# Sonarworks Reference 4



## mscp (Jun 6, 2019)

Thoughts about Sonarworks Reference 4? Has anyone used it? How well does it work? I wonder how well the mixes are translated when using headphones.

Thank you!


----------



## WindcryMusic (Jun 6, 2019)

In six words: I can't live without it anymore.


----------



## JacquesMathias (Jun 6, 2019)

Phil81 said:


> Thoughts about Sonarworks Reference 4? Has anyone used it? How well does it work? I wonder how well the mixes are translated when using headphones.
> 
> Thank you!


It’s great - it has definitely helped me out with headphones mixes. However, I have gone through the Toonebosters’ Morphit/Isone route. Worth checking them out, too.


----------



## burp182 (Jun 6, 2019)

Big believer in Sonarworks for monitor correction.


----------



## jonathanparham (Jun 6, 2019)

Got it at the end of last year. It's now permanently on my mix bus


----------



## Henu (Jun 7, 2019)

Bought a bit over year ago, can't understand how I have worked without it.


----------



## DS_Joost (Jun 8, 2019)

Henu said:


> Bought a bit over year ago, can't understand how I have worked without it.



This times a million. I spend 150 euros on it two years ago. Best. Money. Ever. Spend.

Seriously OP. Thank us later.


----------



## Divico (Jun 8, 2019)

Use it in muy monitoring chain and on systemwide. basically for everything. Listening to music, practicing, composing, mixing. great stuff


----------



## labornvain (Jun 9, 2019)

Wow. So no one else has a problem with the significant loss in audio quality of running your mix through this equalizer?

I just can't get past it.


----------



## karelpsota (Jun 9, 2019)

Having Sonarworks in a studio should be like having wheels on a car.

once you know "flat" like the back of your hand. You can travel to any studio that's also calibrated and NOT feel lost.

Also, it's advised to run the EQ with Audio-Hijack (Mac) so all computer audio runs through it. Sonarworks offers Systemwide, but there's still too much latency.

@Blakus has a cool video on it.


----------



## Divico (Jun 10, 2019)

labornvain said:


> Wow. So no one else has a problem with the significant loss in audio quality of running your mix through this equalizer?
> 
> I just can't get past it.


Not sure what you mean. Every eq makes problems. Choose between phase isaues or pre ringing. Imo the benefit is higher than the loose here


----------



## muk (Jun 10, 2019)

Digital room correction can be a nice improvement under the right circumstances. I tested several options a while ago, and Sonarworks was among the ones I found to be the least effectual. The best were Dirac Live (currently only available with hardware, but should be back as standalone software app), and Python Open Room Correction (PORC).

For my setup, both Dirac's and PORC's correction was vastly superior to Sonarworks. Sonarworks sounded like an eq that linearized the frequency response. Dirac and PORC do that too. But on top of that they also correct phase problems, resulting in a much more defined stereo image.

If you are tech savvy, PORC currently is the best option in my opinion. Together with REW and Equalizer APO it offers systemwide DRC, and it's completely free. Needless to say it's what I have been using for a few years now, and still am using today.


----------



## steveo42 (Jun 10, 2019)

I've been using SonarWorks since V1 for room and headphone. I'm another believer in it's abilities. It is not a miracle worker, nothing other than full treatment of the listening space is, but assuming your room is decent, your monitor placement follows the standard rules and you have decent monitors to begin with, SW is an excellent addition to your toolbox. They do have a demo I believe, so give it a try.


----------



## MartinH. (Jun 10, 2019)

I've downloaded the demo of Morphit ( https://www.toneboosters.com/tb_morphit_v1.html ), selected my headphones from the profile list, set it to "correct" and listened to some music. Is that what "reference sound" is supposed to sound like? It's a clear difference on the headphones, but fairly close to how my desktop speakers with turned down bass sound (I always have it turned down). Is that a good sign?

I don't have any aspirations of getting a "studio grade" setup here, I'm just a hobbyist and will happily settle for "ok-ish" in this regard.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Jun 10, 2019)

Canopener studio into Sonarworks headphone is how I do it.

