"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 539 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #16141 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 06:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Zen Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Liked: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hi Chris,

...My own ears first confirmed that the 25Hz output of my subwoofer had diminished before I looked at the meter siting on the tripod in my main listening position. Additionally I had pictures on the wall that ceased to vibrate with the 25Hz warble tone with the same test material under the same conditions post calibration.

Could the vibrations you felt at 25 Hz before actually be boomyness you became accustomed to instead of actually experiencing the lower end cleaner after running Audyssey?
Zen Traveler is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #16142 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 07:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Todd, are you making the same distinction between measuring subwoofer output and subwoofer frequency response? To me, it looks like you are not. The lack of accuracy makes the Radio shack meter and test tones, well . . inaccurate for measuring response. Also, it is possible that previously there was a big room hump at 25Hz and after Audyssey the hump has been flattened.

Just saying that there are other alternative explanations for your "findings."

Hey prepar,

Yes I am aware of difference between my subwoofers output (in my case I'm referring to spl) and frequency response (as in 31.5Hz vs 25Hz). Yes you are right that the radio shack spl meter is not accurate. This is not a problem because it is proven to be precise, their is a difference. But don't take my word for it, SVS has built a reputation on knowing a thing or two about bass:

"The Radio Shack sound meter is not totally "linear" in its accuracy down there. All such meters are off by the same amount depending on the frequency however, which is good news! So that while its sensitivity below 20Hz is not what it is at 50Hz, there is a simple way to compensate for this deficiency. It's called a compensation chart. Using one is very simple, and a pencil and paper is all you need."

Under the exact same conditions, I got a reading of 77dB spl at 31.5Hz and 76dB at 25Hz, after recalibration I got 71dB at 31.5Hz and 62dB at 25Hz. Surely you can't call a introducing a 9dB dip in response, "flattening a hump".
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16143 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 07:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

Could the vibrations you felt at 25 Hz before actually be boomyness you became accustomed to instead of actually experiencing the lower end cleaner after running Audyssey?

Hey ZT,

No.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16144 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 07:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kjgarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi,

To clarify what I was saying with regard to "isolate various sub to speaker frequency responses", I was attempting to describe the process by which we observe the specific frequency response between the subwoofer and each speaker.

Some refer this as the subwoofer to speaker "splice" or subwoofer to speaker integration. I was referring to isolating each subwoofer to speaker combination, versus the response of all speakers. This of course can be observed if only the subwoofer and the selected speaker being studied are playing the test signal. If other speakers are also playing the test signal then we can't isolate and observe how smooth the frequency response is between the subwoofer and the speaker of interest.

You no doubt are aware of this since you have ensured that only the subwoofer and, in this case, the center are playing the test signal. As I tried to explain in my previous posting, I believe your confusion lies in a misunderstanding of how the subwoofer filter is intended to work.

Larry

Hi Larry,

I'm not sure what confusion you're referring to. I was pointing out is that it is not possible to truly isolate the subwoofer and center. Sure the center is isolated, but the sub is not. It is not limited to only playing what it should be playing in conjuction with the center as called for by the sub/center crossover. The sub is also playing what it should be playing in conjunction with the mains in conjuction with the sub/mains crossover . There is no setting in speaker setup of "none" for the mains. I suppose a sub measurement alone (mains unplugged) could be done with "no" center, and the results could be subtracted by hand from what the sub puts out with a combined mains+center setup (mains unplugged) measurement to derive a reasonably pure sub/center measurement.
kjgarrison is offline  
post #16145 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 08:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey prepar,

Yes I am aware of difference between my subwoofers output (in my case I'm referring to spl) and frequency response (as in 31.5Hz vs 25Hz). Yes you are right that the radio shack spl meter is not accurate. This is not a problem because it is proven to be precise, their is a difference. But don't take my word for it, SVS has built a reputation on knowing a thing or two about bass:

"The Radio Shack sound meter is not totally "linear" in its accuracy down there. All such meters are off by the same amount depending on the frequency however, which is good news! So that while its sensitivity below 20Hz is not what it is at 50Hz, there is a simple way to compensate for this deficiency. It's called a compensation chart. Using one is very simple, and a pencil and paper is all you need."

Under the exact same conditions, I got a reading of 77dB spl at 31.5Hz and 76dB at 25Hz, after recalibration I got 71dB at 31.5Hz and 62dB at 25Hz. Surely you can't call a introducing a 9dB dip in response, "flattening a hump".

Do you have a notebook/sound card and REW software?

If you do you could run the measurements and post the before Audyssey and after Audyssey FR plots.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #16146 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesky636 View Post

An apology wasn't expected or required. I asked for a clarification and got it.

I can live with "may," "maybe," "might," and "possibly."

Hi,

My apology was directed to those prospective buyers, who as you pointed out, may have arrived at the wrong conclusion from my imprecise remarks. I should hasten to add those remarks were based purely on theoretical issues discussed by Chris and not my own personal experience.

Yesterday I completed my first calibration with my new Onkyo Pro PR-SC886 prepro, and now I can move from the theoretical to the actual.

