Seaton Sound SubMersive1 [Text View] - Page 19

craig john

11-06-10, 05:51 PM

Part I

I received my Seaton Sound Submersive HP amps, (3 of them), a week ago. At the same time, I also upgraded my pre/pro from an Onkyo PR-SC885 to an Integra DHC-80.2, which upgrades from Audyssey MultEQ XT to MultEQ XT32, which has 32 times the resolution of XT for the main channels. I have spent the last week playing around with configurations of the system and placements of the subs to find the optimum setup. A week later, a half dozen configurations, about 6 or 7 Audyssey MultEQ XT32 runs, and probably 100 xtz measurements, and I think I've come up with the best setup.

My current system consists of:
Atlantic Technology 8200e THX Ultra2 LCR's, (3 identical speakers with the CC placed behind the screen)
Atlantic Technology 8200e SR THX Ultra2, (L & R Surrounds, bipole and at 90 degrees to the LP)
Klipsch AW-650's Rear L & R Surrounds, (mounted horizontal at 135 degrees to the LP)
3 Seaton Sound Submersive HP's, (dual-opposed 15" drivers with 2,400 watt amps, placed asymmetrically to the LP
Integra DHC-80.2 Pre/Pro, (Audyssey MultEQ XT32)
Earthquake Cinenova Grande 5, (300 wpc x 5 into 8 ohms for LCR and L/R Surrounds)
Emotiva RPA-1, (200 wpc into 8 ohms for Rear Surrounds)
Oppo BDP-83
BenQ W10000 projector
SeymourAV 128" electric drop-down AT screen
Crowson Tech Tactile Transducer powered by Buttkicker BKA1000 amp.

My room is in the basement, carpet over concrete, about 3,800 cubic ft., with bass traps in the front corners and the ceiling. It is *not* a sealed room; it is open to a stairwell, a hallway to a bathroom, and it has a large, double sliding glass door in the back as well as 2 windows. Also, it is not rectangular; it has a pool, table/bar area in the back and a walkway on the right side. The room does not do a great job of reinforcing the bass; it does not provide a lot of room gain, and it has a lot of modes, as you will see below.

One comment about the new Submersive amps... with the previous amps, I needed to use cheater plugs to eliminate the hum from the subs. With the new amps, the cheater plugs are removed and the subs are dead silent with no signal applied. :) The system is wired using balanced interconnects and there is no hum whatsoever! :)

My previous system with the 1,000 watt Submersive amps, EQ'd with MultEQ XT was the best system I had ever experienced in my HT. I knew it was going to take some work to exceed what I had before. I think I've done it, but read on...

1 Output or 2, Gain-Match vs. Level-Match. My first consideration was how to connect 3 Submersives to the 2 subwoofer outputs of the Integra. My subs are placed asymmetrically to the LP, (non-equidistant), with one on the left side at ~ 1/5 wall, one up front between the CC and the R speakers, and one in the left, rear at ~ 2/3 wall. I had previously been advised by several members to connect 2 of the subs to one output, (preferably the 2 that were closest to being equidistant to the LP), then connect the 3rd to the other output, and then level-match them. The logic was that Audyssey could then set the Distance controls independently to better time-align the subs... well, at least the 2 subs with the one sub.

So I tried this approach. In every combination I tried, (and I tried them all), the gain setting on the lone sub ended up being set 6 to 8 dB higher than the gain settings on the 2 subs ganged together. Considering that a 6 dB difference is equivalent to 4X the amplifier power and excursion, I felt this 6 to 8 dB of gain setting difference was excessive. I didn't want one sub to be working 4X as hard as the other two. Consequently, I abandoned this approach.

Next I tried gain-matching. I moved each sub to the middle of the room, then, playing the subwoofer test tone from the pre/pro, I measured the SPL with my RS meter from 3" away from the "front" of the box, (the front being the side with no driver or amp.) I set all 3 subs to the same nearfield SPL of 85 dB. Then I moved each sub back into it's place, and mesured each one's SPL at the LP. Theoretically, his should yield different SPL's for each sub based on their in-room FR and the distance from the LP. Surprisingly, they were very similar, (70, 70 and 68 dB's.) In this configuration, all 3 subs were Y'd together off one subwoofer output. Since the Submersives have no Phase Control, and there is only one Distance Setting in this configuration, I have no way to control the individual sub's timing, and there is the potential for the subs to be mis-timed. Nonetheless, I felt that gain-matching was the superior approach, and I moved forward to taking some measurements.

Submersive Placements The 2 front placements yielded very different FR graphs, but they both re-inforced the bass well and had good SPL's. The right rear 2/3 sub had lower average SPL, which would explain it's lower measurement when measured at the LP. I moved that sub all over the back of the room and measured it in every conceivable location. It didn't measure any better anywhere else, and it measured worse in most other locations. I left it where it was, but I am open to suggestion about other placements in the front of the room.

First, I measured each sub individually. The following 3 graphs are the subs with the speakers, and with an 80 Hz crossover. I included the speakers so you can see that the levels were the same for all measurements, and the only variable was the sub being measured. Note that from about 100 Hz up, the speakers measure exactly the same in each of the 3 graphs:

Left 1/5 wall:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190449&stc=1&d=1289138639

Front:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190450&stc=1&d=1289138689

Right Rear 2/3 wall:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190451&stc=1&d=1289138726

Obviously, each sub is interacting quite differently with the room and listening position. However, once they are combined, the summed response looks better than any of the individual responses:

All 3 subs together. (This graph is the subs alone, without the speakers, but with the 80 Hz crossover set. As you will see, there is some interactivity of the FR once the speakers are added back into the mix, so here I am showing the subs isolated from the speakers):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190453&stc=1&d=1289138787

Using this combined response, I finally ran Audyssey MultEQ XT32. Here is the result:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190454&stc=1&d=1289138850

This graph is self-explanatory. Plus 1.5 dB/ Minus 0 dB from 16 Hz to just below 80, with the expected tapering to allow a -3 dB point at 80 Hz. This is as perfect a result as I have ever seen. After seeing this, I am convinced that there is no benefit to going back and re-configuring the system to set it up as 2 and 1 with level-matching. The technique of gain-matching works so well that I can't see that there would be any improvement.

In the next post, I show the speakers and sub re-combined.

craig john

11-06-10, 05:51 PM

Part II The System

The following graph is the composite of the speakers and subs, with an 80 Hz crossover, but with Audyssey turned OFF. This shows the native response of the system with no EQ:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190455&stc=1&d=1289138991

The next graph is just the speakers playing, with the subs turned off. Audyssey is turned back on. This shows the response of the speakers as they are impacted by the 80 Hz crossover and Audyssey EQ:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190456&stc=1&d=1289139024

(I was surprised at this graph as it shows a more shallow roll-off than I expected to see. My speakers are sealed and THX certified, so they are designed to work with the THX crossover of 80 Hz and 12 dB/Octave High Pass. The combination of the 12 dB/Octave slope of sealed speakers with the 12 dB/Octave High Pass of the crossover should yield the 24 dB/Octave slope needed for the L/R (4th/4th) crossover. Yet the in-room roll-off of the speakers doesn't provide that. Hmmm...???)

Finally, this graph shows the speakers and subs combined:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190457&stc=1&d=1289139056

Comparing the subs alone without the speakers, (see above post), to the combined speakers and subs, it is apparent that there is some interplay between the speakers and subs in the ranges they share. I tried different crossover points, both above and below 80 Hz to see what looked better, but the best looking graph was the 80 Hz crossover. Nonetheless, the response is +/- 3 dB from 16 Hz to 300 Hz. :)

I should also mention that the Distance setting was consistently wrong after every Audyssey run. There was a consistently huge 25 dB trough from about 65 Hz to about 90 Hz, (i.e., through the crossover point.) This trough was measurable all over the listening area. The subs and speakers were clearly out of phase with each other. The system found the subs at 10.4 ft every time. I had to reset the Distance to 13.8 ft. in order to eliminate this trough. Once I did that, it resulted in the response you see above. I suspect the system found the distance of the closest sub, which is right at 10 ft. However, the best integration of the 3 subs was realized with a Distance setting closer to the average distance of all 3 subs. (I did not save the graphs with the trough and the incorrect Distance setting, but I can re-run it if anyone is interested.)

This was likely an anomaly of my system, and in a system with just 2 subs, and having them set up in the conventional configuration with 2 subs connected to 2 outputs, I would expect the system to find the distances more appropriately. Nonetheless, with a system like mine, (3 subs all connected to one output), the system was fooled into an incorrect Distance setting. The only way to know this, and the *only* way to optimize such a system, or any other multi-sub system, is to be able to measure the response with a program like xtz, REW or some other measurement system.

I should mention that the above measurements were taken with the Submersive HP amps in DSP Prog 1, which is designed to be flat to 19 Hz. I subsequently measured them with Prog 2, designed to be flat to 16 Hz. I measured the nearfield response with Programs 1 and 2 and the difference started about 40 Hz, with the 2 graphs slowly separating to yield 1 dB at 30 Hz, 2 Db at 20 Hz and 3 dB of additional output at 16 Hz, just as predicted. Setting the subs to Prog 2 yielded the following graph:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190458&stc=1&d=1289139103

I played around with Dynamic EQ and it provided a similar kind of uptick in the bass as Prog 2, but I liked the sound of the system with Prog2 over the sound with Dynamic EQ. It's hard to describe the difference, but DEQ sounded somewhat artificial and "hollow" whereas Prog2 sounded "right", and very similar to Prog 1, just with more impact, concussiveness and DEEP, DEEP bass.

Next, listening impressions...

craig john

11-06-10, 05:52 PM

Part III Listening Impressions

Stay tuned...

audioguy

11-06-10, 08:50 PM

Craig John: For some reason, none of your graphs are visible! (On a Mac with Firefox)

Warpdrv

11-06-10, 09:04 PM

Craig John: For some reason, none of your graphs are visible! (On a Mac with Firefox)

No graphs for me either....

Thanks for the write up though CJ....

I'm really enjoying my HP as well, haven't really pushed the limits, though I know for a fact its overkill for my small bedroom... In fact I get better down low from it then all my subs in my great room...

millerwill

11-06-10, 09:05 PM

No graphs for me either.... .

Same for me; and would surely like to see them.

Warpdrv

11-06-10, 09:18 PM

I have a few pics of the HP integration.....
I have to say, I'm thrilled with the performance, and I think it blends extremely well in the looks dept for my setup...

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d109/Warpdrv/Bedroom/DSC_0191.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d109/Warpdrv/Bedroom/DSC_0190.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d109/Warpdrv/Bedroom/DSC_0193.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d109/Warpdrv/Bedroom/photo.jpg

audioguy

11-06-10, 09:18 PM

My plan is to upgrade to the 80.2. I am currently using the Onkyo 885 PLUS the Audyssey SubEQ. I have 4 subs. The front two are equidistant from the LP and the back two are as well but the back two are not the same distance as the front two.

My sub locations were initially chosen to optimize the FR when I had just two subs (one was on the side wall near the front and the other was in the back corner). So the way I have them now running under the Audyssey SubEQ is that the left two subs are on one connection and the right two are on the other. So while a front and rear sub (which Audyssey sees as one sub) are not the same distance, it does look at the combined response. My LFE output is amazing.

Prior to this configuration, I had the front two as one output and the rear two as the other so that Audyssey could time correct the rears to the fronts. The quality of my LFE now is at least as good as it was when I used the previous configuration.

As an aside, I have the gain position on all four subs set the same even though, using the RS meter, the rear subs measure louder than the fronts.

The distance difference of the fronts to the rears is maybe a foot or so. Given the wave length of an 80hz cycle is about 14 feet, I would be hard pressed to believe I am able to hear less than 10% phase shift at those frequencies.

Earl Geddes has written extensively about sub positioning and he likes the approach you have taken.

firebrick

11-06-10, 09:20 PM

Try out Trent reznors new album "the social network" if u want some good submersive pounding music.

MIkeDuke

11-06-10, 10:04 PM

Very nice write up Craig , but like other folks, I can't see any of the graphs. I am in IE. On Nov 20th Craig and Dennis will help me with setting up my "new" setup. I am replacing my Halo C2 and Esoteric DV50s with an Integra 80.2 and the OPPO 83. I have one sub and a pretty good starting point so I hopefull that we can get great results without to much effort. I hope that with room correction, my entire system will be taken up a few levels :).

MARS08

11-06-10, 10:16 PM

Next I tried gain-matching. I moved each sub to the middle of the room, then, playing the subwoofer test tone from the pre/pro, I measured the SPL with my RS meter from 3" away from the "front" of the box, (the front being the side with no driver or amp.) I set all 3 subs to the same nearfield SPL of 85 dB.

Craig, out of curiosity...were any of your HP's set to a different volume level on the amp? I have two HP's and simply set them to the same volume level on the amp without measuring. I assumed that this effectively gain matched them as they use the same amplifier. Is this a bad assumption?

thanks,
Martin

craig john

11-07-10, 09:32 AM

I have re-attached the graphs above. They seem to be working now. I'm still working on the Listening Impressions.

Craig, out of curiosity...were any of your HP's set to a different volume level on the amp? I have two HP's and simply set them to the same volume level on the amp without measuring. I assumed that this effectively gain matched them as they use the same amplifier. Is this a bad assumption?

thanks,
Martin

Martin,

One of the subs was one-tick lower than the other 2. It changed about 2 dB with one tick of the volume control. It's probably not a big deal, but it doesn't hurt to measure them if you have an SPL meter.

To do this, move one of the subs out to the middle of the room, place the SPL meter 3" from the middle of the "front" side, and play the subwoofer noise tone from your pre/pro. Record the SPL, then switch that sub with the other one, place it in exactly the same spot, (I use duct tape on the floor around the first sub to ensure I get the second and third in exactly the same spot), and measure it. With the SPL meter in the same position, set the Volume Control so it measures exactly the same SPL as the first one. They are now exactly gain-matched.

Craig

hometheatergeek

11-07-10, 09:56 AM

I have re-attached the graphs above. They seem to be working now. I'm still working on the Listening Impressions

Very nice work on your part Craig. Now that I can see your graphs. Truly a flat reponse. Would love to come by sometime and give it a listen.

millerwill

11-07-10, 12:05 PM

I have re-attached the graphs above. They seem to be working now. I'm still working on the Listening Impressions.

Thanks for your efforts, Craig; the pics now come through perfectly, and they do show quite impressive results. Are these XTZ measurements? And if so, are you using its mike in one position, or more?

So you are now using only Audyssey for eq, correct? Nothing (Antimode 8033, SMS-1, etc.) else? Do you know whether or not the '32' enhancement to the 'XT' version of Aud made a major improvement in your results?

Thanks again, and congrats! (Will you be using Prg2, or staying with Prg1?)

MIkeDuke

11-07-10, 12:18 PM

That looks great Craig. I can only imagine how it might sound. If it sounds much better then what I heae before, then it should really be outstanding. But, I will say that I am very anxious to see what you can do with my system :). Hopefully we can take some more measurments of my system as well.

craig john

11-07-10, 12:44 PM

Very nice work on your part Craig. Now that I can see your graphs. Truly a flat reponse. Would love to come by sometime and give it a listen.
If you're ever in the area, give me a shout. You're always welcome.

Thanks for your efforts, Craig; the pics now come through perfectly, and they do show quite impressive results. Are these XTZ measurements? And if so, are you using its mike in one position, or more?
These xtz measurements are all at the primary LP.

