The Audyssey Pro Installer Kit Thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 78 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2311 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 08:27 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by tandy1000rl View Post

Yes, using the default Audyssey curve (with mid-range compensation removed) in the smaller room, while I'm using curve 2 in the large room with additional edits.

Before defeating the midcomp, had you listened to music? Your 5KHz tweak might be needed because midcomp is off.

Just a thought.

Jeff
pepar is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2312 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 08:35 AM
 
goneten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

The Pro kit isn't an alternative to any version of MultEQ, it uses the filtering capability of whatever version of MultEQ it is used with and supplements it by adding a more precise measuring system and the ability to customize the target curve. And the crossover calculations are more flexible and precise.

Sorry, I should have mentioned XT + Pro kit. Would XT+Pro offer more accurate measurements than XT32, assuming both are using 8 points for measuring? Is it true (or not) that XT32 has more filtering resolution on the speaker and subwoofer side compared to XT Pro? Thanks.
goneten is offline  
post #2313 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 08:38 AM
Member
 
tandy1000rl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Some posters leave Mid-range Comp on, some turn it off. I would like to experiment to see which setting is best for my listening room. Can someone share what to listen for? Since it takes several minutes to switch the setting on and off, I have found it difficult to discern audible differences that would help me make the right choice. Is there a particular type of content to use? Are the differences obvious? Any direction would be appreciated.

The best way I can describe the difference I hear is that mid-range compensation pushes (female) vocals farther back into the mix; it's not as intimate.

Another indicator for me is do I wince at 1:15 into "Famous Blue Raincoat" by Jennifer Warnes, when she sings the name "Jane". In my large room, with midrange comp turned off, I wince just a bit, as though that word is coming through a little too "forward" and "glaring", whereas that doesn't happen with it turned on.

I would say try to focus on female vocals where there is also some light instrumentation. If you play vocal only, it may be tougher to discern its relative depth in the mix.
tandy1000rl is offline  
post #2314 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 08:53 AM
Member
 
tandy1000rl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Your front speakers, especially the left, drop off dramatically at 6KHz. At 10KHz, it looks like about -7dB and at 20KHz -12dB. Have you done any independent measuring of their unequalized response? Should their native response be what it seems to be in the before graphs?
Jeff

I haven't done any independent measurements in my room, but here is what Home Theater mag's graph shows (the red line). They go on to say that the listening-window response (a five-point average of axial and +/-15-degree horizontal and vertical responses) measures +1.22/-4.05 dB from 200 Hz to 10 kHz. So yes, very polite at the top end.

As far as being down 7dB @ 10kHz and 12 @dB @ 20kHz, I'm also down about 4dB starting at 1.5Khz and that pretty much stays. So taking that into account, is it safe to conclude I'm only down 3dB and 8dB at 10kHz and 20kHz respectively? It's almost like there's a "DC offset" problem with all my graphs in both rooms, where everything is shifted below the baseline.

I wish Audyssey would publish beyond just the "-2db@10kHz" for their reference curve. It's not like the target curves themselves are the secret sauce in their recipe.

Any additional insights you can share are appreciated of course!
tandy1000rl is offline  
post #2315 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 09:09 AM
Member
 
tandy1000rl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Before defeating the midcomp, had you listened to music? Your 5KHz tweak might be needed because midcomp is off.

Just a thought.

Jeff

The smaller room is for movies-in-bed only. Any music there would not be critical listening. No tweaks (5kHz or otherwise) made to curve 1 in the smaller room other than turning off midrange comp. In this room I preferred a more "forward" vocal since the primary use of the system is for movies. Also, the speakers are low to the ground firing up towards MLP. A good chunk of the direct energy is likewise absorbed/blocked by the foot of the bed. I just barely have line-of-site to the speaker drivers from MLP in that room.
tandy1000rl is offline  
post #2316 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 09:27 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

Sorry, I should have mentioned XT + Pro kit. Would XT+Pro offer more accurate measurements than XT32, assuming both are using 8 points for measuring? Is it true (or not) that XT32 has more filtering resolution on the speaker and subwoofer side compared to XT Pro? Thanks.