First and foremost I watch movies, so I'm not an audiophile, but I do have a small collection of multichannel music, DVDs, Blu-ray and HD DVD discs. So yesterday I had an opportunity to listen to three Blu-ray music samples, 1) symphonic music Mussorgsky Stokowski (7.1 channel DTS-HD master audio), 2)Rock and Roll Rolling Stones Shine a Light (5.1 channel DTS-HD master audio) and 3) Rock and Roll Jethro Tull Live at Montreux (5.1 channel DTS-HD master audio).

I listened to all of these samples with Dynamic EQ on. I can definitively state that I was extremely pleased with these listening experiences. In the case of the symphonic music mix I was listening very comfortably at -5 dB below reference, without any discomfort.

For the two Rock and Roll samples the experience was equally satisfying but required lower listening levels. In particular, the Jethro Tull disc needed to be turned down to about -25 dB.

So whereas movies may have a theoretical advantage in terms of accuracy, so far I have not heard any music content that didn't sound very good with Audyssey MultEQ and Dynamic EQ, and I doubt I have the necessary trained ears to hear that theoretical difference.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16147 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 10:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison View Post

Hi Larry,

I'm not sure what confusion you're referring to. I was pointing out is that it is not possible to truly isolate the subwoofer and center. Sure the center is isolated, but the sub is not. It is not limited to only playing what it should be playing in conjuction with the center as called for by the sub/center crossover. The sub is also playing what it should be playing in conjunction with the mains in conjuction with the sub/mains crossover . There is no setting in speaker setup of "none" for the mains. I suppose a sub measurement alone (mains unplugged) could be done with "no" center, and the results could be subtracted by hand from what the sub puts out with a combined mains+center setup (mains unplugged) measurement to derive a reasonably pure sub/center measurement.

Hi,

By confusion I'm referring to this statement:

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison View Post

Yes, that's what I did. And even though it is possible by saying "none" to surrounds and unhooking the mains, to isolate the center, I don't think that isolates what the sub puts out. The sub "thinks" the mains are there and it is sending energy up to the crossover (60Hz in my case) of the mains. My issue is that it didn't seem to send energy to match the center, which was set at a higher crossover. But if you look at the graph, maybe it's just a big dip and that the sub was "trying". Well below the rolloff of the center, there is sound which has to be coming from the sub ... albeit 15db LOWER than it should be.

You have the Low Pass Filter on your subwoofer set to 60 Hz, which means the subwoofer starts rolling off at above 60 Hz. So you may get a smooth frequency response when integrating the subwoofer to the mains which have usable output down to 60 Hz. However, your center channel only has usable output down to 150 Hz, and you have your subwoofer filter set to roll-off at 60 Hz so there will be a big dip in the response as your graph demonstrates.

Your confusion seems to be that you expect the subwoofer to have selectively different Low Pass Filters for each channel. There is only one global setting which in your case should be set to about 150 dB to integrate better with your center channel.


With regard to the other discussion about "isolation" I was attempting to describe the measurement process by which we run test signals to only the subwoofer and the speaker of interest in order to view the specific frequency response describing that particular subwoofer to speaker integration. Yes, in normal operation, with all speakers and the subwoofer playing, the subwoofer could be playing content redirected from all speakers designated as small.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16148 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 10:16 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey prepar,

Yes I am aware of difference between my subwoofers output (in my case I'm referring to spl) and frequency response (as in 31.5Hz vs 25Hz). Yes you are right that the radio shack spl meter is not accurate. This is not a problem because it is proven to be precise, their is a difference. But don't take my word for it, SVS has built a reputation on knowing a thing or two about bass:

"The Radio Shack sound meter is not totally "linear" in its accuracy down there. All such meters are off by the same amount depending on the frequency however, which is good news! So that while its sensitivity below 20Hz is not what it is at 50Hz, there is a simple way to compensate for this deficiency. It's called a compensation chart. Using one is very simple, and a pencil and paper is all you need."

Under the exact same conditions, I got a reading of 77dB spl at 31.5Hz and 76dB at 25Hz, after recalibration I got 71dB at 31.5Hz and 62dB at 25Hz. Surely you can't call a introducing a 9dB dip in response, "flattening a hump".

The advice to use REW is a good one if you want to get a more accurate picture of what is going on in your room. With that, you can take, I believe, up to 8 measurements and average them. As Chris (audyssey) has pointed out, (single) readings can easily vary by 6 dB or more just by moving the meter a few inches.

I am not trying to cast aspersions upon your science, just trying to get you to up your game!
pepar is online now  
post #16149 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 12:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Do you have a notebook/sound card and REW software?

If you do you could run the measurements and post the before Audyssey and after Audyssey FR plots.

Hey penngray,

Good suggestion about the REW software. I actually have it, but I haven't picked up a suitable soundcard for my laptop. I just picked up a new sub and laptop in the same week, probably won't be buying a soundcard right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

The advice to use REW is a good one if you want to get a more accurate picture of what is going on in your room. With that, you can take, I believe, up to 8 measurements and average them. As Chris (audyssey) has pointed out, (single) readings can easily vary by 6 dB or more just by moving the meter a few inches.