So you are now using only Audyssey for eq, correct? Nothing (Antimode 8033, SMS-1, etc.) else? Do you know whether or not the '32' enhancement to the 'XT' version of Aud made a major improvement in your results?
I took the SMS-1 out of the system when I got the 3rd Submersive. I no longer needed it. It's assign the improvement in the bass to XT32 or to the new amps. I suspect the improvement in the articulation, clarity and detail is due to XT32, especially in the mid-bass were XT32 has so much more correction capability in the man channels. The DEEPER response is certainly due to the new amps.

Thanks again, and congrats! (Will you be using Prg2, or staying with Prg1?)
Program 2. :)

That looks great Craig. I can only imagine how it might sound. If it sounds much better then what I heae before, then it should really be outstanding. But, I will say that I am very anxious to see what you can do with my system :). Hopefully we can take some more measurments of my system as well.
We'll get you setup and I am now sure it will make a big difference in your system. We can certainly do some measurements. :)

Craig

MIkeDuke

11-07-10, 12:50 PM

Cool. I am glad that you got to hear my setup before. So now you can also make a comparison as well. Looking forward to this.

Gary J

11-07-10, 01:10 PM

Thanks for your efforts, Craig; the pics now come through perfectly, and they do show quite impressive results. Are these XTZ measurements? And if so, are you using its mike in one position, or more?

There is little doubt Room EQ can be trusted to provide tremendous benefit. However measurements after the fact is quite a slippery slope as Audyssey has mentioned in many posts such as this one -

I guess this is the crux of the issue. There are a number of things that must be "just right" in order to be assured that there is a good correspondence between a nice graph and the desired sound.

I can get an absolutely perfect graph by taking an Audyssey measurement in one spot and then using any of the available third party tools to verify that measurement in that exact spot and with the exact same mic. But, guess what? It will sound like doo doo because the methodology is wrong. We don't hear what the single mic point is telling the graph it hears.

And that's just one example. Waterfall plots make assumptions about windowing functions that may or may not be perceptually relevant. Stimulus signals that are used to generate these plots may or may not discard excess phase in their calculations. Microphones used to make the measurements may be calibrated for diffuse field in the measurement protocol and free field in the verification protocol. I could go on, but the point I'm trying to make is that there is uncertainty introduced when crossing methods.

Ultimately I think it comes down to this: Audyssey is not "satisfying" for those who love to tweak. I get that. And tweaking is great fun! Let's leave it at that.

craig john

11-07-10, 02:28 PM

There is little doubt Room EQ can be trusted to provide tremendous benefit. However measurements after the fact is quite a slippery slope as Audyssey has mentioned in many posts such as this one -
While I agree that Audyssey is a great system, I believe in Ronald Reagan's philosophy... "Trust, but verify."

Here is the graph of the response with Audyssey/Integra's recommended Distance setting of 10.4 ft:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190486&stc=1&d=1289161201

Lest you think this is due to a single position measurement, I took one that is a weighted average of 3 positions:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190487&stc=1&d=1289161278

The trough is worse than I described previously. It starts at 50 Hz and goes to well above 100 Hz. The subs and speakers are *clearly* out of phase. Setting the Distance to 13.8 ft. resulted in the flat response I showed above in Post #4508 & 4509:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190457&stc=1&d=1289139056

I never would have known this, or been able to correct it without measurements. One can certainly blindly accept the response provided by Audyssey and your receiver or pre/pro. Myself, I'll verify it, and correct it when necessary.

Craig

Gary J

11-07-10, 02:36 PM

You missed the point of Audyssey's post. Verifying is only possible with the most sophisticated equipment and technique. $300 XTZ does not rise to that standard.

craig john

11-07-10, 03:13 PM

You missed the point of Audyssey's post. Verifying is only possible with the most sophisticated equipment and technique. $300 XTZ does not rise to that standard.
:D You're funny.

Gary J

11-07-10, 03:26 PM

Thanks! :D That's the counterpoint?

I would agree that there may be some value to pre-calibration measurements for such things as finding room modes, speaker placement, etc. After Audyssey I make no changes based on measurements or anything else. In fact quite the opposite - I if change something I run Audyssey.

But have fun in any case. ;)

craig john

11-07-10, 03:28 PM

Thanks! :D That's the counterpoint?
Yeah, if those graphs are not conclusive enough evidence, then any more discussion is pointless.
Craig

James W. Johnson

11-07-10, 05:51 PM

Part III Listening Impressions

Stay tuned...

waiting for these^^^ :)

I recently upgraded to an HP amp, IMO it kind of refines an already fantastic subwoofer........that is about all I can say. :)

DMark1

11-07-10, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by Gary J
Thanks! That's the counterpoint?

Yeah, if those graphs are not conclusive enough evidence, then any more discussion is pointless.
Craig

Gary, I've used XTZ on my system with Craig's help, and there is NO doubt in my mind that it is definately a worthwhile tool when used correctly. ...And Craig sure knows how to use it correctly! It may not be as fancy as some professional gear, but it can show and tell you plenty of excellent information about any system. Well worth the money!

millerwill

11-07-10, 09:08 PM

sean_w_smith

11-07-10, 11:24 PM

Well,

Since I last posted I was catching some serious cabin fever so I had to take off and go hang with my college roomate in venice beach last week so I just got back today and installed the HP upgrade amp and put the stack back together (again). New amp dropped right in and was very easy to re-install.

Spent a about 4 hours messing with Eq's and remembering how to work the panel on my Behringer FB2496.

Anyway the sub moved 7 feet from its old location and is now 3-4 feet behind my main listening position at like 5 o'clock. This obviously is not optimal but for me it is, as the WAF is really high. we got rid of a peice of furniture she wanted gone and I got a another subwoofer out of the deal.

I scribbled down all the settings mark had dialed in for the original non HP sub in the original position as reference. most of the eq settings were not very close anymore. After playing around in XTZ and BFD and Audessy here's what I ended up today with. These graphs are just Audessy with no filters on the BFD at this point. For those who don't know have 3 MultXt receivers and have used them in at least 8 different rooms between 3 houses. I have always felt positive about the increase in spaciousness and imaging with Audessy. Many times the it worked great. some times it does weird things...

like cutting the bass dramatically. (old issue with the 805, doesn't exist with the 876)

sometimes it works great like it seemed to today. This same receiver with older fimware in the old sub location before #2, generally was not as accurate.

Results from today look and sound great so far. Only had time to check out transformers two opening scene and it was submersive as usual. I will have a chance to do some quality listening during the week when everyone is off at work and school. to be continued. If you have any comments on the graphs, I'm all ears...

EDIT: Link to full size images: http://picasaweb.google.com/rufrothy/SubmersiveStack#

Frequency Response - Center Listening Position Only (for reference). Before and After Audessy. No BFD.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bOHj0kP1agQ/TNd9oKqtraI/AAAAAAAAJpE/DSQ2q75A5f0/s800/before%20and%20after%20audessy%20freq%20resp%20center%20list ening%20position%20only..gif

Freq Response - Average of 3 primary listening position - Before and After Audessy.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bOHj0kP1agQ/TNd9oj6LveI/AAAAAAAAJpU/it2qPABWigs/s800/Audessy%20-%20No%20PEQ%20-%20average%20of%203%20main%20listening%20positions%20freq%20 resp.gif

Decay Map - before Audessy - Average of 3 listening positions
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bOHj0kP1agQ/TNd9oFpxNUI/AAAAAAAAJpM/XZ76V-eCtkc/s800/No%20Audessy%20-%20No%20PEQ%20-%20average%20of%203%20main%20listening%20positions%20heat%20 map.gif

Decay Map - After Audessy - Average of 3 listening positions
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_bOHj0kP1agQ/TNd9oQtX3VI/AAAAAAAAJpQ/DbW7rBv6efw/s800/Audessy%20-%20No%20PEQ%20-%20average%20of%203%20main%20listening%20positions%20heat%20 map.gif

craig john

11-09-10, 09:38 PM

Since Sean posted his Energy/Time/Frequency graphs, I thought I would also post mine. For anyone unfamiliar with these graphs, they plot energy, (SPL), by frequency over time: the right axis is frequency; the bottom axis is time; and energy is plotted with color. The right axis shows the SPL by color graphic, with purple being full scale, red being -10 dB, yellow -20 dB, cyan -30 dB, etc., down to dark blue being -50 dB. The sounds starts out on the left at time "0" as high SPL, plotted in purple or red, and then decay over time down to blue/dark blue.

ETF Audyssey Off
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190694&stc=1&d=1289361429

In this first graph, with Audyssey off, you can see a resonance at 125 Hz, and another, larger resonance at 25 Hz, and another about 12 Hz. My room is pretty well bass trapped and these resonances are pretty low in intensity, and not very long, (the 125 Hz resonance is pretty low (-30 dB) by 125 ms.) The resonance at 25 Hz is too low in frequency for bass traps, so it is longer and more sustained in level.

EFT Audyssey XT32 On
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190695&stc=1&d=1289361492

In this graph, you can see that Audyssey has tamed the resonances pretty effectively. The 125 Hz resonance is GONE completely. The 25 Hz resonance is lowered in level and shortened in time.

The next pair of graphs are full range, 1/3 Octave RTA graphs. They show FR in 1/3 Octave bands from 16 Hz to 20 kHz. The first graph is Audyssey Off, the second is Audyssey On:

RTA Audyssey Off
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190696&stc=1&d=1289361492

RTA Audyssey XT32 On
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190697&stc=1&d=1289361492

Clearly, Audyssey is flattening the response across the entire frequency spectrum. It's not perfect, but it's definitely improved over no Audyssey. It's interesting that an inexpensive little acoustic measurement program like xtz can actually verify what Audyssey is doing. :rolleyes:

Listening Impressions

(Caveat #1) This is a little imprecise because I have changed 2 components in my system; the Submersive HP amps and the Integra Pre/Pro with Audyssey XT32. It is somewhat difficult to separate the improvements attributable to each individual upgrade. I will try to keep them separate, but there will be some unavoidable crossover.) The bass in particular will be difficult to separate. There is a significant improvement in DEEP, DEEP bass which is exclusively due to the new HP amps. However, there is also a big improvement in mid and upper bass, which is likely due to the improvement in the filter resolution capability of Audyssey XT32 on the main channels. The mains are crossed at 80 Hz. They each have dual 8" woofers, so they are capable of good output easily to their crossover point. Audyssey XT32's ability to improve the mid and upper bass is seen in the RTA, which shows very flat response all the way up to about 500 Hz.

(Caveat #2): I have a tactile transducer in my system. I have had it for several years and I am very familiar with it's capabilities. I have it because my room is in the basement and is carpet over concrete. *NO* subwoofer system can shake concrete. Therefore, if I want tactile response, I need the transducer. In my listening impressions, whenever I refer to the tactile response of the system, I have made a conscious attempt to factor out the tactile response of the transducer. However, I did have it on during my listening because it is my "frame of reference". It is impossible to completely ignore it, but I have at least made an attempt to do so.

(Caveat #3): These listening impressions were done with Prog 2 invoked after Audyssey was performed. IOW, Audyssey provided a flat response, and then that flat response was augmented with Prog 2. However, DEQ was *not* used. In my measurements, both Prog 2 and DEQ provided similar measurements, (at least at -12.5 MVC). What they do at different MVC levels I didn't measure, but I definitely preferred the *sound* of Prog 2 on the amps to DEQ in the Pre/Pro.

I provide the above caveats because some folks may disagree with these settings, and I want "full disclosure" of my methods. Feel free to criticize away!!! :)

War of the Worlds. BluRay. MVC was set -3 from RL. Holy $hit! I watched the "lightening strikes", the "pod emerges" and the "bridge explosion". I have probably demo'd these scenes 20 or 25 times, with various systems over the years. I have *never* heard them like this. Everything about them was better, stronger, deeper, cleaner, and more articulate than ever before. The deepest bass was definitely more tactile and concussive. When the hole starts to open in the ground, and Tom Cruise says, "Did you feel that?"... well yes, I felt that! :) When the pod's feet come up out of the hole, and stomp on the ground, the whole room shook and vibrated. This was much stronger and more concussive than previous. The death rays have a very low frequency component that is penetrating, and it is more so with the new amps than ever before.

In addition, the entire range of sounds, from the shattering of windows and the tinkling of falling glass, to the crunching of metal and glass when the Jeep flies out of the hole and lands on the car, to the full range of sounds in the lightening strikes, everything sounded crisper, more articulate and more detailed. Finally, the immersiveness of the surrounds was significantly improved.

Overall, I have personally never heard a system reproduce this soundtrack better than this.

Flight of the Phoenix BluRay MVC was set -3 from RL. Holy $hit! I watched the "plane crash" scene. The vibration and pressurization during the free fall of the plane was more palpable and sensory than ever before. The passengers' hair was standing on end, and mine, (what little I have left), was too! I could literally feel my hair moving by the air movement. This was much more involving, enveloping and scary than when I have watched it before.

I have to say that the new sub amps reproduce more than just the generalized "rumble" of some other subwoofer systems. There is not just one big "rumble" tone, but every rumble tone is different, with a different frequency signature; a distinguishable sound and tonal structure. I have heard some massive ported bass systems with huge output capabilities, and none have the tonal structure that the Submersive HP's have, even on loud and deep LFE type sounds. It's possible that this is due to the improvements in Audyssey XT32, but I think a lot has to do with the improved amps in the Submersives.

There are a dozen more movies I could watch and report on, but I wouldn't expect my impressions to be much different than what I heard on these two bass spectaculars. Therefore, lets switch gears to music.

Morph The Cat, Donald Fagen DVD-A MVC was set at -10 to RL. WOW! The bass on this disc is absolutely incredible, It's one of the best bass recordings I've ever heard! It's an Elliot Scheiner recording,and he is my favorite recording engineer. With the new system, the bass and bass drum are completely separate and distinguishable. They're both articulate in their own "space", and, though they both play together, you can hear them as separate instruments. I will have to ascribe most of the improvement to Audyssey XT32. There is not much on this, (or any music disk), below about 30 Hz, so the new amps and Prog 2 don't factor in as much, (except for the headroom increases.) Still the articulation and detail across the board are significantly improved. The sounds of the saxophones, drums, cymbals, guitars, percussion, even DF's voice are much more clear, detailed and involving. Credit for this has to go to Audyssey XT32.

Best! 1991-2004 Seal DVD-A MVC was set at -6 from RL. This disc is probably limited to ~40 Hz response. However, from that point up, it has incredible punch, dynamics and impact. The 5.1 DVD-A has very impressive surround information, immersiveness and envelopment. Seal's voice just seems to pour out of the center channel, and all the other instruments surround and compliment it. This disc sounded better on my new system than it ever has.

Farewell I The Eagles, HD DVD MVC set to -8. This my all-time favorite concert DVD. I grew up with the Eagles. I know every note of every song on every album they ever did. I have also seen The Eagles 3 times in concert, in 3 different decades, in 3 different environments, and 3 different song sets. I have also listened to this disc on many different systems and I am intimately familiar with it. To say that the sound of this disc on my new system is a *revelation* is not an understatement. The improvement in envelopment, immersiveness and and detail is striking. Timothy B. Schmidt's bass guitar is extremely articulate, much more so than I've ever heard it before, and *way* better than I've heard it live. The sound of the percussion is also significantly better. Don Henley's drums are incredible and extremely well recorded. Joe Walsh's guitar is... well... Joe Walsh. The other guy they have taking Don Felder's place, Steuart Smith is awesome as well.

