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 142

post #4231 of 5251
Has the marantz 8801 firmware been updated to enable the use of a pro kit?
post #4232 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmschnur View Post

Has the marantz 8801 firmware been updated to enable the use of a pro kit?

It is on their list as being "installer-ready."

http://audyssey.com/products?installable[]=1&pid=123&ptype=5
post #4233 of 5251
Thanks. In his review in march, Kal had said it needed a fix. I guess that has happened.
post #4234 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmschnur View Post

Thanks. In his review in march, Kal had said it needed a fix. I guess that has happened.

It certainly has.

post #4235 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

My curve edit "shelves" the mains at 150Hz (anchored to "reference" at 250Hz) and lifts gradually above 12k to slightly counteract the roll-off of Audyssey Reference before being anchored at 22k. The sub channel is excluded from this edited curve.

Jeff


Curious,why do shelf the mains at 150Hz? Are you trying to add more midbass bump or are you using the editor to compensate for a measured dip in that region?
post #4236 of 5251
To each his or her own, of course. But, after dabbling, I am happiest with the standard target curve 1 with MRC removed, which I think makes both excellent theoretical sense for most rooms and subjectively is most satisfying to me in my otherwise untreated room with hard Sheetrock walls and a few glass windows and pictures. Our choices of predominant media, genres, etc. for listening may also play some role in our differing preferences. I also tend to sit further from the stage and closer to the rear of the hall at live concerts, which may condition my ears to a less bright direct sound. More aggressive rolloff and the MRC dip on has also tended to sound duller than the real thing live, not only to me but to a friend with similar tastes on his system. He is especially sensitive to and does not want excessive high frequency energy. It is all subjective in the end, but we are quite happy as I have described.
post #4237 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenLansing View Post

Curious,why do shelf the mains at 150Hz? Are you trying to add more midbass bump or are you using the editor to compensate for a measured dip in that region?

I have the M&K S-150 and while they are THX certified and designed to be crossed at 80Hz, the two 5" mid-range cones just do not have the heft I like from, typically, male and some female vocals. I've mentioned it before - I use "well-recorded" music (a lot of it live) to dial in my system. When vocals are right and when the music is right, movies sound great as well. It's only a single dB, and that tapers to reference (0dB) at 250Hz and wherever the boost naturally "peters out" below 150Hz, so I haven't caused even a "bump." Call it sweetening. smile.gif

Jeff
Edited by pepar - 5/24/13 at 7:03am
post #4238 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I have the M&K S-150 and while they are THX certified and designed to be crossed at 80Hz, the two 5" mid-range cones just do not have the heft I like from, typically, male and some female vocals. I've mentioned it before - I use "well-recorded" music (a lot of it live) to dial in my system. When vocals are right and when the music is right, movies sound great as well. It's only a single dB, and that tapers to reference (0dB) at 250Hz and wherever the boost naturally "peters out" below 150Hz, so I haven't caused even a "bump." Call it sweetening. smile.gif

Jeff

Thanks:)
post #4239 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post

New Pro user here. I'm unable to measure more than one listening position because of the USB-to-serial time-outs ("Communications timeout error"). I get a timeout either before position 2 or when position 2 data is being transferred to the AVR. I have followed the directions from the FAQ and tried unplugging the cable and reinserting it, but that does not clear the error. The only way I've found to get around it is to soft reset the AVR by unplugging it for 10-15 mins. Simply turning it off and then back on doesn't do it; Audyssey software starts with "Please check the connection and verify that 2-way remote is set to not used" error.
I'm using Denon 4311CI, cable supplied with the kit, no extension cables, software version 3.6 and Win 7 driver from the downloads section of the Audyssey site. Any suggestions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post

The problematic laptop was an Asus Zenbook Prime with Win7 64-bit and only USB 3.0 ports, but also have an old Toshiba with WinXP 32-bit and USB 2.0.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post

Forgot to mention that the laptop was plugged in to eliminate power management issues. I also ordered the Plugable USB to serial cable just to try the newest Prolific chip and driver combo.

Got it to work a while ago on Asus Zenbook Prime with Win7 64-bit and USB 3.0 ports, but forgot to report back. It might have been simply a Win7 64-bit driver issue, but just in case I bought a Plugable USB-serial adapter (along with a DB9 male/female mini gender changer and a Plugable 32' USB extension cable), installed the latest Prolific driver that Plugable supplies on their site and haven't seen a USB time-out since then. Again, thanks for all the suggestions.
post #4240 of 5251
It's usually the Windoze drivers. wink.gif

Glad to hear you're up and running!

