Kodi Community Forum
Digital Room Correction (DRC) Audio Filter? - Printable Version

+- Kodi Community Forum (https://forum.kodi.tv)
+-- Forum: Discussions (https://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=222)
+--- Forum: Feature Requests (https://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Digital Room Correction (DRC) Audio Filter? (/showthread.php?tid=283)

Pages: 1 2


Digital Room Correction (DRC) Audio Filter? - Ondjultomte - 2003-11-03

a very useful feature that would really benefit all music lovers would be a implementation of brutefir.
the question is, would the box cpu capacity be enough ?
it would be great if you could use the box for drc purposes instead of buying "hifi hardware" for several 1000$
currently im using my computer for drc, but i would love to use the box instead.

would such a feature be insteresting?

interesting links:

http://freshmeat.net/projects/drc/?topic_id=114

http://www.ludd.luth.se/~torger/brutefir.html

http://www.mooneyass.com/drc/drc%20guide%20v1.0.pdf


- Hullebulle - 2003-11-03

i am not a dev, but this sounds like the xbox is to slow for it:
:from http://www.ludd.luth.se/~torger/brutefir.html
Quote:hardware considerations
what is important for brutefir is that the machine has fast memory and fast processor. a pentium 4 with its rdram is probably the best choice today. however, an athlon with ddr ram is not bad either, and significantly cheaper. a fast processor on a computer with slow memory is what most often causes disappointment. for example, a dual pentium iii at 1 ghz with good use of both processors was found to be slower than a single processor 1 ghz amd athlon with ddr ram. the problem was that the pentium iii had poor memory performance. the stream benchmark [20] is a good program to use to verify the memory bandwidth if you think you get poor brutefir performance.
if you use sdram you will never get exceptional memory bandwidth, however, some tuning of timer settings in the bios, or overclocking of the memory bus can give you quite decent performance.



- jmarshall - 2003-11-03

the one advantage the xbox does have is it's audio hardware can do some limited fir stuff. whether it'd be enough to get the sort of stuff you're after such as room correction is another question.

ofcourse, you'd have to put up with upsampling to 48khz (which we are trying to work around, although the outlook is not terribly good at the moment).


Digital Room Correction (DRC) in XBMC for Linux, Mac, and Windows? - johndoe2000 - 2008-12-05

If support for drc would be implemented in XBMC that would make xbmc the ultimate media player, for high end enthusiats.

http://drc-fir.sourceforge.net/

Support for these filter which are made externally.

Now that xbmc is available (finally) on powerfull PC hardware there would be no performance problems as with xbox1


- muttley:bd - 2011-05-26

There is some news for this features?

Is there some "how to" for make Digital room correction on linux for xbmc?!

thanks!


- spiff - 2011-05-26

1) get a receiver that supports it
2) you're set


- muttley:bd - 2011-05-26

-1) give me money for get a new receiver!

But if i have an amazing programmable machine (PC) with wanderfull S.O. (Linux) and great player (XBMC) i think can be better, and more flexible, of new receiver!Nod

I must only understand how to use: DRC, BruteFIR, jack and pulseaudio...google...some help...shake...and hope Rofl


- quotaholic - 2011-05-26

I am a little confused as to how one would benefit from this as opposed to say the included microphone and audessey set up that modern receivers go through today. In my Arcam receiver not only did the audessey determine my speakers position to the second decimal place but it also determined the correct crossover points based on how the sound propagated through my listening room. One more, after applying delays for speaker distance delta's and correct attenuation the Arcam put parametric equalization to each channel individually in order to balance tone.

Don't get me wrong I realize that drc, not to be confused with Dynamic Range Compression, is a realtime "engine". I have to imagine it would rely on several input devices to give it feedback as to how the sound is propagating or microphones. Possibly only one microphone however the architecture versus cost versus benefit is something that I have a hard time imagining. Measurement quality microphone, high speed low latency interface (I am thinking firewire), yeah this will be expensive.

