AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
8M views 80K replies 3K participants last post by  Mike Lang 
#1 ·

I've been in several threads lately where the topic has been all about Audyssey and I've noted that there's not actually a thread specifically for it. There's one that seems to be about it, but it's titled as being about the Denon 3806. Audyssey, of course, exists in far more receivers than the 3806 nowadays, so I thought I'd throw a starter into the pool to see if people were interested in having one thread to discuss all Audyssey issues/comments/questions/stories/impressions that they've come up with from their personal receiver-experiences.


Myself, i was quite anti-Audyssey when I first came across it. My ears were quite used to what they'd had before which was very bass & treble heavy. Time has passed and I've really come to understand the strengths of Audyssey and respect the clean, flat signal that I now love and enjoy (and couldn't imagine being without). I'd love to hear from anyone else that wants to chime in or discuss issues.


Basic starter-links:


The Audyssey homepage .


The types of Audyssey implimentations in different receivers.



The Audyssey FAQ


The Audyssey setup guide


====

Audyssey tips:

Microphone Placement


The microphone has been calibrated for grazing incidence and so it must point to the ceiling during calibration. Any other orientation will produce incorrect results.


The microphone response has been calibrated to match (on average) the response of an industry-standard ¼ instrumentation microphone. It is critical to use the microphone that came with the receiver and not one from another model that may have a different calibration curve.


It is also important to place the microphone on a tripod or other stand so that it is at ear height. We strongly recommend against holding the microphone in your hand because this can give rise to low frequency handling noise that will cause the MultEQ filters to compensate by cutting those frequencies. Furthermore, it is not recommended to place the microphone on the back of the couch or recliner. If a tripod is used, care must be taken to ensure that the microphone is placed at a height just above the seat back so that reflections from the seat do not cause problems at higher frequencies.


The first microphone position is used to calculate the distances to each loudspeaker and subwoofer and set the delays. It is also used to measure and set the trims. So, it is important to place the microphone in the main listening seat for the first measurement.


MultEQ measures the background noise level in the room before playing the test signal from each speaker. For the measurements to be valid, the signal to noise ratio must be above a certain threshold. If it is not, the test signal from that speaker will repeat at a higher level. If the noise in the room happens to be higher during some of the speaker measurements, then the test signals from those speakers will sound louder than the test signals from the other speakers. This does not affect the calculation of trim levels. If the room noise is too high even after the test signals increase in level, then an error message will be displayed warning the user that measurements can not be completed.


After the first position is measured, MultEQ measures other positions in the room around the listening area. These do not necessarily have to be in each individual seat. The idea is to capture as many points around the listening area as possible so that the acoustical problems that affect the quality of sound within that area are minimized.


For example, we recommend taking 3 positions on the couch facing the TV and then 3 more positions about 3 feet in front of the couch and parallel to the first three. Measurements up against the back or side walls should be avoided.


Some loudspeakers have rather problematic responses when measured off-axis (i.e. more than 15° away from the imaginary straight line that points to the listening position). In these systems, measurements taken too far away from the center line will show a reduced high-frequency response that may result in overcorrection and thus overly bright sound. Although it is difficult to predict which type of loudspeaker will have these off-axis problems we have most often observed them in poorly-designed multiple-driver arrays that exhibit very high off-axis lobing. In these situations we recommend a tighter calibration pattern centered around the main listening position and making sure that the mic is not placed in extreme locations and certainly not outside the plane of the front main speakers.

Checking the Results


Once MultEQ calibration is complete the results are stored in the receiver memory.


It is important to activate MultEQ by selecting one of the target curves. This is not performed by default after the calibration is finished and must be selected by the user. In a THX system we recommend using the Flat setting that allows the re-equalization to work as intended. In other systems, we recommend Audyssey for movie playback and Flat for music playback. Unfortunately, the music industry does not have any mixing standards like the movie industry so some music program material may sound better with the Audyssey setting. Front Align also uses the Audyssey process, but it does not apply the filters to the two front loudspeakers. Manual is not an Audyssey setting and does not use MultEQ filters. It is a simple parametric equalizer and will be subject to all the limitations that come with parametric EQ.


