"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 1264 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #37891 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 07:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 18,678
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1895 Post(s)
Liked: 1982
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

My ears and brain are the"ultimate measuring system" so those 18KHz tones my transducers can produce and measure are imaginary since I can't hear them.

If you can’t hear those tones, what exactly is the purpose of having a graph that shows them?

Incidentally, from a philosophocal POV, because you can't see or hear something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, or is 'imaginary'. The chair is still there when you turn your back on it. It's still real. But that's another story altogether

Kind Regards,

Keith
kbarnes701 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #37892 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 08:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 18,678
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1895 Post(s)
Liked: 1982
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

ggsantafe,

Thank you. Your post caused me to click on the linked video. Brilliant! And thank you, ReneV, for posting it.

Jeff

The whole issue is an interesting philosophocal area. Nobody can know exactly how I see a green leaf when I look at it. You can measure the wavelength of the light reflected off it and that is totally objective. Nobody can know how my brain interprets that wavelength after it has been processed by my eyes. I may well see a different green from the one you see. I may, nonetheless, enjoy enormously the experience of seeing the green that I see. Of course, if one wishes to reproduce that leaf, getting the copy to have exactly the same wavelength of light as the original guarantees that one is the same as the other. But that tells you nothing whatsoever about how I see that leaf compared with how you see it. I think it's the same with sound. You and I can both listen to Coleman Hawkins playing Chelsea Bridge. The sound is the same for both of us, according to any measurements anyone cares to make. But the way you hear Hawk playing and the way I hear him playing cannot be known to each other. We can try to describe the experience, but it will inevitably be a lame attempt because we cannot adequately describe emotions with words (some of the great poets do better than you an I might at that, but let that go for a moment ). The emotional impact of the piece may well be more intense for you than it is for me. Or vice versa (is that English or Latin?). The point is, measuring the sound wavelengths etc adds nothing to the emotional experience. Nothing at all. When Mozart wrote music there were no instruments to measure the sound his music made when played by competent musicians. People enjoyed it, or didn't, according to what their ears told them. If I prefer the way that Hawk plays the sax, as compared with, for example, the way that Coletrane plays the sax, what benefit is there to me in seeing a graph of what their music looks like? Will the Coletrane graph convince me that I am "wrong" and that I "should" prefer Coletrane to Hawkins? No it won't. I have been listening to an enjoying music for more than 50 years. In all that time my ears have served me well. They are fine "instruments" and can enable my brain to interpret emotions from acoustical stimulation of a few hairs and bones. Looking at a graph adds nothing to this.

Now, HST, I do not, as some would do, totally disrespect the views of those who like to see a graph or two. Measuring the room responses to bass has, for example, enabled me to dramatcially improve bass reproduction in my room. But it was my ears that told me that the bass needed improving in the first place and it is my ears that tell me it has improved beyond all imagining since I added my EQ1. The graph is just a visual representation of what the EQ1 is doing - but it is my ears that do the listening and my brain that tells me the sound is better and more enjoyable.

At the end of the day, it will always be my ears that matter, for me. Nobody can sensibly argue with that because nobody can ever know what I am hearing through those ears, nor how it differs from what they might be hearing. It's all "just my opinion", but nobody has the right to disrespect that opinion because nobody knows what I am hearing anyway.

Jeff, none of this is directed at you personally in any way - it was just your post and that video that inspired me to comment, that's all.

Kind Regards,

Keith
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #37893 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 08:19 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,073
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

Despite the fact that Audyssey produces reasonably clear instructions for using their systems the "real" instructions are in this thread and actually following the Audyssey process is a mistake.

Admittedly, even for someone like me who places MultEQ into the "cold, dead hands" category, there does seem to be a lot of .. auxiliary .. information that must be digested to get the most out of Audyssey. Actually, though, I think the "real" instructions are in the manuals from the licensees with all the oddities that come with owner's manuals (I'll reference batpig's Denon to English Guide) .. and not directly from Audyssey. Not an excuse, just a somewhat puzzling observation; someone correct me if I am wrong.

That this thread has gotten the participation of Chris Kyriakakis might be in some way an acknowledgment of how different rooms/systems might throw a curve at MultEQ.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #37894 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bodosom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Niagara Frontier
Posts: 6,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Besides being a Nobel Prize winner Dr. Richard Phillips Feynman was a US national treasure. Sadly he was vaulted into public consciousness as a result of the Challenger disaster.