The Pro Kit just improves on the results of whatever the underlying MultEQ version is. MultEQ XT 32 is a giant step better, in my opinion, than MultEQ XT. But Pro on XT is better than just XT. It's not really possible to compare consumer XT 32 to Pro XT because of the changes from receiver/processor to receiver/processor to get from XT to XT 32. But my guess is that consumer XT 32 is better than Pro/XT.

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2317 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 09:52 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by tandy1000rl View Post

The best way I can describe the difference I hear is that mid-range compensation pushes (female) vocals farther back into the mix; it's not as intimate.

Another indicator for me is do I wince at 1:15 into "Famous Blue Raincoat" by Jennifer Warnes, when she sings the name "Jane". In my large room, with midrange comp turned off, I wince just a bit, as though that word is coming through a little too "forward" and "glaring", whereas that doesn't happen with it turned on.

I would say try to focus on female vocals where there is also some light instrumentation. If you play vocal only, it may be tougher to discern its relative depth in the mix.

I think there are other clues/cues that convey where the front/back placement is, and for me the description of removing a glaring aspect would trump any effect on the layering of a vocal in the mix. My experience is that adding "air" (12KHz-0dB, 20KHz-+1.5dB, 24KHz-0dB) does wonders for "depth perception."

... My experience ...

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2318 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 09:57 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by tandy1000rl View Post

I haven't done any independent measurements in my room, but here is what Home Theater mag's graph shows (the red line).

It does not appear that that is how they are performing in your room. With your investment (time, money, research, etc), you should consider XTZ, OmniMic or a Room EQ Wizard setup. Questions are arising that cannot be answered otherwise.

... in my opinion ...

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2319 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 09:59 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by tandy1000rl View Post

The smaller room is for movies-in-bed only. Any music there would not be critical listening. No tweaks (5kHz or otherwise) made to curve 1 in the smaller room other than turning off midrange comp. In this room I preferred a more "forward" vocal since the primary use of the system is for movies. Also, the speakers are low to the ground firing up towards MLP. A good chunk of the direct energy is likewise absorbed/blocked by the foot of the bed. I just barely have line-of-site to the speaker drivers from MLP in that room.

I see the beginning of a lot of movies on my in-bed system ....
pepar is online now  
post #2320 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 11:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
fitzcaraldo215's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by tandy1000rl View Post

Care to post your certificate, at least for just the main channels? I've love to see some additional "very large room" graphs! ;-)

Sorry, the graphs were lost on a PC crash. But, in essence, my after graphs look exactly like target curve #1, within less than 1 dB. That is all that really matters to me. Independently measured before graphs are not particularly useful or interesting, IMHO, since I do not listen that way.

I did a friend's room with XT/Pro. We tried both mid compensation on and curve #2. Neither of us liked it at all. But, we liked MRC off and curve 1 very much. YMMV.

Music is our interest, so that is what we used exclusively. It is more continuous than movies, and not interrupted by dialog, which is not particularly useful in judging SQ. That is, unless you have a dialog articulation problem, which we do not. In general, you will not have that issue if the after graphs are close to target.

It s a good idea to use hi Rez music if you can for subjective evaluation. We do. Some CDs may have more of a tendency toward "digititis", at least in my experience. But, it may depend on what sources you listen to most and wish to optimize for.
fitzcaraldo215 is offline  
post #2321 of 5609 Old 05-04-2012, 11:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
muad'dib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 839
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Question about changing power amps and EQ...

If i used the pro kit to calibrate my denon a-100, then decided to add a 5 channel rotel amp, would I need to re-run audyssey pro again because of amp change?

I can manually set levels with SPL meter to compensate for new amp, but does EQ change?

Thanks
muad'dib is offline  
post #2322 of 5609 Old 05-05-2012, 12:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 487 Post(s)
Liked: 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by muad'dib View Post

Question about changing power amps and EQ...

If i used the pro kit to calibrate my denon a-100, then decided to add a 5 channel rotel amp, would I need to re-run audyssey pro again because of amp change?

I can manually set levels with SPL meter to compensate for new amp, but does EQ change?

