Thanks, Amir. Audyssey graphs, both consumer and Pro, are ... not useful. And the "after" isn't really even "after." It is "before" with calculations. Querying that, we get "linear systems theory" as part of the answer. Maybe so, but I don't think that instilled confidence in anyone that we were looking at what we were hearing. Plus, proprietary secret sauce is used, so even if we could use REW to measure in identical locations, we still wouldn't know how to weight the results. Fortunately, the results are usually so darn spectacular that we grouse about it and then sit down and enjoy our systems.
I doubt that we will ever get the detail ... or the realtime results ... that Synthesis offers. Fortunately, the results with Audyssey are usually so darn spectacular ....
+1 to all you said Jeff.
Meantime, while since REW was mentioned here, amid all the bells and whistles it has a neat little Generator that can be easily used to let us hear what we will hear.
As a starting point to verify the bass department select Log Sweep, Start: 10 Hz, End. 200 Hz, Duration: 60 sec (slow enough for a careful listening), Level: to taste:
I believe we are all able to spot variances in level (or call it loudness) while the sweep slowly advances. When I followed Mark Seaton's and Craig John's method of sub distance adjustment to flatten out the crossover splice, I used this method to cross check the results BY EAR!!!. After a bit of iteration of the original sub distance set by Audyssey I could clearly hear a smooth (read: constant level) of the test sweep as it went through the crossover region (in my case at around 80 Hz). With the original Audyssey sub distance there was an audible level drop definitely detectable by ear.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating!