"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 2068 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #62011 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 02:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

^^ Turning the question on its side--is there any (semi) automated room correction that _does_ optimize the delay for the crossover/splice correctly, as implemented in AVRs on the consumer HT market?

i know the only real test is post-calibration external measurement using REW or similar, but AFAIK it hasn't been documented for ARC, MCACC, or YPAO either.

Not that your argument concerning Audyssey isn't otherwise correct -- again.

Stuart, according to my information Audyssey would be ready to do this during auto setup (somewhere Chris once made a hint on that), but the AVR makers don't want to give up Bass Management, for the time being at least. When time comes Audyssey will probably be among the first ones to implement such a feature. But it's the marketing Gods at the AVR makers who are controlling the salami slicing machine! cool.gif

On another note, in the current hierarchy of AVRs where Audyssey is only EQ'ing the speaker channels, but not setting crossovers IMHO and with my logic, it would be impossible to do it automatically, coz when each channel EQ is finished the mic would need to be placed back to the exact same location again for a second sub-sat combined "chirping". With Audyssey taking over the Bass Management Department a one time "chirping" would be enough, probably the calculation time would need to be extended. But we can wait a bit, eh? wink.gif

P.S.: To whom it may concern! Let's keep our discussions limited to technical topics only, and refrain from getting personal! Deal? cool.gifsmile.gif Thank you! smile.gif


P.S.2: Just found the quote. The topic of the discussion was that it is not Audyssey but the AVR that sets crossovers. Here's Chris's comment: "This is a sore point with us. We have been trying to convince AVR makers to have more control over the crossovers and bass management, but it hasn't happened yet."

 

Unfortunately for your argument, Feri, the issue under discussion is not one of setting the crossovers but one of setting the distance (for the sub) and the distance is not set by the AVR, but is set (incorrectly in almost all cases) by Audyssey.

 

I didn't spot your apology for accusing me of spreading 'wrong information'?  I'll let it go if you will stop spreading information that really is wrong.

kbarnes701 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62012 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 03:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Stuart, according to my information Audyssey would be ready to do this during auto setup (somewhere Chris once made a hint on that), but the AVR makers don't want to give up Bass Management, for the time being at least. When time comes Audyssey will probably be among the first ones to implement such a feature. But it's the marketing Gods at the AVR makers who are controlling the salami slicing machine! cool.gif
 

 

Yeah. I can just imagine the conversation:

 

Room Correction System Company (RC): "Hey, we have the ability to implement a great new feature where we measure the sub for distance and the satellites for distance but then we measure them bioth together for the final adjustment..."

 

AVR Manufacturer (AVR): "What does that do then?"

 

RC: "Well, it allows us to optimise the frequency response around the crossover region or 'splice'?"

 

AVR: "And what does that do?"

 

RC: "It gives a smoother response at the crossover region and ensures the sub and satellite speakers are in phase and that makes the system sound much better."

 

AVR: "Anything else?"

 

RC: "Well if you incorporate this tech into your AVR it will give your units much better sound quality that competitors who don't have it - a real edge for you/'

 

AVR: "Nah - I don't think we'll bother with it, thanks."

 

I think this is called 'passing the buck'. 

 

But it's not really relevant to what we were discussing anyway because the poor optimisation at the splice IS controlled by Audyssey when Audyssey sets the incorrect sub distance, something it does because it does not ping the subs and the satellites together, only separately, so it never knows what their combined response is. End result: a system that sounds good but is not sounding as good as it could if it were optimised.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #62013 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 03:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Keith, this is the first time for me to hear Audyssey never gets the sub-satellite splice right. biggrin.gif Since when is Audyssey in charge of Bass Management and especially setting the smoothness of the sub-sat splice? Please don't spread out wrong information, especially to newbees who might be discuraged by reading such (other wise wrong) info. Audyssey EQ's each speaker channel independently and reports the low frequency -3 dB roll-off points to the AVR so that the Bass Management Department can set a crossover. Right? cool.gif

Actually IIRC it wasn't too long ago somebody posted a quote from Audyssey's Chris K to the effect that Audyssey has the "test the speakers plus sub" step built, but receiver manufacturers don't want it. Can't put it in if they won't let 'em.