If I am listening to DTS-MA content at 24 bits and 192k the throughput needed on a cpu level for 8 channels worth of audio would be huge. Heck even something like the Konnekt Live from TC Electonics with built in DSP engine and ability to do real time room correction via filters may not be enough by the time by the time the math is done, filter is made and applied to the outgoing audio stream. Add a Powercore and now we are talking. To do this in all software I have to think would be ludicrous.

In comparison to the audessey calibration, and correct me if I am wrong, this would correct the audio in the room making real time adjustments if say someone were to get up from the sofa and walk across the listening room to go to the bathroom while something was playing? I love technology but I fail to realize a benefit for this in 99 percent of applications. Dont get me wrong it sounds cool and I would love to play with it however is it possible and for how much and how much difference will I see over my audessy set up?

quotaholic


- GJones - 2011-05-26

muttley:bd Wrote:-1) give me money for get a new receiver!

But if i have an amazing programmable machine (PC) with wanderfull S.O. (Linux) and great player (XBMC) i think can be better, and more flexible, of new receiver!Nod

I must only understand how to use: DRC, BruteFIR, jack and pulseaudio...google...some help...shake...and hope Rofl

The cost of the reciever would be so much lower than the cost of the software development (I value dev time, even if it's free), that it would be hard to justify the work.

This is a solution desired by a limited number of people and already available through a hardware solution for them.


- Livin - 2011-05-26

I'll take the $400 receiver that has a chip & algorythms in it with 10+ years of maturity, tweaking, and the best minds in A/V contributing, over a software version with little to no maturity -- Any day!


- muttley:bd - 2011-05-26

sorry, but my english is not very well...if i understand what you say:

I think your Arcam make Digital Room Correction:
Quote:but it also determined the correct crossover points based on how the sound propagated through my listening room.

i don't think DRC is real time, only at start use microphone, after that the filter is "static".

Quote:The cost of the reciever would be so much lower than the cost of the software development (I value dev time, even if it's free), that it would be hard to justify the work.

This is a solution desired by a limited number of people and already available through a hardware solution for them.

Huh

RE-READ my post:
Quote:I must only understand how to use: DRC, BruteFIR, jack and pulseaudio...google...some help...shake...and hope

DRC on linux is just supported, but i don't find a guide or someone for help me Blush


- quotaholic - 2011-05-26

Ahh, my mistake. I pictured what little I read as being a real time solution. That not being the case, yes I do see some application for this. The DIY amplifier community. There are a number of high end amplifier kits out on the market that would either require a "commercially available" preamp in order to decode digital streams or a d/a converter. In the latter of the two there would be no on board room calibration included so yes this would be a solution to some who also have the hardware option.


- muttley:bd - 2011-05-27

quotaholic Wrote:Ahh, my mistake. I pictured what little I read as being a real time solution. That not being the case, yes I do see some application for this. The DIY amplifier community. There are a number of high end amplifier kits out on the market that would either require a "commercially available" preamp in order to decode digital streams or a d/a converter. In the latter of the two there would be no on board room calibration included so yes this would be a solution to some who also have the hardware option.
thanks for your understand!

I also add that with DRC implemented in "software mode", the user have more flexible system and i think also better. This because for DRC Hardware there is low-end system (cheap) and high-end (very expensive) that don't make the same DRC .

however i would remark only that this feature is not to be implemented by xbmc, but i think only "supported". And maybe xbmc can just support it Laugh

for mplayer (after drc, jack, brutefir) just start it with:
mplayer -ao jack:brutefir

...and i think can be the same on xbmc


- BoxFreak - 2011-05-27

One cheap option: http://www.minidsp.com/


- muttley:bd - 2011-05-30

BoxFreak Wrote:One cheap option: http://www.minidsp.com/

interesting object, but...

It's not the same of a DRC: http://www.minidsp.com/forum/3-suggestion-box/33-convolver-plugin Rolleyes

...and is not so cheap, about 170 $ for a similar DRC!

The pro is that with this object you can switch off the pc...but xbmc work on the pc Laugh