No matter what you do, or don't, you still should be familiar with whatever you use as monitors and AB your tracks with reference material. Ideally the tools you use help make that faster and easier. If not, don't use them!


----------



## mscp (Jun 10, 2019)

vitocorleone123 said:


> Canopener studio into Sonarworks headphone is how I do it.
> 
> No matter what you do, or don't, you still should be familiar with whatever you use as monitors and AB your tracks with reference material. Ideally the tools you use help make that faster and easier. If not, don't use them!



My goal is to monitor in random places (on the go), not to use it in my calibrated studio monitors/setup.


----------



## jonnybutter (Jun 10, 2019)

Made a huge difference for me - more than any other piece of software I've purchased in the last couple of years. Doesn't beat a well treated room of course, though I still found it useful when I did have a pretty good room (which I no longer have, unfortunately). Great for headphones. I bought a pair of headphones from them which came with a custom preset for that particular pair. Nice. They have sales on those now and then.


----------



## SBK (Jun 10, 2019)

I did the next step to level up and send them my BD 880 pro for calibration! Are you jealous? :D

Its totally worth it! Or buying pre calibrated headphones from them.
At least you can be sure what you are listening to into headphones! Because speakers are hard to fix cause of acoustics and all that!


----------



## storyteller (Jun 10, 2019)

labornvain said:


> Wow. So no one else has a problem with the significant loss in audio quality of running your mix through this equalizer?
> 
> I just can't get past it.


I’m with you on the loss of audio quality 1000%. I have it. Use it. Hate it. Quit using it. Decide I need it again because ...in theory... it should work. Use it again. Realize the pre-ringing and phase issues drive me bonkers while mixing. It has been a vicious cycle, but I’ve landed on “better off without it” for my own sanity while mixing rather than due to results.

That said, I (like you), probably fall into a very, very small percentage of users that would actually notice that problem to the point it bothered them in an OCD kind of way. I’d assume for many the software serves as a revelation and helps many people greatly improve mixes.


----------



## neblix (Jun 10, 2019)

The headphone calibration is okay. The studio monitor and room calibration is magic.


----------



## fustrun (Jun 11, 2019)

+1 for room calibration .. magic ..


----------



## dgburns (Jun 11, 2019)

muk said:


> Digital room correction can be a nice improvement under the right circumstances. I tested several options a while ago, and Sonarworks was among the ones I found to be the least effectual. The best were Dirac Live (currently only available with hardware, but should be back as standalone software app), and Python Open Room Correction (PORC).
> 
> For my setup, both Dirac's and PORC's correction was vastly superior to Sonarworks. Sonarworks sounded like an eq that linearized the frequency response. Dirac and PORC do that too. But on top of that they also correct phase problems, resulting in a much more defined stereo image.
> 
> If you are tech savvy, PORC currently is the best option in my opinion. Together with REW and Equalizer APO it offers systemwide DRC, and it's completely free. Needless to say it's what I have been using for a few years now, and still am using today.



I’d like to ask you to clarify your post a bit. I’m a Sonarworks Reference 4 user, but have not used the other ones you mention. I like what Reference 4 does for me. Still trying to get used to the correction however.

That said, you mention Sonarworks Reference does not correct phase, but this is inaccurate. You have the option to run in latency free mode (no phase correction) or in higher latency mode (phase correction). I can def hear the difference, but it’s not been a deal breaker for me. Reference 4 will show you the phase correction plot if you check the box in the plugin window.

I use the plugin version and monitor through Protools, but work in Logic with two machines slaved. I don’t use the systemwide version. In working with video, so scoring to picture, I’ve not had any issues running the no latency version. But it will spike cpu every once in awhile.

I’ve run the measurement software many times, and with the supplied mic from Sonarworks. It is a must have imho.

Anyway, not trying to spark a debate, but Sonarworks is working for me. Just wish they added 5.1 support.


----------



## babylonwaves (Jun 11, 2019)

dgburns said:


> Anyway, not trying to spark a debate, but Sonarworks is working for me. Just wish they added 5.1 support.


i use dirac live as a software component on my mac. and I prefer it again SW4, i believe it is less intrusive in terms of coloration and adding artefacts to what you hear. there is a surround version available. the system latency introduced by dirac live is also a lot smaller in comparison to what System Wide does. the latency is the range of maybe 15ms from the top of my head. from what i've heart you cannot test or buy dirac live right now but that will change once they've done with the update they're working on.


