WiiM Home App v3.2.2 Update – May 23, 2025

Please review the app update release notes below. If you encounter any issues, feel free to reach out to us.

App Release Version
v3.2.2

What's New:

1. Center Channel for Dolby 5.1 Setup: Assign a device as the Center Speaker (requires upcoming beta firmware update).
2. Improved Qobuz Browsing: A redesigned layout that enhances navigation, bringing it closer to the native Qobuz app experience.
3. Thumb Up/Down for Pandora: Support for thumbs up and thumbs down functionality on Pandora (requires upcoming firmware update).
4. NAS Indexing:
- Support for Minim Media Server indexing to enhance browsing.
- Folder category browsing for Windows Media Player Share in "Advanced Mode."
5. Local Music Improvements:
- Organize music by Composers and Genres for easier browsing.
- Enhanced Genre page layout, organizing tracks, albums, and artists all in one view.
- Add "Date Added" sorting option for tracks.
6. HotMix Update:
- Add "Rap US" and "Rap Francais" radio stations.
- Support for adding to Presets (requires upcoming firmware update).
7. [Android] Track Title Display: Show full track titles for KKBox, NAS, USB, Samba, Local Music, and Qobuz.
8. [Android] MMM for Stereo Room Correction (Beta): Support for Moving Microphone Measurement in Stereo Room Correction. Enable this feature in Room Correction settings. The Moving Microphone Measurement (MMM) for Left/Right Room Correction is coming soon. Stay tuned!
9. Input Rename: Option to restore default input names.
10. Lock Screen Controls for Various Inputs: Support for controlling playback directly from the Lock Screen, except for Bluetooth input.

Bug Fixes:

1. USB Media Library Fix: Fixed incorrect album artist names (requires upcoming firmware update).
2. [Android] Playback Failure Fix: Resolve playback issues caused by special characters.
3. General Enhancements: Improved overall stability, performance, and bug fixes.

 

[pieterv1]

Thanks.

On my OnePlus phone the use of the volume side buttons work but not as expected (not absolute volume but relative) and the WiiM Home App take focus even when in the background and another app is using the volume control.

Please refer to ticket #531682 raised 3 weeks ago.

Edit: Just tested new version. Unfortunately still failing in important areas. E.g. The volume control on the lock-screen allows for adjusting the volume between 36 and 58 (depending on initial volume set in WHA).

Same situation here - Pixel 6, Android 16 beta

 

[slartibartfast]

As far as I can get from a lil' calibrated microphone (a simple IMM-6) , I noticed a filters Q management more relaxed.
This makes me suppose that a value integration is actually done, through a larger number of points achieved during the mic travel.
Of course, what happens under the hood and how the device manages those addictional readings is far from my reach.

I don't know why it needs to do the static measurement before the moving microphone procedure. If it didn't do that we would know what the mmm measured response looked like.

 

[harkpabst]

I don't know why it needs to do the static measurement before the moving microphone procedure. If it didn't do that we would know what the mmm measured response looked like.

It's still the MLP where you want the best result, so this baseline measurement still makes a lot of sense.

WiiM won't explain in full detail how their algorithm works (and why should they?), but I assume that the MMMM will help to find out what's even worth correcting for and what not and to get an idea of the sound energy in the room. Note that we are instructed to walk around our usual listening area, not just to move the mic a couple of inches here and there.

 

[slartibartfast]

It's still the MLP where you want the best result, so this baseline measurement still makes a lot of sense.

WiiM won't explain in full detail how their algorithm works (and why should they?), but I assume that the MMMM will help to find out what's even worth correcting for and what not and to get an idea of the sound energy in the room. Note that we are instructed to walk around our usual listening area, not just to move the mic a couple of inches here and there.

I was moving my mic at listening distance from the left speaker to the right speaker at slightly varying heights. I suppose we can compare results between
1. Stereo sweep
2. MMM with moving mic
3. MMM with stationary mic.

 

[Saponetto]

I don't know why it needs to do the static measurement before the moving microphone procedure. If it didn't do that we would know what the mmm measured response looked like.