 

Even if that is true (and I am not saying it isn't) it doesn't really affect the discussion between me and Feri. The fact is, because it is not an included feature, Audyssey allows a system that results in a less than optimised setup. IOW, it is not 'perfect'. (Not that the vast majority of us think it is perfect of course).

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #62014 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 03:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

How about stopping here for a moment Guys? Who said the solution as a new feature is adjusting the subwoofer delay? That IMHO is just a workaround. Moreover, it is just supposed to work for one single mic position only. It's not just Audyssey, but other Room Correction systems that are also working on multiple measurement principles, even if there is only one listener at the MLP (with a tighter multiple measurement scheme). smile.gif

 

Are you saying then that everyone who has done the 'sub distance tweak' is lying or mistaken when they report (and measure) considerable sonic improvements as a result of setting the sub delay properly?

 

This argument that it is done "from a single position and therefore isn't as good as/can't be compared with Audyssey" is always trotted out by you when you have no facts to support your case. I repeat - everyone (except Jeff) reported a substantial improvement in sound quality after doing the tweak. This includes Mark Seaton (who knows a little bit about sub optimisation), Craig John (who also knows far more about the subject than most), AustinJerry (who measures everything that moves and often things that don't) Stuart (sdrucker) and dozens of others who have tried it and reported back. The one thing that these guys all have in common is enormous credibility. Also, many of these users also reported significant improvements across the entire room when taking additional measurements (me included) which rather kills the argument that a single mic position measurement is no good. Also, I might point out that Audyssey only measures the distance/delay from a single mic position anyway, which rather makes a mockery of your criticism. 

 

Give up, Feri. First you try to deflect by making it a crossover issue, then you try to deflect by accusing me (obliquely) of making personal remarks about you, then you try to deflect by saying "well other RC companies don't do it either", then you try to deflect by bringing up the old standby of the number of mic positions. Bottom line: Audyssey doesn’t get the sub distance right and that's all there is to it.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #62015 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 08:31 AM
Member
 
MagnoliaMOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello. I currently have a 5.1 setup with MartinLogan Theos, Stage, Descent-i, and Montage. I am currently using Mcintosh MX121 which uses Audyssey Multieq XT as opposed to the XT32 on the AV8801. I have some room treatments, such as absorption panels behind my speakers and additional treatments in the corners. No bass traps yet. Would XT32 make a difference over XT. I love the sound from the MX121 but also want to explore XT32. Any thoughts?

MagMo
Elite 70" (PRO70X5FD), Oppo BDP-105, Marantz AV-8801, Marantz MM-7055, PS4, PS3 (Fatty SACD), MartinLogan Theos, MartinLogan Stage, MartinLogan Montage, MartinLogan Descent-i
MagnoliaMOE is offline  
post #62016 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 09:35 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 MagnoliaMOE View Post

Hello. I currently have a 5.1 setup with MartinLogan Theos, Stage, Descent-i, and Montage. I am currently using Mcintosh MX121 which uses Audyssey Multieq XT as opposed to the XT32 on the AV8801. I have some room treatments, such as absorption panels behind my speakers and additional treatments in the corners. No bass traps yet. Would XT32 make a difference over XT. I love the sound from the MX121 but also want to explore XT32. Any thoughts?

I also have Martin Logan speakers, but I use an Integra 80.2 with XT/32, having also had prior Integras with XT. I also use Audyssey Pro, by the way. All I can say is that much as I was happy with XT, XT/32 was noticeably better, sweeter sounding and more beautifully realistic. I think it was mostly about tonality. I do not think there was much effect on imaging. Trying to keep perspective, it was not a night/day difference, but it was noticeable and XT/32 was definitely preferable. The listening comparisons were all done with MCh classical SACD's, by the way.

