"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 591 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #17701 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 12:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by soul embrace View Post

i've ran the set up for my denon 1610 and i have some questions: am i suppose to leave the high cut knob set to the highest setting and the volume at half way after i run the test?

Did you miss my response yesterday morning?
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post17043549

ps no need to quote the guide here, we all have it memorized

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17702 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 12:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
soul embrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: decatur, alabama
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

Did you miss my response yesterday morning?
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post17043549

ps no need to quote the guide here, we all have it memorized


yes i did, i scan all the post after i posted it last night and didn't see it.
thanks for the reply


Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

The high cut knob is never moved from the highest setting. Once you set the volume knob, you leave it there (unless you need to adjust it and rerun Audyssey). If the sub reads 2' further than the physical distance, that is nothing to worry about. How's it sound?

ok

i've put the volume knob and high cut knob back to where it was in the first step. i will rerun audyssey tonight since i put the knobs back in the original setting before i finished doing the test.

right now i think it sounds pretty good, i watched the dark knight and everything sounded great but there are a few scenes where the sub sounded like it might have bottom out just for a second, so i'm hoping when i re run audyssey it will fix that problem....

"I believe, that whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you....Stranger" - Joker
soul embrace is offline  
post #17703 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by tratliff View Post

Excellent points. Yes, the center speaker does have a horizontal mid/tweeter layout. My installer cautioned me about that but I didn't want to got with a much larger, more expensive speaker. My fault.
Would you increase the center channel level?

Honestly, I would throw the center away and just run phantom rather than using a toppled MTM. A well set-up hard center is a great improvement on everything. (Well set-up = identical to the mains, and used in the same orientation at the same elevation.) I've yet to hear any other center channel configuration sound acceptable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

What about a horizontal midrange/tweeter hurts dialog intelligbility? Is the problem mainly for the off-axis seats?

What people don't seem to understand is that one doesn't just hear the direct on-axis sound. In fact, the quote-unquote "on axis lobe" is a very small portion of what one actually hears in a regular room (as opposed to an anechoic chamber). And a toppled-MTM has exactly the wrong dispersion pattern for use in a domestic living room. It has very wide vertical dispersion, which means one gets all kinds of early reflections off of nearby furniture, protruding stands, TV frames, and so on that indelibly muddy the sound. But a toppled-MTM also has very erratic horizontal dispersion, which leads to sonic issues right at the frequencies most prevalent in male voices. So the bottom line is, stay away from toppled-MTM centers if fidelity to the source material is even at the bottom of one's list of goals.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #17704 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by tratliff View Post

This isn't really an audyssey question. . but.

Dialog during movies is often hard to understand. It is the common problem where you have to turn up the volume during soft talking parts of the movie.

I thought Audyssey would help this issue. While Audyssey certaintly has greatly improved the overall sound, it hasn't helped the dialog problem.

I currently have Integra receiver and Triad speakers. Was previusly using a different reciever with same results. I have had a professional Audyssey calibration (MultEQ Pro) and tried regular consumer MultEQ - both with similar results.

My center channel is below the display, 25 inches from the floor. While not ideal, I wouldn't think the position would have that much of a negative impact on dialog would it?

If I bump up the level of the center channel that may help the dialog intelligibilty problem but that would cause a lot of other problems wouldn't it?

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Hey tratliff,

Do you ever use Dynamic Volume? Dialog intelligibility is one of it's biggest reasons I use it for movie watching.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #17705 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,664
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

What people don't seem to understand is that one doesn't just hear the direct on-axis sound.

My money is on Roger Dressler, Director, Technology Strategy at Dolby Laboratories Inc., understanding what he is talking about.
Gary J is online now  
post #17706 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:22 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 195 Post(s)
Liked: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

What people don't seem to understand is that one doesn't just hear the direct on-axis sound. In fact, the quote-unquote "on axis lobe" is a very small portion of what one actually hears in a regular room (as opposed to an anechoic chamber). And a toppled-MTM has exactly the wrong dispersion pattern for use in a domestic living room. It has very wide vertical dispersion, which means one gets all kinds of early reflections off of nearby furniture, protruding stands, TV frames, and so on that indelibly muddy the sound. But a toppled-MTM also has very erratic horizontal dispersion, which leads to sonic issues right at the frequencies most prevalent in male voices. So the bottom line is, stay away from toppled-MTM centers if fidelity to the source material is even at the bottom of one's list of goals.

It's not unusual to have to make some compromises, which "toppling" an MTM certainly qualifies.
pepar is offline  
post #17707 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:23 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 195 Post(s)
Liked: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

My money is on Roger Dressler, Director, Technology Strategy at Dolby Laboratories Inc., understanding what he is talking about.

Spoil sport.
pepar is offline  
post #17708 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,664
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 99
Should I delete?
Gary J is online now  
post #17709 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:30 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 195 Post(s)
Liked: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Should I delete?