----------



## Greg (Jun 11, 2019)

labornvain said:


> Wow. So no one else has a problem with the significant loss in audio quality of running your mix through this equalizer?
> 
> I just can't get past it.



I tried every setup possible and still hate it too. It really takes the life out of the sound in my setup.


----------



## dgburns (Jun 11, 2019)

babylonwaves said:


> i use dirac live as a software component on my mac. and I prefer it again SW4, i believe it is less intrusive in terms of coloration and adding artefacts to what you hear. there is a surround version available. the system latency introduced by dirac live is also a lot smaller in comparison to what System Wide does. the latency is the range of maybe 15ms from the top of my head. from what i've heart you cannot test or buy dirac live right now but that will change once they've done with the update they're working on.



Interesting


----------



## muk (Jun 11, 2019)

dgburns said:


> That said, you mention Sonarworks Reference does not correct phase, but this is inaccurate.



Sorry, incorrect wording on my part. What I meant to say is that on my setup, I could not hear any improvement on that front with Sonarworks. Dirac and PORC both have a clearly audible effect on the stereo image, while Sonarworks 3 (that's the version I tested at the time) did not. With Dirac and PORC the stereo image is more clearly defined. It's particularly audible for the phantom center. Sonarworks had no such effect on my setup.


----------



## Divico (Jun 11, 2019)

muk said:


> Sorry, incorrect wording on my part. What I meant to say is that on my setup, I could not hear any improvement on that front with Sonarworks. Dirac and PORC both have a clearly audible effect on the stereo image, while Sonarworks 3 (that's the version I tested at the time) did not. With Dirac and PORC the stereo image is more clearly defined. It's particularly audible for the phantom center. Sonarworks had no such effect on my setup.


Do you use the listening spot correction? Its basically a delay and volume correction for one of the speakers to correct stereo imaging (if it is messed up in your sweet spot).


----------



## muk (Jun 11, 2019)

Divico said:


> Do you use the listening spot correction?



Yes, I did. I made several measurements as well, all with similar results. It could be specific to my room and speakers, but in my case Sonarworks was clearly not on the same level as the other two programs.


----------



## dgburns (Jun 11, 2019)

muk said:


> Yes, I did. I made several measurements as well, all with similar results. It could be specific to my room and speakers, but in my case Sonarworks was clearly not on the same level as the other two programs.



I’d say try v4.


----------



## robgb (Jun 11, 2019)

I used the Sonarworks Headphones trial for a couple weeks and matched the EQ they provided for my headphones. Now I use that every time I mix. I also bought Waves NX when it was on sale for $29, and it does a great job at room placement.


----------



## muk (Jun 11, 2019)

dgburns said:


> I’d say try v4.



I'd say try Dirac and PORC. They are simply better than Sonarworks.

I seem to be the only person who has done some research and directly compared various programs, yet people who only tried Sonarworks are convinced that it's the best. Fine by me. But you are certainly not going to convince me that it is better, because I tried so I know. In my case compared to the other two programs Sonarworks (and IK Multimedia Arc too, by the way) was substandard.


----------



## dgburns (Jun 13, 2019)

muk said:


> I'd say try Dirac and PORC. They are simply better than Sonarworks.
> 
> I seem to be the only person who has done some research and directly compared various programs, yet people who only tried Sonarworks are convinced that it's the best. Fine by me. But you are certainly not going to convince me that it is better, because I tried so I know. In my casr comoared to the other two programs Sonarworks (and IK Multimedia Arc too, by the way) was substandard.



