AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The AUDYSSEY SOUNDS HORRIBLE THREAD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The AUDYSSEY SOUNDS HORRIBLE THREAD - Page 2  

post #31 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

Mcacc,ypao and Audysey all get it wrong. Too bright and they suck the life out of the midrange area along with bloated bass. I had my system (Onkyo 5008,sms1 sub eq,svs cylinder subs) professionally calibrated by Umr,Jeff Meier and I can tell you that it makes a huge differrence. I attached a graph of what "pocket rta" app showed me on my ipad after he calibrated (pocket rta set to no weighting). I did this playing pink noise from an avia II audio test disk from all 5 speakers just like he did with his own test disc and equipment. The attached graph shows the results. This is what a professional cal job with professional equipment looks like using pocket rta app.

If you dl pocket rta on your device, play back pink noise on all 5 channels, you can manually adjust your receivers EQ to emulate my graph. This will be a very good approxiamation of a pro calibrated system. Much,much better than its built in auto cal system.

Remember, he manually calibrated the system with his equipment. All I did was measure his results with my equipment ( pocket rta and avia2 disc). Set pocket rta to "no weighting" to get the your EQ results to look like this. I tried this on my sons system and it worked beautifully . We a/b'd audyssey results vs. our manual settings for hours. Just smoked the auto cal results. Everything more natural and pleasing .This is not to say your system will be the equivalent of a pro calibrated system,but I'm confident the results will be better than any of the auto cal systems including xt32.If you listen to a variety of material (cd,vinyl,movies)and have a good ear, you should Discover the same thing.

Attachment 245907

I wouldn't trust the app

AVS Top Picks

post #32 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

Mcacc,ypao and Audysey all get it wrong.

. . .

Do you really need to spam multiple threads with exactly the same post, telling your story of how you "calibrated" your system with a seven band graphic EQ?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=2893

AJ
post #33 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post


I wouldn't trust the app

You really don't need to trust the app ( Jeff was actually rather impressed with it). All its showing is it's interpitation of HIS calibration with HIS equipment. If you simply manually eq your system to look like the graph, you will have a good idea of what a manually calibrated system sounds like. Just try it. Granted, the pocket rta is only 1/6 octave while his went out to 1/24th but the results will still be close. I've tried it on several systems and its always superior to the receiver auto cal system.
post #34 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:32pm
Audyssey MultEQ XT32 awarded accessory product of the year from Stereophile. Yeah I can see now why it SOUNDS SO HORRIBLE. If more people read the first post in the Audyssey thread which has the setup guide and FAQ then they might have a better feel for Audyssey. I know it helped me quite a bit on how to do a proper calibration.

http://www.audyssey.com/about/press-...accessory-year

Bill
post #35 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:35pm
This thread reminds me of the days when audyssey first came out
post #36 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post


Do you really need to spam multiple threads with exactly the same post, telling your story of how you "calibrated" your system with a seven band graphic EQ?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=2893

AJ

Well I was going to put that disclaimer in here that I posted a very slightly similar post in the sc55/57 thread, but said screw it. . Its only 2 threads.
post #37 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:39pm
Not trying to be argumentative but have you used all 3? All 3 of them aren't the same and since you posted in the sc55 area I assume you used mcacc. I used mcacc before and the change to audyssey wowed me. Once again I think others here can agree too! (Steve?)
post #38 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

Audyssey MultEQ XT32 awarded accessory product of the year from Stereophile. Yeah I can see now why it SOUNDS SO HORRIBLE. If more people read the first post in the Audyssey thread which has the setup guide and FAQ then they might have a better feel for Audyssey. I know it helped me quite a bit on how to do a proper calibration.

http://www.audyssey.com/about/press-...accessory-year

Bill

I do not think its horrible. Only sounds worse than a good manual cal. Listening to vinyl with audyssey or others like it engaged, can and often does sounds bad. Everything just sounds less engaging, less musical . It CAN have its moments of goodness in my experience, but they are few and far between.
post #39 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

Not trying to be argumentative but have you used all 3? All 3 of them aren't the same and since you posted in the sc55 area I assume you used mcacc. I used mcacc before and the change to audyssey wowed me. Once again I think others here can agree too! (Steve?)

