OK, this post is not intended to be a "I have $$$ to spend, what sub should I get", rather it is a "I have $$$ to spend where is it best spent" thread.

This may need to be posted in the treatments section to get more feedback, but I'll start it here.

Right now my modest theater consists of the following:

Kenwood VR-7080 (replaced on Christmas with a Onkyo TX-SR706, hopefully)
Paridigm Mini Monitors (Mains)
Paridigm CC-370 (Center)
Monoprice 6 1/2 inch In walls (http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=108&cp_id=10837&cs_id=1083702&p_id=4100&seq=1&format=2) (Side and Rear Surrounds)
12'' JVC powered sub (from an old 5.1 system)

Toshiba HD-A2
Playstation 3
Toshiba 65HM167
other non-important devices...

Pictures of my Room are attached, it is above the garage, and affectionately referred to as the "Man Cave". As you can see it is not large, and has sloped ceilings, as well as a main listening position that is against a wall, and open doors to the left.

Clapping results in noticeable echo, but bass seems to be OK with my very weak subwoofer (no MAJOR lulls).

When researching the Onkyo 706, I read all about Audysey and was looking forward to implementing it. While researching Audysey I read all about room modes, and therefore about bass traps and acustical treatments. This constant education has my brain in a mush and my pocket book screaming, but I believe I have a decent plan toward bass nirvana (or at least as much nirvana as my wallet will allow).

The Stereo is coming first as a Christmas gift, then I was going to pick up a subwoofer, run audessy and then be happy; and perhaps I would have been, except for all this reading about room modes and nulls (ignorance is bliss).

So now this is my potential plan:

1. Move (Yet to be determined) Sub after crawl test (limited by corner or front wall placement only…)
2. Place Bass Traps in corners to reduce corner loading (cost = Unknown?).
a. Best locations are a challenge because of slopped ceiling and surround speaker placement.
3. Measure Room Modes using REW and Radio Shack SPL.
4. Cut largest modes using (yet to be determined) parametric EQ.
5. Tame remaining modes using Audessy Multi EQ in receiver

so here is my question after all that:

Should I go with the above plan with a total budget of $600 or should I spend the whole $600 on the sub (or subs) and see how it sounds?

Either way what subs would you recommend in that price range (~$600 to just get the subs) or ($600 - Bass Traps = Sub money). I have no idea how much Bass Traps will cost, but I am not against DIY, this is complicated by the slopped ceilings.

For subs, the brands I am leaning toward are (in order of preference): ED, SVS, and Paradigm (although I know their lower cost subs are lackluster). I just found out about the PA-120, which looks like a nice option to use with the bass traps, or should I get two of those instead of one ED or SVS sub?

Thanks, and I look forward to the discussion

As a follow up to this and to bump this up, here is some more information:

Room size in Cubic Feet: ~2500

The doors to the other room stay open, however so I don't know if this matters. This adds approx. another 2500 cubic feet.

My listening habits are about 80% Television and Movies, 10% Games, and 10% Music.

5,000 cubic feet is huge. You would need a very big sub to fill that space. I would close the doors on movie night.

I would start with a good $600 sub and add traps over time.
That's me, others might suggest the opposite.

I'll bet the HSU VFT 3.3 will be on sale as Christmas approaches, the AV123 MFW is a great value that is popular.

I am sure there will be lots of great suggestions at that price point.

Good luck!

i would set up room the long way.
bass trapps are eazy to make, as are reflection panels.
is a big room....

I originally wanted to setup the room lengthwise, but it didn't work with the furniture we had, it looked dumb and actually placed me closer to the screen than I already am... I was not happy about it at first, but it works.

With the doors closed there is a LOT of echo, perhaps some treatments to them will knock that down. But my wife and dog may object to having the doors shut, so I may just have to get more sub to deal with the added cubic footage.


Thanks for the input so far!

Chris K. of Audyssey has said in the past that Audyssey can make an untreated room better, but it can make a well-treated room spectacular. My suggestion to you is to start with "better". Once you've upgraded your sub, make every effort to optimize your listening location. If possible, move the seating away from the back wall, and out to the 1/3 (or 2/3) dimension of the room. This will be about the best location you can get. Then, use the "crawl method" to optimize subwoofer placement.

Then, the next step should be to perform your Audyssey measurement and EQ, according to the detailed Audyssey setup guide listed here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=14456895#post14456895
Note the number of mic locations and their relative positions WRT the seating, the walls and the speakers. Also note the manual adjustments that are sometimes required after running Audyssey.

