AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Why do I hate Audyssey so much? (AVR-4311, MultEQ XT32)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do I hate Audyssey so much? (AVR-4311, MultEQ XT32) - Page 2

post #31 of 76
2/6/12 at 4:37pm
Maybe it's because he appreciates the fact that the amplifiers in most receivers that sell for less than $1000 are made for about $30 per channel and distort like hell if driven hard (and then there is also the cheesy underpowered el cheapo power supply that has to run them...).

Very few receiver manufacturers even give specs for the amplifiers with all channels driven, because the power supply is so small that the results are a bad joke. The specs they DO give are evasive and designed to mislead the unwary as much as they can.

A few, like Cambridge Audio, are starting to give specs for power output with all channels driven at a meaningful distortion level; that is a start; it is way overdue.

The amplifier quality you get in a cheap receiver is way less than the quality of a pair of $800 speakers. You can get some pretty good speakers for $800 per pair (although you can also buy some for that price that are not so good...). The typical amplifier quality of a $1000 receiver is much lower, IMO.

A great example of the crap that some manufacturers try to pass off as quality is the Anthem MRX700 receiver. This is a $2000 receiver that will only put out 43 watts per channel with an acceptable distortion level, according to actual Home Theater magazine lab test results for all channels driven. Check the magazine review yourself if you don't believe it.

I wonder how many of the people who bought this piece of junk realized that before they bought it? Very damn few, I would bet! I am sure they figured that for $2000, they would certainly get something better...oops! Fooled you, huh??

I am certainly glad that we have Home Theater magazine to expose this kind of gilded turd.

Anthem gets my El Cheapo Grande award for that one. I won't be buying any of their products.



[/QUOTE:]
As an aside, why would anyone spend $2k on an AVR to feed $800 a pair main speakers, is beyond me....[/quote]
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #32 of 76
2/6/12 at 5:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

With the room you have, I think you have an excessively complex acoustical mess that Audessy simply cannot solve; nothing can! You have too many speakers trying to do too many things in a room that is not even symmetrical. The whole thing is out of control! Trying to get Audessy to fix it is like trying to lasso a runaway semi from horseback.

You would be far better off going back to 5.1 or 5.2 and work very hard to be certain that you have a satisfactory acoustical resolution of your problems at that level. Speaker positioning can be very critical. Get that fine tuned and working perfectly before you even attempt to increase the complexity of the system to 7.2. If you can't get 7.2 to work right, be satisfied with 5.2 or 5.1.

The comments you made about the bass make me fairly sure that your subwoofers are not working together properly and need a lot of experimentation and fine-tuning of their positions to get that working right.

The complexity of the relationships between speakers with 8 speakers is hard enough to sort out in a perfectly rectangular room with excellent acoustics and very limited hard walls or other hard surfaces.. It is EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A 9.1 OR 9.2 SYSTEM WORK WORTH A DAMN, and to get it to happen might require totally rebuilding your room with acoustically absorbent materials.

I have only seen it done properly once or twice and even if you could, it wouldn't sound significantly better than a good 7.1 system anyway. Think about the complexity of all of those speakers operating out of phase with each other and then compound that 10 times over with all of the reflections off of every hard surface in the room. The complexity and difficulties are off the chart.

Sometimes it is hard to get just TWO speakers properly positioned for good performance in a room, and you think you can get EIGHT perfectly positioned to do it. That is absolutely absurd! It is very close to impossible!!

Too much complexity leads to uncontrollable consequences; that is your problem. Your room is probably NEVER going to work right with 9.2, and may never work right with 7.2. Less is sometimes more.

So audyssey is pretty much worthless if you have 7.1 or higher. So why do people think it's so great when it can't be used for what it's needed for?
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 76
2/6/12 at 5:33pm
The problem is that some people expect it to perform miracles, rather than what it IS able to do. It is certainly not worthless, but it does not replace due diligence or common sense when setting up a room for home theater. Some rooms will never work out very well no matter what you do, unless you go to great expense and apply extreme measures. Even that may not do it.

A tuneup doesn't turn a worn-out Honda into a Ferrari, and Audessy can't take an acoustically bad room with mis-positioned speakers and turn it into a good-sounding home theater system. Nothing can perform that miracle, but some people think Audessy should be able to.

People need to pay a lot more attention to the basics, like getting the speakers properly positioned for proper performance in the first place, and learning a bit about room acoustical problems and doing something to correct them before they expect miracles from Audessy. It can only do so much.

People who won't do what is reasonable and necessary to set up their speakers and room for decent performance in the first place or don't have the knowledge to do it will often be disappointed with Audessy or any similar program. No surprise there.

If you have a room that is problematical, Audessy (and proper attention to the basics) may be more effective at managing the problems with a less complex system using less speakers. Adding more speakers just makes the room problems more complex and therefore more difficult to solve.

The hall where the New York Philharmonic performs had such bad acoustics when it opened that it had to be completely gutted and rebuilt at a cost of many millions of dollars. Several more expensive attempts have failed to completely fix its problems. When a room has fundamentally bad acoustics, sometimes it just can't be satisfactorily fixed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

So audyssey is pretty much worthless if you have 7.1 or higher. So why do people think it's so great when it can't be used for what it's needed for?
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 76
2/6/12 at 5:40pm
Quote:


As an aside, why would anyone spend $2k on an AVR to feed $800 a pair main speakers, is beyond me....

Another way to look at it:

Sound quality of speakers is a SUBJECTIVE thing. Case in point: My $600 a pair Ascends measure better than any B&W ever made, but how many people would trade their B&Ws for my Ascends? Not many. They love the sound of their B&Ws and think they are better than Ascends. I think my Ascends are better than B&Ws. Is one of us right? No, because speakers are a personal, subjective thing.

Receivers, on the other hand, are far more of an OBJECTIVE thing. They either have a certain amount of amp power or they do not. They have Audyssey or they do not. They have 7 HDMI inputs or 5. Yes, there are still SUBJECTIVE parts... do they look good? Does the remote suck?

In my case, the $2000 receiver was the only one that had the features I wanted. I matched it with $600/pr speakers that have the sound I like. Yes, I listened to "better" speakers... Focals, B&W, etc. etc. but to me they were NOT better.

Anyway... another way to look at it.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 76
2/6/12 at 5:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

The problem is that some people expect it to perform miracles, rather than what it IS able to do. It is certainly not worthless, but it does not replace due diligence or common sense when setting up a room for home theater. Some rooms will never work out very well no matter what you do, unless you go to great expense and apply extreme measures.

A tuneup doesn't turn a worn-out Honda into a Ferrari, and Audessy can't take an acoustically bad room with mis-positioned speakers and turn it into a good-sounding home theater system. Nothing can perform that miracle, but some people think it should be able to.

People need to pay a lot more attention to the basics, like getting the speakers properly positioned for proper performance in the first place, and learning a bit about room acoustical problems and doing something to correct them before they expect miracles from Audessy. It can only do so much.

People who won't do what is reasonable and necessary to set up their speakers and room for decent performance in the first place or don't have the knowledge to do it will often be disappointed with Audessy or any similar program. No surprise there.

Now here is a good post.

XT32 in my acoustically treated, nice sounding room made things sound even better. Worth every penny.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 76
2/6/12 at 8:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

Maybe it's because he appreciates the fact that the amplifiers in most receivers that sell for less than $1000 are made for about $30 per channel and distort like hell if driven hard (and then there is also the cheesy underpowered el cheapo power supply that has to run them...).

Very few receiver manufacturers even give specs for the amplifiers with all channels driven, because the power supply is so small that the results are a bad joke. The specs they DO give are evasive and designed to mislead the unwary as much as they can....

Huh? Where did you get this?!

Virtually all receivers from mainstream manufacturers will do just fine with most "normal" speakers, in the average user's space.

For instance, here is the measured output of another, cheaper Denon. In the decidedly not-real world scenario of all-channels driven, it still gets 81WPC, which is far more that's needed to drive the 93dB sensitivity mains the OP has, in the room he describes.