On one of my all-time favorite Eagles songs, Hotel California, the horns, percussion, drums, guitars and Glen Frey's vocals are absolutely incredible, with fantastic clarity, articulation and detail. At one point, Joe Walsh and Steuart Smith are playing together, and playing the exact same notes. Each guitar is easily distinguishable as it's own sound. In addition, the horn section is playing at the same time. Each horn is horn is heard as a separate and distinguishable instrument. At the same time, the bass and percussion lines are easily followed. Few systems, IME, are able to separate and articulate each instrument from the others playing simultaneously. Audyssey XT32 and the Submersive amp upgrades have allowed my system to get there. :)

Overall, I couldn't be happier with the upgrades I have done. I am planning to have an Audyssey Pro calibration done in the near future. I will report back with any improvements I see from that. In the meantime, I am definitely going to enjoy my new system!

Craig

millerwill

11-09-10, 10:12 PM

craig john

11-09-10, 10:48 PM

Great review, Craig. I had similar feelings with WOTW with my new HP amp (for my 1 SubM), but your experience with XT32 does make me envious (I'm still with XT); will resist an upgrade for a while, but it does seem like it does a good job.

XT32's biggest benefit, (IMO), is it's increased resolution and filter capability in the range dominated by the speakers... not the range dominated by the subs. If you are currently happy with your sub's capability, then there is little to be gained in the subwoofer range by going to XT32.

OTOH, there is a lot to be gained in the main channels by going to XT32.

Craig

millerwill

11-09-10, 11:11 PM

XT32's biggest benefit, (IMO), is it's increased resolution and filter capability in the range dominated by the speakers... not the range dominated by the subs. If you are currently happy with your sub's capability, then there is little to be gained in the subwoofer range by going to XT32.

OTOH, there is a lot to be gained in the main channels by going to XT32.

Craig

Thanks, Craig; yes, this is what I understand that XT32 will do. I like my speakers (Ascendacoutic Sierra's) very much, but do have the feeling that in my medium-small room (17x14x8.5) an effective mid-range eq would be helpful. The next time I do an AVR upgrade I look forward to XT32 (and whatever else is available in a yr or 2). But no upgrade to the SubM/HP will be necessary!

Bunga99

11-09-10, 11:19 PM

Awesome write up Craig!! (all 3 parts!).

MIkeDuke

11-10-10, 10:13 AM

Great update Craig. Can't wait to get my system done. And I am sorry about being such a pain in the ass about certain things. I am looking forward to working them out together :).

pepar

11-10-10, 11:30 AM

Overall, I couldn't be happier with the upgrades I have done. I am planning to have an Audyssey Pro calibration done in the near future. I will report back with any improvements I see from that. In the meantime, I am definitely going to enjoy my new system!
G-r-e-a-t review! It would be nice to be able to allocate improvements to the various upgrades, but with so many variables I guess that's impossible. I'd like to think that the 80.2 over the 885 is responsible for the mid- and high-frequency improvements (more transparency), XT32 for the improvements in LF on the mains and sub amp upgrades for the added ooomph at the very bottom. But that is all guessing ....

I guess we will hear the difference between XT 32 and XT 32 & Pro as that will be the only change.

Again, great write-up! I am indeed interested in dropping by and hearing your system!

Jeff

allredp

11-10-10, 09:02 PM

Thanks, Craig....

The next time I do an AVR upgrade I look forward to XT32 (and whatever else is available in a yr or 2).

But no upgrade to the SubM/HP will be necessary!

Same here millerwill - my HP is revealing nuances and sheer grunt that I've never experienced before.

Quoting Craig from earlier who said it better than I could: "every rumble tone is different, with a different frequency signature; a distinguishable sound and tonal structure. I have heard some massive ported bass systems with huge output capabilities, and none have the tonal structure that the Submersive HP's..."

YES! So cool... :cool: :)

savjam

11-10-10, 09:42 PM

Same here millerwill - my HP is revealing nuances and sheer grunt that I've never experienced before.

Quoting Craig from earlier who said it better than I could: "every rumble tone is different, with a different frequency signature; a distinguishable sound and tonal structure. I have heard some massive ported bass systems with huge output capabilities, and none have the tonal structure that the Submersive HP's..."

YES! So cool... :cool: :)

Extremely encouraging. I can't wait to receive my new amp on Saturday!!

allredp

11-10-10, 10:15 PM

Extremely encouraging. I can't wait to receive my new amp on Saturday!!
That's great news for you - not too long now! :D

Totally slick retro Mark has figured out for us. :cool:

audioguy

11-10-10, 11:51 PM

Gary J

11-11-10, 06:26 AM

But it has great "tonal structure". ;)

allredp

11-11-10, 07:21 AM

Craig John: So do I understand you are running your 3 SubMersive HP's with the out (new)setting. Is that correct? I only ask because I read where someone else thought it was too "boomy" in that mode (but I don't know if they had SubEQ or X32 on their system)

But it has great "tonal structure". ;)

FWIW, not Craig here, but, I am running in #2 "out" position and it is not boomy in my 15 x 27 x 8 semi-sealed room (well-treated). Need to experiment with music, but HT is fantastic so far.

I've played the Spiderman 1 scene where the guy turns into sand dozens of times, but never had the visceralality nor fascinating variety of sounds and feelings I get now. The "tonal structure" is truly impressive now. ;)

Can't imagine the headroom Craig must be enjoying with 3 of these bad-boys! My single HP is crushing my room... :eek: :D

audioguy

11-11-10, 07:27 AM

So what is the cost to swap amps on an existing SubMersive (or four)?

allredp

11-11-10, 08:09 AM

So what is the cost to swap amps on an existing SubMersive (or four)?
If things haven't changed with Mark since a few weeks ago - you're looking at $385 per unit, which includes shipping in US. To go from 1kw to 2.4kw (feels like gigawatts) that's pretty incredible! The swap out is totally slick as well.

I just don't see anyone touching Mark's level of build-quality, engineering, and flat out performance for the $$ anywhere. period. :cool:

craig john

11-11-10, 08:56 AM

Craig John: So do I understand you are running your 3 SubMersive HP's with the out (new)setting. Is that correct? I only ask because I read where someone else thought it was too "boomy" in that mode (but I don't know if they had SubEQ or X32 on their system)
Yes, I am running them in Prog 2, ("out" setting"). I ran Audyssey XT 32 with them in Prog 1 and then reset them to Prog 2 afterward. There is no "boom" with this. Just "more" deep bass.

I have rerun the nearfield measurement so you can see exactly what Prog 2 is doing.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190828&stc=1&d=1289486802

The net effect of this is to add a "house curve" that shelves up the response to account for low frequency hearing loss that humans have. It is very similar to what Dynamic EQ does. In fact, my in-room measurements of DEQ vs Prog 2 were almost indistinguishable, (at least at -12.5 MVC that I used for the measurements.)

Prog 2, (IMO) is *the* main reason the upgrade to the HP amps. Of course, if you're like Gary J, and you don't have a "preference" for this, then, as Mark instructed him, you should not upgrade. :p

Craig

Gary J

11-11-10, 09:37 AM

Prog 2, (IMO) is *the* main reason the upgrade to the HP amps. Of course, if you're like Gary J, and you don't have a "preference" for this, then, as Mark instructed him, you should not upgrade. :p

Actually if you want or need more headroom that alone is reason to upgrade and use Prog 1. Plus you get to play with new graphs of dubious use all over again. :p

craig john

11-11-10, 03:33 PM

Gary,

The link in your sig says you have a Def Tech SuperCube 1 subwoofer. Is that link old and not updated? Do you have Submersive(s)? How many?

Craig

Gary J

11-11-10, 03:43 PM

Fixed. One is all that is needed.

sean_w_smith

11-11-10, 04:37 PM

Actually if you want or need more headroom that alone is reason to upgrade and use Prog 1. Plus you get to play with new graphs of dubious use all over again. :p

Why do you have to be such a jerk?

Sean

audioguy

11-11-10, 04:44 PM

With 4 SubMersives in a 3800cf room, I do not lack for headroom (nor, do I suspect, did Craig John). But I do like the idea of the built-in house curve. I was wondering how Audyssey wouldn't undo what the new setting does but you answered that by running Audyssey and then putting the button in the new position. Clever!!

I take it you don't currently use Audyssey Pro. What kind of "curve" does regular Audyssey assign to the speakers, or is it ruler flat?

Does this EVER end ??? I mean how would one have ever imagined that 4 SubMersives wasn't the end-all be-all of sub-woofer land. I need to quit visiting these Forums and save myself a lot of money.

James W. Johnson

11-11-10, 05:28 PM

Does this EVER end ??? I mean how would one have ever imagined that 4 SubMersives wasn't the end-all be-all of sub-woofer land. I need to quit visiting these Forums and save myself a lot of money.

No it does not ever end, welcome to the home theater hobby! :)

Ive been upgrading steadily since 1997 or so. ;)

Edit: I see you have been at this awhile, every once in awhile you gotta pull out , take a 6 month or so break. I've taken a year or so break a few times since I got into this hobby. You kinda got to do this.

audioguy

11-11-10, 06:08 PM

Edit: I see you have been at this awhile, every once in awhile you gotta pull out , take a 6 month or so break. I've taken a year or so break a few times since I got into this hobby. You kinda got to do this.

I had a two channel media room when the first Laser Disks appeared in the early 80's. Built my first dedicated HT in about 1992 and it was a steady pace of very expensive upgrades until 2005. Major changes in my life took place and then I started again in 2008 (but at a much much much lower level) but it is exactly the same disease. It's always: "once I get this [fill in the blank], my room will be complete" and I have been buying into that lie since the get go.

Aaaaargh !!!

James W. Johnson

11-11-10, 07:14 PM

Early eighties? lol, you have been at this awhile. :)

I guess I should be grateful that I have been pretty satisfied with my last gear upgrades for quite a long time now. I have not once felt that my single SubMersive might not be adequate , it does its job perfectly and I even upgraded to the 2400 watt amp while I know for a fact the 1000 watter was enough. :)

My only current problem is my blu-ray buying...........I am trying to tame it but I am in about $6500 in and I buy them WAY faster than I can watch them.

bsoko2

11-11-10, 07:25 PM

hometheatergeek

11-11-10, 07:37 PM

I had a two channel media room when the first Laser Disks appeared in the early 80's. Built my first dedicated HT in about 1992 and it was a steady pace of very expensive upgrades until 2005. Major changes in my life took place and then I started again in 2008 (but at a much much much lower level) but it is exactly the same disease. It's always: "once I get this [fill in the blank], my room will be complete" and I have been buying into that lie since the get go.

Aaaaargh !!!

That's what got me hooked also. Darn those Laserdiscs.

millerwill

11-11-10, 08:04 PM

GPBURNS

11-11-10, 08:40 PM

Exactly my thoughts!

or more interesting analogy
Kind of like you have a hot new girlfriend – it’s your birthday – got over to her place for first time and she says with big smile "meet my roommate" who is even hotter

sean_w_smith

11-11-10, 09:33 PM

Exactly my thoughts!

I thought the same thing and have been pleasently surprised at the uprade. Duals are now a whole new level. I had no idea how much compression I was seeing befoe at even -10 to -15db from reference. Simply astounding. Would not have a guessed....

Sean

MIkeDuke

11-12-10, 06:20 AM

I will be ordering mine next week(new amp) and putting it in next Sat. Should be a fun day :).

Gary J

11-12-10, 06:29 AM

I have not once felt that my single SubMersive might not be adequate , it does its job perfectly and I even upgraded to the 2400 watt amp while I know for a fact the 1000 watter was enough. :)

The amp is probably a good upgrade but 3-4 HPs is probably overkill for anything less than Madison Square Garden. ;)

pepar

11-12-10, 06:49 AM

The amp is probably a good upgrade but 3-4 HPs is probably overkill for anything less than Madison Square Garden. ;)

I've heard Craig's three Submersives and it is impressive. And smoother than when he had "only" two. In fact, once you get enough sub "power" in the room, the benefit of more subs is smoothing of the response.

Jeff

Gary J

11-12-10, 06:56 AM

Anything worth doing is worth overdoing.

Like eating, drinking, sleeping?... ;) And at what cost? Cost/benefit comes into play pretty quickly.

pepar

11-12-10, 07:02 AM

Like eating, drinking, sleeping?... ;) And at what cost? Cost/benefit comes into play pretty quickly.
Benefit is in the mind of the beholder. And cost .. well what I think is a lot of money might be pocket change for the next person.

J

Gary J

11-12-10, 07:10 AM

Benefit is in the mind of the beholder.

As is value, which does not depend on the size of ones' pockets. ;)

craig john

11-12-10, 02:58 PM

Hey Gary... since you seem to think you're qualified to make "value" judgments for me, let me return the favor:

The link in your sig says you own a pair of Def Tech BP3000 TL loudspeakers. In fact, all of your speakers have powered woofers. Checking the spec's for the BP3000 TL's on the Def Tech website, those speakers appear to have 18" woofers powered by 1 kilowatt amps, and an LF extension to 13 Hz, (if you can believe Def Tech's spec's):
http://www.definitivetech.com/Products/products.aspx?path=Old%20Models&productid=BP3000TL

Tell me, Gary, where is the "value" in buying speakers with big-a$$ed, 18" drivers, massive amplification, and deep LF extension... only to set them to "Small"???

(Being the devoted and dogmatic Audyssey disciple we all know you are, we *know* you're setting a crossover, right??? After all, aren't you the guy that said:
Isn't "fullband speakers" a mutually exclusive term? ;)
Why would you say that ^ and then buy speakers with 18" drivers, 1 kilowatt amps, and a specified FR of 13 Hz??? And, BTW, a more succinct way of saying "a mutually exclusive term" is to just say "oxymoron".) :D

Moreover, if your speakers are set to "Small" then you're actually sending the bass away from 18" drivers to a sub with 15" drivers???? Why would you do something with such "dubious" value??? :confused: :rolleyes:

Or,... maybe in spite of your "by the book" Audyssey posturing, you are actually *surreptitiously* running your speakers as "Large"!!! :eek: (If that's the case, you are a BAD, BAD boy... saying one thing and doing another! Tsk,tsk.)

But wait!!!! If you're running your speakers as "Large", then those 18" drivers would actually be "subwoofers"... and you would then have just as many subwoofers as I do! :eek:

In which case, why all the righteous indignation?

I am :confused:

Craig

Gary J

11-12-10, 03:26 PM

Nice try at hyperbole Mark but this can be summed up quite succinctly.

1. Yes, there is no such thing as a "large" speaker. Modern bass management 101 as I am sure you know.

2. Def Tech specs are waaay out of line. Great HT bipole speakers but their published FR specs are never to be taken seriously by anyone in the know. You are in the know, right Mark?

Now how about some more pretty charts? :D

bsoko2

11-12-10, 03:32 PM

You kids need to play nice together!

Gary J

11-12-10, 03:51 PM

Who's "Mark?"

Oh I guess it's craig - craig-the-chart-man. :D

/sorry

Mark Seaton

11-12-10, 03:52 PM

I thought I'd help bring things back to focus on tangible results... I had previously posted:

At CEDIA I had a moment to look over what looks to be a great little measurement system from Parts Express. It will have some limits, but it is a calibrated plug and measure (USB) system with most of the important capabilities. They are hopeful it will show up before the end of November, and at $349 I expect it will definitely see some demand.

Well that sounds cool - thanks for the heads-up Mark...

BTW, happy to join the HP crew later today whenever the truck shows up. :D

I just saw an e-mail today noting this was now live on the PE website:

Dayton OmniMic Measurement System
http://www.parts-express.com/images/item_standard/390-790_s.jpg (http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=390-790)

I intend to play with one when they come in to know for sure, but I think this will be a real winner. Just need to see about some USB extension options for ultimate flexibility.

craig john

11-12-10, 05:31 PM

Nice try at hyperbole Mark but this can be summed up quite succinctly.
You talkin' ta me, Willis?

1. Yes, there is no such thing as a "large" speaker. Modern bass management 101 as I am sure you know.

2. Def Tech specs are waaay out of line. Great HT bipole speakers but their published FR specs are never to be taken seriously by anyone in the know. You are in the know, right Mark?