I agree on this point.
First thought is that this MMM procedure needs some homing from which to start, but it also implies that MMM itself is way more complicated than the simple RC itself.
Subjective listening tells my damaged ears that it actually widens the soft spot, and here I prudentially shut my mouth...

 

[harkpabst]

I don't know any room correction system that does not take at least one measurement from the MLP.

 

[slartibartfast]

I don't know any room correction system that does not take at least one measurement from the MLP.

MMM measurements include the listening position but don't use a separate sweep measurement.

The moving microphone method (MMM) for Dummies using REW

After getting a couple of weird results on my first MMM measurements, I went searching around the forums & YouTube for what went wrong. To save others from gathering various bits and pieces of info from a dozen sources, I decided to publish this quick write-up here. You can use it as a rough...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[harkpabst]

MMM measurements include the listening position but don't use a separate sweep measurement.

It cannot be moving when it is in the listening position, right?

So it's not a matter of moving or not, it's a matter of the test signal used. Ask John Mulcahy which signal is generally better suited to precise room measurements, pink noise of sweeps.

 

[slartibartfast]

It cannot be moving when it is in the listening position, right?

So it's not a matter of moving or not, it's a matter of the test signal used. Ask John Mulcahy which signal is generally better suited to precise room measurements, pink noise of sweeps.

I imagine he prefers pink noise for moving microphone measurements and sweeps for a single listening position measurement.

 

[dominikz]

Naturally, the results will vary greatly depending on how the mic is moved, so I have no idea now how the mic should be moved .

This should not happen, normally MMM results are really stable between attempts, regardless of the pattern of movement, as long as the movement covers a similar area of space.
This is actually one of the benefits of MMM over single-point sweeps. Unfortunately I will only be able to make my own tests in a week or so.

@WiiM Support Could there be a bug in current MMM implementation?

 

[WiiM Support]

I have tried a few things, but I am still not sure how I can utilise this feature in my room.

This is a personal request, but can you add an option to turn off screen rotation?
I have an external mic connected via a USB cable and it is very annoying when the screen rotates.


Anyway I'll put up the results of today's test...

View attachment 21402


[RC 1]
Slides 30 cm to the left and rightView attachment 21404
View attachment 21401



[RC 2] Spinning around the head
View attachment 21405
View attachment 21406


[RC 3]
Cross
View attachment 21408
View attachment 21407


[RC 4]
Zigzag
View attachment 21410
View attachment 21409


[RC 5]
MMM off (Stereo RC)
View attachment 21412


What was interesting was the result of the first measurement. The measurement range is 120hz-10khz, but WiiM tried to reinforce the bass by raising the 216hz by 10.9dB with Q0.25.
View attachment 21413
View attachment 21414

Only the first one is boosted, even though the other four RCs measured the same low frequencies. If I am not mistaken, I have never seen such a result before. (However, I have two subwoofers connected to other WiiM devices, so this error(?)could have occurred.)


Back on topic,
Naturally, the results will vary greatly depending on how the mic is moved, so I have no idea now how the mic should be moved .

Hi Wiimer,

Thank you for your tests. Please send us a ticket so our engineer can check your results promptly.

 

[Wiimer]

This should not happen, normally MMM results are really stable between attempts, regardless of the pattern of movement, as long as the movement covers a similar area of space.
This is actually one of the benefits of MMM over single-point sweeps. Unfortunately I will only be able to make my own tests in a week or so.

@WiiM Support Could there be a bug in current MMM implementation?

This was my first test and I may have done it wrong.. I look forward to your test. Thank you.

 

[harkpabst]

I imagine he prefers pink noise for moving microphone measurements and sweeps for a single listening position measurement.

And that's what I think. And what WiiM did. Why should they give up the advantages of a sweep measurement in single-point measurement just because they add MMM to the mix?

As users, we don't have to fully understand how the algorithm works. We should worry about if the results are good. And consistent, of course.

 

[dominikz]

It cannot be moving when it is in the listening position, right?

