"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 953 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #28561 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 01:34 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mactavish View Post

You are so hardcore. Just don't hold your iPhone 4 the wrong way! Look forward to your "floor coverage"!

I have the rugged rubber baby buggy bumper.
pepar is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #28562 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 02:49 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: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bazzy View Post


...I would like to ask if one can run DSX Wides & Dolby Pro-Logic IIz Heights together (as many affordable receivers offer both formats) & the user can then benefit by being able to employ both the Wide & Height channels at the same time...

Hi Bazzy,
The reason for not running Wides and Heights together is not just a processing limitation. It is a limitation in the number of amplifier channels. The units that can only run Wides or Heights don't have the amp channels needed to support this.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #28563 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 04:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Cam Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ & Los Angeles,CA, USA
Posts: 2,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Has anyone had cause to add a Sub Equalizer to their system after a MultEQ Pro calibration has already been accomplished with an installer-ready product? It seems that this could be a reasonably common occurence as an afterthought embellishment. Is it a necessity to re-accomplish the Pro calibration after the Sub EQ is added and calibrated, or can the Sub Equalizer calibration be done? A brief explanation for that necessity would be interesting.
Cam Man is offline  
post #28564 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 04:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bazzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Hi Bazzy,
The reason for not running Wides and Heights together is not just a processing limitation. It is a limitation in the number of amplifier channels. The units that can only run Wides or Heights don't have the amp channels needed to support this.

Hi Chris!

Many thanks for the input! If I were to buy a 9.1 receiver & not use any "Back Surround" speakers, could I then be able to use DSX Wides & DPLIIz Heights as I would have enough channels?

Many Thanks!

Bazzy!
Bazzy is offline  
post #28565 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 05:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 23,887
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Liked: 975
No! DSX and PLIIz are mutually exclusive. If the receiver can't do wides+heights simultaneously, it can't do it... no way to "trick" it

The real limitation is how the manufacturer chose to implement things, if it COULD do wide+height simultaneously, then you would just use DSX for both!!

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #28566 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 05:15 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: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bazzy View Post

...If I were to buy a 9.1 receiver & not use any "Back Surround" speakers, could I then be able to use DSX Wides & DPLIIz Heights as I would have enough channels?

Hi Bazzy,

Audyssey DSX and PLIIz are completely different in how they create the content for the additional channels. If you want Wides and Heights simultaneously, then you can use some of the new AVRs coming out--but, you will have to give up on the (less useful) Back Surrounds.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #28567 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 05:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsoko2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 4,315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Has anyone had cause to add a Sub Equalizer to their system after a MultEQ Pro calibration has already been accomplished with an installer-ready product? It seems that this could be a reasonably common occurence as an afterthought embellishment. Is it a necessity to re-accomplish the Pro calibration after the Sub EQ is added and calibrated, or can the Sub Equalizer calibration be done? A brief explanation for that necessity would be interesting.

I had a Pro install done by a installer and later down the road bought the Audyssey Sub EQ. You have to run the Sub EQ first, then redo the MultEQ or Pro in the reciever/prepro second. Now, everytime you move something or change speaker postion in the room, MultiEQ has to be redone all over again. I bought the Installer Kit and saved a bundle instead of paying a installer every time. Now, you can go with other Sub EQ systems and just go with the Audyssey program that came generic with the revciever or prepro. What ever way go go with all of this, you run the Sub EQ first, then the reciever EQ second.

Bill
bsoko2 is offline  
post #28568 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 05:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Cam Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ & Los Angeles,CA, USA
Posts: 2,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

I had a Pro install done by a installer and later down the road bought the Audyssey Sub EQ. You have to run the Sub EQ first, then redo the MultEQ or Pro in the reciever/prepro second. Now, everytime you move something or change speaker postion in the room, MultiEQ has to be redone all over again. I bought the Installer Kit and saved a bundle instead of paying a installer every time. Now, you can go with other Sub EQ systems and just go with the Audyssey program that came generic with the revciever or prepro. What ever way go go with all of this, you run the Sub EQ first, then the reciever EQ second.

Bill

Thanks Bill. I have always heard this is true, but didn't know why. Maybe Chris will explain...if for our curiosity/entertainment, if nothing else.
Cam Man is offline  
post #28569 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 06:16 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: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Thanks Bill. I have always heard this is true, but didn't know why. Maybe Chris will explain...if for our curiosity/entertainment, if nothing else.

