"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 993 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #29761 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:13 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

Anything you care to post on what you have gleaned from that data?

Jeff

Sure, I can post the paper (or a summary) once its presented.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #29762 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:21 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 yorknh View Post

I have and Onkyo1007, external amplifiers, bi-ampable speakers, an external active crossover, and tactile transducers...my goal is to make the best use of all of this equipment and get it all to play nice.

Hi,
I highly recommend that you let the Onkyo handle the crossover duties for your sub. It is much better suited to do so in the digital domain rather than adding an external crossover. The xover you have is best suited for legacy equipment that doesn't have modern digital bass management.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #29763 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:21 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchong View Post

So what does it all mean? I'm lost, no clue what I'm looking at.

Regardless of the dimensions, always avoid sitting in the middle of the room. Beyond that, there seems to be some difference of opinion on the usefulness of the spreadsheet. Personally, I would avoid sitting where nulls are clustered. Fortunately, what yours shows is that only happens near the walls, floor and ceiling.



That's my non-professional $.02, which is free here on the thread and worth every penny of the price.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #29764 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:30 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Sure, I can post the paper (or a summary) once its presented.

Moscone in Nov?
pepar is offline  
post #29765 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 221 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Regardless of the dimensions, always avoid sitting in the middle of the room. Beyond that, there seems to be some difference of opinion on the usefulness of the spreadsheet. Personally, I would avoid sitting where nulls are clustered. Fortunately, what yours shows is that only happens near the walls, floor and ceiling.

...

That's my non-professional $.02, which is free here on the thread and worth every penny of the price.

Jeff

In most real rooms sitting in the middle isn't any better or worse than sitting somewhere else (except sitting very near to walls).
That's the problem when only looking at simulations under idealized conditions (loudspeaker in corner, perfectly rigid walls).

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is online now  
post #29766 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:32 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

Moscone in Nov?

Yup

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #29767 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:34 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 markus767 View Post

In most real rooms sitting in the middle isn't any better or worse than sitting somewhere else (except sitting very near to walls).
That's the problem when only looking at simulations under idealized conditions (loudspeaker in corner, perfectly rigid walls).

Very true. Furthermore, the spreadsheet only shows the simple axial modes and not the oblique or tangential modes that involve more than just two parallel surfaces.

Chris

Join me for Audyssey Tech Talk on Facebook here.
Follow me @ChrisAudyssey on Twitter here.
audyssey is offline  
post #29768 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 09:50 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Very true. Furthermore, the spreadsheet only shows the simple axial modes and not the oblique or tangential modes that involve more than just two parallel surfaces.

So the only thing we should take away from the spreadsheet - and then who needs the spreadsheet for it - is that we shouldn't sit close to the walls?
pepar is offline  
post #29769 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 10:08 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

In most real rooms sitting in the middle isn't any better or worse than sitting somewhere else (except sitting very near to walls).
That's the problem when only looking at simulations under idealized conditions (loudspeaker in corner, perfectly rigid walls).

So I was wrong when I posted a few pages back that home theater designers working from scratch try to place seats at fifths and sevenths along the front/back and left/right axes to avoid major peaks and nulls? I'm sure that I read that somewhere....

I know that I have read many times that speaker placement, listener location, acoustical treatments and electronic correction are the measures to take - and in that order - to improve the sound quality. Numbers one and two seem to go out the window with what I'm reading here .. now.

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #29770 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 10:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rickardl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

Very true. Furthermore, the spreadsheet only shows the simple axial modes and not the oblique or tangential modes that involve more than just two parallel surfaces.

If you switch to the "MODES" worksheet in the same spreadsheet, it will
show oblique and tangential modes as well... see pic.

But I find the realtraps calculator easier to understand and it can take meters and centimeters as input:
http://www.realtraps.com/modecalc.htm
LL
rickardl is offline  
post #29771 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 10:21 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 pepar View Post

So I was wrong when I posted a few pages back that home theater designers working from scratch try to place seats at fifths and sevenths along the front/back and left/right axes to avoid major peaks and nulls? I'm sure that I read that somewhere....