On the other hand, there is more to the sound quality than just the Audyssey version. So , ideally, you would be able to compare your Mac to an XT/32 equipped prepro in your home, trying to keep calibration mike positions as similar as possible. But, you might find a Marantz 8801 or an Integra 80.3 preferable. I would stick with hi Rez music for the comparison. Movies are usually too dialog intensive. If it sounds right with music, it is going to be fine with movies.
fitzcaraldo215 is offline  
post #62017 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 11:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnoliaMOE View Post

Hello. I currently have a 5.1 setup with MartinLogan Theos, Stage, Descent-i, and Montage. I am currently using Mcintosh MX121 which uses Audyssey Multieq XT as opposed to the XT32 on the AV8801. I have some room treatments, such as absorption panels behind my speakers and additional treatments in the corners. No bass traps yet. Would XT32 make a difference over XT. I love the sound from the MX121 but also want to explore XT32. Any thoughts?

 

I would say it would make a difference. XT32 not only does far more correcting in the bass region, where it is needed most, but also handles upper frequency correction better than XT. The better treated your room is (especially perhaps wrt to the bass traps you seem to be considering), the less impact automated room EQ solutions will impact on the overall sound, but even in heavily treated rooms (like my own) the benefits of XT32 over XT can normally be felt (heard).

 

If you are happy with the upper range performance from your room and your MX121, one option to consider might be trying to find a used SVS AS-EQ1. These have been discontinued since the advent of XT32 but essentially they provide the identical performance of XT32 but for the bass frequencies only. As the bass is where you need the correction most this could be an excellent compromise for you and would allow you to hang on to the MX121 which you love. Just a thought.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #62018 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 11:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnoliaMOE View Post

Hello. I currently have a 5.1 setup with MartinLogan Theos, Stage, Descent-i, and Montage. I am currently using Mcintosh MX121 which uses Audyssey Multieq XT as opposed to the XT32 on the AV8801. I have some room treatments, such as absorption panels behind my speakers and additional treatments in the corners. No bass traps yet. Would XT32 make a difference over XT. I love the sound from the MX121 but also want to explore XT32. Any thoughts?

I also have Martin Logan speakers, but I use an Integra 80.2 with XT/32, having also had prior Integras with XT. I also use Audyssey Pro, by the way. All I can say is that much as I was happy with XT, XT/32 was noticeably better, sweeter sounding and more beautifully realistic. I think it was mostly about tonality. I do not think there was much effect on imaging. Trying to keep perspective, it was not a night/day difference, but it was noticeable and XT/32 was definitely preferable. The listening comparisons were all done with MCh classical SACD's, by the way.

On the other hand, there is more to the sound quality than just the Audyssey version. So , ideally, you would be able to compare your Mac to an XT/32 equipped prepro in your home, trying to keep calibration mike positions as similar as possible. But, you might find a Marantz 8801 or an Integra 80.3 preferable. I would stick with hi Rez music for the comparison. Movies are usually too dialog intensive. If it sounds right with music, it is going to be fine with movies.

 

+1.

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #62019 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 11:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Glad to year you are finally also a satisfied customer pbarach. smile.gif

Now this has lead me to the idea to start a sub-topic in this Audyssey thread where we could discuss how satisfied or unsatisfied we are. How about setting up groups as follows:

1. I'm satisfied from the beginning.
2. I'm not satisfied at all.
3. I was not satisfied, but now I am, coz ...(put description/solution here).
4. I was satisfied, but not satisfied now, coz...(put description/headache here).
5. Join this group in case you think you do not fit into any of the above,...and give reason, please.

Let's discuss. smile.gif

Bump!

Anyone? smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62020 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 12:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
D Bone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 1,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Bump!

Anyone? smile.gif


3. I was not satisfied, but now I am, coz ...........

Unsatisfied is a bit harsh, but with my Onkyo 709 XT, I was never fully satisfied with the overall result of XT. On a scale of 1-10, I was probably a 7. I was extremely satisfied with the bass result, but always felt it was just too bright. I tried dozens (literally) of 8pt calibrations, with all the usual tips supplied in this thread, but always ended up with the same result. I started mapping my calibration procedures, both in terms of mic measurements and the order of mic placement, so if I ever hit the "magic" calibration, I could replicate it again.

I had to replace my 709 due to an HDMI board failure, and I replaced it with another receiver that also has XT. Upon setup of the new receiver, I went back to my last mapped calibration procedure and I followed it exactly, both in mic placement and the order of placement. The end result of the new receiver has me now completely satisfied with Audyssey XT. Great bass with multiple layered notes, and smooth mids and highs are now what I'm enjoying.........On a scale of 1-10, I am currently a 10.

