Audyssey MultEQ XT32 + SubEQ HT thread - Page 3

Talk about having too many variables!

You are avoiding the matter of the measurements. They were not identical so it is reasonable that the two EQ results would be likely to perform differently with different source materials. As for the comparison of music recordings with music from movies, the music discs I use are typically not studio mixes but live classical recordings and that does differentiate them from typical music in movies.

As for your accusations about "buying" good reviews, I dismiss that smokescreen with scorn unless you want to offer proof in specific regarding this issue.

This is interesting http://www.audyssey.com/technology/audyssey-lfc.html & http://www.audyssey.com/aboutus/pres...cy-containment

I am currently in the process of calibrating my home theater setup using a Denon AVR-4311ci receiver and Audyssey MultEQ XT32. I am using the following Definitive Technology speakers with the calibration:

Left and Right Front - Mythos ST (each which includes 300 watt powered subwoofer)

Center - Mythos 10 (no subwoofer)

I'm using monoprice 12 guage speaker wire between the receiver and all speakers (about 10 feet in length for each). I also have the 10 foot LFE cables from Sub 1 and Sub 2 outs on the Denon to each of the SuperTowers.

Prior to performing the calibration, I selected LFE (not LFE+Main) for the subwoofer output per recommendations I have read here and elsewhere.

After completing the calibration setup (during which both subwoofers were tuned manually to 75db) I found that the Denon 4311 had configured the left and right SuperTowers to Large and the Mythos 10 to Small.

The crossovers for the SuperTowers was set to (Full Band) which was actually dialed in at 40hz. However the Mythos 10 Center had it's crossover set to 80hz.

Channel level reductions for all speakers and two subwoofers were all below -8db (so I'm not maxing out the receiver which has a channel trim limit of +/- 12db)

I have repeated this process a couple of times and always get the same results so I'm pretty sure that I have consistent/good numbers from the Audyssey calibration.

------

Now for my questions/comments:

The Denon Manual states that if LFE is chosen (and not LFE+Main) as the subwoofer setting, then speakers set to Large "will not pass" their frequencies below the crossover to the subwoofer. They will instead use the full dynamic range of the given speaker.

The Definitive Technology user manual says that if the LFE connection on the SuperTower is used, then the speakers should be set to Large and Subwoofer "Yes". It says that it will pass the required .1 frequencies from the content through the speaker wire directly to the subwoofer (and not use the LFE)

As the Mythos 10 Center Channel has no subwoofer, I would expect that it would be set to Small (which it is).

------

1. Therefore, would the only reason in using the LFE inputs on the SuperTowers be to pass the "center channel's" lower frequencies to the subwoofer (as the SuperTowers "Left/Right Front" themselves would not actually use the LFE due to Denon Front Left and Right "Large" speaker configuration)?

2. If the SuperTower LFE's are used (for the center channel speaker), does the Denon 4311 still actually send the entire frequency range to the SuperTowers Front Left and Right that then pass on the lower frequencies to the subwoofer as Definitive Technology claims?


3. I have read other areas regarding Audyssey setup that if "any subwoofer" is used, all speakers in the configuration should be set to Small. Does this help to improve the soundstage by forcing all of the speakers including the SuperTowers to use the LFE input for the lower frequencies?

------

4. If I set all my speakers to Small, I see that the previously Audyssey calibrated crossover settings for the Mythos 10 center channel (80hz) is different than the Supertowers (40hz). (Again, Audyssey had set the Front Left and Right to Large during calibration).

5. What I don't understand is that if these speakers are matched (same speaker dimensions), shouldn't the crossover be the same?

6. If I was to set all speakers to Small would it be better to set all of the crossovers to match (at 80hz) as all three speakers would then be using the LFE inputs for the lower frequencies?

7. Would I lose any dynamic range of the Mythos ST by changing the Denon setting from Large to Small.

------

8. What (if any) are the optimal settings for Audyssey with my components? I am looking for an optimal reference level for movies (with music being a close second). Does anyone else have this same setup?

It has, for a long time, been no reason to buy as-eq1....,
because Denon with Audyssey MultEQ XT do a better calibration - even models with one SW Line Output...
Please find our Graphs here....
Subwoofer Calibration with Audyssey - 30th July 2009

Can SubEQ HT handle more than two subs and are there any preamps/receivers that have 3 or more sub outs for use with it? Two subs is definitely a step in the right direction, but some larger rooms could use 3 or more. Mo is betta ...

No, just like the external sub eq. Two independent sub outs max. You can certainly split the output and add more than two, but there won't be separate level and time alignment.

Thanks. That's what I suspected. Splitting the output seems to defeat the purpose of SubEQ HT. The subs would have to already be time-phase aligned by placement or other EQ methods. At least, though, overall sub EQ could still be done. Seems the options are to spend $$$$ on an Audyssey equipped processor and work around this (slight) limitation, or spend $$$$$ on a "high end" processor like ADA, Lexicon, Datasat, etc. There certainly seems to be a lot of value in the Audyssey equipped pre-pro's (order of magnitude) .....

Hi mrb55,
I am trying to set up my Integra DHC 80.2 using Audyssey MultiEQXT32. Speakers are Revel F52, C52 and S30s. Interested to know how yours went? Did you eventually find the correct balance and optimal result that you were seeking? If yes, can you please give me a couple of tips to start with? Will appreaciate so much. My email: cgrove321@yahoo.com. Regards, Golam (prosoft7).

Recently, I read somewhere (I can't remember exactly where) that if you leveled your subs to 86 or 91dB,
instead of 75dB prior to running Audyssey MultEQ XT32 Sub EQ HT, you would get better bass performance
in your room.