I know that I have read many times that speaker placement, listener location, acoustical treatments and electronic correction are the measures to take - and in that order - to improve the sound quality. Numbers one and two seem to go out the window with what I'm reading here .. now.

Jeff


I mentioned this before, but I think most people don't really know how extremely complicated the field of acoustics really is. Why is that?
errivera is offline  
post #29772 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 10:30 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickardl View Post

If you switch to the "MODES" worksheet in the same spreadsheet, it will
show oblique and tangential modes as well... see pic.

But I find the realtraps calculator easier to understand and it can take meters and centimeters as input:
http://www.realtraps.com/modecalc.htm

Struggling to make some sense of this, especially troubling because I *thought* that I had been making sense of it.

Somebody tell me if this is a valid observation ... with 8' x 13' x 21' the "all" (modes) line shows quite dense with peaks and nulls from ~100Hz to ~350Hz .. and that is good, right?? Seems to go to Markus' post that "In most real rooms sitting in the middle isn't any better or worse than sitting somewhere else." Of course, this is not factoring in non-rigid walls which will ... what, help?

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #29773 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 10:34 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by errivera View Post

I mentioned this before, but I think most people don't really know how extremely complicated the field of acoustics really is. Why is that?

Seems like a good argument for in-ear monitors.
pepar is offline  
post #29774 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 10:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
mcsoul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Rowlett, Tx.
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I am running dipole rear SL/SR and audyssey set the crossover to 150hz, the manufacturer states that the -3db is 100hz. I suspect the off-axis measurement (triangle corner pointed towards listening area rather than either speaker) may have been the reason for the difference. My FL/FR and center all measured perfectly per manufacturer spec.

Am I safe to manually set the SL/SR crossover to 100 or 110hz?
mcsoul is offline  
post #29775 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 11:20 AM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcsoul View Post

I am running dipole rear SL/SR and audyssey set the crossover to 150hz, the manufacturer states that the -3db is 100hz. I suspect the off-axis measurement (triangle corner pointed towards listening area rather than either speaker) may have been the reason for the difference. My FL/FR and center all measured perfectly per manufacturer spec.

Am I safe to manually set the SL/SR crossover to 100 or 110hz?

The recommendation is to NOT lower crossovers. If they are set to 150Hz, then that is what the measurements indicated that they should be based on their real world, in-room performance. If you raise crossovers, the speakers will be reproducing content outside of the correction filter that was generated for them.

And I am sure of this!

Jeff
pepar is offline  
post #29776 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 11:23 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 23,719
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcsoul View Post

I am running dipole rear SL/SR and audyssey set the crossover to 150hz, the manufacturer states that the -3db is 100hz.

what makes you think the manufacturer spec will be precisely the same as how your speakers are actually measured to perform in your room?

as stated a few posts up, acoustics is complicated leave the crossover where it is.

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #29777 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 12:28 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 rickardl View Post

If you switch to the "MODES" worksheet in the same spreadsheet, it will
show oblique and tangential modes as well... see pic.

But I find the realtraps calculator easier to understand and it can take meters and centimeters as input:
http://www.realtraps.com/modecalc.htm

Hi Rickard,

The key attribute of the first Harman WAVES worksheet is that it attempts to display the physical locations of peaks and nulls in the three dimensions of a rectangular room for the most prominent mode, the axial mode. So it may serve as a "poor man's" guide to speaker and seating placement for rectangular rooms without coupled open spaces.

The other two modal calculators only calculate modal frequencies, not the associated physical locations of the modal peaks and nulls in the room. In the case of Real Trap's calculator, ModeCalc, it only calculates the axial modes.

In contrast, the RPG folks have developed "Room Optimizer" software which claims to employ a sophisticated computational approach to aid in room design and placement issues that is superior to idealized modal calculators. Here's an excerpt from the abstract of an AES white paper.

Quote:


Room Optimizer: A Computer Program to Optimize the Placement of Listener, Loudspeakers, Acoustical Surface Treatment and Room Dimensions in Critical Listening Rooms
An automated Windows 95- program has been developed to optimize the placement of listener, loudspeakers, and acoustical surface treatment, as well as the room dimensions in critical listening rooms. The quality of the low-frequency room response is monitored in terms of the spectra received by the listener over just the early reflections (65 ms) and also over multiple (15-30) reflection orders. This amounts to monitoring the effects of comb filter coloration due to early arriving reflections and the quality of the modal response, respectively. The program uses optimization routines to achieve the flattest response over these two spectra, while satisfying displacement, symmetry, and stereo angular constraints.

