The Audyssey Pro Installer Kit Thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 112

 

My inconsistency can be attributed to one or more of the following:

 

- Advanced age

- Lack of understanding the ULF Trim adjustment

- So many things have changed in the interim that the results are indeed different

 

I hope it's not the first one, and is likely a combination of the last two.  Anyway, measurements don't lie, and they show a clear difference for the ULF Trim settings (on paper, but not sure I can hear the difference).

 

It's not that I have lost any faith in the ULS-15's.  There are several aspects to bass response:  smoothness, extension, and output volume.  IMO, the ULS-15's produce smooth bass, and the extension is clearly down to below 20Hz.  Where the Submersives trump the Hsu's is in sheer output volume, if I understand what I have read.  So, my initial thoughts are whether I want to expend a significant amount of money just for the sheer output.  Or perhaps the green monster will have an effect....  (Darn you, Keith!)

If I understand correctly, the following screen shot shows two curve edits in effect, the first one affecting the left and right speakers, and the second one affecting the two sub channels.  Have I got it right?

 

 

And after clicking Done, the following graph shows a dip below 100Hz, which represents the curve edits' effect?

 

 

Absolutely concurred, Stuart. Today was my first attempt at using the Curve Editor and it has been most worthwhile. I shall examine the rest of my FR via OmniMic and see if there are yet further gains to be made. I have a slight dip at around 500Hz that has always irked me so that will be the next thing to look at.

 

 

That would be terrific if you can get a round tuit. Simple is good - one of the problems with Pro is that it has this 'advanced user' tag and that might well put people off from trying it and gaining all its benefits. Hopefully the FAQ can show that anyone can use Pro and some form of measuring gear and get a good result. Heck, if I can, anyone can - I'm hardly the world's most techy person.

 

I have wondered about setting a different XO for the centre channel because Pro offers me my wished-for 100Hz as an option for the centre channel but not for the R & L. What I have been doing is selecting 80 Hz for all three (80 is offered as an option for all three) and then raising all three to 100Hz post-Audyssey in the AVP settings (bad practice probably but it seems to work OK). I wonder if using the offered 100Hz for the centre channel would be better - then I would only have to jimmy the L&R XOs in the AVP post-cal.  The reason I didn’t do it this way is because it seems 'foreign' to use different XOs across the front three - but in your experience it isn't any sort of problem?

 

Sorry for straying OT guys, but just to make this one comment for Jerry's consideration... one of the things that has impressed me most so far about the F2s is not the sheer quantity of bass they can deliver, but also the quality of the bass. I am the sort of person who would always go for quality over quantity (ideally having both) and in this regard the F2s really shine. The control they exhibit is remarkable - they start and stop on a dime. They do not announce their presence until/unless required and then - wham! And equally as quickly they are gone. I hesitate to use an audiofool term but if you understand what I mean by 'texture', the bass from the F2s has this beautiful way of revealing the texture of the bass as well as its depth. I don't notice this so much on movies but do on the music tracks I use to evaluate bass after tweakery has occurred. Playing an acoustic double bass reveals so much more 'texture' than my previous subs did - it is much easier to recognise the bass player now, for example, from the way he manipulates the notes. IOW, the F2s seem to reveal more of what is there somehow. I doubt if this matters much for movies, where the terrifying output of the F2s is probably more important, but if you also use your HT system for music, then I cannot see you failing to be impressed. HST I am not in any way criticising your present subs in this regard - how could I - I have never heard them. But I think the Submersives may give you the best of ALL worlds.

 

On a totally subjective note, I just wanted the Submersives. Craig John was very influential in my decision, as was Max who first put the notion in my head. I then read the entire Submersive thread over a week or so and decided that I wanted in - I know they will be the last subs I buy and that in itself was important to me IYKWIM. What I would say to you, Jerry, is this: if you want them, and you can afford them - do it. It's only money and you can't take it with you....

I've been a bit confused by the 1,2,3,4 etc too and am working on the same basis as you. Hopefully, Jeff's tutorial will clarify all this.

From my practitioner's POV and previous use of MCACC, I think the Pro kit is 'scarier' than it really should be. IMO anyone that can use Advanced MCACC has the technical skills to use the Pro Kit if they're willing to pay for it, for personal use (I'd argue that for a real CI, the bar has to be higher for professional integrity/liability reasons). However, to use it _well_ , that requires a measurement kit like OmniMic and a willingness to ignore the Post-Audyssey graphs due to the high level of smoothing, as well as to dip your feet into the waters of the Curve Editor. And depending on where you decide to sit back and enjoy, that leads you down the path that people like you and AJ have went down - adding treatments, swapping subs, and a time investment that may takes months to ever 'get it right'. I look at it like having a personal trainer: there's never a point where you're 'done', but paths where you can decide where to maintain vs. raise the bar. I'm personally near the 'maintain' level except for curve tweaks and possibly rerunning with heights (I don't feel a need for wides with my Mythos ST fronts), but YMMV.

