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 116

post #3451 of 5258
Bonjour Jeff,
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

...
One might think that much of the human voice is 400 - 1000, and fundamentally that is true. ...
Jeff

Yes, but one shouldn't forget that the very basic individual hearing is essentially based on ear/hearing optimization to the mother tong language... which by definition, can be very different as far as frequency bandwidth is concerned.

An illustration of what I'm talking about can be found here, Tomatis. And there is an simple explicit audio example at the bottom of the page.

Bonne lecture... et écoute(s),

Hugo
post #3452 of 5258
Interesting, Hugo. Is it their contention that clarity and the "position" in the overall mix is perceived differently for a person speaking in one's native language?

That is our context here, specifically with regards to Keith's target curve edits.

Jeff
post #3453 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Interesting, Hugo. Is it their contention that clarity and the "position" in the overall mix is perceived differently for a person speaking in one's native language?

That is our context here, specifically with regards to Keith's target curve edits.

Jeff

 

As a graduate linguist I know what Hugo is referring to and agree with his premise - the 'rhythms' of language are acquired very early in life and stay with us, and this does have an inhibiting effect on learning new languages later in life. Indeed, whenever I go to visit Italy, for example, it takes me a day or so for my ear to 'tune in' to the natural rhythm of Italian and until it does so, I struggle to understand what is being said.  HST, the differences between American spoken English and British spoken English are much less pronounced, although on occasion I do struggle a little with some of the more 'unusual' American accents (by which I mean accents I don't usually hear much). I imagine it is the same for Americans if they listen to British accents from the North East or South West of England, or from Glasgow in Scotland. I know Americans who sometimes have to turn on the subtitles in order to be able to decipher some of these regional accents (and sometimes I struggle a little myself, especially with Glaswegian for example).

 

What I think all this boils down to is the importance of ensuring that the centre channel dialogue is as clear as it can be - and in this regard I have found, personally, that dampening reflections with room treatments (plus using Audyssey of course) has made the most significant improvement, once one assumes a decent centre channel speaker with proper placement, correct toe-up (!) etc. and a properly EQd system. 

 

While I do take your point, Jeff, that a system that is good for music will also be good for movies (which, logically, has to be the same as saying that a system that is good for movies will also be good for music), I do maintain that intelligibility of the human voice (dialogue) is paramount for movies and perhaps a little less so for music. HST, I agree that a system built around the twin premises of accuracy and transparency to the source will sound good on any content it is charged with reproducing and thus the entire discussion is probably pointless ;)  This is not, of course, to be conflated with saying that a system used primarily for movies needs to be designed with all of the same parameters in mind as for one that is primarily designed for music. For music, I do not need two subwoofers with virtually flat response into single figures and for movies I would be prepared to sacrifice, for example, and if I had to choose, some extreme top end for a little more clarity on dialogue reproduction. The huge 'distraction' of the visuals diminishes the need to be so absolutely critical of whether the massed violins in the score have all the openness and 'airiness' they can muster, for example - whereas if you didn't quite catch Morpheus saying that his belief system does not require that you believe the same as he does, well, you may have missed the entire point of the movie <LOL>.

post #3454 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


While I do take your point, Jeff, that a system that is good for music will also be good for movies (which, logically, has to be the same as saying that a system that is good for movies will also be good for music), I do maintain that intelligibility of the human voice (dialogue) is paramount for movies and perhaps a little less so for music. HST, I agree that a system built around the twin premises of accuracy and transparency to the source will sound good on any content it is charged with reproducing and thus the entire discussion is probably pointless wink.gif  This is not, of course, to be conflated with saying that a system used primarily for movies needs to be designed with all of the same parameters in mind as for one that is primarily designed for music. For music, I do not need two subwoofers with virtually flat response into single figures and for movies I would be prepared to sacrifice, for example, and if I had to choose, some extreme top end for a little more clarity on dialogue reproduction. The huge 'distraction' of the visuals diminishes the need to be so absolutely critical of whether the massed violins in the score have all the openness and 'airiness' they can muster, for example - whereas if you didn't quite catch Morpheus saying that his belief system does not require that you believe the same as he does, well, you may have missed the entire point of the movie .