Man, I’m confused about Dirac. How in hell do you use it, is it software? Does it do surround. I wish there was a monitoring box with Dirac built-in. To fully appreciate the improvement/ differences, I would need to hear it side by side against Sonarworks. Yet, you’ve got me intrigued to say the least. (others have said the same thing you are saying about Dirac)

Also, not to continue to poo-poo on your anti Reference 4, but in my case, I got the calibration mic, and went about it over time. Using their mic is key to getting a good result, imho. Reference 4 works well, it’s not perfect for sure, but it’s way better then nothing. And it’s better then Arc, which seems to be the consensus with those that have used both. Having the plugin running inside Protools is a better option for me then systemwide, I’d welcome a Dirac Protools plugin.


----------



## muk (Jun 14, 2019)

dgburns said:


> Man, I’m confused about Dirac. How in hell do you use it, is it software? Does it do surround. I wish there was a monitoring box with Dirac built-in.



It's a bit complicated with Dirac Live at the moment. It used to be a software application. Currently it is only available bundled with hardware unfortunately. It is planned to be released as standalone software again in the future. But I have no idea when this will be the case. I think this is one of the cheapest options at the moment:

https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series

And yes, there is a surround unit as well. 4-channel correction is available for 399$ (including a dsp processor, so there is no strain to your cpu), 8 channel surround for 899$.

PORC can be used for surround too. It's free, but fiendishly complicated to set up.


----------



## shawnsingh (Jun 14, 2019)

storyteller said:


> I’m with you on the loss of audio quality 1000%. I have it. Use it. Hate it. Quit using it. Decide I need it again because ...in theory... it should work. Use it again. Realize the pre-ringing and phase issues drive me bonkers while mixing. It has been a vicious cycle, but I’ve landed on “better off without it” for my own sanity while mixing rather than due to results.
> 
> That said, I (like you), probably fall into a very, very small percentage of users that would actually notice that problem to the point it bothered them in an OCD kind of way. I’d assume for many the software serves as a revelation and helps many people greatly improve mixes.



If it's not too much trouble, would you please be willing to post examples? I'm curious if I can try to train my ears to hear it.

Are you using headphones for sonarworks? Which headphones? Do you hear this issue with other headphones+ sonarworks too? Again just curious, nothing more. I thought it might be interesting to see if different phase response of different EQ curves would make the problem more audible for some headphones and less on others.


----------



## DS_Joost (Jun 14, 2019)

shawnsingh said:


> If it's not too much trouble, would you please be willing to post examples? I'm curious if I can try to train my ears to hear it.
> 
> Are you using headphones for sonarworks? Which headphones? Do you hear this issue with other headphones+ sonarworks too? Again just curious, nothing more. I thought it might be interesting to see if different phase response of different EQ curves would make the problem more audible for some headphones and less on others.



He hears it because Sonarworks doesn't tune down to 432hz

Sorry, sorry, I will see myself out... I just can't help kicking down open doors...


----------



## storyteller (Jun 14, 2019)

shawnsingh said:


> If it's not too much trouble, would you please be willing to post examples? I'm curious if I can try to train my ears to hear it.
> 
> Are you using headphones for sonarworks? Which headphones? Do you hear this issue with other headphones+ sonarworks too? Again just curious, nothing more. I thought it might be interesting to see if different phase response of different EQ curves would make the problem more audible for some headphones and less on others.


Examples wouldn't do much good since the plugin affects the source and not the mix... until you try to change your mix based on the artifacting you hear. But even then it wouldn't be something that is demonstrable through an example. It is something you have to learn to hear. I was talking specifically about the headphone plugin when mixing on the go. HD650s are my primary headphones but I've tried it with a variety of headphones and it will still produce the same artifacts (though it will vary in intensity and frequency placement since different headphones have different curves).

Realistically, any eq curve will produce "artifacts" of some sort - so it isn't specific to Sonarworks. These artifacts can be desirable in some EQs when used in a mix, but rarely would artifacting from a linear EQ be desirable. So when the EQ is meant for curve correction on a final output rather than for coloring a source in a mix, the byproduct can be perceived more negatively as artifacting the source and impacting sound quality. Especially in linear phase mode, the algorithm produces audible ringing which is very undesirable to hear when you know what to listen for. Many might not notice it though.

Note: "ringing" is not a clear explanation for what happens with a linear EQ. I'm at a loss to describe the artifact sound in totality though. Perhaps "squishy frequency bands with strange harmonic shifts" is another way to think about it.