The only valuable feature for 7.2 set up that the 4133 has over most ~$700 receivers is Audyssey MultiEQ XT32, which the OP doesn't even like. Better speakers and cheaper MultiEQ XT AVR would probably have yielded a much better sound, and that's almost always the case.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 76
2/6/12 at 8:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

Anthem gets my El Cheapo Grande award for that one. I won't be buying any of their products.

So how do you know that their product is laughable if you haven't even tried them?

As accurate as the lab test show (0.1% distortion at 43.9 watts, 7 channel driven at full spectrum). I have yet to hear a single soundtrack of any movie where all 7 channels are driven continuously will full spectrum 20 Hz to 20 kHz at any period of time.

Usually 80 Hz and lower got thrown away to the subwoofer, at least for the centre, surround and rear surrounds. Furthermore, the rear and side surrounds get only occasional transient and definitely not full spectrum and not simultaneously at any prolonged period of time. On top of that, studies have shown that most of the population can't even hear distortion at 1%.

So yes, the measured wattage maybe low, but actual real-life usage will still result in the minimum of 80 wpc even when connected to all 7 speakers in THX configuration (where all speakers run only down to 80 Hz and the rest goes to the subwoofer).

Reply
Reply
post #38 of 76
2/6/12 at 8:28pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAMP568 View Post

1) Make sure to use a mic stand. I had to raise the mic higher then ear level (one of my problems was having high back seat)

2) Use 8 mic spots to calibration(I changed my last two spots and it made a difference)

I've now done this. Amazingly, 8 positions did make a difference. It sounds a lot better with 8. I was surprised at this because I was thinking it was calibrating for the seating position (as the setup says) but truly it needs more data points to calibrate from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAMP568 View Post

5) You mentioned you turned the db’s up on your subs, whenever you feel that you will be making these type of adjustments, make sure to raise the db level inside the Denon and not on the subwoofer.

Right, I don't adjust the volume knob on the sub after Audyssey, but if I turn it down so it reads 75db in the Audyssey level matching, its too quiet, so I set is at ~80db for the Audyssey setup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAMP568 View Post

You should use a SPL meter when making those changes.

I really need to get a SPL meter I know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

The AUTO EQ program is going to ignore whatever settings you have set as you learned. You simply change the speaker settings to SMALL w/80hz crossovers after the program is run as doing so won't impact the EQ process.

Yeah, not a fan of Auto EQ either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotcheckBilly View Post

Set your speakers to "small", use a 80 Hz crossover (or higher) for XT, 40 Hz for XT32 if your mains can handle it. Set the LPF of the LFE channel to 120 Hz and leave it there.

I understand the forum reasoning behind this, but what I don't understand is if Audyssey programs the software, and they say to always set it to small, why even allow large as an option...It seems silly to run this 'all powerful' calibration software, only to say 'make sure to change whatever it came up with to "x" and "x".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jproy13 View Post

That's what I was doing wrong until I saw this graph.

Why this picture wasn't in the onscreen setup is beyond me. It made it sound a lot better and would have saved me a lot of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

receivers automatically engage Audyssey Dynamic Volume

I noticed this right away and hated it, shutting it off made it much better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

On denons you can switch to Audyssey flat which removes the high end roll off.

I preferred 'Flat' over the other mixes, I still need to play with it more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

The OP states specifically that he "first calibrated in only one location, then three." Which is not what most would call proper set up.

I followed the on screen guide, I don't have 8 seating positions, so I didn't know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

Then he goes on to post a new thread titled "Why do I hate Audyssey so much?", even though there are appropriate threads for his questions (if you can really call a thread with "hate" in the title a legitimate question).

It got me 1300 views and 34 replies in 1 day. Sorry for not posting into a mega thread where there are 15 conversions happening at once. I will never apologize for making a specific thread for a specific issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

The bottom line is, if someone really feels this strongly, they should either do some research and expend some effort making sure they are setting things correctly, or just turn the feature off and enjoy their sound without it.

I want to maximize my sound quality potential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

As an aside, why would anyone spend $2k on an AVR to feed $800 a pair main speakers, is beyond me....