WRT to perception and the cited video -- and somewhat relevant to the topic at hand -- some flowers (beautiful or otherwise) have adapted to the vision of pollinators and have UV coloring. Not UV reactive dyes but UV coloring since some pollinators are sensitive to the UV spectrum.

As a human ethologist struggles to understand why some plants are more successful than others they might draw the erroneous conclusion that it's because of a specific stamen shape simply because humans don't see UV. The truth is often beyond our senses even though it impinges upon them. Our senses combined with our (unavoidable) biases leads us astray. The scientific method is an attempt to find our way out of the tangled thicket of subjectivity.

Audyssey may or may not provide a truer experience for some people but it certainly changes things. It can be reasonable to ask for something beyond "I like it". It can also be unreasonable. It depends on the circumstances. Since Audyssey says they're better because of science it's fair to call them on it.
bodosom is offline  
post #37895 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 08:29 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,073
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


Jeff, none of this is directed at you personally in any way - it was just your post and that video that inspired me to comment, that's all.

In my post above I was this close to commenting on the donnybrook that I stirred up (odd mix of metaphors) with my original post, but decided against it. But perhaps this is my entre into doing that.

My takeaway from the Feynman video was that the scientist's additional appreciation of the flower did not in any way subtract from the somewhat simpler appreciation of the artist. More importantly, the scientist did not in any way insinuate that his appreciation was greater than the artist's, or worse, that the artist's appreciation was inadequate.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #37896 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 08:36 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,073
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post


Audyssey may or may not provide a truer experience for some people but it certainly changes things. It can be reasonable to ask for something beyond "I like it". It can also be unreasonable. It depends on the circumstances. Since Audyssey says they're better because of science it fair to call them on it.

I don't have the data any more, but my waterfalls improved immensely below the Schroeder Frequency with the addition, first, of the AS-EQ1 and then even more with the Pro calibration.

As noted in my sig (shameless plug here), I am selling my 885 and upgrading to a 5508. As I will be starting from scratch, so to speak, I will endeavor (endeavour for you folks across the pond) to take every measurement I can when I do that comparing my room/system with/without MultEQ XT 32 and then progressing to the Pro calibration.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #37897 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 09:31 AM
 
mjf_uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I am selling my 885 and upgrading to a 5508. As I will be starting from scratch, so to speak, I will endeavor (endeavour for you folks across the pond) to take every measurement I can when I do that comparing my room/system with/without MultEQ XT 32 and then progressing to the Pro calibration.

I'm just looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the differences that you experience as a result of the upgrade.

I would then also very much appreciate your comments about any differences between using the standard mic and the Pro mic and if you feel that the benefits of the Pro calibration are really worth the price of a Pro Install Kit.
mjf_uk is offline  
post #37898 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 10:04 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,323
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

Would you be so kind to post your data? I didn't see that happening in my data.

Since no one else has stepped up and done this, I will give it a shot...

Here is my time domain response with Audyssey XT32 shut off:


And here is my time domain response with AudysseyXT32 turned on:

(If you need some help interpreting these graphic depictions of the time domain response, let me know and I'll explain it for you.)

You can see that the big resonance at 20 to 25 Hz has been virtually eliminated, as has the one at 125 Hz. You can also see the impact Audyssey XT32 had on the FR in the small graphs in the upper right corners of the images.

In addition, here are the RTA's, (1/3 octave), of the pre- and post-Audyssey XT32 full range response:





Audyssey works, and it can be measured.

Craig

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #37899 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 10:49 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,073
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Thanks, Craig. I'll definitely want you to be part of the listening panel when the 5508 gets here, as well as bring the XTZ.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #37900 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 12:03 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,073
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjf_uk View Post

I'm just looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the differences that you experience as a result of the upgrade.

I would then also very much appreciate your comments about any differences between using the standard mic and the Pro mic and if you feel that the benefits of the Pro calibration are really worth the price of a Pro Install Kit.

It is my intention to address both the subjective and objective, and to have a few others be part of it. Those others do not presently have Pro cals and only one, Craig, has XT 32.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #37901 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 12:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bodosom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Niagara Frontier
Posts: 6,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Since no one else has stepped up and done this, I will give it a shot...Audyssey works, and it can be measured.