Samsung UN60D6420 ~ DirecTV HR-44 ~ Sony S5100 ~ Roku 3 ~ Denon X-2000 ~ HTD Level TWO Towers ~ HTD Level TWO Surrounds ~ Power Sound Audio XV15
D Bone is offline  
post #62021 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 12:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by D Bone View Post

3. I was not satisfied, but now I am, coz ...........

Unsatisfied is a bit harsh, but with my Onkyo 709 XT, I was never fully satisfied with the overall result of XT. On a scale of 1-10, I was probably a 7. I was extremely satisfied with the bass result, but always felt it was just too bright. I tried dozens (literally) of 8pt calibrations, with all the usual tips supplied in this thread, but always ended up with the same result. I started mapping my calibration procedures, both in terms of mic measurements and the order of mic placement, so if I ever hit the "magic" calibration, I could replicate it again.

I had to replace my 709 due to an HDMI board failure, and I replaced it with another receiver that also has XT. Upon setup of the new receiver, I went back to my last mapped calibration procedure and I followed it exactly, both in mic placement and the order of placement. The end result of the new receiver has me now completely satisfied with Audyssey XT. Great bass with multiple layered notes, and smooth mids and highs are now what I'm enjoying.........On a scale of 1-10, I am currently a 10.

Glad to hear you're a happy camper D Bone. Thanks for your contribution. I'd like to point out your excellent idea of the importance of mapping calibration procedures. This is how we can learn something very useful from each other. smile.gif

Take care! smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62022 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 12:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,815
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by D Bone View Post

I started mapping my calibration procedures, both in terms of mic measurements and the order of mic placement...

I'm glad you are satisfied now, but you can stop documenting the order of mic placement--it has no bearing on the calibration results. With the exception of the first mic position, of course.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #62023 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 12:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
D Bone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 1,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Glad to hear you're a happy camper D Bone. Thanks for your contribution. I'd like to point out your excellent idea of the importance of mapping calibration procedures. This is how we can learn something very useful from each other. smile.gif

Take care! smile.gif

I like the question, and look forward to the responses. My "fix" isn't much help to anyone, as I'm certainly not recommending that people swap receiver brands, but in my case, it is simply what happened. I don't know the reasons for the change in my case, but at this point I don't really care, because the end result is just awesome. I figured mapping my procedures would come in handy, and it did. It sure extends the calibration time, and by a lot,eek.gif but it is worth it once the 'holy grail' is found. biggrin.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

I'm glad you are satisfied now, but you can stop documenting the order of mic placement--it has no bearing on the calibration results. With the exception of the first mic position, of course.


I didn't know that. It doesn't add much time, so I'll probably keep doing it. Measuring the mic is what takes the longest time, as I have to get two measurements off of opposite walls and of course the floor. I doubt I will need to worry about this any time soon, as I am so happy with my system there is no need to re-calibrate.............Hopefully EVER! wink.gif

Samsung UN60D6420 ~ DirecTV HR-44 ~ Sony S5100 ~ Roku 3 ~ Denon X-2000 ~ HTD Level TWO Towers ~ HTD Level TWO Surrounds ~ Power Sound Audio XV15
D Bone is offline  
post #62024 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 01:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

I'm glad you are satisfied now, but you can stop documenting the order of mic placement--it has no bearing on the calibration results. With the exception of the first mic position, of course.

Jerry, while the order of the mic placement really doesn't have any bearing apart from the first placement, doing so won't 'urt, eh? wink.gif So, why not?cool.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62025 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 01:41 PM
Member
 
MagnoliaMOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

I also have Martin Logan speakers, but I use an Integra 80.2 with XT/32, having also had prior Integras with XT. I also use Audyssey Pro, by the way. All I can say is that much as I was happy with XT, XT/32 was noticeably better, sweeter sounding and more beautifully realistic. I think it was mostly about tonality. I do not think there was much effect on imaging. Trying to keep perspective, it was not a night/day difference, but it was noticeable and XT/32 was definitely preferable. The listening comparisons were all done with MCh classical SACD's, by the way.