I am not trying to cast aspersions upon your science, just trying to get you to up your game!

Hey pepar,

I understand the whole 6dB or more by moving the meter a few inches, my meter was not moved at all. I was hoping that someone else had already worked through this experience. I'm sure that I'll get it figured out next weekend when I have time to play with calibration again. I would suggest that you do read up on the RS spl meter and correction charts for it, you're pretty hard on this useful tool blaming it right off the bat. The RS spl meter is precise enough to be used with the REW software. Thanks for taking the time to try to help.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16150 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 12:10 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey penngray,

Good suggestion about the REW software. I actually have it, but I haven't picked up a suitable soundcard for my laptop. I just picked up a new sub and laptop in the same week, probably won't be buying a soundcard right now.



Hey pepar,

I understand the whole 6dB or more by moving the meter a few inches, my meter was not moved at all. I was hoping that someone else had already worked through this experience. I'm sure that I'll get it figured out next weekend when I have time to play with calibration again. I would suggest that you do read up on the RS spl meter and correction charts for it, you're pretty hard on this useful tool blaming it right off the bat. The RS spl meter is precise enough to be used with the REW software..

No, it really isn't, especially at low frequencies. Seriously, regardless of what you've read. I'm trying not to "blame" anything, but only point out a possible contributing factor. If "we" cannot eliminate the variables and boil your situation down, they "we" cannot help.
pepar is online now  
post #16151 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 12:45 PM
Member
 
aboulfad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi,

can someone please take a look at the result of my audyssey MultEqXT calibration for a 5.0 system no sub and 5.1.

I notice a difference for the Main L/R with and without a sub, and i would like to understand that. Further the curves for the Front Left and right are different at the low freqs. Why ? I am just curious, not that there is a problem.

And a noob question, are those curves what Audyssey has corrected ? or the response of my room before correction?

Thanks !
aboulfad is offline  
post #16152 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 12:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

No, it really isn't, especially at low frequencies. Seriously, regardless of what you've read. I'm trying not to "blame" anything, but only point out a possible contributing factor. If "we" cannot eliminate the variables and boil your situation down, they "we" cannot help.

Hey pepar,

I hope your not getting offended, it's not what I'm trying to do. I totally get it that the RS meter is not the equivalent of $1500 model, I'm not saying it's accurate, but it's precise enough to be useful. The lack of accuracy is ok though because of the correction charts and I understand that there is a calibration file for REW to be used with the RS meter. I have to agree with Chris's statement: "If you measured the new sub with the filters in place for the old sub then who knows what that would give you..." Out of curiosity do you use REW, and if so what are you using for the mic?
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16153 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 01:11 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey pepar,

I hope your not getting offended, it's not what I'm trying to do. I totally get it that the RS meter is not the equivalent of $1500 model, I'm not saying it's accurate, but it's precise enough to be useful. The lack of accuracy is ok though because of the correction charts and I understand that there is a calibration file for REW to be used with the RS meter. I have to agree with Chris's statement: "If you measured the new sub with the filters in place for the old sub then who knows what that would give you..." Out of curiosity do you use REW, and if so what are you using for the mic?

I do use REW. Some years ago I purchased the EMM8 mic from ETF Acoustics. I think with the mic pre-amp it was around $400.

I was only trying to say that the variation you mentioned *could* be from the gear and/or technique you are using. that's all.
pepar is online now  
post #16154 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 01:14 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
counsil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kansas City, Missouri
Posts: 1,979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

No, it really isn't, especially at low frequencies. Seriously, regardless of what you've read. I'm trying not to "blame" anything, but only point out a possible contributing factor. If "we" cannot eliminate the variables and boil your situation down, they "we" cannot help.

I agree that the RS SPL meter is inaccurate in it's readings, but in my experience it has been extremely consistent irregardless of SPL levels (within reason anyway). Therefore you can do A/B comparsions to see how changes effect your frequency response. You just can't determine what your exact frequency response is.

Just my $.02.

Never argue with an idiot; they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Counsil Basement HT
counsil is offline  
post #16155 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 01:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I do use REW. Some years ago I purchased the EMM8 mic from ETF Acoustics. I think with the mic pre-amp it was around $400.

I was only trying to say that the variation you mentioned *could* be from the gear and/or technique you are using. that's all.

Hey pepar,

Wow must be nice, but unfortunately I don't see a $400 mic in my future. I do look forward to playing with REW in the near future.

Thank you
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16156 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 01:49 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey pepar,

Wow must be nice, but unfortunately I don't see a $400 mic in my future. I do look forward to playing with REW in the near future.

Well, I don't see one in my future either, so it's good that I already own it.
pepar is online now  
post #16157 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 03:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bluesky636's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi,

My apology was directed to those prospective buyers, who as you pointed out, may have arrived at the wrong conclusion from my imprecise remarks. I should hasten to add those remarks were based purely on theoretical issues discussed by Chris and not my own personal experience.