Ever upgrade anything? You do everything at once every time?
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

With the room you have, I think you have an excessively complex acoustical mess that Audessy simply cannot solve; nothing can! You have too many speakers trying to do too many things in a room that is not even symmetrical.

I tried to get the speakers symmetrical to the seating area, I understand this is meaningless when factoring room acoustics, but still, it's the best its going to get in this room. I'd love to build a dedicated theater, but this house is not the right one, much planning will go into the next house for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

Too much complexity leads to uncontrollable consequences; that is your problem. Your room is probably NEVER going to work right with 9.2, and may never work right with 7.2. Less is sometimes more.

I'll play with it and try 5.2/7.2/9.2 and see what sounds best after Audyssey 8 point calibration. I just had all the speakers, and amp channels...
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

When a room has fundamentally bad acoustics, sometimes it just can't be satisfactorily fixed.

Agreed. I can't rebuild my house for my HT and acoustic treatment is a waste if I plan on moving (which I do). I've got to make the best out of my 'non-dedicated' home theater. But sheesh, Audyssey vs Pure Direct was like night and day. Even if the room is 'challenging' it shouldn't make it sound worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by S_rangeBrew View Post

XT32 in my acoustically treated, nice sounding room made things sound even better. Worth every penny.

*Dreams of dedicated theater room*

Here is what Audyssey came up with. Before anyone jumps on my back, I haven't changed anything, and I know that everyone says to change the speakers to small, etc etc...





Reply
Reply
post #39 of 76
2/6/12 at 8:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbobuick86 View Post

I've tried dealing with YPAO. Once these calibration programs set my fronts to large and then mute my subs, they lose me. I've tried to force the fronts to stay small and still run the program but it resets them to large. Seems there is no flexability.

Back to the SPL meter and AVIA disk. Works for me.

Simple...run YPAO, then set the speakers you want to small. That's how I do it, anyway.

Nothing wrong with Avia, but it won't do room correction.

Note that YPAO includes auto setup AND room correction. Of course you don't need to use either. But you might want to at least try YPAO like I suggest, and then see if you like it's room correction.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 76
2/6/12 at 10:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post

Ya, the problem I have with that study is the ones that were preferred had a boosted bass response. For the one we think was Audyssey, it was just the reference curve without DynEQ so no bass boost and therefore apples and oranges. But that was the main point of the study, people don't prefer a flat response and they were trying to find what curve people preferred.

1. It's been verified that the last one *was* Audyssey

2. Audyssey was at no unfair disadvantage by not having DEQ, as I don't believe any of the other ones did

3. Audyssey *is* at a self-inflicted disadvantage by its poor choice of target curves; the only way I was able to get the bass to sound right on any of the three Audyssey receivers I've had (just sold the 4311) was with an outboard DSP for my subs.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 76
2/7/12 at 1:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

1. It's been verified that the last one *was* Audyssey

2. Audyssey was at no unfair disadvantage by not having DEQ, as I don't believe any of the other ones did

3. Audyssey *is* at a self-inflicted disadvantage by its poor choice of target curves; the only way I was able to get the bass to sound right on any of the three Audyssey receivers I've had (just sold the 4311) was with an outboard DSP for my subs.

I found the opposite. Audyssey did noticeably reduce my boominess and at first it was a bit disconcerting, but after a short while my ears started appreciating the better controlled bass. Dialog is also noticeably improved with Audysey.

The HK test is interesting, but one can argue that the testers chose exaggerated bass in the same way people choose exaggerated brightness/color settings when shopping for TVs in big-box stores. But when they get home, such exaggerated settings quickly become tiring (homies/boombox aficionados excepted )
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 76
2/7/12 at 2:18am
+1
My results after Audyssey EQ (MultEQ XT) have been a markedly improved bass without boominess, much cleaner plus deeper going, and a more realistic space representation overall. Because of the corrected bass, it was "less" in terms of pure volume due to calmed down room modes, but much more natural and believable (unobtrusive), fitting alsmost perfectly into the overall sound impression.
Some People, which expect the "boom" to increase or stay the same after EQ may be dissatisfied, but that's life...
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 76
2/7/12 at 2:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotcheckBilly View Post

Choose "Music" instead of "Movie/TV" on Onkyo/Integra to get Audyssey flat.