On the other hand, there is more to the sound quality than just the Audyssey version. So , ideally, you would be able to compare your Mac to an XT/32 equipped prepro in your home, trying to keep calibration mike positions as similar as possible. But, you might find a Marantz 8801 or an Integra 80.3 preferable. I would stick with hi Rez music for the comparison. Movies are usually too dialog intensive. If it sounds right with music, it is going to be fine with movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I would say it would make a difference. XT32 not only does far more correcting in the bass region, where it is needed most, but also handles upper frequency correction better than XT. The better treated your room is (especially perhaps wrt to the bass traps you seem to be considering), the less impact automated room EQ solutions will impact on the overall sound, but even in heavily treated rooms (like my own) the benefits of XT32 over XT can normally be felt (heard).

If you are happy with the upper range performance from your room and your MX121, one option to consider might be trying to find a used SVS AS-EQ1. These have been discontinued since the advent of XT32 but essentially they provide the identical performance of XT32 but for the bass frequencies only. As the bass is where you need the correction most this could be an excellent compromise for you and would allow you to hang on to the MX121 which you love. Just a thought.

Thank you both. I appreaciate the quick reply. Makes sense to me.

MagMo
Elite 70" (PRO70X5FD), Oppo BDP-105, Marantz AV-8801, Marantz MM-7055, PS4, PS3 (Fatty SACD), MartinLogan Theos, MartinLogan Stage, MartinLogan Montage, MartinLogan Descent-i
MagnoliaMOE is offline  
post #62026 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 01:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,815
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Jerry, while the order of the mic placement really doesn't have any bearing apart from the first placement, doing so won't 'urt, eh? wink.gif So, why not?cool.gif

Are you joking? One of our purposes in participating in this thread is to provide accurate advice, and allowing someone to think that the order of mic placement has any bearing on the outcome would not be right.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #62027 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Are you joking? One of our purposes in participating in this thread is to provide accurate advice, and allowing someone to think that the order of mic placement has any bearing on the outcome would not be right.

Come on Jerry, what difference would it make if the OP would follow his order as far as it has no bearing? smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62028 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 02:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
IgorZep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

As baptig says, I'd doubt very much if either of them would like to be characterised as 'similar' to each other, even in this one suggested way smile.gif
They are not nearly similar. Here I totally agree. And I fully respect Markus presence here. Sorry if I was too emotional in some statements tongue.gif
IgorZep is offline  
post #62029 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 02:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post

They are not nearly similar. Here I totally agree. And I fully respect Markus presence here. Sorry if I was too emotional in some statements tongue.gif

Hi Igor, let's cut the emotional part, this is a science thread! How is your Onkyo 818 issue going on, did you solve the boost under -3 dB point of your satellites yet? smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62030 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 03:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
IgorZep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Hi Igor, let's cut the emotional part, this is a science thread! How is your Onkyo 818 issue going on, did you solve the boost under -3 dB point of your satellites yet? smile.gif
Emotions is the energy, they move things forward. There would be no science without it. wink.gif
Considering 818, as I have said there is no solution in my room. The last hope is acoustical treatments, but due to the budget reasons they are delayed for an unspecified time (but there is a plan). smile.gif
As they will change considerably how the room responds (making it essentially another room acoustically) the issue might potentially go away... But for this to happen this Onkyo should also survive in my room until I finally get the treatments rolleyes.gif
IgorZep is offline  
post #62031 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 04:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post

Emotions is the energy, they move things forward. There would be no science without it. wink.gif
Considering 818, as I have said there is no solution in my room. The last hope is acoustical treatments, but due to the budget reasons they are delayed for an unspecified time (but there is a plan). smile.gif
As they will change considerably how the room responds (making it essentially another room acoustically) the issue might potentially go away... But for this to happen this Onkyo should also survive in my room until I finally get the treatments rolleyes.gif

Igor, would it be possible for you to move all your stuff, I mean the Onkyo 818 and all your speakers to another room, let alone to a friend's room just in order to rule out the anomaly you are facing now. Sorry for the hassle. Heck with it Man, it would clearly show whether it's an Onkyo/Audyssey issue or an issue rarely happening that even Chris K. said they could not reproduce on their test rig.

