Talking of ARC ...

I already have a BeyerDynamic MM1 which is a much better measurement mic than the one that comes with IK's ARC.
 
Is there equivalent ARC software I can get without shelling out a fortune to IK for a mic and plugin I already have?  (I just don't have the plugin)

My understanding is that the ARC mic is calibrated to the software so that the measurements are as close to accurate as possible. The intended purpose is to accurately assess the room and it's characteristics for accurate mixing.
 
I guess a similar comparison  would be the difference between using home stereo speakers, no matter how good they are for home stereo use, as mixing reference speakers. Due to the built in bias of those speakers, the mix would likely never be right or easy to get "right" using them.
 
Microphones are similar in that they have less than flat response curves. So, I'm thinking that would not be a good option.... not impossible but a lot of reverse engineering on the software to get a simulated flat and accurate response for the purpose.
 
Some time back, I was kind of taken to task for suggesting that I could use the ARC mic to record my acoustic guitar since it's freq response was flat and not warm like some other mics. Kind of a shoe on the other foot thing.
 
So, no, I'd say it's probably cheaper to bust out the bucks for ARC and get it right the first time.
 
 
EDIT: however.... ask Dave...Bitflipper, I'll just bet he has a solution that might give you some sort of idea about the character of the room. I don't think it will give you the "corrected audio output" like ARC does, but if you know the room's deficiencies, you're in a better position to mix more accurately.

ok,  I had a look at Audysses' web site and they are saying you must use their mic which comes in the package..
 
In other words, the mic calibration is hard coded into the software..
 

drewfx1

mike_mccue
It doesn't correct the room reflections but it endeavors to load the room in anticipation of the effect of the reflections you are dealing with.
 

How do you know it doesn't correct the room reflections?

Because it doesn't fill your room with acoustic foam?
 
 
 
During the measurement/set up it will send a few pulses from each speaker and measure the echo/reverb/reflection at the listening position.
 
During normal playback it can make use of that data to add in extra echoes which arrive directly at your listening position at the same time and same volume as the room reflections, but out of phase...  so they cancel.
 
It is loading the room with anti-phase, time shifted copies of the sound to cancel out reflections.  It's not actually correcting the room.

Karyn
It is loading the room with anti-phase, time shifted copies of the sound to cancel out reflections.  It's not actually correcting the room.

To the extent that it actually works, I would say it does correct the room at the listening position. 
 
It's sort of a question of semantics, but I think people start getting confused when they start from a certain premise.

mike_mccue
The premise of my statement is that the room reflections, the resonance, and impedance of the air within it is not physically changed, but rather it is anticipated and the signal injected into the room is altered in some way which interacts with the existing physicality in such a way that a net effect is achieved.
 
This is, to date, my best understanding of what is going on... I'm eager to learn more.

I'm thinking from the perspective of the listening position. How "correct" the sound arriving there is is what I would focus on.

I think what you might still be missing, based on this statement:
 

mike_mccue
In addition to making dramatic EQ adjustments to your speaker output it uses "fuzzy logic" to dynamically combine the collection of impulse response samples you make to compensate for the effect of your room reflections.
 

 
"EQ" and IR compensation are the same thing. I said this in another thread, but an FIR filter just convolves the signal with the filter's IR the same way a convolution reverb does (in theory) with its IR. And frequency and phase together gives you time (f=cycles/second and phase in degrees = cycles/360). So if phase is taken into account, frequency compensation (i.e. "EQ") and time compensation are the exact same thing.

batsbrew
the mic is cheap...
but IS dialed in for a specific purpose.
 
it was probably easier to write the software using the sonic fingerprint for a known source,
rather than let people arbitrarily pick ANY mic (albiet quite possibly a better one) and the software NOT know how to compensate for all the corresponding readings....
 

ARC's use of a test mic begs comparison to systems that can use any omni mic, but work best when that mic is accompanied by a calibration file that is unique to that mic and reflects the results of a recent test.
 
The use of mics that have calibration data associated with them is fairly routine in test procedures.
 
It may not be as easy to code, but a program such as ARC could use that sort of data if it was programmed to.

mike_mccue
Hi drew,
 
 Regarding what you have just said about FIR, what is your take on this:
 
 from: http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/arc/
 
"Other types of electronic correction systems use some form of equalization that works only on the frequency response of the room but worsen the phase response of what you are hearing."
 
1) a fact
2) a generalization
3) a fact and a generalization

If you just change frequency response and completely ignore phase you really have no idea what you will end up with in terms of phase response. This is where the oft heard "you can't correct time problems with EQ" statement comes from.
 

It's Audyssey's use of the term "fuzzy logic" and what I've been assuming is some sort of application of dynamic convolution that really fascinates me.