Craig

I've seen pre/post room response plots here on AVS and there's a (stale) thread over at HTS for REW pre/post FR plots. I don't think anyone is suggesting it doesn't work. Some folks think it's oversold and some folks think it makes things worse. That's still "working".

After seeing a narrow but clearly audible Audyssey provided cut I no longer trust 1/3 octave plots of low frequencies. That's part of why I griped about the Audyssey plots in the 4311 thread. Those plots are a perfect example of what might make a skeptic suspicious.
bodosom is offline  
post #37902 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 12:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
Gotchaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Audyssey Experts,

I ran 16 samples with the Pro Tool, the Denon wanted to set my Mains to FULL, and xover for center to 60hz, surround to 60hz, and back to 40hz. I set them all to 80hz per recommendations of setup, and all speakers to SMALL.

I enabled X32T mode and selected Stereo setting. I am playing back DSD via HDMI from an OPPO BDP 93, it is 2 Channel SACD. Here is what I am experiencing:

1. Very High Frequency, almost no MID or Bass coming from Front channels, BASS does does not seem to be coming from Sub (set to 120HZ)

2. When I switch the Denon A100(4311ci) to Direct or Pure Direct Mode, BASS kicks in, it sounds full and more pleasurebale

What the heck is going on? How can I get decent mid/BASS with XT32? How many samples do I need to do?

All my speakers are toe in and facing Seat 1 location. Sampling was done at ear level, mic straight up to the ceiling, following Audyssey's best practices. It just does not result in pleasureable playback for 2 ch stereo SACD's.
Gotchaa is offline  
post #37903 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 12:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
ghstudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotchaa View Post

Audyssey Experts,

I ran 16 samples with the Pro Tool, the Denon wanted to set my Mains to FULL, and xover for center to 60hz, surround to 60hz, and back to 40hz. I set them all to 80hz per recommendations of setup, and all speakers to SMALL.

I enabled X32T mode and selected Stereo setting. I am playing back DSD via HDMI from an OPPO BDP 93, it is 2 Channel SACD. Here is what I am experiencing:

1. Very High Frequency, almost no MID or Bass coming from Front channels, BASS does does not seem to be coming from Sub (set to 120HZ)

2. When I switch the Denon A100(4311ci) to Direct or Pure Direct Mode, BASS kicks in, it sounds full and more pleasurebale

What the heck is going on? How can I get decent mid/BASS with XT32? How many samples do I need to do?

All my speakers are toe in and facing Seat 1 location. Sampling was done at ear level, mic straight up to the ceiling, following Audyssey's best practices. It just does not result in pleasureable playback for 2 ch stereo SACD's.

Actually, the recent recommendations are that with XT32, you can actually run with 40hz crossovers or even full range, if that's what the software recommends. Personally, although the pro software recommends that my fronts and center should be full range, I set them to 40hz crossovers and let my sub do the real low stuff.

One recommendation though....if you are going to change the crossover settings, do it in the pro software...not later on the 4311 itself.
ghstudio is offline  
post #37904 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 12:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jmschnur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: VA MD DC area
Posts: 2,940
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Be sure Audyssey. Is enabled when you use DSD with the two channel sacd. Try stereo and see how that sounds
jmschnur is offline  
post #37905 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 12:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bodosom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Niagara Frontier
Posts: 6,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Actually, though, I think the "real" instructions are in the manuals from the licensees with all the oddities that come with owner's manuals (I'll reference batpig's Denon to English Guide) .. and not directly from Audyssey. Not an excuse, just a somewhat puzzling observation; someone correct me if I am wrong.

I believe this is wrong at least in the case of my Denon. The Denon provided instructions are a rewrite of the Audyssey instructions although (I might have missed this in the Audyssey doc) they are specific about what do (use MLP) if your MLP is not in the center of an odd number of chairs/seats/seating positions and they speak about a small room. Denon's instructions barely amplify and certainly do not supplement or contradict the Audyssey documents.

Then of course there are the Pro Kit instructions. Since there aren't any for the 4311 I read more than one. Modulo the contact page they all appear to be the same V3 document.

