I just really wish there was a way for you guys to try it for yourselves just to see how it works in your realms without springing for it cash wise.

I'd be satisfied if any disinterested third party published a detailed evaluation. But I have looked and so far I have found only magazine reviews that either paraphrase IK's marketing literature or add their own indefensible embellishments (example:"why struggle with egg boxes and bass traps when there's another way!" Aargh.) . If such an evaluation exists, IK neither quotes it nor links to it.

There have been some AES papers on the subject of room correction, but I am not an AES member and therefore do not have access to them (unless I want to buy them at 20 bucks a pop). Examples: http://www.aes.org/events/123/papers/session.cfm?code=P16

One of the few references I was able to access is a lecture presented by the CTO of Lyngdorf Audio, which sells a room-correction product called RoomPerfect. It's a real gem. Here is the lecture, and here are the accompanying slides. Be sure to get the slides, as an audio lecture is hard to follow without visual aids. Also be sure to listen to the entire lecture (over an hour), as the answers to many nagging questions are given toward the end.

Although this speaker's impartiality might be questioned, given that the he works for a room-correction vendor, the presenter is a legitimate expert (in both acoustics and DSP) and the audience is a group of AES members, presumably a knowledgeable and skeptical crowd. (His company's product lists for $3,800, making ARC a bargain by comparison)

If nothing else, Mr. Pedersen's lecture offers a good argument for the importance of speaker placement. But it also explains the logic behind multiple measurement positions (minimum of 4, one of which is the listening position, 9 positions recommended).

Interestingly, his approach requires measurements in random positions and with random microphone orientation, unlike IK's method, which uses very specific positions. As expected, the slides reveal that sound pressure levels can vary by 30-40db at different points in the room. Like with ARC, he is averaging the sound pressure measurements to form the basis for an equalization curve.

The key to the system is setting gain limits based on the room's profile (based on average SPL readings). The EQ profile is then constrained by these gain limits. This turns out to be the answer to the "how do you fix a null?" question - you don't try.

Note that the ultimate goal is optimizing the listening (mix) position, acknowledging that it's not "room" correction, but rather "listening position" correction.

But at no point does the presenter show anything like the ruler-flat response shown on the ARC display. In fact, he criticizes vendors who claim to be able to get such a flat result.

ORIGINAL: mudgel

Hi Danny

I think if you read my post that describes my process for measuring you'll realize that I actually unpackaged ARC and set to do an initial run through following the instructions one step at a time. Just get the box open, install the software etc and get going. My measurement were pretty rough. I was simply trying to complete a full and minimum measurement cycle to get a response curve saved fro reference later on as I developed an idea of what I was actually doing.

This was the one and only measurement I had taken. I used visual cues in my room to find centers and whilst I tried to get pretty accurate I wouldn't say that the 14 measurements I made were perfectly symmetrical so I fully understand the limitations of what i had done. To make more precise measurements to get perfect symmetry in mic placement I'll need to move quite a bit of stuff around in my room to access walls at floor level etc for precise measuring. Not anything I've had time to do since those initial tests and what I thought was pretty clearly just my initial impressions of the ARC system.

On the whole my results in terms of the audio I heard before and after ARC was that they were so encouraging that I want to spend more time but that needs to be contiguous time say a whole morning or afternoon, even a whole day to get an absolutely perfect reading.

As my room is a rectangular prism with much stuff around the perimeter its going to take me a while to get things sorted out. My speakers are wall mounted on steel brackets that provide very good disconnection from the wall but are a little closer to the wall than I'd like. For me ARC was never going to be a complete solution. It was part of a much bigger picture in my mind but at the price I paid for it, I'll mention again that it was the single most significant step fo a given amount of improvement in sound quality that I' have done with my current setup.

Its all just a long road that I'm part way down. I never thought this thread was going to go on for so long. In fact I debated with myself whether I was even going to bother with another post but here I am. So when i get the time I'll do some more but in the meantime life beckons as do other things.

See you round like a rissole.

Hi Mike,

Yeah I read the post and completely understand what and why you did what you did. I did the exact same thing as you with the one screen shot you saw of mine. All by eye and I used "landmarks" in my room. You just wait until you can get some time to really do this thing right. It should take you about 30 minutes to map out your placements and 35-40 on the nose to do the actual measurements. Another thing I picked up on from a few users that had experienced "phasing".

