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 145

post #4321 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

 

Not that I am aware of, Cal.  Pretty quiet around my home.

That is a pretty mean bass cut which increases with decreasing frequency suggesting something with great sub-sonic energy.  It is possible that you would not notice it.

post #4322 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

That is a pretty mean bass cut which increases with decreasing frequency suggesting something with great sub-sonic energy.  It is possible that you would not notice it.

That's only observable in one channel? When I've seen it in my setup, it would only affect one or two channels as well.
post #4323 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post


That's only observable in one channel? When I've seen it in my setup, it would only affect one or two channels as well.

Good point but, if intermittant, could affect 1-2 mic position measurements of just the center by chance.  Grasping at straws.

post #4324 of 5281

I have the results for the new calibration.

 

"Rogue" calibration EQ:

 

 

New calibration:

 

 

"Rogue" cert:

 

 

New cert:

 

 

Rogue" freq response:

 

 

New freq response:

 

 

Things are not 100% the same.  I moved the MLP back 4" to address a different issue, which probably accounts for the different frequency response.  But does it account for the huge difference in the AVR EQ settings? 

post #4325 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

But does it account for the huge difference in the AVR EQ settings? 

Like I said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post

It's as if there is a decision point somewhere in the algorithm, and it either leaves the natural LF roll-off more or less alone or effectively applies an HPF to it. Seems like sometimes this condition could go either way, so you can get two distinct shapes of "after" curves even under nearly identical calibration conditions.

I think you can see the same sort of inconsistent high-passing in some of the "after" curves of the example certificate in the Pro FAQ.
post #4326 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post


Things are not 100% the same.  I moved the MLP back 4" to address a different issue, which probably accounts for the different frequency response.  But does it account for the huge difference in the AVR EQ settings? 

How does it sound now? wink.gif

Jeff
post #4327 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post


How does it sound now? wink.gif

Jeff

 

You are assuming that what is displayed in the graphs is readily audible, which is not the case.

post #4328 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

I have the results for the new calibration.

"Rogue" calibration EQ:




New calibration:




"Rogue" cert:




New cert:




Rogue" freq response:




New freq response:




Things are not 100% the same.  I moved the MLP back 4" to address a different issue, which probably accounts for the different frequency response.  But does it account for the huge difference in the AVR EQ settings? 

YMMV, but below the crossover, with REW your rogue calibration looks 'better', at least wrt flatter frequency response at your 1/6 graph resolution.
post #4329 of 5281
^^ Jerry,

You aren't seeing the true picture with the way you took your measurements in REW.

The graphs on the Denon and in Audyssey Pro are for the Center channel only, Large, with no sub.

When you took the measurements with REW, the crossover is in effect and the subs are obviously on.

You can see in the first REW graph with the "Rogue" measurement the response below ~200hz starts to fall off, but then your crossover kicks in and so do the subs.

You need to set the Center Channel to large/no subs for these measurements if you wish to compare against the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs.

I don't know why you are getting the weird results and the only thing I can think of is what Kal eluded to. It's very possible you wouldn't hear whatever is causing it if something is kicking on or there is heavy machinery a mile away, for instance. But the mic would. wink.gif

Could you redo the measurements with REW for the rogue and the regular with the Center set to large/no subs so we can verify it tracks with the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs?

Then we can look into it more.

--J
post #4330 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisakuku View Post


Yeah, I've seen that happen as well. It's as if there is a decision point somewhere in the algorithm, and it either leaves the natural LF roll-off more or less alone or effectively applies an HPF to it. Seems like sometimes this condition could go either way, so you can get two distinct shapes of "after" curves even under nearly identical calibration conditions.

 

Interesting that you may have seen this as well.  I'm running a fresh calibration now, so we'll see the results later this afternoon.

