When I changed from my old Yamaha receiver to the AVR390 and setup Dirac it was clear that what I had been listening to prior was an unholy incoherent mess. So was really pleased with the night & day improvements.
Now I want to change from 5.1 to 2-channel stereo only. As it happens the particular
speakers I'm considering are 4ohm and whilst the 390
might manage with its 8ohm impendence I'd rather just move to a new Amp that is designed for and supports 4ohm That's neither here nor there for now.
My room is difficult and clearly Dirac has compensated for that to a large extent but I wonder too did Dirac also sort out my speakers (in Sig below) regardless of the room? In other words, if I had a 'perfect' room then the assumption would be that Dirac would have made little or no difference. Right? As it happens my current setup with Dirac presents much improved imaging and sound stage. If I switch off EQ the sound quality suffers (but still so much better than the Yamaha ever was).
So the point of this post. If I go down the route of a new Amp (have
this in mind) am I destined to revert to poor quality without Dirac? Or will the [
excellent] Amp itself make up for some part of that (not the room issues per se) but overall sound quality.
I'm just conscious that reviewers talks about how great a particular amp is - do we assume their listening rooms are treated to the Nth degree therefore and what they hear is as good as it gets?
Or is a case that my sound quality issue are 95% a result of a poor room. I think I've just answered my own question.
Glad to hear other views.