 
I think all they're talking about is how they combine the impulses from different positions to make a single impulse that works reasonably well over a larger listening area.

Awe, thanks Dave

Apparently there are two different mics used with ARC...I had a tough time figuring out which one came with my plug-in because the description wasn't the best..If you don't tell it which one you have it throws off the measurements.
 
Karyn-You can sometimes get a good deal on ARC at certain times with IK promos..

Hi Karyn,
 
Mind if I throw a few things your way? I know you're not interested in ARC and I don't mean to sound like I'm trying to sell you on it. However, I do think a few things may be missing that I'd like to at least share.
 
As far as software, this was the best one I tried. http://www.roomeqwizard.com/
 
But I also really felt the need to address a few things because well...I felt the need! :)
 
So you have this mic that is a pretty flat response mic. Have you tried any type of room eq software to fix your problems? I have tried several that I found on the net that looked promising and I even bought a really nice analyzer like the ones the "room eq guys" use when they come to your studio to eq your monitors for flat. I've really done my best there and though I have always had decent mixes, nothing has ever helped me as much as ARC. Now hold on, that's not a sales pitch...stick with me.
 
The one thing I'd like to throw out the window for a second, is the whole thing about ARC correcting a room. Let's say it does nothing at all for your room. I don't know what it does....but it helps my sorry @ss. LOL!
 
What I can say that it DOES do and it does it well, is at the worst case scenario, it will flatten your monitors. If you are not having any major issues with your mixes translating anywhere, I'd not buy ARC and would try to figure something else out. I gotta tell you though, I'm not a rich man but I can't put a price on NOT having to second guess myself anymore. Whatever it does do, it stopped that from happening.
 
I've worked in some really crappy rooms my entire life as a recording guy. Some rooms were in million dollar studio's that were over-booked and their A, B and C rooms were taken. So they put me and the band we'd be working with in a closet, bathroom, storage space, you name it, I made it work. But they put me there because I always delivered the goods. The reason for that was my monitors I used were always corrected. To me, having flat monitors and good ears can get you super close to where you need to be even in an unforgiving room. Nothing I've tried has gotten me to that point other than ARC or when you hire one of those pro analyzer dude's to come to the studio and you supply them with a few Rane eq's to flatten everything.
 
Even there, they only get the main sweet-spot sort of down. ARC seems to make the listening experience much better on the ears wherever you are in your room. Not that THAT matters at all, but it's nice to hear what you mixed sounding good all over your room as well as in your sweet spot.
 
My point in saying this.....if you can find something that truly gets your monitors "flat" you'll be in pretty good shape. I can't think of anything that can do that better than ARC. Yeah, the price sucks and I've always felt it was a bit high. BUT...frustration is an even higher price for me. I can't tell you what it does to me. I paid $500 for my ARC 1 and again...I'm not loaded but even that was a small price to pay to NOT second guess myself. For $300....if a person doesn't have the money, they simply don't have the money and I can understand that. But I have to ask "what is your level of frustration and how happy are you with your mixes?" Happy to semi-happy...you don't need ARC. Seldom happy and frustrated quite often....think about taking the plunge.
 
If the thing does nothing at all to my room and is a load of crap....it sure did fool me into making everything I work on sound better and get done faster. At the worst....it flattened my monitors pretty darned good and I didn't have to hire anyone to do it or buy any additional hardware eq's.
 
For what it's worth, the stuff I have heard from you always sounded pretty good. Most of the stuff you shared here, you didn't put a load of time into so I couldn't really tell what you were capable of. But at the end of the day, if your level of frustration is high and you'd like to get things done faster without second guessing, ARC is definitely something to consider that should help fix at least THOSE things. Good luck. :)
 
-Danny

sharke
I feel like I've had cataract surgery, but for the ears!

Hahaha! Similar for me....I felt like the storm clouds parted and went away for good then the sun came out showing me a rainbow. You know...like when a hurricane leaves and everything seems fresh and new again. :)
 
-Danny

Danny Danzi

sharke
I feel like I've had cataract surgery, but for the ears!

Hahaha! Similar for me....I felt like the storm clouds parted and went away for good then the sun came out showing me a rainbow. You know...like when a hurricane leaves and everything seems fresh and new again. :)
 
-Danny

Yup. Same here. I drank the kool-aid and it tastes (errm... sounds) good.

S.L.I.P.
Arc 2 is going for $179.00, with free shipping on Amazon:
 
http://www.amazon.com/IK-...8-1&keywords=arc+2

That's great,  fantastic value.
 
 
But for anyone who doesn't live in the centre of the known universe and therefor has to subsidise the cheap US prices, it's £199.54 on Amazon,  or about $340 at current exchange rates...