Jeff
post #4241 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Target Curve 1, Target Curve 2 and whatever the other one is are not related to Audyssey Movie and Music Curves. The former selections are chosen during calibration and are based on room size and are the starting points for MultEQ Pro to achieve Audyssey Reference. The latter are selected when using the system and are based on preferences for movies and music.

Whether one is using the consumer or Pro versions of MultEQ, there is only ONE filter set/curve loaded into the receiver/processor. Audyssey Music/Flat only offsets from that a predetermined amount. So, if one has used the curve editor to create a flat target curve, Music/Flat will still offset by the same amount that was needed to turn Movie/Reference into Music/Flat and the result will be w-a-y too bright.

Jeff

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

There is one curve/filter set that is loaded into the receiver/processor. And that can be from the onboard, consumer MultEQ, or from MultEQ Pro. If the latter, then that curve could have been derived from any of the starting curves, with or without midrange compensation and/or the curve editor. Once it is loaded, the receiver/processor takes over.

So I thought I understood the relationship between target curve preferences in the Pro software (3 types of HF roll-off and +/-MRC) and Audyssey (Movie) / Audyssey Flat (Music) switching in the receiver, but after some more reading, I've managed to confuse myself.

1) After a consumer (non-Pro) Audyssey calibration, does the offset applied by receiver when switching to Audyssey Flat (Music) setting eliminate MRC?

2) After a Pro calibration, does the selection of the HF roll-off curve and MRC get transmitted to the receiver in order for the Audyssey Flat (Music) setting to result in applying an offset that makes the FR actually flat? If not, then wouldn't the offset applied by Audyssey Flat (Music) setting to eliminate MRC if no MRC had been selected during calibration actually result in a peak at 2 kHz? Also, wouldn't the HF offset overshoot or undershoot a flat FR depending on which type of HF roll-off had been selected during calibration?
post #4242 of 5251
Thread Starter 
^
Here's my understanding
1. No. MRC is included in the 2 curves (std and flat/movie and music) in all Audyssey-equipped processors.

2. Pro simply allows you to remove MRC should you want to and the processor does not put it back in.
As to the Audyssey curves in any processor and how the Pro curves affect them, I find this post a clear explanation:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1346723/the-audyssey-pro-installer-kit-thread-faq-in-post-1/3180#post_22477990
post #4243 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

^
Here's my understanding
1. No. MRC is included in the 2 curves (std and flat/movie and music) in all Audyssey-equipped processors.

2. Pro simply allows you to remove MRC should you want to and the processor does not put it back in.
As to the Audyssey curves in any processor and how the Pro curves affect them, I find this post a clear explanation:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1346723/the-audyssey-pro-installer-kit-thread-faq-in-post-1/3180#post_22477990

1) That was exactly my understanding until I saw somebody on a different forum claiming that MRC is removed for Audyssey Flat (Music).

2) I understand the explanation, and since no MRC compensatory offset is applied by Audyssey Flat (Music), the MRC part of the question is moot. But what about the 3 different HF roll-off curves? Which one is the Audyssey Flat offset modeled on?
post #4244 of 5251
Thread Starter 
^OK but it seems you are taking as a given, based on that post somewhere, that Aud Flat/Music in a processor does not have MRC applied. Flat is "Flat" because it does not apply the HF roll-off, but the MRC dip is still applied.

I base this on this post by Chris on the Audyssey thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/28770#post_18910114

Q: "Originally Posted by gamelover360
Does Audyssey Flat engaged by selecting THX Cinema on my Integra 9.9 (Re-EQ off of course) maintain the Midrange compensation dip if I selected it in Pro?"
A: Yes."

Some other of his posts you may find interesting to this discussion:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/33960#post_19714566
"Yes, the midrange compensation dip is on by default in the built-in MultEQ versions. You have the option of turning it off in the Pro software."

http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/17880#post_17072684
"One of the key reasons for the roll off in the high frequencies is to compensate for the amount of direct vs reverberant sound energy in your room. Content is mixed in rooms in which the listener is dominated by direct sound. Most home listening rooms place the listener farther away and are more reverberant and so is dominated by reverberant sound. The high frequency roll off is a method to compensate for these differences. The rule of thumb is that the smaller the room the less roll off is needed. In your room it sounds like the standard Audyssey curve (called High Frequency Roll Off 1 in MultEQ Pro) is the one to start with. You can also try High Frequency Roll Off 2. The room volume is a rough indicator because other factors, such as absorption, also influence this decision.