Thanks

It isn't perhaps theoretically necessary but if I changed amps I'd rerun Audyssey just to be sure.
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2323 of 5609 Old 05-05-2012, 05:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by muad'dib View Post

Question about changing power amps and EQ...
If i used the pro kit to calibrate my denon a-100, then decided to add a 5 channel rotel amp, would I need to re-run audyssey pro again because of amp change? I can manually set levels with SPL meter to compensate for new amp, but does EQ change? Thanks

It is extremely doubtful that placing a neutral decent amp in the chain would change the EQ from the neutral clean internal amps. If you are using some channels of internal amplification, use of the meter to level-match the ext amp ch levels is entirely appropriate (and sufficient) as the gain may not be equal.

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #2324 of 5609 Old 05-05-2012, 05:45 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

... I'd rerun Audyssey just to be sure.

Time to restart your Luvox.

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #2325 of 5609 Old 05-05-2012, 06:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


It isn't perhaps theoretically necessary but if I changed amps I'd rerun Audyssey just to be sure.

+1. When any change is made, IMO it is always better to run a fresh calibration.
AustinJerry is online now  
post #2326 of 5609 Old 05-05-2012, 06:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
muad'dib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 839
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Thanks guys for the quick answers.

Guess when I get the time and amp I may just re-run the measurements.

At least until I get the time to do so, I can still enjoy the current EQ readings without too much change.
muad'dib is offline  
post #2327 of 5609 Old 05-05-2012, 06:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
fitzcaraldo215's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

+1. When any change is made, IMO it is always better to run a fresh calibration.

+2. Besides, it cannot hurt, and, if in doubt, with Pro you can easily compare the old and new calibrations to see which one you subjectively prefer with the new gear.
fitzcaraldo215 is offline  
post #2328 of 5609 Old 05-06-2012, 02:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 487 Post(s)
Liked: 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post


Time to restart your Luvox.

LOL. Exactly!

Seriously, a different amp may have different gain and possibly the best way to get the speaker levels right is to use Audyssey rather than a SPL meter which is likely less accurate. Maybe.
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2329 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 05:38 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
(Sleuth that one, Keith!)

I put my 5508 back into my system last night and prepared to load the calibration. Before doing that, I looked at the speaker config and settings. We had turned Audyssey off and manually set everything, specifically one subwoofer at 13.6'.

I loaded the calibration. In spite of having two subs, and the cal having been done with two subs, after loading the cal I still had only one sub. It was at 14.2', so that had changed, but only ONE sub.

I manually set it for two subs and reloaded. OK, some progress as there were now two subs ... both at 14.2'. I considered manually setting the distance for the second sub (6.0') until I looked at the level trims. They were both -2.5dB whereas previously there had been six dB or so delta.

My margarita was melting and my movie-watching window was closing, but I pulled out my Pro Kit and began to run a calibration. Sub A wasn't working ... yanked the 5508 forward and moved the Sub A XLR from High/Wide to .. tada Sub A.

At six measurement positions I aborted the cal, took my margarita and watched two episodes of NCIS on my bedroom system. Tonight I will do the cal, record the setting, frappé up another margarita and .....

That loading my calibration didn't set the distances correct is one annoying point, but that it didn't even activate the second sub is very troubling. Manually setting anything before running an Audyssey calibration flies in the face of nearly everything we know.

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2330 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 06:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,399
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I put my 5508 back into my system last night and prepared to load the calibration. Before doing that, I looked at the speaker config and settings. We had turned Audyssey off and manually set everything, specifically one subwoofer at 13.6'.

The latter may be the reason for the "new" issue.

Quote:


I loaded the calibration. In spite of having two subs, and the cal having been done with two subs, after loading the cal I still had only one sub. It was at 14.2', so that had changed, but only ONE sub.

I manually set it for two subs and reloaded. OK, some progress as there were now two subs ... both at 14.2'. I considered manually setting the distance for the second sub (6.0') until I looked at the level trims. They were both -2.5dB whereas previously there had been six dB or so delta.

