Originally Posted by craig john
You essentially described it above, (although using a less rigorous method than mine of moving the subs to the middle of the room to reduce room interactions.) Your method could potentially still be polluted with room effects, especially if the subs are room-loaded differently.
Hence why I included that some encourage this measurement be taken at one foot in an effort to reduce room interaction. I do try to cover all bases in my comments but I can't be held accountable for some people's propensity to go off at half-kock; a term, the genesis of, you're familiar with.
For example, if one sub is in a corner and the other sub is mid-wall, the corner loaded sub will read higher than the mid-wall sub.
Correct, and by individually measuring each sub while the other subs are turned off, will take this thought into consideration and then each sub, individually will be calibrated according to their placed room position and if I recall correctly, when a synergistic reading is taken at the main listening position, the final reading will be read as a single source point and this consideration will automatically average any conflicts that individual sub positions, leave behind.
If your OCD requires you to check the level settings post-Audysey, you should use test signals that go THROUGH Audyssey's processing/EQ,...
Setting the AVR gain does nothing to Audyssy recommended settings other than to raise of lower the final output. As to running tests post-Audyssey, this is what any rational individual would do and which room analyzing programs automatically do. Doing measurements, post-Audyssey run EG'q, would make absolutely zero sense but despite what some say, if measurements are made and evaluated, there's no harm in changing the final, at listening position, internal AVR menu provided, gain setting.
You should NOT change the phase settings on the sub after running Audyssey.
I get to change anything I want, anytime I want, without reservation as in the end, it's all about improving the final measurement, not preserving what Audyssey has failed to offer. If Audyssey has failed to provide the perfect solution, then I get to augment Audyssey's efforts in any fashion of my choosing. Audyssey's recommended setting changes to the AVR is not the final arbiter in this process. There's theory and then there's practical application of theory and human's have the innate ability to know when to intervene. Public education does it's level headed best to beat this primal awareness, out of us; bias.
Changing the phase settings of the subs will change the baseline response and the Audyssey filters will no longer be correct.
I'm changing the phase setting because Audyssey failed in it's purpose, recommending the perfect setting solution and because Audyssey's filters were set incorrectly, I'm changing the settings because Audyssey failed to do a bang up job and room analyzing programs reveal this fact.
It will impact the blend of the speakers and sub(s) at the crossover point and it should be adjusted to optimize this parameter.
Agreeing with you when I post, I should hope so. Hence the need for the room analyzing program so the individual can see what the changes are that are taking place.
Changing the subwoofer Distance in the receiver after running Audyssey will not affect the EQ filters.
No it won't but it sure will improve on the errors that Audyssey left behind and in my book, improving the final curve is what it's all about.
At lease we can agree on something.