or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Denon AVR-5805 Arrived.....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Denon AVR-5805 Arrived..... - Page 4

post #91 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by noah katz
"(Nevertheless, I still read "average" as in "compromised" but let's not start all over again.)"

"Of course "averaging" is a compromise,..."

I questioned Chris of Audyssey in the MultEQ at length about this, and I don't understand how it can be, but he says that not only is it definitely *not* averaging, but

"...perhaps the most surprising result for some, is that correction for mulitple locations makes each location better. In fact, doing this gives better performance at each seat than what you would get by calibrating that seat on its own (i.e. with the single point methods available)."

post #36 from this thread

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...94#post4926594

I am not a speaker expert, but isn't one of the tests of a good speaker off-axis response. It would seem to me that if you correct from different positions you are correcting off-axis response, but then again that may make no sense-I am not very sharp this morning that is for sure.
post #92 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by Edvard_Grieg
Actually Sanjay, there are many different types of averages beyond the (n1 + n2 + ... + nk)/k

Well for that matter, "average" also has legal and nautical definitions. But in this context, average was being used in the classical sense: (n1 + n2 + ... + nk)/k. You can tell that readers were interpreting it that way because they immediately labeled it a "compromise". And they are correct: averaging the measurements would in fact compromise the auto-EQ process.
Quote:


I think that at this point it is just the semantic splitting of hairs, but I just wanted to give you an FYI on the question you asked

I appreciate the FYI, but I'll repeat what I said earlier about it not being semantics for me. The point of posting information is to help clarify things, not confuse. Both manufacturers (Lexicon and Audyssey) have not only stated that their processes don't average multiple measurements, but have gone on to explain why. If, after all that, posters still insist on deliberately using the word "averaging" to describe what those processes do, then that's their prerogative. But I have to wonder how that clarifies things, since most readers will interpret "average" in the traditional way and get the wrong impression of the process.

So rather than describe the process as "averaging", I'll simply call it "combining". If I end up being the only one that uses that term, then so be it. Just so long as people understand the difference.

Best,
Sanjay
post #93 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by sdurani
Hi Randy,

Haven't compared Lex vs Audyssey. Both systems would literally have to be in the same room in order for the comparison to be fair and meaningful. We're comparing room-EQ after all.

I doubt Lexicon is interested in licensing their proprietary technology to others. Parent company Harman got LOGIC7 into their H/K receivers, but I don't think it will show up in many (if any) other brands. Ditto their room EQ technology, especially since H/K has its own (good) room EQ system already.

As for Audyssey MultEQ, I hope it gets licensed to everything from high-end pre-pros to HTiBs. Seriously, what percentage of average consumers do you think calibrate their "stereos"? Ten percent? I'm probably being generous. If consumers could have speaker levels, time-alignment, bass management and minimal room-EQ done automatically, I think it could become the single most important to feature to ever hit home theatre. We're not talking perfection here; but rudimentary calibration, which is better than nothing.

I mean, can you imagine if even mid-to-low priced TVs came with a small suction cup that you placed on the screen that allowed the display to automatically calibrate itself? For us enthusiasts, it wouldn't replace careful ISF calibration. But for most consumers, it would probably be the first time they were viewing a decent image.

The only place I think we'll see Meridian's and Lexicon's proprietary EQ systems "filter down to" is lower priced models from those same companies. For the mass market and/or companies that don't have in-house expertise in signal processing, you'll have to look to licensed products: e.g., MultEQ from Audyssey and A.R.T. from Analog Devices.

Best,
Sanjay

I agree and wouldn't be surprised to see "room correction" systems on just about all home theater receivers and HTIB in a couple years.

Yea, I understand the difficulty of carrying out a truely meaningful tests of both systems but just curious if you had a chance to hear both and came away with any thoughts.


Thanks,

Randy
post #94 of 1311
There is an excellent article dealing with the Audessy MultEQ system at Audioholics. The use fuzzy logic, not averaging, to create a balanced effect for all measured locations.
post #95 of 1311
Noah,
Quote:


I questioned Chris of Audyssey in the MultEQ at length about this, and I don't understand how it can be, but he says that not only is it definitely *not* averaging, but

"...perhaps the most surprising result for some, is that correction for mulitple locations makes each location better. In fact, doing this gives better performance at each seat than what you would get by calibrating that seat on its own (i.e. with the single point methods available)."

