I'm looking at the Outlaw LFM-1 EX/ Velodyne SMS-1 promo. I'm tempted, but I want to hear from others about the SMS-1. At this point I am not concerned if you own an Outlaw sub or not. I just want to know if the SMS truly has made a difference in your own set-up.

I'm looking at the Outlaw LFM-1 EX/ Velodyne SMS-1 promo. I'm tempted, but I want to hear from others about the SMS-1. At this point I am not concerned if you own an Outlaw sub or not. I just want to know if the SMS truly has made a difference in your own set-up.

Yes, the SMS-1 is a valuable tool that has made a significant difference. I use mine primarily to boost the low end in a sealed DIY subwoofer setup.

There are certainly less expensive solutions out there, but few can match the ease of use and instant results of the SMS.

There some issues with the freq response and distortion when overdriving the input side. The freq response/low end rolloff issue is supposed to be cured with the latest firmware update. The distortion issue can be cured by using the XLR input or keeping the input levels very low on the RCA side.

I have one that I got very recently. The auto setup is super easy to use... but I haven't yet figured out how to do any manual tweaks.

It is a far easier solution then others out there, and can have a significant impact to ones system, especially if you have multiple subs.... I really like mine and it provided me the opportunity to smooth out my room very easily.... and as jpmst3 has stated, some people are anxiously awaiting the next firmware release to remove the abrupt low end roll off....

In addition to my acoustic bass traps and panels, the sms-1 has been a wonderful addition to helping achieve as flat of response as possible. The manual setup is the way to go in my opinion for best results and is very easy, just takes a little time.

I love mine and don't want to do without it!! (or any other type of sub eq for that matter). It's so easy to use and helped me dial in my new PC-Ultra that I got last night. The great thing is that there is 6 different pre-sets so it gives you the opportunity to experiment without erasing the setting that you already have.

I have a setting for movies (sub playing by itself, flat from 15-80hz) and another setting for music, which I only use the sub to fill in the FR of my Aerial 9 playing as "large".

yes, it makes a big difference. I can tailor the response EXACTLY the way I want it. Unlike other people I don't want a perfectly flat response, but the SMS allows for that because you can shape the frequency response.

I really like the presets and its ease of use.

Thanks everyone,

You have no idea how these posts have helped. I'm going to print out this whole thread except this particular post. So here is the "rest of the story":

I had convinced my wife that we "needed" a new subwoofer to optimize our system. By negotiation we settled on a budget of between $700- $800.

By the way, here is a handy tip when looking at new gear. In our house, whenever I get something I want, I make sure that she gets something else out of the deal. (The home theater cost me an extra $3000 for an "upgrade" to the guest bathroom.) This new sub will cost me a new IPOD Nano for her.

Anyway, I looked at all the usual suspects and even considered the Hsu VTF-3 until she got a look at the optional turbo. I have finally settled on the Outlaw LFM-1 EX and bragged that I was coming in under budget at $650. Then I got the email Friday night for the promo combo of the EX/SMS-1 for $999. That raises the top end of my negotiated $800 budget another $200.

While it is part of the combo I can explain that the SMS-1 is not part of the sub. So I think I can make the case that we will have better performance and equally important flexibility in moving (make that "hiding" ) the subwoofer.

Guys, your comments will truly help me in making my case. Thanks so much for the feedback. However, I now have a suspicion that she will suggest that she "needs" an IPOD Touch instead of the Nano.

Tell her spending the extra 200 will make your 800 sub sound like the 3k units in the store (without EQ, even a 3k sub can sound bloated and boomy in a problem room, which is pretty much any untreated room). Seriously though, the SMS-1 will allow you to reduce room peaks at the listening position and will make any sub reach it's full potential, and the LFM-1 EX has a lot of potential. I had a 12db peak at 40hz in my room at my listening position, but once I tamed it with my SMS-1, it really cleaned up the bass big time. I'm of the opinion that anyone who's serious about clean, deep bass really needs an SMS-1 or other parametric EQ for thier sub.

After you get your SMS-1, it'll be time to start working on her to add bass traps to your room. That'll be tough, bass traps have low WAF. Might have to involve jewelry for her...

Deneb,

Bass traps won't cut it unless I want to put a down payment on the Hope Diamond, which is a little out of my price range this year. It's tough enough that I have to "close" her on this deal before Outlaw shuts the door.

I just got my SMS-1 today, and it is an amazing product! To be able to watch the nulls in your room on a screen and then correct it, priceless. It is very easy to use, and for how much difference it can make it is easily the best $600 you can spend on your system.

I just got my SMS-1 today, and it is an amazing product! To be able to watch the nulls in your room on a screen and then correct it, priceless. It is very easy to use, and for how much difference it can make it is easily the best $600 you can spend on your system.

Congrats and enjoy!:)

Now if they would only release the firmware update to correct the rolloff we will be all set!

I just got my SMS-1 today, and it is an amazing product! To be able to watch the nulls in your room on a screen and then correct it, priceless. It is very easy to use, and for how much difference it can make it is easily the best $600 you can spend on your system.

Boosting nulls with EQ (SMS-1 or other EQ) isn't a good idea, you'll run out of headroom on your sub amp very quickly. EQ is great for reducing peaks, but to reduce nulls, your options are experimenting with placement and phase on your sub as well as adding bass traps.

yes, please don't boost nulls. Maybe go +2db on a dip, and that's it.