Midrange compensation is an intentional dip in the 2 kHz region where the vast majority of tweeter-to-midrange crossovers are. In that region the tweeter is at the low end of its range and the midrange at the high end of its range and the directivity of the speaker goes through major changes. We found that if that region is equalized to flat, the change in direct to reflected ratio that happens because of the directivity variations causes voices to sound harsh (among other things). So, we have this implemented in the Audyssey target curve. With MultEQ Pro you can choose to turn it off, but we don't recommend it. This notion was observed 40 years ago by BBC speaker designers in their studio monitors. They designed their speakers with this "BBC dip" intentionally in the speaker response."
post #4245 of 5251
Thread Starter 
In my recent search, I stumbled across this old post by Chris about xover selection and the splice in Pro:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/20340#post_17490386

Remember that in the MultEQ Pro software the algorithm in recommending the crossover frequency is much more advanced than in the built-in version. It first finds the -3 dB roll off point, but then performs a search of other higher frequencies and internally combines them with the measured response of each speaker to see what combination gives the flattest (amplitude and phase) at the crossover. So, the numbers you see listed are in decreasing order of recommendations. The ones at the top of the list produced the best amplitude and phase blend at the crossover.
post #4246 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

"Midrange compensation is an intentional dip in the 2 kHz region where the vast majority of tweeter-to-midrange crossovers are. In that region the tweeter is at the low end of its range and the midrange at the high end of its range and the directivity of the speaker goes through major changes. We found that if that region is equalized to flat, the change in direct to reflected ratio that happens because of the directivity variations causes voices to sound harsh (among other things). So, we have this implemented in the Audyssey target curve. With MultEQ Pro you can choose to turn it off, but we don't recommend it. This notion was observed 40 years ago by BBC speaker designers in their studio monitors. They designed their speakers with this "BBC dip" intentionally in the speaker response."

 

This has always struck me as a kludgey thing, even though I leave it on by default. I think that loudspeaker design has progressed somewhat in the last 40 years and many designs these days don't have the tweeter to mid XO anywhere near that region as far as I am aware. My own S150s, for example, cross over at 1.5Khz, because the triple tweeter array can handle far more power than a single tweeter, allowing the designer to work with the lower XO. I suppose that I really ought to kill the MRC/BBC Dip in Pro. I can see it when I measure with REW but I have had other priorities (bass) for a long time and have overlooked the whole issue. Certainly the 2-3KHz area is one that is critically important for the human voice.

 

I am on a break from measuring currently (mainly due to a huge backlog of bought but as-yet-unwatched movies) but next time I dig out the gear, I will try the system with and without MRC.

post #4247 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

In my recent search, I stumbled across this old post by Chris about xover selection and the splice in Pro:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/20340#post_17490386

Remember that in the MultEQ Pro software the algorithm in recommending the crossover frequency is much more advanced than in the built-in version. It first finds the -3 dB roll off point, but then performs a search of other higher frequencies and internally combines them with the measured response of each speaker to see what combination gives the flattest (amplitude and phase) at the crossover. So, the numbers you see listed are in decreasing order of recommendations. The ones at the top of the list produced the best amplitude and phase blend at the crossover.

 

This is something else you have reminded me about today too, SoM. My Pro recommendations for my mains usually suggest something like 40Hz for the XO, even though they are THX designs and intended to be crossed at 80Hz. For all the reasons we know so well, I ignore this recommendation and select 100Hz as the XO point, based mainly on Mark Seaton;s recommendation and findings for use of the Submersives with the M&K S150s. I am sure that Pro is measuring the in-room response well and that 40Hz is indeed what the mains are delivering when taking into account the room's influence, but it seems somewhat perverse to use 40Hz when the speakers have specifically been designed to use 80Hz. Not to mention the well-known additional reasons for using a higher XO - taking the strain off the amps, letting the sub do its job, etc etc. Asking the S150s to deliver 40Hz just doesn't seem like a good idea.

 

HST, this is perhaps something else I should check - using the 1st choice XO recommendations and then measuring again and seeing how the splice is or isn't affected.

