"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 2515 - 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: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-27-2015, 11:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 11,111
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4631 Post(s)
Liked: 1853
No blanket on this leather couch here:

ellisr63 likes this.
NorthSky is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-28-2015, 01:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Would love to hear a bit more on the above. Please kindly expand on the bolded part.
If you really don't know how to optimise speaker and sub placement, which I find hard to believe, then you need www.google.com

Last edited by kbarnes701; 04-28-2015 at 01:39 AM.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 01:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by doognam View Post
I thought that with rigorous reasoning and complete data one should be able to calculate the combined response.
Audyssey does calculate the combined response. A calculated response is less accurate than a measured response, which is why it is almost always possible to improve on Audyssey's calculated delays for the subs. I assume you have not read the Guide I keep referring to - all this is explained in there, with graphs showing the improvements which can be achieved.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 01:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylinestar View Post
Is there any AVR/prepro in the market today that measures the combined response, thus getting a perfect crossover speaker splice?
Not that I know of - and certainly not in the "affordable" category.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 606 Post(s)
Liked: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Audyssey does calculate the combined response. A calculated response is less accurate than a measured response, which is why it is almost always possible to improve on Audyssey's calculated delays for the subs. I assume you have not read the Guide I keep referring to - all this is explained in there, with graphs showing the improvements which can be achieved.
A measured response can be summed accurately if you have the same time reference for each measurement hence it is possible to optimise the crossover "on paper". I was under the impression dirac does this which puts it in the affordable category.
3ll3d00d is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:42 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
A measured response can be summed accurately if you have the same time reference for each measurement hence it is possible to optimise the crossover "on paper". I was under the impression dirac does this which puts it in the affordable category.
It may be possible but Audyssey can't do it. With one exception (IIRC) everyone who has done the Sub Distance tweak reported a significant improvement around the splice - there are exemplar graphs in the Guide.

Dirac certainly does it better, but one would probably expect that.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
...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.
This is wrong information. The Audyssey algorithm does not give priority to "problems" found only at one mic spot. It has a pattern recognition system, clusters the mic measurements, looks for similarities and weights them with fuzzy logic to create the final filter. Right?
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 606 Post(s)
Liked: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
It may be possible but Audyssey can't do it. With one exception (IIRC) everyone who has done the Sub Distance tweak reported a significant improvement around the splice - there are exemplar graphs in the Guide.

Dirac certainly does it better, but one would probably expect that.
Yes indeed, I was just pointing out that it is technically possible so audyssey could implement such an enhancement if they were developing the product.
3ll3d00d is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 606 Post(s)
Liked: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
This is wrong information. The Audyssey algorithm does not give priority to "problems" found only at one mic spot. It has a pattern recognition system, clusters the mic measurements, looks for similarities and weights them with fuzzy logic to create the final filter. Right?
It is not wrong, it is the reason why audyssey has a feature like that. ie to avoid over correction.
3ll3d00d is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
It is not wrong, it is the reason why audyssey has a feature like that. ie to avoid over correction.
Sorry, but I need to stick to "wrong information". One problem found is not distributed by the algorithm.
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 03:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 606 Post(s)
Liked: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Sorry, but I need to stick to "wrong information". One problem found is not distributed by the algorithm.
I think you are misinterpreting his point which is that there are problems that exist which cannot be addressed by EQ. This is a simple fact. If audyssey has a strategy to avoid making such issues worse then that is great but better to fix those issues, if you can, first and then run audyssey. This is setup 101 really so I'm not sure where you are going with the "wrong information" point of view.
3ll3d00d is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
I think you are misinterpreting his point which is that there are problems that exist which cannot be addressed by EQ. This is a simple fact. If audyssey has a strategy to avoid making such issues worse then that is great but better to fix those issues, if you can, first and then run audyssey. This is setup 101 really so I'm not sure where you are going with the "wrong information" point of view.
I'll quote what Keith said again: "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."

Now, do you also think a peak at one seat will cause the algorithm to pull it down in the final filter when it does not appear at the rest of the measurement points?
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
This is wrong information. The Audyssey algorithm does not give priority to "problems" found only at one mic spot. It has a pattern recognition system, clusters the mic measurements, looks for similarities and weights them with fuzzy logic to create the final filter. Right?
No it is not wrong. Explain how electronic EQ can correct a 7dB peak at seat number 4 without affecting the same frequency heard at seat number 2.

