"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 565 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #16921 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 11:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I have been considering switching to (side) surround speakers identical to my LCRs at 130°, the closest I can get them to the recommended angle, mostly for hi-res multichannel audio listening. It has been suggested by a fellow HT nut that I would not be happy with them there for cinema because of the "hole" between the fronts and surrounds. First, do you think that would be the case and second, would the WIDE channels fill in any hole created by surrounds at 130°?

Yes, your fellow HT nut is correct. This has always been one of the shortcomings of 5.1 surround. We want the speakers further back for envelopment behind us, but doing so creates a gap to the sides.

It's because of one of the mechanisms that we use for imaging: time of arrival. With two speakers in front, we interpret differences in time of arrival into position of the sound image. But, with the speakers on the side the time of arrival to both ears is nearly identical. So, we get "confused". Adding a speaker there helps greatly and we have a series of experiments that showed that panning is actually possible from front to back with the added width speaker at 60°.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #16922 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 12:18 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Yes, your fellow HT nut is correct. This has always been one of the shortcomings of 5.1 surround. We want the speakers further back for envelopment behind us, but doing so creates a gap to the sides.

It's because of one of the mechanisms that we use for imaging: time of arrival. With two speakers in front, we interpret differences in time of arrival into position of the sound image. But, with the speakers on the side the time of arrival to both ears is nearly identical. So, we get "confused". Adding a speaker there helps greatly and we have a series of experiments that showed that panning is actually possible from front to back with the added width speaker at 60°.

Thanks, I will try the 130° surrounds with a near future pre/pro upgrade in mind. I need to again look at the 60° spots in my room as well.
pepar is offline  
post #16923 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 01:04 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 LarryChanin View Post

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the explanation. My remark was not meant as criticism of Dynamic Volume, since as you point out, it is only by decreasing the dynamic range of the content can it fulfill it's design intent to avoid disturbing others.

Rather, my remark was intended to convey that in no way is Dynamic Volume dangerous, but rather to suggest that Dynamic Volume might mitigate the bass boosting effects of Dynamic EQ that some forum members have concerns about.

Todd's measurements didn't seem to support my speculation. Do you have any insights to share regarding this interaction of Dynamic Volume with Dynamic EQ? I gather that in general Dynamic Volume's effects are not subtle with regard to high levels?

Thanks.

Larry

Hey Larry,

I agree with you and Chris that Dynamic volume's boosting bass at low listening levels wouldn't be a problem. It's just that Yosef's sub gain at 12 to 3 o'clock along with a sub level on his 1909 of +6 sounds too high to me. For some reason I get a really bass heavy calibration with both subs I've used, I've always calibrated with my subs gain at 12 o'clock and end up with postive values for the sub channel on my 1909, when it should be negative values. I'm talking about watching CNN and not hearing the anchor man over deep rumbling bass. Why, I have no clue, I just turn the sub down. If anyone is in the Seattle area or coming through here, I'd be glad to have any of you guys stop by to show you, then we can throw something on the grill and enjoy a couple beers.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16924 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 01:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey Larry,

I agree with you and Chris that Dynamic volume's boosting bass at low listening levels wouldn't be a problem. It's just that Yosef's sub gain at 12 to 3 o'clock along with a sub level on his 1909 of +6 sounds too high to me. For some reason I get a really bass heavy calibration with both subs I've used, I've always calibrated with my subs gain at 12 o'clock and end up with postive values for the sub channel on my 1909, when it should be negative values. I'm talking about watching CNN and not hearing the anchor man over deep rumbling bass. Why, I have no clue, I just turn the sub down. If anyone is in the Seattle area or coming through here, I'd be glad to have any of you guys stop by to show you, then we can throw something on the grill and enjoy a couple beers.

Hi Todd,

There are two separate issues here:

1) The level being set for the sub is for film reference. So, it really doesn't matter at all what the level on the back of the sub is and what the trim is (assuming it is in the AVR allowable range). They are just relative volume controls that ensure one, and only one, thing: when you set the master volume of the AVR to 0 you will be getting film reference level from your sub.