This seems to support a theory I mentioned earlier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Here's another theory for you.

I guess the question is which peaks and nulls are you concerned about? There are modal peaks and nulls caused by standing waves and there are different types of peaks and nulls associated with comb filtering reflections off of room boundaries and contents in the room. The combined effects of these two phenomenon result in a composite frequency response at each microphone location.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #29778 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 12:38 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Hmmm, I wonder if we can deduce anything from "An automated Windows 95- program"?

Still, thumbs up, Larry, for the post. I'm regaining the feeling that I am standing on my feet and not swimming.

J
pepar is offline  
post #29779 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 12:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AustinJerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,724
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 629
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

I do just as you say (always have), and my RS SPL meter also registers ~ 70 dB after Aud XT. I'm just assuming that it's the inaccuracy in the meter (though it is uniform, just low) and leave things as Aud does it. Just means that my main vol is ~ -5 rather than -10 for BD's (and down ~ 5 dB for most hdtv).

My RS SPL generally measures 72 dB after the MultEQ XT calibration. What is important is that *all* channels measure 72 dB, indicating that their relative volumes are being set accurately by Audyssey. The 3 dB could easily be the SPL--it is at least 10 years old. Like you, I never make any adjustments.
AustinJerry is offline  
post #29780 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 12:49 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 24,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

My RS SPL generally measures 72 dB after the MultEQ XT calibration. What is important is that *all* channels measure 72 dB, indicating that their relative volumes are being set accurately by Audyssey. The 3 dB could easily be the SPL--it is at least 10 years old. Like you, I never make any adjustments.

Mine varies by a constant 3.5dB low on the main channel noise. It varies wildly - from moment to moment and inch to inch - for sub level measurement so I don't use it for that.
pepar is offline  
post #29781 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 12:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rickardl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi Rickard,

The key attribute of the first Harman WAVES worksheet is that it attempts to display the physical locations of peaks and nulls in the three dimensions of a rectangular room for the most prominent mode, the axial mode. So it may serve as a "poor man's" guide to speaker and seating placement for rectangular rooms without coupled open spaces.

The other two modal calculators only calculate modal frequencies, not the associated physical locations of the modal peaks and nulls in the room. In the case of Real Trap's calculator, ModeCalc, it only calculates the axial modes.

In contrast, the RPG folks have developed "Room Optimizer" software which claims to employ a sophisticated computational approach to aid in room design and placement issues that is superior to idealized modal calculators. Here's an excerpt from the abstract of an AES white paper.



This seems to support a theory I mentioned earlier.



Larry

This is getting complicated... I am sticking with the XTZ Room Analyzer which finds the actual room modes in my room.
rickardl is offline  
post #29782 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 01:02 PM
Member
 
mahm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

My RS SPL generally measures 72 dB after the MultEQ XT calibration. What is important is that *all* channels measure 72 dB, indicating that their relative volumes are being set accurately by Audyssey. The 3 dB could easily be the SPL--it is at least 10 years old. Like you, I never make any adjustments.

My 10 year old RS meter also measures each speaker at 72db after Audyssey XT calibration.

I have left the levels at that as i feel the the microphone and software within the processor must be more accurate than the RS meter

Sounds good.

My Audyssey crossover results were as follows..

Front L/R 120hz
Center 60hz (changed this to 80hz)
Surrounds 80hz
Sub LPF to LFE 120hz

My speakers are MK 5.1 sub sat. I always had them set at 80hz before Audyssey. Have to admit that the sound is more 'cinematic' with the sub at 120hz compared to 80hz
mahm is offline  
post #29783 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gamelover360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orebro, Sweden!!!
Posts: 2,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mahm View Post

My 10 year old RS meter also measures each speaker at 72db after Audyssey XT calibration.

I have left the levels at that as i feel the the microphone and software within the processor must be more accurate than the RS meter

Sounds good.