Yesterday I completed my first calibration with my new Onkyo Pro PR-SC886 prepro, and now I can move from the theoretical to the actual.

First and foremost I watch movies, so I'm not an audiophile, but I do have a small collection of multichannel music, DVDs, Blu-ray and HD DVD discs. So yesterday I had an opportunity to listen to three Blu-ray music samples, 1) symphonic music Mussorgsky Stokowski (7.1 channel DTS-HD master audio), 2)Rock and Roll Rolling Stones Shine a Light (5.1 channel DTS-HD master audio) and 3) Rock and Roll Jethro Tull Live at Montreux (5.1 channel DTS-HD master audio).

I listened to all of these samples with Dynamic EQ on. I can definitively state that I was extremely pleased with these listening experiences. In the case of the symphonic music mix I was listening very comfortably at -5 dB below reference, without any discomfort.

For the two Rock and Roll samples the experience was equally satisfying but required lower listening levels. In particular, the Jethro Tull disc needed to be turned down to about -25 dB.

So whereas movies may have a theoretical advantage in terms of accuracy, so far I have not heard any music content that didn't sound very good with Audyssey MultEQ and Dynamic EQ, and I doubt I have the necessary trained ears to hear that theoretical difference.

Larry

Ah, but the music you were listening to was MOVIE MUSIC, that I would guess (hope) was mastered in a studio using the same standards as all movie audio.

Instead, what you need to listen to is a 20 year old Jethro Tull or Rolling Stones CD and see what conclusions you draw.

Have fun with your new system.
bluesky636 is offline  
post #16158 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 04:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesky636 View Post

Ah, but the music you were listening to was MOVIE MUSIC, that I would guess (hope) was mastered in a studio using the same standards as all movie audio.

Instead, what you need to listen to is a 20 year old Jethro Tull or Rolling Stones CD and see what conclusions you draw.

Have fun with your new system.

Hi,

Thanks.

Yes, likely in regards to the Stones concert, which is labeled as a Martin Scorsese film.

Much less likely in the case of the symphonic music which didn't even have any video.

I don't listen to stereo, just multichannel music. I don't think the fairly dead acoustics in my home theater would do them justice. Maybe one of the available surround processes would simulate a serviceable multichannel presentation.

Better yet it's gratifying that they are remixing the old stuff in 5.1 without resorting to simulations provide by our prepros. For instance, I have the 1968 Cream Farewell Concert that was remixed in 1999 in 5.1 DTS, and now 40 years later the Cream have gotten together for an Albert Hall concert in 2005. Very cool!

I'm really not anxious to find a poorly mixed classic to justify my prior remarks.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16159 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 04:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bluesky636's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi,

Thanks.

Yes, likely in regards to the Stones concert, which is labeled as a Martin Scorsese film.

Much less likely in the case of the symphonic music which didn't even have any video.

I don't listen to stereo, just multichannel music. I don't think the fairly dead acoustics in my home theater would do them justice. Maybe one of the available surround processes would simulate a serviceable multichannel presentation.

Better yet it's gratifying that they are remixing the old stuff in 5.1 without resorting to simulations provide by our prepros. For instance, I have the 1968 Cream Farewell Concert that was remixed in 1999 in 5.1 DTS, and now 40 years later the Cream have gotten together for an Albert Hall concert in 2005. Very cool!

I'm really not anxious to find a poorly mixed classic to justify my prior remarks.

Larry

I too have the two Cream DVDs.

The 2005 concert looks and sounds great.

The 1968 concert, well, it WAS 1968.
bluesky636 is offline  
post #16160 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 06:26 PM
Newbie
 
libjhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This is my first ever forum entry, so excuse me if I wet myself. I want to thank all contributors to the Audyssey and Denon 2809 threads, especially batpig, giomania and Chris/Audyssey. Also thanks to Rod Elliott for his zealous support of active biamping.

I've had my Mirage OM-10 and OM-C2 speakers for nearly 10 years, and though they are great, they could sound better and I was a little bored with them. So I passively biamped them using older Adcom amps. This was a definite improvement over my HK receiver's built-in amps, but I wanted a real change. After much research, I purchased the excellent Marchand XM9 3-channel 2-way crossover and removed the rather complicated passive crossovers from all 3 front speakers. I was surprised at the super cheap parts Mirage had used. The sound of the speaker drivers was improved tremendously - they now had real life. The level and damping controls of the electronic crossover were fine for getting everything lined up around the 1.9 KHz crossover point. Unfortunately I still needed baffle slope compensation and bass alignment. I was in over my head and these are not ordinary speakers. I believe Mr. Marchand can add these filters to the XM9L, but I didn't know exactly what was needed. I was about to purchase an RTA/EQ when I came across this thread. So I purchased the 2809 instead.