 

Jerry, I have had similar 'rogue' results now and then but, unlike you, I am not merely meticulous enough in my documentation of these things so all I can do is recall from memory that it has happened. Not very often but at least once and maybe twice. I re-ran the calibration afterwards and all was well. So it seems to be either an 'anomaly' (aka 'I have NFI what is going on') or maybe a 'decision point' as suggested elsewhere and the very slight differences between the two cals causes it to swing one side or the other. 

post #4331 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Any theories about what causes the "rogue" results?  confused.gif
F3 mis-estimate... Looks like Audyssey thinks it is 80Hz when real one is much lower in frequency. So, it tries to correct to the one it expects. Something like I have but on the other side, this one is much better for the sound through.
post #4332 of 5281
Could you REW guys clarify something for me that may have been stated way back, but is not clear from the above? Do you spatially average or not? I understand that Audyssey 's spatial averaging technique is a mystery in its " fuzzy logic" details, and that, therefore, REW would not be able to duplicate averaged response. By in my limited layman's understanding of room acoustics, many measured phenomena are local, and therefore spatial averaging gives a truer picture of what is going on.
post #4333 of 5281
^^

Even using REW's averaging feature does not duplicate what Audyssey's doing. However, there is a correlation between what Audyssey is doing, what we hear and what REW measures. It's not 1:1:1, and there's the rub.

Jeff
post #4334 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by jevansoh View Post

^^ Jerry,

You aren't seeing the true picture with the way you took your measurements in REW.

The graphs on the Denon and in Audyssey Pro are for the Center channel only, Large, with no sub.

When you took the measurements with REW, the crossover is in effect and the subs are obviously on.

You can see in the first REW graph with the "Rogue" measurement the response below ~200hz starts to fall off, but then your crossover kicks in and so do the subs.

You need to set the Center Channel to large/no subs for these measurements if you wish to compare against the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs.

I don't know why you are getting the weird results and the only thing I can think of is what Kal eluded to. It's very possible you wouldn't hear whatever is causing it if something is kicking on or there is heavy machinery a mile away, for instance. But the mic would. wink.gif

Could you redo the measurements with REW for the rogue and the regular with the Center set to large/no subs so we can verify it tracks with the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs?

Then we can look into it more.

--J

 

OK, J, here are the revised measurements, with Center set to Large:

 

 

 

Clearly something different is going on with the "rogue" cal.  As far as external noise, the HVAC is off, there are no appliances running, and I am in a very quiet residential neighborhood.  If there is some weird subsonic noise influencing the calibration, that would be news to me.  I also had new windows installed last month, which are triple-pane glass.  The new windows do an excellent job in isolating the interior from external noises.

 

I guess we could just say this type of calibration is an anomaly, knowing that if we encounter one, the best option is to discard it and run a new one.

post #4335 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Could you REW guys clarify something for me that may have been stated way back, but is not clear from the above? Do you spatially average or not? I understand that Audyssey 's spatial averaging technique is a mystery in its " fuzzy logic" details, and that, therefore, REW would not be able to duplicate averaged response. By in my limited layman's understanding of room acoustics, many measured phenomena are local, and therefore spatial averaging gives a truer picture of what is going on.

 

I used to run an 8-point REW spatial average, using the same measurement points as the Audyssey calibration.  However, since I am a single guy, and 95% of the time it's only me sitting in the MLP, I decided the spatial average didn't provide much benefit.  I no longer bother with it, unless there is a special reason.

post #4336 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post


F3 mis-estimate... Looks like Audyssey thinks it is 80Hz when real one is much lower in frequency. So, it tries to correct to the one it expects. Something like I have but on the other side, this one is much better for the sound through.

 

So what you are saying is that Audyssey Pro occasionally has an unexplained logic error?  I guess I could agree, since there doesn't seem to be any other logical explanation.  Perhaps I should take this over to Ask Audyssey?

post #4337 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by jevansoh View Post

^^ Jerry,

You aren't seeing the true picture with the way you took your measurements in REW.

The graphs on the Denon and in Audyssey Pro are for the Center channel only, Large, with no sub.

When you took the measurements with REW, the crossover is in effect and the subs are obviously on.

You can see in the first REW graph with the "Rogue" measurement the response below ~200hz starts to fall off, but then your crossover kicks in and so do the subs.

You need to set the Center Channel to large/no subs for these measurements if you wish to compare against the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs.

I don't know why you are getting the weird results and the only thing I can think of is what Kal eluded to. It's very possible you wouldn't hear whatever is causing it if something is kicking on or there is heavy machinery a mile away, for instance. But the mic would. wink.gif

Could you redo the measurements with REW for the rogue and the regular with the Center set to large/no subs so we can verify it tracks with the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs?

Then we can look into it more.

--J

We have probably all had a similar experience from time to time, at least I know I have, but not too often. When I did, I felt it was external noise, sometimes unnoticed during calibration. I have become ever more careful, moving myself and my PC outside the room during calibration, which seems to have improved consistency. So, I have become a bit obsessive about avoiding as much external noise as possible, even from my own body noises.