Say the peak is at 400Hz. Audyssey measures using all its resources and it detects a 7dB peak at 400Hz at one point in the room, which we are calling seat number 4 (this is arbitray - it's just where the mic happens to be placed when it detects the peak). Audyssey then creates a filter which pulls down the peak. However, there was no peak at 400hz at seat number 2, but the frequency response has changed for ALL seats and so seat number 2 now has 400Hz pulled down by 7dB even though there was no 400Hz peak at that seat. Obviously, Audyssey cannot create different frequency responses for different seats, at the same time.

No matter what "fuzzy logic" it uses, it cannot do the impossible. So the result has to be some sort of compromise, where neither seat 4 nor seat 2 is corrected properly but both have some correction, making one seat slightly better and one seat slightly worse.

Clearly, Audyssey does not use some simple averaging. If it did then it would encounter another problem: if seat 1 had a 6dB boost at 300Hz and seat 5 had a 6dB dip at 300Hz, then simple averaging of those two positions would mean Audyssey would see no problem at all and do nothing. That would be a ludicrous solution.

More likely, and nobody knows as this is proprietary information, what Audyssey does is this: it measures the response at various positions and it looks for similarities and differences. If it sees the same, or essentially similar, problem at all seats, then it knows it can safely fix this problem, because all seats will benefit. If it sees just one seat has a problem, then it can ignore that one seat and assume the problem is an outlier - creating the greatest good for the greatest number. Or, it can attempt some form of correction of that problem, but if it does, whatever correction it applies will also apply to all other seats (as EQ cannot create different frequency responses for different listeners/seats/positions).

This is why the whole 'religion' that correcting for multiple seats is the only possible way to go, is totally wrong. If one is solely concerned with one seat, as many are, then correcting for that one seat resolves all of the above problems at a stroke. However, if one wishes to give a good result for a larger number of listeners, then inevitably there has to be compromise and each seat will get a good result but no seat will get an optimum result. So in the end, as I said, it is a matter of choice depending on circumstances as to which route one wishes to take, with neither being 'right' and neither being 'wrong'.

Audyssey XT32 is pretty good, but it cannot do the impossible





3.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 606 Post(s)
Liked: 182
My previous reply stands, a 7dB cut in the direct signal is a 7dB cut everywhere. Whether audyssey reacts to a 7dB peak at one location with a 7dB cut is another question entirely. The best solution to such a situation (peak at one location only, eg a width mode across a row of seats) will be a non electronic one.
3ll3d00d is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
I think you are misinterpreting his point which is that there are problems that exist which cannot be addressed by EQ. This is a simple fact. If audyssey has a strategy to avoid making such issues worse then that is great but better to fix those issues, if you can, first and then run audyssey. This is setup 101 really so I'm not sure where you are going with the "wrong information" point of view.
You have interpreted me correctly. Room EQ cannot fix problems it cannot fix. The type of problems I was discussing can be fixed by speaker placement optimisation, acoustic treatments and adjustment of MLP location and these should be done before using EQ if one wants best results. As you say, setup 101.

If one wishes to simply plonk speakers and subs where they look good and then rely on EQ to fix everything, one is guaranteeing poor sound.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:08 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
I'll quote what Keith said again: "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."

Now, do you also think a peak at one seat will cause the algorithm to pull it down in the final filter when it does not appear at the rest of the measurement points?
Quoting out of context ought to be beneath you. You omitted that I was not even specifically referencing Audyssey here by not quoting the first part of the sentence which you selectively quoted: "Electronic EQ cannot pull down peaks or boost dips for more than one place at a time."

Nowhere in that entire post did I mention Audyssey. However, I have elaborated on how Audyssey attempts to resolve this kind of problem in a later post.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
My previous reply stands, a 7dB cut in the direct signal is a 7dB cut everywhere. Whether audyssey reacts to a 7dB peak at one location with a 7dB cut is another question entirely. The best solution to such a situation (peak at one location only, eg a width mode across a row of seats) will be a non electronic one.
And no matter how Audyssey responds to that 7dB peak, whether it cuts it by 7dB, or by 3dB or ignores it altogether, its solution is bound to impact the other seat which did not have the peak to begin with. It is physically impossible to be otherwise (unless one believes Audyssey is some form of divine solution )