Now how about some more pretty charts? :D
Let me simplify and re-phrase the question. If you're not going to use your speakers as "full range" speakers, where is the "VALUE" in buying speakers with big, powered woofers??? You're spending a bunch of money for bass response you have no intention of using. :confused:

Craig, (not Mark)

Gary J

11-12-10, 05:45 PM

They are being used, Fred. You just don't know it.

Albeit more so 11 years ago.

Now please continue with the perusal of my web page. ;)

Mark Seaton

11-12-10, 07:37 PM

While I agree that Audyssey is a great system, I believe in Ronald Reagan's philosophy... "Trust, but verify."

Here is the graph of the response with Audyssey/Integra's recommended Distance setting of 10.4 ft:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190486&stc=1&d=1289161201

Lest you think this is due to a single position measurement, I took one that is a weighted average of 3 positions:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190487&stc=1&d=1289161278

The trough is worse than I described previously. It starts at 50 Hz and goes to well above 100 Hz. The subs and speakers are *clearly* out of phase. Setting the Distance to 13.8 ft. resulted in the flat response I showed above in Post #4508 & 4509:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190457&stc=1&d=1289139056

I never would have known this, or been able to correct it without measurements. One can certainly blindly accept the response provided by Audyssey and your receiver or pre/pro. Myself, I'll verify it, and correct it when necessary.

Craig

Great post and info Craig.

Very good to hear things are working out so impressively. With any luck I should be in the area and maybe have a chance to give it a listen in the coming months.

This very nicely highlights why verifying measurements can be so worthwhile. Audyssey will very often do a nice job with the response of the individualized speakers and subwoofers, but the integration is generally "assumed" by the system and not checked in any way by the auto setup process. This is the finer detail tuning of the system, but it can yield big benefits. While the subs and the speakers look good individually, if you go back and listen to the result with the sub distance set to 10.4' the response you show above will certainly sound lacking in punch and detail in the bass. This is one of the aspects I spend quite a bit of time with when I optimize a system.

As much fun as it is to run around the country calibrating systems into the wee hours of the morning :rolleyes:, I'd much rather be here to get more speakers out the door and new products to market. Measurement systems like XTZ, the one I linked above and REW are key to insuring you are maximizing your home theater experience.

Mark Seaton

11-12-10, 07:54 PM

You missed the point of Audyssey's post. Verifying is only possible with the most sophisticated equipment and technique. $300 XTZ does not rise to that standard.

Thanks! :D That's the counterpoint?

I would agree that there may be some value to pre-calibration measurements for such things as finding room modes, speaker placement, etc. After Audyssey I make no changes based on measurements or anything else. In fact quite the opposite - I if change something I run Audyssey.

But have fun in any case. ;)

Your faith in software is impressive, and much greater than mine. The limitations lie in the assumptions which must be made to fit the setup task into a real world implementation that doesn't take hours to compute. I am pretty certain Audyssey has no process in it's correction and setup process to catch the issue so well illustrated above. The matter of subwoofer channel delay is a rather fuzzy thing for which there isn't a precisely correct answer, just one that affords a desirable interaction with the loudspeakers. I am in no way surprised that this would trip up an automated routine... especially one which does not take confirming measurements to determine the effectiveness of the processing efforts.

The measurement systems are different, and we should not expect a ruler flat Audyssey display to be observed as ruler flat in a conventional measurement system. We still can still readily call out obvious mis-steps such as what Craig observed (as I have in multiple systems as well). I doubt anyone could make a solid argument as to why an ideally optimized system would exhibit the behavior Craig noted with the automated distance setting of the subwoofer.

sean_w_smith

11-12-10, 08:01 PM

Your faith in software is impressive, and much greater than mine. The limitations lie in the assumptions which must be made to fit the setup task into a real world implementation that doesn't take hours to compute. I am pretty certain Audyssey has no process in it's correction and setup process to catch the issue so well illustrated above. The matter of subwoofer channel delay is a rather fuzzy thing for which there isn't a precisely correct answer, just one that affords a desirable interaction with the loudspeakers. I am in no way surprised that this would trip up an automated routine... especially one which does not take confirming measurements to determine the effectiveness of the processing efforts.

The measurement systems are different, and we should not expect a ruler flat Audyssey display to be observed as ruler flat in a conventional measurement system. We still can still readily call out obvious mis-steps such as what Craig observed (as I have in multiple systems as well). I doubt anyone could make a solid argument as to why an ideally optimized system would exhibit the behavior Craig noted with the automated distance setting of the subwoofer.

Thanks for the explanations Mark. I will post another text book example next week of audessy not getting the phase right once I get back from racing at thunderhill and have a chance to do some more dialing in. The physical distance on my sub is about 7 feet from the listening position with the BFD in the path which adds even more delay (depends on the filters used). Generally this means my distance should be somewhere around 15-19 feet. Mark had it dailed in perfectly using his professional grade measurement system and deciced on 16.5 feet. Audyssey says its 4 foot which is wrong.

now I move my subs and audessy is saying its 1 foot. The new number is probably more like 12 feet. We'll see next week when I get it dialed in prooperly and post the pics to show and explain the process for those interested.

Cheers,
Sean

pepar

11-12-10, 08:35 PM

Thanks for the explanations Mark. I will post another text book example next week of audessy not getting the phase right once I get back from racing at thunderhill and have a chance to do some more dialing in. The physical distance on my sub is about 7 feet from the listening position with the BFD in the path which adds even more delay (depends on the filters used). Generally this means my distance should be somewhere around 15-19 feet. Mark had it dailed in perfectly using his professional grade measurement system and deciced on 16.5 feet. Audyssey says its 4 foot which is wrong.

now I move my subs and audessy is saying its 1 foot. The new number is probably more like 12 feet. We'll see next week when I get it dialed in prooperly and post the pics to show and explain the process for those interested.

Cheers,
Sean

"Text book?"

sean_w_smith

11-12-10, 08:44 PM

"Text book" you know like this one....

http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduction-Acoustics-Psychoacoustics-Loudspeakers/dp/0240520092/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1289616231&sr=8-4

BTW: Edit, I really am enjoying that book but to most its probably more painful than pulling teeth. I find it a pleasant break from the super geekness of work.

Sean

pepar

11-12-10, 09:05 PM

James W. Johnson

11-12-10, 09:27 PM

sean_w_smith

11-13-10, 01:30 AM

I know what a text book is, but your context seemed to be more along the lines of a reference to the connotation of it being "classic" and I was curious as to what would be classic about Audyssey not getting phase right?

Jeff

Sorry poor choice of adjectives. I meant with respect to being wrong and being visable in the resultant graph.

That said I have seen Audessy get the phase within 1ft of Marks setup in my utah theater. Of the 10+ rooms between 3 houses I have tried Audessy in the last 5 years it seems to get the setup pretty close about 80% of the time but sometimes weird things happen.

its seems very related to the setup in the room. I have moved and changed systems between rooms and even in one case rotated the whole orientation of the room 90 degress and Audessy worked very well in one case and in the other case not so much.

I unlike some folks love what audessy XT does for imaging and overall presentation in every case I have tried it. Its certainly more dramatic on some setups than others.

I have seen cases in the utah theather where audessy pretty much nails the levels and distances. I measured the response using Audessy only and Marks PEQ settings from DCX2496 from all 4 seating positions. The graphs look similarly flat. Thats where the similarities ended. So in this case it did an excellent job at setup but something was very weird with the resultant bass sound. Marks setup had great bass on movies and music. well controlled, authoritative and some good subsonic effects. The Audessy sounded nothing like it. limp. not a subtle change, subsonics are gone. its sounds like I have a little 10" incher :) really bizarre. Saw this same problem in my Raleigh house Dedicated theather with the Onkyo 805 (I own 2 of them). Then I tried the Onkyo 876 same room, same speakers, very different result. Is it new mic, new sw (better algorithms and bug fixes and improved heuristics). Who knows but its clearly very different.

point of all this. Audessy is awesome. Its not perfect. A little effort in listening and measuring if possible certainly allow the enthusiast to make sure they are getting the best sound.

I really would love to check out XT32.

Have a great weekend everyone. No big bass movies for me. I have a 25" CRT in the hotel room here.

Sean

Gary J

11-13-10, 07:00 AM

craig john

11-13-10, 08:20 AM

Hey Jeff, I don't see you lending support to your buddy for changing distances. And make sure to edit about 1000 posts in the Audyssey thread. :D

And since when has "ruler flat" been a goal of Audyssey? ;)

Jeff has not been over to hear the system since I changed out the HP amps and added the Integra DHC-80.2. Therefore, it's not possible for him to confirm or counter the benefit of the Distance Setting change.

However, you're on-going denial of something so blatantly obvious as the 20 dB cancellation caused by the Audyssey/Integra Distance Setting, and the complete correction of it with my Distance Setting, makes me wonder if you are able to make any interpretive judgments of your own. You seem to be so blinded by faith in Audyssey that you can't get beyond it to see that it's not the *perfect* system.

Listen, I have met Chris Kyriakakis. He is a great guy, and *very* smart. I respect him and I believe most everything he says. However, Audyssey is a generic, "one size fits all" solution to a problem, (room acoustics), that doesn't have any 2 sizes the same. It can't possibly be all things, all the time. It only has so much measurement capacity, and a limited amount of correction capability. Hell, it sometimes can't even measure the same room twice and come up with the same result. To blindly accept the results without verification and measurement, especially in a system with 3 subs placed asymmetrically to the LP, would be acting like an ostrich, (a$$ in the air and head firmly buried in the sand.) :rolleyes: If you want to do that in your system, feel free. For me, I'll make the effort to improve on Audyssey's results whenever possible.

I told you earlier that, "...if those graphs are not conclusive enough evidence, then any more discussion is pointless." Yet, you goaded me back into further discussion. I was right the first time, and it is obviously pointless. I am finished with this discussion with you. Go find someone else to throw your snide little barbs at.

Craig

Gary J

11-13-10, 08:47 AM

However, you're on-going denial of something so blatantly obvious as the 20 dB cancellation caused by the Audyssey/Integra Distance Setting, and the complete correction of it with my Distance Setting, makes me wonder if you are able to make any interpretive judgments of your own. You seem to be so blinded by faith in Audyssey that you can't get beyond it to see that it's not the *perfect* system.

No, measurements can be of value but not with one mic in one position using equipment and measurement technology that is completely different than that used in calibration. Move that mic the width of your head and see if you don't get completely different results.

Trust can be a good thing. Verifying with suspect methods and tweaking based on that leaves one firmly entrenched in Preference Land. I would be the first to agree there is absolutely wrong with that. Just don't tell me it leaves anyone closer to Reference Sound, which is a goal for many of us.

I guess this is the crux of the issue. There are a number of things that must be "just right" in order to be assured that there is a good correspondence between a nice graph and the desired sound.

I can get an absolutely perfect graph by taking an Audyssey measurement in one spot and then using any of the available third party tools to verify that measurement in that exact spot and with the exact same mic. But, guess what? It will sound like doo doo because the methodology is wrong. We don't hear what the single mic point is telling the graph it hears.

And that's just one example. Waterfall plots make assumptions about windowing functions that may or may not be perceptually relevant. Stimulus signals that are used to generate these plots may or may not discard excess phase in their calculations. Microphones used to make the measurements may be calibrated for diffuse field in the measurement protocol and free field in the verification protocol. I could go on, but the point I'm trying to make is that there is uncertainty introduced when crossing methods.

Ultimately I think it comes down to this: Audyssey is not "satisfying" for those who love to tweak. I get that. And tweaking is great fun! Let's leave it at that.

pepar

11-13-10, 09:17 AM

craig john

11-13-10, 09:26 AM

Great post and info Craig.

Very good to hear things are working out so impressively. With any luck I should be in the area and maybe have a chance to give it a listen in the coming months.
That would be very cool, Mark. You're definitely welcome whenever it suits you.

This very nicely highlights why verifying measurements can be so worthwhile. Audyssey will very often do a nice job with the response of the individualized speakers and subwoofers, but the integration is generally "assumed" by the system and not checked in any way by the auto setup process. This is the finer detail tuning of the system, but it can yield big benefits. While the subs and the speakers look good individually, if you go back and listen to the result with the sub distance set to 10.4' the response you show above will certainly sound lacking in punch and detail in the bass. This is one of the aspects I spend quite a bit of time with when I optimize a system.
I never did listen to it with the old Audyssey/Integra Distance Setting. I will do that and report back.

As much fun as it is to run around the country calibrating systems into the wee hours of the morning :rolleyes:, I'd much rather be here to get more speakers out the door and new products to market. Measurement systems like XTZ, the one I linked above and REW are key to insuring you are maximizing your home theater experience.
Thanks for that endorsement. I suspect you can do an even better job than I did. It would be terrific to have you come visit and see what's "left in the tank" in my system. :)

More speakers.... new products.... even with this economy? It sounds like it's a good time to be Seaton Sound. :) Best of luck as you move your business forward.

Craig

craig john

11-13-10, 09:30 AM

Audyssey MultEQ XT is only a tool. And like all tools, it needs to be used skillfully to achieve the best results. The "skill" with the onboard version is where the measurements are taken (and not taken) and interpreting ... and adjusting if appropriate ... the distance, crossover and level settings. MultEQ Pro brings additional tweaking opportunities. Again, skill is required to improve the "automatic" results. But skill and experience can definitely improve the results.

I would say, based on Craig's data, that he has definitely improved the results and did so with a simple adjustment that his experience told him to do.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I need to get you over here to check out the upgrades. Let's get Dennis up and running with my old Onkyo pre/pro and a Pro calibration, then work on getting you guys over here. Dennis and I are also going up to MikeDuke's place on next Saturday to help him set up his new 80.2, his new HP amp for his Submersive and his new Oppo BluRay player. Lot's going on, but we'll get it done. :)

Craig

pepar

11-13-10, 10:02 AM

Hi Jeff,

I need to get you over here to check out the upgrades. Let's get Dennis up and running with my old Onkyo pre/pro and a Pro calibration, then work on getting you guys over here. Dennis and I are also going up to MikeDuke's place on next Saturday to help him set up his new 80.2, his new HP amp for his Submersive and his new Oppo BluRay player. Lot's going on, but we'll get it done. :)

Craig
Sounds like a plan. Thanks to Kalman, I have the v1.05 firmware needed to advance his 885 to the latest firmware. I am at a trade show all next week, but Dennis and I have 11/22 and 11/23 open for me to do the upgrades and Pro cal. Able to make either of those?

The week after Thanksgiving, I am back in Dalton for a carpet inspector's course. So I'd be looking at the week of 12/6 for a visit to your house.

Jeff

MIkeDuke

11-13-10, 10:09 AM

Craig, check your pm and email :).
Mike

MIkeDuke

11-13-10, 10:13 AM

Mark, check your PM please.

millerwill

11-13-10, 11:30 AM

No, measurements can be of value but not with one mic in one position using equipment and measurement technology that is completely different than that used in calibration. Move that mic the width of your head and see if you don't get completely different results.

I believe that Craig verified that his one position measurement was essentially unchanged from that of averaging over three positions; not as good as 32 different positions, but enough to know if there were any serious effects from this. And I don't get your issue with XTZ just because it's not more expensive; it seems that some of the most professional audio people in the business find it their favorite.

Gary J

11-13-10, 12:14 PM

I believe that Craig verified that his one position measurement was essentially unchanged from that of averaging over three positions; not as good as 32 different positions, but enough to know if there were any serious effects from this. And I don't get your issue with XTZ just because it's not more expensive; it seems that some of the most professional audio people in the business find it their favorite.