Once you've optimized the LP, the subwoofer position and run Audyssey, then spend some time listening to your system. If the bass still sounds boomy, slow or indistinct, your next step should be room treatments, followed by another Audyssey run. You may find at this point that some measurement equipment is helpful to see the impact of the treatments. However, before you do that, you should educate yourself on room acoustic treatments by reading the educational materials on the following websites:
www.realtraps.com
www.gikacoustics.com
www.readytraps.com

If you want to make your own acoustic treatments, there are instructions to do so on those sites. Otherwise, you can use Google to find references, and you can devour the Acoustic Treatments Master Thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=255432

Here is another interesting link with some High WAF Acoustical Treatments:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=14260553#post14260553

The very last step I would take is single-point parametric EQ. A single point measurement and single point EQ can only improve a *single point*! It can make other positions *worse*. Since you have two ears, they occupy two different points. Which ear are you going to EQ for? Also, EQ can only reduce peaks; it can do nothing for nulls. The only thing that can help nulls are bass traps. They absorb the canceling reflections, effectively canceling the cancellations.

I would only use single point parametric EQ to tame a large peak that is inadequately addressed by Audyssey, (which, IME, is rare.)

Anyway, that's the progression I would use to improve the bass response in your room. Good luck, have fun and enjoy the process.

Craig

I don't know how you feel about DIY, but if the room is over the garage how about an IB setup ported through the floor? Killer bass on a budget without a box taking up space in the room.

single point EQ can only improve a *single point*! It can make other positions *worse*. Since you have two ears, they occupy two different points.

How big is your head?:-) At bass frequencies the correction is not *that* sensitive to location. 20 cm is only 1/10th of a wavelength for a 150Hz signal, thus not a significant change in the room response. So, you can correct bass for one listening position even with single-calibration-point-eq and you are still allowed to move your head a dozen inches before noticing a change in the response.

Higher frequencies are a different thing. With them an eq system won't correct individual frequencies, just the envelope. (At least if the designer has had any smarts with him.)

How big is your head?:-) At bass frequencies the correction is not *that* sensitive to location. 20 cm is only 1/10th of a wavelength for a 150Hz signal, thus not a significant change in the room response. So, you can correct bass for one listening position even with single-calibration-point-eq and you are still allowed to move your head a dozen inches before noticing a change in the response.

Higher frequencies are a different thing. With them an eq system won't correct individual frequencies, just the envelope. (At least if the designer has had any smarts with him.)
If you use a low resolution measurement system, you may not see the changes. However, if you use a high enough resolution measurement system, (i.e., 1/24th Octave), and you move the mic even a few inches, you'll see changes in the response.

I have a disc with individual frequencies. You can play a continuous 70 Hz sine wave and literally stick your head in and out of the peaks and nulls just by moving a few inches.

Craig

Craig,

Thanks for your extensive post. I appreciate all the links you provided.

I have read (or at least skimmed) most of that stuff. My brain still hurts!

I have considered moving my seating position forward off of the wall, but I am already only 11 feet away from my 65 inch display, so it will have to be a compromise(viewing position vs. listening position), perhaps I can move it forward 6 inches or a foot, moving my head 2 feet off of the wall.

If I were to use an EQ it would only be to tame a large peak (or peaks) that exist throughout the listening position after taking multiple measurements to identify that problem frequency. And only then so that Audyssey did not have to waste bandwidth on that correction... After your input, I will leave that for last after treatments.

I don't know how you feel about DIY, but if the room is over the garage how about an IB setup ported through the floor? Killer bass on a budget without a box taking up space in the room.

I didn't even know about IB's before you posted this, very cool! Have any more info (maybe a how to or FAQ), my searches returned some stuff, but nothing comprehensive.

Certanly something to consider, thanks!

I didn't even know about IB's before you posted this, very cool! Have any more info (maybe a how to or FAQ), my searches returned some stuff, but nothing comprehensive.

Try here http://ibsubwoofers.proboards51.com/index.cgi

if you use a high enough resolution measurement system, (i.e., 1/24th Octave), and you move the mic even a few inches, you'll see changes in the response.

Of course you see differences in the measured response. That still doesn't require you to cut out your other ear and keep the remaining one exactly in the calibration location to get a substantial improvement provided by an EQ.

Of course you see differences in the measured response. That still doesn't require you to cut out your other ear and keep the remaining one exactly in the calibration location to get a substantial improvement provided by an EQ.
But how do you decide which single point to EQ for? And how do you ensure that you're not making other, more distant listening positions much worse?

My whole point is that single point EQ should be the *last* method used to flatten the response. A multi-point measurement and correction system, with time and frequency based correction, (like Audyssey), is a much better "EQ" system than single point EQ, whether graphic, (worthless), or parametric, (better, but not by much.)