Update on my setup. As I said before, I just got a PC-Ultra and I'm using an XLR connection from the SMS-1. After a few days of experimenting, I settled on the 15hz tune. For several reasons that i won't get into here, it wasn't giving me the performance I had hoped to get. So I decided to put my Servo-15 back into action, together with the SVS. SVS in front, Paradigm in the back. Without EQ, I was very fortunate to score a fairly flat FR with the Servo-15 in a serviceable location. Be careful though, one could go either way when it comes to multiple subs. In my case, one helped the other, and now I can drive each sub lower, as well as getting the highest number of "listenable seats" in my theater. Putting the subs to test through The Haunting (DTS), Day After Tomorrow, Flight of the Phoenix, PotC 2, and Master and Commander finally left a smile on my face.

The SMS-1 made the process easy. I sat near my Servo-15 and dialed in exactly how much gain as I watched the screen. I was able to quickly determine the FR of each of my ten seats so I know how many "bad seats" each location generated. Technofreaks will tell you it's not a perfect product, but i'd rather live with its flaws than not have it at all.

There was a giant thread on the SMS-1 that was archived. It had a tremendous amount of useful information about the device. Here it is for anyone who wants to learn more about the SMS-1:
http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=495331&page=1&pp=30&highlight=sms1+accuracy

I wish there was a way to revive this thread. I had a post on Page 41 of that thread about the progression I use to setup my SMS-1 with my receiver's auto-setup routine, YPAO. I'll quote it here in the hopes that the OP will find it beneficial:

I have a Yamaha RX-V4600 and here is the progression I use to incorporate both the SMS-1 and the YPAO:

First, I ignore self-EQ and Auto-EQ; I go straight to "Manual". I start with the SMS-1 at the factory default settings and in the "setup" mode. I then go back to the receiver and set the bass management, (all speakers "small" and LFE/subwoofer output to subwoofer.) Remember that the SMS-1 can only EQ the sub, so sending LF bass to all speakers will make the EQ much less effective. There are several other advantages to this setup, even if you have nearly full-range speakers. The key is the crossover point. My mains extend into the mid-40's, so I use an 80 Hz crossover. If your mains extend lower than that, use a lower crossover. Just remember that any bass produced by speakers other than the sub can't be EQ'd with the SMS-1. Also, the SMS-1 has a fixed 80 Hz high pass crossover, so it's output drops dramatically above this.

The next thing I do is set up the subwoofer. I set the volume control to approximately 10:00 (or whatever is reasonable on your sub). I turn the sub's internal crossover all the way up to it's highest point. If it can be disengaged, I do that. I'm using bass management in the receiver and it set's the crossover point. Using another one in the sub is not only redundant, it can be detrimental. I set the phase control to "zero" or "+".

The next thing I do is run the the YPAO, but I disengage the EQ's. I just have it set speaker levels and distance. If it selects the wrong crossover or speaker size setting, (which it always does), I change it. Now I'm ready to start EQ'ing because I'm using the correct size, level and distance settings that I will eventually be using when I'm finished. If you do the entire EQ first and then change something later by running the YPAO, you will affect the EQ.

BTW, the receiver should be in stereo mode at this point. The SMS-1 outputs a stereo signal and the receiver's bass management re-directs the the bass to the subwoofer output. Putting the system in a multichannel mode won't help, at least not at this point.

Before I start EQ-ing, I disconnect the mains. With the speakers disconnected, I'm only looking at the response of the subwoofer without any influence of the speakers. I also reset some of the factory defaults on Page 2. I defeat the low-pass crossover, (once again because I'm using the receiver's crossover and redundant crossovers can be detrimental.) I also reset the subsonic filter to it's lowest point (5 Hz with the new software) and the slope to 6 dB/octave. (When I'm finished I will reset these to 10 Hz and 24 dB/octave for safety purposes, but for EQ-ing, the levels are not high enough to be of concern.)

Now, after I've done all this, it's finally time to EQ the sub. This is the fun part! I use the manual mode and the "Setup" preset, as this will set the default EQ for all other presets. I look for the biggest peaks in my response. I ignore nulls as EQ can't do much to fix them anyway. (I used to use a lot of boost to augment the VLF response, but I've gotten away from that.) I move my sliders to points underneath the peaks and bring them down. I can also change the "Q" to widen or narrow the effect of each slider. As I reduce the peaks, I will also increase the overall volume to maintain the same average or total volume.

Once I've gotten the sub EQ'd to my liking, I reconnect the mains and evaluate the response. What usually happens is that the response changes most at and around the crossover. These response changes are caused by multiple speakers reproducing the same frequencies. At some frequencies they are out of phase with each other (causing cancelations). At other frequencies they are in phase with each other, (causing augmentation). Therefore, if the response with the stereo speakers engaged is not what I want, I will first try to improve it with the phase control on Page 2. I try not to change the EQ of the sub because I know it is correct by itself.

(You can also use the speaker distance control in the receiver to adjust phase. This control is actually a delay in the signal sent to the speakers which are "closer" than the furthest away speaker to bring them into time alignment. You can do this, but it's more complicated and I prefer to use the SMS-1 phase control and leave the speaker distances at the YPAO settings.)

Then I put the receiver in one of the multichannel modes, (PLIIx, etc.). This engages the rest of the speakers and shows how they interact with the sub. I usually don't change anything here, I'm just looking to ensure it doesn't induce any significant problems.

When I've finished with the SMS-1, I go back and re-check the levels of the speakers and sub manually with the receiver, (or with Avia and an SPL meter.) If the sub level is off, I don't reset it in the receiver, I use the volume control on the SMS-1. I never re-engage the YPAO's EQ's. I don't like what any of them do to the imaging so I don't use them.