When they did the mic corrections, they forgot to kill the mic from re-sending the sound. LOL! So the chirp from ARC was coming out and feeding into the mic, and the mic was literally in monitor mode at the time. So it was dual feeding it back in. Not sure if you're aware of this possibility, but if you aren't I figured I'd pass it on to you. Make sure you save that current curve you have so you can compare it to the new one you make when you get time. Just so you can literally hear how much of a difference it makes when you go through the pains of hell to get all your measurements accurate. I know the thing isn't the be all end all to room issues....but man, it sure has made an incredible difference for me and many others that have used it right. Good luck!

ORIGINAL: bitflipper

I just really wish there was a way for you guys to try it for yourselves just to see how it works in your realms without springing for it cash wise.

I'd be satisfied if any disinterested third party published a detailed evaluation. But I have looked and so far I have found only magazine reviews that either paraphrase IK's marketing literature or add their own indefensible embellishments (example:"why struggle with egg boxes and bass traps when there's another way!" Aargh.) . If such an evaluation exists, IK neither quotes it nor links to it.

There have been some AES papers on the subject of room correction, but I am not an AES member and therefore do not have access to them (unless I want to buy them at 20 bucks a pop). Examples: http://www.aes.org/events/123/papers/session.cfm?code=P16

One of the few references I was able to access is a lecture presented by the CTO of Lyngdorf Audio, which sells a room-correction product called RoomPerfect. It's a real gem. Here is the lecture, and here are the accompanying slides. Be sure to get the slides, as an audio lecture is hard to follow without visual aids. Also be sure to listen to the entire lecture (over an hour), as the answers to many nagging questions are given toward the end.

Although this speaker's impartiality might be questioned, given that the he works for a room-correction vendor, the presenter is a legitimate expert (in both acoustics and DSP) and the audience is a group of AES members, presumably a knowledgeable and skeptical crowd. (His company's product lists for $3,800, making ARC a bargain by comparison)

If nothing else, Mr. Pedersen's lecture offers a good argument for the importance of speaker placement. But it also explains the logic behind multiple measurement positions (minimum of 4, one of which is the listening position, 9 positions recommended).

Interestingly, his approach requires measurements in random positions and with random microphone orientation, unlike IK's method, which uses very specific positions. As expected, the slides reveal that sound pressure levels can vary by 30-40db at different points in the room. Like with ARC, he is averaging the sound pressure measurements to form the basis for an equalization curve.

The key to the system is setting gain limits based on the room's profile (based on average SPL readings). The EQ profile is then constrained by these gain limits. This turns out to be the answer to the "how do you fix a null?" question - you don't try.

Note that the ultimate goal is optimizing the listening (mix) position, acknowledging that it's not "room" correction, but rather "listening position" correction.

But at no point does the presenter show anything like the ruler-flat response shown on the ARC display. In fact, he criticizes vendors who claim to be able to get such a flat result.

Some good reading there Bit, thanks for sharing it! That of course goes a bit beyond my intelligence for this sort of thing, but it was way informative for sure! I'm just one of those guys that looks at things as "ok, this supposedly works...lets try it", it if works, I'm in good shape and I'll brag about it. If it sucks, I'll bash it into the ground and tell everyone not to waste their money. The bottom line in my humble opinion is this...

If you or someone else is constantly messing with eq's in a mix and you're not down with some of that ugly room decor stuff...this little gem makes a huge difference and if you move your gear, all you have to do is take some new measurements. It even helps monitors that are not very good to sound flatter. If you are not having any problems with your mixes and you never second guess yourself, this thing probably will make matters worse for you because you will have to relearn what your monitors sound like while using it. I was so bad with my setup, I was seriously ready to just give up. I've been engineering for a very long time and always felt though I knew the talk and practiced all the right starting points while keeping myself focused, I still sounded like a n00b in certain areas. It was actually demoralizing to be honest. I really took it to heart. Granted, I have NEVER expected to crank out major label sounding stuff, but it really is disheartening when you can't even at least *somewhat* come close, ya know? I know the cards are against us....some of us are not specialists in the field, and we can't compare our thousands of dollars in gear vs major label millions with producers, engineers and pro mastering guys. But, we should still be able to come close or at least have a product we are happy with at the end of the day. I've never been happy with a single recording I've ever created or mixed until ARC came around. I know, that sounds like a blatant ad for them....but I'm really being serious. It was quite refreshing to know that I really wasn't a crap engineer and my issue was I was not hearing the correct stuff to make the right calls, ya know?

