Originally Posted by ccotenj
choosing to remain uneducated about the topic will not make you correct...
I have a slightly different technique in obtaining knowledge. If I find a problem or inconsistency, rather than go to a forum and read massive amounts of opinion and anecdote, I go to the engineers who created the item and speak with them, one engineer to another.
But we are both talking generalities here. It would appear you're saying that you can measure the frequency response of a system that has Audyssey applied and verify exactly what it has done using an RTA. Perhaps I'm assuming something you haven't actually said. You can see, using an RTA, that Audyssey has done something, that's true. But you won't be able to measure the response before and after Audyssey with an RTA then dial that difference curve into an equalizer, and expect the same result in every case, in every room. If that were true, the entire fuzzy clustering technique would be unnecessary, and they could have used an FFT based RTA in the first place. In point of fact, a spacial/temporal average taken with an RTA results in reduced resolution masking response excursions, whereas the fuzzy clustering technique does not reduce resolution or mask response excursions. Hence, you'll end up with different curves. You also cannot make a valid comparison between a single point RTA measurement and an 8 point Audyssey calibration, that should be obvious. And making comparisons of the various measurement techniques in a single room or situation will also cloud one's perception. And all of that is only scratching the surface.
I won't bore you with talking about how many rooms I've worked with, but I'm not just an experimenter playing around in his own living room.
You see, I have not chosen to remain uneducated, I have chosen which school to attend.