Although my technique is a little different than what Velodyne recommends, I have used it with success. I have a reason for every choice I make and the end result works. I arrived at it through a lot of experimentation. I'm sure you will want to experiment with yours also. You'll find that all these controls in the receiver, the SMS-1 and the subwoofer interact and you'll want to set things appropriately for your system before you begin the EQ process.

Good luck.

Craig

Edit. I forgot one very important step. Before you begin EQ-ing, you need to move your sub into all the possible locations in your room to find the best baseline response. Most rooms only have a few possible locations from an aesthetics POV. Try the sub in each location, and even in a few variations within each location, i.e., move it a little left, right, front and back, turn it so the driver faces different directions, etc. This is really easy to do with the SMS-1 because the sweeps are so quick. Once you've found the best location, you can proceed with the rest of the EQ process.

I hope that helps anyone getting an SMS-1.

Craig

Maybe I missed it, and it's getting late... but what's the proper way to position the SMS mic? I have two subs, both on the left side of the room - one in front of the listening position, one rear of the listening position. Do you aim it upward, ala' an Audyessy mic? Toward the front of the room?

Thanks

Maybe I missed it, and it's getting late... but what's the proper way to position the SMS mic? I have two subs, both on the left side of the room - one in front of the listening position, one rear of the listening position. Do you aim it upward, ala' an Audyessy mic? Toward the front of the room?

Thanks

Vertical, ear height at the LP.

Vertical, ear height at the LP.

Thanks for the response - this is what I did, but I'm not a whole lot happy with the sound yet. I'll post my current graph and equipment information subsequent to this post.

Ironically, I came across this mic-position answer from 2005 post on the archived thread about the SMS-1 on AVS http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=495331&page=22&pp=30&highlight=sms1+accuracy (from a "Curt C" - Velodyne employee? Installer?)

Hi,
We normally point it straight ahead on a stand or table just in front of seated position.
Curt

Perhaps it doesn't matter a whole bunch - I find it odd the manual doesn't seem to indicate directionality of the mic at the listening position.

i pointed mine straight ahead as well...great results

Althought the mic is considered omnidirectional. I aim mine towards the front at about an 45 degree angle from the ceiling.

Just a thought, while the SMS-1 is cycling through the frequencies, change the angle of the mic and see if there's any difference between straight up, 45 degrees and 90 degrees.

So here's my manual EQ - I don't have a shot of Page 2 at the moment, but will post shortly...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=109988&stc=1&d=1210426127

My Setup:
Onkyo 905/EarthQuake Cinenova Grande 7 - all speakers set to 80Hz - Mythos ST L/R - not using LFE inputs on ST's...Two sus connected to the SMS - JL Fathom 113, internally calibrated, reference volume level - crossover bypassed. DefTech Supercube 1, about 3'oclock on the volume knob, crossovers defeated. 905 sub trim at -2.5. About 75 db RatShack SPL prior

Room treatments. Not a lot - wall to wall carpeting, homemade triangular rear corner bass traps (4 foot stack of mineral wool board), two rear 2x4 by two inch mineral wool (note, in the room pictures, the 2x4 panels are behind the front speakers, but they were moved to the rear walls beneath each back surround prior to using the SMS-1)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=109984&d=1210425952
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=109985&d=1210425952
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=109986&d=1210425952
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=109987&d=1210425978

Crossover OFF in SMS. I tweaked PHASE and POLARITY settings to get the graph as smooth as possible, then EQ'd as seen here. Tried to cut more than gain, as per my reading of the manuals and on AVS

After EQ'ing with the SMS, I check the internal test tone of the 905 for the LFE, and it remained around 75 db

But on listening tests, the low end sounds a bit weak and at times coarse/uneven (listened to WOTW/DTS and I Am Legend, DTS MA

I have yet to re-run Audyssey (I loathe that step...) Is this critical? Should I use the Fathom 113 ARO internal calibration (as I have), or should it be bypassed?

I'll get screen two posted in a little while.


Thanks

I have a SMS-1 in a 2 channel system and love it. For the time being I am driving my mains full range and use the SMS's low pass crossover to my sub's LFE input. I have experimented with the SMS's high pass crossover and it's first order slope works well with several speakers that I've tried in the past. I will probably go back to the high pass crossover to the mains as it's better at higher volumes or when playing a DVD with a lot of bass.

My room had some nasty peaks, the worst being a 8 dB hump at 40 Hz that the SMS did a great job at taming. As great as the SMS is I can honestly say that the number one improvement in my system's bass and overall clarity was when I put a Auralex SubDude under the sub. The difference that this $50 tweek made was incredible, so much so that I had to re-EQ the sub. The peaks were about 3dB lower just from decoupling the sub from the room.

While I can recommend the SMS highly, I think the SubDude has a much higher performance/price ratio and should be used FIRST. My room was an acoustical nightmare with hardwood floors, 9' ceilings, 6' windows, and a tin ceiling. Before adding the SubDude everthing vibrated, and being a 120 year old house there wasn't much I could do. The combination of the SMS and SubDude was staggering, the rattles were gone and the bass was deep and tight. It's amazing how great a system can sound when room resonances don't impart their own nasty signature.

thrang,

My guess is that your system doesn't respond well to having 1 equalizer adjusting 2 subs.

If you've got the time, unplug one of the subs and do a screen capture of the resulting frequency response plot. Then do it again with the other sub unplugged and the first one plugged in.