Is this a setting on newer Onkyo/Integra units? I have the 886 and just looked in the manual and in the 886's menu to find this option. I couldn't find a optional setting for Audyssey for "Music" or "Movie/TV". I might have missed it though. If it is on older Onkyo models where in the menu would I find this setting?

Bill
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 76
2/7/12 at 3:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

Is this a setting on newer Onkyo/Integra units? I have the 886 and just looked in the manual and in the 886's menu to find this option. I couldn't find a optional setting for Audyssey for "Music" or "Movie/TV". I might have missed it though. If it is on older Onkyo models where in the menu would I find this setting?

Bill

It is new for the 2011 models.
The only way to get the "flat" target with your model is to use a THX listening mode (and turn off THX Re-EQ if it is THX Cinema).
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 76
2/7/12 at 3:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickardl View Post

It is new for the 2011 models.
The only way to get the "flat" target with your model is to use a THX listening mode (and turn off THX Re-EQ if it is THX Cinema).

rickardl,

Thanks for the information! Sometimes it is easy to miss these settings especially early in the AM. I will try one of the THX modes to see if that helps as I use the 886 for listening to MCH SACD/DVD-As. I bounce back and forth between using HDMI with Audyssey and the MCH analog input.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotcheckBilly View Post

Choose "Music" instead of "Movie/TV" on Onkyo/Integra to get Audyssey flat.

SB,

Just a suggestion but you might want to edit your post to show this option is only on 2011 Onkyo and Integra units.

Bill
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 76
2/7/12 at 4:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

I found the opposite. Audyssey did noticeably reduce my boominess and at first it was a bit disconcerting, but after a short while my ears started appreciating the better controlled bass. Dialog is also noticeably improved with Audysey.

The HK test is interesting, but one can argue that the testers chose exaggerated bass in the same way people choose exaggerated brightness/color settings when shopping for TVs in big-box stores. But when they get home, such exaggerated settings quickly become tiring (homies/boombox aficionados excepted )

The issue with Audyssey (for me) is what Noah referred to. Their stated goal is 'reference not preference'. Which is all well and good. We all want a 'reference'.

But who chooses said 'reference'?

The study linked to earlier shows that consumers have definite preference for a target curve that slopes downwards from the bass by about 10db from 20Hz to 20Khz.

Audyssey believe this is euphonic nonsense, and aim for a curve that is flat out to about 5K (with a 2khz dip) and then rolls off.

So naturally when their 'reference' is tested against consumers 'preference' they don't do so well, even though they have met their own target.

It comes down to whose 'reference' you believe is correct.

Personally, I think Audyssey have their target wrong. For movies it doesn't make a massive difference, but for music (especially acoustic music) it always sounds off compared to what I think I hear in a concert hall.

I currently use Audyssey to correct the bass in my sub, but choose the Denon L/R bypass so it leaves my main speakers alone.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 76
2/7/12 at 5:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

I understand the forum reasoning behind this, but what I don't understand is if Audyssey programs the software, and they say to always set it to small, why even allow large as an option...It seems silly to run this 'all powerful' calibration software, only to say 'make sure to change whatever it came up with to "x" and "x".

I think all room correction software does that. My mains and surround are rated to go down to 40Hz and 50Hz so Audyssey thinks that it can handle that but we all know it's not the case. Not sure why it does that when satelites are being used though. So I set my speakers to small but cross them over at 60 for my main and surround and 80 for my center and surround back.

I've noticed your subs trimmed at -12db, where is your volume knob behind your subs?


Quote:


Why this picture wasn't in the onscreen setup is beyond me. It made it sound a lot better and would have saved me a lot of time.

I know. When I read "measure from the 6 seating position", I guess they did not mean litterally.

Quote:


I noticed this right away and hated it, shutting it off made it much better.

don't use it either.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 76
2/7/12 at 5:47am
Lots of good advice in this thread about how to properly use the Audyssey calibration.