----------



## babylonwaves (Jun 14, 2019)

dgburns said:


> Man, I’m confused about Dirac. How in hell do you use it, is it software? Does it do surround. I wish there was a monitoring box with Dirac built-in. To fully appreciate the improvement/ differences, I would need to hear it side by side against Sonarworks. Yet, you’ve got me intrigued to say the least. (others have said the same thing you are saying about Dirac)


wait some time and download a demo version. i did the same, stayed with it. and i've also compared dirac with other solutions. it's a meta driver. all you need to do is to select Dirac in your audio output preferences and in Dirac you select the sound card you want to playback your music. it's not difficult at all.


----------



## GtrString (Jun 16, 2019)

Another option is to get flatter headphones, like the Ollo's
https://www.olloaudio.com


----------



## jonnybutter (Jun 16, 2019)

muk said:


> yet people who only tried Sonarworks are convinced that it's the best.



Who said that? I'm not convinced Sonarworks 'the best'. The OP asked what people who have used it thought of it. I use it and it has helped me a lot. My mixes translate much better now. I'm open to trying something else, too.


----------



## erikradbo (Jun 17, 2019)

Ordered it today, after many years of wanting it, tried to get it yesterday but my VAT code didn't work. Thanks Thomann for still giving me more than half f the discount even though ordered one day too late.


----------



## bengoss (Jun 17, 2019)

I used it a lot and recently I moved the speakers and remeasured everything again and the sound is terrible, can’t make it work anymore. So I don’t use it lately.

B


----------



## antonikoll (Dec 10, 2019)

One question about the usage of reference. How do you use it? I mix with reference 4 , i put it as plug-in in control room in cubase. So i mix and reference is enabled. When i export the stereo output to my headphones it sounds great.. (because there was calibration to them by reference 4) but when i listen the track in the car or in my mobile it sounds awful. So my question is how do you use the reference 4?


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 10, 2019)

Reference is to make the headphones/speakers as flat or neutral as possible. So that you know what it sounds like by default, and then know that any adjustments will be noticeable from there.

I don't mix with my headphones until it sounds awesome. I mix until it sounds like reference material.


----------



## dflood (Dec 10, 2019)

muk said:


> If you are tech savvy, PORC currently is the best option in my opinion. Together with REW and Equalizer APO it offers systemwide DRC, and it's completely free. Needless to say it's what I have been using for a few years now, and still am using today.



Can you point us towards any resources for learning more about PORC?


----------



## muk (Dec 11, 2019)

dflood said:


> Can you point us towards any resources for learning more about PORC?



Here is the code I am using (with the original code the target curves don't work. That is fixed in this repository):









GitHub - bstegmaier75/porc: Python Open Room Correction (PORC)


Python Open Room Correction (PORC). Contribute to bstegmaier75/porc development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com





And here are two forum threads with a lot of info:






MiniDSP : Re: Python Open Room Correction (PORC) (1/4)


I've created the Python Open Room Correction (PORC) project to generate room correction filters for OpenDRC, or any other ...




www.minidsp.com










Python Open Room Correction (PORC)


Here is the updated code https://github.com/smartrobot/porc let me know if there are any issues. When porting the code I only ran into syntax and casting errors. Nothing to technical. Hi Smartrobot, Many thanks for the porting to Py3. I've run into few issues.... some maybe related to the...




www.diyaudio.com





I haven't touched my setup in a long time. But feel free to pm me if you have any questions.


----------



## Divico (Dec 11, 2019)

antonikoll said:


> One question about the usage of reference. How do you use it? I mix with reference 4 , i put it as plug-in in control room in cubase. So i mix and reference is enabled. When i export the stereo output to my headphones it sounds great.. (because there was calibration to them by reference 4) but when i listen the track in the car or in my mobile it sounds awful. So my question is how do you use the reference 4?


Exactly like this. If it sounds bad in your car your mix isnt translating well. You have 2 options:
1. Fuck the car, your music should be listened to in a good environment.
2. Audition on as many systems as possible. Make a compromise, so it sounds good everywhere.