Well I had to rearrange some furniture so I had to run Audyssey again.
So I leveled all four of my subwoofers individually to 80dB prior to running calibration.
After calibration my subs did indeed sound and feel more fuller and deeper.

Anybody else try this?

this makes no sense... at all... if you "leveled the subs" higher than reference, audyssey will just cut them...

At 75db my sub seemed flat and barely there so I also raised my sub level to 90db and re-calibrated. Sounded much fuller.

you could have just raised the volume of the sub channel instead

by raising the sub 15dB, all you did was ensure that Audyssey "ran out of room" trying to correct it to the level of the other speakers, and so you were left with an artificially "hot" sub level. Which many prefer, nothing wrong with that... but I am willing to bet that your sub channel level is now maxed out at -12dB or whatever. Instead of these shenanigans, you should have just started from the calibrated reference and then simply raised the sub volume to taste.

^^^ this...

I tried both.
I only have 1 cheaper 12" sub for a 21'x17' room and it just seemed to produce better doing it this way. I'm no expert but that's what my ears told me.
I also tweaked the speaker settings slightly after the audyssey setup.
It set my mains to 40hz and my center to 100hz. Just didn't seem right.

^^^

it is likely that you would benefit greatly from the audyssey setup guide that avs members have compiled...

well if you tried raising the sub trims in teh receiver before running Audyssey, it's a fruitless endeavor because the autosetup routine ignores all those settings. That's covered in the setup guide and the FAQ, IIRC. AFAIK, it is not possible for, say, 6 dB louder to sound different depending on which volume control you use to get there. The nice thing about actually calibrating to "correct" then making desired changes with the receiver trims is you can always go back to "correct" to see how it strikes you. For me there was a time when I had to reduce my sub level from the autosetup because it called attention to itself - - not that notes seemed to be coming from the sub (localization) but that bass instruments sounded unnatrual (probably from some remaining incompletely tamed room mode). A rearrangement ended that problem, and I pretty much always use Dynamic EQ, which at least tries to "correctly correct" the bass deficit that we perceive when listening below reference with movies, or relatively quietly with music. The caveat with music is you really need the reference level offset because music has no "real" reference, but its "effective" reference level is lower, making it louder at any given volume control setting than AUdyssey expects, and causing Audyssey's DEQ corrections to overcorrect.

Cool thanks. I didn't raise the trim levels just cranked the volume on the sub after using Audyssey. I've only had it 2 weeks and this is my first Onkyo. Coming from Yamaha for many years this is a bit of a learning curve for me. I keep wondering if I should have gone with the RX-A 3010. I'll keep playing and see.

Should also mention this is for 99% movie watching.

So I re-calibrated setting the sub to just under 80db and audyssey changed the sub level from +2 to -2. So I dropped my sub level and it lowered the sub level as well. I manually changed it back to where it was the first time.

No response from the guru's on this??? I too would be interested to know...

You'll note that post was made over 1 1/2 years ago and if you check out the OP's history of posting, you'll note he also posted the same question in 2 other threads 1 of which was responded to in the post below ...

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1274153/the-official-denon-avr-4311ci-avr-a100-thread-no-price-talk/10100_100#post_20665056

Thanks a ton, JD.

Next time, u might try "here's a response to the issue here: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1274153/the-official-denon-avr-4311ci-avr-a100-thread-no-price-talk/10100_100#post_20665056[/quote] "

That way, you don't come off as a tool.

Unlike the tool who responded to a post from July 2011

Way to be a dick after he went out of his way to search the guy's post history on your behalf and find a post in another thread which answers your question. So classy.

OK, so it's my-bad for thinking there was ever a chance a post was overlooked then? If the idea of searching for the same question in another thread had crossed my mind, then I probably would have done that. As it was, I was using the search function to try and get some answers (which guys get beat up for NOT using, right?)

Check my post count; I admit I'm not up to speed on all the ways to work the forum as those of you with multi-thousands of posts and hours seem to, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna roll over when I get attitude when all I'm looking for is information.

You guys have helped out MANY folks around here for a long time (including me), but that fact alone doesn't excuse ANYONE for exercising a bit of common courtesy, and you ought to know better! If I have to get smart-ass comments just to get an answer for something, I'd prefer to not get anything at all. I'll bet I'm not alone on this...

Thanks for injecting yourself into the conversation, Bat.

The problem is yours as you jumped to a conclusion, reading into jdsmoothie's reply as being some sort of snarkiness on his part, then called him so much as a tool for it. But there was no "attitude" on his part, just a straight reporting of information but instead you interpreted it to have some sort of sarcastic edge. So I'm with batpig on this one. Jdsmoothie deserved your benefit of doubt, especially given how freely he contributes to this site. His time. His expertise. Willingly given. For free. His long posting history also demonstrates an aversion to rudeness and drama. Perhaps if you had been more aware of this context, you wouldn't have been so quick to assume the worst.

+1

Thanks for having my back guys.


Sorry you felt there was "attitude" behind my response as I was simply trying to let you know the logic I came up with to find the solution for you ... which was considering the post was so old with no response in this thread, that he might have posted elsewhere for a reponse ..... which he did and received the answer I reposted for your benefit.
Edited by jdsmoothie - 2/4/13 at 12:16pm

Jerk! :ReallyAngryFace:

If that is the case, then I sincerely apologize.

I interpreted the added info (outside of the link) as a bit of an "unnecessary swipe"; but I also know that when writing, things can get lost in translation, so to speak.