 

So much to do...

 

EDIT: I should add that I perform the 'sub distance tweak' every time anyway, to optimise the splice as verified by independent measuring, so maybe the above is all irrelevant. IDK.

post #4248 of 5251
Thread Starter 
^I too get 40hz recommendations from Pro and currently have those loaded. This quote clarifies for me that Audyssey sees the splice as important and has a basic system for optimizing the splice in place with Pro, i.e., by ranking xovers.

It would be interesting to see sequential measurements of the below 300 Hz range as one moves down the list of xovers and the result of distance tweaks with each. Jerry, do you have a few hours to spare? biggrin.gif

Theoretically one would gain the least by use of REW-guided distance tweaks if one selects the top-ranked xover, but if selecting far down the list there may be far more benefit from the distance tweak.
post #4249 of 5251
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

This has always struck me as a kludgey thing, even though I leave it on by default. I think that loudspeaker design has progressed somewhat in the last 40 years and many designs these days don't have the tweeter to mid XO anywhere near that region as far as I am aware. My own S150s, for example, cross over at 1.5Khz, because the triple tweeter array can handle far more power than a single tweeter, allowing the designer to work with the lower XO. I suppose that I really ought to kill the MRC/BBC Dip in Pro. I can see it when I measure with REW but I have had other priorities (bass) for a long time and have overlooked the whole issue. Certainly the 2-3KHz area is one that is critically important for the human voice.

I am on a break from measuring currently (mainly due to a huge backlog of bought but as-yet-unwatched movies) but next time I dig out the gear, I will try the system with and without MRC.
I recall some discussion as to whether the exact xover freq really makes much diff irt to MRC. A very few folks have A/B MRC on/off. Precious few have actually preferred it off.

I intend some day to do that A/B but I've had little motivation as it already sounds so good and my free time has been well- spent listening not tweaking.

My Dalis have a dual-array soft/dome/ribbon tweeter assembly. One really has to wonder why such renowned speaker OEMs wouldn't use such a trick if it improved vocal SQ across the board.

In my case the CC is 2200Hz so a simple on/off A/B should suffice. But my FR/L are x'd up at 3300 so if it's really about the xover I was thinking an interesting additional test would be to do a custom curve with the MRC moved up to 3300, but that gets pretty tricky and beyond my Pro skill level.
post #4250 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

^OK but it seems you are taking as a given, based on that post somewhere, that Aud Flat/Music in a processor does not have MRC applied. Flat is "Flat" because it does not apply the HF roll-off, but the MRC dip is still applied.

SoM, thank you for digging up those quotes from the official Audyssey thread. I did a search there as well, but must have not been thorough enough in reading through the results.

I think you're misunderstanding what I was trying to say. Let me try again. The way Pepar explained it in the post I quoted above, only one set of filters is saved post-calibration. It becomes the Audyssey (Movie) curve. In order to get the Audyssey Flat (Music) curve, the receiver applies a pre-determined transform that is agnostic of the settings influencing the shape of the target curve in Pro and "hopes" this results in a flat target curve. Simplistically, let's say for a given frequency Type 1 HF roll-off is -2dB, Type 2 is -3dB, Type 3 is -4dB. The receiver doesn't know which one had been selected, so it applies a +3dB offset to this frequency for its Audyssey Flat (Music) curve. That only results in a flat FR if Type 2 HF roll-off had been selected in Pro software. For the other two types the offset undershoots or overshoots.

I wasn't saying that Audyssey Flat (Music) does not have MRC applied. Instead, I just stated that since MRC is applied for both curves, there is no need for the Audyssey Flat (Music) transform to apply an offset that would compensate for MRC in Audyssey (Movie). The Audyssey Flat (Music) offset only compensates for HF roll-off in Audyssey (Movie).
post #4251 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

^I too get 40hz recommendations from Pro and currently have those loaded. This quote clarifies for me that Audyssey sees the splice as important and has a basic system for optimizing the splice in place with Pro, i.e., by ranking xovers.

It would be interesting to see sequential measurements of the below 300 Hz range as one moves down the list of xovers and the result of distance tweaks with each. Jerry, do you have a few hours to spare? biggrin.gif

Theoretically one would gain the least by use of REW-guided distance tweaks if one selects the top-ranked xover, but if selecting far down the list there may be far more benefit from the distance tweak.