After some trial and error, I was able to get Audyssey to more than make up for my speaker building inadequacies. Pure and Direct modes sound much better than Stereo mode, but my speakers also sound much better with the deep bass removed. So I broke out my old Outlaw ICBM - sometimes it's good to be a pack rat. I used the ICBM as an 80 Hz high pass filter for the OM-10s. Audyssey decided that my full range speakers now needed to be crossed over at 150 Hz. So I lowered the ICBM to 40 Hz which brought Audyssey down to 100 Hz - still no good. Finally I put the ICBM on bypass and Audyssey gave me a 60 Hz crossover point. I then adjusted the ICBM back to 80 Hz and got a perfect blend with the subs set at 80 Hz in Pure/Direct mode. At first I lamented having not purchased 3-way crossovers, but I could not have done this without 2 separate units.

The results are fantastic! Honestly, the best sound I've ever heard. Audyssey needs to be marketed to audiophiles. I wonder why some pigeonhole it as just for home theater? I can't believe Denon has eliminated Audyssey from Pure/Direct mode in the xx10 models and that the 3310 does not have XT. Batpig, my check is in the mail.

I hope to eventually replace the Outlaw with another Marchand, but for now, I'm in audio heaven. Again, heaps of thanks to you all.
John
libjhk is offline  
post #16161 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 10:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjgarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi,


You have the Low Pass Filter on your subwoofer set to 60 Hz, which means the subwoofer starts rolling off at above 60 Hz. So you may get a smooth frequency response when integrating the subwoofer to the mains which have usable output down to 60 Hz. However, your center channel only has usable output down to 150 Hz, and you have your subwoofer filter set to roll-off at 60 Hz so there will be a big dip in the response as your graph demonstrates.

Your confusion seems to be that you expect the subwoofer to have selectively different Low Pass Filters for each channel. There is only one global setting which in your case should be set to about 150 dB to integrate better with your center channel.


Larry

Nope. I don't even have a low pass filter ON my subwoofer. I just have my AVR doing bass management, and in the section for crossover settings there is an advanced sub-section. In that sub-section crossover settings can be different for mains/center/surrounds. The crossover for my mains is 60Hz. If thinking that this means my sub is supposed to meet up with all of the designated speakers at the assigned crossover points (60 for the mains, higher and variable numbers for the others) is incorrect, then I am indeed confused.

But I don't think I am.
kjgarrison is offline  
post #16162 of 72198 Old 07-06-2009, 11:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rickardl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by counsil View Post

I agree that the RS SPL meter is inaccurate in it's readings, but in my experience it has been extremely consistent irregardless of SPL levels (within reason anyway). Therefore you can do A/B comparsions to see how changes effect your frequency response. You just can't determine what your exact frequency response is.

Just my $.02.

Some more $.02:
From what I have read, it is not really the RS SPL meter itself that is the problem, it is the characteristics of the room that affect the sound that you are using as test tones. Anything else than pink noise, band limited to 500 Hz to 2 kHz seems like a bad idea:

"With low-frequency components present, there's lots of level bouncing around, and when played back in a room, the effects of standing waves are to add a frequency-by-frequency ±15 dB variation to the level typically. One way to solve this problem is to band limit the noise to above the Schroeder frequency; that room-volume dependent frequency where not much else above it in the soundfield can be called diffuse. For small rooms, 500 Hz will do.

At the high-frequency end of the range, there's lots of trouble, too. Half-inch measurement microphones exhibit an 8 dB difference between direct sound and diffuse field sound at 20 kHz, and 6 dB at 10 kHz. These are big differences that will show up in an overall measurement, depending on whether you are direct- or diffuse-field dominated, and which way you aim the mic. Also, for interchangeability with the largest range of differing systems where house curves or the X curve of motion picture sound is in effect starting their rolloff at 2 kHz, rejecting frequencies above 2 kHz leads to maximum utility.

So pink noise, band limited to 500 Hz to 2 kHz is the preferred source to set acoustic levels. It is broad enough so that single-frequency standing waves don't make the measurement inaccurate, and narrow enough that low- and high-frequency acoustical and sound system effects are minimized.

Using this two-octave band noise also solves another problem. The standard of the motion-picture industry for level setting is the ubiquitous Radio Shack sound level meter. Everybody should have one. Get the cheaper analog meter that has better resolution than the more expensive digital one. I have calibrated more than 100 of these meters over a period of years, and find them out of the factory to mostly be within 1 dB, pretty good for such a cheap device. However, they do vary one to the next in their C weighting filter, so that broadband noise may show a different level meter-to-meter when they are calibrated on a midrange tone (or noise)."

http://surroundpro.com/articles/publ...inter_30.shtml

I believe the above is written by Tomlinson Holman, co-founder and Chief Scientist of Audyssey and the TH in THX).
There is also a note about standard levels:

"Television mixing...........................78 dBC slow
Film sound, small room....................83 dBC slow
Film sound, large room.....................85 dBC slow
Music mixing Varies, try the range above"
rickardl is offline  
post #16163 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 03:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddriffic View Post

hello all,

i have the denon 1909, which i had a mirage omni s8 sub woofer that could play level down 31.5hz in my room according to the results of my radio shack spl meter and the warble tones from the stereophile test cd #1.

I swapped it out for a bigger energy s10.3 subwoofer. I measured the s10.3 to play level down to 25hz (20hz was about -12db below 25hz).