My Audyssey crossover results were as follows..

Front L/R 120hz
Center 60hz (changed this to 80hz)
Surrounds 80hz
Sub LPF to LFE 120hz

My speakers are MK 5.1 sub sat. I always had them set at 80hz before Audyssey. Have to admit that the sound is more 'cinematic' with the sub at 120hz compared to 80hz

The LPF of teh sub shouldn't make too much of an audible difference at either 80 or 120, but with some content you may be right. But of course you should always set the LPF of the sub to 120.

If you are referring to the 120 hz crossover of your L\\R speakers....well that means your sub is now taking care of everything up to 120 hz that was intended for the L\\R speakers. Whereas before the sub only handled up to 80 hz for the L\\R speakers. You may or may not run into localization problems with the sub playing 120 hz.

I find it slightly odd at the disparity between the crossovers you got recommended. I am not saying it is wrong, but are you following the recommended Audyssey measurement pattern? How many locations are you taking measurements at?
gamelover360 is offline  
post #29784 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 01:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mrjktcvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
MultEQ XT32 seems to be really cool, but I'm wondering if it takes up to 32 times longer to run...
mrjktcvs is offline  
post #29785 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 02:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,285
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Sherwood View Post

When you say "4 rigid walls..." within reason don't most of room have these?

Maybe if your walls are cinderblock or concrete.

Otherwise, both the drywall and the entire wall as a unit flex significantly enough to make the assumption of a rigid boundary that perfectly reflects low freq waves less than 100% accurate.

Over in the DIY speaker/sub forum, a guy with horn subs with strong output to 12 Hz traced a huge 14 Hz suckout to flexure of his floor.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #29786 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 02:19 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 rickardl View Post

This is getting complicated... I am sticking with the XTZ Room Analyzer which finds the actual room modes in my room.

Hi Rickard,

Yes, and as Chris mentioned many of us are constrained by existing room dimensions and we also have limited flexibility in placement of seating and speakers in that fixed space. Therefore, placement optimizers may have limited effectiveness for many of us.

However, I'd like to return to the earlier question that was posed, "Why do subjective listening results occasionally sound better with different Audyssey microphone configurations?" In addition to the theory that differing amounts of comb filtering effects at the microphone locations may effect the degree to which the modal response is corrected, I have another theory.

If we happen to have microphone locations where the majority are situated near modal peaks rather than modal nulls, then Audyssey will have more resources available to flatten the response, i.e. -20dB for peaks vs. +9dB for nulls. So the resulting composite fuzzy logic weighted response for situations with more peaks would likely be flatter than those with more nulls. Now, this assumes that all of the microphone locations are still near an actual seating location and are therefore providing relevant data. In such cases perhaps the WAVES worksheet might provide some guidance where those peaks are likely to be located for the first three axial modal frequencies for each room dimension.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #29787 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 02:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
mcsoul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Rowlett, Tx.
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjktcvs View Post

MultEQ XT32 seems to be really cool, but I'm wondering if it takes up to 32 times longer to run...

Hopefully the results will be 32x more worth the wait!

My MultEQ XT results definitely seem to be worth their wait time.

I only wish I could manually adjust the subwoofer eq instead of being stuck with whatever -3db Audyssey measures (and I wish it told me what that was). I think I could apply a little boost to my sealed subs and get them to go a few hertz deeper safely.

I also wonder if Audyssey applies a subsonic filter at the SW -3db point?
mcsoul is offline  
post #29788 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 02:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
millerwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 11,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickardl View Post

This is getting complicated... I am sticking with the XTZ Room Analyzer which finds the actual room modes in my room.

Agreed. Rooms and boundary conditions are really to complex for accurate calculations, so it's much simpler and more reliable to MEASURE the response to find resonances and nulls, etc.

This, of course, is what Audyssey does, and then decides on the time/freq filters to use.
millerwill is offline  
post #29789 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 02:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gamelover360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orebro, Sweden!!!
Posts: 2,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi Rickard,

Yes, and as Chris mentioned many of us are constrained by existing room dimensions and we also have limited flexibility in placement of seating and speakers in that fixed space. Therefore, placement optimizers may have limited effectiveness for many of us.