I was thinking of this above case while driving to the office in the morning the other day. Talk about emotions, eh? smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62032 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 04:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Hello I just run my aud. Multeq .My question is can I turn off the dynamic EQ? And what is the purpose of the DEQ? Also I noticed that if I turned it off i can adjust the treble and bass. What is the use of treble and bass? Thanks. Newbie here. Ty

(2) Energy RC 70 towers
(1) Energy Veritas 2.0C center
(2) Energy Veritas 2.0R surrounds
(2) Energy RC LCR back surrounds
(1) Rythmik LV12R sub
(1) Denon 2112CI avr
(1) LG 55" LM7600 tv
caloyzki is offline  
post #62033 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 04:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post

Hello I just run my aud. Multeq .My question is can I turn off the dynamic EQ?

Yes you can, any time.
Quote:
And what is the purpose of the DEQ?

The purpose of DEQ is to restore percieved loudness below reference level.
Quote:
Also I noticed that if I turned it off i can adjust the treble and bass. What is the use of treble and bass?

Treble and bass are supposed to enhance or cut treble and bass, but with Audyssey on board you no longer need to tweak them. They are there for 20th century guys, we still have some of them, so the AVR makers are doing their best to please all kinds of customers. smile.gif
mogorf is online now  
post #62034 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 05:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Yes you can, any time.


The purpose of DEQ is to restore percieved loudness below reference level.
Treble and bass are supposed to enhance or cut treble and bass, but with Audyssey on board you no longer need to tweak them. They are there for 20th century guys, we still have some of them, so the AVR makers are doing their best to please all kinds of customers. smile.gif
Okay thank you. So turning off the DEQ won't affect the aud. Result right? If I turn off I can hear louder now in my subwoofer compare to its on? Ok I will never touch the bass and treble I will just live it as is default.

(2) Energy RC 70 towers
(1) Energy Veritas 2.0C center
(2) Energy Veritas 2.0R surrounds
(2) Energy RC LCR back surrounds
(1) Rythmik LV12R sub
(1) Denon 2112CI avr
(1) LG 55" LM7600 tv
caloyzki is offline  
post #62035 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 05:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post

Okay thank you.

Your welcome.

Quote:
So turning off the DEQ won't affect the aud. Result right?

Won't affect the EQ filters, but will affect preceived loudness when Master Volume is set below 0 dB.
Quote:
If I turn off I can hear louder now in my subwoofer compare to its on? Ok I will never touch the bass and treble I will just live it as is default.

Nope, although I'm not sure I understand your question regarding hearing subwoofer louder. Care to rephrase your question?
mogorf is online now  
post #62036 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 05:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Your welcome.
Won't affect the EQ filters, but will affect preceived loudness when Master Volume is set below 0 dB.


Nope, although I'm not sure I understand your question regarding hearing subwoofer louder. Care to rephrase your question?
I see. So what do you prefer Deq on or off while watching movies? I mean is deq only effect the loudness of the sub woofer or included the speakers? Is it the same sound of the subwoofer the avr will produce whether deq on our off?

(2) Energy RC 70 towers
(1) Energy Veritas 2.0C center
(2) Energy Veritas 2.0R surrounds
(2) Energy RC LCR back surrounds
(1) Rythmik LV12R sub
(1) Denon 2112CI avr
(1) LG 55" LM7600 tv
caloyzki is offline  
post #62037 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 07:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,815
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post

I see. So what do you prefer Deq on or off while watching movies? I mean is deq only effect the loudness of the sub woofer or included the speakers? Is it the same sound of the subwoofer the avr will produce whether deq on our off?

I recommend you read the Audyssey FAQ for answers to your questions. Here is the section on DEQ: http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/51750#user_g2
AustinJerry is offline  
post #62038 of 71853 Old 05-12-2013, 07:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
djbluemax1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

^^ Turning the question on its side--is there any (semi) automated room correction that _does_ optimize the delay for the crossover/splice correctly, as implemented in AVRs on the consumer HT market?


i know the only real test is post-calibration external measurement using REW or similar, but AFAIK it hasn't been documented for ARC, MCACC, or YPAO either.


Not that your argument concerning Audyssey isn't otherwise correct -- again.