Then i actually re-ran the audyssey calibration, as i had not yet done this with the new sub. The problem is that post recalibration, 25hz is now 7-9 db down from 31.5hz depending on whether the 1909 is using dynamic eq alone or with dynamic volume. I was careful to use the same source material (warble tones from stereophile test cd #1) with the same level on the the 1909 (sw -6) the same volume on the 1909 (-35db) the sub had not been moved or had any settings change at all. I'm really at a loss as to how the s10.3 had deeper bass extension when using the audyssey calibration taken with the smaller omni s8 sub. Anyone run into this issue?

Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

hi todd,

the most likely reason is the measurement method. unfortunately it is not at all reliable to use an spl meter for measuring subwoofer levels and certainly not for measuring the subwoofer frequency response. the readings can easily vary by 6 db or more just by moving the meter a few inches. The only reliable way to do this is by looking at the spectrum and by taking multiple measurements in the listening area and averaging them.

I am also not clear on your exact experiment. It sounds like you measured the new energy sub before recalibrating and got one number and then calibrated and got a different number. If that's the case then i am not at all surprised. If you measured the new sub with the filters in place for the old sub then who knows what that would give you...

Quote:
Originally Posted by toddriffic View Post

hi chris,

first, let me say thank you so much for your response, i am a walking advertisement for audyssey. I have waited years for something with like audyssey to show up, it is the sole reason for my last receiver upgrade. The multi eq room correction along with dynamic eq that allows me to enjoy movies at a level much lower than reference volume and dynamic volume keeps the wife and neighbors happy is fantastic!

I do have to respectfully disagree that a spl meter is not a reliable method of measuring subwoofer output. I have used these same meters for almost 20 years now and they are reliable in terms precision (precision vs accuracy). My own ears first confirmed that the 25hz output of my subwoofer had diminished before i looked at the meter siting on the tripod in my main listening position. Additionally i had pictures on the wall that ceased to vibrate with the 25hz warble tone with the same test material under the same conditions post calibration.

Yes you are absolutely correct, i did measure the new bigger energy subwoofer before rerunning the calibration again. That's my dilemma. I can't figure out why running audyssey calibration would actually diminish it's low bass output when i thought it would only make an improvement. Any suggestions as to where to go from here to get the 25hz output back to where it was would be appreciated. I'll put the little s8 back and run calibration again just to replace it post calibration with the s10.3 to get the lowest bass extension back if i have to!:d

again, i can't say enough about what the audyssey team has done. I can't picture buying another avr without it.

Thanks again chris

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

todd, are you making the distinction between measuring subwoofer output and subwoofer frequency response? To me, it looks like you are not. the lack of accuracy makes the radio shack meter and test tones, well . . inaccurate for measuring response. also, it is possible that previously there was a big room hump at 25hz and after audyssey the hump has been flattened.

Just saying that there are other alternative explanations for your "findings."

Quote:
Originally Posted by toddriffic View Post

hey prepar,

yes i am aware of difference between my subwoofers output (in my case i'm referring to spl) and frequency response (as in 31.5hz vs 25hz). yes you are right that the radio shack spl meter is not accurate. This is not a problem because it is proven to be precise, their is a difference. But don't take my word for it, svs has built a reputation on knowing a thing or two about bass:

"the radio shack sound meter is not totally "linear" in its accuracy down there. All such meters are off by the same amount depending on the frequency however, which is good news! So that while its sensitivity below 20hz is not what it is at 50hz, there is a simple way to compensate for this deficiency. It's called a compensation chart. Using one is very simple, and a pencil and paper is all you need."

under the exact same conditions, i got a reading of 77db spl at 31.5hz and 76db at 25hz, after recalibration i got 71db at 31.5hz and 62db at 25hz. surely you can't call a introducing a 9db dip in response, "flattening a hump".

Quote:
Originally Posted by toddriffic View Post

hey penngray,

good suggestion about the rew software. I actually have it, but i haven't picked up a suitable soundcard for my laptop. I just picked up a new sub and laptop in the same week, probably won't be buying a soundcard right now.



Hey pepar,

i understand the whole 6db or more by moving the meter a few inches, my meter was not moved at all. i was hoping that someone else had already worked through this experience. I'm sure that i'll get it figured out next weekend when i have time to play with calibration again. i would suggest that you do read up on the rs spl meter and correction charts for it, you're pretty hard on this useful tool blaming it right off the bat. The rs spl meter is precise enough to be used with the rew software. thanks for taking the time to try to help.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

no, it really isn't, especially at low frequencies. Seriously, regardless of what you've read. i'm trying not to "blame" anything, but only point out a possible contributing factor. If "we" cannot eliminate the variables and boil your situation down, they "we" cannot help.

Quote:
Originally Posted by counsil View Post

i agree that the rs spl meter is inaccurate in it's readings, but in my experience it has been extremely consistent irregardless of spl levels (within reason anyway). Therefore you can do a/b comparsions to see how changes effect your frequency response. You just can't determine what your exact frequency response is.