I remember once starting a calibration, then, midway through, there was a burst of constant rain outside - no thunder though - with my listening room directly under the roof of the house. It did not seem excessively loud, so I continued calibrating anyway, but was greatly disappointed in the result. A re-cal after the storm fixed it nicely. A lesson learned. There was no noise warning message or louder re do of the test tones. I think things have to be really bad for that, and even without those, noise seems like it can play a role in the result.

A suburban friend's room has been a bit troublesome from time to time, with seemingly soft, distant sounds, like neighbors lawn mowers, dogs barking, birds chirping, passing cars, and who knows what else even after silencing his heater and refrigerator. I am happy to repeat a specific tone sweep if there was something sudden and obvious. No sure if I am always able to pick up with my ears some noises that might affect things, though. But, even so, a number of his earlier cals did not seem quite optimal. Fortunately, the last time I tried it there, I think we nailed it pretty well. Time of day and season of the year might give an opportunity that is better than others to be freer of the possibility of external noise that could have an effect on the calibration. It is a luxury that neither he nor I possess to have rooms acoustically isolated from external noise.
post #4338 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

So what you are saying is that Audyssey Pro occasionally has an unexplained logic error?  I guess I could agree, since there doesn't seem to be any other logical explanation. 
Looking at more detailed REW graph it doen't look like just F3 mis-estimate anymore, the slope is too high for it. But there is definitely some logic error somewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Perhaps I should take this over to Ask Audyssey?
Good idea. It seems there is some stability problem with Aydyssey at the borders of speaker/room frequency response. Probably my problem with boost is also somehow triggered by the same logic error. The more data they will have about such problems, the more chances it will be fixed at some point, the better for us, ordinary customers.
post #4339 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Could you REW guys clarify something for me that may have been stated way back, but is not clear from the above? Do you spatially average or not? I understand that Audyssey 's spatial averaging technique is a mystery in its " fuzzy logic" details, and that, therefore, REW would not be able to duplicate averaged response. By in my limited layman's understanding of room acoustics, many measured phenomena are local, and therefore spatial averaging gives a truer picture of what is going on.

 

I don't. I have considered it but haven't bothered with it. I am only concerned with the MLP so it seems pointless to spatially average several mic positions and readings. If I had to consider several seats I would possibly do it though. 

post #4340 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

^^

Even using REW's averaging feature does not duplicate what Audyssey's doing. However, there is a correlation between what Audyssey is doing, what we hear and what REW measures. It's not 1:1:1, and there's the rub.

Jeff

 

True. REW has to be the final arbiter though doesn't it, because REW is measuring the room after all the tweaks, treatments and Audyssey etc have done their bit. Bear in mind only one seat interests me though.

post #4341 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post


F3 mis-estimate... Looks like Audyssey thinks it is 80Hz when real one is much lower in frequency. So, it tries to correct to the one it expects. Something like I have but on the other side, this one is much better for the sound through.

 

So what you are saying is that Audyssey Pro occasionally has an unexplained logic error?  I guess I could agree, since there doesn't seem to be any other logical explanation.  Perhaps I should take this over to Ask Audyssey?

 

Good luck with that, Jerry. Let me see if I can preempt their reply: "We can't see any reason for that to happen and we are unable to replicate it here". 

post #4342 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcaraldo215 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jevansoh View Post

^^ Jerry,

You aren't seeing the true picture with the way you took your measurements in REW.

The graphs on the Denon and in Audyssey Pro are for the Center channel only, Large, with no sub.

When you took the measurements with REW, the crossover is in effect and the subs are obviously on.

You can see in the first REW graph with the "Rogue" measurement the response below ~200hz starts to fall off, but then your crossover kicks in and so do the subs.

You need to set the Center Channel to large/no subs for these measurements if you wish to compare against the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs.

I don't know why you are getting the weird results and the only thing I can think of is what Kal eluded to. It's very possible you wouldn't hear whatever is causing it if something is kicking on or there is heavy machinery a mile away, for instance. But the mic would. wink.gif

Could you redo the measurements with REW for the rogue and the regular with the Center set to large/no subs so we can verify it tracks with the Denon and Audyssey Pro graphs?

Then we can look into it more.

--J

We have probably all had a similar experience from time to time, at least I know I have, but not too often. When I did, I felt it was external noise, sometimes unnoticed during calibration. I have become ever more careful, moving myself and my PC outside the room during calibration, which seems to have improved consistency. So, I have become a bit obsessive about avoiding as much external noise as possible, even from my own body noises.

