Originally Posted by lovinthehd
Craig---Curious, does the 4311 not also provide for another set of eq frequencies for the sub itself? My Onkyo does (and they're not PEQ either)....but I just use Audyssey for the reasons you explain. Although I may some day consider doing more, Audyssey is so much easier
The 4311CI only EQ's the L/R channels. It has no separate EQ for the sub. It does have an adjustable LPF of LFE, but that's not an EQ; just a low pass filter that only affects the LFE channel. It also has adjustable crossovers for each channel, but again, those are not EQ filters.
The Onkyo only has a few preset center frequency filters for the subwoofer: “25Hz”, “40Hz”, “63Hz”, “100Hz”, or “160Hz”. Only 3 of these are useful if you have an 80 Hz crossover, and then they're not adjustable for center frequency or filter width. You can only adjust the magnitude at those exact filters and the 1/3 octave bandwidths. If your problems lie outside those ranges, (and they virtually always do), then the EQ filters are worthless.
I can think of no reason to use the EQ in the receiver instead of Audyssey. The EQ has far less precision, no adjustability and it only EQ's a very few bands in the frequency domain. Whereas Audyssey actually measures the in-room response, identifies the exact problem frequencies, and applies hundreds of filter taps in both the frequency AND time domains to correct the specific problems in YOUR room and system. Audyssey not only improves the magnitude response primarily, it also reduces ringing, which is probably a bigger detriment to sound quality than the primary peaks and nulls in the frequency response.
Here is a graph showing the in-room magnitude response without Audyssey:
Hers is the same room and system with Audyssey on:
(Click on the images to see a higher resolution version.)
Note the flattening of the magnitude response with a reduction of the peaks and valleys in the FR.
More importantly, note the small colorful graphs in the upper right corners. These are the time domain graphs. In the Pre-Audyssey graph, everywhere there is a peak in the frequency graph, there is a red and yellow "trail" in the time domain graph. These "trails" represent the ringing and overhang of the sound at those frequencies. In the post-Audyssey graph, those "trails" are completely obliterated. You simply can't do that with a graphic EQ.
The difference in the "sound" between these two graphs is huge. Where the first graph sounds indistinct and inarticulate, with bass notes smearing from one to the next, the second graph sounds articulate and precise with each bass note being distinct and recognizable from the next note. IMO, this is the biggest improvement Audyssey imparts; the bass definition improves dramatically. Some folks are so used to the smeared and muddy bass that they miss it when it gone. However, some quality listening time will show that the bass detail and articulation are much improved and the bass is in better balance to the rest of the sound. At least, that's what my experience tells me.
Stick with Audyssey, my friend!
CraigEdited by craig john - 6/14/13 at 1:58pm