sure ... therefore i like the miniDSP SHD studio - dirac insideBass is dominated by your room. Unless you EQed both speakers, no comparison is possible.
with the genelcs will have to test what it better ... dirac or glm
sure ... therefore i like the miniDSP SHD studio - dirac insideBass is dominated by your room. Unless you EQed both speakers, no comparison is possible.
I am very curious about that comparison. Very.sure ... therefore i like the miniDSP SHD studio - dirac inside
with the genelcs will have to test what it better ... dirac or glm
I’m wondering how that’s going to work.sure ... therefore i like the miniDSP SHD studio - dirac inside
with the genelcs will have to test what it better ... dirac or glm
I plan on calibrating with GLM first then store to the speakers. Then I can apply other calibrations on top of that. Hopefully which won’t need to do much on top.I’m wondering how that’s going to work.
I’d be concerned about ruining the DAC’s in the speakers. But I don’t know enough about the hardware to even say it’s a problem.I plan on calibrating with GLM first then store to the speakers. Then I can apply other calibrations on top of that. Hopefully which won’t need to do much on top.
I’m happy enough with GLM for now so I will take my time and wait for the price to go down of such receivers. Maybe even play with multichannel.
So it will be a separate calibration from my 2 channel stereo which will use AES. The other one will all be connected via analog cables and run GLM. Then connect the subs to the receiver.
Probably won’t mess with it until 2 more years honestly.
Not sure what you mean by ruining the DACs inside the Genelec, but all the Genelec protections for overdriving the monitors are always active.I’d be concerned about ruining the DAC’s in the speakers. But I don’t know enough about the hardware to even say it’s a problem.
For SAM Genelec monitors adjusting the volume in GLM is the same as changing the input sensitivity. I only use analogue input for my Genelec and I’ve turned down the volume in GLM to a fixed value for both my systems.If for any reason some correction caused a signal to get “too hot” I would just adjust the analog sensitivity on all monitors at least if not also the subs. Probably will take some advice and set the sensitivity lower before I start.
In any case protection exists. There is no ruining any DAC.
The awesome thing about GLM is I can create another group. Name it and then run it analog uncalibrated and let Dirac handle it all.
So many ways to compare.
I would probably need someone on here to come in talking about how great it is before I get the motivation to do it.
After all these newer room corrections are the only “upgrades” left for this system in a treated room.
Wow I see. Yes I use the GLM volume knob but my connections are digital.For SAM Genelec monitors adjusting the volume in GLM is the same as changing the input sensitivity. I only use analogue input for my Genelec and I’ve turned down the volume in GLM to a fixed value for both my systems.
Now, if you want to use GLM, say using a Genelec remote, then this might not work for you.
I don’t think you can set a max volume level in GLM for digital while still using GLM for volume control, so a full scale signal would be loud.Wow I see. Yes I use the GLM volume knob but my connections are digital.
I see so one would set a hard limit in GLM for their analog group. In any case for that group I would use the receiver volume control and let the receiver control whatever it wants dynamically if it does.
For my digital stereo group I would just continue to use the GLM volume.
Overdriving was not what I was thinking. These are digital speakers expecting GLM to be modifying the cover points etc. using a DSP device other them GLM sounds like an issue to me.Not sure what you mean by ruining the DACs inside the Genelec, but all the Genelec protections for overdriving the monitors are always active.
Sure, setting xover for subs in both GLM and another room EQ is probably not good, and this assumes that he uses Genelec subwoofers in this system.Overdriving was not what I was thinking. These are digital speakers expecting GLM to be modifying the cover points etc. using a DSP device other them GLM sounds like an issue to me.
But I can for analog which I is how I would use Dirac via a receiver. There’s no defeating most of these protections. Even if this were the case if running through a receiver I would simply set the GLM volume and unplug that volume knob and use the receiver volume.I don’t think you can see a max volume level in GLM for digital while still using GLM for volume control, so a full scale signal would be loud.