No, it's quote-unquote "too late."
pepar is offline  
post #17710 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

It's not unusual to have to make some compromises, which "toppling" an MTM certainly qualifies.

Except that it's not really a compromise, but an abject waste of money. Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question. IMO, the reason multichannel audio hasn't taken off as it should have over the past decade - because it is much more closer-to-real sounding than 2-channel when done right - is because we've been plagued by badly-designed, bad-sounding center channels that ruin the whole thing.

And regardless of who the gentleman who asked the question was, my points are substantively correct. Every measurement ever published of the polar or power response of a toppled MTM speaker shows it. And the measurements look better than the listening sounds...

Not that any of this stuff has anything to do with Audyssey, who after all don't design, make, market, or even certify speakers. (Except, I guess, for small subs or shelf systems.) Except in that even really amazing technology - which I have found MultEQ XT and Dynamic EQ to be - cannot be expected to wholly overcome fatal flaws in system design such as toppled-MTM center channels.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #17711 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:50 PM
Member
 
tratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Horseshoe Bay, TX
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddRiffic View Post

Hey tratliff,

Do you ever use Dynamic Volume? Dialog intelligibility is one of it's biggest reasons I use it for movie watching.

I use MultEQ XT (of course) and Dynamic EQ. I haven't used Dynamic Volume because I didn't want to compress the intended dynamic range of the movie's audio. But now that I think about it, if I'm raising and lowering the volume that's what I'm doing anyway. I turn on Dynamic Volume and give it a try. Thanks.
tratliff is offline  
post #17712 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:56 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 DS-21 View Post

Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question.

Hi,

Well, at least we can agree that a phantom image is a serious compromise from a physical center channel speaker.

So, spacing the drivers horizontally a few inches in a toppled-MTM arrangment is going to sound much worse than spacing the drivers horizontally several feet in the case of a phantom stereo image? Why would that be?

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #17713 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 02:57 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 195 Post(s)
Liked: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

Except that it's not really a compromise, but an abject waste of money. Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question. IMO, the reason multichannel audio hasn't taken off as it should have over the past decade - because it is much more closer-to-real sounding than 2-channel when done right - is because we've been plagued by badly-designed, bad-sounding center channels that ruin the whole thing.

Everyone draws the line at a different place depending on one's situation. You obviously have strong opinions - who among us doesn't? - but applying your weighting system to someone else's criteria is . . well, it makes for short discussions without ever understanding the other person's situation.

Quote:


And regardless of who the gentleman who asked the question was, my points are substantively correct. Every measurement ever published of the polar or power response of a toppled MTM speaker shows it. And the measurements look better than the listening sounds...

See above.

Quote:


Not that any of this stuff has anything to do with Audyssey, who after all don't design, make, market, or even certify speakers. (Except, I guess, for small subs or shelf systems.) Except in that even really amazing technology - which I have found MultEQ XT and Dynamic EQ to be - cannot be expected to wholly overcome fatal flaws in system design such as toppled-MTM center channels.

OK, I agree with "most" of that. Not Audyssey, though, on the design, make, etc stuff - THX does some of it. But no certification can prevent a product from being used in an unintended way.
pepar is offline  
post #17714 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 47
I think some center speakers, that are the same MTM speaker as the L and R mains, have the tweeter of the center rotated 90 deg to give better horizontal dispersion for it. Also, if the horizontal center is on a shelf or bench, it's imp to have it place forward enough so that the front on the speaker is at least an inch or 2 beyond what it's sitting on (and as said above, angled up or down toward the listeners).
millerwill is online now  
post #17715 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:26 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
jlachanc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi,
I find that while the sound is much clearer and pleasing with MULTEQ engaged is just is not quite loud enough for me, even at max volume, during action movies. If I turn off MULTEQ, it is plenty loud at -20db on the volume control.

This is the case regardless of source and I have the all source trims (Intellivolume' on the 9.9) settings maxed at +12db

I have an Integra 9.9 unit paired to an Outlaw 200 watt/ch amp running 7.1 setup. Speakers are the Axiom Epic 80 series with an EP600 sub. My room has acoustic treatments designed by one of the experts found here at AVS.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Jason

-------------------------
My build thread
jlachanc is offline  
post #17716 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:31 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 195 Post(s)
Liked: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlachanc View Post

Hi,
I find that while the sound is much clearer and pleasing with MULTEQ engaged is just is not quite loud enough for me, even at max volume, during action movies. If I turn off MULTEQ, it is plenty loud at -20db on the volume control.

