or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The Audyssey Pro Installer Kit Thread (FAQ in post #1)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Audyssey Pro Installer Kit Thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 71

post #2101 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

OK Chris - be glad to. I'll just do another graph of the second seat - there's no point going to the right of the MLP as it will be too close to the wall (this really is a small room!). Can I please have until tomorrow?

I really would love to see what I could achieve in a more suitable room. I am so impressed with the SQ I am now getting, but I know that the room is awful from so many perspectives - it is too small, it is square, speaker and sub placement options are very limited, I am sitting too close to the back wall etc etc etc. Yet it sounds terrific - but having got it this far, I always wonder just what the same gear would sound like if I could set up in a more ideal room.

yes, i will allow you until tomorrow...

but as long as i'm giving you some extra time to do your homework... how about a few decay graphs as well?
post #2102 of 5258
@keith...

as far as the much coveted perfect room goes.... and i think all of us harbor a desire for something like a dennis erskine room...

warning: heresy coming up...

to be honest, that's what modern dsp is for... look at your end result... in effect, you have made your room "more suitable"... we have reached the point with processing power and software that we can make room effects "disappear" (as long as they are not profoundly disastrous)... especially of the user is willing to put in the effort to make it all work together...

too often, we see posts that go on and on about room treatments, dimensions, etc., and finish with "and eq last, only as a finishing touch"...

i am of the opinion that only the finished product matters... and if using dsp gives you a finished product that is "the same" as "a real good room" (without the hassle of creating said "real good room"), then i know what option i'm choosing... i'm a lazy boy... the easiest path to the best result is usually the one i take...

iow, while a "really good room" would be nice, it would be unlikely to change the end product...

to paraphrase the great rasheed wallace... "graph don't lie"...
post #2103 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

@keith...

as far as the much coveted perfect room goes.... and i think all of us harbor a desire for something like a dennis erskine room...

warning: heresy coming up...

to be honest, that's what modern dsp is for... look at your end result... in effect, you have made your room "more suitable"... we have reached the point with processing power and software that we can make room effects "disappear" (as long as they are not profoundly disastrous)... especially of the user is willing to put in the effort to make it all work together...

too often, we see posts that go on and on about room treatments, dimensions, etc., and finish with "and eq last, only as a finishing touch"...

i am of the opinion that only the finished product matters... and if using dsp gives you a finished product that is "the same" as "a real good room" (without the hassle of creating said "real good room"), then i know what option i'm choosing... i'm a lazy boy... the easiest path to the best result is usually the one i take...

iow, while a "really good room" would be nice, it would be unlikely to change the end product...

to paraphrase the great rasheed wallace... "graph don't lie"...

Not herersy. I agree DSP is awesome, but it's not perfect. For instance, the minimal ability of EQ to correct ringing and the way EQ robs headroom are a couple of shortfalls. But as you pointed out, if you're close before EQ then pumping a ton of time and money into physical fixes may be hitting the diminishing returns law.

But for those of us that can't fix things any other way, EQ is a beautiful thing.
post #2104 of 5258
^^^

oh yea... not perfect, no doubt there...

but perfect is hard to get...
post #2105 of 5258
quick question:

is it possible to select a xover other than the 4 recommended ones in the drop down box? i.e. force in a value that isn't in the dropdown box? i'd like to experiment with something, but haven't figured out a way around that roadblock...

if it's not possible, c'est la vie...
post #2106 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

quick question:

is it possible to select a xover other than the 4 recommended ones in the drop down box? i.e. force in a value that isn't in the dropdown box? i'd like to experiment with something, but haven't figured out a way around that roadblock...

if it's not possible, c'est la vie...

no es possible.
post #2107 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

quick question:

is it possible to select a xover other than the 4 recommended ones in the drop down box? i.e. force in a value that isn't in the dropdown box? i'd like to experiment with something, but haven't figured out a way around that roadblock...

if it's not possible, c'est la vie...

Check out post 334 in this thread - looks like it's possible to manually edit the Audyssey file saved to a computer then reload.