Small vs. Large speakers. This is the most commonly discussed topic by MultEQ users. The first thing to understand is that it is not a personal insult to your system if your speakers were detected as Small. It simply means, that in the room they were measured the - 3 dB point was detected at 80 Hz or above. This may happen even if the manufacturer's spec shows that the speaker is capable of playing lower. In fact, there are several benefits at crossing the speakers over at 80 Hz that have to do with power handling and headroom in the bass region that will be handled by the subwoofer amplifier.


The second most common question also relates to Small vs. Large. In the Denon receivers, MultEQ will designate as Large any speaker that has a -3 dB point below 80 Hz. For non-THX speaker systems this is an arbitrary definition that often causes confusion. All it means is that the speaker will not be bass managed unless the user tells it to be. Because Audyssey is not in charge of bass management, we have to abide by the manufacturers' rules and simply report the information found by the measurements to the bass management system.


In situations where the speakers do not play significantly below 80 Hz, an additional step must be taken to make sure that there is no loss of bass information. The user must set the speaker to Small manually so that bass management is performed properly.


Polarity: MultEQ checks the absolute polarity of each loudspeaker and reports it to the user. This is simply a report and does not affect the subsequent calculations in any way. It just asks you to check the wiring to make sure it is connected properly to each speaker. Sometimes we get false alarms. This is usually because the speaker has a driver (usually the mid-range driver) wired out-of-phase intentionally to make up for some problems at the crossover region. If a phase warning is shown, it is not a cause of alarm. Simply check the cables and hit Skip if everything is fine. Again, this does not have any effect on the EQ results.


Subwoofer distance: in many active subwoofers it is not possible to defeat the low-pass filtering. That means that the pre-pro bass management filters will be on top of the low-pass filters inside the subwoofer. The built-in low-filters introduce a delay to the signal coming in (because they have poles). This delay is seen by MultEQ as acoustical delay and is reported in the results. That is why sometimes the subwoofer distance is reported to be longer than the physical measured distance. The setting should not be changed because the blend between the sub and the satellites has been designed based on this time delay.


The design constraints for MultEQ were that it (1) must fit within a small portion of the DSP so that other processes can also run and (2) it must use FIR filters because of the well-known artifacts that IIR filters cause particularly in the time domain response. As it turns out, these two requirements are contradicting. In order for FIR filters to be effective and capable of correcting to low frequencies, they must consist of several thousand coefficients (taps). The problem is that the CPU power required increases with the number of taps, hence the dilemma. What we did at Audyssey was to come up with a different way to partition the frequency axis so that we can use fewer taps and yet not completely give up on low frequency resolution (and therefore low frequency correction). This allows us to take a 512 tap filter that would normally have a resolution of 94 Hz (meaning that any peak or dip narrower than 94 Hz would be missed) and significantly improve its resolving power. The resolution of the filter actually varies continuously with frequency and starts at around 10 Hz. Does this mean that MultEQ can correct an arbitrarily narrow peak or dip at 30 Hz? Of course not. The reality is that in the MultEQ XT version found in receivers, we can correct broader features below 100 Hz better than narrow ones. For example, a lump that is half an octave wide at 50 Hz can be fixed. A narrow dip or peak that is 1/3 or 1/6 octaves wide and centered at 30 Hz will be improved, but not eliminated.


The on-screen display in the receiver has very limited graphics. Therefore it is not possible to really show what the MultEQ correction filter is doing at all frequencies. It appears to only be operating on 9 bands like a parametric equalizer, but this is not the case. What is shown is a very crude approximation to the MultEQ correction and it should not be used to read exact values of cut or boost at the 9 frequencies shown.


Furthermore, there is no display for the subwoofer filter. This doesn't mean that there is no subwoofer correction. It was not added to the display because of interface and memory considerations.


(tips by Chris, CTO, Audyssey Laboratories)
 
See less See more
#51,661 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by cavchameleon /forum/post/21773990


^^^ means referring to the above post, but my was beat with a post in-between...


