"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 2514 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
Reply
Thread Tools
post #75391 of 75417 Unread Today, 01:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
Tyrindor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 939
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Why on earth would it seem like it "almost wouldn’t work?" I've explained above exactly why it works and how it overcomes a limitation in room EQ systems like Audyssey.
Your guide seems a little complicated and seems like a lot of work, I honestly don't understand some of it... I don't have REW or any other way to measure audio other than my ears.

Is there some method I can use for my 2 subs to see if I need to adjust the distance, can I just increase them both or decrease them both and see if there's an improvement?
Tyrindor is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #75392 of 75417 Unread Today, 01:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
Patrick Murphy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 835
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post
Simple -they want Chris's when their preference is aligned with Audyssey's - come close to the sound mixer's mandate in the studio which MANY people want actually. You sound new at this.

Didn't Tomlinson Holman have hand in this also?
Patrick Murphy is online now  
post #75393 of 75417 Unread Today, 02:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Murphy View Post
Didn't Tomlinson Holman have hand in this also?
and millions of dollars and decades of research and even more brilliant sound engineers. The point is do not make it sound like there are not MANY people who prefer it's optimization of a listening area to a distorted version of it for one person at one location.
Patrick Murphy likes this.
Gary J is offline  
post #75394 of 75417 Unread Today, 02:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Murphy View Post
Didn't Tomlinson Holman have hand in this also?
Once I asked Chris K. on the background of the early days of Audyssey. Here's what he replied on FB Audyssey Tech Talk:

Qte

It all started in 1996 with a large research grant from the National Science Foundation. An engineering research center was established at USC to study Immersive Technologies. I was one of the EE faculty that had helped write the proposal and together with my colleague from the School of Cinema (Tom Holman) we started the Immersive Audio Lab.

Our research was focused at the intersection of room acoustics, psychoacoustics and audio signal processing. To study immersion using sound we started looking at what needed to be done so that we could take a group of people into our lab and make them believe they were somewhere else--just using sound.

One of the earlier problems that we identified was the "distortion" that was being added by the room despite the careful room design and high quality speakers. Tom had been fixing this problem in movie theaters for years, but it took him hours and he was doing it all manually and with tools that were actually not capturing all the needed information. That was his challenge to me: "go figure out how to do what I do, but do it better and faster." Not a small challenge…

After 6 years of experiments and a PhD dissertation by one of my students we had something. That was the basis of the patent that started the company as a spinout from USC.

Unquote
Gary J and Patrick Murphy like this.
mogorf is offline  
post #75395 of 75417 Unread Today, 02:15 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrindor View Post
...
Interesting. Any thoughts on WHY this would happen? I haven't tried this yet because it almost seems like it wouldn't work... did you increase or decrease the distance?

MY understanding of kbarnes post is that it is because of an Audessy limitation with regards to the crossovers of the multiple speakers.

I did not have, before then, any foreknowledge or expectation of this limitation.

I also thought, based on cursory reading of Audessy ads, that Audessy would have already detected then "factored in" and calculated the "variables" that can be attributed to the multiple speaker x-overs. So I thought, that was one of the reason for Audessy's calibration.

But anyway, as to WHY the calibration missed these x-over "variables", if this is true, is problematic to me because I think the calibration test tones should be able to detect these as well. But anyway, life goes on.

Enjoy your system.
doognam is offline  
post #75396 of 75417 Unread Today, 02:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by doognam View Post
MY understanding of kbarnes post is that it is because of an Audessy limitation with regards to the crossovers of the multiple speakers.
I wouldn't say it is an Audyssey limitation, but a limitation of the AVR makers on Audyssey. Marketing comes to mind, a solution yet not introduced.


Quote:
Enjoy your system.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...
mogorf is offline  
post #75397 of 75417 Unread Today, 03:15 PM
Senior Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Once I asked Chris K. on the background of the early days of Audyssey. Here's what he replied on FB Audyssey Tech Talk:

Qte

It all started in 1996 with a large research grant from the National Science Foundation. An engineering research center was established at USC to study Immersive Technologies. I was one of the EE faculty that had helped write the proposal and together with my colleague from the School of Cinema (Tom Holman) we started the Immersive Audio Lab.

