or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Sherwood R-972 User Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sherwood R-972 User Thread - Page 98

post #2911 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

So chen will you compare the 972 Trinnov vs the Audyssey XT32? I don't want two processors just one will do for me and before spending the money I would love to hear your opinion smile.gif. I also don't need remapping as my speakers are properly positioned!

Well, that simplifies things. If you think that, and have these many doubts, get something else. Trinnov Remapping is a major part (along with EQ) of why anyone here has an R-972. If you have no interest in it because you're sure about your positioning, and only could have a single processor, I think a Denon X4000 is very likely in your future based on my opinion before actually trying this Sherwood unit. Or if you can find one, the older 4311.

I'm probably getting the R-972 set up tomorrow night and will start getting familiar with Trinnov...probably a good week before I feel comfortable enough to do serious A/B tests with REW and some source material. I'm in no rush to get a cal ASAP, but would rather think through what the numbers are telling me first, and understand the unit as much as anyone can.

For one thing I'm waiting for the +3 and +6 db files from Sherwood support: had a nice talk with the tech guy yesterday about that and a few more things. He was aware of the minor AVS cult about the unit, BTW smile.gif.

Keep in mind that I'm using the R-972 not as a full fledged pre-pro or an AVR, but more as a DRC box working with a multi-source player doing A/V processing and an existing AVR as the amp. I don't think I can give you a good either/or opinion based on experience for all the unit's issues, or how likely they are.

I know what my _current_ opinion would be....which is get the most cost-effective XT32 receiver you can. Audyssey has a lot of AVS users, there's a great how-to guide you can find, and quite honestly it will be much easier for you to use than Trinnov by all accounts, and possibly aggrevate you less. And that's aside from the Sherwood's quirks as a receiver. But can a well-executed Trinnov cal, if you leverage isues with the unit, sound better to you? Maybe so. I'm taking a chance but in a less risky way than most here, I hope, to find out smile.gif.

You need to read through this thread and maybe the one on HTS and see if you want to take a chance on it as your receiver/pre-pro or not based on many user experiences. Only you can answer that, not me.

Good luck - I can't give you more advice than that.
Edited by sdrucker - 8/24/13 at 12:50pm

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2912 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Well, that simplifies things. If you think that, and have these many doubts, get something else. Trinnov Remapping is a major part (along with EQ) of why anyone here has an R-972. If you have no interest in it because you're sure about your positioning, and only could have a single processor, I think a Denon X4000 is very likely in your future based on my opinion before actually trying this Sherwood unit. Or if you can find one, the older 4311.

I'm probably getting the R-972 set up tomorrow night and will start getting familiar with Trinnov...probably a good week before I feel comfortable enough to do serious A/B tests with REW and some source material. I'm in no rush to get a cal ASAP, but would rather think through what the numbers are telling me first, and understand the unit as much as anyone can.

For one thing I'm waiting for the +3 and +6 db files from Sherwood support: had a nice talk with the tech guy yesterday about that and a few more things. He was aware of the minor AVS cult about the unit, BTW smile.gif.

Keep in mind that I'm using the R-972 not as a full fledged pre-pro or an AVR, but more as a DRC box working with a multi-source player doing A/V processing and an existing AVR as the amp....

A couple of observations:

1. Audyssey is easier to set up, even having to run it for 8 different positions. The Trinnov will sometimes fail to process speakers which the Audyssey picks up without a problem. I had to tilt my surrounds differently to be picked up by the Trinnov mike -- your experience may be different.

At the same time, my experience with MultiEQ XT (not 32) was underwhelming. XT32 has better filter resolution and it should improve sub EQ, but I have no experience with it. But in my room, XT provided rather limited improvement, while Trinnov made a very noticeable difference for the better (readily apparent to my wife, who did not even know that something had changed).

2. 3D remapping makes a significant difference, even though my speakers are more or less in the right positions. I use the Surround Back speaker amps to drive Heights, which are placed wider than the FL/FR. I also drive 4 speaker hooked up to the Surrounds. With 3D remapping, the speakers practically disappear and the sound field is enveloping. Basically, it makes it seem that the main dialog comes out from the center of my screen, while other sounds come from all over the front wall and to a lesser extend the rest of the room. Again, the actual speakers become almost impossible to locate (which I find to be a good thing).