2) As I have mentioned before, reference mixing standards do not exist outside the film industry. TV content can be a particularly bad offender. Although most TV production is standardized to 78 dB reference, the biggest problem is the monitoring environment. They simply do not use subwoofers when they monitor and the 6" woofers in the speakers sitting above the console do not reproduce content below 40 Hz. So, there are huge issues with rumble, studio noises, foot thumps, and even voices. TV mixing has not fully understood the reality: people at home are listening with much wider range systems than what is used in monitoring in the studio. Some stations are really good at this and others are not. I could tell you stories that I hear from my colleague Tom Holman who is heavily involved with the standards committees that are pushing new standards through as we speak. Until that happens, we will have to live with different settings for Dynamic EQ for TV. That's why we introduced an "offset" control in the newer models coming out this year. The same thing can be achieved by turning down the digital input trim level on the 1909 input that you use for your TV source.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #16925 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 01:56 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 audyssey View Post

Hi Todd,

There are two separate issues here:

1) The level being set for the sub is for film reference. So, it really doesn't matter at all what the level on the back of the sub is and what the trim is (assuming it is in the AVR allowable range). They are just relative volume controls that ensure one, and only one, thing: when you set the master volume of the AVR to 0 you will be getting film reference level from your sub.

2) As I have mentioned before, reference mixing standards do not exist outside the film industry. TV content can be a particularly bad offender. Although most TV production is standardized to 78 dB reference, the biggest problem is the monitoring environment. They simply do not use subwoofers when they monitor and the 6" woofers in the speakers sitting above the console do not reproduce content below 40 Hz. So, there are huge issues with rumble, studio noises, foot thumps, and even voices. TV mixing has not fully understood the reality: people at home are listening with much wider range systems than what is used in monitoring in the studio. Some stations are really good at this and others are not. I could tell you stories that I hear from my colleague Tom Holman who is heavily involved with the standards committees that are pushing new standards through as we speak. Until that happens, we will have to live with different settings for Dynamic EQ for TV. That's why we introduced an "offset" control in the newer models coming out this year. The same thing can be achieved by turning down the digital input trim level on the 1909 input that you use for your TV source.

Hey Chris,

I really wish Mr. Holman luck in his efforts, I completely agree you never know what you are getting with TV. Honestly though, the bass heavy levels I end up with is their with Blu rays too. Anyone is welcome to come over and observe it for themselves, it's no big deal, I just turn it down.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16926 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 02:17 PM
Senior Member
 
Yosef 615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bartlesville, OK
Posts: 214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Sorry, but I don't think so. A 9 dB boost when the master volume is turned down and the speaker is already rolling off by 10 or more dB is not going to blow any drivers. A quick search on Google brought up a couple of hits of people talking about some sort of manufacturing issue on the drivers. I would suggest making sure that this is not the case in your sub.

Also, I would suggest turning off Audyssey completely (i.e. turn off MultEQ which will also turn off everything else). Then set the level for your sub using an SPL meter and listen at the volumes you like. I suspect you will have the same issue.

Well, the volume isn't turned down and obviously something is happening outside of what the sub is physically capable of. Is it a sub defect? I don't know. I'm about to be on my third driver and I've seen no forum postings on any similar issues with the same driver. Could you link to the driver issues you're talking about? Were they specific to the A5-350?

I'm still researching for a cause and solution, but nothing concrete yet. Maybe I'll be able to tell more when I get my SPL meter in.

XBox Live Gamertag: Vash615

Boomer Sooner!!!
Yosef 615 is offline  
post #16927 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 02:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosef 615 View Post

Well, the volume isn't turned down and obviously something is happening outside of what the sub is physically capable of. Is it a sub defect? I don't know. I'm about to be on my third driver and I've seen no forum postings on any similar issues with the same driver. Could you link to the driver issues you're talking about? Were they specific to the A5-350?

I'm still researching for a cause and solution, but nothing concrete yet. Maybe I'll be able to tell more when I get my SPL meter in.