Our research was focused at the intersection of room acoustics, psychoacoustics and audio signal processing. To study immersion using sound we started looking at what needed to be done so that we could take a group of people into our lab and make them believe they were somewhere else--just using sound.

One of the earlier problems that we identified was the "distortion" that was being added by the room despite the careful room design and high quality speakers. Tom had been fixing this problem in movie theaters for years, but it took him hours and he was doing it all manually and with tools that were actually not capturing all the needed information. That was his challenge to me: "go figure out how to do what I do, but do it better and faster." Not a small challenge…

After 6 years of experiments and a PhD dissertation by one of my students we had something. That was the basis of the patent that started the company as a spinout from USC.

Unquote

Thanks for sharing this quote again. I believe that Chris was always very clear about their goals. As he says above, it was to reduce distortion in listening rooms better and faster. That is an aspect of Audyssey that is pretty universally appreciated. Whether we will all like having the same speakers, in the same configuration, with the same amplifiers, watching the same movies, and listening to the same music, from the same sources, all with the same settings, is another matter. There is plenty of room to thoroughly appreciate what Audyssey does to reduce distortion, while still preserving some individuality in the way we implement it and every other aspect of our music and home theater systems. I know that you understand that already, Feri. I just thought that Chris' quote was a good opportunity to remind ourselves that reducing distortion and pleasing ourselves about the particular undistorted sounds we hear are different things.

Mike
mthomas47 is offline  
post #75398 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
Thanks for sharing this quote again. I believe that Chris was always very clear about their goals. As he says above, it was to reduce distortion in listening rooms better and faster. That is an aspect of Audyssey that is pretty universally appreciated. Whether we will all like having the same speakers, in the same configuration, with the same amplifiers, watching the same movies, and listening to the same music, from the same sources, all with the same settings, is another matter. There is plenty of room to thoroughly appreciate what Audyssey does to reduce distortion, while still preserving some individuality in the way we implement it and every other aspect of our music and home theater systems. I know that you understand that already, Feri. I just thought that Chris' quote was a good opportunity to remind ourselves that reducing distortion and pleasing ourselves about the particular undistorted sounds we hear are different things.

Mike
Hiya Mike. I like to read your posts/comments, coz you always have a great amount of dignity and open-mindedness in your approach. Really!

I think we can agree that we all hear different things and those different things are the ones that please us individually. Striving to prove universal truth by any member here should be beyond the mission we all represent, hence the great nature of a thread where we can freely/positively exchange our position/experience and a bit of advice to queries raised by fellow members. Why not keep it up this way!
mthomas47 likes this.
mogorf is offline  
post #75399 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:12 PM
Senior Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Hiya Mike. I like to read your posts/comments, coz you always have a great amount of dignity and open-mindedness in your approach. Really!

I think we can agree that we all hear different things and those different things are the ones that please us individually. Striving to prove universal truth by any member here should be beyond the mission we all represent, hence the great nature of a thread where we can freely/positively exchange our position/experience and a bit of advice to queries raised by fellow members. Why not keep it up this way!

Thank you, Feri! That is a very nice complement, and I completely agree with your second paragraph.

Regards,
Mike
mogorf likes this.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #75400 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,127
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4101 Post(s)
Liked: 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrindor View Post
Your guide seems a little complicated and seems like a lot of work, I honestly don't understand some of it... I don't have REW or any other way to measure audio other than my ears.

Is there some method I can use for my 2 subs to see if I need to adjust the distance, can I just increase them both or decrease them both and see if there's an improvement?
You can do it "blind" but I doubt you will get good results. The method detailed in the Sub Distance Tweak Guide has been developed by people who really know what they are doing - I can only suggest that anyone wishing to optimise the FR around the splice follow it closely.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #75401 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:43 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
I wouldn't say it is an Audyssey limitation, but a limitation of the AVR makers on Audyssey. .....
I find this statement very difficult to reconcile with my understanding that what Audessy does or supposed to do or deliver is defined in/by software/firmware which is licensed to AVR makers. I imagine that the capabilities of one version of Audessy would be the same regardless of AVR maker. That is, AVR makers would find it difficult to limit or alter Audessy's abilities - either thru contractual obligations or intellectual property considerations.