----------



## Mornats (Dec 11, 2019)

Are you exporting with sonarworks still enabled?


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 11, 2019)

Mornats said:


> Are you exporting with sonarworks still enabled?



And, if you aren't exporting with it enabled, then definitely spend time listening to a lot of commercial tracks with it enabled so you know how they sound with it on. And especially listen to your reference tracks a lot with it enabled. Then mix so your track sounds like those, not so it sounds "good" with it enabled, which typically means hyped bass and treble.


----------



## antonikoll (Dec 11, 2019)

Mornats said:


> Are you exporting with sonarworks still enabled?


No I use cubase and I have the plugin in Control room as insert. I thought that If I have the plugin ebable all the time in my mixing that means that any adjustments I would make in my mixing process will be real to my ear. But it is not. I think.. I can not understand how to use this plugin.. If i mix with it the result in my monitors is very good but in other monitors is not.


----------



## antonikoll (Dec 11, 2019)

Ok I will give a try..


----------



## neblix (Dec 11, 2019)

Enable the plugin while you are mixing and then disable it before you export the song.


----------



## rrichard63 (Dec 11, 2019)

neblix said:


> Enable the plugin while you are mixing and then disable it before you export the song.


If I understand Cubase correctly (I don't use it myself) the point of the control room feature is that plugins you put there don't affect the exported audio. Or am I missing something?


----------



## ceemusic (Dec 11, 2019)

Correct, you don't have to disable any plugins in CR when rendering audio/ mixdowns.


----------



## Olfirf (Dec 11, 2019)

muk said:


> Here is the code I am using (with the original code the target curves don't work. That is fixed in this repository):
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dirac live is now available as a plug-in again and a trial will be a available in 2020. I asked Dirac research for the latency and they say the plugin adds 10ms to your DAWs output. A little bit to much for playing piano sounds or drums IMO, but as a plug-in you could just deactivate it for that purpose.
Now, I read about PORC for the first time! Interesting! I might investigate that, too, before making a choice. Could you say a bit more about your setup? Is PORC used in a nonissue hardware? As a plug-in? Compatible with Mac, PC, both? Stereo or surround system (I have a 5.1 setup)? How much addition latency? Is it equally good as Dirac for your ears?


----------



## darcvision (Dec 11, 2019)

it might be a stupid question, but what's difference between using sonarworks standalone(win/mac) than putting sonarworks inside your master bus?


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 11, 2019)

stefandy31 said:


> it might be a stupid question, but what's difference between using sonarworks standalone(win/mac) than putting sonarworks inside your master bus?



That's for outside your DAW (e.g., when just listening to music). If you have that on, it should disable itself if you add it to your DAW and you DAW is open, etc.


----------



## rrichard63 (Dec 11, 2019)

EDIT: I was wrong below and @vitocorleone123 is correct. I was confusing Reference 4 Systemwide with a separate product called Sonarworks True-Fi. You can configure Systemwide to disable itself when it senses that you have the plugin activated in your DAW.



stefandy31 said:


> it might be a stupid question, but what's difference between using sonarworks standalone(win/mac) than putting sonarworks inside your master bus?



The standalone app processes audio from applications that use the operating system's default audio driver -- e.g. your web browser and media player. Very few us direct DAW output to the operating system's default audio; on Windows at least we almost always use ASIO drivers. So the standalone Sonarworks wouldn't process it.

EDIT: I see that @vitocorleone123 gave a somewhat different answer. My understanding is that standalone Sonarworks doesn't affect ASIO signals. I could be wrong and the other answer could be right. It's been a while since I've used Sonarworks.


----------



## antonikoll (Dec 12, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> EDIT: I was wrong below and @vitocorleone123 is correct. I was confusing Reference 4 Systemwide with a separate product called Sonarworks True-Fi. You can configure Systemwide to disable itself when it senses that you have the plugin activated in your DAW.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## antonikoll (Dec 12, 2019)

Can I use Reference 4 Systemwide with my DAW?


Yes, you can. Systemwide can be used to route your system audio (like your music players or internet browser) through the calibration and it can also be used the same way with your DAW. Just make ...




support.sonarworks.com





But not for cubase.. If you want to listen spotify, you tube music, in order to use to the audio , you can enable systemwide as an audio device.