The whole discussion is pretty pointless because you know, and I know, and you know I know and I know you know, and even the person arguing knows, the statements made above are totally correct and can be no other way.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 22,342
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked: 3168
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
Yes indeed, I was just pointing out that it is technically possible so audyssey could implement such an enhancement if they were developing the product.
Sure. It would be good if Audyssey did develop their product as they have now fallen substantially behind the SOTA, unsurprisingly since no development has been done in about 5 years now. Sadly, it looks as if their interests now lie elsewhere.
kbarnes701 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 04:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
gadgtfreek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,584
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 501 Post(s)
Liked: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
No blanket on this leather couch here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=okyNlhJ3Hvo
LMAO. Did you even watch that part of the video? He made the statement about not getting close to the couch or wall behind it. This of course is to AVOID reflection...

The blanket allows you to stay more close, if needed, to a position and avoid reflection. For example, my glass table. I can use a small cloth and stay at ear height which is 5-7" off glass, can't exactly remember or move up to 12"+ off the glass, which is not ear height. For me, I see it as you want the accurate frequency response of each channel in a spot, and reflections being involved is not accurate for the base measurement. Same reason we turn the AC off when running it, even though the AC might run an entire movie. If you neighbor likes to cut grass a lot, are you going to wait and run it while he is cutting grass? Some of you want an imperfect but helpful system to be perfect, aint gonna happen. It does do a good job though.

As far as using REW after Audyssey, heck no. Not wasting my time. The simple fact of the matter is, when I follow all the guidelines set forth in this thread, my end result sounds excellent watching blu-rays at reference level. Isn't that the reason we use it? Use a cloth, dont use a cloth, you'd never know the difference I imagine. And if it sounds good to you, who cares?

Panasonic 65" VT50 / Oppo 103D
Marantz AV7702 / Outlaw Model 7500
Klipsch RF7II (2) and RC64II / Hsu VTF-15H (2)
Panamax MR5100

Last edited by gadgtfreek; 04-28-2015 at 05:02 AM.
gadgtfreek is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 05:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
My previous reply stands, a 7dB cut in the direct signal is a 7dB cut everywhere. Whether audyssey reacts to a 7dB peak at one location with a 7dB cut is another question entirely. The best solution to such a situation (peak at one location only, eg a width mode across a row of seats) will be a non electronic one.
Nope, Audyssey does not react to a 7 dB peak found at one location by applying a 7 dB cut to the final filter. Hope its clear by now.

Thanks for your attention.
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 07:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,774
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
My previous reply stands, a 7dB cut in the direct signal is a 7dB cut everywhere. Whether audyssey reacts to a 7dB peak at one location with a 7dB cut is another question entirely. The best solution to such a situation (peak at one location only, eg a width mode across a row of seats) will be a non electronic one.
Nope, Audyssey does not react to a 7 dB peak found at one location by applying a 7 dB cut to the final filter. Hope its clear by now.

Thanks for your attention.
It's obviously not clear to YOU. Are you familiar with the meaning of the word "if"?
batpig is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 07:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,774
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
A measured response can be summed accurately if you have the same time reference for each measurement hence it is possible to optimise the crossover "on paper". I was under the impression dirac does this which puts it in the affordable category.
It may be possible but Audyssey can't do it. With one exception (IIRC) everyone who has done the Sub Distance tweak reported a significant improvement around the splice - there are exemplar graphs in the Guide.
Add another exception. I've never been able to improve things with the distance tweak. Instead of saying that Audyssey "almost always" gets it wrong it's probably more cautious to say that it MAY be possible to improve things at the crossover. But only measurements will tell.
batpig is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 07:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 508
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Mike?

I'm really not sure what I can add to the discussion that hasn't already been said. Keith's post # 75433, just above, seems to clearly summarize the nature of the problem confronting any automated room EQ system. Whether a particular peak, at a particular location, absolutely will be pulled down, or not, is purely a matter of speculation. But in theory, at least, it could be, so either very critical listening, or testing, would be helpful to determine whether a particular calibration is successful or not. I think there is a tendency to think in absolutes here: it either absolutely will, or it absolutely won't, and I think it probably depends on the room and the particular pattern of mic. locations used.