I remember once starting a calibration, then, midway through, there was a burst of constant rain outside - no thunder though - with my listening room directly under the roof of the house. It did not seem excessively loud, so I continued calibrating anyway, but was greatly disappointed in the result. A re-cal after the storm fixed it nicely. A lesson learned. There was no noise warning message or louder re do of the test tones. I think things have to be really bad for that, and even without those, noise seems like it can play a role in the result.

A suburban friend's room has been a bit troublesome from time to time, with seemingly soft, distant sounds, like neighbors lawn mowers, dogs barking, birds chirping, passing cars, and who knows what else even after silencing his heater and refrigerator. I am happy to repeat a specific tone sweep if there was something sudden and obvious. No sure if I am always able to pick up with my ears some noises that might affect things, though. But, even so, a number of his earlier cals did not seem quite optimal. Fortunately, the last time I tried it there, I think we nailed it pretty well. Time of day and season of the year might give an opportunity that is better than others to be freer of the possibility of external noise that could have an effect on the calibration. It is a luxury that neither he nor I possess to have rooms acoustically isolated from external noise.

 

Not to gainsay anything in your report there, Fitz, but according to Chris K, unless Audyssey pops up the 'ambient noise too high' warning, there is sufficient signal to noise, after the two attempts with raised SPL of the chirps, to give a normal calibration.  Not that I always take Chris's word as the gospel - just sayin'.

post #4343 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

So what you are saying is that Audyssey Pro occasionally has an unexplained logic error?  I guess I could agree, since there doesn't seem to be any other logical explanation.  Perhaps I should take this over to Ask Audyssey?

I would try the Audyssey Tech Talk group on Facebook. Chris posts relatively frequently there. It's clearly a logic error because there's no reason to impose that steep a correction in your observed range on a speaker at a crossover of 80 Hz.

Although with a 80 Hz crossover, and an effectively flattish response from approximately 50 Hz at 1/6th smoothing, I'm not sure how much it's going to matter practically unless you leave your subs off for multichannel music listening. IMO it's more of a potential issue if this kind of drastic filtering on your "rogue" plot was closer to the crossover, particularly if you were doing a 40 or 60 Hz crossover. Still, they need to know.
post #4344 of 5281
Hi all im curious I was told that the marantz 8801 is Ausyssey pro ready but I cannot find any details on how it connects up. I loaded up the audyssey software its not even on the list. Is anyone using a Marantz 8801 with Audyssey Pro?

Thanks
post #4345 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

Hi all im curious I was told that the marantz 8801 is Ausyssey pro ready but I cannot find any details on how it connects up. I loaded up the audyssey software its not even on the list. Is anyone using a Marantz 8801 with Audyssey Pro?

Thanks

 

Are you running the latest firmware for your unit?  Sometimes they release the unit and then add Pro functionality via a FW update - this is what happened, for example, with my Onkyo 5509. You will also need the very latest version of Audyssey Pro software.

post #4346 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Are you running the latest firmware for your unit?  Sometimes they release the unit and then add Pro functionality via a FW update - this is what happened, for example, with my Onkyo 5509. You will also need the very latest version of Audyssey Pro software.

I don't have the unit as of yet I should be picking it up next week but I was very curious to read how connect audyssey pro with the unit.
post #4347 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

You will also need the very latest version of Audyssey Pro software.

Thanks for that I've just checked I did not realise there was another update for the Audyssey pro will update tonight
post #4348 of 5281
Hi Franck,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

Hi all im curious I was told that the marantz 8801 is Ausyssey pro ready but I cannot find any details on how it connects up. I loaded up the audyssey software its not even on the list. Is anyone using a Marantz 8801 with Audyssey Pro?

Thanks

Since January I do use Audyssye Pro on the 8801 and even after its' latest FW update, no problem. smile.gif

Hugo
post #4349 of 5281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post

Hi Franck,
Since January I do use Audyssye Pro on the 8801 and even after its' latest FW update, no problem. smile.gif

Hugo

Thanks Hugo just one more question do you connect via RS232 or LAN?

Thank you
post #4350 of 5281
^^^^

I am also using Audyssey Pro with 8801: connect via RS232 via USB adapter to PC

Once you get the Pro kit, you have to go online and buy a license to use it with the 8801: it is definitely supported
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)