Since Audyssey (understandably) isn't divulging proprietary information, the best we can do is make an educated guess about what their EQ process is doing. It's possible that the results aren't averaged, because a couple of the samples may not be used. For example: of the 8 measurements you take, one is in a deep null. The process may simply discard that particular sample because: a) it can't fix a null, b) including this sample may do nothing more than offset/skew the results, and c) ignoring it might not be problematic since nulls are psychoacoustically less objectionable than peaks.

What Chris said about correcting for multiple locations is consistent with what Dr. Jim Muller (designer of Lexicon's room EQ) has said an. Low frequency waves are so large (sometimes bigger than the room) that correcting at one location will yield audible benefits at all locations. Sampling from various locations may help you find room problems that aren't as easily noticable from the sweet spot. For their EQ process, Lex recommends spreading the 4 mics around the room; various directions, different heights. In fact, none of them have to be in any of the seating locations, let alone the sweet spot. The goal is to catch as many problems as possible, and sampling from multiple locations helps you do that.

Best,
Sanjay
post #96 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by Capfacsurf
There is an excellent article dealing with the Audessy MultEQ system at Audioholics. The use fuzzy logic, not averaging, to create a balanced effect for all measured locations.

See my post on the previous page for that article....
post #97 of 1311
Sanjay,

>>may discard that particular sample because b) including this sample may do nothing more than offset/skew the results.<<

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but when you use the term "skewing the results", doesn't that imply some sort of averaging, be it either simple or complex(algorithmic, neural net, etc.)? Sorry if my logic appears fuzzy.

Ran
post #98 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by theranman
when you use the term "skewing the results", doesn't that imply some sort of averaging, be it either simple or complex(algorithmic, neural net, etc.)?

All it implies is that each sample is taken into consideration by the auto-EQ system. Audyssey hasn't made it clear how they compare & use the various samples to reach a conclusion about what is happening in the room and what correction should be applied. Whatever process they're using to examine the measurements, it's possible that a particular sample could hinder that process (skew the results) rather than help it. If the system can recognize this, then it may not use that particular sample.

Sanjay
post #99 of 1311
Quote:


So rather than describe the process as "averaging", I'll simply call it "combining".

That sounds like a good way to avoid confusing anyone. "Combine" has a nice neutral ring to it. In my work (trying to make sense of the stock market) I use a variety of digital filters that are basically variations on the "average" theme, even though some of them use a page of code, but the average person probably thinks of a simple mean when the word is used. So, "combine" it is.
post #100 of 1311
No, I think what the investment industry uses are "tea leaves and coin flips". If they could get as dramatic results as the MultEQ, THAT would be science, not soothsaying.
post #101 of 1311
Yep you're right, Capfacsurf. Fortunately, I'm not part of all that unless you consider a few computers in the spare bedroom an industry.
post #102 of 1311
Sanjay,

"Low frequency waves are so large (sometimes bigger than the room) that correcting at one location will yield audible benefits at all locations."

I think this is stretching things a bit.

Modes occur at wavelengths 2X a room's dimension. Obviously that's bigger, and these modes are exactly what cause the big response swings as you move around in the room.

The assertion would apply at frequencies in the pressurization region below the first mode, where wavelengths are so long that at any instant in time pressure rises throughtout the room in phase.

But this is not the case for most of the audible bass range in the vast majority of rooms.
post #103 of 1311
Quote:
Originally posted by sdurani
Noah, Since Audyssey (understandably) isn't divulging proprietary information, the best we can do is make an educated guess about what their EQ process is doing. It's possible that the results aren't averaged, because a couple of the samples may not be used. For example: of the 8 measurements you take, one is in a deep null. The process may simply discard that particular sample because: a) it can't fix a null, b) including this sample may do nothing more than offset/skew the results, and c) ignoring it might not be problematic since nulls are psychoacoustically less objectionable than peaks.
...

