ONKYO + Audyssey Sub EQ HT

Sub EQ is included with XT32, not XT

Adding into that...the only receivers (by ANYBODY, not just Onkyo) that have sub EQ are Audyssey Multi EQ XT32.

Although, without using Audyssey(and in going out and buying a SPL meter), you can EQ your sub manually.

OR with...
PARC
Antimode 8033

And the many other "separate" EQ programs out there.

How do you EQ a sub with an SPL meter?

I believe any receiver with Audyssey MultiEQ & up do have subwoofer eq algorithm, albiet not as sophisticated as XT32.

You EQ a subwoofer with a SPL meter by...

1. Buying a SPL meter accurate to 20hz
2. Using a sine sweep (audiocheck.net)
3. Buying a receiver that has manual subwoofer EQ

That was not the question. Certainly, all MultEQ versions will EQ a single sub channel but only MultEQ XT32 has Sub EQ HT.

Can you name some?

But is it implemented with any non-XT32 products?

Receivers with manual subwoofer EQ...

Integra dating back to the X.8(would also assume Onkyo included them) and probably even earlier...

I'd have to check, but I think the Denon AVR 4810 has manual subwoofer EQ(I use the EQ tuning the Velodyne came with)

Most of the time if I find a room that needs subwoofer EQ-ing beyond finding the "right place to put it" I use Antimode 8033 or PARC. Both of which allow tweaking.

Which assuming, Mr. Rubinson, you are still familiar with PARC.

I will have to check but such are usually too limited for the task. Too few and fixed bands (63Hz, 125Hz only in the Denon) with fixed and undefined Q.


And with sub-PARC. All 3 suggestions are good ones.

A (one third octave?) graphic EQ with only five bands (“25Hz”, “40Hz”, “63Hz”, “100Hz”, or “160Hz”) of which only three bands are below typical bass management crossover frequency is not precise enough for effective subwoofer EQ.

AJ

Sure it is. If you can't EQ a sub with those three bands...

MOVE YOUR SUBWOOFER...

No amount of "correction" makes up for lousy placement.

You also have to remember that I've been dealing with subwoofers since David and Goliath. We didn't have "room correction" back then. I wouldn't let Audyssey mess with a Volkswoofer.

In my opinion...

Audyssey=Gelding.

Move your sub until exactly three room modes precisely align in frequency (and Q) with 25 Hz, 40 Hz, and 63 Hz? Good luck with that.


Yep, that is your questionably informed opinion. Others far more astute than you disagree.

AJ

More astute than me disagree? Ok.

Have you ever heard the David and Goliath? How about a Volkswoofer? How about a Klipsch subwoofer based on the Klipschorn?

Yes, back then, when M&K made a splash, everybody else jumped on the bandwagon. Klipsch made(but as far as I know never sold it) a "Hornsub" to pair with LaScala.

So, those of us with subwoofers since before 1980 have no idea how to correct for anything? Yeah right.

Guess what guys ... we were wrong .... Sub EQ HT actually IS implemented on some Onkyo XT models ....

I just reviewed the Audyssey thread and as noted in Chris's posts below, Onkyo actually started introducing Sub EQ XT in some XT XX07 models (1007,3007,5007; partially implemented) and it was fully implemented starting with some XX08 models.

Lose the straw man fallacy.

And maybe you are just an old dog, while Audyssey is a new trick.



AJ

Did you not note my use of Antimode 8033 or PARC above?

Both of those ALLOW manual control...greater than Audyssey/EZSet/MCACC/YPAO give you.

Also, depending on the subwoofer, you get subwoofer EQ that is also manual with greater control than you get from the AVR.

Also, you must have missed "subwoofer placement 101"...

Response valleys are NOT correctable...other than by MOVING THE SUBWOOFER.

Manual control on the Antimode 8033? I see option for bumping the extreme LF but no real control of the EQ itself.

It is true that optimal sub placement is just as important now as it was when the first sub was produced. However, after I optimized my sub positions, I've never had a reason to manually tweak the LF using Audyssey. It's a remarkable improvement in SQ using Audyssey and I've never read anything that would support the the fact that *any* parametric EQ is superior to the FIR filters and algorithms utilized by Audyssey.
Also, in contrast to a parametric EQ, Audyssey corrects in the time domain. Lastly, the Pro version of Audyssey I use does allow manual manipulation of the FR curve, so your premise is not true.

You may not prefer the fact that there is no manual adjustment in the standard version of Audyssey, but you are trading magnitudes greater time domain filter resolution in Audyssey for the ability to manually tweak an inferior EQ technology.

To each his own.

i was under the impression that part of the SubEQ / XT32 advantage was not just multiple sub support, but also increased resolution in the sub frequencies.

was this also an unadvertised feature in onkyo's XT implementation?

i have an onkyo pro 5507 pre/pro, and an svs as-eq1. can i sell the EQ?

If the 5507 included Sub EQ HT (likely) then yes. AFAIK though although the AS-EQ1 uses the same number of filters as does Sub EQ HT, XT32 has 2x the sub filter resolution of either one.

The x007 had the SubEQ partially implemented. Not sure if Audyssey didn't inform Onkyo of the proper way of doing or if it was the source code Audyssey provided to Onkyo.

The correct way is on the x008 series and the standalone Audyssey SubEQ unit:
1. The subs are individually set to 75dB AND
2, The subs distances are calculated individually AND
3. The subs are pinged at the same time

This is done so the correction filter is calculated with the summed signal. The idea behind this is that it is considered more ideal to run multiple subs with a monoular signal. Each sub will have its own peaks and valleys with the same signal so they help to compensate for each other and in the end give smoother bass response.

The x007 does this:
1. The subs are pinged individually to set gain and distance AND
2. The subs are subsequently pinged individually on the remaining mic locations.

So in this implementation a correction filter is created for each sub. The problem is that the sub signal is typically a monoular signal so creating a separate correction for each one may lead to uneven response.

If the mulitple subs are delivering a single sub signal, it is much better to create the correction filter based on the sum of the mulitple units. It will deliver a smoother signal in the end.

That technique would probably yield better results... but if you are going to use a single out with a Y-splitter I believe you are actually supposed to calibrate 75-3 = 72dB because if you calibrate both to 75db, the summed output would be 3dB above reference. The x008 line takes care of this internally by applying 3dB of attenuation when running dual subs.

The real advantage of the x008 series is the following
1 - it does the pinging correctly as a summed signal
2 - it has the user calibrate each sub gain to acheive a 75dB level prior to the ping so Audyssey shouldn't have to adjust the receivers internal gain much
3 - it can set unique distance for each sub
4 - it automatically applies the 3dB of attenuation on dual sub systems
5 - I believe you have double the resolution of the filter taps for the summed sub signal.

I am not sure on the 709. I would guess that the true SubEQ algorithm is still only found on the x009 models. I am using a 3008 because the XT32 is a better system if you are running speakers near full range. XT32 has the same number of taps on the main channels in the bass region as XT did on the sub channel only. I highly recommend anyone running speakers with powered woofers to upgrade to an unit with XT32. Its just better all the way around.

per chris @ audyssey, the filter resolution in XT32 is identical to subEQ in the AS-EQ1. XT, as implemented in the xx07 Onkyos, does *not* provide the additional resolution.