Yes, all 3. Of the 3, i do think Audyssey is the lesser of the 3 evils but generally speaking the end results have similar traits but in different degrees. Lack of midrange,bloated bass, excessive highs. Its very obvious once you hear a pro calibrated system.
post #40 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

Well I was going to put that disclaimer in here that I posted a very slightly similar post in the sc55/57 thread, but said screw it. . Its only 2 threads.

Until you can produce legitimate room measurements -- iOS app RTA readings do not qualify -- your claims remain suspect. Furthermore, it is downright disingenuous, even irresponsible to suggest that others can achieve the same "better" results with a measly seven band graphic EQ and an iPad. You need to disclose that you also use a Velodyne SMS-1, which few other users have. And your sig file implies that you may also use multiple subs.

AJ
post #41 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:54pm
Have you tried tweaking audyssey? Disengaging Dyn Eq? change Ref levels? That's when the magic happens
post #42 of 57
5/8/12 at 4:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post


Until you can produce legitimate room measurements -- iOS app RTA readings do not qualify -- your claims remain suspect. Furthermore, it is downright disingenuous, even irresponsible to suggest that others can achieve the same "better" results with a measly seven band graphic EQ and an iPad. You need to disclose that you also use a Velodyne SMS-1, which few other users have. And your sig file implies that you may also use multiple subs.

AJ

I did say I have svs subs and sms1 in this thread. Other systems I tested this on, did not have subs this good nor did the have an sms1. They still sounded better than the auto cal sysems. This is MY experience with these auto cals ever since they started putting them in receivers. My listening days go back to the seventies and I have pretty good ears. I am pleased that my personal experience with the auto cals is the same as Jeff Meier's experience with them. I firmly believe that he is the best calibrator for audio/video in this country.
post #43 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

Have you tried tweaking audyssey? Disengaging Dyn Eq? change Ref levels? That's when the magic happens

Tried everything over the years. I was rather happy with the results on occasion with movies. It wasn't until I got back into vinyl with a good setup that Audysseys short commings often had me wanting to modify its eq settings ( of course I set spkrs to small before anyone asks). Unfortunetly, it doesn't allow for that .I loved the fact that Ypao in my previous Yamaha RX-V3900 did. Either way, it was a done deal when Jeff offered to manually cal my system during one of his tours. If I don't like it, he would not charge me. Simple. I loved it. That was many ,many months ago and I have never felt the need to re adjust anything. It just sounds so correct. That goes for my Kuro tv that he also calibrated,but thats a story for another thread.
post #44 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

Mcacc,ypao and Audysey all get it wrong. Too bright and they suck the life out of the midrange area along with bloated bass. I had my system (Onkyo 5008,sms1 sub eq,svs cylinder subs) professionally calibrated by Umr,Jeff Meier, and I can tell you that it makes a huge difference.He is not a big fan of any auto cals either. As an audio engineer for some 30 years plus tons of on the job experience, i believe him fully. My ears agree . I attached a graph of what "pocket rta" app showed me on my ipad after he calibrated (pocket rta set to no weighting). I did this playing pink noise from an avia II audio test disk from all 5 speakers just like he did with his own test disc and equipment. The attached graph shows the results. This is what a professional cal job with professional equipment looks like using pocket rta app.

If you dl pocket rta on your device, play back pink noise on all 5 channels, you can manually adjust your receivers EQ to emulate my graph. This will be a very good approxiamation of a pro calibrated system. Much,much better than its built in auto cal system.