Best,
Sanjay

Sanjay,

Actually all measurements are used in MultEQ. We don't discard any. We just have a unique way of combining them. Another way to think of it: When you average, you are giving equal importance to each measurement (weight of 1) and then adding them and dividing by the number of measurements. However, in a real room not all measured positions have the same problems. Some have more and some less and this depends on frequency as well. So, in our method we "weigh" the severity of the problem in each measured position and derive a filter that way. It takes several passes to do this, as measurements are clustered together by "similarity" and a representative response is generated from each cluster. From the group of representative responses we create one final uber-response that we can show better represents the problems in each measured location than the average response.

Best,
Chris
post #104 of 1311
Noah, I should have worded my comment more carefully. Room-EQ systems from Meridian and Lexicon don't operate above roughly 250Hz. One of the reasons being that the wavelengths under that point are still several feet long and corrections in that range can benefit multiple locations (which is what I should have said instead of all locations).

BTW, room modes can occur at any integer multiples of half-wavelengths; e.g., a room that is 16 feet long will exhibit resonances along that length at 32ft (35Hz), 16ft (71Hz), 11ft (106Hz), 8ft (141Hz), etc. They're all in the audible bass range.

Chris, thanx for clarifying. The 'discarding' was a hypothetical example (the first thing off the top off my head). The point simply being that combining the samples doesn't necessarily mean averaging them.

Best,
Sanjay
post #105 of 1311
Can anyone tell me if the S video monitor out and component video monitor out are active at the same time? In other words, if I'm feeding an S video cable from my digital cable box into the receiver and I have an S video cable going from the receiver to my TV on one input AND a component video cable going from the receiver to the TV on a different input, will I be able to get picture out of both inputs on the TV?

Bob
post #106 of 1311
Thread Starter 
Quote:


Originally posted by bslep
Can anyone tell me if the S video monitor out and component video monitor out are active at the same time? In other words, if I'm feeding an S video cable from my digital cable box into the receiver and I have an S video cable going from the receiver to my TV on one input AND a component video cable going from the receiver to the TV on a different input, will I be able to get picture out of both inputs on the TV?

Bob

Yes both will be active at the same time....
post #107 of 1311
Thanks Jim. I have one on order and can't wait to get it.
post #108 of 1311
I also have purchased the 5805 and wow! is it big! But the Audyssey alone is worth the price, just kidding, but it is very, very good.
I would comment that you can't get, via separates, the features that the 5805 has. I very much also wanted the DVI and HDMI switching for now with Denon DVD 3910 (hdmi and dvi output) and dish network HD DVR with DVI output so that I could connect once with the HDMI connector on my MITS TV. I am. however having a problem with the Dish unit and the 5805. Although the 5805 switches the dvd player hdmi ok, it won't also switch the DVI from the Dish. AFter discussions with Denon, we think it is the Dish units implementation of HDCP, but ????
post #109 of 1311
For those of you who have now owned the 5805 for a while, how would you describe the 'sound'? Does it seem warm/laid back; neutral or bright/forward?

Has anyone had any problems with the units ability to switch video sources, especially the digital ones, HDMI and/or DVI.

Lastly, how does the video scaling seem to work for the analog video components? Has anyone compared the ability of the 5805 to scale a 480i source to 480p versus having your DVD player do that process?
Thanks,
Bish
post #110 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by davpum
I also have purchased the 5805 and wow! is it big! But the Audyssey alone is worth the price, just kidding, but it is very, very good.
I would comment that you can't get, via separates, the features that the 5805 has. I very much also wanted the DVI and HDMI switching for now with Denon DVD 3910 (hdmi and dvi output) and dish network HD DVR with DVI output so that I could connect once with the HDMI connector on my MITS TV. I am. however having a problem with the Dish unit and the 5805. Although the 5805 switches the dvd player hdmi ok, it won't also switch the DVI from the Dish. AFter discussions with Denon, we think it is the Dish units implementation of HDCP, but ????

Strange, I'm having similar problems with HDMI/DVI switching.
The 5805 will switch the DVD player (HDMI) and Sony SAT HD-300 (DVI) just fine. But refuses to switch the JVC D-VHS player (HDMI) or the Mortorola HD cable box (DVI). And will switch video HDMI of the Hughes HD Directv TIVO box but won't do audio through the HDMI.
Very strange stuff..........