Sure, a system that is properly set up will work well for both movies and music. I use music recordings I do to put the finishing touches on a system, though, because they are known to my ears. But that is definitely conditional upon the speakers being of a certain quality, aimed correctly, with adequate amplification and then in a room that is properly treated.

Jeff
post #3455 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


While I do take your point, Jeff, that a system that is good for music will also be good for movies (which, logically, has to be the same as saying that a system that is good for movies will also be good for music), I do maintain that intelligibility of the human voice (dialogue) is paramount for movies and perhaps a little less so for music. HST, I agree that a system built around the twin premises of accuracy and transparency to the source will sound good on any content it is charged with reproducing and thus the entire discussion is probably pointless wink.gif  This is not, of course, to be conflated with saying that a system used primarily for movies needs to be designed with all of the same parameters in mind as for one that is primarily designed for music. For music, I do not need two subwoofers with virtually flat response into single figures and for movies I would be prepared to sacrifice, for example, and if I had to choose, some extreme top end for a little more clarity on dialogue reproduction. The huge 'distraction' of the visuals diminishes the need to be so absolutely critical of whether the massed violins in the score have all the openness and 'airiness' they can muster, for example - whereas if you didn't quite catch Morpheus saying that his belief system does not require that you believe the same as he does, well, you may have missed the entire point of the movie .

Sure, a system that is properly set up will work well for both movies and music. I use music recordings I do to put the finishing touches on a system, though, because they are known to my ears. But that is definitely conditional upon the speakers being of a certain quality, aimed correctly, with adequate amplification and then in a room that is properly treated.

Jeff

 

We have, Jeff, achieved concurrence :)

post #3456 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

We have, Jeff, achieved concurrence smile.gif

Typos and all ...
post #3457 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

As a graduate linguist I know what Hugo is referring to and agree with his premise - the 'rhythms' of language are acquired very early in life and stay with us, and this does have an inhibiting effect on learning new languages later in life. Indeed, whenever I go to visit Italy, for example, it takes me a day or so for my ear to 'tune in' to the natural rhythm of Italian and until it does so, I struggle to understand what is being said.  HST, the differences between American spoken English and British spoken English are much less pronounced, although on occasion I do struggle a little with some of the more 'unusual' American accents (by which I mean accents I don't usually hear much). I imagine it is the same for Americans if they listen to British accents from the North East or South West of England, or from Glasgow in Scotland. I know Americans who sometimes have to turn on the subtitles in order to be able to decipher some of these regional accents (and sometimes I struggle a little myself, especially with Glaswegian for example).

Being an American from the midwest (purest accent possible in the US!) and having spent a lot of time in Europe as well as the UK, I'm fondly reminded of the first time I watched Snatch. I honestly had no clue what was being said and had to resort to subtitles! This is where the difference between accent and dialect becomes readily apparent!
post #3458 of 5258
Bonjour Jeff and Keith,
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Interesting, Hugo. Is it their contention that clarity and the "position" in the overall mix is perceived differently for a person speaking in one's native language?
That is our context here, specifically with regards to Keith's target curve edits.
Jeff

Yes. But please bear in mind that this matter is not my specialty, but only one of my points of interest. Actually @ 45yrs ago, an article on Tomatis's work, started my HiFi/Audiophile, today HT, passion...

Anyway to have an idea of these ethnological differences please have a look here (in French).

Now as Keith has mentioned above, the clear "audibility" of human voice is essential in HT. But this means that depending on native language and then cultural habits (multiple languages spoken = heard = ear adaptation = Keith in Italy...), age + room impact in HiFi/HT, there are multiple reasons for individual differences in the end hearing (understanding) of the very same sound.

In my opinion this is where Pro is exceptional in giving any individual the ability to tweak the resulting sound to his own taste.

And does this mean that Audyssey DynamicEQ is "only" really tweaked for US people hearings? Possibly... wink.gif

But then maybe we could return to basics as all this is Human knowledge impacting an out of the world passion. As for decades, haven't we happily lived with HiFi systems consisting of 2 (possibly small) speakers, a simple stereo amplifier and a turntable playing scratching vinyl discs? Ah paired Rogers LS3/5A + NAD 3020 + Thorens/Grado... souvenirs, souvenirs and progress eek.gif...