The ^ is the Shift-6 key.

My Hungarian keyboard gives: "/" with Shift-6!!
Never mind but thanks!



Edit: found it, it's: Alt Gr + 3 + Space, heck with it, it's too complicated even to remember!!
^^^
 
#51,662 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by veger69 /forum/post/21773997


Correct although it was more bad memory than typo 2809ci

Yours is a fine AVR ( my son has my old 2809) but is not Pro-capable. For most circumstances I recommend upgrading to an XT32 model (like the 4311) before investing in Pro.
 
#51,664 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 /forum/post/21773861


I think that the fact that there are some 52,000 posts in this thread shows that setting up Audyssey is as much an art as a science - a black art possibly
. Your own setup procedure, while clearly very effective for you, is miles from what Audyssey say is needed, and again, I put that forward as evidence that it is from from 'perfect'.

Is it really far from perfect? Would most casual users know the difference? Didn't you say you know there's a difference but can't say one or the other set of mic positions is correct?


As long as the software doesn't give a bad result when following the guide I'd say it's giving a good result.


I refrained from using the seven letter word.



Harrison
 
#51,665 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by veger69 /forum/post/21773895


Thanks Harrison

I have a Denon AVR 2903ci with Audyssey MultiEq XT. I do not believe my receiver is compatible with the pro kit.

You are correct. However, though you may be limited to 8 mic locations, you still can avoid errors and maximize your results with knowledge gained from the Guide (which applies primarily to your case) and other postings here.


Harrison
 
#51,666 ·
Figured I would post this here, lot of the peoples opinions I want are in this thread LOL!!


Whats your opinion of this dual sub placement?


I just got another 15" sub and have placed them in the front soundstage instead of one in the front and one in the rear, what are your opionins on this. I have heard with 2 subs place at the same distance on the front wall and the other on the rear wall would be best....my questions are:


1. I have a laminate floor behind MLP, I know this will effect the bass but how bad?


2. I can not put a sub directly in the middle on the front wall, I can on the rear. I am using isolation pads just incase anyone asks.


3. Is the sound quality going to be that noticable.....I have to run a 30-40ft cable to do this and hope it is worth it LOL!!


Room Measurements: 25 ft wide and 27 ft deep and ceilings are 6.9"

Accoustics:(Figured I would list this in case it helps on a decision)


Bass traps: GIK Tri-traps fromm floor to ceiling in all 4 corners

Rear wall: 3 X 7.5" "monster bass trap and QRD diffussers

All other reflection points Ceiling, side walls done with 242 accoustic panels.

Pics of Room:


Current location:




I am standing where the other sub is basically so you can see the space I have behind MLP:

 
#51,667 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by cavchameleon /forum/post/21773928


As mentioned I tried many different mic positions, starting with a minimum of 8 and the full 32 positions. There did not seem to be anything different in the graphs after I went above 15 positions (in my room) and it really did not sound any different with more. I still did 20 just to have a good sampling of the seating area as in my diagram. At one point I actually did 15 (remove the ones not on the couch) and added another 15 in the same spots, but 5 inches above. Again, the results did not seem that different than the original 15.

Sounds like good news to me. if the results don't change much with added positions, those positions aren't picking up much in the way of significant missed problems that XT can help with.


Harrison
 
#51,668 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robc1976 /forum/post/21774319


Figured I would post this here, lot of the peoples opinions I want are in this thread LOL!!


Whats your opinion of this dual sub placement?


I just got another 15" sub and have placed them in the front soundstage instead of one in the front and one in the rear, what are your opionins on this. I have heard with 2 subs place at the same distance on the front wall and the other on the rear wall would be best....my questions are:


. . . . . . . .

robc, do you have a pro install kit? Or a receiver that will show you the corrections that Audyssey makes? Do you have some time? If so you can run tests that will tell you how each sub is doing in the listening area. I can explain how to do that if you wish.


Harrison
 
#51,669 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by hclarkx /forum/post/21774393


robc, do you have a pro install kit? Or a receiver that will show you the corrections that Audyssey makes? Do you have some time? If so you can run tests that will tell you how each sub is doing in the listening area. I can explain how to do that if you wish.