I was worried about losing Dynamic EQ, but found that Trinnov cleans up the dialog even better, making it at least as intelligible, if not more so.

I still do not quite understand why sdrucker is creating this kind of Frankenstein set up, since I really fail to see the purpose or the benefits of it. Granted, I do not watch regular TV, so I never "channel-flip" and thus I am not bothered by the audio delay issue when changing codecs.

Overall, I am kind of cultish about Trinnov, since my room sucks acoustically and Trinnov has made it sound better than I really hoped to ever get it (without ruining the esthetics, which for me take priority smile.gif

I am actually nervous that there is nothing new on the horizon which approximates what Trinnov does and I do not think I can go back to Audyssey and give up 3D remapping, if something ever happens to my R-972.
post #2913 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

I still do not quite understand why sdrucker is creating this kind of Frankenstein set up, since I really fail to see the purpose or the benefits of it. Granted, I do not watch regular TV, so I never "channel-flip" and thus I am not bothered by the audio delay issue when changing codecs.

Overall, I am kind of cultish about Trinnov, since my room sucks acoustically and Trinnov has made it sound better than I really hoped to ever get it (without ruining the esthetics, which for me take priority smile.gif

I am actually nervous that there is nothing new on the horizon which approximates what Trinnov does and I do not think I can go back to Audyssey and give up 3D remapping, if something ever happens to my R-972.

Hi Ryan,
The short answer is to confuse you, and because I can. biggrin.gif. The real answer is much more nuanced.

You had an overall positive experience with the R-972, but reading this thread and the one on AVS, between quirks, the Trinnov learning curve, and QC issues, there's a true love or hate feeling about this receiver. Nothing new there.

OTOH, Trinnov is a more sophisticated RC than anything else out there except for possibly Dirac, even in the version that's in the Sherwood. Since I'm not a rich guy, that rules out an five-figure ADA solution with SOTA Trinnov. As you point out, that's all there is right now and likely to be in the forseeable future. Yet I wanted to experience Trinnov for myself specifically due to Remapping, in our non-standard L-shaped living/dining room where my pair of surrounds are closer to being rears than ITU standard sides, as well how the Trinnov EQ may deal with the time domain overall differently than Audyssey.

Sure I could do that by simply swapping my Denon for the Sherwood. But the Denon 4311 I've got is highly stable, has networking and Internet Radio features the Sherwood doesn't, and fabulous amps. Exchanging that for an unknown, and subjecting my family to possibly going nuts wondering why suddenly some things like HDMI input switches might be squirrely or there's strange thumps or sound delays (some of the issues that seem to be more common) wasn't something I wanted to do. Even for $600!

Then it struck me I didn't need to do that, but go ahead and get the R-972. Basically I could use an Oppo-103's unique ability to apply audio decoding + video processing to two HDMI inputs, export LPCM on HDMI to the Sherwood, and send independent audio and video HDMI output to different places via Split A/V to minimize if not avoid the possible problems of input switches and bitstream codec delays. Plus I have a Denon that can be an amp, and has independent channel trim for an analog MC in. That gets around two other potential weakness of the Sherwood: relatively weak amps by reputation, and a lack of electronic tweakability of channel trims with Trinnov engaged. Best of all I'm not asking the Sherwood to do video anything except HDMI out (with HDMI audio off) for menu OSD. The display issue of sources to my Panny VT50 is handled elsewhere.

Oh, and I already have an Oppo 93, so I can easily A/B room correction for most of my music and HT needs without cable switching, vs. those switched through the 103. And a TiVo than can do component and HDMI video outs, as long as they run one at a time, going to the 4311 when I use Audyssey and the Oppo 103 etc. otherwise. Biggest thing: a Harmony I can use for pulling things all together. This would be brutal otherwise.

So...the Franken processor smile.gif. People use alternate software all the time on the same PC, so why not alternate RC? It's also my personal toy, so the family (for now) can enjoy things without interruption while I tweak away.

I've got REW and am used to measuring as well, so I can also do something nobody else has all that much: true A/B comparisons of XT32 and Trinnov. As a market research methodologist professionally, experiments are par for the course.