I am guessing that your 2 subs are not playing very well together or you like a very steep bass curve.

1) Have you tried switching the phase knob or switch on one of your subs while playing music and does it have any effect on the amount of bass you hear?

Regarding the setup - Here would be my advice for your setup:

1) Turn down the sub gain on the subs so they are both at 72db to 75db and re-run the setup using the tripod/mic stand and multiple positions as advised. Right now they are both being trimmed by 12db which is the max limit. This may be resulting in the subs not being EQ'd properly at all.

2) Change the front speakers to small and set the crossover to 80Hz
3) Change the surrounds to cross at 80Hz
4) Change the Front Wides to cross at 80Hz
5) Make sure Audyssey Volume is OFF and Audyssey Dynamic EQ is ON (max setting).
6) Turn up the subs (LAST) in EQUAL increments using the AVR (not the sub dials) until you are more happy with the amount of bass you hear.
7) Play around with the music and movie curves as well as reference level offset until you find something that best matches your tastes.
8) Leave it all like that for 2 weeks.
9) turn Audyssey off and listen after 2 weeks. I would be very surprised if you are not very dissapointed in the sound without Audyssey engaged.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 76
2/7/12 at 5:48am
The decision about Large or Small is not done by Audyssey but the component it is included with, i.e., the AVR. Its the manufacturers choice (his programming / firmware does this) to suggest the classification and how to react to this situation. This has been stated by Audyssey numerous times.
Audyssey measures, designs filters, does some matrixing like in DSX and provides an interface etc., all other options and choices are provided by the manufacturer of the unit. Thus you have to blame him... if at all.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:06am
I think most people pass judgement about Audyssey on the before and after SQ... People who believe that Audyssey's filtering can turn a good sounding system into a poor sounding one, based on what they are hearing... Is this thread about the bugs in Audyssey or the bugs with the denon 4311, or both for 2x the bugs that bug us all...
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

The issue with Audyssey (for me) is what Noah referred to. Their stated goal is 'reference not preference'. Which is all well and good. We all want a 'reference'.

But who chooses said 'reference'?

The study linked to earlier shows that consumers have definite preference for a target curve that slopes downwards from the bass by about 10db from 20Hz to 20Khz.

Audyssey believe this is euphonic nonsense, and aim for a curve that is flat out to about 5K (with a 2khz dip) and then rolls off.

So naturally when their 'reference' is tested against consumers 'preference' they don't do so well, even though they have met their own target.

It comes down to whose 'reference' you believe is correct.

Personally, I think Audyssey have their target wrong. For movies it doesn't make a massive difference, but for music (especially acoustic music) it always sounds off compared to what I think I hear in a concert hall.

I currently use Audyssey to correct the bass in my sub, but choose the Denon L/R bypass so it leaves my main speakers alone.

But I think Audyssey inventors do know people prefer a sloped curve, ie more bass and less treble, but go about it differently. Harmon believes this is always the case at not matter what volume. Audyssey believes it is only needed when listening below reference volume. So by turning on DynEQ the target curves get much closer between the two.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mde8965 View Post

""turn Audyssey off and listen after 2 weeks. I would be very surprised if you are not very dissapointed in the sound without Audyssey engaged.""

Is this a Audyssey brainwashing trick, the slave has now become the master..
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

I've now done this. Amazingly, 8 positions did make a difference. It sounds a lot better with 8. I was surprised at this because I was thinking it was calibrating for the seating position (as the setup says) but truly it needs more data points to calibrate from.

Exactly. The #1 mic position is taken at the main listening position, ear height, and the remaining 7 positions should be within a 2'-3' radius around that #1 position (not where folks actually sit).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

I understand the forum reasoning behind this, but what I don't understand is if Audyssey programs the software, and they say to always set it to small, why even allow large as an option...It seems silly to run this 'all powerful' calibration software, only to say 'make sure to change whatever it came up with to "x" and "x".

It's because Audyssey only does the actual filtering/EQing ... the AVR sets the speaker LARGE/SMALL setting,crossovers, and distance/delay settings.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Is this a Audyssey brainwashing trick, the slave has now become the master..