Missed that part about 3 positions. Link? The XTZ issue is covered in the Audyssey quote (and many others in the Audyssey thread) - basically altogether different measurement system from EQ system.

millerwill

11-13-10, 12:38 PM

Missed that part about 3 positions. Link?

Post #4526 in this thread.

millerwill

11-13-10, 12:44 PM

The XTZ issue is covered in the Audyssey quote (and many others in the Audyssey thread) - basically altogether different measurement system from EQ system.

I do follow the Audyssey thread, but don't remember 'the XTZ issue'. It is of course not an EQ system, but rather a measurement tool, so I don't understand what is matters about it being a 'different measurement system' if it is accurate. Kal Rubenstein, who I perceive to be one of the real audio guru's, has stated in print that XTZ is his favorite measurement tool, so I doubt that it is too bad.

Gary J

11-13-10, 12:49 PM

And the graph is "worse". Not a surprise. Different measure system and technique from the EQ system.

Gary J

11-13-10, 12:51 PM

I do follow the Audyssey thread, but don't remember 'the XTZ issue'. It is of course not an EQ system, but rather a measurement tool, so I don't understand what is matters about it being a 'different measurement system' if it is accurate. Kal Rubenstein, who I perceive to be one of the real audio guru's, has stated in print that XTZ is his favorite measurement tool, so I doubt that it is too bad.

Kal is good. I prefer what the inventors of Audyssey say about measuring their EQ.

Geoff4RFC

11-13-10, 12:54 PM

Spyboy ...
You are starting to sound like the guy who thinks he is an expert on women because he "reads" Playboy and Penthouse.

:)

Since when does anyone "read" Playboy and Penthouse??????????:D

James W. Johnson

11-13-10, 01:44 PM

Since when does anyone "read" Playboy and Penthouse??????????:D

LMAO!:p

millerwill

11-13-10, 01:55 PM

And the graph is "worse". Not a surprise. Different measure system and technique from the EQ system.

Just one more comment and I'll end this unproductive discussion with you.

you miss the point: the 1 and 3 positions measurements (with the sub in the less optimal position) were essentially the same, showing much poorer freq response than when he moved the sub to its more optimal location. I.e., your suggestion that his results were meaningless because he used only a single position are clearly unfounded.

craig john

11-13-10, 02:16 PM

You are starting to sound like the guy who thinks he is an expert on women because he reads Playboy and Penthouse.

Just so there is no confusion... I am *not* craigsub.

Craig (John)

Gary J

11-13-10, 02:19 PM

I'll end this unproductive discussion with you.

I'm heartbroken!

Carry on.

craig john

11-13-10, 02:42 PM

While the subs and the speakers look good individually, if you go back and listen to the result with the sub distance set to 10.4' the response you show above will certainly sound lacking in punch and detail in the bass. This is one of the aspects I spend quite a bit of time with when I optimize a system.

I never did listen to it with the old Audyssey/Integra Distance Setting. I will do that and report back.
Reporting back...

I went downstairs to my theater and reset the Distance Setting to 10.4 ft. I put on Donald Fagen, Morph the Cat. This song has incredible bass as recorded by Elliott Schiener. The bass guitar is articulate, strong and punchy. The bass drum has incredible "kick" and punch. Still, when both instruments play together, they are "heard" as separate instruments.

With the 10.4 Distance Setting, the bass was anemic, thin and totally lacking in punch and detail, just as Mark predicted. I reset it again to 13.8 ft and replayed the same song. The bass suddenly came alive with phenomenal dynamics, punch and weight. It was definitely not overbearing or accentuated; it was in perfect balance to the rest of the sound.

So which setting resulted in a sound that was closer to what Elliott Schiener intended, (or IOW, closer to "reference")? There is no doubt in my mind that ES would be embarrassed to hear it with the 10.4 ft. setting. He would be wondering how he could have screwed up the recording so bad. But, if he heard it with the 13.8 ft. setting, he'd have a big ole $hlt-eatin' grin on his face. :D

The difference was so obvious that I didn't even bother with any further listening. I just left it at 13.8 ft. Thanks again, Mark!

Craig

craig john

11-13-10, 03:02 PM

...the 1 and 3 positions measurements (with the sub in the less optimal position) were essentially the same, showing much poorer freq response than when he moved the sub to its more optimal location. I.e., your suggestion that his results were meaningless because he used only a single position are clearly unfounded.
Just to clarify... I didn't change the location of any of the subs. I changed the Distance Setting in the pre/pro. Audyssey/Integra measured the Distance at 10.4 ft. I reset it to 13.8 ft to eliminate the phase cancellation dip. Neither of these settings correlate to the actual physical distance of any of the 3 subs. In addition, the subs have the DSP in the signal path, which will add a small additional delay.

If I had changed the location of any of the subs, I would have re-run Audyssey.

The first measurement was a single position measurement, with the mic at the primary LP:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190486&stc=1&d=1289161201

The second was another measurement of the 10.4 ft Distance Setting. However, it was a weighted-average, 3 position measurement, with the mic moved from the left LP, to the center LP, to the right LP, and weighted at 30%, 40% and 30% respectively, (this is how xtz calculates a 3-position, weighted average). The "depth" of the cancellation was reduced by about 5 dB, but it still covered the same frequency range:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190487&stc=1&d=1289161278

Craig

millerwill

11-13-10, 04:19 PM

Just to clarify... I didn't change the location of any of the subs. I changed the Distance Setting in the pre/pro. Audyssey/Integra measured the Distance at 10.4 ft. I reset it to 13.8 ft to eliminate the phase cancellation dip. Neither of these settings correlate to the actual physical distance of any of the 3 subs. In addition, the subs have the DSP in the signal path, which will add a small additional delay.

If I had changed the location of any of the subs, I would have re-run Audyssey.

The first measurement was a single position measurement, with the mic at the primary LP:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190486&stc=1&d=1289161201

The second was another measurement of the 10.4 ft Distance Setting. However, it was a weighted-average, 3 position measurement, with the mic moved from the left LP, to the center LP, to the right LP, and weighted at 30%, 40% and 30% respectively, (this is how xtz calculates a 3-position, weighted average). The "depth" of the cancellation was reduced by about 5 dB, but it still covered the same frequency range:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190487&stc=1&d=1289161278

Craig

Oops! Yes, I did know that the change was in your sub distance, not the subs themselves; just a lapse.

audioguy

11-14-10, 07:45 PM

I did not read all of the recent posts so if I missed it I apologize. What method did you and/or Mark use to come up with the new sub distance that gave you the better results.

I spent 10 years installing digital room correction systems well before Audyssey was ever thought of. I think DRC is the greatest addition to audio since I have been in this hobby (40+ years). I also think Audyssey enabled products have probably done more to (a) bring awareness to the necessity of room correction than any other single product and (b) provide a much improved listening experience for more users than any other single product. There is probably no more huge fan. That said, it is not perfect -- including Audyssey Pro. It must have some built in limitations for it to be used by the masses and individuals not well versed in room acoustics. And it does --- many of them. (On the other end of the spectrum of ease of use and flexibility is the $15,000 TacT Audio TCS MK III which I lived with for a month or so). Much better results than Audyssey but WAY WAY WAY more complicated than the average user would ever want to deal with.

I would suggest, Gary, that because Audyssey sets a level or a distance (or crossover) for a particular speaker does NOT mean it is absolutely perfect. It’s way better than an individual would do who had no other measuring tools, but it is only a tool. Craig was dealing with sub distance. In my case, I ended up increasing the distance of my rear speakers from what Audyssey set (by a very small amount) because it greatly improved side wall imaging (a trick I learned from Mark as well). Audyssey is a great starting point but if you have other tools available, I sure would want to carefully check every Audyssey setting.

craig john

11-14-10, 08:08 PM

I did not read all of the recent posts so if I missed it I apologize. What method did you and/or Mark use to come up with the new sub distance that gave you the better results.
I used "trial and error" with measurements. I increased the Distance Setting in 1 ft increments until I got close to flat response through the crossover region. Then I changed the settings in 0.2 ft increments until I "went past" the flattest setting; then I backed up to the flattest setting. Finally, I checked a 3-position measurement to ensure it was appropriate for all 3 of the primary listening positions.

The beauty of a measurement system like xtz is how quickly and easily you can run through all the possibilities to find the optimum setting.

I spent 10 years installing digital room correction systems well before Audyssey was ever thought of. I think DRC is the greatest addition to audio since I have been in this hobby (40+ years). I also think Audyssey enabled products have probably done more to (a) bring awareness to the necessity of room correction than any other single product and (b) provide a much improved listening experience for more users than any other single product. There is probably no more huge fan. That said, it is not perfect -- including Audyssey Pro. It must have some built in limitations for it to be used by the masses and individuals not well versed in room acoustics. And it does --- many of them. (On the other end of the spectrum of ease of use and flexibility is the $15,000 TacT Audio TCS MK III which I lived with for a month or so). Much better results than Audyssey but WAY WAY WAY more complicated than the average user would ever want to deal with.

I would suggest, Gary, that because Audyssey sets a level or a distance (or crossover) for a particular speaker does NOT mean it is absolutely perfect. It’s way better than an individual would do who had no other measuring tools, but it is only a tool. Craig was dealing with sub distance. In my case, I ended up increasing the distance of my rear speakers from what Audyssey set (by a very small amount) because it greatly improved side wall imaging (a trick I learned from Mark as well). Audyssey is a great starting point but if you have other tools available, I sure would want to carefully check every Audyssey setting.
Can you describe the process you went through to optimize your rear speaker distances? Thanks!

Craig

pepar

11-14-10, 08:14 PM

Would be interesting to have done some listening as the distance was changed. With the dramatic change in measured response, I wonder if it would have been audible?

Jeff

craig john

11-14-10, 08:15 PM

Would be interesting to have done some listening as the distance was changed ....
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=19482998&postcount=4605

pepar

11-14-10, 08:36 PM

Doh! :o

I even read that ....

pepar

11-14-10, 08:41 PM

You're thinking that the notch was entirely due to cancellation between main ans subs in the crossover region, right?

audioguy

11-14-10, 09:54 PM

Can you describe the process you went through to optimize your rear speaker distances? Thanks!

Craig

Trial and error as well. I used either The 5.1 Audio Toolkit that Mark provides or Avia. One of the options on those disks will play a signal out of a front and same-side rear speaker simultaneously. While sitting in the LP adjust the rear distance until the image from that signal appears to come from the center of that wall. You will need to switch between the setup screen on your prepro to adjust the distance and the playing of the DVD. Adjust by the .2 foot increments until the image is where you want it and repeat for the other side of the room. Works like a champ and will really improve the whole envelopment phenomenon. It is certainly possible that the distance Audyssey comes up with will be correct but it has not been for my room and my speakers. IIRC I changed the distance by .4 feet for both speakers. fWIW I used to try to accomplish the wall centering trick by increasing the volume of the rear speakers but this is a lot better way.

I'd like to say I came up with that idea but I stole it from Mark Seaton. (who else).

Mark Seaton

11-14-10, 10:22 PM

You're thinking that the notch was entirely due to cancellation between main ans subs in the crossover region, right?

As that was the only change made, absolutely. This sort of fine tuning of a crossover is very common practice for those setting up professional sound reinforcement systems. A phase change could have a related, but slightly different effect, but I often find better results by making delay adjustments rather than using something like a variable phase knob/all-pass filter, which would also go against some of the correction Audyssey is working to correct.

Given the realities of the crossover implementation in a modern multi-channel system, this sort of fine tuning should not be a surprise to anyone who has looked into crossover design (and yes, I realize most have not). The distance change we are talking about here is only 3.4' which is roughly a 1/4 wavelength around 80+Hz. If we dig deeper into the resulting group delay and other delays incurred through filters/correction employed, this isn't a huge mismatch for this frequency range. The mismatch could very easily, and I suspect more likely, be the result of deviations in the real response of the main speakers rather than that of the subwoofer.

Here in Craig's earlier post of the subwoofer only response is the proof that the issue lies in the interaction of the main speaker and sub.

All 3 subs together. (This graph is the subs alone, without the speakers, but with the 80 Hz crossover set. As you will see, there is some interactivity of the FR once the speakers are added back into the mix, so here I am showing the subs isolated from the speakers):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190453&stc=1&d=1289138787

Using this combined response, I finally ran Audyssey MultEQ XT32. Here is the result:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=190454&stc=1&d=1289138850

This graph is self-explanatory. Plus 1.5 dB/ Minus 0 dB from 16 Hz to just below 80, with the expected tapering to allow a -3 dB point at 80 Hz. This is as perfect a result as I have ever seen. After seeing this, I am convinced that there is no benefit to going back and re-configuring the system to set it up as 2 and 1 with level-matching. The technique of gain-matching works so well that I can't see that there would be any improvement.

An overlay of the above corrected response, that of the main speakers, and the combined response would complete the picture.

Craig: Had you taken a measurement of the Center-Subwoofer combo? This is accomplished by sending the same signal to both the L & R input of your preamp with the surround mode in Dolby PLII: Cinema (not Music).

Gary J

11-15-10, 06:50 AM

I often find better results by making delay adjustments rather than using something like a variable phase knob/all-pass filter, which would also go against some of the correction Audyssey is working to correct.

How is it that using something like a variable phase knob/all-pass filter would go against some of the correction Audyssey is working to correct and making delay adjustments would not?

Mark Seaton

11-15-10, 09:08 AM

How is it that using something like a variable phase knob/all-pass filter would go against some of the correction Audyssey is working to correct and making delay adjustments would not?

I am referring to the phase response and decay time correction that Audyssey can do. By definition, a phase shift function by creating a variable delay vs. frequency which increases as frequency lowers (lower frequencies = longer period = greater group delay for the same phase shift).

Adjusting the delay (by way of relative distance settings) creates an equal delay offset per frequency which does not skew the bass range, but shifts it cohesively. Any way cut it up, use of a phase knob to make this adjustment will create an overall more significant deviation vs. the delay adjustment.

Gary J

11-15-10, 09:15 AM

Any way cut it up, use of a phase knob to make this adjustment will create an overall more significant deviation vs. the delay adjustment.

So you are saying delay adjustment will cause deviation also, just less so?

Mark Seaton

11-15-10, 10:59 AM

So you are saying delay adjustment will cause deviation also, just less so?

Since the correction is applied to the subwoofer in isolation, no. The phase behavior of the subwoofer will remain the same. The only change will be the integration/interaction with the main speakers, which in this case makes for an improvement. Using a conventional phase control to make this final tweak would skew the group delay vs. frequency.

Gary J

11-15-10, 11:10 AM

Got it. Thanks. Still don't like the trade-offs over a listening area vs. a single position.

BTW, my HP sounds great!

Mark Seaton

11-15-10, 12:13 PM

Got it. Thanks. Still don't like the trade-offs over a listening area vs. a single position.

BTW, my HP sounds great!

And please do keep enjoying your SubMersive HP. :)

The point I believe you are missing in the above discussion is that we are only tweaking the settings made by Audyssey which are effectively assumptions without any verification on Audyssey's part. You reference trade offs over the listening area. If we were adding post EQ to the subwoofer channel, then you might have substance for a complaint, but we are leaving all of the processing Audyssey has done to the response of each speaker channel. As I recall, we are instructed to carefully pick the first measurement location, as this *single location* is used for delay settings. As such, the delay is not optimized for all locations in the way the speaker correction is.

If we were setting up our home theater in a large back yard this delay calculation would be very simple and straight forward. Within a home theater and with real loudspeakers picking a precise delay time is anything but straight forward if you are looking at anything below 10kHz. The "automagic systems," as Dennis Erskine calls them, must make a best assumption on what will most often be relevant to what we hear to do their calculation. Getting a specific number with a few decimal points at the end doesn't mean the number is more correct. To steal a quote my Dad often uses, it's generally better to be reasonably correct than precisely wrong.