Here is one that sounds similar to your case (my bolding):

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=2117298

Im on my third 15' driver for my a5-350,
1)manufacture defect
2) sounded killer for 3 months then the amp went out, got a replacement amp and found out the one voice coil in the driver was out as well.
3)Paid for and got the 3rd driver installed a month and a half ago, ever since the driver has made an rattle noise, (even at low volumes), so i decided to finally hook up my second sub and run two subs.
It sounds awesome, but when i put a test tone to the subs, the velodyne generates a solid bass tone with zero noise, the ED has a rattling noise. My best friend comes over and we take out the ED 15' and install a rockford 15' in the a5-350 enclosure, my god what a difference, ZERO rattle, and i can turn the gain on the sub almost to the max and it does not clip, it can handle way more power than the ED driver and it is rated at half the power handling.
Interesting.... I have the older blown ED driver that I have contacted ED about to see if they want it back, they never have responded, so if anyone wants it, let me know, you can have it just pay shipping.
The question i have is why when i get a new driver from ED, the new one cant handle the power the old one did, i have to run the gain way low, and it rattles.
-------------------------------------
I have both subs running out of the ED EQ 2, the huge A5-350 rattles and clips even at 1/4th the gain, the velodyne i can turn up to 3/4th gain and it still dont clip. The ED did not do this until i replaced the amp and driver.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #16928 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 02:55 PM
Senior Member
 
DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Louis area
Posts: 328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
First, thanks Chris for answering my question last week about whether dust could affect the calibration mic. And thanks to the Audyssey company for Dynamic EQ because I think it's awesome (on stuff mixed at the correct reference level) and one of the best new, useful features to come along in awhile. I don't know that brands without Audyssey have any sort of "dynamic loudness compensation," so I have to shake my head when I see others spending money and getting excited about another brand, and presumably not knowing what they're missing from their movie experience without DEQ (assuming they listen below reference). It's a "must have" for me!

Anyway, while doing other experiments with bitstream vs PCM with DD/DTS DVDs on the PS3, I found an easily discernible (dramatic?) difference between the 2 with Dynamic EQ enabled on my Denon 1909. Bitstream results in a good amount more bass. Anyone else noticed this?

Initially with a DD track, I thought it was something to do with Dialnorm (-4dB) since Chris said, somewhere, that DEQ takes it into account or such. But there's just as much difference with a -2 Dialnorm offset (both on a DD and DTS track as indicated by the AVR), as well as a DTS track without Dialnorm.

Without Dynamic EQ, it's hard to say for sure, but I'd say bitstream vs PCM sounds the same, as I'd expect, after adjusting the volume if needed: The -4dB Dialnorm DD bitstream is ~4dB louder than PCM; the non-Dialnorm DTS bitstream sounds pretty much the same level as its decoded PCM (again, hard to tell), but I still notice a definite difference in the bass with Dynamic EQ on!

Since that DTS track sounds pretty much the same without DEQ, I guess that rules out my thought that the PS3's PCM output level was lower, which in combination with a then-higher volume setting, would result in less bass boost.

Remember, this is with regular DVDs, so it's the same track; not BD lossless over PCM or such, though that's what my concern IS about, if they don't get "enough" boost. And the PS3's PCM output level is at 0 (or whatever the default middle is), Dynamic Range Compression is Off, the AVR's LFE is at 0dB for DD/DTS/MPCM, etc. (everything is the same AFAICT), and my listening tests were done around -40...

Any thoughts? A way to make things more consistent, whichever way is "correct?" As of now, I'm assuming that the bitstreamed versions are sounding "correct." Thanks!
DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR is offline  
post #16929 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 02:56 PM
Senior Member
 
Yosef 615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bartlesville, OK
Posts: 214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
@ audyssey

That's interesting. Only thing is that now I'm just stuck w/ the basic problem of two product vendors blaming each others product leaving me w/ only a bag full of maybe's and should haves.

I really wish I had the tools and knowledge available to do an empirical root cause analysis instead of sifting through theory after theory short of having someone come out to my house.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off negative or critical. I'm absolutely not trying to do so. It's just that this whole ordeal is very perplexing and annoying.

XBox Live Gamertag: Vash615

Boomer Sooner!!!
Yosef 615 is offline  
post #16930 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 04:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosef 615 View Post

@ audyssey

That's interesting. Only thing is that now I'm just stuck w/ the basic problem of two product vendors blaming each others product leaving me w/ only a bag full of maybe's and should haves.