I'd be happy to explain, but I'm not sure which part of Bill's answer you are asking about.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #28570 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 07:25 PM
Member
 
BobbyBobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello folks, I have an issue I hope I can get more guidance with. I have a Denon 1610, I've run Audyssey a few times, and I think the dips and spikes in my frequency response are kinda bad. I've made measurements with a db meter and obviously my ears here the uneveness. I've done slow sine sweeps and also heard bass is music sounding peaky.

I've followed the tutorial on page 191, and done more reading to try and solve this, but I don't know what I'm missing (or if I'm just asking too much of Audyssey). My sub is corner loaded and it's not going to be very feasible to move it. I do have a fairly large room (~3840 cu ft) and it's open to another room. I'm not sure if that could effect my search for a fairly flat frequency response. But also, my wavey response extends into the midbass area as well (80-250) and possibly beyond.

[QUOTE3. Audyssey recommends that all speakers be set to Small (i.e. not Full Band) by selecting a crossover frequency. This will re-direct the frequencies below the crossover point to the subwoofer, resulting in improved headroom for the main amplifier and 8x higher MultEQ filter resolution in the subwoofer channel (e.g. flatter bass).
a. Setting the speakers to Small with a 60 Hz - 80 Hz crossover is a good starting point, assuming the post-calibration crossover setting is 60 Hz or lower.][/quote]

The only thing I wonder about here is my front speakers were set to crossover at 40 hz after the Audyssey auto setup. I may not be understanding this correctly, but is that possibly too low and causing some issues here?
BobbyBobo is offline  
post #28571 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 07:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
warlord260's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: kent,wa.
Posts: 1,350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It is good that audyssey found your fronts at 40 hz. That means you can move them up to 80 hz no problem. You can raise the crossover, just cant lower it. As for issues at 40 hz you need to let the greater rez of the sub filter in audyssey do its thing by giving it more to work with.
warlord260 is offline  
post #28572 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 08:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,839
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 249 Post(s)
Liked: 650
So back on the MultEQ XT 32 discussion, how will this new technology interact with the sub equalizers many of us already have in place? Does it really change anything? Or does it make the sub equalizer obsolete?
AustinJerry is offline  
post #28573 of 71921 Old 07-09-2010, 09:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
warlord260's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: kent,wa.
Posts: 1,350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

So back on the MultEQ XT 32 discussion, how will this new technology interact with the sub equalizers many of us already have in place? Does it really change anything? Or does it make the sub equalizer obsolete?

It would seem to me, to be able to render something obsolete would depend on the price of the new technology relative to the price of what one already has.
warlord260 is offline  
post #28574 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 03:17 AM
Senior Member
 
errivera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Hi Bazzy,

Audyssey DSX and PLIIz are completely different in how they create the content for the additional channels. If you want Wides and Heights simultaneously, then you can use some of the new AVRs coming out--but, you will have to give up on the (less useful) Back Surrounds.


I understand the manufacturers wanting to push additional channels on the consumer as they have merchandise to sell (amps, receivers, pre/pros, DVDs, etc) but I personally have found a well designed 5.1 system to be more than adequate. Recently however, I tried 7.1 at home and found that the effects on the rear channels (with well recorded material using PLIIx) is incredible. I would not consider the 'Back Surrounds' as being 'less useful' at all.

Although DSX (I have not experienced it yet) appears to make a convincing argument, I'm not one to jump on every new band-wagon that presents itself. The fact that DSX is not a 'standard' (like THX, Dolby and their variations within the movie recording community) raises my brow.

Audyssey equalization is a great tool but we will have to see where DSX is in a few years. It may just go wayside like so many other proprietary soundfield enhancement algorithms have in years past. I do wish you luck, Chris; you're a hard working, intelligent individual but I will wait to see how this all gets sorted out.

Just my opinion.
errivera is offline  
post #28575 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 04:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by errivera View Post

I understand the manufacturers wanting to push additional channels on the consumer as they have merchandise to sell (amps, receivers, pre/pros, DVDs, etc) but I personally have found a well designed 5.1 system to be more than adequate. Recently however, I tried 7.1 at home and found that the effects on the rear channels (with well recorded material using PLIIx) is incredible. I would not consider the 'Back Surrounds' as being 'less useful' at all.