This also heads into the reason for delays to exist in a surround system at all. The early processors only offered delay adjustments (in milliseconds) for surround and center speakers. Later they realized it is a trivial calculation to allow users to instead set up delays by entering the measured distances to each speaker. Since the functions were already there it only made sense to include the subwoofer in the delay functions. The purpose of the delay adjustments for main speakers is to aide with multi-channel imaging and surround field envelopment. With the subwoofer being a single channel, it has no imaging effects for which this is needed. The delay setting for the subwoofer channel is there to keep the subwoofer in relative sync with the arrival of sound from the main speakers.

If the subwoofer's sound reaches the listener much sooner than the overlapping sounds from the main speakers (ie crossover range), it will call much more attention to itself and can cause localization issues. Arrival differences also affect how closely the crossovers actually function to the theoretical ideal. Unfortunately the theoretical ideal can only work ideally for a single location. When the arrival times for a given frequency range change, the summation between the two signals change and can range from a maximum of +6dB reference to either, or a deep cancellation of 20+dB. For reference, an 80Hz wavelength is just over 14' long. If we had a perfect 6dB summation at 80Hz and then added a 7' equivalent delay, we would then see a very deep notch at 80Hz. In the real world we are dealing with the interaction of many frequencies, where 1-6' can have quite significant effects on the resulting interaction.

I fully expect this aspect of auto-optimization will see continued revisions and improvements to the measurement, calculation and confirmation process. For a very simplified analogy, just because your favorite GPS Navigation system doesn't know that a bridge is removed for construction, I wouldn't expect you to drive off the bridge it directs you to take. In the case of audio setup, without some basic measurement systems we can't see out the front windshield that the bridge is out and the assumption of the computer is incorrect.

Gary J

11-15-10, 02:33 PM

Unfortunately the theoretical ideal can only work ideally for a single location.

Presumably this applies also when delays are adjusted so the interactions are merely being shifted in the listening area. At least I would hope people are not doing this to the detriment of other listening positions (unless they have one person HTs !).

Geez this has to be causing HP fulfillment issues. Send me a bill. :D

sean_w_smith

11-15-10, 07:50 PM

Trial and error as well. I used either The 5.1 Audio Toolkit that Mark provides or Avia. One of the options on those disks will play a signal out of a front and same-side rear speaker simultaneously. While sitting in the LP adjust the rear distance until the image from that signal appears to come from the center of that wall. You will need to switch between the setup screen on your prepro to adjust the distance and the playing of the DVD. Adjust by the .2 foot increments until the image is where you want it and repeat for the other side of the room. Works like a champ and will really improve the whole envelopment phenomenon. It is certainly possible that the distance Audyssey comes up with will be correct but it has not been for my room and my speakers. IIRC I changed the distance by .4 feet for both speakers. fWIW I used to try to accomplish the wall centering trick by increasing the volume of the rear speakers but this is a lot better way.

I'd like to say I came up with that idea but I stole it from Mark Seaton. (who else).

+1 on this. Also learned this technique from Mark and its an easy way to dial in the HT. In the utah theather all the distances mark came up with are within a foot of audessy. I have extensively A/B'd Marks settings for the distances on the rears and his settings clearly make a more immersive soundfield. Ever since then I always use this test disc as part of the process of verifying and dialing in my setup. I have seen a few cases where audessy gets it perfectly but usually I just need to a 6in adjust on the distances to get it from very good to great. I will also comment that you can hear the effect of this from all listening positions and its not a case where we are only optimizing a single listening position. The effect is more dramatic from the center listening position but you can easily here in the image move even from the extreme listening positions.

Something most Submersive owners can check out for themselves for 0 cost using the test disc Mark provides.

Sean

allredp

11-15-10, 08:58 PM

+1 on this. Also learned this technique from Mark and its an easy way to dial in the HT. In the utah theather all the distances mark came up with are within a foot of audessy. I have extensively A/B'd Marks settings for the distances on the rears and his settings clearly make a more immersive soundfield. Ever since then I always use this test disc as part of the process of verifying and dialing in my setup. I have seen a few cases where audessy gets it perfectly but usually I just need to a 6in adjust on the distances to get it from very good to great. I will also comment that you can hear the effect of this from all listening positions and its not a case where we are only optimizing a single listening position. The effect is more dramatic from the center listening position but you can easily here in the image move even from the extreme listening positions.

Something most Submersive owners can check out for themselves for 0 cost using the test disc Mark provides.

Sean
Fascinating - just wondering what AVR/pre-pro's you guys have. My Onkyo 875 (used as pre-pro) only has .5 foot increments for distance IIRC. Am I missing something/somewhere I can make .2 adjustments?

audioguy

11-15-10, 09:57 PM

allredp

11-15-10, 11:44 PM

Onkyo 885 distance settings

Thanks - hopefully .5 will get me lucky... I hate the upgrade madness this hobby encourages! :rolleyes: ;)

Having fun with the HP tonight - hitting 115+dB with an effortlessness and speed that is just stunning. :cool:

For example, Robin Hood isn't what most would call an impressive sub workout. However, with the HP it has some great moments - one in particular was cool where multiple horses galloping produced inaudible sound waves that moved the air - and my clothes and sectional - most impressively. Fun stuff...

BRAC

11-15-10, 11:48 PM

Gary J

11-16-10, 06:51 AM

I am using the MultEQ XT in my Denon 3808. Audyssey set the sub distance to 0.1ft.

This (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15457955&highlight=1ft#post15457955) will probably help.

BRAC

11-16-10, 08:22 AM

This (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15457955&highlight=1ft#post15457955) will probably help.

I don't think that's the problem... I did the upgrade way back when it was first released and never had any issues with it. I have done a number of Audyssey runs since, on three different setup's, without any problems.

Plus, it got the distances and levels correct on all my other speakers, and even the sub level was very close.

GPBURNS

11-16-10, 05:07 PM

Mark,

The HP has been great so far. A real improvement over my previous dual 12's.

That said, I have the sub placed just to the left of my primary seating position, ~4ft away, crossover set to 80hz. At times it will reveal its location, most noticeably during material with lots of automatic gunfire. I am using the MultEQ XT in my Denon 3808. Audyssey set the sub distance to 0.1ft.

After reading some of these recent posts, I decided to experiment with the distance setting. I tried a handful of different values from 0 to 24ft, but I couldn't detect much of a change. Any ideas?

Am I expecting too much coming from duals? Plus, I had my previous subs both up front...

That’s going to be tough
In my experience I could never get a near field sub position (my favorite position) to disappear with only one sub unless
I lowered x-over down to 60 or so
Coming from Duals that position may be problematic for you in that regard
I have my SubMersives on both sides on my listening position and they are invisible (audio speaking)
And mine are x-over at 100 – If I disable one I become aware of location
On the other hand – Could solve problem with another Hp
Dual subs are always way to go :)

craig john

11-16-10, 05:18 PM

Mark,

The HP has been great so far. A real improvement over my previous dual 12's.

That said, I have the sub placed just to the left of my primary seating position, ~4ft away, crossover set to 80hz. At times it will reveal its location, most noticeably during material with lots of automatic gunfire. I am using the MultEQ XT in my Denon 3808. Audyssey set the sub distance to 0.1ft.

After reading some of these recent posts, I decided to experiment with the distance setting. I tried a handful of different values from 0 to 24ft, but I couldn't detect much of a change. Any ideas?

Am I expecting too much coming from duals? Plus, I had my previous subs both up front...

The is another reason you could be measuring 0.1 Ft. Distance. There could be some mechanical connection from the sub to the mic. If the mic is sitting on the seating, and the seating is vibrating from the sub output during the sub chirps, the vibration of the mic could be polluting the reading. Do you have a mic stand or a mic boom? That would de-couple the mic from any vibrations.

Craig

BRAC

11-16-10, 06:10 PM

That’s going to be tough
In my experience I could never get a near field sub position (my favorite position) to disappear with only one sub unless
I lowered x-over down to 60 or so
Coming from Duals that position may be problematic for you in that regard
I have my SubMersives on both sides on my listening position and they are invisible (audio speaking)
And mine are x-over at 100 – If I disable one I become aware of location
On the other hand – Could solve problem with another Hp
Dual subs are always way to go :)

Thanks...:) That is very helpful info. This is my first time placing a sub nearfield.

BRAC

11-16-10, 06:35 PM

The is another reason you could be measuring 0.1 Ft. Distance. There could be some mechanical connection from the sub to the mic. If the mic is sitting on the seating, and the seating is vibrating from the sub output during the sub chirps, the vibration of the mic could be polluting the reading. Do you have a mic stand or a mic boom? That would de-couple the mic from any vibrations.

Craig

My mic was attached to a camera tripod sitting on top of the seating. I find the sub chirps almost inaudible. Have you personally experienced what you are describing? And, is it normal for Audyssey to have the sub closer than it really is? I have heard that the opposite can be quite normal.

Ughhh.....I was hoping to avoid that massive Audyssey thread.:eek::rolleyes::D

pepar

11-16-10, 06:39 PM

craig john

11-16-10, 06:48 PM

My mic was attached to a camera tripod sitting on top of the seating. I find the sub chirps almost inaudible. Have you personally experienced what you are describing? And, is it normal for Audyssey to have the sub closer than it really is? I have heard that the opposite can be quite normal.

Ughhh.....I was hoping to avoid that massive Audyssey thread.:eek::rolleyes::D
I had it happen when I left my tactile transducer on once during the chirps. The mechanical output of the transducer polluted the reading and I got a 0.1 Ft. Distance setting. The same thing can happen, (and has been reported to happen), with mechanical coupling of the sub to the seating. This could certainly happen with a nearfield placement of the sub. De-coupling the mic from the seating eliminates the problem.

You could also try dampening the vibrations by placing a thick blanket or a soft pillow beneath the mic tripod. It's worth a shot, but your best bet is a mic boom.

Craig

BRAC

11-16-10, 07:22 PM

craig john/pepar,

Thanks for the tip guys.:) I will try and isolate the mic a little better, then run Audyssey again.

pepar

11-16-10, 08:31 PM

craig john/pepar,

Thanks for the tip guys.:) I will try and isolate the mic a little better, then run Audyssey again.
Just do one measurement and look at the sub distance. Distances and trims are set based on the first measurement and that will tell you whether you have improved your process.

Jeff

BRAC

11-17-10, 12:33 AM

Just do one measurement and look at the sub distance. Distances and trims are set based on the first measurement and that will tell you whether you have improved your process.

Jeff

No dice...:( I isolated the microphone using a makeshift mic boom stand and then did one set of measurements. After the calculations it's giving me 0.0ft for the sub. All the other calculations are almost identical as well. I did notice that it chirps the sub twice, almost as if it is having trouble zeroing in on it. I remember it doing that the last time too. The only part of the mic making contact with the seating is the thin connection cord. Tomorrow I will lift the cord up and repeat the process just to be sure. Any other suggestions?

Btw, the mic stand is now on the opposite side of the room, ~10ft from the sub on a concrete floor.

Sorry for the brief thread derail folks...;)

Mark Seaton

11-17-10, 12:41 AM

No dice...:( I isolated the microphone using a makeshift mic boom stand and then did one set of measurements. After the calculations it's giving me 0.0ft for the sub. All the other calculations are almost identical as well. I did notice that it chirps the sub twice, almost as if it is having trouble zeroing in on it. I remember it doing that the last time too. The only part of the mic making contact with the seating is the thin connection cord. Tomorrow I will lift the cord up and repeat the process just to be sure. Any other suggestions?

Btw, the mic stand is now on the opposite side of the room, ~10ft from the sub on a concrete floor.

Sorry for the brief thread derail folks...;)

It might be worth checking what Audyssey is setting the subwoofer channel level to after calibration? Then also try running the test again after raising the subwoofer level knob by ~6dB.

BRAC

11-17-10, 01:17 AM

It might be worth checking what Audyssey is setting the subwoofer channel level to after calibration? Then also try running the test again after raising the subwoofer level knob by ~6dB.

Audyssey set the sub channel level at -5dB. Actually, I believe all the channels are in that -4dB to -6dB range.

Edit:

Mark, what is the thought process behind raising the sub level knob by 6dB and then running the test again? Thanks.

craig john

11-18-10, 03:47 PM

Craig: Had you taken a measurement of the Center-Subwoofer combo? This is accomplished by sending the same signal to both the L & R input of your preamp with the surround mode in Dolby PLII: Cinema (not Music).
Sorry, been meaning to get back to this. Here is the graph as you suggested, (Dolby PLIIx Movie):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=191487&d=1290116676

Guess which one is the 10.4 ft. Distance setting and which is the 13.8 ft setting. :D

Craig

sean_w_smith

11-18-10, 07:09 PM

Fascinating - just wondering what AVR/pre-pro's you guys have. My Onkyo 875 (used as pre-pro) only has .5 foot increments for distance IIRC. Am I missing something/somewhere I can make .2 adjustments?

mine 805's and 876's only support resolution to 6" or .5 feet. Still makes a big difference. The higher end models have finer granularity.

Sean

sean_w_smith

11-18-10, 07:12 PM

Sorry, been meaning to get back to this. Here is the graph as you suggested, (Dolby PLIIx Movie):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=191487&d=1290116676

Guess which one is the 10.4 ft. Distance setting and which is the 13.8 ft setting. :D

Craig

Wow, huge difference. I need to haul the gear out tommorow and re-do mine.

Sean

allredp

11-18-10, 11:01 PM

mine 805's and 876's only support resolution to 6" or .5 feet. Still makes a big difference. The higher end models have finer granularity.

Sean
Figured - well, I'll have a go at that then at least.

Can't believe Craig John's center/sub graph!!! WOW! What a shocker. Going to have to try that as well. :D

Heinrich S

11-19-10, 06:06 AM

Hi Craig John,

It's your good friend. Do you remember me ?

Heinrich S

11-19-10, 06:08 AM

pepar

11-19-10, 08:28 AM

HTIB and a Submersive. Yowsah!

Gary J

11-19-10, 08:33 AM

Beats being Submersive-deprived. :p

James W. Johnson

11-19-10, 09:00 AM

Will there be any Christmas specials on the Submersive ? Like a $500 off the normal pricing kind of thing ? I need to add this subwoofer to my HTIB set up. I'll just disconnect the sub, add the Submersive and let the satellites with their 2" mid-range drivers handle all the good stuff. I'll set the Submersive to 200 Hz and all is groovey. Sounds like a plan.

Now I just need that discount...

Mark is not making a fortune off these subwoofers. Just save up and get one man, you won't regret it. Don't forget you can get the cheaper finish and the SubMersives come with a 3 year warranty. You can get the original SubMersive in black for about $2100 shipped. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/images/icons/icon14.gif

TnTBigman

11-19-10, 09:01 AM

Or get the one up for sale on Audiogon.com if the finish fits.

goneten

11-19-10, 09:47 AM

My sarcasm meter lit up when I read Heinrich's post. It is obvious he was joking. Using a HTIB with a Submersive is messing with the space-time continuum; it's something that is unnatural and should never be done, ever (even if it were theoretically possible).

James W. Johnson

11-19-10, 09:48 AM

Or get the one up for sale on Audiogon.com if the finish fits.

LINK (http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?homesubw&1294692272&/Seaton-Sound-submersive-Black-)

James W. Johnson

11-19-10, 09:48 AM

I detect a serious amount of sarcasm in Heinrich's post. Using a HTIB with a Submersive is messing with the space-time continuum; it's something that is unnatural and should never be done, ever.