Now I am confused so I am sorry if this has already been answered before but I have to ask:

Is Audessy a software product that is licenced to AVR makers or is it a product that can be tampered with by AVR makers as a matter of course?

Last edited by doognam; Today at 04:54 PM. Reason: rephrase into IN/BY software
doognam is offline  
post #75402 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,127
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4101 Post(s)
Liked: 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by doognam View Post
MY understanding of kbarnes post is that it is because of an Audessy limitation with regards to the crossovers of the multiple speakers.

I did not have, before then, any foreknowledge or expectation of this limitation.
It's not just a limitation of Audyssey - AFAIK there are no REQ solutions which measure the combined response of the speakers and the subs. Nor is it a limitation determined by the AVR manufacturers, nor is it "marketing", whatever that means. It is just a plain and simple fact: if you don't measure the combined response of the speakers and the subs around the frequency where they overlap each other (the XO frequency), then it is not possible to optimise the splice. The method described in the Sub Distance Tweak Guide does measure the combined response and allows the user to discover the best delay for the suns so that the phase interaction is optimised.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doognam View Post
I also thought, based on cursory reading of Audessy ads, that Audessy would have already detected then "factored in" and calculated the "variables" that can be attributed to the multiple speaker x-overs. So I thought, that was one of the reason for Audessy's calibration.
Yes, it "calculates" the best delay for the sub in relation to the mains. A calculation cannot be as good as a measurement. One is an 'educated guess' and the other is a real-life measurement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doognam View Post
But anyway, as to WHY the calibration missed these x-over "variables", if this is true, is problematic to me because I think the calibration test tones should be able to detect these as well. But anyway, life goes on.
Either I don't understand what you just said, or you haven’t understood my explanations. The calibration didn't "miss" anything - it never measured them in the first place. It may be problematic to you, but I am sure you can understand that the "calibration tones" cannot "detect" that which they do not measure.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #75403 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
You can do it "blind" but I doubt you will get good results. The method detailed in the Sub Distance Tweak Guide has been developed by people who really know what they are doing - I can only suggest that anyone wishing to optimise the FR around the splice follow it closely.
Is this a one-seat solution or it also works in a multi-seater environment? Proof-graphs with narratives are more than welcome. Thanks as always.
mogorf is offline  
post #75404 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,127
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4101 Post(s)
Liked: 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by doognam View Post
I find this statement very difficult to reconcile
I wouldn’t worry about it - it's wrong anyway.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #75405 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,127
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4101 Post(s)
Liked: 3089
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Is this a one-seat solution or it also works in a multi-seater environment? Proof-graphs with narratives are more than welcome. Thanks as always.
Read the Guide.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #75406 of 75417 Unread Today, 04:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,127
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4101 Post(s)
Liked: 3089
A couple of posters have referred to "one seat solutions" and "area solutions" or multi-seat solutions. First, there is nothing wrong with optimising for one seat. Many people use their HTs primarily on their own and in those circumstances optimising for the single seat is absolutely the best solution.

For people who want to have a good result for several seats, the absolute best solution is to use speaker and sub placement optimisation ahead of electronic EQ. The reason for this is fairly obvious: electronic EQ cannot pull down peaks or boost dips for more than one place at a time. IOW, if you have, say, a 7dB peak at one seat location and the REQ corrects it, then it has also brought that frequency down by 7dB for all the other seats, including those which did not suffer the 7dB peak to begin with. That much is obvious.

So when electronic REQ attempts to correct for several seats, the result is a compromise. No one seat is optimal, but equally no one seat is terrible. By definition, using room EQ to correct for several seats means that every seat is less than optimal. That is not to say that the result is poor, but it is what it is. This is why for people who listen to their music mostly on their own, or watch their movies alone, or with people who don't GAF about the sound quality, optimising for one seat is a good solution.