Harrison

I have a 4311ci but I dont have the pro-kit (still kicking my self for not having it yet) LOL! My 4311ci when I had 1 sub would NEVER get the distance setting...it woyld say it was 0.7ft away when it was 12 ft so I always set it to exactly what it was....had to do this with 2 subs here to.
 
#51,670 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robc1976 /forum/post/21774319



Whats your opinion of this dual sub placement?

It looks nice. However, rarely is a dual sub placement like this the best placement. Midwall front/rear or midwall left/right is the best as it smooths out the room's moes.


edit: gotta watch those moes ...
 
#51,671 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robc1976 /forum/post/21774319


Figured I would post this here, lot of the peoples opinions I want are in this thread LOL!!

Hi Rob,


I would most probably take those subs out of the front corners of the room and would put them on the sidewalls a tad bit in a line above the couch but lower than the side towers. And then would re-run Audyssey. Try to experiment!



Nice pix, BTW!
 
#51,672 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robc1976 /forum/post/21774411


I have a 4311ci but I dont have the pro-kit (still kicking my self for not having it yet) LOL! My 4311ci when I had 1 sub would NEVER get the distance setting...it woyld say it was 0.7ft away when it was 12 ft so I always set it to exactly what it was....had to do this with 2 subs here to.

The 4311 like it's predecessors will show you a graph of the filter magnitude correction that is being applied. You can run a single mic location test at each of three or four head positions across the sofa with just one sub connected and look at that display to see what corrections Audyssey would need to make. Do this for each of the two subs. If it shows problems that Audyssey can't handle, one or both subs need to be moved.


If you have REW, it will do this job with less effort, but the job can be done with the built-in Audyssey software.


What you want to see from the tests is minimum sub correction requirements and corrections on the two subs that are at different frequencies or that are offsetting. A correction that goes beyond 10 db is to be avoided. Large corrections at the same frequency on both subs are to be avoided. If one sub has a peak and the other has a dip at the same frequency, that is okay.


If the 4311 insists on some minimum number of measurements, run all of them without moving the mic. I'd use a digital camera to record the results of each test run.


Corner sub performance depends heavily on what's in the diagonally opposite corner. A trap there or other absorbing item will be helpful. The second best locations is 1/3 of the way across a wall. That excites room modes less at lower frequencies. In my own case the two locations are the left corner and 1/3 of the way in from the right corner, behind or just to the left or your right main. These two locations may be highly complementary in terms of the ups and downs in the frequency response across the sofa. If the opposite corner is better for the right corner sub, leave it and move the left one in to the 1/3 point.


However, do check both subs as outlined above before moving either of them. You might luck out with two corner subs. Like Pepar said, that often doesn't work, but it's worth a try. If it works for even just one sub, you are ahead of the game in that that strengthens the direct wave significantly and gives you more sub SPL for your money.


My experience with sidewall subs was disastrous. Putting them 1/3 of the way across the wall is best but if that's anywhere near the left or right side of the sofa, you may find a huge dip that runs fore and aft at the frequency where the direct wave and the reflection coming back off of the far wall meet. The frequency where that occurs is different for each position on the sofa. This dip is very high Q and may be very deep (20 db or more) so might be beyond Audyssey's capability to correct. Your room treatments may help deal with this but I'd say it's likely not ideal.


Hope this is helpful. You are sure to get other inputs.


Harrison
 
#51,673 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar /forum/post/21774438


It looks nice. However, rarely is a dual sub placement like this the best placement. Midwall front/rear or midwall left/right is the best as it smooths out the room's moes.


edit: gotta watch those moes ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf /forum/post/21774450


Hi Rob,


I would most probably take those subs out of the front corners of the room and would put them on the sidewalls a tad bit in a line above the couch but lower than the side towers. And then would re-run Audyssey. Try to experiment!



Nice pix, BTW!

Like this guys?? This would be much easier since I wouldn't have to run a 30 ft sub cable in the ceiling LOL!! The panels behind the sub I will raise up a bit.