Also....very important...be sure that you peak out the crossover region by adjusting the subwoofer distance adjustment in your preamp/receiver. Your 75 hz boost indicates somethings going on there.

I have a SMS-1 in a 2 channel system and love it. For the time being I am driving my mains full range and use the SMS's low pass crossover to my sub's LFE input. I have experimented with the SMS's high pass crossover and it's first order slope works well with several speakers that I've tried in the past. I will probably go back to the high pass crossover to the mains as it's better at higher volumes or when playing a DVD with a lot of bass.

My room had some nasty peaks, the worst being a 8 dB hump at 40 Hz that the SMS did a great job at taming. As great as the SMS is I can honestly say that the number one improvement in my system's bass and overall clarity was when I put a Auralex SubDude under the sub. The difference that this $50 tweek made was incredible, so much so that I had to re-EQ the sub. The peaks were about 3dB lower just from decoupling the sub from the room.

While I can recommend the SMS highly, I think the SubDude has a much higher performance/price ratio and should be used FIRST. My room was an acoustical nightmare with hardwood floors, 9' ceilings, 6' windows, and a tin ceiling. Before adding the SubDude everthing vibrated, and being a 120 year old house there wasn't much I could do. The combination of the SMS and SubDude was staggering, the rattles were gone and the bass was deep and tight. It's amazing how great a system can sound when room resonances don't impart their own nasty signature.


Funny, I was looking at that same product just a few days ago. I'll give it a shot - thanks.

thrang,

My guess is that your system doesn't respond well to having 1 equalizer adjusting 2 subs.

If you've got the time, unplug one of the subs and do a screen capture of the resulting frequency response plot. Then do it again with the other sub unplugged and the first one plugged in.

Also....very important...be sure that you peak out the crossover region by adjusting the subwoofer distance adjustment in your preamp/receiver. Your 75 hz boost indicates somethings going on there.

I will try this and post some screen shots - are thinking the boosts in the 75 and 90 ranges are what may be causing my feeling that the LFE is coarse or uneven.

I'll also be ordering and installing four 2x4 by 4 inch ATS bass absorbers and probably two RFZ Real Trap panels for the first reflect points on the ceiling as well. I also may try the trick of putting rolled fiberglass insulation in the front corners, providing I can sew a slip cover with that ATS/GOM acoustically transparent material to blend it in to the room....

Thanks

Funny, I was looking at that same product just a few days ago. I'll give it a shot - thanks.

If you've got a carpet over concrete slab foundation, there wouldn't be any benefit to a subdude or similar product.

If your subwoofer is large enough to transfer energy through a concrete slab foundation......then the next home theater get to gether is at your place. We'll all want to see/feel it. :D

You've got a nice looking room. The problem I have at my place is in a non dedicated home theater with lots of windows, you really can't put enough panals in place to do it enough good to justify doing it. Its very questionable if the chase is worth the catch.

I do think that once you get your sub/equalization thing worked out, you're going to have more than enough bass. Then it'll be a question on how to refine it.

If you've got a carpet over concrete slab foundation, there wouldn't be any benefit to a subdude or similar product.

If your subwoofer is large enough to transfer energy through a concrete slab foundation......then the next home theater get to gether is at your place. We'll all want to see/feel it. :D

I wish...Actually, I have (as the pictures indicate) wall to wall carpeting, but it is over standard floor joists/plywood with insulation between the joists. So the SubDude would still be of benefit, I'm presuming (the Fathom is a fairly heavy mother - around 135 pounds...)

Just a warning, I purchased a pair of Subdudes for my F113 pair. The F113 is heavily weighted to the back of the unit and the F113's compressed the Subdude foam base so that they sat at an angle listing to stern by 15-20 degrees. I tried shimming the Subdudes with additional foam wedges in the back in order to have the F113's level. Ended up scrapping them.

I've read that the SMS best serves multiples subs. Is it worth getting one for a single sub system. I have an old Paradigm PW-2200. Quite boomy. I'm hoping the SMS can help me clear the boom.

Any thoughts?

Just a warning, I purchased a pair of Subdudes for my F113 pair. The F113 is heavily weighted to the back of the unit and the F113's compressed the Subdude foam base so that they sat at an angle listing to stern by 15-20 degrees. I tried shimming the Subdudes with additional foam wedges in the back in order to have the F113's level. Ended up scrapping them.

thanks for this info - I did end up ordering the auralex gramma, so hopefully the larger base will give me better weight distribution

Havent had a chance to do any further experimenting with the sms-1 given mothers day yesterday, but today and tomorrow should yield more results.

I've read that the SMS best serves multiples subs. Is it worth getting one for a single sub system. I have an old Paradigm PW-2200. Quite boomy. I'm hoping the SMS can help me clear the boom.

Any thoughts?

If its in a corner, move it.

Have you run a frequency response test?

I have yet to re-run Audyssey (I loathe that step...) Is this critical? Should I use the Fathom 113 ARO internal calibration (as I have), or should it be bypassed?
Audyssey, SMS-1 and ARO. Hmmmmm...... so many EQ's... so little time. :D

I have the same "issue" as you. I have an Onkyo 885 pre/pro with Audyssey MultEQ XT, (what version of Audyssey do you have?), an SMS-1 and dual JL F112's with ARO. After much experimentation I have decided to remove the SMS-1, turn off the ARO's and just let Audyssey MultEQ XT be the sole EQ for my system.