In another disconnect note that despite the continued assertion that "Large v. Small" is an OEM choice the Pro Kit makes the same one even given XT32 (I'll admit to assuming that the 4311 support code in 3.4 includes some knowledge of XT32).
bodosom is offline  
post #37906 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 03:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fastslappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: La CasaSlappy @ SlappyVille,SF NorthBay,CALI
Posts: 6,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by gamelover360 View Post

This thread is about helping each other get the best out of Audyssey. Lately it has become a pissing match. Everyone involved adds some real knowledge to this thread, so why don't we do that as respectfully as possible, and let debate be healthy and productive. Lest also accept that measuring sound and the science of sound is far from perfect and decided. Our ears must also agree that things sound better, or right. However science and measuring is also very important.......at the core of what Audyssey is about. So lets accept that a single graph should not be the reason to say your sound is good........without listening to back it up....graphs can be innacurate in certain areas depending on measuring method and room size, etc. '

And no one is a proponent of listening to your system and saying it sounds good without any measuring or calibration to get you to a reference point that is at least close to where it should be scientifically. Lets, get back to the regularly scheduled program and stop these interludes that become boring and rude debates about stuff that wanders too far from the point of this thread.

this is the internet , not a perfect world / there are no trolls in a perfect world

Now for that regularly scheduled program that stays on point , we can only hope that will be the case .

Mike

JAZZ IS NOT DEAD IT JUST SMELLS FUNNY ; FRANK ZAPPA
Fastslappy is offline  
post #37907 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 03:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post


Now for that regularly scheduled program that stays on point , we can only hope that will be the case .

On the other hand I don't think you want your last 3 posts in this thread quoted.
Gary J is online now  
post #37908 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 04:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fastslappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: La CasaSlappy @ SlappyVille,SF NorthBay,CALI
Posts: 6,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

On the other hand I don't think you want your last 3 posts in this thread quoted.

I was staying on the derailed train !

Mike

JAZZ IS NOT DEAD IT JUST SMELLS FUNNY ; FRANK ZAPPA
Fastslappy is offline  
post #37909 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 04:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tom Hilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: North Carolina, USA
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Can't we all just get along?


Blessed are the peacemakers...


Jeff,

I had a little time today to catch up on this thread and the "donnybrook" as you termed it. The reading evoked a remembrance of your short post from a few days ago---an excellent suggestion and good advice for us all.

Now, I trust that getting along includes the freedom to express a perspective on audio evaluation which diverges from a certain doctrine of audiometric correctness that has found advocacy in this thread. I trust it also includes a reasonable expectation that members may post in considered dissent of that doctrine without repeated exposure to dismissive and condescending replies from its inventor.

In an earlier post, I expressed my strong disagreement with this "audio correctness" dogma---pointing out some dubious assumptions as well as conclusions---and I expressed my objection to the disdainful attitude displayed by its advocate toward those who do not share his point of view.

Mainly, though, I've tried to express my own particular understanding of audio perception and evaluation. My view (meaning simply that this is an opinion capable of being wrong) is that audio measurement techniques are very helpful tools, and well worth employing to our best advantage for improving sonic performance in our HT environments. Metric displays are especially effective in identifying problem areas that are discerned during the listening process and in guiding us toward targeted correction strategies. However, I do not believe that audiometric techniques should take precedence over the faculties of human perception---i.e., listening---when it comes to the final evaluation of audio quality.

Human subjectivity is assumed by some to be a glaring detriment in evaluating audio. I dissent from this view---our subjectivity need not be seen as a negative factor in evaluative listening. In fact, it is an indispensable way of informing us intuitively about fundamentals within the soundtracks we hear: what we like and don't like, what sounds pleasing or appropriate or convincing and what does not. It can be conceded that the subjectivity of human perceiving is less precise than audio metrics in a number of ways. Nevertheless, I believe the capacities of human hearing (from sensory sound reception in the ear to subjective mental processing in the mind) constitute a powerful combination that grasps the character of sound more comprehensively and reliably than any array of metric instruments. At the same time, I believe that the measuring techniques now available to help us are also very beneficial, and can mesh well with our inherently subjective perception. In the end, though, I think we should acknowledge realistically the preeminence of ear and mind in the process of perceiving audio. We should be willing to employ more fully our listening minds---that indispensable subjective capacity--- which extends our ability to evaluate audio well beyond the doctrinaire analysis of metric data.