Stuart, according to my information Audyssey would be ready to do this during auto setup (somewhere Chris once made a hint on that), but the AVR makers don't want to give up Bass Management, for the time being at least. When time comes Audyssey will probably be among the first ones to implement such a feature. But it's the marketing Gods at the AVR makers who are controlling the salami slicing machine! cool.gif


On another note, in the current hierarchy of AVRs where Audyssey is only EQ'ing the speaker channels, but not setting crossovers IMHO and with my logic, it would be impossible to do it automatically, coz when each channel EQ is finished the mic would need to be placed back to the exact same location again for a second sub-sat combined "chirping". With Audyssey taking over the Bass Management Department a one time "chirping" would be enough, probably the calculation time would need to be extended. But we can wait a bit, eh? wink.gif


P.S.: To whom it may concern! Let's keep our discussions limited to technical topics only, and refrain from getting personal! Deal? cool.gifsmile.gif Thank you! smile.gif

P.S.2: Just found the quote. The topic of the discussion was that it is not Audyssey but the AVR that sets crossovers. Here's Chris's comment: "This is a sore point with us. We have been trying to convince AVR makers to have more control over the crossovers and bass management, but it hasn't happened yet."

Unfortunately for your argument, Feri, the issue under discussion is not one of setting the crossovers but one of setting the distance (for the sub) and the distance is not set by the AVR, but is set (incorrectly in almost all cases) by Audyssey.

I didn't spot your apology for accusing me of spreading 'wrong information'?  I'll let it go if you will stop spreading information that really is wrong.
Just thought I'd clarify one point in this discussion:

For some reason, it is the dual (or multiple) sub systems that Audyssey has a problem with.

Single sub setups do not seem to suffer from this problem. Back when I was running one sub, the sub-mains crossover was the smoothest section of the REW graph.

The moment I put a second sub on the Sub 2 output, the results produced a dip at the crossover region that was correctible with the distance/delay tweak.

I'm not sure what it is about using both sub outputs that confounds the process. I also never tried putting both subs on the same output to check those results as I didn't have a y-splitter.



Max
djbluemax1 is offline  
post #62039 of 71853 Old 05-13-2013, 02:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 16,519
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

I'm glad you are satisfied now, but you can stop documenting the order of mic placement--it has no bearing on the calibration results. With the exception of the first mic position, of course.

Jerry, while the order of the mic placement really doesn't have any bearing apart from the first placement, doing so won't 'urt, eh? wink.gif So, why not?cool.gif

 

Well, a few pages back, batpig gave an example of how misinformation can 'hurt' and you enthusiastically agreed with him:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

I say this just because I want to head off any spiral from "lurkers" suddenly growing worried about potential damage to their systems. I know how internet forms work, somebody mentions some obscure problem and then the paranoia spreads smile.gif

+1. smile.gifcool.gif

 

While the order of the mic positions cannot physically damage a system, suggesting that it is worthwhile to 'map' the order of placement for the mic positions can easily come into this same category as batpig, rightly, commented on. Before you know it, it has become 'Internet lore' and whenever someone mentions that the order is irrelevant (other than the first position of course), people will rise up to challenge that, quoting a post he saw on the Official Audyssey Thread which said that it was an "excellent idea" to map the order of mic placements.

 

For this reason, and one which you seemed to support wholeheartedly a few days ago, I am in total agreement with Jerry when he points out that the mic placement order is entirely irrelevant to an Audyssey calibration, so long as the 1st position is respected and that more experienced users have a duty to stamp out such misinformation, not to tacitly support it.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Are you joking? One of our purposes in participating in this thread is to provide accurate advice, and allowing someone to think that the order of mic placement has any bearing on the outcome would not be right.
 

For the benefit of anyone who wants more information on this topic, this FAQ answer covers it in some detail:

 

d)3.   Where should I position the mic for best results?

kbarnes701 is offline  
post #62040 of 71853 Old 05-13-2013, 02:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
IgorZep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Igor, would it be possible for you to move all your stuff, I mean the Onkyo 818 and all your speakers to another room, let alone to a friend's room just in order to rule out the anomaly you are facing now.
It seems it is going to happen in not so distant future... I'll post here few words when this happens. smile.gif
IgorZep 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

    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