Bon WE,

Hugo
post #3459 of 5258
Yes, I advised my brother to buy the NAD integrated amp back in the early '80s. It was a great little amp and as far as I know he's still using it (we don't talk).
post #3460 of 5258
Hmm .... sounds like a good New Year's resolution .... mend some broken fences.
post #3461 of 5258

Just purchased the Audyessy Pro Kit and have bought the license/set up the key. This may be a stupid question but do I need to download the mic calibration file?

post #3462 of 5258
If you bought the kit, it should be on the software installation disc. If the kit is new, the software should be up-to-date. Otherwise, you will need to download the latest version.

Have you set up an Audyssey Installer account on the website? You will need the account to buy a license and to renew the key.
post #3463 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

If you bought the kit, it should be on the software installation disc. If the kit is new, the software should be up-to-date. Otherwise, you will need to download the latest version.
Have you set up an Audyssey Installer account on the website? You will need the account to buy a license and to renew the key.

Yes I bought the kit new and it has the version 3.6 software. I did set up an account when purchasing the license, just wasn't sure if I should download the mic calibration file or not.

 

Thanks for the answer, I'm sure I'll have more when I start calibrating.

post #3464 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by weird 23 View Post

Just purchased the Audyessy Pro Kit and have bought the license/set up the key. This may be a stupid question but do I need to download the mic calibration file?

 

No - the mic calibration file is on the disc supplied with the kit. Of course, once you know the serial number of the mic, you can download it if you wish. 

 

See this section of the FAQ for more detail:

 

b)4.   How do I get started?

post #3465 of 5258

Talking of version 3.6, do we have an 'official' answer to what the differences are between 3.6 and 3.5?  I am using 3.5 and I don't usually update software that is working unless there are new features I need etc or some bug that was affecting me has been fixed.  If someone can point me to the differences, and suggest if updating serves any useful purpose, I will add the info to the FAQ under a 'Software versions' header.  Often the software seems to be updated as new hardware comes out - if that is the only difference, I'll stick with 3.5 for now. Thanks.

post #3466 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Talking of version 3.6, do we have an 'official' answer to what the differences are between 3.6 and 3.5?  I am using 3.5 and I don't usually update software that is working unless there are new features I need etc or some bug that was affecting me has been fixed.  If someone can point me to the differences, and suggest if updating serves any useful purpose, I will add the info to the FAQ under a 'Software versions' header.  Often the software seems to be updated as new hardware comes out - if that is the only difference, I'll stick with 3.5 for now. Thanks.

Luke, Sep 13 12:10 pm (PDT):

Hi Jeff,

The MultEQ Pro 3.6 is introduce to support new devices, there are "some" updates and we will release a list once all AVR customers finalize their firmware.

Regards,
Luke
Audyssey Laboratories

No list has been released yet.
post #3467 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Talking of version 3.6, do we have an 'official' answer to what the differences are between 3.6 and 3.5?  I am using 3.5 and I don't usually update software that is working unless there are new features I need etc or some bug that was affecting me has been fixed.  If someone can point me to the differences, and suggest if updating serves any useful purpose, I will add the info to the FAQ under a 'Software versions' header.  Often the software seems to be updated as new hardware comes out - if that is the only difference, I'll stick with 3.5 for now. Thanks.

Luke, Sep 13 12:10 pm (PDT):

Hi Jeff,

The MultEQ Pro 3.6 is introduce to support new devices, there are "some" updates and we will release a list once all AVR customers finalize their firmware.

Regards,
Luke
Audyssey Laboratories

No list has been released yet.

 

So just new device support then? 

post #3468 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

So just new device support then? 

There are those as of now undisclosed "updates" that will be listed when manufacturers finalize their firmware.

Jeff
post #3469 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

There are those as of now undisclosed "updates" that will be listed when manufacturers finalize their firmware.
Jeff

What's the over/under that 3.7 will come out first?
post #3470 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

So just new device support then? 