So look at it this way...if you have any of those issues, try it out. If it fails, maybe it just wasn't for you and I'm sure someone would buy it off you that it may work for. I would just like to see how those that said it failed, measured their rooms. I'd be willing to bet they did not go through the steps that I, Billy Buck and others used to make this thing worth bragging about. Trust me, I was skeptical also at first. As a matter of fact, after my first correction I looked at myself and said "you dumbass, you wasted another $499 on another hyped piece of gear". But, I'm one of those guys that tries to exhaust something to the fullest before I give up on it and I'm glad I did because once I got this thing tweaked the right way, the differences in my mixes were just astonishing to me. As a matter of fact, one of my friends who I consider a guru has always been tough on me when I have emailed him a tune or brought him a cd to listen to in person.

So much so, he'd stop the cd in 5 seconds and say "dude, this sounds like azz"....hand me a pen and paper and say "listen to this and write down all the stuff you think is wrong with it." After I was done listening and writing it all down, he'd say "ok, if you can hear all this stuff here, why can't you hear it at your place? Right Danny....LIKE I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU FOR YEARS, YOU NEED ROOM CORRECTION!!!!" He went on to tell me that I'd NEVER be able to hear what I'm supposed to hear with the way my room is set up as well as using the first generation NS-10's. My monitors were too close to the wall, I had 0 bass response so I kept on adding it in till it sounded like enough...and I was just a mess. So, I thought new monitors would help. I bought the Adams and though they helped a lot, I was still missing things. When I got ARC and used it, I brough that same guy a mix of a tune and the first thing he said was "ok, who did you have mix this?" LOL!! It was then that he asked me to ARC his room...and he's the dude with the 2 mill studio I mentioned in another post.

We can analyze the thing like mad....or we can say screw it, give it a shot and see what it does. But only if you are having mix issues and you find yourself frustrated. If it doesn't work, you know you tried it and gave it an honest shot. Just sell it off. It WILL work for someone, that's for sure. :)

∞

Maybe you guys can help me understand this thing. I've been mixing a track all day. I get it sounding great on my computer (near field monitors), burn it, run to the living room stereo, then to the car and it sounds like crap. Full of mid range mud with no crisp highs.  Knowing this, I finally mixed it on the computer with the high end burning my ears with sizzle and taking out so much mid that it was completely void. Then I burnt it and it sounded not bad in the car or home stereo.
 
Here's my question.
 
The ARC basically EQ's my system to make it flat. I imagine the graph will show a bunch of mid range has been removed around 200-300 hz. (Looking at ARC screen shots, this is what I mostly see). With the ARC engaged, I now mix the project to my liking, disengage ARC and burn it. What I don't understand is that ARC will remove all that mid range mud while I'm mixing, I end up with the sound I like which means probably adding some mid range. When I then disengage and burn it, won't I be adding even more mid than if I hadn't used ARC at all?
 
I'm confused.

i'm using it and while i found it very disturbing in the begining (was so used to my "dirty" sound" it absolutly rocks !! adam P11A and sub , genelec 8020a and sub ...all crazy good improvement , correction of eq , phase and delays between speakers ....

for those who wonder , i listen to all my cd and my mp3 in winanp witch has a module to integrate any vst so , i'm listening to my references with arc !!!

I believe that one can EQ a speaker system and have said so for a long time now. The system being talked about here automates the process but the basic principle is much the same as what I have been advocating for years now. It comes to me from the HI FI stereo audiophile days that I have been involved for nearly all my life.

The notion that monitors can't benefit from a good EQ puzzles me. Its been around for a very long time and is used for this purpose longer then many of you have been alive. Why not try it and then make comments?

The Edirol MX 16 DX has a form of this built in and it works.

dmmi


Bit....

Do you own it?

I don't....and I'm sceptical as well.  But I'm also looking for a "quick fix" for my room.

If not, then why try to discredit anything that someone has had a positive experience with.  I believe that is rude.   Don't try to take that away from them....just leave it be. 
 