Although DSX (I have not experienced it yet) appears to make a convincing argument, I'm not one to jump on every new band-wagon that presents itself. The fact that DSX is not a 'standard' (like THX, Dolby and their variations within the movie recording community) raises my brow.

Audyssey equalization is a great tool but we will have to see where DSX is in a few years. It may just go wayside like so many other proprietary soundfield enhancement algorithms have in years past. I do wish you luck, Chris; you're a hard working, intelligent individual but I will wait to see how this all gets sorted out.

Just my opinion.

I basically agree with all of this especially when using dipoles/bipoles to diffuse the sound. It's not like wides and heights (back surrounds as well) are adding discrete channels as opposed to derived. Back surrounds have been around for a while now and I don't see the studios in a rush to add many true 7.1 discrete channel recordings.
Gary J is offline  
post #28576 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 05:51 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by errivera View Post

I understand the manufacturers wanting to push additional channels on the consumer as they have merchandise to sell (amps, receivers, pre/pros, DVDs, etc) but I personally have found a well designed 5.1 system to be more than adequate. Recently however, I tried 7.1 at home and found that the effects on the rear channels (with well recorded material using PLIIx) is incredible. I would not consider the 'Back Surrounds' as being 'less useful' at all.

Although DSX (I have not experienced it yet) appears to make a convincing argument, I'm not one to jump on every new band-wagon that presents itself. The fact that DSX is not a 'standard' (like THX, Dolby and their variations within the movie recording community) raises my brow.

Audyssey equalization is a great tool but we will have to see where DSX is in a few years. It may just go wayside like so many other proprietary soundfield enhancement algorithms have in years past. I do wish you luck, Chris; you're a hard working, intelligent individual but I will wait to see how this all gets sorted out.

Just my opinion.

Since I have had Blu-ray as my source, I have not applied any "listening modes" to the lossless audio like I had with DVD's. So, only BD's with the rare 7.1 DTS-HD MA have used my rear surrounds. I never A/B'd any of them with Neural THX on or off, or any other mode that would have derived rear channels but - and here's my point - I never thought that anything was missing either. And my movie watching for the longest time consisted of watching my "classics", i.e. movies that I had watched over and over on DVD.

Just my opinion.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #28577 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 06:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Cam Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ & Los Angeles,CA, USA
Posts: 2,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

I'd be happy to explain, but I'm not sure which part of Bill's answer you are asking about.

Hi Chris, well let me take the opportunity to ask for a little primer on why we always do the Pro calibration last...which will probably also answer why it needs to be re-done if a Sub EQ is added down the road of a Pro calibration. I would presume that doing it this way permits higher resolution filtering of the rest of the spectrum and better crossover predicitions since Pro doesn't see any need for any filtering in the LF. Did I correctly answer my own question?
Cam Man is offline  
post #28578 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 07:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bazzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

No! DSX and PLIIz are mutually exclusive. If the receiver can't do wides+heights simultaneously, it can't do it... no way to "trick" it

The real limitation is how the manufacturer chose to implement things, if it COULD do wide+height simultaneously, then you would just use DSX for both!!

Hi Batpig!

Thanks for the input - you are always very helpful! You are very correct - these new formats are not very well implemented by the brands imho as one even though the receivers may have both DSX & DPLIIiz - in reality, one is forced to make a choice in choosing one over the other & there may be many occasions when a user prefers one over the other depending on content & they will not be able to choose or compare with the vast majority of receivers out there today.

OK, now I know one cannot make combined use of DSX Wides & DPLIIz at the same time, I take it there would be no issues if one were to hook up speakers for wides & heights & then choose either DSX Wide OR DPLIIz (but not both)?

I take your point about using DSX Wides & Heights if one had the option but the reason I enquired was that having read user reviews of the two formats, it seems some prefer DSX Heights & others prefer DPLIIz Heights so I guess it is down to personal choice & content suitability & it would have been very nice to have been able to compare between the two & choose the best preferred format at any given time - currently, one of the formats will be never be used as the use of it precludes the use of the other which seems silly to me anyway!