You could try sending Genelec support and ask if the have any recommendations or workarounds for your use case. In my experience they are very responsive.
i will be using analog for any receiver signal. We don’t have a way to defeat copy protection to get a digital signal anyway. I consider the A/D conversion in the monitors to be transparent so I won’t lose sleep over that.I don’t think you can set a max volume level in GLM for digital while still using GLM for volume control, so a full scale signal would be loud.
You could try sending Genelec support and ask if the have any recommendations or workarounds for your use case. In my experience they are very responsive.
have to correct me a bit ... 8351B playing already in my room and now i can do a proper comparison.But the technology is developing and this world-famous ATC-midrange is just not that unique anymore On the other hand those speakers cant still be very pleasing for a lot of listener. For me - i found the genelec mids more revealing and fullbody and with more impact and dynamic. Regarding bass and hights will say they are different but not that the one is better than the other. Actually in bass perhaps ATC is better resolving, but is a stand mount after all and closed box....
So you're missing details you hear on the ATCs with the Genelecs?have to correct me a bit ... 8351B playing already in my room and now i can do a proper comparison.
Bass on genelec is equally good. A little bit different texture and emphasis here and there, but veeery nice resolving, fast and hefty especially considering the size of the speakers.
Mids ... nothing new here - genelec tops easily - more body, more resolution, more impact. Just stunning. Vocals are phenomenal.
Prise for the Hights unfortunately goes full to ATC - they sound just nicer, with more "bells and whistles" and depth or fine nuances ... will miss this.
As overall package genelec hard to beat thought .... except if you go DIY.
PJ5k, remember that ATCs have directivity error in the highs due to the manner of mounting. I would bet on that being the cause of what he heard, nevermind the report being based on uncontrolled listening, and nevermind its positive lean. All guesswork in any case since we have few good ATC measurements.So you're missing details you hear on the ATCs with the Genelecs?
have to correct me a bit ... 8351B playing already in my room and now i can do a proper comparison.
Bass on genelec is equally good. A little bit different texture and emphasis here and there, but veeery nice resolving, fast and hefty especially considering the size of the speakers.
Mids ... nothing new here - genelec tops easily - more body, more resolution, more impact. Just stunning. Vocals are phenomenal.
Prise for the Hights unfortunately goes full to ATC - they sound just nicer, with more "bells and whistles" and depth or fine nuances ... will miss this.
As overall package genelec hard to beat thought .... except if you go DIY.
If you want analog sound definitely go with ATCYou are one of the few who commented that have heard both ATC and the Genelec "One". I would expect the active Genelec to have more resolution over the passive ATC's that you own. The active ATC's offer a lot more resolution than their passive models, especially the 3-way passive vs 3-way active models. So I'm not surprised there... but how about the tonality of musical instruments. Which one reproduces violin or guitar with the most body, richness, and depth? I was actually confused a bit by your post, because it sounds like you appreciate the resolution of the Genelec but prefer the sound and tonalty of the ATC? Hoping you can further clarify your subjective opinion.
I'm deciding between an ATC and the Genelec "One". I like the all in one package Genelec w/GLM provides, but am afraid I'm going to miss out on something more "analog" sounding, for the lack of a better word. Are they fatiguing at all?
Analog gear does not have a distinct sound.You are one of the few who commented that have heard both ATC and the Genelec "One". I would expect the active Genelec to have more resolution over the passive ATC's that you own. The active ATC's offer a lot more resolution than their passive models, especially the 3-way passive vs 3-way active models. So I'm not surprised there... but how about the tonality of musical instruments. Which one reproduces violin or guitar with the most body, richness, and depth? I was actually confused a bit by your post, because it sounds like you appreciate the resolution of the Genelec but prefer the sound and tonalty of the ATC? Hoping you can further clarify your subjective opinion.
I'm deciding between an ATC and the Genelec "One". I like the all in one package Genelec w/GLM provides, but am afraid I'm going to miss out on something more "analog" sounding, for the lack of a better word. Are they fatiguing at all?