Many many people judge ANY room correction software based on an initial impression in which all they can focus on is "where did all the bass go". Because they are so used to the acoustic elements intoduced by the room architecture that they are used to hearing. And often because they did not understand how all the various options in the AVR and in Audyssey work and how to tweak them.

Once they calibrate and make some tweaks to their liking, then go through their music collection listening critically to things like voices, percussion, horns, etc... they may (or may not) determine that they sound they hear is more accurate. Then they can choose as to if they like the reference or preference better. If its the latter, turn off the room correction and manually EQ to taste.

The point is that a few minutes listening and keying in on the "lack of bass" is not a reason to dismiss room correction....
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:34am
It's the imperfections that make it sound better...
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Is this a Audyssey brainwashing trick, the slave has now become the master..

Exactly. It reveals and reverses the bias we all suffer when comparing something new to something familiar.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 76
2/7/12 at 6:44am
Maybe people hate Audyssey cause it reveals bad judgement in SQ tast. The bigger the change between Audyssey on and off, the less you really know about what sounds right... Or worse how bad ones hearing as become...
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 76
2/7/12 at 7:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Maybe people hate Audyssey cause it reveals bad judgement in SQ tast. The bigger the change between Audyssey on and off, the less you really know about what sounds right... Or worse how bad ones hearing as become...

That's a bold statement. What have you compared Audyssey with? Perhaps you are suffering from what Kal stated on top. Nobody is saying Audyssey is the end all be all, as a matter of fact, the MCACC version of the Elite SC/55,57 is very well regarded and so is YPAO in the A2000/3000 series. What version of Audyssey have you used to compare?

are you going to manually EQ your system for your room? if so please start a thread and share your expertise.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 76
2/7/12 at 7:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Maybe people hate Audyssey cause it reveals bad judgement in SQ tast. The bigger the change between Audyssey on and off, the less you really know about what sounds right... Or worse how bad ones hearing as become...

This MIGHT be true-ish if everybody purchased speakers after careful auditioning in their own rooms. Since the effect of every room is different, what we hear in the store is not what we hear at home.

That doesn't mean room-impacted sound is not enjoyable. Just that sound that is closer to what the mixers heard is more accurate and, for many, ultimately more enjoyable.

Your ears/brain pretty quickly adapt even to grossly inaccurate frequency response (say a big peak in the presence region) and you'll enjoy the sound if you let yourself. But that peak might cause details to be masked that are both intended to be heard and significant in one's enjoyment of the overall recording.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 76
2/7/12 at 8:10am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jproy13 View Post

I've noticed your subs trimmed at -12db, where is your volume knob behind your subs?

When I re-ran Audyssey with all 8 positions, I had the sub level at ~80db, so Audyssey turned them all the way down. Normal listening have them at -7db, I'm going to turn them down to 75db and re-run Audyssey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jproy13 View Post

I know. When I read "measure from the 6 seating position", I guess they did not mean litterally.

Cause when I read seating position, I instantly think location around main seating position . Silly Audyssey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

I think most people pass judgement about Audyssey on the before and after SQ... People who believe that Audyssey's filtering can turn a good sounding system into a poor sounding one, based on what they are hearing... Is this thread about the bugs in Audyssey or the bugs with the denon 4311, or both for 2x the bugs that bug us all...

Wut? Yes!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

Exactly. The #1 mic position is taken at the main listening position, ear height, and the remaining 7 positions should be within a 2'-3' radius around that #1 position (not where folks actually sit).

Yeah, I learned that. You'd think if the position picture was on-screen (and perhaps using a term other than 'seating position'), it'd massively increase the satisfaction rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post

It's because Audyssey only does the actual filtering/EQing ... the AVR sets the speaker LARGE/SMALL setting,crossovers, and distance/delay settings.

If the manufacturer goes through the trouble of incorporating Audyssey into their receiver, you'd think they'd ask how it should be used.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Why do I hate Audyssey so much? (AVR-4311, MultEQ XT32)