If I may, I'd like to recapitulate from an earlier post: Audio reproduction was invented and designed to target the sensory apparatus of human beings. Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that, in any given audio environment, a sonic evaluation which is derived through human auditory functioning (the ear-brain perceptual apparatus) should rightly receive greater weight than data derived from audiometric analysis. In other words, human listening ought to be regarded as the most decisive criterion for judging the quality of reproduced sound.

(This is my view, a single opinion offered for general consideration and unaccompanied by any attempt or coercive desire to impose it upon others. Persuasion is the only "authority" it could possess, if any.)

So anyway, I've had my say and I'll be standing down from the controversy. I've placed the referenced poster in my Unpersuaded file and it would be best if he deposited me in a similar file of his own.

IMO, it's worth remembering that none of our metric devices or graphic displays can appreciate audio/video the way we humans can. Yes, we are subjective...because we are subjects, not mere objects. We have minds and ears capable of the remarkably complex process we call "listening", so we should feel free to use our listening minds to enjoy the hobby we share. Happy home theater-ing!


Tom

Tom


The world is more than we know...more than we imagine...more even than we can imagine.
Tom Hilton is offline  
post #37910 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 05:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fastslappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: La CasaSlappy @ SlappyVille,SF NorthBay,CALI
Posts: 6,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 753
Nicely said Tom ,
Way better than I could have posted , I fully agree with you.

Mike

JAZZ IS NOT DEAD IT JUST SMELLS FUNNY ; FRANK ZAPPA
Fastslappy is offline  
post #37911 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 05:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 767 Post(s)
Liked: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Since no one else has stepped up and done this, I will give it a shot...

Here is my time domain response with Audyssey XT32 shut off:
[...]

And here is my time domain response with AudysseyXT32 turned on:
[...]

Hi Craig,

Is this a single speaker or multiple speakers, a single measurement or an average?

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is offline  
post #37912 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 06:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bodosom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Niagara Frontier
Posts: 6,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hilton View Post

Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that, in any given audio environment, a sonic evaluation which is derived through human auditory functioning (the ear-brain perceptual apparatus) should rightly receive greater weight than data derived from audiometric analysis. In other words, human listening ought to be regarded as the most decisive criterion for judging the quality of reproduced sound.

Is this simply an elaboration of "reference v. preference" or does this mean that if I assert that my $50k collection of power cords sounds better than the OEM versions -- despite any measurements -- that they do (even if only to me)?
bodosom is offline  
post #37913 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 06:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fastslappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: La CasaSlappy @ SlappyVille,SF NorthBay,CALI
Posts: 6,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

Is this simply an elaboration of "reference v. preference" or does this mean that if I assert that my $50k collection of power cords sounds better than the OEM versions -- despite any measurements -- that they do (even if only to me)?

the train is derailing again .. Hmmmn ; I knew it wouldn't last long ..

Mike

JAZZ IS NOT DEAD IT JUST SMELLS FUNNY ; FRANK ZAPPA
Fastslappy is offline  
post #37914 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 06:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jmschnur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: VA MD DC area
Posts: 2,940
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Sounds a lot like the placebo effect. Which of course is real
jmschnur is offline  
post #37915 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 07:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
IceTBC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: California
Posts: 513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotchaa View Post

Audyssey Experts,

I ran 16 samples with the Pro Tool, the Denon wanted to set my Mains to FULL, and xover for center to 60hz, surround to 60hz, and back to 40hz. I set them all to 80hz per recommendations of setup, and all speakers to SMALL.

I enabled X32T mode and selected Stereo setting. I am playing back DSD via HDMI from an OPPO BDP 93, it is 2 Channel SACD. Here is what I am experiencing:

1. Very High Frequency, almost no MID or Bass coming from Front channels, BASS does does not seem to be coming from Sub (set to 120HZ)

2. When I switch the Denon A100(4311ci) to Direct or Pure Direct Mode, BASS kicks in, it sounds full and more pleasurebale

What the heck is going on? How can I get decent mid/BASS with XT32? How many samples do I need to do?

All my speakers are toe in and facing Seat 1 location. Sampling was done at ear level, mic straight up to the ceiling, following Audyssey's best practices. It just does not result in pleasureable playback for 2 ch stereo SACD's.

Heh. I'll repost my response to you from the 4311 thread.

It seems you're saying you're not getting bass using DSD from your Oppo 93.