Maybe, but I have other audio time commitments as well. I am tearing down my room treatments and re-installing them one-by-one to measure and tweak their effectiveness. It would make sense to add this to the list of measurements.

What Chris doesn't clarify is the how less than optimal the lower crossover selections are. Clearly, a selection of 40Hz for the mains, vs. 80Hz, introduces other trade-offs as well. If only this were an exact science!
post #4252 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post


What Chris doesn't clarify is the how less than optimal the lower crossover selections are. Clearly, a selection of 40Hz for the mains, vs. 80Hz, introduces other trade-offs as well. If only this were an exact science!

There is a huge amount of science involved. But then human hearing enters the picture. And human perception. And then individual preferences. While the first two can be quantified, they can only be characterized as graph plots showing averages and deviations from the averages. Preferences? lol
post #4253 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

 
What Chris doesn't clarify is the how less than optimal the lower crossover selections are. Clearly, a selection of 40Hz for the mains, vs. 80Hz, introduces other trade-offs as well. If only this were an exact science!

 

Yes - it is these "other tradeoffs" that make me raise my XOs from the Audyssey Pro 1st choice of 40Hz. I believe I benefit greatly by doing so, and if it is at the expense of the splice, well the sub distance tweak plus a little REW-ery soon brings that back into line.

post #4254 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post


What Chris doesn't clarify is the how less than optimal the lower crossover selections are. Clearly, a selection of 40Hz for the mains, vs. 80Hz, introduces other trade-offs as well. If only this were an exact science!

There is a huge amount of science involved. But then human hearing enters the picture. And human perception. And then individual preferences. While the first two can be quantified, they can only be characterized as graph plots showing averages and deviations from the averages. Preferences? lol

 

Blimey, Jeff - you have been de-lurked. Welcome back!  :)

post #4255 of 5251
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post

SoM, thank you for digging up those quotes from the official Audyssey thread. I did a search there as well, but must have not been thorough enough in reading through the results.

I think you're misunderstanding what I was trying to say. Let me try again. The way Pepar explained it in the post I quoted above, only one set of filters is saved post-calibration. It becomes the Audyssey (Movie) curve. In order to get the Audyssey Flat (Music) curve, the receiver applies a pre-determined transform that is agnostic of the settings influencing the shape of the target curve in Pro and "hopes" this results in a flat target curve. Simplistically, let's say for a given frequency Type 1 HF roll-off is -2dB, Type 2 is -3dB, Type 3 is -4dB. The receiver doesn't know which one had been selected, so it applies a +3dB offset to this frequency for its Audyssey Flat (Music) curve. That only results in a flat FR if Type 2 HF roll-off had been selected in Pro software. For the other two types the offset undershoots or overshoots.

I wasn't saying that Audyssey Flat (Music) does not have MRC applied. Instead, I just stated that since MRC is applied for both curves, there is no need for the Audyssey Flat (Music) transform to apply an offset that would compensate for MRC in Audyssey (Movie). The Audyssey Flat (Music) offset only compensates for HF roll-off in Audyssey (Movie).

Ohh, OK so we are cool on the MRC thing.

And I think we're sympatico irt your second paragraph as well. AFAIK what ever you load from Pro overwrites the std Audyssey/Movie curve in your processor. If you then select Flat/music the processor modifies that curve according to its internal protocol, in effect boosting the highs from wherever Pro set them.

Others are welcome to correct me if need be. smile.gif
post #4256 of 5251
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Maybe, but I have other audio time commitments as well. I am tearing down my room treatments and re-installing them one-by-one to measure and tweak their effectiveness. It would make sense to add this to the list of measurements...
Wow. Keeps you off the streets. biggrin.gif
post #4257 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post

Simplistically, let's say for a given frequency Type 1 HF roll-off is -2dB, Type 2 is -3dB, Type 3 is -4dB. The receiver doesn't know which one had been selected, so it applies a +3dB offset to this frequency for its Audyssey Flat (Music) curve. That only results in a flat FR if Type 2 HF roll-off had been selected in Pro software. For the other two types the offset undershoots or overshoots.

Small correction. Since the Type 1 HF roll-off curve is the default one used for consumer Audyssey calibration, it would follow that the Audyssey Flat (Music) offset would be designed to bring Type 1 HF roll-off to flat. So does that mean if one selects Type 2 or 3 HF roll-off in Pro, which are steeper than Type 1, the resulting Audyssey Flat (Music) curve would still have some HF roll-off since the offset being applied is smaller?
post #4258 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

Ohh, OK so we are cool on the MRC thing.