Not sure what you can and can't force, but might be a way to experiment.
post #2108 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

I assume you are talking about the computer to prepro connection, since the mike and its cable must be in the room being calibrated. That PC connection to the 80.3 is Ethernet cat 5 or 6, and it is not supplied with the kit. But, you will have to run up and down the stairs for each mike position. Most of us use laptops in the room or just outside it. If your PC is already networked to the 80.3, you can use that connection. I prefer to be out of the room during the test tones myself. Just make sure you have the latest firmware loaded on the 80.3.

Everything else is in the kit, including more mike cable than you will ever need, plus dongles to connect the mike preamp to the prepro.

So, there are only two connections to the prepro: the PC and the mike preamp. Enjoy.

Thanks Fitz, appreciate your help....

I have a PC right next to the 80.3, which are both on the network & both in the basement.. I can "remote" into that PC to perform the setup....

From what I can see in the manual, pg. 15 - If my PC is hooked up to the 80.3 both via the network and USB to RS-232, the only cable I need to run to the basement is
Quote:


D - Connect another mini-XLR cable to the LINE OUT output of the mic preamp. Connect the mini-XLR-to-RCA adapter to this mini-XLR cable.
E - Prepare to connect the mini-XLR-to-RCA adaptor to the Denon front panel “V.AUX” left channel audio input (but leave disconnected for now).

I'm really sorry for all the goofy questions, I'm just trying to figure out if this is even doable for me if I decide to pick one of these up...

If I'm running the PC remotely, I don't really have to run up and down stairs to do the whole thing do I ?

Thanks

Warp
post #2109 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

no es possible.

merci beaucoup, mon ami...

darn... i really wanted to see what a 120hz xover might show me... seeing all of keith's graphs and all of the discussion surrounding them has fired up my geek juices...

feature enhancement please!
post #2110 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post

Check out post 334 in this thread - looks like it's possible to manually edit the Audyssey file saved to a computer then reload.

Not sure what you can and can't force, but might be a way to experiment.

will check, thanks...

the thing is, even if you could manipulate the xover value, the trick would be to get it to recalculate the filters based upon your spoofed value...
post #2111 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

will check, thanks...

the thing is, even if you could manipulate the xover value, the trick would be to get it to recalculate the filters based upon your spoofed value...

Well, there is that....
post #2112 of 5258
since i am "participating" in an all day conference call today, some expanded measurements and some "thoughts"...

xovers are set to 80hz... no changes yet in distances, etc. later today after i have a chance to fully digest what the graphs are telling me, and you guys have had a chance to comment...

the right/left side graphs are provided essentially for amusement purposes... although it will be interesting to see if/what changes there when the "distance tweaking, etc." begins...

btw... this is a fun thread... som, you done good by starting/shepherding this one...
post #2113 of 5258
money seat first... lol... when i (or someone else) refers to "money seat" in this thread, it always reminds me of the mtv cribs shows when they get to showing the bedroom and the dude puffs himself up big and says, "yea, this is where ALL the ACTION happens"...

no aud, 10-200hz...


aud, 10-200hz...


no aud, 10-500hz...


aud, 10-500hz...


no aud, 500hz-15khz...


aud, 500hz-15khz...


no aud, 500hz-15khz, 1/6th smoothing...


aud, 500hz-15khz, 1/6th smoothing...
post #2114 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Another thought for Keith is the other slight null in his measured response at between about 150-200Hz. This shows up in the higher resolution measurement, but not in the 1/6 measurement or in the Audyssey graphs. If he has the inclination someday, perhaps further measurement will reveal whether it is just a localized measurement or more global spatially. The REG article I previously posted makes clear that all single measurements are spatially unstable, and I agree. And, in any case, it is known that generally the ear is less sensitive to minor dips than it is to peaks. So, it might not be worth futzing over. And, the only solution would likely be treatment with absorbers effective in that range, which need not be the biggest, heavy duty bass traps.

Similar to your theory, I wonder if it could be the result of measuring FL and FR at the same time (ie comb filtering). I always thought it was a no-no to measure more than 1 speaker simultaneously (other than a crossed over subwoofer plus satellite) for that very reason?
post #2115 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

merci beaucoup, mon ami...

darn... i really wanted to see what a 120hz xover might show me... seeing all of keith's graphs and all of the discussion surrounding them has fired up my geek juices...

feature enhancement please!