It's like me saying your music sucks, when you clearly enjoy what you do, and you think it sounds great.  (note...I don't have this opinion of your music....just an analogy to let others enjoy themselves!)

hmmm...

Here is some logic outside of your physics mumbo jumbo (which I do understand clearly....but also understand the principles of this system)

If someone has had such a great experience, and others have, and the system is still on the market, and there arn't outrages of dis-satified customers.....says to me it doesn't suck

by the way.....where is the mic input for your outboard EQ to initialize the advanced correction algorythm and move those little sliders for you?
 
 
Danny:
 
Honestly,
 
What is your opinion of the ARC compared to KRK's Ergo?
 

dmmi, my thoughts exactly only I'm a bitflipper lover, so though I agree with you, my little rant here is not directed at him. :) I can't tell you how many times I've gotten into arguments with people about this plug on other forums as well as in real life. It's to the point where I don't even want to share any info about it and let it remain my little secret. I've yelled at the top of my lungs to several "BUT DO YOU HAVE IT AND HAVE YOU USED IT TO MAKE SUCH CLAIMS?! UNTIL YOU DO, DRINK A 55 GALLON DRUM OF STFU!!!"
 
Seriously, it's like me saying guitar plug sims suck if I'm a tube amp man that has never tried one. The biggest problem with the recording field is all the technical mumbo jumbo that doesn't do a single fookin thing to make someone a better engineer.  Most times, people like that speak for the sake of having a voice in an attempt to intellectually intimidate others. Pff...if I had a penny for everytime I've called one of those jokers out to put their money where their mouth is and post their best recording against mine, Donald Trump would be my butler. I'll use a Realtek soundcard on this net box here and smoke 60% of the dudes talkin crap about the aesthetics of audio and I won't even use a mic pre. LOL! Sorry man, I just get sick of that stuff really. Rant over. LOL! ;)
 
To answer your question about the Ergo, I've never tried it so I can't make any comments there. I also don't know anyone using it to get any feedback. I have tried the JBL monitors with the correction pack that comes with it...and ARC obliterates it in every way. No contest.
 
John: though your theory has merit, ARC works way better than an eq man. It doesn't just do a sweetspot, it does several and compensates for reflections as well. It's something you'd just have to try to appreciate man, that's all I can really say. In my "C room" here, which I call "The Cell Block", I'm in a 12x12 room loaded with gear, bad positioning, and a whole bunch of other stuff that would make you and everyone on this forum cringe, throw up, throw things at me as well as laugh. However, the sound that comes out is a totally different animal and the way it transfers onto other systems is what totally blows me away. In my B room where the room is a little bigger and correctly set up for audio, I can't tell the difference when I mix there or in the C room. Same monitors in there...Adam A-7 with the Sub 8 as well as a set of Genelecs.
 
The A room is completely set up for audio and has some big guns for speakers, so the sound there is a little different due to the size of the speakers used. I have an A-7 rig there as well for nearfields as well as a newer pair of NS-10's, Tannoy, Tascam, and the big Genelecs which I use most of the time there. But still, in every room I work in over here, ARC is used and it's totally changed everything. The cool thing about it that you have to keep in mind is, you don't just do one sweet spot. I did 18 on my B and C room, and 32 on my A room. This allows ARC to make your monitors sound good no matter where you sit, stand, lay...it's just something you have to experience. I don't know how it does it, I don't know about the science or inner sanctum of how it works or if someone can prove it's a load of crap and to be honest, I don't really care. All that I know is it works perfectly for me and all that I do here. 
 
What I ALSO know is that I have not mixed a song in 4-6 hours in my life to where I didn't have to question what I was hearing until ARC. I didn't have to make copies to take to my car any longer and I didn't have to send stuff to the 5 engineers I have counted on for many years to bail my sorry ass out. I don't second guess anything and what I hear, is what I get everywhere. So whatever this thing does, it's made an incredible difference for me. I remember when mixing one song took a week or longer. Out to the car, writing things down while I listened, coming in and trying to make changes that I couldn't even hear to fix. The only things I may change after mixing something, are levels which are subjective. The instrumentation in all the mixes I do today is completely audible on all counts due to me being able to draw the right eq curve and hear the right stuff on the first try. Hell, this thing even fixed a set of Altec Lansing pc speakers that have a sub. I can even mix or record on them now too...go figure.
 