My margarita was melting and my movie-watching window was closing, but I pulled out my Pro Kit and began to run a calibration. Sub A wasn't working ... yanked the 5508 forward and moved the Sub A XLR from High/Wide to .. tada Sub A.

At six measurement positions I aborted the cal, took my margarita and watched two episodes of NCIS on my bedroom system. Tonight I will do the cal, record the setting, frappé up another margarita and .....

That loading my calibration didn't set the distances correct is one annoying point, but that it didn't even activate the second sub is very troubling. Manually setting anything before running an Audyssey calibration flies in the face of nearly everything we know.

Jeff

I have reloaded and added measurements several times and never had any issue with both subs working. All I had to do was to re-enter the distance numbers by hand.

I believe your issue is due to your setting the 5508 to one sub before reloading the calibration. Note that the reload does not go through the initial sub setup or polling the channels. There is a warning on Pro to check that the system configuration matches that of the reloaded measurements.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is offline  
post #2331 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 07:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 487 Post(s)
Liked: 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

(Sleuth that one, Keith!)

I put my 5508 back into my system last night and prepared to load the calibration. Before doing that, I looked at the speaker config and settings. We had turned Audyssey off and manually set everything, specifically one subwoofer at 13.6'.

I loaded the calibration. In spite of having two subs, and the cal having been done with two subs, after loading the cal I still had only one sub. It was at 14.2', so that had changed, but only ONE sub.

I manually set it for two subs and reloaded. OK, some progress as there were now two subs ... both at 14.2'. I considered manually setting the distance for the second sub (6.0') until I looked at the level trims. They were both -2.5dB whereas previously there had been six dB or so delta.

My margarita was melting and my movie-watching window was closing, but I pulled out my Pro Kit and began to run a calibration. Sub A wasn't working ... yanked the 5508 forward and moved the Sub A XLR from High/Wide to .. tada Sub A.

At six measurement positions I aborted the cal, took my margarita and watched two episodes of NCIS on my bedroom system. Tonight I will do the cal, record the setting, frappé up another margarita and .....

That loading my calibration didn't set the distances correct is one annoying point, but that it didn't even activate the second sub is very troubling. Manually setting anything before running an Audyssey calibration flies in the face of nearly everything we know.

Jeff

AHFPITA indeed, Jeff! This sort of thing is one of the reasons I hate changing anything around to much once I have it all working as I want it. I hope your new cal goes OK.

I believe you always have to tell the system you have two subs before running Audyssey. Also, as Kal says, Pro does warn you to make sure that the setup is the same when you reload as it was when you made the calibration. All is well...
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2332 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 08:18 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

The latter may be the reason for the "new" issue.

I have reloaded and added measurements several times and never had any issue with both subs working. All I had to do was to re-enter the distance numbers by hand.

I believe your issue is due to your setting the 5508 to one sub before reloading the calibration. Note that the reload does not go through the initial sub setup or polling the channels. There is a warning on Pro to check that the system configuration matches that of the reloaded measurements.

This makes sense. But I would have thought that whatever it detected when the calibration was originally done would be embedded in the saved AMD file.

I never bothered recording any sub settings, but now I will write down distances and trims. I plan on trying gain-matching and will need the trims recorded if I want to return to level-matching.

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2333 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 08:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

This makes sense. But I would have thought that whatever it detected when the calibration was originally done would be embedded in the saved AMD file.

I never bothered recording any sub settings, but now I will write down distances and trims. I plan on trying gain-matching and will need the trims recorded if I want to return to level-matching.

Jeff

Like Kal and Keith mention I'm pretty sure you need to manually make sure the config is correct before loading a previous measurement file.

If you are going to experiment with gain-matching, are you going to follow this set up procedure (sorry if this is already obvious to you
AustinJerry is online now  
post #2334 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 08:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I plan on trying gain-matching and will need the trims recorded if I want to return to level-matching.

Jeff

Jeff, if you are going to try gain-matching, will you be following this setup procedure: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post21557746

(Sorry if this was obvious to you already.)