Will this cause a reflection with my wide speaker....I really do not want to move it foward but will if I have to...I have OCD about that stuff LOL!!

 
#51,674 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry /forum/post/21773934


I agree with you, Keith. One of the challenges we face in this thread is to assess a poster's level of expertise and target the response accordingly. If we were to somehow be able to assemble the incredible amount of knowledge in this thread into an Audyssey FAQ, then both the basic and advanced aspects of a topic could be presented. I continue to respect the valuable advice that you provide to the new thread participants!

Thanks AJ. Yes, if a FAQ were possible it would be fantastic. But it would be a huge undertaking for someone and I doubt if anyone has the time (or indeed inclination). Meanwhile, we all soldier on, doing our bit when we can I guess
And so the thread gets bigger... and bigger... and bigger...
 
#51,675 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf /forum/post/21773952


Keith, ...or as another option we can use our own ears as well. I've just recently come to the conclusion how superb microphones our ears can be when it comes to tweaking such delicate issues like the XO splice. Warning: deep water, swimmers only!

The problem with relying on our ears for adjusting the sub distance/splice is that it would take for ever and be so time consuming nobody would want to undertake it. And that is assuming that our ears are reliable enough and our incredibly brief auditory memory is up to the job. I think it would be very difficult to remember the way it sounded in between tests, the tests taking at the very least a few minutes to undertake.


The beauty of using OmniMic is that you can see in a few minutes exactly what difference you have made by adjusting the sub distance by +0.5 feet, +1 foot, + 1.5 feet etc etc etc and then -0.5 feet, -1 foot etc etc etc. In fact when I tried it I only needed to do two or three runs and I could see the difference clearly. I am sure I would have found it very difficult to remember the differences and would have had to repeat the tests ad infinitum before I had confidence in the results.
 
#51,676 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by hclarkx /forum/post/21774246


Is it really far from perfect? Would most casual users know the difference? Didn't you say you know there's a difference but can't say one or the other set of mic positions is correct?

I did. That's why I think it's not perfect though.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hclarkx /forum/post/21774246


As long as the software doesn't give a bad result when following the guide I'd say it's giving a good result.

Oh I heartily agree - a great result even.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hclarkx /forum/post/21774246


I refrained from using the seven letter word.

So you did
Shall we agree that the horse, if not dead, is thoroughly exhausted and in need of a good rest?
 
#51,677 ·
Robc1976: Awesome room that is SCREAMING for a screen at least 10 feet wide.


Very nice. Very!!!!!
 
#51,678 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robc1976 /forum/post/0



Like this guys?? This would be much easier since I wouldn't have to run a 30 ft sub cable in the ceiling LOL!! The panels behind the sub I will raise up a bit.


Will this cause a reflection with my wide speaker....I really do not want to move it foward but will if I have to...I have OCD about that stuff LOL!!

If you don't have measurement gear to help show which is better for response, I would try the original corner location and then like you have pictured now. One third along the front wall looks to be about where your mains are so probably won't work fo you. So run audyssey with both setups and see which you prefer. I run mine both along the front wall at 1/3 points.
 
#51,679 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy /forum/post/21774777


Robc1976: Awesome room that is SCREAMING for a screen at least 10 feet wide.


Very nice. Very!!!!!

Thanks man!!! Lot of work and a lot of great advice from people in this thread made it possible!
 
#51,680 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 /forum/post/21774619


Thanks AJ. Yes, if a FAQ were possible it would be fantastic. But it would be a huge undertaking for someone and I doubt if anyone has the time (or indeed inclination). Meanwhile, we all soldier on, doing our bit when we can I guess
And so the thread gets bigger... and bigger... and bigger...

I sure wouldn't want to go back and catalog all of the good points made in the 1700 pages, but a lot of the issues come up time and again. If we just started collecting the wisdom going forward, it would mount up fairly quickly.


Also, sometimes it's easier to start over than to edit older material into a new format.


If we started with an outline of the topics to be covered we could add pieces as they come along.


Harrison
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top