Understood, and a minor source of frustration for me occasionally. But it calcs five (or whatever) different crossovers in order of recommendation. If the one you want isn't listed then it was less ... recommended.

Jeff
post #2116 of 5258
right seat...

no aud, 10-200hz...


aud, 10-200hz...


no aud, 10-500hz...


aud, 10-500hz...


no aud, 500hz-15khz...


aud, 500hz-15khz...


can't get a visual better example of comb filtering there... fortunately, when it's caused by multiple sources because of timing delays, we "hear it" like the following two graphs...

no aud, 500hz-15khz, 1/6th smoothing...


aud, 500hz-15khz, 1/6th smoothing...
post #2117 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Another thought for Keith is the other slight null in his measured response at between about 150-200Hz. This shows up in the higher resolution measurement, but not in the 1/6 measurement or in the Audyssey graphs. If he has the inclination someday, perhaps further measurement will reveal whether it is just a localized measurement or more global spatially. The REG article I previously posted makes clear that all single measurements are spatially unstable, and I agree. And, in any case, it is known that generally the ear is less sensitive to minor dips than it is to peaks. So, it might not be worth futzing over. And, the only solution would likely be treatment with absorbers effective in that range, which need not be the biggest, heavy duty bass traps.

Just thinking, given the issue is below Schroeder it might be possible to correct it with minor repositioning of the mains.
post #2118 of 5258
left seat...

no aud, 10-200hz...


aud, 10-200hz...


no aud, 10-500hz...


aud, 10-500hz...


no aud, 500hz-15khz...


aud, 500hz-15khz...


and up shows mr. comb filter again... lol...

no aud, 500hz-15khz, 1/6th smoothing...


aud, 500hz-15khz, 1/6th smoothing...
post #2119 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


I am fairly convinced now that Sub 2 is wired internally with its polarity reversed - I would never have discovered this problem if it had not been for OmniMic and the encouragement and support from the Group.

Hopefully your subs are both fine, and it's just room interactions and placement driving the need for one to be out of phase with the other, but other possibilities include the LFE port on the AVR being wired incorrectly, or the RCA/XLR cable itself being wired incorrectly. Very very unlikely, and no idea how to test for that, but just pointing out it may not actually be the subs.

Case in point being an LG portable DVD player I used to own, where the 1/8" TV out mini plug was mis-wired and I had to plug the red RCA into the video input on the tv and use the yellow plug as my right audio channel. Yikes!
post #2120 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by tandy1000rl View Post

Similar to your theory, I wonder if it could be the result of measuring FL and FR at the same time (ie comb filtering). I always thought it was a no-no to measure more than 1 speaker simultaneously (other than a crossed over subwoofer plus satellite) for that very reason?

comb filtering due to timing differences should be minimal, if a factor at all , at the money seat, as the timing is optimized for that location...
post #2121 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Understood, and a minor source of frustration for me occasionally. But it calcs five (or whatever) different crossovers in order of recommendation. If the one you want isn't listed then it was less ... recommended.

Jeff

lol... that's a nice way of putting it...
post #2122 of 5258
a few "thoughts"...

money seat looks pretty good... a bit messy from 95-350hz, pretty much as expected... nice and flat above 500hz, even with 1/24th smoothing... aud didn't try to do much there, again as expected (and desired)...

edit: fwiw, left seat and right seat are about 2.5 feet from money seat...

left seat ain't bad... aud makes a pretty significant difference there... again, pretty much leaving 500hz and above alone...

right seat... well.... at first blush, the graphs don't look much better with aud, as they are still lumpy compared to other 2 seats... but when taken on their own, aud is actually making quite a big difference...

all told, it doesn't suck...
post #2123 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Keith, you mentioned that you don't fancy opening up the sub to check its wiring. If you Google "speaker polarity battery test", you will find a description of how to test the polarity without opening the case. Just thought I would mention this in case you aren't familiar with the test.

Thanks, AJ. I remember the battery test from my formative stereo years... I'll perhaps give that a try.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Really nice results--congratulations!