I really wish I had the tools and knowledge available to do an empirical root cause analysis instead of sifting through theory after theory short of having someone come out to my house.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off negative or critical. I'm absolutely not trying to do so. It's just that this whole ordeal is very perplexing and annoying.

I am not in any way blaming another product vendor. I was just pointing out another user that seemed to have similar issues with what you are having.

Please try my previous suggestion: turn off Audyssey MultEQ and listen at the levels you were listening before to see if the issue persists.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #16931 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 04:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR View Post

...
Anyway, while doing other experiments with bitstream vs PCM with DD/DTS DVDs on the PS3, I found an easily discernible (dramatic?) difference between the 2 with Dynamic EQ enabled on my Denon 1909. Bitstream results in a good amount more bass. Anyone else noticed this? ....

Hi Larry,

This needs a little more investigating. First off, DTS does not use dialnorm so I don't understand how you can be seeing dialnorm readings for DTS content. There is no such flag set in DTS content.

Next, we need to look at what "PCM" really is. Is it downmixed to 2 channels in the PS3? If so, you no longer have a separate LFE track coming to your receiver.

Finally, you should keep in mind that DD and DTS tracks are not directly comparable. They are often a different mix and are not encoded in a way that tries to keeps the levels identical.

So, there are a lot of variables to track down including the internal downmixing process of the PS3.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #16932 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 06:54 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 toddRiffic View Post

Hey Larry,

I agree with you and Chris that Dynamic volume's boosting bass at low listening levels wouldn't be a problem.

Hi Todd,

Just one minor clarification, Dynamic Volume doesn't boost bass, it reduces dynamic range. Dynamic EQ boosts bass and it is enabled when Dynamic Volume is enabled.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16933 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 07:07 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
Not sure if this has been discussed specifically.

I understand about the various curves that Audyssey creates (Flat, Reference, etc.) but I am curious about how side and back surrounds are handled.

Given that in a home theater, the side and back surrounds are mounted a couple of feet above the listener's ears, and not aimed at them, how much correction does Audyssey apply to them? I know that when I hear bullets or glass breaking around me (on the movie ) they sound pretty bright. Does Audyssey really apply that much EQ to them? Are we talking a couple of db or many db? I would think this could be a real issue with dipoles given the fact that the listener is sitting in a null, or should be.
bluesky636 is offline  
post #16934 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 07:13 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 LarryChanin View Post

Hi Todd,

Just one minor clarification, Dynamic Volume doesn't boost bass, it reduces dynamic range. Dynamic EQ boosts bass and it is enabled when Dynamic Volume is enabled.

Larry

Hey Larry,

Good point about it being Dynamic EQ's job to boost the bass. Thing is I do measure a small increase in output when switching from Dynamic EQ only to Dynamic EQ & Volume with the simple measurement methods I have. It can also be a little confusing because turning on Dynamic volume over just using the multi eq correction ends up boosting the bass because it is inseparable from dynamic EQ.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16935 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 07:39 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 toddRiffic View Post

Hey Larry,

Good point about it being Dynamic EQ's job to boost the bass. Thing is I do measure a small increase in output when switching from Dynamic EQ only to Dynamic EQ & Volume with the simple measurement methods I have. It can also be a little confusing because turning on Dynamic volume over just using the multi eq correction ends up boosting the bass because it is inseparable from dynamic EQ.

Hi Todd,

As has been mentioned measuring bass levels with an SPL meter is subject to considerable variation. I have to believe that the small variation you measured has nothing to do with Dynamic Volume, but rather those random variations in levels you would experience even if Audyssey were off.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16936 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 07:59 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

Not sure if this has been discussed specifically.

I understand about the various curves that Audyssey creates (Flat, Reference, etc.) but I am curious about how side and back surrounds are handled.

Given that in a home theater, the side and back surrounds are mounted a couple of feet above the listener's ears, and not aimed at them, how much correction does Audyssey apply to them? I know that when I hear bullets or glass breaking around me (on the movie ) they sound pretty bright. Does Audyssey really apply that much EQ to them? Are we talking a couple of db or many db? I would think this could be a real issue with dipoles given the fact that the listener is sitting in a null, or should be.