Maybe too complex: sure! But for A/B testing with some controls and flexibility...why not? And other than a little money, an extra A/V shelf allocated, and some time...
Edited by sdrucker - 8/24/13 at 4:49pm
post #2914 of 3156
^^
keep the comments & comparisons coming, Stu smile.gif
I have to reply to your PM redface.gif on doing actual measurements, you are way ahead of me wink.gif

so, in your opinion, would you say this form of Trinnov better than Audyssey 32XT?

the Frankenprocessor - wonder where you got that idea from wink.gifbiggrin.gif at least you're trying something different redface.gif
post #2915 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

^^
keep the comments & comparisons coming, Stu smile.gif
I have to reply to your PM redface.gif on doing actual measurements, you are way ahead of me wink.gif

so, in your opinion, would you say this form of Trinnov better than Audyssey 32XT?

the Frankenprocessor - wonder where you got that idea from wink.gifbiggrin.gif at least you're trying something different redface.gif

Too soon to tell...see me in at least a week!

And yes, I've had some inspiration biggrin.gif. What's a little repurposing of our toys between hobbyists?
Edited by sdrucker - 8/24/13 at 5:43pm
post #2916 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

...except for possibly Dirac...

Nah

post #2917 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Too soon to tell...see me in at least a week! And yes, I've had some inspiration biggrin.gif. What's a little repurposing of our toys between hobbyists?

I am looking forward to your analysis, Marketing Research good!
post #2918 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

OTOH, Trinnov is a more sophisticated RC than anything else out there except for possibly Dirac, even in the version that's in the Sherwood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Nah
They each have their advantages, but the Trinnov software in the Sherwood is nowhere near as powerful or versatile as Dirac. That being said, the Sherwood units is a good bang for the buck.

PS, RUR I recognize that you only referenced Trinnov in your quote and not the Sherwood implementation, but just wanted to make sure my comments clearly differentiated between the two..
post #2919 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Thanks Steven! I thought so but I wanted to confirm.

I could see why people that prefer house curves would prefer the +6 db addition to the bass....is that sloped as well or a uniform +6 db bump up to 200 Hz?

The bass files only apply to the subwoofer channel up to the chosen x-over point.They don't affect the the other channels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Hi Ryan,
The short answer is to confuse you, and because I can. biggrin.gif. The real answer is much more nuanced.

Exactly!
post #2920 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
I confirmed that with consumer Audyssey because there's a bug with Pro for independent distance levels. 
BTW, I read your notes, and I'm going to do a separate calibration with my Mythos ST mains as full-range for two-channel stereo listening. That's something I could do with Audyssey Pro without having a separate Save/Load step, or having to run my mains as Large for a multichannel calibration (no thanks with two subs). And the sub and non-sub portions of each speaker were already level matched a while back too. This should put me in at least good shape for getting started, I hope smile.gif.

AFAIK, that only occurs when one tries to reload a prior calibration.  The bug is in Pro's inability to store data for more than one sub.   However, if you just run a Pro calibration and use it on the processor, there will be independant entries for distance/level for each sub.  At that point, write down or print out those values so that, if necessary, you can enter them when you summon up an old calibrration.

post #2921 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Hi Ryan,
The short answer is to confuse you, and because I can. biggrin.gif. The real answer is much more nuanced.

You had an overall positive experience with the R-972, but reading this thread and the one on AVS, between quirks, the Trinnov learning curve, and QC issues, there's a true love or hate feeling about this receiver. Nothing new there.
...

Hah! It kind of makes sense, although it takes a better man than me to actually do it biggrin.gif

I don't expect that you'll find much of a difference in terms of amplification, at least at reasonable volume and I do not have any HDMI switching issues, but it sounds like the audio delay issue will be rendered mute.

A good universal remote is a must, definitely. For what it's worth, I currently use a Harmony, which is definitely easier to set up than my old URC. But I find that the URC was probably 10% more reliable at executing commands correctly -- although I do use RF, so this may not apply to you.

Most important (for selfish me) will be your ability to do RC A/B testing and I'd be really curious as to what comes out.

Good luck!
Edited by Ryan1 - 8/25/13 at 10:48am
post #2922 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

AFAIK, that only occurs when one tries to reload a prior calibration.  The bug is in Pro's inability to store data for more than one sub.   However, if you just run a Pro calibration and use it on the processor, there will be independant entries for distance/level for each sub.  At that point, write down or print out those values so that, if necessary, you can enter them when you summon up an old calibrration.