However, I'd like to return to the earlier question that was posed, "Why do subjective listening results occasionally sound better with different Audyssey microphone configurations?" In addition to the theory that differing amounts of comb filtering effects at the microphone locations may effect the degree to which the modal response is corrected, I have another theory.

If we happen to have microphone locations where the majority are situated near modal peaks rather than modal nulls, then Audyssey will have more resources available to flatten the response, i.e. -20dB for peaks vs. +9dB for nulls. So the resulting composite fuzzy logic weighted response for situations with more peaks would likely be flatter than those with more nulls. Now, this assumes that all of the microphone locations are still near an actual seating location and are therefore providing relevant data. In such cases perhaps the WAVES worksheet might provide some guidance where those peaks are likely to be located for the first three axial modal frequencies for each room dimension.

Larry

Just an idea Larry. I don't understand the science of this stuff like you, but I am a DIY tweaker who has engaged in much subjective listening tests involving different calibrations in my room. For me, it is all about what sounds best to my ears. My room is my room, and that is not changing. So playing around with different measurement patterns and sizes was my option....oh, and the 4 dsp's on my sub.

I found that Audyssey Pro is incredible level of repeatabilty. When I did four calibrations using the 12 point pattern.....one for each dsp...I found remarkably similar before and after graphs for all speakers (except the sub, it showed some small variation). However the performance of my subs was not uniform. Obviously Audyssey cannot negate a dsp in a sub completely...or else all 4 calibrations would sound the same in terms of the bass. And I am not saying this is a flaw of Audyssey. In my case the results were wonderful for each dsp.....but absolutely oustanding for one in particular. When I looked at the graphs, two dsp calibrations were showing ruler flat after graphs for the subs.....but my favorite dsp calibration was like a flat line with very small intermittent bumps. This dsp calibration yielded the strongest bass response, and this was most pleasing to me. The graphs showed it to be louder at 20 hz as well. So in this case it was really a matter of selecting the best dsp for my room. It was just a simple 12 point cal with Audyssey.

My point is that these dsp's can be likened to irregularities in our particular rooms dimensions, etc. Doing multiple calibrations each with some variation of the mic placement, and them comparing the results with graphs, recommended crossovers, and most importantly listening tests can yield fruit for some. This is a very practical method...and the end result is always what sounds best to you, not what should theoretically sound the best.

One more thing found cool was that I did one calibration where I did rows of measurements that went right to left in my listening area. After each row I saved the calibration, and generated graphs. So after my seven row calibration I had 7 different cal files, and 7 sets of data with which to see how mic movement in my room effected speaker responses and crossovers. It was fun and informative. It did get me thinking that it was important to not have too great a number of measurements in a certain slice of the room, etc. But everything leads back to Audyssey knows best! Damn, why are they so smart. I could have just followed the setup guide. Dohhhh! But then what would be the fun in that. I always have to learn the hard way. And the fun way.
gamelover360 is offline  
post #29790 of 71786 Old 08-17-2010, 02:54 PM
Member
 
mahm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gamelover360 View Post

The LPF of teh sub shouldn't make too much of an audible difference at either 80 or 120, but with some content you may be right. But of course you should always set the LPF of the sub to 120.

If you are referring to the 120 hz crossover of your L\\R speakers....well that means your sub is now taking care of everything up to 120 hz that was intended for the L\\R speakers. Whereas before the sub only handled up to 80 hz for the L\\R speakers. You may or may not run into localization problems with the sub playing 120 hz.

I find it slightly odd at the disparity between the crossovers you got recommended. I am not saying it is wrong, but are you following the recommended Audyssey measurement pattern? How many locations are you taking measurements at?

Hi

My MK speakers are a THX design and they have an 80hz recommended crossover. The speaker manual states that the crossover should be at 80hz, but then these speakers were made when no automated room correction technology existed at the time. Before Audyssey, i was using the 80hz setting in my old processor.

I am using all 8 positions for the readings in a very quiet room. My L/R are on stands with the tweeter 3ft off the floor and the center is in a cabinet under the tv.

Any advice welcome

mahm 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