Nonetheless, a system like Audyssey is only the fourth step in the ladder to optimizing the bass response of a room/system. The *first* step is to optimize the listening position. The second step is to optimize the subwoofer location WRT the room and listening position. The third step is to optimize the room acoustics, (with room treatments.) The fourth step is multi-point, time and frequency based room correction, (i.e., Audyssey, Audyssey Pro, Trinnov, Dolby Lake, etc.)

The *last* step would be to try to supplement the multi-point room correction with a single point EQ system. This should only be used if there is a very large coverage area peak that the multi-point system is not powerful enough to correct. However, adding a single-point EQ will add some delay to the signal and this must be accounted for in the "distance" measurements of the receiver/pre/pro. Also, most parametric EQ's add some phase anomalies. Therefore, the single-point EQ should be applied *before* the multi-point time and frequency based room correction.

Too many people think that a single-point, parametric EQ is all you need to optimize the bass output. They think it is *the* replacement for a good, optimized listening position, subwoofer placement, acoustic treatments and multi-point room correction. There are significant, inherent limitations to single-point EQ. It can't possibly be a complete answer to the question of bass "optimization", at least not as the primary method of correction.

Craig

how do you ensure that you're not making other, more distant listening positions much worse?

By optimizing for one point everywhere else becomes worse in some respects. By optimizing for multiple points these points become a compromise and everywhere else becomes worse in some respects. Doing any correction guaratees that you get a worse response in some other points.

A multi-point measurement and correction system, with time and frequency based correction, (like Audyssey), is a much better "EQ" system than single point EQ

We basically agree about the progression, while you categorize even the most accurate single-point EQ as not worth the effort. Also, the more points you optimize for, the more compromises are needed, although a good multi-point EQ will make the right compromises.

Too many people think that a single-point, parametric EQ is all you need to optimize the bass output. They think it is *the* replacement for a good, optimized listening position, subwoofer placement, acoustic treatments and multi-point room correction.

If you are restricted in how many subs you can have in a room, where to place them, where to sit, and how much treatments and bass traps are practical, you still should be allowed to get an EQ. Preferably something with a calibration for a larger listening area, but certainly accurate enough to make things better and not worse.

By optimizing for one point everywhere else becomes worse in some respects. By optimizing for multiple points these points become a compromise and everywhere else becomes worse in some respects. Doing any correction guaratees that you get a worse response in some other points.
Check out post #142 in this thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15283848#post15283848
These are measurements of Audyssey On and Audyssey Off at 3 different LP's. It shows that Audyssey improves all three LP's. It does not make a perfectly flat line at any one position, but it does improve things over an "area" rather than just a point.

Also note that Audyssey does not attempt to boost any deep, narrow troughs, as these are "nulls", and can't be improved with EQ. :)

We basically agree about the progression, while you categorize even the most accurate single-point EQ as not worth the effort.
Hmmmm.... is single point EQ "worth the effort"? I suppose, if there is only one LP in the room and the listener is willing to keep his/her head *very* close to the EQ'd position, then single point EQ is "worth the effort". However, if there are multiple LP's in the room, it seems rather selfish to optimize one position at the detriment of all the others.

My point is that single-point EQ is not the panacea many make it out to be. It should not be used as a substitute for proper subwoofer integration and acoustic optimization. It should be used as a final, last ditch tweak, when all else fails.

Also, the more points you optimize for, the more compromises are needed, although a good multi-point EQ will make the right compromises.
Agreed, (see above.)

If you are restricted in how many subs you can have in a room, where to place them, where to sit, and how much treatments and bass traps are practical, you still should be allowed to get an EQ. Preferably something with a calibration for a larger listening area, but certainly accurate enough to make things better and not worse.
If you are truly rquired to have a sub-optimal bass setup, then my advice would be to get an Audyssey MultEQ XT enabled receiver, rather than invest in a single-point EQ. Audyssey will at least make things better. Still, *anything* one can do to improve/optimize the LP/subwoofer placement/room acoustics will make Audyssey's job easier, and the final result better.

Craig

I have considered moving my seating position forward off of the wall, but I am already only 11 feet away from my 65 inch display, so it will have to be a compromise(viewing position vs. listening position), perhaps I can move it forward 6 inches or a foot, moving my head 2 feet off of the wall.
Use this Viewing Distance Calculator:
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html
For a 65" display, the SMPTE recommended 30 degree viewing angle requires a seating distance of 8.8'. The THX recommended 36 degree viewing angle requires a seating distance of 7.3'. IMO, you can improve your bass response AND your viewing experience by moving your seating forward. :) It will improve the "surround" experience also, by moving you away from the rear speakers.

Craig