Kal,
There have also been some users that have reported incorrect distance settings on Sub 2 on fresh Pro calibrations, at least with the Denon 4311 and Sub EQ HT with two independent sub inputs. That's aside from the issue of distances and trims not being saved correctly due to storage limitations. There are workarounds, with some planning and independent measuring tools.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1346723/the-audyssey-pro-installer-kit-thread-faq-in-post-1/3630#post_22745547

Here's what I do, following AustinJerry's lead:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1346723/the-audyssey-pro-installer-kit-thread-faq-in-post-1/3660#post_22757290

I don't think it neccessarily impacts all XT32/Pro cals (Jerry notes that the distances are set correctly with his 4520 running Pro), but since the Denon 4311's one of the more popular AVRs with XT32 and Pro used in tandem, it's worth noting.

Edit: my original post turned out to be more right than we knew. Just saw this:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1346723/the-audyssey-pro-installer-kit-thread-faq-in-post-1/4620#post_23666884
Edited by sdrucker - 8/25/13 at 11:56am
post #2923 of 3156
Setting up both my new Oppo 103 and the Sherwood....and getting to play nice with a Lumagen Mini (two HDMI in, one out)...

A question for anyone else using the Oppo 103/105 with the R-972 and a Lumagen...has anyone run into any weird audio downmixing or video processing issues using the Oppo on Source Direct with HDMI 1 to the R-972 and HDMI 2 to a Lumagen HDMI input, with Dual Display? I would have LPCM audio output and video on Bypass to the Sherwood . The HDMI Monitor out wouldn't be used in my pre-out to amp setup except for menu related things.

I had planned to reverse this (HDMI 1 to the Lumagen and 2 to the R-972) and do Split A/V, but HDMI 1 has hard-wired 'minimal' DNR enabled and HDMI 2 doesn't. Some Oppo users seem to prefer to have HDMI 2 feed a Lumagen rather than HDMI 1 to get optimal VP for the Oppo 103/Lumagen combo, but I'd have to use Dual Display to get audio to the Sherwood in this case. Which kind of chains the resolutions together with the 'lowest common denominator' element. My usage would be strictly 2D, and ideally Source Direct so that that the Lumagen Mini does the heavy VP/scaling lifting.

BTW I was slightly off: as per Bob P. on the Oppo thread, even in Split A/V HDMI 2 still carries 2D video to the highest possible resolution, so technically my original plan wasn't so much audio only to the Sherwood as 'video ignored'.

One other possibly odd question, related to the first (sort of): I know that the R-972 doesn't have a PAL scaler, nor would I need one. However, if there were some reason I had to do so, will the R-972 pass through a PAL (576i) video on Bypass, or at least leave the LPCM multichannel audio uncorrupted up to eight channel 24/48 from DVDs? The latter's all I really am concerned about as long as there's no audio downmixing.

Not sure if this is really an R-972 or an Oppo set of questions, honestly.

Sorry to drive you guys nuts...
Edited by sdrucker - 8/25/13 at 12:35pm
post #2924 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Nah

I assume you have used both Dirac and Trinnov and have done measurement comparisons.Care to share the data that supports this?
post #2925 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

There have also been some users that have reported incorrect distance settings on Sub 2 on fresh Pro calibrations, at least with the Denon 4311 and Sub EQ HT with two independent sub inputs. That's aside from the issue of distances and trims not being saved correctly due to storage limitations. There are workarounds, with some planning and independent measuring tools.
  

I know about these issues but have not experienced them with either my old Integra 80.2 or the Marantz 8801.  It may be related to the processor itself or to Audyssey Pro's drivers for those processors.  AFAIK, it has never been pinned down.  On both those prepros, I have switched my two subs from 1-2 and 2-1 and gotten predictable results.  I will point out that I always did a factory reset on the Integra before any calibration.

 

In any case, this is getting off-topic for this thread.

post #2926 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

I know about these issues but have not experienced them with either my old Integra 80.2 or the Marantz 8801.  It may be related to the processor itself or to Audyssey Pro's drivers for those processors.  AFAIK, it has never been pinned down.  On both those prepros, I have switched my two subs from 1-2 and 2-1 and gotten predictable results.  I will point out that I always did a factory reset on the Integra before any calibration.

In any case, this is getting off-topic for this thread.