Bazzy!
Bazzy is offline  
post #28579 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 08:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bazzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Hi Bazzy,

Audyssey DSX and PLIIz are completely different in how they create the content for the additional channels. If you want Wides and Heights simultaneously, then you can use some of the new AVRs coming out--but, you will have to give up on the (less useful) Back Surrounds.

Hi Chris,

Many thanks for the reply - I will not be running back surrounds so I take it that in order to run DSX Wides & Heights, I will need a 9.1 receiver? If so, can you confirm that the Onkyo TX-NR1008 offers DSX in both Wides & Heights? Any others you know of that may be due out shortly but are more mid range tahn high end?

Many Thanks,

Bazzy!
Bazzy is offline  
post #28580 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 08:08 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,405
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Thanks Bill. I have always heard this is true, but didn't know why. Maybe Chris will explain...if for our curiosity/entertainment, if nothing else.

(1) The subEQ has more facilities and filter resolution for the sub(s) than does MultEQ XT, even with Pro calibration.
(2) The SubEQ is downstream from MultEQ XT and cannot know what the latter does. OTOH, MultEQ XT calibration sees the system only through the downstream SubEQ and needs that fully calibrated for it to do its own calibration in a meaningful way. (If the SubEQ is bypassed for MultEQ and then reintroduced, there will be duplicate and excessive filtration.)

Not Chris.

Kal Rubinson

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

Kal Rubinson is offline  
post #28581 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 08:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Cam Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ & Los Angeles,CA, USA
Posts: 2,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

(1) The subEQ has more facilities and filter resolution for the sub(s) than does MultEQ XT, even with Pro calibration.
(2) The SubEQ is downstream from MultEQ XT and cannot know what the latter does. OTOH, MultEQ XT calibration sees the system only through the downstream SubEQ and needs that fully calibrated for it to do its own calibration in a meaningful way. (If the SubEQ is bypassed for MultEQ and then reintroduced, there will be duplicate and excessive filtration.)

Not Chris.

Very good. Thanks for that, Kal.
Cam Man is offline  
post #28582 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 10:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gooddoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 145
I wonder if any of the new MultEQ32 receivers will implement Auddyssey calibration for dual subs? I was literally on the order page for a SVS sub EQ when I saw the announcements for 32. It appears at this point the only advantage of the sub EQ is the time domain processing for multiple subs. I am curious as to the SQ difference between time domain EQ and non-time domain EQ at the same filter resolution? It appears I will have to wait a while to flesh this out. I would rather put the sub EQ money towards a new AVR with 32 if possible as my current AVR lacks all the new goodies such as dynamic volume and DSX capabilities.

JTR Noesis 212HT x 3 (LCR) powered by Lab Gruppen 10000Q amp
CHT SHO-10 x 4 (sides and rear) powered by Denon 4311
JTR S2 x 2
CHT 18.1 x2
Oppo BDP103D bluray player/Sonos/PS3
Gooddoc is offline  
post #28583 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 10:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Cam Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ & Los Angeles,CA, USA
Posts: 2,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Sure, maybe he's waiting 'til it's only you and me online to answer.


Because sub channel filter resolution is now 128x with MultEQ XT, while main channel filter resolution is 16x. Let's see ... MultEQ XT 32... what could it be?

Jeff

Any chance that "32" just refers to the use of 32-bit DACs?
Cam Man is offline  
post #28584 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 10:48 AM
Member
 
GregHolt12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I posted this in another thread but thought this thread might be more appropriate. I am attempting to caibrate my new speakers with my Denon 790 Audyssey and am having some issues I have not experienced before.

1 - I ran the calibration from listening position 1 and went ahead and calculated and got some strange readings for my crossovers (my surrounds which are smaller and less powerful speakers are coming back with a lower crossover than my mains. Ant the same thing with my mains and center.

2 - I decided to run through the calibration for all listening positions. The first listening position runs fine but when I get to the second, on random speakers the calibration noise (not sure the technical term) is either very inaudable from certian speakers or Audyssey does not pick the speaker up on that channel and gives me an error (even though it did from the first listening position)

I am stumped and any advice would be great. Thanks.