Hi,

I assume you are concerned about Audyssey measuring off-axis response and being too aggressive in correcting for high frequency roll-off?

Obviously, this is going to depend on several factors, the vertical off-axis frequency response of the surrounds, the number of feet they are above ear level, and the particular location of listeners in relation to the speaker.

In most case if we are dealing with just a few feet of elevation, the speaker drivers will be only a few degrees above the horizon and so over compensation by Audyssey should be minimal.

If the drivers are very high, and you feel the correction is overly bright, it might be necessary to tilt the microphone backward during the surround measurements to achieve grazing incidence and/or direct the surrounds downward toward the listeners.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16937 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 09:25 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 toddRiffic View Post

Hey Larry,

Good point about it being Dynamic EQ's job to boost the bass. Thing is I do measure a small increase in output when switching from Dynamic EQ only to Dynamic EQ & Volume with the simple measurement methods I have. It can also be a little confusing because turning on Dynamic volume over just using the multi eq correction ends up boosting the bass because it is inseparable from dynamic EQ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi Todd,

As has been mentioned measuring bass levels with an SPL meter is subject to considerable variation. I have to believe that the small variation you measured has nothing to do with Dynamic Volume, but rather those random variations in levels you would experience even if Audyssey were off.

Larry

If you are taking these measurements using the AVR's internally generated test tones, I would think that you would see no change in level of any significance. Aren't the test tones generated WITHOUT any influence by Audyssey?

Now if you are taking your measurements with real world material (music, movie soundtrack, etc.) I would definitely expect to see a difference in the measured level. The purpose of Dynamic Volume is to reduce the dynamic range of what you are listening to. It does so, in simple terms, by REDUCING the peak levels of the audio while at the same time INCREASING the low levels of the audio. So although the difference between the loudest and quietest parts of the signal are reduced, the AVERAGE level of the signal may actually increase slightly. And since the SPL meter is measuring average levels, this would be seen as a slight increase in level on the SPL meter.

That's my theory, anyway.
bluesky636 is offline  
post #16938 of 71744 Old 07-30-2009, 09:36 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,

I assume you are concerned about Audyssey measuring off-axis response and being too aggressive in correcting for high frequency roll-off?

Obviously, this is going to depend on several factors, the vertical off-axis frequency response of the surrounds, the number of feet they are above ear level, and the particular location of listeners in relation to the speaker.

In most case if we are dealing with just a few feet of elevation, the speaker drivers will be only a few degrees above the horizon and so over compensation by Audyssey should be minimal.

If the drivers are very high, and you feel the correction is overly bright, it might be necessary to tilt the microphone backward during the surround measurements to achieve grazing incidence and/or direct the surrounds downward toward the listeners.

Larry

That's just it. From my listening position. the side and back surrounds DON'T sound overly bright or aggressive. They sound just right to me in relation to the LCRs. Now If I stand up in the room, they do sound a little brighter, but not terribly so. Also, I use THX Re-Eq all the time so that might help some. The sides are about 7 feet away and the backs about 6 feet away from my listening position as measured by Audyssey. All are about 3 feet above my listening position. That's why I was wondering if there was some max boost applied to the surrounds so they DON'T sound overly bright because they are above the listening position.

Oh, when I said in my original post that breaking glass or bullets sound "bright," I should have said "realistically bright." Like you would expect them to sound, neither muffled nor "overly bright."
bluesky636 is offline  
post #16939 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 12:03 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 LarryChanin View Post

Hi Todd,

As has been mentioned measuring bass levels with an SPL meter is subject to considerable variation. I have to believe that the small variation you measured has nothing to do with Dynamic Volume, but rather those random variations in levels you would experience even if Audyssey were off.

Larry

Hey Larry,

You could very well be right about that. I can easily hear a 2dB difference in the level of my satellites in the upper frequencies, I'm not sure about the lower frequencies the sub produces, I suspect it would be much more difficult. I really enjoy this thread as I love what Audyssey does for me and could very well be in over my head a bit, but that's a good thing, over time it will expand my horizon's.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16940 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 12:43 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 bluesky636 View Post

If you are taking these measurements using the AVR's internally generated test tones, I would think that you would see no change in level of any significance. Aren't the test tones generated WITHOUT any influence by Audyssey?