Even better I'd like to know how you were able to talk to someone from Denon, anybody.....
Even my dealer is having no luck contacting them about this issue.
I love the unit but...............

dc
post #111 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by DreamCatcher
And will switch video HDMI of the Hughes HD Directv TIVO box but won't do audio through the HDMI.

dc

The HR10-250 does not output audio through HDMI. It was designed that way.

Brian
post #112 of 1311
Quote:


Originally posted by bkzoller
The HR10-250 does not output audio through HDMI. It was designed that way.

Brian

Brian, Are you sure?
I can't find anything referring to that in the manual.

Regards,

dc
post #113 of 1311
I thought I remembered reading that on TiVo Community Forum last year. I don't have an HDMI receiver or pre/pro for testing the audio on mine. The only thing I could find there was that people had to turn off Dolby Digital in the TiVo to get their display to play the audio.

Brian
post #114 of 1311
I just read this entire thread and find it very intresting.
I think one thing is getting overlooked, we are talking about 8 speakers(7.1) and 8 locations. The results produced by Boosting/Cutting frequincies from each speaker individualy are mind-boggeling! I don't think the best audiophile could accomplish comparible results before the 5805 is obselete.
Quote:


Originally posted by sdurani
I wasn't proposing that an EQ system could simultaneously boost and cut the same frequency. My hypothetical was simply an example of how the problems at two locations could cancel each other when "averaged" and fool the system into thinking that there was no problem.

So i think the system can in fact boost and cut the same frequency, albeit from different speakers.
post #115 of 1311
Thread Starter 
Originally posted by thebishman
1) For those of you who have now owned the 5805 for a while, how would you describe the 'sound'? Does it seem warm/laid back; neutral or bright/forward?

It's hard to say as everyone might not hear it the same,but from what i have heard from SACD & DVD Audio running though the 1394 the sound is neutral & very very open sounding in a very good way,to my ears the 5805 sounds alot better than my 5803A did running though RCA cables... as far as home theater sound with the audyssey the sound becomes neutral & maybe a little on the bright side but with a more open sound & the speakers are much more discrete than with Audyssey off....
______________________________________________________
2) Has anyone had any problems with the units ability to switch video sources, especially the digital ones, HDMI and/or DVI.

I have not tryed the HDMI or DVI yet but hope to do so this weekend as my local stores have been out of stock on these type of cables but suppose to get them in stock this weekend, i have the denon 3910 & Voom to try out using hdmi & dvi & will post back with what i find out... now with all my other video sources the 5805 does a good job with switching them....
______________________________________________________
3) Lastly, how does the video scaling seem to work for the analog video components? Has anyone compared the ability of the 5805 to scale a 480i source to 480p versus having your DVD player do that process?
Thanks,

i have not tryed my dvd players using the built in scaler on the 5805 but i have tryed out my JVC S-vhs vcr, Sony mini DV player & a very old Sony beta & the 5805 built in scaler does a very good job with these....now with my Xbox the scaler on the 5805 does not do a good job at all so i let the xbox do all the scaling,it just looks alot better using the built in scaler in the xbox....this is allso the case with Voom, the built in scaler in the voom does a better job than the scaler in the 5805....hope this helps Jim....
______________________________________________________
post #116 of 1311
Thread Starter 
Quote:


Originally posted by bslep
Thanks Jim. I have one on order and can't wait to get it.

Your welcome, you should really like the 5805, i'm learning something new everyday with this thing, it does so much more that has not even been posted, it does not get old by no means,there is allways something new to find out & i like that & think you will too......congrats on the 5805....Jim
post #117 of 1311
hello
anyone here decided to go with the 4806 instead ? already shipped and delivered ? thanks.
post #118 of 1311
Jim1961,
Thanks for your reply. I have a 5803 that I have been very happy with and the Denon 5805 is on my 'short-list' of components to upgrade to. I was almost ready to purchase an Integra Research 7.1 but am now concerned about the sound of the unit, (some owners calling it very bright), as well as other quality control issues. Also, I'd have to buy the IR sight-unseen and from out of state; at least with the Denon I can buy it locally and perhaps trade-in my pristine 5803.
Bish
post #119 of 1311
I sent the following to Jeff Talmadge Denon marketing director at the suggestion of the service rep at Denon, Itasca, IL (Tony) that helped me get the Denon DVD 3910 patch that fixed the problem with the 5805 switching its HDMI outputs.