ÂYes, my good man, IÂll have the milk steak, boiled over hard, and your finest jelly beans ... raw. - Charlie Kelly
GregHolt12 is offline  
post #28585 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 11:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 23,887
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Liked: 975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Any chance that "32" just refers to the use of 32-bit DACs?

no, because we already know that it refers the fact that MultEQ XT 32 has 32 times the filter resolution of MultEQ XT. Read back a few pages, Chris finally spilled the beans

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #28586 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 11:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 23,887
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Liked: 975
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregHolt12 View Post

I posted this in another thread but thought this thread might be more appropriate. I am attempting to caibrate my new speakers with my Denon 790 Audyssey and am having some issues I have not experienced before.

1 - I ran the calibration from listening position 1 and went ahead and calculated and got some strange readings for my crossovers (my surrounds which are smaller and less powerful speakers are coming back with a lower crossover than my mains. Ant the same thing with my mains and center.

2 - I decided to run through the calibration for all listening positions. The first listening position runs fine but when I get to the second, on random speakers the calibration noise (not sure the technical term) is either very inaudable from certian speakers or Audyssey does not pick the speaker up on that channel and gives me an error (even though it did from the first listening position)

I am stumped and any advice would be great. Thanks.

Greg - Saw your post in the other thread:

1) there is absolutely nothing "strange" about your crossover results, they actually look totally normal. All of your DT's are smallish speakers and roll off in the 100Hz range, so the ultimate decision of 90 vs 100 vs 110 is going to be more about room acoustics influencing that low end...

2) this IS "strange"! that is not normal Audyssey function, I assure you. sounds like you need to reset the microprocessor and then, if the problem is still happening, assume the receiver may be defective

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #28587 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 11:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

Now, everytime you move something or change speaker postion in the room, MultiEQ has to be redone all over again.

I put in an enhancement request to Audyssey to allow running it on a per speaker basis; there's no intrinsic need to recalculate all of the filters if you're just changing a pair of surrounds or the subwoofer.

This would save lots of time, especially in the latter case where you may want to experiment with sub placement.

If others chime in maybe this would happen sooner rather than later/at all.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #28588 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 12:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsoko2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 4,315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Since I have had Blu-ray as my source, I have not applied any "listening modes" to the lossless audio like I had with DVD's. So, only BD's with the rare 7.1 DTS-HD MA have used my rear surrounds. I never A/B'd any of them with Neural THX on or off, or any other mode that would have derived rear channels but - and here's my point - I never thought that anything was missing either. And my movie watching for the longest time consisted of watching my "classics", i.e. movies that I had watched over and over on DVD.

Just my opinion.

Jeff

I use the rear speakers when watching any movie, BD & SD. My room is large (28X18X8 to 14 with sloped ceiling with a ridge down the middle) and the L & R and the rear surrounds (large monitors) are 9 ft from the seat. Rear surounds are located 8 ft up on the wall and L & R surrounds are 6 ft up from the floor. The rears fill the space better then with just using L & R surrounds. Others have come and listened and have came to the same conclusion as I.

Bill
bsoko2 is offline  
post #28589 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 12:45 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

I use the rear speakers when watching any movie, BD & SD. My room is large (28X18X8 to 14 with sloped ceiling with a ridge down the middle) and the L & R and the rear surrounds (large monitors) are 9 ft from the seat. Rear surounds are located 8 ft up on the wall and L & R surrounds are 6 ft up from the floor. The rears fill the space better then with just using L & R surrounds. Others have come and listened and have came to the same conclusion as I.

Bill

I'd speculate that it is room-dependent, system-dependent and preference-dependent.

I was just saying that, without consciously deciding to not use my rear surrounds, the effect of not applying a 7.1 listening mode to native 5.1 TrueHD/DTS-HD MA content was that they were not in use. And I did not "miss" them while watching very familiar movies which I had only ever watched with THX Ultra2 7.1 applied.

We'll have to wait and "see" how this develops going forward, but I get the sense that rear surrounds will be more in the "cold dead hands" category than the "I don't need 'em" one.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #28590 of 71921 Old 07-10-2010, 12:56 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

I put in an enhancement request to Audyssey to allow running it on a per speaker basis; there's no intrinsic need to recalculate all of the filters if you're just changing a pair of surrounds or the subwoofer.

This would save lots of time, especially in the latter case where you may want to experiment with sub placement.

If others chime in maybe this would happen sooner rather than later/at all.

IMO, if there is no technical reason why it could not be implemented there might be a chance they'd do something like that with "Pro" but I doubt it will ever appear on a consumer product. Differentiation.

Jeff
pepar 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