Genelec Community Forum has been archived

Thank you for all the years of Community discussions and activity!

The time has come for us to retire the community forums, but we will keep everything available for reading. There is a lot of valuable content written over the years, and you'll be able to access all of that. However, no new posts can be written, or old posts modified.

If you have questions, we recommend you use the Support function on the bottom right corner to contact our Customer Support directly.

Alternatively, if you wish to engage in a community discussion with other people, there are many active forums available. There is also an active, fan managed GENELEC COMMUNITY in Facebook, and many Genelec employees are active in the discussions there.

We are sorry for any possible inconvenience this may cause you, but we hope to hear from you through the other channels mentioned above.

Genelec Support

Message Boards

effectiveness of digital room correction and digital monitor

campus, modified 5 Years ago.

effectiveness of digital room correction and digital monitor

Youngling Posts: 12 Join Date: 9/19/14 Recent Posts
First of all, I am a very happy owner of a pair of Genelec 8050B connected to the XLR stereo OUT of an Oppo BDP-105D.
1) I am skeptical about Digital Room Correction (DRC) because the theory says that it improves the response in one point in space (i.e. where you put the microphone during adaptation) BUT makes it worst in other points (even near it) and the listener usually can move, at least a bit.
2) How big is the sweet spot (the space with improved response around the point where was put the microphone) with SAM stereo system (after GLM adaptation) e.g. with 8351 or 8350 or 8260? Is it different for 5.1 channels instead of stereo?
3) GLM corrects the amplitude of the frequency response but what about the phase?
4) With near field listening (i.e. less influence of the room on perceived sound) is the improvement given by DRC so important to justify the complicated architecture with the need to give to the monitors a digital (instead of analogue) signal and also a control signal (GLM network) and move the volume control from the source to the speakers?
5) Is in production a Genelec 3 way, analogue, compact monitor? I.e. similar measures to 8050 (or little more) but 3 way and analogue.
6) I can not find Genelec 1037 monitor on the web site:
http://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/ ... subwoofers
is it still in production?
ilkka-rissanen, modified 5 Years ago.

Re: effectiveness of digital room correction and digital mon

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
First of all, I am a very happy owner of a pair of Genelec 8050B connected to the XLR stereo OUT of an Oppo BDP-105D.

Thank you for your questions, I will reply them one by one.

1) I am skeptical about Digital Room Correction (DRC) because the theory says that it improves the response in one point in space (i.e. where you put the microphone during adaptation) BUT makes it worst in other points (even near it) and the listener usually can move, at least a bit.

I haven't heard about this theory before, can you please tell me more about it? Maybe some links to scientific papers too?

2) How big is the sweet spot (the space with improved response around the point where was put the microphone) with SAM stereo system (after GLM adaptation) e.g. with 8351 or 8350 or 8260? Is it different for 5.1 channels instead of stereo?

The size of the sweep spot depends on many variables, for example the general acoustical properties of your room, speaker setup (placement), frequency range of the correction used, single-point or multipoint calibration etc. Typically stereo listening is more critical to accurate stereo imaging than multichannel listening.

3) GLM corrects the amplitude of the frequency response but what about the phase?

GLM/AutoCal corrects both amplitude and phase response in a minimum phase system.

4) With near field listening (i.e. less influence of the room on perceived sound) is the improvement given by DRC so important to justify the complicated architecture with the need to give to the monitors a digital (instead of analogue) signal and also a control signal (GLM network) and move the volume control from the source to the speakers?

I would say yes, it is very important even in near field listening conditions. Unless your room is already perfect without a calibration (I haven't yet seen/measured a room like this), the answer is yes. Also DSP technology brings many other benefits and improvement such as constant latency above 200 Hz which improves imaging and time-domain behaviour.

5) Is in production a Genelec 3 way, analogue, compact monitor? I.e. similar measures to 8050 (or little more) but 3 way and analogue.

There is no such monitor is our product range. All of our larger monitors belong to the SAM (Smart Active Monitoring) range.

6) I can not find Genelec 1037 monitor on the web site:
http://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/ ... subwoofers
is it still in production?

It is not in production any more.
campus, modified 5 Years ago.

Re: effectiveness of digital room correction and digital mon

Youngling Posts: 12 Join Date: 9/19/14 Recent Posts
Thank you, for an example of the reference you requested please look at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_room_correction
in particular "Challenges".
There are some Papers listed at the end.
ilkka-rissanen, modified 5 Years ago.

Re: effectiveness of digital room correction and digital mon

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
As it is written on Wikipedia: "Room correction filter calculation systems instead favor a robust approach, and employ sophisticated processing to attempt to produce an inverse filter which will work over a usably large volume, and which avoid producing bad-sounding artifacts outside of that volume, at the expense of peak accuracy at the measurement location."