True, but just responding...let's move on
post #2927 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenLansing View Post


I assume you have used both Dirac and Trinnov and have done measurement comparisons.Care to share the data that supports this?

Just being whimsical, Steven.  Chill.

post #2928 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Just being whimsical, Steven.  Chill.

Same here.
post #2929 of 3156
Question regarding horizontal angle adjustment when calibrating and looking for clarification for the initial optimization results.

Curt's optimization guide states to, "Try for better then 1 degree for the center speaker if it is supposed to be dead ahead." Shouldn't the "Front" dot on the calibration microphone face the center speaker directly and yield an optimal horizontal angle of zero degrees? Also, when looking at the Trinnov microphone from above (top down) and if the "Front" dot is at 12 o'clock (zero degrees), should the left speaker be measured at +x degrees and the right front speaker be at -x degrees or, should the front left be at -x degrees and the right at +x degrees, or???

I appreciate the clarification!
post #2930 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by KK20 View Post

Question regarding horizontal angle adjustment when calibrating and looking for clarification for the initial optimization results.

Curt's optimization guide states to, "Try for better then 1 degree for the center speaker if it is supposed to be dead ahead." Shouldn't the "Front" dot on the calibration microphone face the center speaker directly and yield an optimal horizontal angle of zero degrees? Also, when looking at the Trinnov microphone from above (top down) and if the "Front" dot is at 12 o'clock (zero degrees), should the left speaker be measured at +x degrees and the right front speaker be at -x degrees or, should the front left be at -x degrees and the right at +x degrees, or???

I appreciate the clarification!

The front dot should be pointed exactly where you want to place the center of the image. This may or may not be in the same location as the center speaker. I believe it was Curt's intent to move the microphone orientation or the center speaker location for a situation where the center speaker was to be "centered" until the speaker's location was identified within one degree.

I do not have the R-972 here to verify the plus or minus reports of the L/R speakers.

Jeff
post #2931 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by KK20 View Post

Question regarding horizontal angle adjustment when calibrating and looking for clarification for the initial optimization results.

Curt's optimization guide states to, "Try for better then 1 degree for the center speaker if it is supposed to be dead ahead." Shouldn't the "Front" dot on the calibration microphone face the center speaker directly and yield an optimal horizontal angle of zero degrees? Also, when looking at the Trinnov microphone from above (top down) and if the "Front" dot is at 12 o'clock (zero degrees), should the left speaker be measured at +x degrees and the right front speaker be at -x degrees or, should the front left be at -x degrees and the right at +x degrees, or???

I appreciate the clarification!

As Jeff said aim for the center of the image. Be prepared to take several calibrations to get the center at zero. It has taken me as many as 20 times to dial it in but in can be done. Even though my center is below the TV the dialogue comes straight from the people on the screen which is one of Trinnov's greatest assets.

The left speakers will be + and the right speakers will be - on the calibration results.
post #2932 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwiss View Post

As Jeff said aim for the center of the image. Be prepared to take several calibrations to get the center at zero. It has taken me as many as 20 times to dial it in but in can be done. Even though my center is below the TV the dialogue comes straight from the people on the screen which is one of Trinnov's greatest assets.

The left speakers will be + and the right speakers will be - on the calibration results.

+1 on multiple calibrations to get the elusive zero for the center, just the slightest movement left or right to dial it in but it's worth it. I have been lucky though, 20 times eek.gif I don't think I have gotten to 10.

I once put my center channel on the floor with a coffee table between the center and the MLP just to try it out. Trinnov really brought the center up so that it it sounded like it was coming from behind the screen, crazy stuff. Dialogue is outstanding with the Trinnov, never have to ask "what did they say?"
post #2933 of 3156

Accurate Calibration Mic Alignment

 

Here's a solution for getting the aiming done quickly: an inexpensive fluid head that can mount on any camera tripod. Makes incremental calibration adjustments a snap.  This one is the Velbon PH-358.  May be purchased with or without the stand.  If you use it, be sure to not pinch the cable.

 

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100

 

Cheers-

post #2934 of 3156
Hey there -
I contacted Sherwood USA Tech support three times (once by phone, the others by email) and asked for them to send me the +3 db and +6 db files for the target curve, but they never emailed them to me.

Can someone on list please send me the files if possible, so I can start calibrating LOL hopefully tomorrow or Friday? Ideally a YouSendIt link or something equivalent by PM would be great.