Remember, he manually calibrated the system with his equipment. All I did was measure his results with my equipment ( pocket rta and avia2 disc). Set pocket rta to "no weighting" to get the your EQ results to look like this. I tried this on my sons system and it worked beautifully . We a/b'd audyssey results vs. our manual settings for hours. Just smoked the auto cal results. Everything more natural and pleasing .This is not to say your system will be the equivalent of a pro calibrated system,but I'm confident the results will be better than any of the auto cal systems including xt32.If you listen to a variety of material (cd,vinyl,movies)and have a good ear, you should Discover the same thing.

Well, if we all had Umr's with 30 years audiophile experience drop by with their iphone this might be realistic. For the rest of us, Audyssey will just have to do.
post #45 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

Only sounds worse than a good manual cal.

As has already been mentioned how about posting some measurements of your manual calibration in your room. I just noticed that you did not personally manually calibrate your system but Jeff Meier did it. Big difference as your posts led me to believe you did the manual calibration yourself. I would still like to see how your system meaures in your room.

Bill
post #46 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post


Well, if we all had Umr's with 30 years audiophile experience drop by with their iphone this might be realistic. For the rest of us, Audyssey will just have to do.

I'm trying to get you to eat green eggs and ham. If not appealing,stick with what you got. Umr's "iphone" costs thousands!
post #47 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post


As has already been mentioned how about posting some measurements of your manual calibration in your room. I just noticed that you did not personally manually calibrate your system but Jeff Meier did it. Big difference as your posts led me to believe you did the manual calibration yourself. I would still like to see how your system meaures in your room.

Bill

I only have pocket rta's interpetation of Jeff's readings with his 1/24th octave spectrum analyzer.

I posted the" no weighting" reading already.Here is the "c weighting " reading from pocket rta. He has the waterfall graph and other readings he measured. He probably gave me my own copy, but cannot find. All I have is the eq settings that he adjusted on my receiver.

Attachment 245913
LL
post #48 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

I used mcacc before and the change to audyssey wowed me. Once again I think others here can agree too! (Steve?)

yup
post #49 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:35pm
Maybe I should start a ypao sounds terrible thread because I know xt32 beats the hell out of it. Can't be that many audyssey haters here.
post #50 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venomous View Post

Maybe I should start a ypao sounds terrible thread because I know xt32 beats the hell out of it. Can't be that many audyssey haters here.

Forget YPAO, this is an "official" Audyssey thread, so to speak. Mods are watching, so please "post positive observations just to add some balance to the thread". Its almost sinking!
post #51 of 57
5/8/12 at 5:53pm
I don't believe ANY of the auto cal technological out there are perfect. I used YPAO before and MCACC now. And now I have a receiver on pre-order with Audyssey TX32. All of which needed tweeking when done. I have a treated room and also use OmniMic see what I am hearing.

Even if you don't have a treated room or something to measure your system, you still need to tweek a auto cal system to your tastes.

P.S.
I wouldn't trust ANY Apple app to adjust my system. Maybe a very basic reference but that's it.
post #52 of 57
5/8/12 at 6:35pm
Audyssey Sub Equalizer Review. From Jeff Meier web site AccuCalhd.com


;

Audyssey makes products to programatically equalize sound in home theater environments. I typically encounter these in receivers from various manufacturers.

I recently had the opportunity to work with the stand alone version for subwoofers. This system had one attached to a single subwoofer located in the front of the theater.

It appeared to do a reasonable job from 20 to 50 Hz, but was very poor from 50 to 100 Hz. This caused severe bass management problems with speakers that needed to have the speaker crossovers set above 50Hz. The phase of the subwoofer was also dramatically altered with this box in place making it difficult to phase the other speakers with the subwoofer.