My final thoughts....if you have any issues mixing to where you can't make the right calls and purposely make cd's to check them in your car only to write down changes that you have to guess on when you come back in your studio, or constantly email mp3's to other people to get their take on your mix, ARC will be the best little investment you ever made and you won't have to do that stuff any longer. If you do NOT have these problems and what you mix is what you hear, you don't need ARC.
 
Anyone skeptical that hasn't tried it, trust me....it works, it truly works. One thing I do not do, is brag about something unless it really works. I'm telling you, God is my witness, I was ready to totally bag recording and just use my place as a pre-production studio for my head and all I had was the C Room. ARC not only totally helped me to love recording again, but recording is no longer a challenge for me. I feel like recording something, I lay it down and it's done and sounding just as I wanted it to. Unless of course, the song I had in my head sucks when I finally record it and hear it. LOL!
 
It has also helped me to have one of the busiest businesses I could have ever dreamed of as I do at least 12 hours worth of production for clients every day...from mastering, producing, recording, mixing, it's just been off the hook and I'm booked solid until November of 2011. This made me build rooms A and B because they were necessities. I'm supposed to be a performing artist, not an engineer. LOL!! But hey, it's awesome work and I love it. I wake up every day with a smile on my face with a new project to do as well as some new music to listen to and work with that I would have never listened to or bought. I would have never gotten involved to the extent I am now if ARC didn't help me out as much as it has. That's really the best way I can explain it. :) If the whole concept of it is a joke or a scam then I must be an exception to the joke because the audio that I have coming out of here comes out exactly the way I want it to at all times....so help me God. ;)

From bitflipper:

'd be satisfied if any disinterested third party published a detailed evaluation. But I have looked and so far I have found only magazine reviews that either paraphrase IK's marketing literature
...
There have been some AES papers on the subject of room correction,

How about The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products? Given at the AES convention.

The study was a double-blind listening test of various "room correction" products. (Quotes used because the author has acknowledged that "room correction" is an unfortunate name. It doesn't correct the room at all).  It included the Audyessy product which ARC is based on, but sadly it doesn't name names when it comes to conclusions. 

Quick summary:  Room correction products can significantly improve the sound of a listening space, but only when implemented well. One product was implemented so poorly that it was evaluated as sounding worse that the un-corrected room.  (that's where I wished he would have named names.)

Disclaimer: The author of the paper works for Harman International which has developed their own "room correction" system.  But if you read the paper (not just the blog) I think you'll see that his scientific method of double-blind listening tests is sound.

I also highly recommend his whole blog.

anotha option ;

http://www.savioursofsoul.de/Christian/programs/winamp/

Danny, that's great that you're booked out for 2 years! I'm also amazed that you manage to make a large (and very helpful) contribution to this forum, after working 12 hrs a day! After a long day at the studio, the last thing in the world I want to do is sit in front of a computer again, so hats off to you! 

Hey Zo, thanks sooo much! Omg that thing is awesome!!! I have to run everything in a DAW at all times so I can use ARC...this really makes things easier. I really appreciate it. This is like a HUGE deal to me. I went with the first link you supplied...and it works perfectly and seamlessly. I'm soo stoked...like a little kid in a toy store. LOL! I hope you're having a wonderful time skiing and being safe. :) Thanks again, I owe ya one for this....enjoy your holiday!

Hi Danni,
I'm really surprised this thread is still going after all this time.

When I first started the thread, I was like a kid with a new toy. Then I realised this is no toy. I've got the real thing here.

I've kept a low profile about it because it just works and all the nay sayers can say nay for all I care. I don't have to prove ARC's efficacy to them. I took the opportunity to buy the product and it's proven itself to me. If anyone else wants to find out for certain and don't want to take my word then they'll either just continue to be nay sayers or put their money where I put mine.

Nice to read of your continuing commercial growth and success. Above all that you're really enjoying the music. All the best.

SH! Don't tell any one how you did it.

Maybe it'll turn me into a studio engineering hero. LOL!

I just picked the ARC system up and will be doing the measurements this weekend when I have some time.  I have a large high back chair that I sit in when I mix.  It's covered in thick foam and I believe absorbs some high frequencies.  Should I keep it in place when I do my measurements ... the manual doesn't really say?  Thanks.

Cheers,

jayson