will generally be PEQ filters (and seems like Anthem ARC is also PEQ) while Audyssey uses FIR? And Dirac uses a combination of both? Does that make a difference?\n\nGetting back to integration, is there anything that also handles the phase differences between the speakers and the subwoofer and even the speakers themselves? Beyond just setting the delays so that all sounds arrive at the same time, which still leaves significant phase differences in many frequencies.\n\nThere is a lot to unpack here.\n\naround the transition zone and below the problems in a room are almost completely minimum phase. PEQ is minimum phase. It doesn’t mean the EQ doesn’t change the phase. It absolutely does. It means the phase change is tied to the frequency change. As it needs to be. So correcting the amplitude response also fixes the phase response.\n\nnow let’s say we have other delay issues. Well…those can be addressed with time alignment just fine. Nothing fancy needed.\n\nso if we stick to 250hz and below, the likelihood of there being much difference between IIR and FIR filters is likely nill. Exceptions would be just that. Unusual exceptions.\n\nAudyssey uses only FIR which is very inefficiency at low frequencies. The filters also tend to have pre-ringing problems. Audyssey is fairly good, the issues are minimal. Their newest version also has enough taps to do a good enough job that it’s unlikely PEQ would be any better. The differences between manual and automatic tend to be more about how good a job you did setting each up and how good a job it’s algo did figuring out what to correct or not. I find when you get the mic positions right it isn’t bad. It’s why I tell people who have it to get the app and restrict to bass frequencies.\n\nas for Audyssey vs Dirac. I keep telling folks I plan to do a comparison and the plans keep going to the back burner. As many know, I moved, built a house, and have been in limbo. The house will be move in ready in 3 weeks or so, I hope to restart these projects then. I have Dirac, Audyssey, and ARC available. Maybe can come up with more. My experience in the past was Dirac did a bit better job getting the bass right. The response was often that much smoother.\n\nnow…if we begin to compare the bass management and subwoofer alignment that Audyssey XT32 vs Dirac BM does, well now the prize firmly goes to Dirac I believe. I have limited experience with it as I moved soon after receiving my own device with Dirac BM, but my understand and limited experience of the two suggests Dirac is a lot better.\n\na lot of folks do the mics wrong when they do the setup. If you read the study that Olive did, he found that The sound quality preference was tied to how close together the mic positions are. You should always do multiple measurments about your head area. I argue at least 5, more is better. However, a lot of folks put the mic too far out. For the best sound quality in your primary listening position, these work best when the mic is only placed around that seat and not in any other seat. This helps bias the changes toward that seat while still minimizing errors from individual measurement points.