David Pumphrey


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: David Pumphrey [mailto:davpum@charter.net]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 11:25 AM
To: 'J-Talmadge@denonnj.com'
Subject: AVR 5805 and DVD 3910



Your tech support guy, Tony, was helpful yesterday. He got me through the DVD 3910 downloadable upgrade for it which fixed the problem I was having connecting to the AVR 5805 via hdmi and from the 5805 via hdmi to my Mitsubishi WD 62725 tv. Before the upgrade, only the DVI out on the 3910 to the hdmi in on the 5805 worked. I had previously tried a direct connections to the tv via hdmi from the 3910, bypassing the 5805 and that worked fine. However I purchased the 5805 because of the hdmi and dvi multiple inputs and switching and I want that to work.

I have a DISH network satellite system with a 521 Dish HD DVR which has a DVI output. If I connect the DVI directly to the HDMI on the tv, it works fine. This tells me that both devices are HDCP compatible and have correctly implemented the protocol. However when I connect the Dish 521 via DVI to the DVI input on the 5805 and then use the same hdmi to hdmi output that I am now successfully using for the 3910 from the 5805 to the tv, it doesn't work!

Just for the heck of it, at Tony's suggestion, I also tried connecting the dish 521 into the same hdmi connection that I am using for the 3910 (via a dvi to hdmi adaptor) thereby using a known good input and that didn't work either.

I am using the 720p output option for the 3910 and from the dish 521 and I have set the 5805 to output 720p also. That is the native resolution of the Mits TV.

I am now using the Dish component output into the 5805 and then the component output of the 5805 into the component input on the TV and that works. But that isn't what I want to do. I want the most direct digital signal from the dish unit via the 5805 to the tv. I become even more important as new devices are upgraded to dvi and hdmi outputs.

Tony said that other people are also having issues with DISH units, but that it isn't known whether they are the same issues that I am having. Because the DISH DVI direct to the tv works great, I can't believe that it is the HDCP that is the issue.

The serial numbers are denon 5805 sn 4101500225

dvd 3910 sn 4108400987. Purchased from an authorized dealer, The Record Shop.



Your assistance in nailing down and fixing the problem would be greatly appreciated. I would be happy if you confirmed your receipt of this email.

David Pumphrey

P.S. The Audessey setup is fantastic, really works well. The overall unit appears to be great. I have a Paradigm 7.1 speaker system, CD changers, Laser Disk, VCR, Phono, Cable, Separate TIVO unit and Over the Air antennas for local HD. I am usning the IEEE connection and not the Denon Link for obvious reasons, i.e. SACD and DVD Audio compatibility.


This is copied from the Denon web site.

As of February 2, 2004, our West Coast Service Facility is closed. Our new National Service Center is in Itasca, Illinois. Repairs are now being accepted at the New Jersey and Illinois locations.

D&M Holdings US Inc.
Attn: DENON Customer Service
1100 Maplewood Dr.
Itasca, IL 60143
Hours of operation: 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM CST, M-F
Tel. 800-497-8921 Option 2-6-2
Tel. 630-741-0660 Direct
Fax: 630-735-1959
post #120 of 1311
Great post David!
As I stated earlier I'm also having "issues" with the 5805 HDMI/DVI abilities.
It just seems that the 5805 is not compatible with "ALL" HDMI/DVI capable components. This is very dissappointing and I hope Denon is aware of this and doing something about it as we speak. They are so hard to get a hold of via either email or phone.
I will continue to pester my dealer, maybe he can open some lines of communitcation.
Regarding my experience with the JVC HM-DH5U D-VHS player when connected via HDMI out to HDMI in of the 5805. The video/audio switching works fine until I put in a HD VHS tape which outputs 1080i. The 5805 suddenly won't pass this on to the display, but if I bypass the 5805 and go directly to the display, all is fine. Go figure.......
I think Denon has some work to do to get the digital video switching abilities perfected.
The only thing keeping me from returning the unit is it does everything else so damn well............


dc
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Denon AVR-5805 Arrived.....