And I think we're sympatico irt your second paragraph as well. AFAIK what ever you load from Pro overwrites the std Audyssey/Movie curve in your processor. If you then select Flat/music the processor modifies that curve according to its internal protocol, in effect boosting the highs from wherever Pro set them.

Others are welcome to correct me if need be. smile.gif

So that's exactly my question. If it applies the same compensation appropriate for Type 1 HF roll-off regardless of which one is chosen, then the resulting Audyssey Flat (Music) curve isn't flat if the Audyssey (Movie) target curve had one of the other two roll-off types.
post #4259 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

In my recent search, I stumbled across this old post by Chris about xover selection and the splice in Pro:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/20340#post_17490386


Remember that in the MultEQ Pro software the algorithm in recommending the crossover frequency is much more advanced than in the built-in version. It first finds the -3 dB roll off point, but then performs a search of other higher frequencies and internally combines them with the measured response of each speaker to see what combination gives the flattest (amplitude and phase) at the crossover. So, the numbers you see listed are in decreasing order of recommendations. The ones at the top of the list produced the best amplitude and phase blend at the crossover.

This is something else you have reminded me about today too, SoM. My Pro recommendations for my mains usually suggest something like 40Hz for the XO, even though they are THX designs and intended to be crossed at 80Hz. For all the reasons we know so well, I ignore this recommendation and select 100Hz as the XO point, based mainly on Mark Seaton;s recommendation and findings for use of the Submersives with the M&K S150s. I am sure that Pro is measuring the in-room response well and that 40Hz is indeed what the mains are delivering when taking into account the room's influence, but it seems somewhat perverse to use 40Hz when the speakers have specifically been designed to use 80Hz. Not to mention the well-known additional reasons for using a higher XO - taking the strain off the amps, letting the sub do its job, etc etc. Asking the S150s to deliver 40Hz just doesn't seem like a good idea.

HST, this is perhaps something else I should check - using the 1st choice XO recommendations and then measuring again and seeing how the splice is or isn't affected.

So much to do...

EDIT: I should add that I perform the 'sub distance tweak' every time anyway, to optimise the splice as verified by independent measuring, so maybe the above is all irrelevant. IDK.

Just remember that Audyssey can only give recommendations based on the information it is given. It has no field nor measurement to input the bass capabilities of a loudspeaker. The lower crossover suggestions are usually a result of modal/boundary peaks or reinforcement. Sometimes you will see the response dip down in the 60-120Hz range and bump back up down low due to say a 15dB peak. Without more knowledge of the system, it's impossible to know if this is just a hole in the upper bass response of a large speaker due to the room or if it's a small speaker that excited a mode down below its lower corner. This is where user input and intervention comes in and why it's important to provide for such input and adjustment.

Until the software is optimized for a specific set of known speakers, this level of automation will continue to have a level of uncertainty. I've never spoken to anyone at Audyssey about such possibility, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see some added intelligence like this integrated into the pro software in the future. Of course I have to wonder just how much they would charge a speaker manufacturer to add such intelligence! rolleyes.gif
post #4260 of 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post


Just remember that Audyssey can only give recommendations based on the information it is given. It has no field nor measurement to input the bass capabilities of a loudspeaker. The lower crossover suggestions are usually a result of modal/boundary peaks or reinforcement. Sometimes you will see the response dip down in the 60-120Hz range and bump back up down low due to say a 15dB peak. Without more knowledge of the system, it's impossible to know if this is just a hole in the upper bass response of a large speaker due to the room or if it's a small speaker that excited a mode down below its lower corner. This is where user input and intervention comes in and why it's important to provide for such input and adjustment.

Until the software is optimized for a specific set of known speakers, this level of automation will continue to have a level of uncertainty. I've never spoken to anyone at Audyssey about such possibility, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see some added intelligence like this integrated into the pro software in the future. Of course I have to wonder just how much they would charge a speaker manufacturer to add such intelligence! rolleyes.gif

 

That is an interesting idea, Mark.  For example, Audyssey's AMP product (iTunes music playback using headphones) customizes its correction based on the model headset you are using.  Its database of headsets is being periodically updated.  No reason they couldn't consider doing something like this for regular loudspeakers, although it would be much more complicated.

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)