This is the case regardless of source and I have the all source trims (‘Intellivolume’ on the 9.9) settings maxed at +12db

I have an Integra 9.9 unit paired to an Outlaw 200 watt/ch amp running 7.1 setup. Speakers are the Axiom Epic 80 series with an EP600 sub. My room has acoustic treatments designed by one of the experts found here at AVS.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Jason

Jason, you are probably experiencing what is being discussed here.
pepar is offline  
post #17717 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
toddRiffic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by tratliff View Post

I use MultEQ XT (of course) and Dynamic EQ. I haven't used Dynamic Volume because I didn't want to compress the intended dynamic range of the movie's audio. But now that I think about it, if I'm raising and lowering the volume that's what I'm doing anyway. I turn on Dynamic Volume and give it a try. Thanks.

Hey tratliff,

I think you'll find it very useful. My Denon AVR has 3 options for Dynamic Volume's intensity (day/evening/midnight), not sure about your Integra. Please let us know what you thing of it.
toddRiffic is offline  
post #17718 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:47 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
jlachanc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Jason, you are probably experiencing what is being discussed here.

Wow, thanks, that really sounds like the same issue. I had not heard about this one in all my searching. I will try some of his suggestions.

I have to say I'm pretty shocked by this considering the cost of this unit. But I guess I'm in the minority with this issue.

-------------------------
My build thread
jlachanc is offline  
post #17719 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Everyone draws the line at a different place depending on one's situation. You obviously have strong opinions - who among us doesn't? - but applying your weighting system to someone else's criteria is . . well, it makes for short discussions without ever understanding the other person's situation.

Actually, for the situation in question it seems that I understand it quite well: dialog intelligibility is bad, because the center channel has fatal design flaws that Audyssey's wizardry can not overcome.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #17720 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 03:53 PM
EAS
Advanced Member
 
EAS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've been looking for a new AVR for a while now and just learned about DSX. I'm intrigued because I have a spare set of the same speakers I use for my fronts that I could use for wides.

I went to the Audyssey site and searched for units with DSX and found the Onkyo TX-SR707. What's interesting is that on the Onkyo site they don't even highlight the DSX. I had to download the manual to confirm that the Audyssey site was correct and that the unit had the features.

What I'm interested in knowing is that are there any other sub $1k units coming out with DSX in the near term? The 707 looks like a great bargain, but I always like having more than one choice.

Also, I'm not experienced with how the Audyssey implementations work with each vendor. Is the consumer getting the exact same features if they include the Audyssey in the unit or are there features of DSX or MultiEQ that maybe Onkyo would expose, but Denon would not or vis a versa? I guess in a nutshell if the shopping consumer is picking AVR's based on the differentiator or Audyssey inclusion is the same feature set guaranteed?

Thanks.
EAS is offline  
post #17721 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 04:00 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 DS-21 View Post

Except that it's not really a compromise, but an abject waste of money. Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question.

Hi,

No doubt you are correct that there are off-axis problems with toppled-MTM center channels speakers, but there are also serious problems with "phantom" stereo imaging.

Here's an excerpt from Dr. Floyd Toole's recent book "Sound Reproduction: Loudspeakers and Rooms".

Quote:


18.4.2 Horizontal Center-Channel Loudspeakers

A direct-view video display is a challenge for the center loudspeaker. Some people give up in frustration and use the stereo "phantom" center. DON'T DO IT! (See section 9.1.3.) Most people use a horizontal loudspeaker system commonly configured in one of the two options shown in Figure 18.18. The simple one, often called the "midrange-tweeter-midrange" or MTM, arrangement is usually found in entry-level products but also, occasionally, in some expensive products. In this basic configuration both woofers operating in parallel, crossing over to a tweeter--a two-way design--it is not optimum because of off-axis acoustical interference. In Figure 18.18a it is seen that this interference is symmetrical, so both lateral reflections suffer from the same flaw, affecting sound quality.

These designs also show up in vertical arrangements, in which case the acoustical interference is heard after reflection from the floor and ceiling. An intermediate configuration, sometimes call the 2-1/2-way, rolls off one of the woofers at a low frequency, allowing the second unit to function as a midrange. The result is a slight improvement in overall performance, but the horizontal-plane interference is then asymmetrical and still not what is needed. The real solution is to add a midrange loudspeaker allowing both woofers to be crossed over at a frequency sufficiently low that the acoustical interference is avoided.

Dr. Toole recognizes the problems with both "phantom" stereo center images and toppled-MTM centers, but it seems to me that he is much more emphatic about avoiding the former, and presents some "workarounds" for horizontally oriented center speakers.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #17722 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 04:23 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,398
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi,

Well, at least we can agree that a phantom image is a serious compromise from a physical center channel speaker.

So, spacing the drivers horizontally a few inches in a toppled-MTM arrangment is going to sound much worse than spacing the drivers horizontally several feet in the case of a phantom stereo image? Why would that be?