My logic:
1). Daisy-chaining multiple EQ's seems like a bad idea.
2). The SMS-1 can only EQ in the frequency domain and it can only EQ one listening position, (and it can make other LP's worse.)
3). ARO is only one band of EQ if I use the Master/Slave arrangement, or 2 bands, 1 for each F112, if I use the peer to peer arrangement.

Audyssey EQ's both subs together, as if they were one. It EQ's in the frequency *and* the time domains. It EQ's for multiple listening positions and it has higher resolution than the SMS-1. It doesn't have the SMS-1's OSD and there is no way to manually "tweak" the response. However, to my ears, Audyssey does a better job, especially at reducing the ringing of the bass in my room. The bass is tighter, cleaner and it has more "definition" than with the SMS-1, (which was a significant improvement over no EQ at all.)

My suggestion is to run Audyssey with the SMS-1 and ARO off. Then compare the sound of the system EQ'd by the SMS-1 and EQ'd by Audyssey MultEQ XT. I would be interested to see which you prefer. (I am assuming you have Audyssey MultEQ XT. Some of the older versions of Audyssey did not have the bass EQ capability of the MultEQ XT version. If you have an older version of Audyssey, then your SMS-1 will be the preferred method of EQ'ing the bass.)

Craig

Audyssey, SMS-1 and ARO. Hmmmmm...... so many EQ's... so little time. :D

I have the same "issue" as you. I have an Onkyo 885 pre/pro with Audyssey MultEQ XT, (what version of Audyssey do you have?), an SMS-1 and dual JL F112's with ARO. After much experimentation I have decided to remove the SMS-1, turn off the ARO's and just let Audyssey MultEQ XT be the sole EQ for my system.

My logic:
1). Daisy-chaining multiple EQ's seems like a bad idea.
2). The SMS-1 can only EQ in the frequency domain and it can only EQ one listening position, (and it can make other LP's worse.)
3). ARO is only one band of EQ if I use the Master/Slave arrangement, or 2 bands, 1 for each F112, if I use the peer to peer arrangement.

Audyssey EQ's both subs together, as if they were one. It EQ's in the frequency *and* the time domains. It EQ's for multiple listening positions and it has higher resolution than the SMS-1. It doesn't have the SMS-1's OSD and there is no way to manually "tweak" the response. However, to my ears, Audyssey does a better job, especially at reducing the ringing of the bass in my room. The bass is tighter, cleaner and it has more "definition" than with the SMS-1, (which was a significant improvement over no EQ at all.)

My suggestion is to run Audyssey with the SMS-1 and ARO off. Then compare the sound of the system EQ'd by the SMS-1 and EQ'd by Audyssey MultEQ XT. I would be interested to see which you prefer. (I am assuming you have Audyssey MultEQ XT. Some of the older versions of Audyssey did not have the bass EQ capability of the MultEQ XT version. If you have an older version of Audyssey, then your SMS-1 will be the preferred method of EQ'ing the bass.)

Craig

Well hell, I just BOUGHT the SMS a week ago, so I can't give up yet....:)

Actually, part of my pursuit here was Audyssey, for me, has not been such a stellar improvement, and I've spent a lot of time in the Audyssey forum here and been very careful with the measurement process (and have done so numerous times) The 905 does the MultEQ XT as well. For me, I'm finding the sound thin and low/low-mid frequencies diminished (from a purely subjective POV - no room analysis yet, since REW got me a bit befuddled when I tried it for a few hours...)

So in went a Fathom, and things got mostly better but a bit worse, in that there was too much bass in certain regions - which I presume was my room modes in the 30 to 40 hz region)

So I'll play a little bit more tomorrow, but I'm going to be getting some additional room treatment panels (either RealTraps or homebuilt 2 x 4 by 4" 705 board), and possibly some Real Trap RFZ panels for the ceiling, to see if I can tame the room a bit, though from what I'm reading, in the frequencies I'm talking about, it's hard to do...

I have an Integra 9.8, quad Fathoms and an SMS-1. I'm still experimenting but my preference thus far is ARO for each Fathom pair in Master/Slave config, then use the SMS-1 to even out the summed quad sub output for rest of the low frequencies. The Audyssey EQ seems to overly soften my systems sound with or without the additional EQ's. The room has extensive treatments (bass traps and absorbers) so I'm guessing that is the reason Audyssey doesn't work well for me.

I have an Integra 9.8, quad Fathoms and an SMS-1. I'm still experimenting but my preference thus far is ARO for each Fathom pair in Master/Slave config, then use the SMS-1 to even out the summed quad sub output for rest of the low frequencies. The Audyssey EQ seems to overly soften my systems sound with or without the additional EQ's. The room has extensive treatments (bass traps and absorbers) so I'm guessing that is the reason Audyssey doesn't work well for me.
Actually, Chris K, the Chief Technical Officer of Audyssey has commented that Audyssey can make an untreated room sound better, but it can work wonders in a well treated room. My room is pretty extensively treated with bass traps in the corners and absorbers at the first reflection points on all surfaces.

Anyway, you should certainly use whatever sounds best to you. :)

Craig

Ok, here are my updated calibration captures

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=110586&stc=1&d=1210953378

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=110585&stc=1&d=1210953378

I changed the room around a bit - the Fathom 113 is on the left wall, about a 1/4 of the way from the front left corner. The DefTech Supercube 1 in on the rear wall, about 1/5 away from the right corner.

The speakers are crossed at 50 - after trial and error with crossover and the SMS phase controls, this seemed to provide the smoothest reading at any xover point.

