[kbuzz3]

After a few years trying to work out some room issues in my small loft office, i would like to try dirac in conjunction with some treatment.  Was wondering if any MINIDSP  or NAD C658 users can comment on how dirac worked for them.

I run a cpu>USB DAC>hardwired to tube preamp(s)>amp>speakers.  I want to try and get rid of the cpu in the system and try a streamer so I have been looking at the MiniDSP SHD or NAD C658.  I really like my tube preamps, and don't need another preamp, but willing to try one of these products to get the room correction benefit. 

Any thoughts appreciated.

The NAD unit and BLuesound APP looks nice, but as above i don't need another preamp and it has no digital out so you are wedded to the internal DAC. 

The MINI DSP units, look interesting b/c they allow for an external dac, but quick perusal of the manual is not instilling "user friendly" confidence...
 

[mhconley]

The miniDSP SHD Studio would fulfill your needs. (https://www.minidsp.com/products/streaming-hd-series/shd-studio) It's the streamer and Dirac without the preamp component. I plan to replace my preamp, DAC and Raspberry Pi streamer with an SHD in the near future. I agree the manual looks daunting but I think that's just a product of how powerful the units are. There is a lot of support available on the miniDSP community forums. From my research I don't think you'd regret the purchase.

Martin

[kbuzz3]

Thanks so much for the reply! Stupid question re the Studio.  Wouldn't the benefits of the dirac conversion be lost if you are sending the Dirac corrected digital outputs to a DAC?

And just taking a look, i think it only does SPDIF out, so my usb dac would not work.  Maybe i should consider selling my pre amp and trying the all in one Minidsp SHD

[Mike-48]

The Dirac correction is done in the digital domain, so it's the corrected signal that goes to the external DAC. You don't lose the benefit of Dirac.

If you don't need ADC and DAC, the miniDSP SHD Studio has the streaming and DSP parts without those conversions. It's cheaper.

Either miniDSP model will also do crossovers for 1 or 2 subs. But with the SHD Studio, you will then need two stereo DACs -- one for the mains, one for the subs. The NAD, I believe, does one sub with only a fixed crossover frequency.

The miniDSP comes with the full Dirac package. The NAD comes with a cut-down version, but the full is available for an additional fee. Also NAD streams in the Blusound proprietary protocol, while the miniDSP SHD uses DLNA, a non-proprietary standard.

I considered both units and bought the miniDSP SHD for our living-room system. I am happy with it, though I find the interface clunky in some ways. For example, though it is connected to Ethernet, it can't be updated that way. You need to download the update to a computer, hook the computer to the SHD by USB, and run a miniDSP program. I would expect a NAD product to have a smoother interface, but that is speculation.

I have not used the NAD. Looking at comments on forums, my impression was they are slower to fix bugs.

I hope that's helpful. Have fun!

[Rich Carlson]

I'm using a miniDSP DDRC-22D with Dirac Live, between the digital output of a Bluesound Vault 2i and a Benchmark DAC3L.  It replaced a DSPeaker AntiMode 2.0 Dual Core.  I'm thrilled with the sound - I've used a number of room-correction systems, and this one is the most transparent and does the best job of correction I've experienced, especially in the mid-bass region.  I thought about it for a long time before buying because the setup looked pretty daunting, but in practice it wasn't that bad.  I'm totally satisfied with it.  Happy to answer any questions.

The rest of the system is a Benchmark AHB-2 amp, Salk Silk Monitors, and a Hsu ULS15 subwoofer.

[JLM]

First off, what are your complaints?  Secondly suggest reading Floyd Toole's "Sound Reproduction" to learn how speakers/subs behave in-room (and the need for multiple subs).  Realize that your small loft office would appear to a big strike against achieving good sound.  Third, treatments fall into two categories: absorption and diffusion.  Diffusion can only be practically applied to frequencies above 1100 Hz due to the physical size of the sound waves involved.  Absorption is mostly about finding effective material, recommend going with GIK (an AC sponsor) and their 242/244 panels that use Owen Corning 703 high density fiberglass (relatively inexpensive and highly effective).  Treatments can be overdone, so add a few pieces at a time.

Fourth, realize that DSP should only be applied after all physical "fixes" have been fully explored.  It should only be considered as the icing on the cake.  Earl Geddes, a well respected  acoustician, says that physical problems should be addressed via physical means (room, setup, treatments).  DSP effect has been described as squeezing a balloon, whatever is boosted in one place of the room comes out somewhere else.  It's only meant to optimize for one location in the room. 

Started out with a Behringer DEQ2496 which was, like many German designed audio products, maddingly difficult to learn how to use and had a reputation for poor reliability.  Had the DAC modded which is mostly what I used it for as it had no means to measure the room.  Then moved on to a DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core, a compact DAC/preamp/DSP with it's own microphone/room calibration (sounded very good, but screen was tiny, back panel connections were very crowded, and remote was cheesy to the max).  DSP was limited to lower frequencies.  Also had JBL 708P active speakers that had built in DSP, but again no way to measure the room. 

Looked at Mini DSP SHD models when they came out, but ended up with a NAD M10 "streaming amplifier", IMO the value leader of their Masters Series (a souped up throughly modern version of the C658 plus includes 100 wpc amp).  C658/M10 come with microphone to measure the room and the <500 Hz version of Dirac, which many recommend as most of the legitimate point of room correction is in that frequency range (proponents argue that trying to apply it above that range changes the character of the speaker itself) but the full range version can be purchased for $99.  Either handles two subs and are MQA compliant.  M10 control is via Windows, Mac, Android, or iPhone.  C658 comes with a remote, M10 has a huge touch screen.

The M10/BlueSound is slick, compact, and sounds fantastic, so much so that I have a hard time imaging going back to a server, software, and all those cabinets/cables.  It handles my Tidal account and flash drive with the rest of my library that I couldn't find on Tidal (mostly cheap compilations from department stores that music lovers can be suckered into buying).  But the M10/BlueSound has issues.  Extremely slow loading of my 600+ favorites and can only view 10 albums at a time from my MacBook Air or 4 on my iPhone 4S.  Sometimes on start up the M10 doesn't respond at all, requiring unplugging it from the power source and replugging it in.  Sometimes the app on the MacBook freezes, requiring a reboot of BlueSound.  These glitches are commonly found. 

C658/M10 have been well reviewed.  Back when I was looking at miniDSP SHD/Studio there were complaints of noise, don't know if that's been addressed.  For me and my small audio club opinions were split on the benefits of absorption from my ten 2ft x 4ft GIK 244 panels or DSP in my near ideal room with single driver speakers (six GIK 2ft x 4ft 244 panels have proven extremely effective in two other rooms).  But using the Dirac recommended setting (that provides a slight emphasis at the bottom frequency and a 5 dB/octave downward slope with frequency increase) with a boost in my 3 subs volume I'm very happy with the sound. 

Note that when running two DACs in series that the first one has almost no sonic impact.