There is no "right" or"wrong"about this, as some posters have implied - it is purely a decision to be made based on what one is trying to achieve.
ellisr63 likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #75407 of 75417 Unread Today, 05:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
A couple of posters have referred to "one seat solutions" and "area solutions" or multi-seat solutions. First, there is nothing wrong with optimising for one seat. Many people use their HTs primarily on their own and in those circumstances optimising for the single seat is absolutely the best solution.

For people who want to have a good result for several seats, the absolute best solution is to use speaker and sub placement optimisation ahead of electronic EQ. The reason for this is fairly obvious: electronic EQ cannot pull down peaks or boost dips for more than one place at a time. IOW, if you have, say, a 7dB peak at one seat location and the REQ corrects it, then it has also brought that frequency down by 7dB for all the other seats, including those which did not suffer the 7dB peak to begin with. That much is obvious.

So when electronic REQ attempts to correct for several seats, the result is a compromise. No one seat is optimal, but equally no one seat is terrible. By definition, using room EQ to correct for several seats means that every seat is less than optimal. That is not to say that the result is poor, but it is what it is. This is why for people who listen to their music mostly on their own, or watch their movies alone, or with people who don't GAF about the sound quality, optimising for one seat is a good solution.

There is no "right" or"wrong"about this, as some posters have implied - it is purely a decision to be made based on what one is trying to achieve.

Mike?
mogorf is offline  
post #75408 of 75417 Unread Today, 05:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
For people who want to have a good result for several seats, the absolute best solution is to use speaker and sub placement optimisation ahead of electronic EQ.
Would love to hear a bit more on the above. Please kindly expand on the bolded part.
mogorf is offline  
post #75409 of 75417 Unread Today, 05:17 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
..
. It is just a plain and simple fact: if you don't measure the combined response of the speakers and the subs around the frequency where they overlap each other (the XO frequency), then it is not possible to optimise the splice.
.
I thought that with rigorous reasoning and complete data one should be able to calculate the combined response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
..
calibration didn't "miss" anything - it never measured them in the first place.
.
WHY?

Last edited by doognam; Today at 06:04 PM. Reason: remove unhelpful comment
doognam is offline  
post #75410 of 75417 Unread Today, 06:08 PM
Senior Member
 
DaveyMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I stumbled across AVS forums first when I was trying to figure Audyssey out. I found the guide and FAQ very helpful.

Since then I've came to really enjoy these forums. My past experience with forums has just been video game ones. There is lots of passive aggressive, rude, snotty posters in those. Guys that will qoute every sentence and spend their time picking it apart. I think it's called trolling.

I haven't really seen any of that in these forums. I think that is great. But honestly, there seems to be a lot of that in this thread. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. But it seems like some of these posts and questions are disingenuous and mean spirited.
DaveyMac is online now  
post #75411 of 75417 Unread Today, 06:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ellisr63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Northern California, In the HT
Posts: 2,409
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 328 Post(s)
Liked: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrindor View Post
Well i've all but fixed my "dull lifeless" sound issues even more.
- I moved 3 of my mic positions about half a foot back from my front sound stage. The RF-7s are huge and measurements in front of the sofa resulted the mic only being about 6 feet from the speakers.
- I covered my leather sofa with a blanket prior to calibration.
- I moved my RF-7s way closer to the wall, 10 inches down from 18 inches. This brought my center channel to life for some reason, also made the mic another 8 inches away from the fronts.
- I reduced my front speaker toe-in by about 5 degrees, so they aim about 1 foot behind the main listening position instead of AT it.
- I spent 2 hours calibrating with 16hz and 20hz mode on my PB13 Ultras, and my results were 16hz mode with dual subs is the way to go. Another big improvement.
- I turn my subs up 3-4DB after calibration to give subs life again in tracks that don't have a LFE channel.




Interesting. Any thoughts on WHY this would happen? I haven't tried this yet because it almost seems like it wouldn't work... did you increase or decrease the distance?
Why did you cover the couch with a blanket? I would think Leather would reflect more than a blanket would.