The process was the calibrate the Fathom first with it's internal ARO feature. I then used an spl meter and the Onkyo 905 trim control to generally balance the two subs at about 75 db. I then did a manual EQ in the SMS (NO EQ on the 905, xover set to 80, which was the smoothest pre-Audyssey) to get a flat a result as possible. i then did an 8 point Audyssey calibration with the SMS in the loop. I then checked the response curve back in the SMS, determined the 50 hz xover was the best point with Audyssey engaged, and trimmed as you see here.

Things seem generally much improved, but I still think Audyssey is too bright for my tastes. I'm not sure what to do about the dip in the 90 hz region, or if I should be overly concerned...

Feedback would be appreciated.

Ok, here are my updated calibration captures

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=110586&stc=1&d=1210953378

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=110585&stc=1&d=1210953378

That's exceptionally flat response. However, those are some big cuts, ~12 dB at 20 to 30 Hz, and again at 63 Hz. Cutting this much affects the initial soundwave significantly. You take away the initial impact of the sound.

Take some readings at the other points you used for the Audyssey calibration. It would be interesting to see what the combination of Audyssey, the SMS-1 and ARO do at other points than just the primary LP. In addition, what did the response look like before you ran Audyssey? Was it this flat without Audyssey, or did Audyssey improve the respose significantly.

I changed the room around a bit - the Fathom 113 is on the left wall, about a 1/4 of the way from the front left corner. The DefTech Supercube 1 in on the rear wall, about 1/5 away from the right corner.

The speakers are crossed at 50 - after trial and error with crossover and the SMS phase controls, this seemed to provide the smoothest reading at any xover point.
It doesn't look like you used the SMS-1 phase control. They're set to "0". Did you try different settings and decide that "0" was best?

The process was the calibrate the Fathom first with it's internal ARO feature. I then used an spl meter and the Onkyo 905 trim control to generally balance the two subs at about 75 db. I then did a manual EQ in the SMS (NO EQ on the 905, xover set to 80, which was the smoothest pre-Audyssey) to get a flat a result as possible. i then did an 8 point Audyssey calibration with the SMS in the loop. I then checked the response curve back in the SMS, determined the 50 hz xover was the best point with Audyssey engaged, and trimmed as you see here.

Things seem generally much improved, but I still think Audyssey is too bright for my tastes.
I suggest you try Audyssey without the other two EQ's. Audyssey actually has a slight high frequency roll-off in their target curve. If it doesn't sound right to you, I suspect it's something in the setup of three different and independant EQ's. It may be that the bass is so muted by those big cuts that the high frequencies sound exaggerated by comparison.

I'm not sure what to do about the dip in the 90 hz region, or if I should be overly concerned...
There isn't much you can do about it. If your crossover is set at 50 Hz, the speakers are outputting most of the signal at 90 Hz. The sub signal is will be down almost 12 dB at 90 Hz, so the SMS-1 will have very little effect. Audyssey will affect it, but where it is now is probably as much impact as Audyssey will have on it.

Craig

That's exceptionally flat response. However, those are some big cuts, ~12 dB at 20 to 30 Hz, and again at 63 Hz. Cutting this much affects the initial soundwave significantly. You take away the initial impact of the sound.

Take some readings at the other points you used for the Audyssey calibration. It would be interesting to see what the combination of Audyssey, the SMS-1 and ARO do at other points than just the primary LP. In addition, what did the response look like before you ran Audyssey? Was it this flat without Audyssey, or did Audyssey improve the respose significantly.


It doesn't look like you used the SMS-1 phase control. They're set to "0". Did you try different settings and decide that "0" was best?


I suggest you try Audyssey without the other two EQ's. Audyssey actually has a slight high frequency roll-off in their target curve. If it doesn't sound right to you, I suspect it's something in the setup of three different and independant EQ's. It may be that the bass is so muted by those big cuts that the high frequencies sound exaggerated by comparison.


There isn't much you can do about it. If your crossover is set at 50 Hz, the speakers are outputting most of the signal at 90 Hz. The sub signal is will be down almost 12 dB at 90 Hz, so the SMS-1 will have very little effect. Audyssey will affect it, but where it is now is probably as much impact as Audyssey will have on it.

Craig

Thanks for the detailed feedback - I'm in the process of working things with an 80 hz crossover, and will post updated screen shots later

Is there a rule of thumb in terms of maximum db cut? My understanding is that you don't want to boost much more than 1 db to avoid clipping at higher volumes, but your comments about the low cuts seems to indicate perhaps the usefulness of the SMS even when cutting peaks is less than anticpated

In terms of flatness, I got it fairly flat with ARO/SMS - Audyssey actually increased the variations of the response curve, partly because it reset the fronts as full. So I tweaked the SMS as posted here. Foolishly, I did not take a shot of the pre-Audyssey SMS response curve.

And yes, in this go round, I played with every phase step, and this was the best. I'm in the midst of redoing at 80 hz, and it's looking like the phase will be set more like 30 or 45 - + polarity.

I'll be back...

Of course, the more you do this, the more you appreciate the phrase, "ignorance is bliss..." :)

Ok, some more tweaking...ARO and Audyssey still engaged...xover now set to 80

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=110607&stc=1&d=1210983348

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=110608&stc=1&d=1210983348

Some dip around 63, but I don't think as severe as the prior dip at 80, and bit of a tradeoff at the very bottom end, but not as severe cuts as before.