I have never quite understood why there is so much controversy on the thread about whether it is inimical to the basic principles of Audyssey to EQ for a smaller area instead of a larger area. I know that many of us remember Chris addressing this issue several times a few years ago. He didn't seem troubled at all by the idea of using closer mic. positions to EQ for a smaller area, and so advised some people who posted the question on Ask Audyssey. If it didn't bother the inventor of Audyssey, why should it bother us? I think we could probably have some constructive discussions about how close is too close, and how far is too far, but the fact that there is a range that we can use seems inescapable.

I continue to believe that Audyssey is a highly effective room correction system with a fair bit of user-implemented flexibility. The key is to identify the basic principles which are fundamental to the operation of the algorithms, and to concentrate on those. And the FAQ, and the ongoing discussions on the thread, do a great job of helping us with that. Whether we choose to use closer mic. patterns, or more dispersed ones, and which particular settings to employ, seem like purely peripheral and personal questions to me.
kbarnes701 and mogorf like this.
mthomas47 is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 07:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
It's obviously not clear to YOU. Are you familiar with the meaning of the word "if"?
Who are you replying to in this double quoted post bp?
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 07:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,774
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
It's obviously not clear to YOU. Are you familiar with the meaning of the word "if"?
Who are you replying to in this double quoted post bp?
You
batpig is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 07:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,774
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
I have never quite understood why there is so much controversy on the thread about whether it is inimical to the basic principles of Audyssey to EQ for a smaller area instead of a larger area. I know that many of us remember Chris addressing this issue several times a few years ago. He didn't seem troubled at all by the idea of using closer mic. positions to EQ for a smaller area, and so advised some people who posted the question on Ask Audyssey. If it didn't bother the inventor of Audyssey, why should it bother us?
I don't think it does bother any of us except for maybe one or two people. The only reason there is "controversy" is because these people, like true zealots, will at times fight for an even more rigorous orthodoxy than the original creator would himself advocate.

There is no real "controversy" about experimenting with wide vs tight measurement spacing among 99%+ of folks in this thread. Just discussion and investigation.
ellisr63 and Zen Traveler like this.

Last edited by batpig; 04-28-2015 at 08:00 AM.
batpig is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
It's obviously not clear to YOU. Are you familiar with the meaning of the word "if"?
Do you know what the subject of the discussion is?
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,774
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
It's obviously not clear to YOU. Are you familiar with the meaning of the word "if"?
Do you know what the subject of the discussion is?
Yes, I do. But you don't as you are arguing a point nobody is making.

Go back and reread the original comment you replied to and pay attention to the word "if".

It may help you understand if you reread these responses from 3lldd00d carefully, I even highlighted the critical distinction he makes between the discussion others are having and the point you are trying to make which was not in contention:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
I think you are misinterpreting his point which is that there are problems that exist which cannot be addressed by EQ. This is a simple fact. If audyssey has a strategy to avoid making such issues worse then that is great but better to fix those issues, if you can, first and then run audyssey. This is setup 101 really so I'm not sure where you are going with the "wrong information" point of view..... 7dB cut in the direct signal is a 7dB cut everywhere. Whether audyssey reacts to a 7dB peak at one location with a 7dB cut is another question entirely. The best solution to such a situation (peak at one location only, eg a width mode across a row of seats) will be a non electronic one.

Last edited by batpig; 04-28-2015 at 11:18 AM.
batpig is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mogorf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 488 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
Yes, I do. But you don't as you are arguing a point nobody is making.

Go back and reread the original comment you replied to and pay attention to the word "if".

It may help you understand if you reread these responses from 3lldd00d carefully, I even highlighted the critical distinction he makes between the discussion others are having and the point you are trying to make which was not in contention:
bp, the highlighted part is not another question, but the question itself. That's why I asked whether you are familiar with the original subject here or not.

So, do you also think a one point problem gets such priority by the MultEQ algorithm that it is corrected and finally makes the whole seating area sound bad? I don't think you would agree with that statement.
mogorf is online now  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,774
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
So, do you also think a one point problem gets such priority by the MultEQ algorithm that it is corrected and finally makes the whole seating area sound bad?
It wouldn't, but nobody is arguing it would. That's what you're missing, and it's NOT what the discussion was about.

The highlighted part is indeed a separate question, and is the discussion YOU are having. It's just not the one everyone else is having.

batpig's "Denon-to-English Dictionary"
Setup Guide and FAQ
http://batpigworld.com/

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
 

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


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