Now if you were taking your measurements with real world material (music, movie soundtrack, etc.) I would definitely expect to see a difference in the measured level. The purpose of Dynamic Volume is to reduce the dynamic range of what you are listening to. It does so, in simple terms, by REDUCING the peak levels of the audio while at the same time INCREASING the low levels of the audio. So although the difference between the loudest and quietest parts of the signal are reduced, the AVERAGE level of the signal may actually increase slightly. And since the SPL meter is measuring average levels, this would be seen as a slight increase in level on the SPL meter.

That's my theory, anyway.

Hey bluesky,

The measurements that I'm referring to are taken using test tones from Stereophile Test CD 1. I really like your line of thought on the average level being higher with dynamic volume, but I'm not sure it applies to my results as I would believe that these warble tones of 20 seconds per frequency should be void of any variation in level IMHO.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #16941 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 01:13 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

If you are taking these measurements using the AVR's internally generated test tones, I would think that you would see no change in level of any significance. Aren't the test tones generated WITHOUT any influence by Audyssey?

Now if you are taking your measurements with real world material (music, movie soundtrack, etc.) I would definitely expect to see a difference in the measured level. The purpose of Dynamic Volume is to reduce the dynamic range of what you are listening to. It does so, in simple terms, by REDUCING the peak levels of the audio while at the same time INCREASING the low levels of the audio. So although the difference between the loudest and quietest parts of the signal are reduced, the AVERAGE level of the signal may actually increase slightly. And since the SPL meter is measuring average levels, this would be seen as a slight increase in level on the SPL meter.

That's my theory, anyway.

Hi,

You make a good point about the possibility of higher average levels with Dynamic Volume.

However, bass measurements even with internally generated test signals, are very susceptible to level changes due to slight differences in microphone position. So unless the two measurements are precisely in the same position, the small differences in levels could also be attributed to a difference in microphone location, or even slight changes in ambient noise between measurements.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16942 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 05:24 AM
nek
Senior Member
 
nek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Birmingham United Kingdom
Posts: 233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have the Nad T785 AV receiver and Parasound Halo A51 powering 4 Mission 780 Argonaut floor standing loud speakers. These vintage speakers are legendary for their forward, bright detailed sound.

The issue I have is when I calibrate the speakers using audyssey - whilst the bass is dialed in perfect with my twin paradigm Servo 15's, there is a distinct loss of detail/high frequency through my argonauts - so much so that its almost unlistenable using the audyssey configuration

Any ideas??

Ken
nek is offline  
post #16943 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 05:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 84
Yep, you just need to say a whole lot more about your room, speaker placement, following the Audyssey Setup Guide, Audyssey settings (distances, levels), etc.
Gary J is online now  
post #16944 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 05:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by nek View Post

I have the Nad T785 AV receiver and Parasound Halo A51 powering 4 Mission 780 Argonaut floor standing loud speakers. These vintage speakers are legendary for their forward, bright detailed sound.

The issue I have is when I calibrate the speakers using audyssey - whilst the bass is dialed in perfect with my twin paradigm Servo 15's, there is a distinct loss of detail/high frequency through my argonauts - so much so that its almost unlistenable using the audyssey configuration

Any ideas??

Ken



Yep, you just need to say a whole lot more about your room, speaker placement, following the Audyssey Setup Guide, Audyssey settings (distances, levels), etc.
Gary J is online now  
post #16945 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 07:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
Napoleon D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Hi,

It's not that uncommon for a bookshelf speaker placed near the wall to roll off at 40-50 Hz because of the nearby wall reinforcement. You are doing the right thing to be moving the crossover up higher so that more content can be sent to the sub where the MultEQ filters have more resolution. But, I think what you are hearing is in the preference domain. There is very likely a 50-80 Hz bump (boom) that is being flattened and you are so accustomed to it that you "miss it". The recommendation we always give is: listen for a while to see if you start noticing details in the bass that were being masked by the one-note boom.