There are those as of now undisclosed "updates" that will be listed when manufacturers finalize their firmware.

Jeff

 

Hmmm. Call me skeptical.... ;)  Are there any manufacturers who have still not finalised their Pro f/w?

 

Let's tackle it from the other end... has anyone using 3.6 noticed any differences between it and 3.5?  

post #3471 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Hmmm. Call me skeptical.... wink.gif  Are there any manufacturers who have still not finalised their Pro f/w?

Let's tackle it from the other end... has anyone using 3.6 noticed any differences between it and 3.5?  

Some time back, I reported that I had tested ver 3.6 to see if any of the known bugs had been fixed, and the answer is no, they have not. However, I have a different philosophy regarding software updates. I always install the latest version unless there have been reported issues. Of course, I had to upgrade for support of the 4520 model.
post #3472 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Hmmm. Call me skeptical.... wink.gif  Are there any manufacturers who have still not finalised their Pro f/w?

Let's tackle it from the other end... has anyone using 3.6 noticed any differences between it and 3.5?  

Some time back, I reported that I had tested ver 3.6 to see if any of the known bugs had been fixed, and the answer is no, they have not. However, I have a different philosophy regarding software updates. I always install the latest version unless there have been reported issues. Of course, I had to upgrade for support of the 4520 model.

 

Thanks Jerry. I never install a software update unless I know it will bring me a tangible benefit. If it ain't borke, don't fix it is my philosophy :) 

post #3473 of 5258
Hi guys, I've had a bit of bad luck in the middle of a Pro cal of a 5509. Everything was going smoothly until the laptop power got kicked out during a mic position change. Once restarted and lanched, the sub levels in gain matching are indicating 20dB lower than they are. I've verified C-weighted spl by ear, RTA, and even the consumer xt32 gain matching.

I've tried the following:

Laptop restart
Simple clear of 5509.
All Clear of 5509.
uninstall/reinstall of Pro 3.6
Re-load of mic file
Router re-set

Problem persists; it indicates failure at -55dB when it's really -75dB.

Any ideas?

I'm currently running Pro through the min mic locations to let it calc just to see what happens.
Edited by Cam Man - 12/4/12 at 2:54pm
post #3474 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Thanks Jerry. I never install a software update unless I know it will bring me a tangible benefit. If it ain't borke, don't fix it is my philosophy smile.gif 

+1 on that; I've had some cases where software updates create new bugs rather than simply fix (or ignore) old ones. One of my core packages for work actually introduced a bug that made a critical feature produce nonsense results, and was only testable in a way that hardcore statistician types would check. That matters when your business reputation depends on it.

However, I very much appreciate that there are those among us that test so that the rest of us feel comfortable. Thank you AJ, IOW.

Of course, having said that I have 3.6 up.wink.gif
post #3475 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Hi guys, I've had a bit of bad luck in the middle of a Pro cal of a 5509. Everything was going smoothly until the laptop power got kicked out during a mic position change. Once restarted and lanched, the sub levels in gain matching are indicating 20dB lower than they are. I've verified C-weighted spl by ear, RTA, and even the consumer xt32 gain matching.
I've tried the following:
Laptop restart
Simple clear of 5509.
All Clear of 5509.
uninstall/reinstall of Pro 3.6
Re-load of mic file
Router re-set
Problem persists; it indicates failure at -55dB when it's really -75dB.
Any ideas?
I'm currently running Pro through the min mic locations to let it calc just to see what happens.

It doesn't strike me as something wrong with the 5509 or the MultEQ Pro installation. Check all your connections.

Didn't your laptop run on battery when AC was removed?
post #3476 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Hi guys, I've had a bit of bad luck in the middle of a Pro cal of a 5509. Everything was going smoothly until the laptop power got kicked out during a mic position change. Once restarted and lanched, the sub levels in gain matching are indicating 20dB lower than they are. I've verified C-weighted spl by ear, RTA, and even the consumer xt32 gain matching.
I've tried the following:
Laptop restart
Simple clear of 5509.
All Clear of 5509.
uninstall/reinstall of Pro 3.6
Re-load of mic file
Router re-set
Problem persists; it indicates failure at -55dB when it's really -75dB.
Any ideas?
I'm currently running Pro through the min mic locations to let it calc just to see what happens.