Just my $.02.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickardl View Post

some more $.02:
From what i have read, it is not really the rs spl meter itself that is the problem, it is the characteristics of the room that affect the sound that you are using as test tones. Anything else than pink noise, band limited to 500 hz to 2 khz seems like a bad idea:

"with low-frequency components present, there’s lots of level bouncing around, and when played back in a room, the effects of standing waves are to add a frequency-by-frequency ±15 db variation to the level typically. One way to solve this problem is to band limit the noise to above the schroeder frequency; that room-volume dependent frequency where not much else above it in the soundfield can be called diffuse. For small rooms, 500 hz will do.

At the high-frequency end of the range, there’s lots of trouble, too. Half-inch measurement microphones exhibit an 8 db difference between direct sound and diffuse field sound at 20 khz, and 6 db at 10 khz. These are big differences that will show up in an overall measurement, depending on whether you are direct- or diffuse-field dominated, and which way you aim the mic. Also, for interchangeability with the largest range of differing systems where “house curves” or the x curve of motion picture sound is in effect starting their rolloff at 2 khz, rejecting frequencies above 2 khz leads to maximum utility.

so pink noise, band limited to 500 hz to 2 khz is the preferred source to set acoustic levels. It is broad enough so that single-frequency standing waves don’t make the measurement inaccurate, and narrow enough that low- and high-frequency acoustical and sound system effects are minimized.

using this two-octave band noise also solves another problem. the standard of the motion-picture industry for level setting is the ubiquitous radio shack sound level meter. Everybody should have one. get the cheaper analog meter that has better resolution than the more expensive digital one. I have calibrated more than 100 of these meters over a period of years, and find them out of the factory to mostly be within 1 db, pretty good for such a cheap device. However, they do vary one to the next in their c weighting filter, so that broadband noise may show a different level meter-to-meter when they are calibrated on a midrange tone (or noise)."

http://surroundpro.com/articles/publ...inter_30.shtml

i believe the above is written by tomlinson holman, co-founder and chief scientist of audyssey and the th in thx).
there is also a note about standard levels:

"television mixing...........................78 dbc slow
film sound, small room....................83 dbc slow
film sound, large room.....................85 dbc slow
music mixing varies, try the range above"

Hey Guys,

Glad to hear that there is a bit of debate as to using the RS spl meter as a useful tool. I believe it's precision (consistency in it's readings) is far more important than it's accuracy given that we can correct for it's inaccuracy. I'm not trying to to turn this thread into a big RS spl meter debate, but I can't ignore the issue when it is cited as the major reason for my subwoofer's -9dB dip in extension at 25Hz after rerunning Audysssey calibration when it, along with my ears, my tactile sensation and the decrease in vibration in physical objects supports what the RS spl meter is telling me.

I'm still a big fan of what Audyssey does and will recalibrate it in the hope that there was a unknown variable responsible for what is going on with my subwoofer. I'm just not willing to ignore what I am experiencing and submit to blind faith that a Audyssey auto calibration is infallible. I just wanted to know if anyone else had posted this experience.

Have fun with your toys everyone!
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16164 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 08:44 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickardl View Post

Some more $.02:
From what I have read, it is not really the RS SPL meter itself that is the problem, it is the characteristics of the room that affect the sound that you are using as test tones. Anything else than pink noise, band limited to 500 Hz to 2 kHz seems like a bad idea:

"With low-frequency components present, there's lots of level bouncing around, and when played back in a room, the effects of standing waves are to add a frequency-by-frequency ±15 dB variation to the level typically. One way to solve this problem is to band limit the noise to above the Schroeder frequency; that room-volume dependent frequency where not much else above it in the soundfield can be called diffuse. For small rooms, 500 Hz will do.

At the high-frequency end of the range, there's lots of trouble, too. Half-inch measurement microphones exhibit an 8 dB difference between direct sound and diffuse field sound at 20 kHz, and 6 dB at 10 kHz. These are big differences that will show up in an overall measurement, depending on whether you are direct- or diffuse-field dominated, and which way you aim the mic. Also, for interchangeability with the largest range of differing systems where house curves or the X curve of motion picture sound is in effect starting their rolloff at 2 kHz, rejecting frequencies above 2 kHz leads to maximum utility.

So pink noise, band limited to 500 Hz to 2 kHz is the preferred source to set acoustic levels. It is broad enough so that single-frequency standing waves don't make the measurement inaccurate, and narrow enough that low- and high-frequency acoustical and sound system effects are minimized.

Using this two-octave band noise also solves another problem. The standard of the motion-picture industry for level setting is the ubiquitous Radio Shack sound level meter. Everybody should have one. Get the cheaper analog meter that has better resolution than the more expensive digital one. I have calibrated more than 100 of these meters over a period of years, and find them out of the factory to mostly be within 1 dB, pretty good for such a cheap device. However, they do vary one to the next in their C weighting filter, so that broadband noise may show a different level meter-to-meter when they are calibrated on a midrange tone (or noise)."

http://surroundpro.com/articles/publ...inter_30.shtml

I believe the above is written by Tomlinson Holman, co-founder and Chief Scientist of Audyssey and the TH in THX).