I'll do a baseline calibration without this addition, but I want to see what the +6 db curve does for me. smile.gif

Thanks much!
Stuart
post #2935 of 3156
You can get the zip file right here:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-theater-receivers-processors-amps/55399-sherwood-newcastle-r-972-official-thread-7.html#post501981

The instructions are not correct though, don't do a factory reset, just turn the receiver off then on again.
post #2936 of 3156
Calibration frustration…

Recently switched from a Klipsch THX Ultra2 7.1 system to an M&K S5000thx 7.1 surround system as I like the musicality and vocals of the M&K speakers compared to the Klipsch. My R972 calibrations have been odd and extremely frustrating with the newer system as the -6dB crossover point varies on microphone distance.

When I calibrate the system at approximately 4.2m, I get the expected cutoff of the front 3 speakers at 80Hz (expected as these are THX certified). My actual seated position is approximately 5.2m and when I calibrate at that position, the -6dB crossover goes up to 140-155Hz and will not venture below. I never experienced this with the Klipsch speakers, regardless of distance, I’m using the same amp, a shielded coupler, CAT6 extension cable, tripod, bubble level, etc… but the higher crossover point consistently shows up and sounds more hollow/shallow than the 4.2m cutoff of 80Hz. I even moved the R972 (temporarily) closer to the 5.2m location eliminating the need for any cable extension with the same calibration results.

Any ideas as to why this is happening and how to overcome this as the delay is a off at 4.2m given the 1m closer distance to the speakers?
post #2937 of 3156
Sounds like you have a null at 5.2M. There's no real issue using the 4.2M calibration if it sounds better. Time arrivals will be a little off, but that's hard to hear. If you want to confirm the null idea, play a single bass tone on your system and walk around the room. I think you'll be amazed at the variation the room causes. The long term solution could be to add a second subwoofer and to try to follow Todd Welti's placement guidelines: http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Innovation/Pages/WhitePapers.aspx

Jeff
post #2938 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereojeff View Post

Sounds like you have a null at 5.2M. There's no real issue using the 4.2M calibration if it sounds better. Time arrivals will be a little off, but that's hard to hear. If you want to confirm the null idea, play a single bass tone on your system and walk around the room. I think you'll be amazed at the variation the room causes. The long term solution could be to add a second subwoofer and to try to follow Todd Welti's placement guidelines: http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Innovation/Pages/WhitePapers.aspx

Jeff

Thanks for the prompt reply Jeff!

What is odd is that I'm using the identical subwoofer configuration with the M&K's as I did with the Klipsch (the only speakers I did not change), yet the Klipsch calibration at the 5.2m location was at the 80Hz -6dB point. Could speaker efficiency or dynamics given the change to the M&K's be a factor creating the situation?
post #2939 of 3156
The calculated crossover point is dependent on the FR of the speakers and the subwoofer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KK20 View Post

Thanks for the prompt reply Jeff!

What is odd is that I'm using the identical subwoofer configuration with the M&K's as I did with the Klipsch (the only speakers I did not change), yet the Klipsch calibration at the 5.2m location was at the 80Hz -6dB point. Could speaker efficiency or dynamics given the change to the M&K's be a factor creating the situation?
post #2940 of 3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by cschang View Post

The calculated crossover point is dependent on the FR of the speakers and the subwoofer.

Example: If the new sub has a FR (frequency range) that extends higher then the original sub,  ie old sub rolled off at 100Hz, old speakers at 60Hz, the expected result would be 80Hz xover.   If new system has speaker hi pass at 80 and sub low pass is off or set high, resulting in sub output at 200-250Hz, the expected crossover will be 150Hz or so.  

 

If the new setup is exactly like the original- speaker, sub and calibration point, then the change would only be speaker dependent- meaning you can look to your speaker settings.   As Jeff pointed out, if anything has physically changed, then your results are further complicated by additional changes due to room response.  Both the sub and speakers can have significant, broad nulls depending on placement and room.  A speaker that has a roll-off of 80 in the room can end up with a roll-off at 120. 

 

More of this is discussed earlier in this thread and the User Guide thread.  Best results will be found by using a measurement tools and/or outside guidance to solve your particular issues.

 

Cheers

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Sherwood R-972 User Thread