Now to actually listen to it for a change....:rolleyes:

I owned an Onkyo 805 for a week and played with the Audyssey and it set the sub at 20 feet (really 7 ft away), and the fronts and surrounds at 7 ft. This confirmed my suspicion that the circuitry in the SMS delays the audio signal.
I have bipolar speakers, and the changes the Audyssey made were a definite reduction in quality...the sound seemed like it was coming out of a box with it engaged.
I returned the Onkyo (due to other issues), but learned from my experience and have adjusted the LFE delay (when possible) to compensate for the delay (at least in my system) using the SMS.

I use two SMSs and two ICBMs feeding two SVS Ultra 13s (front/stereo, LFE both and equalized) and two SVS CS Ultras (rear/stereo unequalized).

Paul

Thrang,

Is the distance from your front sub and rear sub to your primary listing position the same? If not, what are the distances. Also, does the supercube have any kind of phase (not polarity) control and does it have an equalizer?

One other thing that I see on your last screen capture is that it looks like you're running your subs flat relative to your other speakers. Most run their subs anywhere from 3 to 5dbs hotter than the other speakers. I think Velodyne even recommends running the sub a little hot in the SMS-1 manual.

Thrang,

Is the distance from your front sub and rear sub to your primary listing position the same? If not, what are the distances. Also, does the supercube have any kind of phase (not polarity) control and does it have an equalizer?

One other thing that I see on your last screen capture is that it looks like you're running your subs flat relative to your other speakers. Most run their subs anywhere from 3 to 5dbs hotter than the other speakers. I think Velodyne even recommends running the sub a little hot in the SMS-1 manual.

The distances are close, but not exact - approximately 10 feet from the Fathom to the primary listening position, about 9 feet from the Supercube to the primary listening position.

The Supercube does have a variable phase control, and I did play with this relative to the Fathom and the SMS being 0 Phase, but this only introduce greater fluctuation in the curve (too high in the 40-60, too low in the 80 to 100 regions). The Supercube does not have it's own equalizer.

I thought the idea was to get a fairly linear response in the SMS EQ setting/graph, and then use some trim adjustments (in the presets, for example, or, with less flexibility, overall in the processor SUB setting) to adjust to taste/material. Are you saying you would expect the primary EQ/graph to be flat BUT about 3-5db hotter from the lowest frequency until the crossover? Perhaps I'm reading the documentation wrong, but I thought after adjusting the master and SMS volumes to be equal left and right, you adjust the phase, polarity, and EQ to flatten the response as much as is reasonable.

Thanks

You need to adjust the phase control on the supercube to peak out the crossover region and then correct any uneveness with the equalizer.

The logic behind peaking out the crossover region is that you are compounding the signal at its peak, otherwise they're out of phase causing cancellations(which may very well explain what you're hearing).

You need to adjust the phase control on the supercube to peak out the crossover region and then correct any uneveness with the equalizer.

The logic behind peaking out the crossover region is that you are compounding the signal at its peak, otherwise they're out of phase causing cancellations(which may very well explain what you're hearing).

Well, with 80 as my current xover, I'm not showing a dip in that region. Are you saying I should actually want a small peak in the 80 hz region?

Also, are you saying the Fathom phase should not be adjusted? Just to be clear, both the Fathom and the Supercube are running off a single SMS.

I guess my confusion lies in having two subs and the SMS, each with their own phase adjustments. Sequentially, what is the proper way to approach getting everything dialed in correctly? Should I get the two subs in phase with each other, and then use the SMS to get that pair in phase with the mains?

And to my earlier question - should the EQ/graph be as flat as reasonably possible from 15 to the crossover, or should the 3-5 db bump be factored into to curve itself, from low to crossover?

Thanks

Thanks

thrang,

Please check your PM(personal message).

As a side note, has anyone noticed that selecting "No" when prompted to save changes still saves the changes? I was playing with some "what if" settings, and decided I didn't like the results, so I selected "exit", then "no", and I was returned to the main screen (the unit did not restart when you do choose to save your changes). Yet when I went back into the settings, the "unsaved" changes were still in effect.

Very odd, unless I'm doing something wrong here...

As a side note, has anyone noticed that selecting "No" when prompted to save changes still saves the changes? I was playing with some "what if" settings, and decided I didn't like the results, so I selected "exit", then "no", and I was returned to the main screen (the unit did not restart when you do choose to save your changes). Yet when I went back into the settings, the "unsaved" changes were still in effect.

Very odd, unless I'm doing something wrong here...

My guess is (I haven''t actually tried it) this is a feature, not a bug:). I'm thinking that powering down will loose the changes unless you do a save. That would allow you make changes and then play some material and see if you like the changes. You could then return to the EQ screen and save or tweak as necessary.

My guess is (I haven''t actually tried it) this is a feature, not a bug:). I'm thinking that powering down will loose the changes unless you do a save. That would allow you make changes and then play some material and see if you like the changes. You could then return to the EQ screen and save or tweak as necessary.

Well, what's the point of having a Save option that offers Yes, No, or Cancel??? One would expect selecting no would throw away your changes....:confused:

thrang,

Any progress with the phase settings?

The two women in my car when you called were impressed. Thanks for allowing me to talk over their heads. lol

thrang,

Any progress with the phase settings?

The two women in my car when you called were impressed. Thanks for allowing me to talk over their heads. lol

Two? Does that provide a similar beneficial response like two subs do?:D

I've spent some time working with the phase issue, but need more time to tweak. But so far, it appears all other phase positions other than zero on the Supercube only make the overall response more uneven, without any appreciable change in the 80 hz region. Two things:

- my last graph appears fairly flat at 80 through 100 and beyond (80 being the crossover) is it the dip at 63 you think should be better?