Larry

Larry,

This is a pretty well-documented problem. Horizontal MTM CC's, (aka "toppled" MTM CC's), exhibit lobing and comb-filtering:
http://www.audioholics.com/education...peaker-designs

There are some other "horizontal" CC designs that are not typical MTM's which address this issue. They either use a vertical alignment of the MT in a horizontal WMTW design, or they offset the tweeter and mount the mid-woofers adjacent to each other to make them "couple". Other designs roll one mid-woofer out so it doesn't re-inforce/cancel the other one, or they use coaxial mid/tweeters. (If you are interested, I can provide examples of all these CC designs.)

As DS-21 says, 3 identical speakers, mounted at identical heights, (ear level) is the gold standard. Anything else is a compromise.

Craig

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #17723 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 04:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
goonstopher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: NJ near NYC
Posts: 4,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
This topic is probably making a ton of members (like myself) panic about their center channels.... I really can't afford to keep reading this board and haviong to buy something new
goonstopher is offline  
post #17724 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 04:50 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 craig john View Post

As DS-21 says, 3 identical speakers, mounted at identical heights, (ear level) is the gold standard. Anything else is a compromise.

Craig

Hi Craig,

Thanks for your response, but I don't believe I was disagreeing with the "gold standard". What I was questioning was DS-21's preference to use a phantom center over a real speaker, albeit a toppled-MTM.

As Jeff mentioned these compromises are best determined by the individual's particular situation.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #17725 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 05:01 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,398
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi Craig,

Thanks for your response, but I don't believe I was disagreeing with the "gold standard". What I was questioning was DS-21's preference to use a phantom center over a real speaker, albeit a toppled-MTM.

As Jeff mentioned these compromises are best determined by the individual's particular situation.

Larry

Of course... either choice is a significant compromise outside the central "sweet spot". Phantom CC "imaging" collapses outside the sweet spot. An MTM CC exhibits lobing and comb filtering outside the sweet spot. Pick your poison.

Craig

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #17726 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 05:11 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 craig john View Post

Of course... either choice is a significant compromise outside the central "sweet spot". Phantom CC "imaging" collapses outside the sweet spot. An MTM CC exhibits lobing and comb filtering outside the sweet spot. Pick your poison.

Craig

Hi Craig,

Exactly.

However, a phantom center stereo image also suffers from comb filtering outside the sweet spot in addition to seriously pulling the image off-center.

So for folks with home theaters with audience members sitting off-axis and with displays that are not acoustically transparent, it really does make sense to use a physical speaker, even if it's design is "flawed".

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #17727 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 05:30 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,398
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi Craig,

Exactly.

However, a phantom center stereo image also suffers from comb filtering outside the sweet spot in addition to seriously pulling the image off-center.

So for folks with home theaters with audience members sitting off-axis and with displays that are not acoustically transparent, it really does make sense to use a physical speaker, even if it's design is "flawed".

Larry

It's hard to say whether the bigger "problem" is collapsed imaging or unintelligible dialogue, but to get back "on-topic", Audyssey can't fix either problem... yet.

Craig

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #17728 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 05:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

No doubt you are correct that there are off-axis problems with toppled-MTM center channels speakers, but there are also serious problems with "phantom" stereo imaging.

Well, that's certainly true, though for TV/movie dialogue there's another factor keeping it perceptually front-and-center: the screen. And disagreeing with Dr. Toole about something he's studied seriously is always a bad way to go, even though it is a question of preference (rank-ordering of bad options) in this case.

(And thanks for reminding me to add his book to my amazon order today! I've been meaning to pick it up for a while.)

However, I stand by my original thought that the poster's problem with dialog intelligibility stems from that toppled-MTM center, and there is nothing Audyssey's formidable correction software can do to fix it. If nothing else, people with such problems should experiment with turning the center off and see how much that fixes things.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #17729 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 05:45 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: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by goonstopher View Post

This topic is probably making a ton of members (like myself) panic about their center channels.... I really can't afford to keep reading this board and haviong to buy something new

Doesn't worry me in the least.

If you can't afford, or your setup doesn't accomodate the so-called "gold standard," just do the best setting things up and enjoy what you have instead of fretting over what you don't have.
bluesky636 is offline  
post #17730 of 73150 Old 08-23-2009, 05:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,664
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post


However, I stand by my original thought that the poster's problem with dialog intelligibility stems from that toppled-MTM center, and there is nothing Audyssey's formidable correction software can do to fix it.

Plenty of us have similar speakers with no such complaints. I think Chris's response to the poster is a lot closer to the truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Unfortunately it has a big impact. Having the speaker so close to the floor causes a boomy midbass (around 250 Hz) and that makes voices sound chesty and difficult to understand. MultEQ helps, but fixing the location will help even more. Tilting the speaker up so that the tweeters point to your ears is a good first step if you can't move it further from the floor.

Gary J 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