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)

ARC is based on Audyssey's patented technology.  
 
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.
 
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.
 
I'm not aware of anything quite like it, but I'd sure be curious to learn about anything else that is out there.
 
best regards,
Mike
 
 
 
 
 
 

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.

Guitarhacker
My understanding is that the ARC mic is calibrated to the software so that the measurements are as close to accurate as possible.

My understanding is the ARC mic is a piece of cheap s&^% and the software is calibrated to allow for that...
The MM1 is not the most expensive measurement mic you can get, but certainly wasn't cheap and it comes with an individual calibration sheet for the mic which shows it flat in all the relevant frequencies.  (it would, wouldn't it?  But I believe it, I would, wouldn't I...)
 
I use it with pink noise to flatten P.A. speakers and set speaker delays.  I could just use pink noise and an eq on the studio speaker outputs, but ARC (or equivalent) would be easier if its available without the mic.  (cheaper,  I have the mic!!)

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..
 

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?

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.

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?

 
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.
 
 
 
 
In the mean time, I'm saving up for a full set of Ninjapanels™ to mount on the walls and to use as gobos. They have induction motivated pivoting platelets that respond at 96kHz sampling to achieve >96% diffusion in any room larger than a shower stall, and recent developments inspire reason to feel encouraged that a shower stall gambit will soon be realized.

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.

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....