As to the center, I came from the perspective of a common crossover for all speakers as well (i.e. 80 Hz). However, due to either placement and/or built-in capabilities, I found that I needed different crossover for the fronts (powered section in front), the CS-8080HD center (powered 'sub' on top of the speaker), not to mention the horrid < 120 Hz response from my Gem XL surrounds, when I accessed with the OmniMic. At least for me, it was more 'natural' to have independent crossovers (all over 80 Hz) once I got into the Pro world. And it certainly helped with the crossover region suckouts for the mains and fronts, as they occured at different places (80 to 100 Hz for the fronts, and a giant 90 to 120 Hz suckout for the center that was responsible for the angst I had with the speaker earlier this year).

Like I said, my thinking may not be 'orthodox' compared to two-channel purists, but at least it works.

Keith,
AFAIK the channel numbers line up with the sequence on the Zone Configration and Detection parts of the Pro run. At least it seems that tweaks I've made to channels 1/2/3 and the subs line up that way.

Stuart

I am sure you are right, Keith. But how can you measure the quality of the bass? I know of only two objective measurements, frequency response and a waterfall graph (which, BTW, you have yet to provide). Other than a side-by-side comparison, which would be difficult, how would you propose to assess quality? Without expectation bias getting in the way, of course?

I think it boils down to what you have alluded to--buying a pair of Submersives is like hitting a walk-off home run. Game over.

Sorry for being OT, but it's just us guys, right?

Edit: Uh-oh. I have the tape measure out. Wonder if a Submersive would fit over here....

 

I'm measuring the quality with my ears Jerry. The graphs are invaluable for setting up, for getting rid of anomalies, for getting a flat FR etc - but the true acid test, when all that is done, is 'what does it sound like?'. And it sounds better than I have ever heard here. The waterfall is measuring the room really not the bass - and since adding the traps my ringing is minimal at all frequencies. I'll post some waterfalls next time I get the OM out, if I remember!

 

I take your point about expectation bias and the measurements are a good way to keep us on the righteous path of objectivity. If they measure well, they will usually sound well. And sometimes, something is so much better (or worse) that expectation bias is over-ridden - eg if you had a speaker with a blown tweeter you wouldn’t really need to measure it, or ABX it, to know it sounded like cr^p. Your expectation bias would be right on the money. For me, the Submersives are like that - they are just so superior to what I have had before, the measurements are really just confirming it for me. When I engage Pgm2 I fully expect to be flat, more or less, into single digit Hz. How that will 'sound' to me, I don't know - but my measurements will prove I am getting it. Now bear in mind your current subs are probably much better than my old subs (SVS PC12-NSD - less than a third the price of a Submersive) so I may well be experiencing a much bigger difference than you will with your current subs. I think you will respect the views of Craig John - ask him. He says he has never heard bass in a domestic home theatre that is better than his. That is, in ANY home theatre. 

 

 

Yes, this is a good analogy, and expressed in far fewer words than I just used too :)  Yes - I would describe it that way. Game over.

 

Quote:

LOL!  Well, Jerry, I can tell you from personal experience that once the tape measure comes out, you are sold! Mrs Keith knows enough about me to regularly say, if she sees me coming out the HT with a tape measure in my hand, "Uh oh... what are you buying now....?". 

 

This is always a good read!

Edited by kbarnes701 - 11/25/12 at 12:46pm

Well, I just completed my first Curve Editor exercise.  My objective was to try and smooth the response between 50 and 120 Hz.  I used two edits, one affecting the left and right speakers, and one affecting the two sub channels.  Here is the frequency response for mains+subs, before and after applying the edit (red=before, green=after):

 

 

 

As expected, the difference is subtle, and I am not sure I can hear it.  Don't know whey there is a difference below 15Hz, but this doesn't concern me.

 

Did you try pulling down 50-80Hz and pulling up 80-120Hz?  Where did you put the grips and how many 'handles' did you use (I think I have these terms right - by grips I mean the beginning and end points of the range and by handles I mean the little blocks that go green when you drag the curve around).

 

It will, Jerry, it will 

 

Here are the two edits I created, the first is for the lrft and right speakers, and the second is for the subs.

 

 

Check the Detection Results screen and you will see that #2 is the center channel.. Plus,on mine, even though I have dual subs, there is only one sub channel ... #12. I'd bet yours is the same, and that #11 is the Right Wide.

It is impossible for the simple curve it shows to represent what is happening on all channels, especially when one curve is set for L&R and another for the two subs ...or the sub channel and the Right Wide.

I am in the theater now stepping through the editing process and grabbing screen caps.

Jeff

 

Looking at the Audyssey Pro User Guide, channels 1 and 2 are the left and right front speakers.  You are correct, there is only one sub channel, ch12--my mistake.  Of course, I wasn't paying attention when I was actually running the program, so it is possible that something has changed since the Users Guide was published.  Are you looking at the channel listing with the program open?

 

Shucks, now I'm going to have to do it all over again.  This is time-consuming, especially setting up the REW kit.  Not only that, when I re-load the results into the AVR, I have to fix the sub1 and sub2 distances and trims, which are set wrong because of the known bug.  And then I need to re-check the distance tweak.  Pro is getting to be a lot of trouble.

