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

Originally Posted by kbarnes701

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.

Originally Posted by ccotenj

@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"...

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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...

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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...

Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215

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.

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).

Originally Posted by pepar

no es possible.

Originally Posted by bfreedma

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.

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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...

Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215

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.

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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!

Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215

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.

Originally Posted by kbarnes701


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.

Originally Posted by tandy1000rl

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?

Originally Posted by pepar

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

Originally Posted by AustinJerry

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.

Originally Posted by AustinJerry

Really nice results--congratulations!

Originally Posted by Gooddoc

Oh, congrats on your improvements Keith!

Originally Posted by Gooddoc

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*

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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...

Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215

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?

Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215

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.

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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?

Originally Posted by ccotenj

@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"...

Originally Posted by ccotenj

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...