Thanks Chris. The curious thing is that I had an all 5 speakers toed-in to listener setup, which creates a narrow but tight sound-stage. I typically sit a few feet to the left off axis, as i do in theaters - a subconscious thing I guess When I sit here this I feel less of the re-directed bass even though a mic location was placed here. However when I re-arrange the L and R speakers and angle them out a bit more to aim at either end of the couch, and re-run Audyssey, suddenly the bass comes back. I would have assumed taking a measurement at that seat slightly off-axis would have given the same amount of bass no matter how the speakers are aimed, but it seemed to take the angling out of the L and R to accomplish this. Does this make sense? Either way I thought it was interesting how all this interacted.
Napoleon D is offline  
post #16946 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nek View Post

I have the Nad T785 AV receiver and Parasound Halo A51 powering 4 Mission 780 Argonaut floor standing loud speakers. These vintage speakers are legendary for their forward, bright detailed sound.

The issue I have is when I calibrate the speakers using audyssey - whilst the bass is dialed in perfect with my twin paradigm Servo 15's, there is a distinct loss of detail/high frequency through my argonauts - so much so that its almost unlistenable using the audyssey configuration

Any ideas??

Ken

Hi Ken,

The most common reason for this is that measurements are being taken too far off axis from the speakers. This usually happens if measurements are taken in seats up against the side walls for example. There is a guide that you can read in the first post in this thread that talks about optimal mic placement. The 6-8 measurements should be concentrated in the center of the listening area.

The second reason could be preference vs reference. The Audyssey curve provides the necessary translation needed to listen to movie content in a smaller home listening room. Your NAD also provides a target curve from NAD that also includes a small amount of high frequency roll off. The Flat curve does not have any roll off and is sometimes useful for music listening.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #16947 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 07:36 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Yep, you just need to say a whole lot more about your room, speaker placement, following the Audyssey Setup Guide, Audyssey settings (distances, levels), etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Yep, you just need to say a whole lot more about your room, speaker placement, following the Audyssey Setup Guide, Audyssey settings (distances, levels), etc.

pepar is offline  
post #16948 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 07:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post


double
Gary J is online now  
post #16949 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 08:43 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

That's why I was wondering if there was some max boost applied to the surrounds so they DON'T sound overly bright because they are above the listening position.

Hi,

Chris' advice has been to avoid placing microphone locations outside the spacing of the main speakers to avoid extreme off-axis measurements and the possible resulting over compensation by MultEQ. So I believe its logical to conclude that there isn't a constraint placed on maximum boost on the mains. I'm guessing that the surround channels are not handled any differently.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #16950 of 71744 Old 07-31-2009, 09:54 AM
Senior Member
 
av-ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

...As a first step, I would recommend taking 6-8 measurements with RABOS in the same places where you had the Audyssey mic and then taking an average across those measurements....

Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

...it could be cool if you could post the "averaged" response graph for the 8 measurements, for each of the three situations (no correction, MultEQ XT only, MultEQ XT + PEQ)

Here are the requested measurements/graphs (I even finally decided to use Excel to manage and graph the data). Note that:
  • I used an Infinity RABOS test meter and CD with 1/8th octave test tones.
  • All tests were at the same -14dB master volume needed to keep the RABOS meter within its range.
  • All tests were done with DynamicEQ off and with the same -4dB sub level as that chosen by my Denon 3808's auto setup.
So without further ado...


The following is also the measurements that originally led me to post my concerns (and request for assistance) on this thread:


I'll let the data speak for itself though it doesn't seem to tell me anything that I didn't already think from my primary listening position measurements. I am not here to bash MultEQ XT (I bought my 3808 because it appeared to be the best hope to replace my BFD and has done wonders in EQ'ing my speakers). I still have that as a goal, but I have no idea what to do next given the above and that my ears tell me to keep the BFD (even though the -12dB dip in the 2nd graph is a PEQ artifact that I can't get rid of, so even keeping my BFD is looking like a bad idea). So, what's next in my efforts to make MultEQ work in correcting my sub's response (or to convince me that it is already working)?
av-ra is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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

    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page


    Forum Jump: 

    Posting Rules  
    You may not post new threads
    You may not post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are Off
    Pingbacks are Off
    Refbacks are Off