I am, and with the snipping tool handy! Yeegads, what a plethora of screen caps are needed to tell the story!

Nos. 5 and 6 are the "backs" and switched to "none" when I selected both Wides and Heights for this example.



I think we might have discovered an error on the Pro User's Guide, though newer versions of MulEQ Pro have only the instructions in the app itself as the guide.

Could you be looking at an out of date document?

 

An out of date document?  I think all of the documents on the Installer web site are out of date, so it doesn't surprise me that things have changed.  Unfortunately, it demonstrates that supporting Pro is a low priority at Audyssey.

 

Thanks for confirming this.

For Onkyo anyway, they only have 885/886 Pro user guides. When I asked Luke about the 5508 he pointed me to the in-app instructions. Of course, that works OK, but it precludes someone from familiarizing themselves with instructions for a "new" unit. My context is going to a customer's house to calibrate a new model for the first time ... it would be beneficial to bone up beforehand rather than upon arrival.

Jeff

 

Especially as at least some of the in-program instructions are incorrect on some models. On my 5509, if you follow the in-program instructions it tells you to connect the preamp output to the left Aux-in on the back of the APR, where in reality it has to be connected to the left PC-in. This is not documented *anywhere* officially and I discovered it by accident on a different forum, before I even got my Pro kit. I think the nearest thing to a written set of instructions will be the FAQ (once mature), but that can never be unit-specific I guess. Thank god for this thread is all I can say.

 

This will be awesome though, Jeff!  I agree with Stuart that the Curve Editor, used appropriately, is one of the major reasons to invest in a Pro Kit - as you know I never used it until today but the audible difference it has made is terrific. The only reason I never used it before is because I wasn't sure exactly how to do it, so the tutorial you are preparing will be fabulous. I intend to do more Curve Editor tweakery over time. BTW, today is the first and only time I have ever reloaded a previous calibration too - a very cool feature.

ot, but if every problem in the world got the same type of worldwide collaboration that we have for audyssey issues, it would be a much better place...

This is a very important question, Keith. When I reload a set of measurements in Pro, and when I save the new filters to the AVR, the trim and distances are set to identical values for sub1 and sub2. This is one of the bugs we have been talking about. Can you confirm that you encountered this bug on the Onkyo as well?

I'm not sure that it's manufacturer-specific. It might be that sub distances and levels are not stored ... PERIOD ,,,, with Pro AMD files. Only the settings obtained when using the mic and level match screen are correct and transferred to the target unit. Those data must be written down and re-checked/re-entered when (re)loading calibrations.

I can tell you that It is "by design" and related to an architectural issue, iow, it won't ever be "fixed."

Jeff
Edited by pepar - 11/25/12 at 7:47pm

I suspect that it may be a limitation of the Pro AMD file format.

The purpose of my question was to make sure Keith was aware that his sub settings might not be correct any more. Kal, I reported this to Audyssey several months ago, and the official response I received was that the issue was caused by a "lack of resources made available to Audyssey by the hardware manufacturers", and would not be fixed.

I've heard that one before.  

AJ and Pepar,
I have Multi EQ Pro 3.6 up, and I get a different ordering on my default Zone Configuration than you've screen captured. I'm running Audyssey Pro with a Denon 4311.

The channels I get (in order) are:
L&R Fronts (1 &2)
Center (3)
L&R Surround A (4 & 5)
L&R Surround Back (6 & 7)
L&R Height (8 &9)
L&R Wide (10 & 11)
Subwoofers 1 & 2 (12)



My setup currently doesn't have Surround Backs, Front Heights or Wides, so I set the appropriate channels to "None" when I run Pro. I also just loaded a previously saved AMD file, based on a configuration that had only L&R Fronts, Center, L&R Surround A, and Subwoofers 1 & 2 (i.e. channels 1-5 and 12), and when I generated filters, those channels are named in the same order as listed on the Zone Configuration. So at least on my install and AVR, the channel listing is 'correct' relative to the Guide. I'll see if I can do some OmniMic runs to verify that a curve tweak I did to the Fronts or Center really is being applied to them correctly, but I can't get to that until tomorrow night in all likelihood.
Edited by sdrucker - 11/25/12 at 10:32pm

Well, now that I have actually run Pro again, my results are the same as Stuart's, and different from Jeff's:

 

I suspect, for some reason, that the zone assignment depends on the AVR make/model.

Yes, and it underscores the need to note the configuration and number assignments on the Detection Results screen to use in the Curve Designer/Editor.

I *think* I have all of the screen caps I need to do the Curve Designer/Editor guide. Initially I am going to create a Word document and then we can go from there to integrate it (or not) into the Pro FAQ.. This is going to be lengthy ...

Jeff
Edited by pepar - 11/26/12 at 8:16am

Yes I did. It didn't matter to me as I have a record anyway and I change the sub distances by using my OmniMic to perform the sub distance tweak. From the earlier discussions, I was expecting it to happen, and it did.