----------



## Henu (Dec 12, 2019)

I use SW with Cubase, and ASIO doesn't go through it. They've been promising that to happen at some point, though, but not yet working as we speak.


----------



## darcvision (Dec 12, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> EDIT: I was wrong below and @vitocorleone123 is correct. I was confusing Reference 4 Systemwide with a separate product called Sonarworks True-Fi. You can configure Systemwide to disable itself when it senses that you have the plugin activated in your DAW.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


so is it bad idea if i mix in my daw using sonarworks standalone(windows) because sonarworks doesnt affect asio signal? btw im using asio in my daw ( fl studio )


----------



## Divico (Dec 12, 2019)

stefandy31 said:


> so is it bad idea if i mix in my daw using sonarworks standalone(windows) because sonarworks doesnt affect asio signal? btw im using asio in my daw ( fl studio )


It simply does nothing. The asio setting in systemwide does not interact with your daw. To use it while mixing you need the plugin.


----------



## JT (Dec 12, 2019)

I just added Sonarworks to my setup. It waorks great in Logic as a plugin. But it installed itself as systemwide. How can I turn that off and just use it as a plugin?


----------



## rrichard63 (Dec 12, 2019)

JT said:


> ... But it installed itself as systemwide. How can I turn that off and just use it as a plugin?


Open Systemwide's Settings dialogue and uncheck "Launch on startup".


----------



## muk (Dec 12, 2019)

Olfirf said:


> Dirac live is now available as a plug-in again and a trial will be a available in 2020. I asked Dirac research for the latency and they say the plugin adds 10ms to your DAWs output. A little bit to much for playing piano sounds or drums IMO, but as a plug-in you could just deactivate it for that purpose.
> Now, I read about PORC for the first time! Interesting! I might investigate that, too, before making a choice. Could you say a bit more about your setup? Is PORC used in a nonissue hardware? As a plug-in? Compatible with Mac, PC, both? Stereo or surround system (I have a 5.1 setup)? How much addition latency? Is it equally good as Dirac for your ears?



PORC is simply a program to create a filter (wav file). It's up to you how you implement this wav-file in your system. I am using EqualizerAPO on Windows 10. It's a free systemwide equalizer that lets you load wav-filters. Runs problemfree on my system since a few years. I'm using it in a stereo configuration. I haven't looked into surround capabilities, but it should be possible to achieve that as well.

I haven't investigated the added latency. So far it hasn't bothered me. But I'll do some checks when I have the time.

I compared a few programs some years back. Dirac and PORC were the clear winners for my setup. They were the only programs which improved the stereo image. Instruments positions are clearer, I can locate them better in the stereo field with the filter on. The other programs (Sonarworks, Arc) didn't do that.
Dirac and PORC were on par regarding the improvements of the sound. Dirac was much easier to set up. It's way more user friendly than PORC. But PORC is free, while Dirac cost a few hundred bucks at the time. So I went with PORC and I am using these filters without a hassle since then.


----------



## Diablo IV (Dec 12, 2019)

Sigh, https://www.dirac.com/sensaround pretty but pretty useless website... is there Dirac stuff for heaphones? on pc? how to buy.... form over function...


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 12, 2019)

labornvain said:


> Wow. So no one else has a problem with the significant loss in audio quality of running your mix through this equalizer?
> 
> I just can't get past it.



just to make sure.... but u are only using the plugin for monitoring at the time of export /bounce u take it off, correct?


----------



## Ivan M. (Dec 13, 2019)

I'm using it in both monitoring fx chain and system output, very happy, my mixes greatly improved. 
I realized that by endlessly tweaking my mixes was actually compensating for imperfections of my headphones and speakers. With Reference, I find mixing way easier, and I don't have to adjust it many times.


----------



## labornvain (Dec 13, 2019)

gsilbers said:


> just to make sure.... but u are only using the plugin for monitoring at the time of export /bounce u take it off, correct?


That is correct. It never goes on the master bus. I use Cubase which has a control room feature just for monitoring.


----------