Denon 4520ci, (3) JBL 2360As/EV DHA-1s, (3) 1/4 Pie bass bins, (3) MiniDSP 2x4s, (4) Klipsch HIPs,  PS3, XBox 360, (3) Intel NUCs, Redmere, Monster HTPS7000, 2 DTS-10 subs, Panasonic AE8000, SeymourAV 180 (195" diagonal) scope screen, Darbee Darcet, Yamaha P7000s, (2) Yamaha P2500s, & (3) Topping 25wpch T chip amps.
The Ellis Family Go Big or go Home HT
ellisr63 is online now  
post #75412 of 75417 Unread Today, 06:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gadgtfreek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,468
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellisr63 View Post
Why did you cover the couch with a blanket? I would think Leather would reflect more than a blanket would.
You answered your own question
ellisr63 likes this.

Panasonic 65" VT50 / Oppo 103D
Marantz AV7702 / Outlaw Model 7500
Klipsch RF7II (2) and RC62II / Hsu VTF-15H (2)
Panamax MR5100
gadgtfreek is online now  
post #75413 of 75417 Unread Today, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ellisr63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Northern California, In the HT
Posts: 2,409
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 328 Post(s)
Liked: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgtfreek View Post
You answered your own question
Yes... But unless you are going to leave it there all the time the settings won't be valid.

Denon 4520ci, (3) JBL 2360As/EV DHA-1s, (3) 1/4 Pie bass bins, (3) MiniDSP 2x4s, (4) Klipsch HIPs,  PS3, XBox 360, (3) Intel NUCs, Redmere, Monster HTPS7000, 2 DTS-10 subs, Panasonic AE8000, SeymourAV 180 (195" diagonal) scope screen, Darbee Darcet, Yamaha P7000s, (2) Yamaha P2500s, & (3) Topping 25wpch T chip amps.
The Ellis Family Go Big or go Home HT
ellisr63 is online now  
post #75414 of 75417 Unread Today, 07:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gadgtfreek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,468
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellisr63 View Post
Yes... But unless you are going to leave it there all the time the settings won't be valid.
The blanket absorbs the sound, vs the reflection of the leather or certain types of material. Blanket is also no different than your body sitting their absorbing sound.

From my reading, it is better to stay away from the reflective surfaces, or cover them with a cloth for audyssey, than to let them influence the measurements and mic position. In other words, it is better to reduce the reflections of the couch and place the mic more accurately vs moving the mic further away from where it should be to avoid reflection (12", 20", etc...)

I have a small round glass table between my wife and I, and it is the "MLP". I have started covering the glass with a cloth so I can put the mic at proper ear level vs leaving the glass uncovered and having to place the mic too high.
ellisr63 likes this.

Panasonic 65" VT50 / Oppo 103D
Marantz AV7702 / Outlaw Model 7500
Klipsch RF7II (2) and RC62II / Hsu VTF-15H (2)
Panamax MR5100
gadgtfreek is online now  
post #75415 of 75417 Unread Today, 07:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellisr63 View Post
Yes... But unless you are going to leave it there all the time the settings won't be valid.
I tried to bring that up a while back but got run out of town... *roll eyes*
ellisr63 likes this.
Soulburner is online now  
post #75416 of 75417 Unread Today, 07:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gadgtfreek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,468
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
I tried to bring that up a while back but got run out of town... *roll eyes*
I thought it was simply the fact that you are trying to read frequency response, and if the mic is to close to a reflective surface it can read the tone, and then get the reflection while the mic is still active.

Panasonic 65" VT50 / Oppo 103D
Marantz AV7702 / Outlaw Model 7500
Klipsch RF7II (2) and RC62II / Hsu VTF-15H (2)
Panamax MR5100
gadgtfreek is online now  
post #75417 of 75417 Unread Today, 08:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgtfreek View Post
I thought it was simply the fact that you are trying to read frequency response, and if the mic is to close to a reflective surface it can read the tone, and then get the reflection while the mic is still active.
This is absolutely true. What he's saying is that if you're going to cover reflective surfaces for measurement, you'd better leave them covered for listening. Otherwise you just corrected for a different room than the one you're in.
Soulburner is online now  
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