Thanks again. Any suggestions for potential improvements?
post #2124 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

Oh, congrats on your improvements Keith!

Thanks Gooddoc. It's been a great learning curve for me.
post #2125 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

As far as I remember there isn't a single poster that is willing to hang their hat on an Audyssey graph to make a single decision about what Keith should do to improve his room without confirmation by Omnimic, yet my comment that the Audyssey graphs are useless continues to be met with derision. *confused*

No derision intended here, but the after graph succeeded in alerting us that Audyssey could not fully calibrate his system and also indicated where the calibration had failed (i.e. at the crossover frequency). That's a pretty useful function in my eyes, especially for the intended audience of this technology, professional Audyssey installers who aren't likely to spend weeks or months on a single calibration job like we as enthusiasts may.

Also, the fix Keith put into place (flip sub 2 out of phase) was born out of his own knowledge and experience--that issues around the crossover frequency are driven by summation/cancellation issues due to phase--so that's where he began experimenting. His other measuring system didn't reveal any insights there, other than greater graph resolution. Point is, he could have done the same experimentation with the Audyssey certificate graphs only and arrived at the same place--a successful calibration. ;-)

That said, what insights did you glean from his independent measurements that weren't already in his Apr 20 certificate?
post #2126 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

comb filtering due to timing differences should be minimal, if a factor at all , at the money seat, as the timing is optimized for that location...

Yes, your graphs very clearly show this effect. Thanks for posting!
post #2127 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

As to further tweaking, yes, number one, there is the question of that midrange compensation dip. Personally, I have never been impressed with Kris Kyriakakis' explanations of why it is there. Speaker crossovers have keen mentioned, but speakers vary all over the place. So, why, then, is it fixed at 2k?

My speaker crossover points are 3kHz between the tweeter and the midrange and 300 Hz between the midrange and the woofer. How does that fit in with the mid-range compensation thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Another thought for Keith is the other slight null in his measured response at between about 150-200Hz. This shows up in the higher resolution measurement, but not in the 1/6 measurement or in the Audyssey graphs. If he has the inclination someday, perhaps further measurement will reveal whether it is just a localized measurement or more global spatially. The REG article I previously posted makes clear that all single measurements are spatially unstable, and I agree. And, in any case, it is known that generally the ear is less sensitive to minor dips than it is to peaks. So, it might not be worth futzing over. And, the only solution would likely be treatment with absorbers effective in that range, which need not be the biggest, heavy duty bass traps.

Yes I was looking at that earlier. I can't seem to hear anything amiss in that area but that doesn't mean I wouldn't notice an improvement. I think my next upgrade would have to be room treatments. Thinks....
post #2128 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

yes, i will allow you until tomorrow...

but as long as i'm giving you some extra time to do your homework... how about a few decay graphs as well?

OK. If I can figure out how to do them....
post #2129 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

@keith...

as far as the much coveted perfect room goes.... and i think all of us harbor a desire for something like a dennis erskine room...

warning: heresy coming up...

to be honest, that's what modern dsp is for... look at your end result... in effect, you have made your room "more suitable"... we have reached the point with processing power and software that we can make room effects "disappear" (as long as they are not profoundly disastrous)... especially of the user is willing to put in the effort to make it all work together...

too often, we see posts that go on and on about room treatments, dimensions, etc., and finish with "and eq last, only as a finishing touch"...

i am of the opinion that only the finished product matters... and if using dsp gives you a finished product that is "the same" as "a real good room" (without the hassle of creating said "real good room"), then i know what option i'm choosing... i'm a lazy boy... the easiest path to the best result is usually the one i take...

iow, while a "really good room" would be nice, it would be unlikely to change the end product...

to paraphrase the great rasheed wallace... "graph don't lie"...

I have considerable sympathy with these points of view
post #2130 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

quick question:

is it possible to select a xover other than the 4 recommended ones in the drop down box? i.e. force in a value that isn't in the dropdown box? i'd like to experiment with something, but haven't figured out a way around that roadblock...

if it's not possible, c'est la vie...

I'm sure I had more than 4 recommendations... are you using the latest version of the s/w?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The Audyssey Pro Installer Kit Thread (FAQ in post #1)