Yes, just read that myself. And it further explains the reason that using the Radio Shack meter to measure the frequency response of A SUB is a not a good idea. The only debate is with those who occasionally read what they want to read and ignore the qualifiers.

edit: we really do not need posts that recap the last few pages as we were there.
pepar is online now  
post #16165 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 08:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Yes, just read that myself. And it further explains the reason that using the Radio Shack meter to measure the frequency response of A SUB is a not a good idea. The only debate is with those who occasionally read what they want to read and ignore the qualifiers.

edit: we really do not need posts that recap the last few pages as we were there.

We can take this measurement discussion to the DIY forum because that is where the majority of experience exists.

FWIW, I have both the ECM8000 (professionally calibrated) and the RS Digital SPL meter.

I have REW, I have ARTA, I have TruRTA and even a new HOLM software (DIYaudio)

I have run in room Bass measurements for several years, including Decay during my HT room build to test room treatments.

Its a splitting hairs arguement to say the RS SPL meter should not be used for bass measurements. On a comparison basis it will show you what your levels are accurate enough to know if you have a problem or not.

Im curious to some of the POVs so I will quote them (rickardl post) in the DIY section to get clarification if what he posted actually matters wrt bass measurements.
The difference is nothing to write

Quote:


Originally Posted by rickardl
Some more $.02:
From what I have read, it is not really the RS SPL meter itself that is the problem, it is the characteristics of the room that affect the sound that you are using as test tones. Anything else than pink noise, band limited to 500 Hz to 2 kHz seems like a bad idea:

I think the guy cares about 20Hz to 200hz.

Please go to the DIY forum to continue.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #16166 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 09:06 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post


Its a splitting hairs arguement to say the RS SPL meter should not be used for bass measurements. On a comparison basis it will show you what your levels are accurate enough to know if you have a problem or not.e

Yeah, one more from me on this. The context was that a poster commented on a huge variation in low frequency response from one sub to another sub (and with the addition of MultEQ XT). When people pointed to some possible reasons other than Audyssey, people took sides. That is where it started, but it quickly became about the Radio shack meter, in general.
pepar is online now  
post #16167 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 10:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Kal,

I just read your very informative Audyssey MultEQ Pro3.0 room-correction software review.

Just a couple of questions please.

On the two "After" curves per speaker, were they both performed using the Pro Kit, one with the prepro, and one with the Sound Equalizer?

Was each curve a single measurement taken at the primary listening location?

I'm trying to get an objective expectation for how much of an improvement I'm likely to observe in going from the Audyssey consumer calibration to a professional calibration on my Onkyo PR-SC886.

Thanks.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16168 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 10:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Yeah, one more from me on this. The context was that a poster commented on a huge variation in low frequency response from one sub to another sub (and with the addition of MultEQ XT). When people pointed to some possible reasons other than Audyssey, people took sides. That is where it started, but it quickly became about the Radio shack meter, in general.

Got it, if anyone is interested they can discuss the RS meter usage here.....
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post16784071

Maybe the application of it was different in this scenario but maybe its all better in its own thread.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #16169 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 10:50 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,422
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

On the two "After" curves per speaker, were they both performed using the Pro Kit, one with the prepro, and one with the Sound Equalizer?

Figure 1 compares:
a. No EQ
b. AudysseyPro EQ with the 9.8 hardware
c. AudysseyPro EQ with the Sound Equalizer hardware

Figure 2 compares:
a. No EQ
b. AudysseyPro EQ/SoundEqualizer with 70Hz c/o
c. AudysseyPro EQ/SoundEqualizer with 40Hz c/o

Quote:


Was each curve a single measurement taken at the primary listening location?

Nope. These are the Audyssey output curves as displayed by AudysseyPro.

Quote:


I'm trying to get an objective expectation for how much of an improvement I'm likely to observe in going from the Audyssey consumer calibration to a professional calibration on my Onkyo PR-SC886.

2 big advantages to an AudysseyPro EQ with the Integra/Onkyo prepros;
1. You can customize the FR and, if you choose, get a flat FR and/or add a bump for "room gain."
2. You can preview the low frequency response with different crossover frequencies and choose the optimum one. This is not possible with MultEQ XT alone.

More advantages if you do it yourself!!

Kal Rubinson

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

Kal Rubinson is online now  
post #16170 of 72198 Old 07-07-2009, 11:11 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,989
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Figure 1 compares:
a. No EQ
b. AudysseyPro EQ with the 9.8 hardware
c. AudysseyPro EQ with the Sound Equalizer hardware

Figure 2 compares:
a. No EQ
b. AudysseyPro EQ/SoundEqualizer with 70Hz c/o
c. AudysseyPro EQ/SoundEqualizer with 40Hz c/o

Is the first heavy vertical division on the left 100Hz? Would you say that the lower crossover and resulting smoother response - contrary to conventional wisdom regarding bass frequencies sent to mains - is due to better modal distribution?
pepar 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