But the listening position is not a single point - at the very least it is two (one for each ear).
We also don't sit perfectly still so the auditory system does some spatial averaging too (i.e. similar to MMM).

MMM and single-point sweeps each have their benefits and drawbacks: sweeps are quicker and allow you to measure also the frequency phase response, but sweeps tend to overrepresent the impact of (benign) room reflections at higher frequencies and are not very repeatable.

MMM is a bit more time-consuming and only measures magnitude response, but due to spatial averaging it averages-out many of the audibly-irrelevant room reflections at high frequencies and the response is normally much more stable between multiple measurement attempts.

IMHO there's much less chance of making the sound worse when using MMM compared to single-point sweeps for RC, and I'd also argue the response measured with MMM better represents the response humans actually hear (due to the fact that MMM curves naturally have more averaging/smoothing as frequency goes up).

 

[canard]

But the listening position is not a single point - at the very least it is two (one for each ear).
We also don't sit perfectly still so the auditory system does some spatial averaging too (i.e. similar to MMM).

MMM and single-point sweeps each have their benefits and drawbacks: sweeps are quicker and allow you to measure also the frequency phase response, but sweeps tend to overrepresent the impact of (benign) room reflections at higher frequencies and are not very repeatable.

MMM is a bit more time-consuming and only measures magnitude response, but due to spatial averaging it averages-out many of the audibly-irrelevant room reflections at high frequencies and the response is normally much more stable between multiple measurement attempts.

IMHO there's much less chance of making the sound worse when using MMM compared to single-point sweeps for RC, and I'd also argue the response measured with MMM better represents the response humans actually hear (due to the fact that MMM curves naturally have more averaging/smoothing as frequency goes up).

We can assume that the MMM ( if we respect his approach well ) is a rather elegant solution for general public use, to privilege , corresponding well to the "Wiim" market.
no?
;-)
(see accompanied by a short video from wiim to explain the method)

 

[dominikz]

We can assume that the MMM ( if we respect his approach well ) is a rather elegant solution for general public use, to privilege , corresponding well to the "Wiim" market.
no?
;-)
(see accompanied by a short video from wiim to explain the method)

I would think so as well, yes.

 

[canard]

I would think so as well, yes.

I didn't follow...
because upstream, where is the differentiated definition of positive and negative gain in the processing?
The fact that in a somewhat crazy way the process was trying to circumvent the limits we set by accumulating corrections at the same frequency?
(also autogain?)

A little explanation of the Wiim ingenering of the parts taken into account in the correction processing?
Unlike Harkpabst, it seems necessary to me, even in a simplified way... because it will determine the overall choices to be considered in the settings, etc.
(Unless we consider a solution or a few preset solutions so integrated that we no longer have control over this. which may be an option for most people)
?

 

[Wiimer]

But the listening position is not a single point - at the very least it is two (one for each ear).
We also don't sit perfectly still so the auditory system does some spatial averaging too (i.e. similar to MMM).

MMM and single-point sweeps each have their benefits and drawbacks: sweeps are quicker and allow you to measure also the frequency phase response, but sweeps tend to overrepresent the impact of (benign) room reflections at higher frequencies and are not very repeatable.

MMM is a bit more time-consuming and only measures magnitude response, but due to spatial averaging it averages-out many of the audibly-irrelevant room reflections at high frequencies and the response is normally much more stable between multiple measurement attempts.

IMHO there's much less chance of making the sound worse when using MMM compared to single-point sweeps for RC, and I'd also argue the response measured with MMM better represents the response humans actually hear (due to the fact that MMM curves naturally have more averaging/smoothing as frequency goes up).

Is there an optimal frequency range for MMM?
I am about to try again with 120hz-4khz.

 

[dominikz]

Is there an optimal frequency range for MMM?
I am about to try again with 120hz-4khz.

I'd still advise to most people to only correct below about 400Hz.
Corrections above that should really only be done based on anechoic loudspeaker measurements.

 

[Wiimer]

I'd still advise to most people to only correct below about 400Hz.
Corrections above that should really only be done based on anechoic loudspeaker measurements.

Then I'll try it at 400 hz. Thanks.