Seaton Sound SubMersive1 - Page 153

Exactly my thoughts!

or more interesting analogy
Kind of like you have a hot new girlfriend - it's your birthday - got over to her place for first time and she says with big smile "meet my roommate" who is even hotter

I thought the same thing and have been pleasently surprised at the uprade. Duals are now a whole new level. I had no idea how much compression I was seeing befoe at even -10 to -15db from reference. Simply astounding. Would not have a guessed....

Sean

I will be ordering mine next week(new amp) and putting it in next Sat. Should be a fun day .

The amp is probably a good upgrade but 3-4 HPs is probably overkill for anything less than Madison Square Garden.

I've heard Craig's three Submersives and it is impressive. And smoother than when he had "only" two. In fact, once you get enough sub "power" in the room, the benefit of more subs is smoothing of the response.

Jeff

Like eating, drinking, sleeping?... And at what cost? Cost/benefit comes into play pretty quickly.

Benefit is in the mind of the beholder. And cost .. well what I think is a lot of money might be pocket change for the next person.

J

As is value, which does not depend on the size of ones' pockets.

Hey Gary... since you seem to think you're qualified to make "value" judgments for me, let me return the favor:

The link in your sig says you own a pair of Def Tech BP3000 TL loudspeakers. In fact, all of your speakers have powered woofers. Checking the spec's for the BP3000 TL's on the Def Tech website, those speakers appear to have 18" woofers powered by 1 kilowatt amps, and an LF extension to 13 Hz, (if you can believe Def Tech's spec's):
http://www.definitivetech.com/Produc...uctid=BP3000TL

Tell me, Gary, where is the "value" in buying speakers with big-a$$ed, 18" drivers, massive amplification, and deep LF extension... only to set them to "Small"???

(Being the devoted and dogmatic Audyssey disciple we all know you are, we *know* you're setting a crossover, right??? After all, aren't you the guy that said:

Why would you say that ^ and then buy speakers with 18" drivers, 1 kilowatt amps, and a specified FR of 13 Hz??? And, BTW, a more succinct way of saying "a mutually exclusive term" is to just say "oxymoron".)

Moreover, if your speakers are set to "Small" then you're actually sending the bass away from 18" drivers to a sub with 15" drivers???? Why would you do something with such "dubious" value???

Or,... maybe in spite of your "by the book" Audyssey posturing, you are actually *surreptitiously* running your speakers as "Large"!!! (If that's the case, you are a BAD, BAD boy... saying one thing and doing another! Tsk,tsk.)

But wait!!!! If you're running your speakers as "Large", then those 18" drivers would actually be "subwoofers"... and you would then have just as many subwoofers as I do!

In which case, why all the righteous indignation?

I am

Craig

Nice try at hyperbole Mark but this can be summed up quite succinctly.

1. Yes, there is no such thing as a "large" speaker. Modern bass management 101 as I am sure you know.

2. Def Tech specs are waaay out of line. Great HT bipole speakers but their published FR specs are never to be taken seriously by anyone in the know. You are in the know, right Mark?

Now how about some more pretty charts?

You kids need to play nice together!

Oh I guess it's craig - craig-the-chart-man.

/sorry

I thought I'd help bring things back to focus on tangible results... I had previously posted:



I just saw an e-mail today noting this was now live on the PE website:

Dayton OmniMic Measurement System


I intend to play with one when they come in to know for sure, but I think this will be a real winner. Just need to see about some USB extension options for ultimate flexibility.

You talkin' ta me, Willis?


Let me simplify and re-phrase the question. If you're not going to use your speakers as "full range" speakers, where is the "VALUE" in buying speakers with big, powered woofers??? You're spending a bunch of money for bass response you have no intention of using.

Craig, (not Mark)

They are being used, Fred. You just don't know it.

Albeit more so 11 years ago.

Now please continue with the perusal of my web page.

Great post and info Craig.

Very good to hear things are working out so impressively. With any luck I should be in the area and maybe have a chance to give it a listen in the coming months.