?? umm yeah. :rolleyes:.....On that note, a SubMersive would fit in beautifully with my ~$50 PC speakers. You don't need $10,000 speakers to enjoy a SubMersive.

goneten

11-19-10, 10:09 AM

On that note, a SubMersive would fit in beautifully with my ~$50 PC speakers.

Those are some lofty standards you've got there.

You don't need $10,000 speakers to enjoy a SubMersive.

No, you don't. All you need is a cheap HTIB, set it to 200 Hz and hold on to your seat belts. Audio nirvana I tell you. Audio nirvana.

ccotenj

11-19-10, 10:11 AM

i'm getting a chuckle out of this, because what is being described is what so many "younger drivers" do in their cars... :D

goneten

11-19-10, 10:20 AM

The standards around here have reached new heights. Just when I thought they couldn't get any higher...

goneten

11-19-10, 10:26 AM

i'm getting a chuckle out of this

So am I. I think there are some closet HTIB users posting in this forum. They haven't let go of all the baggage. 'Turn it up...man... turn it up, I can hardly hear a thing...'......'it IS turned up dude...to max volume '

...'WTF man !'

millerwill

11-19-10, 10:33 AM

Surprisingly, though, for HT in a reasonable room, it is actually not necessary to have expensive, high performance speakers for the 7 (in 7.1) satellites. E.g., it has been noted that Dr. Hsu, the well-known sub designer, preferred quite modest satellites (Ascendacoustics HTM-200's, about $140 ea), all identical, for use with one of his high performance subs.

So I think it is not unreasonable to pair an outstanding sub like the SubM with fairly modest satellites. Of course like many of us here, my insecurity in trusting my ears makes me go with L/C/R's that are more capable (Ascendacoustics Sierra-1's), and in a larger room I might even go for Catalysts! (So much for my own advice to me.)

goneten

11-19-10, 10:48 AM

Surprisingly, though, for HT in a reasonable room, it is actually not necessary to have expensive, high performance speakers for the 7 (in 7.1) satellites.

That's why PC speakers were invented. To be used with very high-end subwoofers.

Mark Seaton

11-19-10, 12:01 PM

?? umm yeah. :rolleyes:.....On that note, a SubMersive would fit in beautifully with my ~$50 PC speakers. You don't need $10,000 speakers to enjoy a SubMersive.

A SubMersive and 2 Sparks make for one kick a$$ desktop system where the SubMersive makes a great foot rest with a variable 25" or 17.5" height with a small bit of heat to keep your toes warm. :D ... All for a steal of ~$5k delivered. :rolleyes:

Mike_WI

11-19-10, 01:05 PM

A SubMersive and 2 Sparks make for one kick a$$ desktop system where the SubMersive makes a great foot rest with a variable 25" or 17.5" height with a small bit of heat to keep your toes warm. :D ... All for a steal of ~$5k delivered. :rolleyes:

Soon we'll be needing good toe warmers in WI!
:D

Mike

GPBURNS

11-19-10, 01:17 PM

A SubMersive and 2 Sparks make for one kick a$$ desktop system where the SubMersive makes a great foot rest with a variable 25" or 17.5" height with a small bit of heat to keep your toes warm. :D ... All for a steal of ~$5k delivered. :rolleyes:

I actually did one better for half a day - I sat on one submersive - 2 sparks and 1 submersive foot rest - sounded pretty good

hometheatergeek

11-19-10, 01:20 PM

I actually did one better for half a day - I sat on one submersive - 2 sparks and 1 submersive foot rest - sounded pretty good

Didn't you mean FELT good? :D

Heinrich S

11-19-10, 01:23 PM

Agh, I was just messing with you guys. There is no way I would ever think of using an htiab with a big subbie like the submersive. Thats just sad. I've got some pc speakers on my front desk that are in need of help in the bass department. I still need to know about the discount. I wonder what the submersive would sound like in a car.

craig john

11-19-10, 03:11 PM

Hi Craig John,

It's your good friend. Do you remember me ?

Honestly, no, I don't remember you. Are you sure you're not confusing me with another "Craig"... maybe craigsub? :confused:

Craig (John)

ccotenj

11-19-10, 03:12 PM

^^^

you have a secret admirer craig... :p

mmm... cats and subm in my office... mmm...

James W. Johnson

11-19-10, 03:28 PM

On that note, a SubMersive would fit in beautifully with my ~$50 PC speakers. You don't need $10,000 speakers to enjoy a SubMersive.
A SubMersive and 2 Sparks make for one kick a$$ desktop system where the SubMersive makes a great foot rest with a variable 25" or 17.5" height with a small bit of heat to keep your toes warm. :D ... All for a steal of ~$5k delivered. :rolleyes:

Well actually I am not running some ~$50 Logitech or something, I am running some Audioengine 2s (http://audioengineusa.com/Store/Audioengine-2) which would be far more appropriate to pair with a SubMersive vs some $50 Logitech speakers.

But I can only imagine how incredible a pair of Sparks and a SubMersive would sound doing PC duty. If I came into a nice chunk of money , a pair of Sparks and a SubMersive for PC duty would be on my short list of 'things I want to buy when I lit the lottery list'.

Also on that short list are the houses on the left and right side of my house or soundproofing my home theater room so my neighbors cannot hear any bass or treble and 5 Catalysts and 4 more SubMersives which would make for a total of 5 of these...>> 1.:D2.:D3.:D4.:D5.:D:p

I would already have 5 Catalysts if it were not for my neighbors being able to hear bass and treble from my current home theater which consists of 1 SubMersives and 5 speakers from the now out of business AV123.

Heinrich S

11-20-10, 12:09 PM

I have heard that submersives sound a little boomy. Sort of on the same level as svs subs. But crank out the big notes with style, unlike the svs subs. Is that true ?

James W. Johnson

11-20-10, 12:15 PM

i have heard that submersives sound a little boomy. Is that true ?

nope, not even close.

audioguy

11-20-10, 01:34 PM

I have heard that submersives sound a little boomy. Sort of on the same level as svs subs. But crank out the big notes with style, unlike the svs subs. Is that true ?

That must have come from either someone who has never heard them and/or a competitor. I have owned MANY, MANY, MANY expensive subs and the Submersives are NOT boomy played either loud or soft or anywhere in between. What a joke. I also owned the SVS subs and they are not boomy either.

Mike_WI

11-20-10, 04:11 PM

I have heard that submersives sound a little boomy. Sort of on the same level as svs subs. But crank out the big notes with style, unlike the svs subs. Is that true ?

Who did you hear that from?

Mike

Heinrich S

11-20-10, 04:47 PM

Also , what is a big note?

Sort of resembles a really deep bass frequency. You know, a really long wavelength. That kind of thing.

James W. Johnson

11-20-10, 05:28 PM

I see you just deleted your post.

If I could delete you id have done that as well. :p

goneten

11-20-10, 05:37 PM

Come on James, that's no way to treat a member. Apparently this guy is an old man. Surely you can relate ? He might be senile.

I saw you and Heinrich deleted a few posts. I see everything that goes on around here.

James W. Johnson

11-20-10, 05:38 PM

One more time?:p

Fanaticalism

11-20-10, 06:30 PM

I have heard that submersives sound a little boomy. Sort of on the same level as svs subs. But crank out the big notes with style, unlike the svs subs. Is that true ?

Some confuse a speakers/subs performance with their rooms performance.

pepar

11-20-10, 06:47 PM

Some confuse a speakers/subs performance with their rooms performance.
Yes, precisely. It is the room usually that will cause a boomy sound.

Jeff

James W. Johnson

11-20-10, 11:02 PM

Yes, precisely. It is the room usually that will cause a boomy sound.

Jeff
I disagree! That^^ would be like saying most subwoofers on the market are not boomy, there are TONS of subwoofers out there with an unacceptable amount of boom! I would say that most subwoofers are boomy. :)

If you want a subwoofer with absolutely zero boom, get a SubMersive and be done with it! :cool:

sb1

11-20-10, 11:18 PM

I disagree! That^^ would be like saying most subwoofers on the market are not boomy, there are TONS of subwoofers out there with an unacceptable amount of boom! I would say that most subwoofers are boomy. :)

If you want a subwoofer with absolutely zero boom, get a SubMersive and be done with it! :cool:I'd agree there are plenty of ass-worthy subs out there, but I'd have to say that room acoustics play a much larger role than most people think. Not just for subs, either. I'd also guess that many people who have home theaters are limited on how much they turn their systems up due to nothing more than the sonic activity of their rooms. They get "loud", but only in certain frequencies.

pepar

11-21-10, 10:15 AM

I disagree! That would be like saying most subwoofers on the market are not boomy, there are TONS of subwoofers out there with an unacceptable amount of boom! I would say that most subwoofers are boomy. :)
I didn't say that at all. Below a certain frequency, 400Hz-500Hz in most residential-size home theaters, it is the room that largely determines what we hear unless there are acoustical treatments. Good sub, bad sub .. whatever, they are all at the mercy of the room.

I'd agree there are plenty of ass-worthy subs out there, but I'd have to say that room acoustics play a much larger role than most people think. Not just for subs, either. I'd also guess that many people who have home theaters are limited on how much they turn their systems up due to nothing more than the sonic activity of their rooms. They get "loud", but only in certain frequencies.

Precisely!

pepar

11-21-10, 04:21 PM

Even above 400-500 Hz, the room largely determines what we hear. It simply has greater influence at modal frequencies and hence the differences are more severe.
I think we said the same thing. :)

Jeff

goneten

11-21-10, 04:30 PM

Below a certain frequency, 400Hz-500Hz in most residential-size home theaters, it is the room that largely determines what we hear unless there are acoustical treatments

Even above 400-500 Hz, the room largely determines what we hear. It simply has greater influence at modal frequencies and hence the differences are more severe.

That would be like saying most subwoofers on the market are not boomy, there are TONS of subwoofers out there with an unacceptable amount of boom!

I'm sure many subwoofers that you think or believe are boomy are not actually boomy at all, especially once acoustic treatment has entered the equation.

I also owned the SVS subs and they are not boomy either.

You sound like someone who is in painful denial of the truth.

goneten

11-21-10, 04:34 PM

I think we said the same thing.

You obviously thought wrong. Reread what I wrote then reread what you wrote. Obviously what I said and what you said are clearly different.

pepar

11-21-10, 04:47 PM

Whatever.

goneten

11-21-10, 04:51 PM

Are you sulking now ? :)

pepar

11-21-10, 04:59 PM

Are you sulking now ? :)
No, just not interested in consuming any more thread bandwidth with this. We sort of said the same thing regarding under the Schroeder frequency, and you added the room "the room largely determines what we hear" above it. Not knowing your definition of "largely", I decided it wasn't worth further OT banter.

Jeff

James W. Johnson

11-21-10, 05:24 PM

I am not going to argue with you guys on room treatments because I basically have no experience with doing any. I am sure that room acoustics play a much larger role in things than I think. Id not mind trying a few small things that might bring big results but I am not sure where to start. In 15 years I have never tried doing a single thing besides messing with speaker placement , toe in etc etc. Id have to think Audyssey and the Anti-Mode 8033 are helping out with room acoustics to some degree.

James W. Johnson

11-21-10, 05:27 PM

I have a quick question that is probably best for Mark Seaton.

How much power would the HP amp use if one left it on all of the time and would leaving it on all of the time shorten its lifespan?

Mark Seaton

11-21-10, 05:58 PM

I have a quick question that is probably best for Mark Seaton.

How much power would the HP amp use if one left it on all of the time and would leaving it on all of the time shorten its lifespan?

Hi James,

The HP amp idles at 15-18W, which ranges from $1-2/month in electricity depending on your electricity rates. There is no clear advantage nor concern in leaving your SubMersive on or regularly turning it off in terms of longevity.

James W. Johnson

11-21-10, 06:32 PM

Hi James,

The HP amp idles at 15-18W, which ranges from $1-2/month in electricity depending on your electricity rates. There is no clear advantage nor concern in leaving your SubMersive on or regularly turning it off in terms of longevity.

Thanks a bunch Mark!

For me 15-18 watts 24/7 would run abouts .75-1.50 or so. :)

Does anyone here leave their SubMersive(s) on all the time?

millerwill

11-21-10, 07:11 PM

Thanks a bunch Mark!

For me 15-18 watts 24/7 would run abouts .75-1.50 or so. :)

Does anyone here leave their SubMersive(s) on all the time?

Yes, and I think most folks do.

craig john

11-21-10, 08:00 PM

Thanks a bunch Mark!

For me 15-18 watts 24/7 would run abouts .75-1.50 or so. :)

Does anyone here leave their SubMersive(s) on all the time?
My 3 SubM's are left "On" all the time. For me it's a matter of convenience. My SubM's are all on separate 20 amp circuits. To turn them off, I would need to go to each one, pull it forward and reach to the bottom of the sub and shut the power switch off; then reverse the process to turn them back on. That would be a real PITA!

Yeah, I'm using some background electrical power to keep my SubM's in "standby", and that may not be considered to be "green". However, I pay for my electricity, and hopefully what I pay also pays to offset the environmental impact of that background electrical use.

Craig

audioguy

11-22-10, 09:44 AM

You sound like someone who is in painful denial of the truth.

And you clearly have never had the SVS PB-13 in your room. It may not be the perfect sub but I can assure you it is NOT boomy!

My SubMersives are a better sub but the SVS was an excellent, non-Boomy sub!

James W. Johnson

11-22-10, 05:47 PM

And you clearly have never had the SVS PB-13 in your room. It may not be the perfect sub but I can assure you it is NOT boomy!

My SubMersives are a better sub but the SVS was an excellent, non-Boomy sub!

I don't think anyone can argue with that, the guy who started that company used to post in the DIY sections here and at HTF years ago. BTW I used to be all DIY before I was in a near death motorcycle accident in 2006. Anyhow Tom definitely knows what he is doing. I am not sure if he is still a part of the company he started but he certainly set the pace. :-)

If Mr. Seaton did not start his own company, BTW he used to post in the DIY sections too. I got a ton of help from those 2 ^^ back in my DIY days.
Anyhow if the SubMersive never was, id likely own an SVS sub. :cool:

James W. Johnson

11-22-10, 05:53 PM

Also thanks to millerwill and craig john for the input above ^^ about leaving SubMersive(s) on. Now I won't have to worry if I decide to leave mine on forever. :p:D:)

KX250F

11-22-10, 07:56 PM

James W. Johnson

11-22-10, 08:20 PM

If anyone would be interested in a like new QSC DSP-30 that Mark used to install my three submersives last year give a shout. It was used for a month and then disconnected. I've got the original box and paper work.

Why are you selling it?

And what exactly is it, what does it do etc etc? Ive heard of it before but I don't know all what it does. Thanks

sean_w_smith

11-22-10, 10:27 PM

James W. Johnson

11-22-10, 10:40 PM

My pair of HP's consumes 45 watts at idle according to my killawatt meter here. California has the most expensive energy in the nation (upto ~50c/kwh) so I often turn mine off. I don't always remember but I try. I also turn off the power to AVR via an APC Power Unit. In north carolina where juice is cheap. I would have never bothered but our energy bills here are outrageous even when we dont use heat or ac so I try.

Sean

Here in WA my electricity bill is always between $47 and $52 a month year round, a propane fireplace heats my entire house and AC is not needed up here so that helps a ton but still $50 electricity bills are nice. Is yours way more than $50 a month?...... Just curious, and what exactly is an APC power unit?

pepar

11-22-10, 10:58 PM

http://www.apc.com/index.cfm?ISOCountryCode=US

sean_w_smith

11-22-10, 11:16 PM

Our bill is 350+ even in months when we dont run heat or ac. It gets real expensive to turn the ac on. hot water is gas and heat is gas and thats stuff expensive here as well.... I try not to use too much of that either. Its certainly not like utah where the power and gas are both flat rate and cheap. The term energy star hadn't been coined when most of our appliances here in sunny cali were made :(

off to watch a movie. just finished a long afternoon session involving an 8 location audessy run and then some final tweaking, measuring and listening.