- One additional piece to this is my main towers are powered, and while not hooked up as sub (they do have LFE inputs, unused right now) there is an adjustable low frequency volume knob which I will adjust to see how this effects the response around the crossover. The speakers are DefTech Mythos ST's. Currently, they are set around the halfway point

I owned an Onkyo 805 for a week and played with the Audyssey and it set the sub at 20 feet (really 7 ft away), and the fronts and surrounds at 7 ft. This confirmed my suspicion that the circuitry in the SMS delays the audio signal.
I have bipolar speakers, and the changes the Audyssey made were a definite reduction in quality...the sound seemed like it was coming out of a box with it engaged.
I returned the Onkyo (due to other issues), but learned from my experience and have adjusted the LFE delay (when possible) to compensate for the delay (at least in my system) using the SMS.

I use two SMSs and two ICBMs feeding two SVS Ultra 13s (front/stereo, LFE both and equalized) and two SVS CS Ultras (rear/stereo unequalized).

Paul

Well after placing my order for an SMS-1 earlier today I called Velo product support to ask how many feet they recommend compensating to account for the delay. After being told that my question was "silly", that nobody else had called to ask in the three years they'd been selling it, and that the gentleman I was speaking to had never thought about it because he only thinks about things that matter [no I am not making this up], I was informed that the SMS-1 introduces a 2.5 millisecond delay.

Can anybody here convert that to a distance for the purpose of settings in the AVR or alternatively the degrees of phase to add?

As an aside, I pointed out that it would be very easy to test before and after adjusting by looking at a graph at the crossover, but instead he suggested that I do a blind test with a friend adjusting the phase and suggested that I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Thanks, Velo support. :rolleyes:

About 2.5'

Thanks, yeah... I was just on my way back to post that I calculated it myself once I took a second and realized how simple it was. :o I got about 2.8 using a slightly higher speed of sound than 1k.

Thanks, yeah... I was just on my way back to post that I calculated it myself once I took a second and realized how simple it was. :o I got about 2.8 using a slightly higher speed of sound than 1k.

Yeah but most AVRs are limited to full or half feet.

Yup, mine's limited to full feet. I was mostly just including my calculation to show that I had actually gone and done the math. :D

Thank you again for your response; it was appreciated!

Yup, mine's limited to full feet. I was mostly just including my calculation to show that I had actually gone and done the math. :D

Thank you again for your response; it was appreciated!

So you are reducing the Audyssey/AVR Sub distance by about 2.5 feet to compensate for the SMS delay? (a 12.5 foot reading would become 10 feet)? Am I understanding correctly?

Thanks

Nope; you'd be adding that onto the actual distance of the sub, since it is a delay in the sound reaching your ears, just as a sound's source being further away from you would be.

Nope; you'd be adding that onto the actual distance of the sub, since it is a delay in the sound reaching your ears, just as a sound's source being further away from you would be.

Er...yeah, that's what I meant to say :) (slinking away, getting a 50-50 guess wrong...)

Audyssey already has done the math. If the sub's distance is set higher than it's actual distance, it has already accounted for the delay in the SMS-1. Don't change it.

Craig

Thrang,
I believe you would add to the sub distance to compensate. The other speakers are the ones actually delayed to then equal the sub.
Paul
(I didn't refress before posting this, and missed the other responses)

Audyssey already has done the math. If the sub's distance is set higher than it's actual distance, it has already accounted for the delay in the SMS-1. Don't change it.

Craig

So even if Audyssey is showing the actual/real sub distance (which my setup does - it's not "off" like some others have commented), still leave it alone?

If you took a tape measure and manually input the sub's distance, then you could add to it to compensate. If you used Audyssey to detect the distance since you have hooked up the SMS-1, then you don't need to change anything.

So since I've been here last, I've changed out my speaker setup and updated my sub arrangement, and am back to tweaking the SMS.

My new setup are all RBH speakers - T-1/SE-R as LCR, 66-SE dipoles as side surrounds, and 61-SE direct radiating as rear surrounds. Subs are now two Fathom 113's, located at the front of the room - they are configured in a master/slave. Crossover is 70

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=114174&stc=1&d=1214738102

Process was to ARO the 113's first, then run Audyssey, then set the SMS. Here's the current SMS response - phase is flat on the 113's, 30 on the SMS

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=114175&stc=1&d=1214738102

Things sound fairly good, though a tad weak in the upper bass region - I'm thinking of trying craigjohn's early suggestions of eliminating ARO and the SMS and just try Audyssey alone - alternatively, I may try ARO the subs separately, running the SMS first, and then running Audyssey to compensate for what's left...

Should I be overly concerned about the ugliness around 160 - this is way out of the realm of the subs...

Not trying to oversimplify, but you appear to be running your subs flat relative to the mains. I've found that going 3-5dbs hot on the subs is better. In the SMS-1 manual, I believe it says the same.

As for your question about eliminating multiple equalizers, I have to agree with that. I've tried so many different equalizers in the past in various combinations, that I think that have the least or non will often be better.

Not trying to oversimplify, but you appear to be running your subs flat relative to the mains. I've found that going 3-5dbs hot on the subs is better. In the SMS-1 manual, I believe it says the same.

As for your question about eliminating multiple equalizers, I have to agree with that. I've tried so many different equalizers in the past in various combinations, that I think that have the least or non will often be better.

You know, this sounds like sacrilege - here we are in the home of the SMS-1 on AVS, and we're discussing it's termination....:eek:

But it sounds like you've been there, done that...- so run the 113's as independent masters and ARO each, as the first step...