In general I would avoid this unit. At a price of $799 I would allocate my funds to a second subwoofer, Rane PE-17 and/or a subwoofer with a manual PEQ. My experience with their receiver based products is better than this, but they are still vastly inferior to manually adjusting a subwoofer equalizer, receiver or preamp processor. Multiple subwoofers are a superior way to even out bass response in a room and reduce low frequency distortion. With a price of $799 you can purchase another subwoofer. The second subwoofer also does not need to be as powerful as the primary sub since its primary job will be to smooth the bass response from 30 to 120 hertz. A second subwoofer will also lower the overall distortion at these frequencies since each will need to output less sound to achieve the same sound pressure level. I find manual subwoofer equalization to be preferable to automatic calibration if you have the proper equipment or help in setting it up.
post #53 of 57
5/8/12 at 7:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

Audyssey Sub Equalizer Review. From Jeff Meier web site AccuCal.com

;

Audyssey makes products to programatically equalize sound in home theater environments. I typically encounter these in receivers from various manufacturers.

I recently had the opportunity to work with the stand alone version for subwoofers. This system had one attached to a single subwoofer located in the front of the theater.

It appeared to do a reasonable job from 20 to 50 Hz, but was very poor from 50 to 100 Hz. This caused severe bass management problems with speakers that needed to have the speaker crossovers set above 50Hz. The phase of the subwoofer was also dramatically altered with this box in place making it difficult to phase the other speakers with the subwoofer.

In general I would avoid this unit. At a price of $799 I would allocate my funds to a second subwoofer, Rane PE-17 and/or a subwoofer with a manual PEQ. My experience with their receiver based products is better than this, but they are still vastly inferior to manually adjusting a subwoofer equalizer, receiver or preamp processor. Multiple subwoofers are a superior way to even out bass response in a room and reduce low frequency distortion. With a price of $799 you can purchase another subwoofer. The second subwoofer also does not need to be as powerful as the primary sub since its primary job will be to smooth the bass response from 30 to 120 hertz. A second subwoofer will also lower the overall distortion at these frequencies since each will need to output less sound to achieve the same sound pressure level. I find manual subwoofer equalization to be preferable to automatic calibration if you have the proper equipment or help in setting it up.

Is this a real A/V company? I entered www.AccuCal.com and got a site about calibration......of pipets and a lot of industrial/technical jargon.
post #54 of 57
5/8/12 at 7:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post


Is this a real A/V company? I entered www.AccuCal.com and got a site about calibration......of pipets and a lot of industrial/technical jargon.

Accucalhd.com. Sorry.
post #55 of 57
5/8/12 at 8:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

I did say I have svs subs and sms1 in this thread. Other systems I tested this on, did not have subs this good nor did the have an sms1. They still sounded better than the auto cal sysems. This is MY experience with these auto cals ever since they started putting them in receivers. My listening days go back to the seventies and I have pretty good ears. I am pleased that my personal experience with the auto cals is the same as Jeff Meier's experience with them. I firmly believe that he is the best calibrator for audio/video in this country.


Have you tried the Harman/JBL EQ software....
Its R&D development was led by Dr. Floyd Toole and can be found in the higher end Harman/Kardon and JBL Synthesis products. Their development goes back about 11 years...
And they were the 1st for EQing the subwoofer as well as supporting multiple subwoofers (up to 4)..

Their findings have been published in multiple AES papers..
Not a lot of hype but simple, straight-forward explanations for taming the listening room acoustic problems especially its low frequency peaks & resonances. Whereas common EQ schemes (such as Audyssey) try to boost/
re-Eq for a hole..They do the opposite by providing a frequency cut for each side of the dip (hole)...
This reduces THD while preserving DSP headroom for a higher SNR..

Google.. "Floyd Toole or Sean Olive or Todd Welti"
and you will find their works...

Just my $0.02..
post #56 of 57
5/8/12 at 8:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

I'm trying to get you to eat green eggs and ham. If not appealing,stick with what you got. Umr's "iphone" costs thousands!

Somehow I just knew my point would go over your head.

Not everyone has the luxury of audio engineers coming over to fine-tune their system. <-- did that get through?
post #57 of 57
5/9/12 at 3:42am
further discussions should go in the Audyssey sticky

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795421
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
This thread is locked  

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The AUDYSSEY SOUNDS HORRIBLE THREAD