Is your DSD output from your Oppo set to bitstream? If so there is no bass management going on. Switch your Oppos' DSD output to PCM (in Setup) and you will hear the missing bass. I have a 93 also and this was pointed out in the Oppo 93 thread and I found this was true when I compared the two outputs. This is only true for two channel DSD via HDMI from the Oppo 93.
IceTBC is offline  
post #37916 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 07:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jpco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 1,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

Is this simply an elaboration of "reference v. preference" or does this mean that if I assert that my $50k collection of power cords sounds better than the OEM versions -- despite any measurements -- that they do (even if only to me)?

I see nothing in the post about declaring that absurd tweaks make something sound better or that it's a reference vs. preference thing. Bottom line is that there really is no reference at multiple locations in a room, and measurements can only capture so much.

I'd like to see further technical discussion of how Audyssey truly works because I question whether room correction in the time domain above 300Hz or so makes for more enjoyable sound. My major concerns are with boosts happening at upper frequencies to create a flatter response and with the dynamic removal of potential reflection signals if that's what indeed is happening. If so, that seems like a lot of signal alteration to me.

Just because it measures to have a flatter frequency response above 2kHz or to be "better" in the time domain at higher frequencies does not necessarily mean it will sound better subjectively. The room adds quality to the listening experience, so I would like to know for how much and what parts of the room Audyssey is correcting. Human perception matters, since in the end, no one really knows what sounds enjoyable until the listener has given feedback.
jpco is offline  
post #37917 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 08:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 3,361
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 243
To Tom Hilton's post, I would only say "Amen"! Well said.

Even when I'm not having a particularly good day, I am at least having a day!

New Theater 
 
Build Thread
audioguy is offline  
post #37918 of 72505 Old 03-19-2011, 09:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
Gotchaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceTBC View Post


Heh. I'll repost my response to you from the 4311 thread.

It seems you're saying you're not getting bass using DSD from your Oppo 93.

Is your DSD output from your Oppo set to bitstream? If so there is no bass management going on. Switch your Oppos' DSD output to PCM (in Setup) and you will hear the missing bass. I have a 93 also and this was pointed out in the Oppo 93 thread and I found this was true when I compared the two outputs. This is only true for two channel DSD via HDMI from the Oppo 93.

I have a thought on this, setting to PCM let's the player decode, with bitstream how could BASS be excluded from the signal? surely it gets to the Denon....

If I set to stereo it still sounds poor, if I set to Direct or Pure direct mode it sounds fine, this mode bypasses Audyssey as well as any DSP processing by the Denon short of DSD decoding, and it is bitstream!?

So I am not sure why this would make a difference, it appears it is Audyssey that is the issue here, yes?
Gotchaa is offline  
post #37919 of 72505 Old 03-20-2011, 01:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Wetumpka, AL
Posts: 15,424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
Since no one else has stepped up and done this, I will give it a shot...

snip...

In addition, here are the RTA's, (1/3 octave), of the pre- and post-Audyssey XT32 full range response:





Audyssey works, and it can be measured.

Craig
Craig.....thanks for posting.

Does it appear that correction falls off above 250hz????

Samsung 64F8500, Panasonic 65VT50, Oppo 95, Tivo Roamio for OTA, Dish VIP722, Marantz AV8801 preamp, Rotel Amps, Atlantic Tech 8200 speakers, Seaton Submersive HP, Calman 5, Chromapure, Accupel DVG-5000, i1Display3pro, i1pro2, eecolor colorbox.
JimP is offline  
post #37920 of 72505 Old 03-20-2011, 01:34 AM
Advanced Member
 
ReneV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post
You can see that the big resonance at 20 to 25 Hz has been virtually eliminated, as has the one at 125 Hz. You can also see the impact Audyssey XT32 had on the FR in the small graphs in the upper right corners of the images.
Would you mind saying a bit about the --10Hz range, too? Are you actually reproducing this in your room?
ReneV is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Audyssey , Receivers Amplifiers , Kef Kht1005 2se 5 1 Subwoofer Satellite System With C4 Subwoofer Gloss White , 5 6 7 1 7 2 Or 8 1 8 2 One Or Two Subwoofer Compatible 16 Banana Post 2 Rca Speaker Wall Plate For H
Gear in this thread - Kht1005 by PriceGrabber.com

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