This very nicely highlights why verifying measurements can be so worthwhile. Audyssey will very often do a nice job with the response of the individualized speakers and subwoofers, but the integration is generally "assumed" by the system and not checked in any way by the auto setup process. This is the finer detail tuning of the system, but it can yield big benefits. While the subs and the speakers look good individually, if you go back and listen to the result with the sub distance set to 10.4' the response you show above will certainly sound lacking in punch and detail in the bass. This is one of the aspects I spend quite a bit of time with when I optimize a system.

As much fun as it is to run around the country calibrating systems into the wee hours of the morning , I'd much rather be here to get more speakers out the door and new products to market. Measurement systems like XTZ, the one I linked above and REW are key to insuring you are maximizing your home theater experience.

Your faith in software is impressive, and much greater than mine. The limitations lie in the assumptions which must be made to fit the setup task into a real world implementation that doesn't take hours to compute. I am pretty certain Audyssey has no process in it's correction and setup process to catch the issue so well illustrated above. The matter of subwoofer channel delay is a rather fuzzy thing for which there isn't a precisely correct answer, just one that affords a desirable interaction with the loudspeakers. I am in no way surprised that this would trip up an automated routine... especially one which does not take confirming measurements to determine the effectiveness of the processing efforts.

The measurement systems are different, and we should not expect a ruler flat Audyssey display to be observed as ruler flat in a conventional measurement system. We still can still readily call out obvious mis-steps such as what Craig observed (as I have in multiple systems as well). I doubt anyone could make a solid argument as to why an ideally optimized system would exhibit the behavior Craig noted with the automated distance setting of the subwoofer.

Thanks for the explanations Mark. I will post another text book example next week of audessy not getting the phase right once I get back from racing at thunderhill and have a chance to do some more dialing in. The physical distance on my sub is about 7 feet from the listening position with the BFD in the path which adds even more delay (depends on the filters used). Generally this means my distance should be somewhere around 15-19 feet. Mark had it dailed in perfectly using his professional grade measurement system and deciced on 16.5 feet. Audyssey says its 4 foot which is wrong.

now I move my subs and audessy is saying its 1 foot. The new number is probably more like 12 feet. We'll see next week when I get it dialed in prooperly and post the pics to show and explain the process for those interested.

Cheers,
Sean

"Text book?"

"Text book" you know like this one....

http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduc...9616231&sr=8-4

BTW: Edit, I really am enjoying that book but to most its probably more painful than pulling teeth. I find it a pleasant break from the super geekness of work.

Sean

I know what a text book is, but your context seemed to be more along the lines of a reference to the connotation of it being "classic" and I was curious as to what would be classic about Audyssey not getting phase right?

Jeff

He is a Californian, let it go.

Sorry poor choice of adjectives. I meant with respect to being wrong and being visable in the resultant graph.

That said I have seen Audessy get the phase within 1ft of Marks setup in my utah theater. Of the 10+ rooms between 3 houses I have tried Audessy in the last 5 years it seems to get the setup pretty close about 80% of the time but sometimes weird things happen.

its seems very related to the setup in the room. I have moved and changed systems between rooms and even in one case rotated the whole orientation of the room 90 degress and Audessy worked very well in one case and in the other case not so much.

I unlike some folks love what audessy XT does for imaging and overall presentation in every case I have tried it. Its certainly more dramatic on some setups than others.

I have seen cases in the utah theather where audessy pretty much nails the levels and distances. I measured the response using Audessy only and Marks PEQ settings from DCX2496 from all 4 seating positions. The graphs look similarly flat. Thats where the similarities ended. So in this case it did an excellent job at setup but something was very weird with the resultant bass sound. Marks setup had great bass on movies and music. well controlled, authoritative and some good subsonic effects. The Audessy sounded nothing like it. limp. not a subtle change, subsonics are gone. its sounds like I have a little 10" incher really bizarre. Saw this same problem in my Raleigh house Dedicated theather with the Onkyo 805 (I own 2 of them). Then I tried the Onkyo 876 same room, same speakers, very different result. Is it new mic, new sw (better algorithms and bug fixes and improved heuristics). Who knows but its clearly very different.

point of all this. Audessy is awesome. Its not perfect. A little effort in listening and measuring if possible certainly allow the enthusiast to make sure they are getting the best sound.