That is indeed a strange problem, one I have never heard before. Just curious, since a laptop runs on battery if the power brick cable is kicked out, what actually caused the calibration to fail?

So, if I understand correctly, you are starting the calibration over, and when it gets to the point where the sub levels need to be set to 75dB, the measure is showing 20dB low. If you have indeed verified that the sub levels are at approximately 75dB with your SPL, you could simply skip the level-setting screen and proceed with the calibration, and check the sub trims after the calibration has completed. I think this is what you are trying now, so report back whether the calibration appears to be OK.

Then I would open a case with Audyssey support regarding the failure of the level-setting step.
post #3477 of 5258

I ran a fresh Pro calibration yesterday after making a few changes to my speaker configuration.  After measuring eight positions, saving the measurements, and calculating the filters, I was in the "Transfer filters to the 4520" step.  In the very last step of this process (the "writing filters to flash"), I received the following error:

 

700

 

Clicking OK returned me to the "Transfer filters to the 4520" step.  Several repeated attempts resulted in the same error each time.  So, I terminated the program, re-booted the laptop just to be safe, and power-cycled the 4520.  I then re-launched Pro, loaded the saved measurements, and this time the filters transferred successfully.

 

Of course, by reloading the measurements, I ended up with the sub distances and trims set incorrectly (that pesky bug...).  I had to use sub distances and trims from the last calibration, which I assume are still correct.  Normally, I would have just started over with a new calibration, but the serial transfer bug on the 4520 means that a calibration takes forever.  There are just too many bugs with the Pro software these days.

 

Google search reveals that the error might be due to a stack overflow.  I will report this to Audyssey to see if they have an idea what might have caused it.  Anyone else care to venture a guess?

post #3478 of 5258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Hi guys, I've had a bit of bad luck in the middle of a Pro cal of a 5509. Everything was going smoothly until the laptop power got kicked out during a mic position change. Once restarted and lanched, the sub levels in gain matching are indicating 20dB lower than they are. I've verified C-weighted spl by ear, RTA, and even the consumer xt32 gain matching.

I've tried the following:

Laptop restart
Simple clear of 5509.
All Clear of 5509.
uninstall/reinstall of Pro 3.6
Re-load of mic file
Router re-set

Problem persists; it indicates failure at -55dB when it's really -75dB.

Any ideas?

I'm currently running Pro through the min mic locations to let it calc just to see what happens.

 

I guess you could try a hard reset of the 5509 - nothing to lose (other than all your settings, so make a note of them first).

 

 

RESET Onkyo to Factory

 

To reset the AV receiver to its factory defaults, turn it on and, while holding down the [VCR/DVR] button on the unit, press the [ON/STANDBY] button on the unit. "Clear" will appear on the display and the AV receiver will enter Standby mode.

post #3479 of 5258
Thanks for the help, guys.

There is an All Clear that is even more complete than the one suggested by you, KBarnes.

Sorry, guys, but my laptop is ancient, and the battery will not hold a charge now. This has been easy to work around, but today Murphy's Law dictated that the foot of the mic stand hit the switch on a power strip to which the laptop was connected. That strip was just out of sight under the sofa, so didn't notice it.

As I mentioned, the level has been confirmed via RTA, by the 5509's consumer xt32 calibration, and by ear (you can easily hear 20dB lower).

Since I posted, I did bypass the sub matching and measured just four locations to see what would happen. The trims for the subs were correct (0dB) but all the others were off the chart high. I cranked them back, and the system sounds very nice. The LF is incredibly flat/smooth. Now going to run again to see what happens.
post #3480 of 5258
Regarding the issue with the Denon 4520 serial interface slowness, here is the update from Audyssey today:

Luke, Dec 04 06:07 pm (PST):
We are working with Denon to resolve this issue, should have a solution soon, we will announce it once Denon and us are satisfied with the outcome.

Regards,
Luke
Audyssey Laboratories
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)