Sean

James W. Johnson

11-22-10, 11:23 PM

^^Yikes, I will be sure to never move to CA !! thanks!!! :p

off to watch a movie

ditto!

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 07:24 AM

OK. I put in the new amp and had Craig and his friend Dennis come over to set everything up for me. I bought an Integra 80.2 and OPPO 83 player. What we did was we ran Audyssey in Prog. 1 and then switched to Prog. 2 here is the chart we ended up with. The blue trace is Prog 2 and the green trace is Prog 1
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=192084&d=1290605185.

Mark Seaton

11-24-10, 08:06 AM

OK. I put in the new amp and had Craig and his friend Dennis come over to set everything up for me. I bought an Integra 80.2 and OPPO 83 player. What we did was we ran Audyssey in Prog. 1 and then switched to Prog. 2 here is the chart we ended up with. The blue trace is Prog 2 and the green trace is Prog 1.

That's looking quite promising there Mike. Good to hear things came together as planned. Enjoy!

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 08:53 AM

]Just as a comparison, here is what it was like without Audyssey and just the DSP30
Thank's Mark. I am very impressed with how good my system, including the sub sounds now. It is most certainly different and I do need to get used to it but it is a big step up for sure. The bass is so more refined now. I hope people don't think it was "sloppy" before. But now it start's and stops even better. I was able to watch Star Trek at -10 on the Integra with no problems at all. All the major bass scenes sounded awesome :). We did not take any measurements of any other speakers but really I did nit have that many other issues. But adding the new amp and RC really has raised the bar for me here.I am wondering if a "pro cal" would do anything. You can see that there is no drop off at all at 16hz in the new chart. I wonder how low and flat I can really be measured at. That software goes to 16Hz and that is it.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=192099&d=1290610400

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 09:51 AM

My new chart may not be as flat as some others but it still sounds great. I think for a single sub in a small room, it turned out pretty good. Can't wait to check out more movies :).

Gary J

11-24-10, 10:03 AM

My new chart may not be as flat as some others but it still sounds great. I think for a single sub in a small room, it turned out pretty good. Can't wait to check out more movies :).

Charts are overrated anyway IMO. Try these test tones (http://www.realtraps.com/test-cd.htm) and you can hear what you are seeing. Try all the way down to 10Hz.

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 10:11 AM

They at least let you get a picture of what is going on. I have test tones that go down to 10hz but even before this upgrade I was at the point of not worrying about charts and stuff and just enjoying my system. The charts are cool because we were able to see that the problems that I had were corrected but having a nice looking chart does not make me enjoy my system anymore then before.

Gary J

11-24-10, 10:16 AM

As you go from Hz to Hz you should be able to hear dips and peaks as well. In fact move to a different listening position and you should hear slight differences. Something the chart is not telling you.

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 10:22 AM

True. I expect that different spots will sound have different sounds but for now I am just going to be having movie marathons. Thank goodness for the four day weekend:D.

FOH

11-24-10, 10:23 AM

My new chart may not be as flat as some others but it still sounds great. I think for a single sub in a small room, it turned out pretty good. Can't wait to check out more movies :).

That's certainly an understatement Mike. The in room response you've exhibited in that dual trace chart is terrific. And yes, for just one sub, that's nice and smooth. I've followed your progress here, and on Seaton's forum. Nice job.

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 10:28 AM

That's certainly an understatement Mike. The in room response you've exhibited in that dual trace chart is terrific. And yes, for just one sub, that's nice and smooth. I've followed your progress here, and on Seaton's forum. Nice job.

Thanks. Mark has been instrumental in the Journey as well so I have to again thank him for all of his advice and help along the way.

craig john

11-24-10, 10:53 AM

Hi Mike,

The Submersive HP amp made a big difference in your system. In addition, Audyssey MultEQ XT32 made a big difference in the sound quality of the bass, and of the midrange/treble from the mains and surrounds. Everything sounded smoother and beter integrated.

Mike, post some of the listening impressions you sent me. Also, post some new pic's of your system. We reconfigured the whole front stage, including moving the TV/stand to the middle of the room, splitting the racks with one on each side of the TV, installing the Oppo BluRay player and the Integra 80.2, rewiring everything with HDMI interconnects, repositioning the main speakers and re-mounting the surrounds so they face the LP.

Some of the changes made subtle improvements, like moving the CC so the LP is on-axis. Some made huge differences, like Audyssey XT32 and the Submersive amp. All-in-all, I thought the whole thing turned out pretty darn good. :)

Enjoy!

Craig

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 11:09 AM

Will do Craig. I will take some new pictures this weekend an put them up.
Here are some of the comments I sent:
Now, on to more important things :). I watched Star Trek last night. WOW. The difference was just crazy. I was able to go to -10db on the Integra with no problem. It sounded way better than it ever did before. Pans were much more precise. I was able to get much better channel separation between the left center and right speakers. Plus the surrounds sound fantastic now.

When people were talking in the left or right speaker it was clearly heard. Even as there was main dialog coming from the center. The sound was incredibly clean. As for the sub, it was a completely new feeling, so to speak. It was incredibly tight. It seemed to react so damn fast. I mean it just starts and stops on a dime. The warp jumps were like quick snaps of bass. The “boom” during the space jump onto the platform was incredibly precise. It seems that there is no “extra” stuff at all. It sounded incredible but I do need to get used to it.
And Thanks again to you and Dennis spending the day helping me out. It was a lot of fun.

James W. Johnson

11-24-10, 11:38 AM

OK. I put in the new amp and had Craig and his friend Dennis come over to set everything up for me. I bought an Integra 80.2 and OPPO 83 player. What we did was we ran Audyssey in Prog. 1 and then switched to Prog. 2 here is the chart we ended up with. The blue trace is Prog 2 and the green trace is Prog 1

You just convinced me to try prog 2 on my HP amp, thanks MikeDuke! :)

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 11:54 AM

No problem. Hopefully you will like what it does.

RMK!

11-24-10, 12:32 PM

audioguy

11-24-10, 01:05 PM

]Just as a comparison, here is what it was like without Audyssey and just the DSP30

Did you keep the DSP30 in the chain when you ran Audyssey? Since you did not use Audyssey Pro, that is an incredibly nice bass response and I'm not sure what Pro would improve.

Now I'm excited to get my 80.2 installed. I'm still waiting on Mark to comment on the upgraded amps for my 4 SubMersives or consider swapping a couple of them out and getting a single bigger Seaton Sub but am leaning strongly to getting the HP amps.

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 01:15 PM

Thanks :). It does sound sweet. Even though the chart looks to drift lower I am guessing that it is still pretty good overall? I know I am biased but it does sound outstanding. If anybody could possibly still be on the fence about this sub, don't be. Just get it,with the HP amp and have a good room correction system. I have a hard time believing that anybody would be disappointed with how it sounded

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 01:22 PM

Did you keep the DSP30 in the chain when you ran Audyssey? Since you did not use Audyssey Pro, that is an incredibly nice bass response and I'm not sure what Pro would improve.

Now I'm excited to get my 80.2 installed. I'm still waiting on Mark to comment on the upgraded amps for my 4 SubMersives or consider swapping a couple of them out and getting a single bigger Seaton Sub but am leaning strongly to getting the HP amps.

I guess I am a slow typer:p. No we did not keep the DSP30 in the loop when we tested. Talking to Craig before we did this convinced me that the filters in the Integra were vastly superior to the ones in the DSP30. In both number and sensitivity so I just took it out. So you are maybe thinking of a pair of SubMersives and a pair of Terraform XL's? That would be mind blowing I think. I also think that upgrading the SubMersives to HP status and getting the 80.2 installed in your system would really put you on a new level. You can see what it did for me. With your Cat and Submersive setup I am %100 positive the changes would floor you.

hometheatergeek

11-24-10, 01:56 PM

You guys are killing me with all this talk about owning the Intregra 80.2 and your great looking graphs. So cut it out. :p :D I just can not afford it right now.

BTW I really need to come by your place again Chuck maybe after the HP upgrade. :eek:

craig john

11-24-10, 02:05 PM

Thanks :). It does sound sweet. Even though the chart looks to drift lower I am guessing that it is still pretty good overall?
The chart doesn't really "drift lower." If you look at the levels of the speakers from 80 Hz up, (80 hz being the crossover point), the response is fairly level up to about 250 Hz, and then there is a room induced dip. We can't see beyond that in this measurement, but I'm sure the level is pretty much the same above this, with a few other peaks and dips. Below 80 Hz, with Prog 1, you have a slightly rising response that makes for a very nice "house curve". Prog 2 raises that even a little more. Even though these are just single point measurements at the listening position, I think they are fairly representative of what you're hearing... and I think we both liked how it sounded:

I know I am biased but it does sound outstanding. If anybody could possibly still be on the fence about this sub, don't be. Just get it,with the HP amp and have a good room correction system. I have a hard time believing that anybody would be disappointed with how it sounded.

Unfortunately, by the time we finished everything, we only had time to listen to a few tracks, (it was already an 11 hour day!) :) Nonetheless, what we listened to did sound terrific. That scene in Sherlock Holmes were the ship falls off the rails and slides into the harbor was really spectacular! I wish we had had more time to listen and take some more measurements. The full range measurements would have been interesting.

Also, note how good the "time response" looks in your room, (the little multi-colored graph in the upper right.) For such a small room, with lots of hard walls, windows and doors, the decay is quite good. The traps and acoustic panels you've installed really seem to be working quite well. Good job on that! When you provide Audyssey XT32 with a good starting point, as you've done, it can do a much better job of correcting the remaining problems. Well done, Mike!

Craig

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 02:16 PM

Thanks Craig, I could not have done it without the both of you though. And I was never good at reading charts and graphs. I just know what I like when I hear it. At this point, me likely a lot:D. I try my best to do things the right way, even though it may take longer. I know I am hamstrung because of my room, it's size and makeup. That is why I am very pleased with the results. I know it was a very long day. That's why I really appreciate all your help that much more. We did not rush anything. Even when trying to isolate that hum(which was a problem with the Turn table NOT the amp). New pictures this weekend.
Edited for clarification on hum

craig john

11-24-10, 02:19 PM

Thanks Craig, I could not have done it without the both of you though. And I was never good at reading charts and graphs. I just know what I like when I hear it. At this point, me likely a lot:D. I try my best to do things the right way, even though it may take longer. I know I am hamstrung because of my room, it's size and makeup. That is why I am very pleased with the results. I know it was a very long day. That's why I really appreciate all your help that much more. We did not rush anything. Even when trying to isolate that hum.
Just to clarify... the hum was from the turntable, not the Submersive. The TT needed to be grounded properly, which I had not done initially. I wouldn't want anyone to think it was from the Submersive.

Craig

MIkeDuke

11-24-10, 02:33 PM

Just to clarify... the hum was from the turntable, not the Submersive. The TT needed to be grounded properly, which I had not done initially. I wouldn't want anyone to think it was from the Submersive.

Craig
Correct. I should have been clearer. It was from my TT not the sub.

James W. Johnson

11-25-10, 09:49 PM

Happy Thanksgiving guys! Get those Christmas decorations out! :p

I was wondering if there were any audio tests out there that one could use with an SPL meter to test different subwoofer locations?
It would be nice to have some proof a different subwoofer location is better or worse.
thanks

Heinrich S

11-26-10, 05:30 AM

And you clearly have never had the SVS PB-13 in your room. It may not be the perfect sub but I can assure you it is NOT boomy!

Speaking to someone who heard one and thought it sounded like mud. Very boomy compared to other subs I've heard. I think boomy was an understatement. Just my view. If it isn't boomy then I wouldn't automatically qualify it as being precise or articulate either.

pepar

11-26-10, 08:40 AM

Sooo, still insisting a sub you heard over there is boomy and one you heard over here is not, eh?

Heinrich S

11-26-10, 10:52 AM

Sooo, still insisting a sub you heard over there is boomy and one you heard over here is not, eh?

Contrary to popular belief subwoofers can and do generate higher levels of self-noise than others due to a number of factors ranging from design, to cabinet induced vibrations or some other cause. Some subwoofers ring more than others. I have heard a few SVS models already and every one sounded like a one-note mess. I have also heard the JL Fathom and in EVERY case, it was a major, major improvement on every level. Bass quality was 10 times better.

craig john

11-26-10, 11:06 AM

I was wondering if there were any audio tests out there that one could use with an SPL meter to test different subwoofer locations?
It would be nice to have some proof a different subwoofer location is better or worse.
thanks
The totally "free" solution is to use the RealTraps Test Tones.
http://www.realtraps.com/test-cd.htm
However, you get what you pay for. This is a cumbersome and time consuming system to use. It plays individual tones from 10 Hz to 300 Hz and each tone is played for 10 seconds. It takes about an hour to do each run. You need to write down all the SPL levels or enter them into a spreadsheet. Then use the graphing function of the spreadsheet to graph your results.

Rinse and repeat for other subwoofer locations and listening positions. It could easily take you all day to map out your room.

Next up is another "free" solution, at least for the software:
Room EQ Wizard: http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/
The program is free, and you can use an SPL meter as the mic, but you'll need a duplexing soundcard, and then you'll need to spend a significant amount of time fiddling with it to ensure you have "correct" results. Still, if/when you get it set up properly, it yields some excellent results and lots of information.

A much simpler and easier solution is the system I use:
xtz Room Analyzer:
http://www.xtz.se/uk/products/mearurement-system/room-analyzer
It doesn't use an SPL meter; it has it's own calibrated mic. There is now a US Retailer of the system, and the price is currently about $250.
http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/shop-catalog/xtz-room-analyzer.html
xtz is an all-in-one-box solution that is orders of magnitude less time consuming to use than either of the above systems. All you need is a computer with a USB port. You can be up and running within minutes and everything is pre-calibrated so no fiddling with soundcards, mic preamps, or test tones. Each measurement takes about 5 seconds, (30 seconds if you do 3-position measurements). The graphs I posted recently were xtz graphs. Here is the AVS "Official" thread on it:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1264522&highlight=xtz

Another easy to use measurement system is the Velodyne SMS-1:
http://www.velodyne.com/vproducts/series.aspx?seriesid=1211&v_area=a
It is also an 8-band parametric equalizer, so it can be used to improve the frequency response in addition to just measuring it.

The only other "consumer" level system that I'm aware of is the one Mark linked to a few pages back:
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=390-790&ctab=1#Tabs
It's a little more expensive than xtz, but it looks like it might be a little more extensive in the tests it can run. It's not available yet, but it should be soon.

Beyond "consumer" level systems, there are "pro" systems if you want to get really serious. Here are a couple of examples:
http://www.etfacoustic.com/RPlusDSite/index.html
(They have a "low-rez" version that is free and can be used with an SPL meter, but it shouldn't be used for accurate FR measurements.)
http://www.sencore.com/products/Audio-Consultant-SP495-SoundPro_58.html
http://www.libinst.com/index.htm

If you have an iPhone 4, I believe there is an app coming out for acoustic analysis on it, but I don't know how good it will be, or how accurate the mic in an iPhone 4 is. Still, it should be easy and cheap. :)

Measuring your system can definitely improve your results. You can visually "see" the FR and find the best locations for your subwoofer and your listening position. You can also see the integration of your sub with your speakers and optimize your Bass Management settings.

Good luck with it!

Craig