I really would love to check out XT32.

Have a great weekend everyone. No big bass movies for me. I have a 25" CRT in the hotel room here.

Sean

Hey Jeff, I don't see you lending support to your buddy for changing distances. And make sure to edit about 1000 posts in the Audyssey thread.

And since when has "ruler flat" been a goal of Audyssey?

Jeff has not been over to hear the system since I changed out the HP amps and added the Integra DHC-80.2. Therefore, it's not possible for him to confirm or counter the benefit of the Distance Setting change.

However, you're on-going denial of something so blatantly obvious as the 20 dB cancellation caused by the Audyssey/Integra Distance Setting, and the complete correction of it with my Distance Setting, makes me wonder if you are able to make any interpretive judgments of your own. You seem to be so blinded by faith in Audyssey that you can't get beyond it to see that it's not the *perfect* system.

Listen, I have met Chris Kyriakakis. He is a great guy, and *very* smart. I respect him and I believe most everything he says. However, Audyssey is a generic, "one size fits all" solution to a problem, (room acoustics), that doesn't have any 2 sizes the same. It can't possibly be all things, all the time. It only has so much measurement capacity, and a limited amount of correction capability. Hell, it sometimes can't even measure the same room twice and come up with the same result. To blindly accept the results without verification and measurement, especially in a system with 3 subs placed asymmetrically to the LP, would be acting like an ostrich, (a$$ in the air and head firmly buried in the sand.) If you want to do that in your system, feel free. For me, I'll make the effort to improve on Audyssey's results whenever possible.

I told you earlier that, "...if those graphs are not conclusive enough evidence, then any more discussion is pointless." Yet, you goaded me back into further discussion. I was right the first time, and it is obviously pointless. I am finished with this discussion with you. Go find someone else to throw your snide little barbs at.

Craig

No, measurements can be of value but not with one mic in one position using equipment and measurement technology that is completely different than that used in calibration. Move that mic the width of your head and see if you don't get completely different results.

Trust can be a good thing. Verifying with suspect methods and tweaking based on that leaves one firmly entrenched in Preference Land. I would be the first to agree there is absolutely wrong with that. Just don't tell me it leaves anyone closer to Reference Sound, which is a goal for many of us.

Audyssey MultEQ XT is only a tool. And like all tools, it needs to be used skillfully to achieve the best results. The "skill" with the onboard version is where the measurements are taken (and not taken) and interpreting ... and adjusting if appropriate ... the distance, crossover and level settings. MultEQ Pro brings additional tweaking opportunities. Again, skill is required to improve the "automatic" results. But skill and experience can definitely improve the results.

I would say, based on Craig's data, that he has definitely improved the results and did so with a simple adjustment that his experience told him to do.

Jeff

That would be very cool, Mark. You're definitely welcome whenever it suits you.


I never did listen to it with the old Audyssey/Integra Distance Setting. I will do that and report back.


Thanks for that endorsement. I suspect you can do an even better job than I did. It would be terrific to have you come visit and see what's "left in the tank" in my system.

More speakers.... new products.... even with this economy? It sounds like it's a good time to be Seaton Sound. Best of luck as you move your business forward.

Craig

Hi Jeff,

I need to get you over here to check out the upgrades. Let's get Dennis up and running with my old Onkyo pre/pro and a Pro calibration, then work on getting you guys over here. Dennis and I are also going up to MikeDuke's place on next Saturday to help him set up his new 80.2, his new HP amp for his Submersive and his new Oppo BluRay player. Lot's going on, but we'll get it done.

Craig