Edit: I mention this because if you follow the procedure, you will likely be adjusting the gain controls on the subs themselves. This means no going back to a previous calibration (unless, of course, you can retrurn the sub gain controls to their original settings, which is difficult on subs with analog gain controls).
AustinJerry is online now  
post #2335 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 08:52 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Jeff, if you are going to try gain-matching, will you be following this setup procedure: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post21557746

(Sorry if this was obvious to you already.)

Thanks, I guess I'll be doing a modified gain-matching as I don't want to go to all that.

IIRC, the farthest sub was 6dB higher trim setting than the nearer one. I will lower it by 3dB and raise the near one by 3dB. If I can't localize the near sub, I will nudge them again maybe 1.5dB.

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2336 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 08:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post


Thanks, I guess I'll be doing a modified gain-matching as I don't want to go to all that.

IIRC, the farthest sub was 6dB higher trim setting than the nearer one. I will lower it by 3dB and raise the near one by 3dB.

Jeff

Did you see my edit? IMO, it is essential that each sub be outputting at the same level, otherwise you really haven't "gain-matched".
AustinJerry is online now  
post #2337 of 5609 Old 05-08-2012, 09:43 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Did you see my edit? IMO, it is essential that each sub be outputting at the same level, otherwise you really haven't "gain-matched".

Nothing magical happens when each is outputting identical levels. The real benefit is lessening the load on the far sub with the near one picking up the slack, and what I am going to try will do that.

It'll be a hybrid.

Jeff
pepar is online now  
post #2338 of 5609 Old 05-09-2012, 09:09 AM
Senior Member
 
buddhamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia, Melbourne
Posts: 214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Hey guys,

Gonna run a pro cal this Friday and was wondering...I just upgraded from a Denon 4311 to an 80.3 and was wondering if I had to connect any cables from my laptop to the 80.3...like I did with my 4311.

The 80.3 is on my network and have installed Audyssey Pro 3.5 and it detects the Processor. Does this mean I dont need to connect any cables from the 80.3 to the laptop?....If so that is awesome! haha

Also when i connect the mic to the 80.3 which output do I connect it to?....the "AUX" on the front panel and plug into the Left channel?...correct?. Thats how I connected my pro kit to the 4311.

Thank you
Kevin
buddhamus is offline  
post #2339 of 5609 Old 05-09-2012, 09:16 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Pro calibrates the 80.3 over ethernet.
pepar is online now  
post #2340 of 5609 Old 05-09-2012, 09:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,513
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 487 Post(s)
Liked: 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddhamus View Post

Hey guys,

Gonna run a pro cal this Friday and was wondering...I just upgraded from a Denon 4311 to an 80.3 and was wondering if I had to connect any cables from my laptop to the 80.3...like I did with my 4311.

The 80.3 is on my network and have installed Audyssey Pro 3.5 and it detects the Processor. Does this mean I dont need to connect any cables from the 80.3 to the laptop?....If so that is awesome! haha

Also when i connect the mic to the 80.3 which output do I connect it to?....the "AUX" on the front panel and plug into the Left channel?...correct?. Thats how I connected my pro kit to the 4311.

Thank you
Kevin

The mic connects to the preamp and the preamp connects to the PC Left input on the rear of the unit. If access to the rear of the unit is a PITA, as it is for me, you may consider leaving the cable permanently attached to the PC Left input to make it easier to run Pro again (I guarantee you will run it more than once).

Although the Pro software can connect to the 80.3 over a wireless connection, it is recommended to use an Ethernet cable, so you may wish to consider leaving that in place too. The other end of the Ethernet cable connects to a router. It doesn't have to be the router you normally use for your home network. In my case, my network router is nowhere near where the AVP is, so I use a spare router I had in my junk drawer. The Integra connects to the router, the router connects to the laptop. If you do it this way, you can also leave the router permanently in place if you wish. You will need to go into the Integra Network menu settings to see what IP address the router is using - you will then need to enter that in the Pro software when asked. It all sounds complicated but once you have done it, it's pretty straightforward and obvious.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Denon Avr4310ci Receiver , Audyssey
Gear in this thread

    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page


    Forum Jump: 

    Posting Rules  
    You may not post new threads
    You may not post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are Off
    Pingbacks are Off
    Refbacks are Off