SVS AS-EQ1 Thoughts... - Page 106

seeing that the 7 'main' channels have 32x and the sub has 256x, i am thinking this...

If this chart represents the MAXIMUM processing power of the Sound Equalizer, then it is not capable of supporting 2 subwoofer channels at FULL resolution. Just do the math, 32x * 7 = 224x as compared to 256x. If you rolled all the processing power of the 7 channels into one, you only attain 224x assuming no additional gain from reducing the number of discrete channels processed.

Maybe this why svs suggests 2 in one out over dual discrete?

My set up almost requires dual discrete so it would be disappointing but it makes sense that you get less filters for each sub vs more filters for the sum of both.

I didn't get to the math because I won't assume the chart represents anything beyond what it says. I would not doubt that Audyssey has more products in the pipeline, but right now with the Subwoofer Equalizer on the market I don't think it makes sense for them to rev the Sound Equalizer for two full res sub channels.

So if someone currently only has one sub, how much worth it is it to purchase the Sound Equalizer over the AS-EQ1?

Hard to quantify. Do you have MultEQ in your system? If not, it would be worth the cost. If yes, it is a tougher decision.

goonstopher,

Maybe I missed something. I just got finished working with SVS setting up a new set of Ultras using the AS EQ1 and they did recommend the Dual in Dual out Discrete setup. I think, but could be wrong, they recommend dual in to one out config in cases where the AVR does not actually have full discrete dual sub outs. From my understanding to have discrete sub outs, you have to be able to set distance and trim separately for each sub in the AVR. And that the built-in Audyssey routine pings each sub separately.

I would be interested to know if your supposition about filter usage is correct?

Its basic logic, if there are a certain number of filters than can be used on a single summed response then that number needs to be split in half and each half given to the singular response of each subwoofer because of the set limited amount of resources.

My AVR does not have dual output but my subs -3 pounds are SO far apart that I would probably lose a lot of the as-eq1's power in 1 in 2 out because the summed -3 point would be far to high for the ported sub.

Hi, was "dual in to one out" a typo? That's not an option. If a processor has only one sub out then that's what goes in to the AS-EQ1.

Basic, but flawed logic, IMO. The AS-EQ1 has two EQ channels with the same number of filters and doesn't care if one of both are used or if there are one or two subs down stream from those channels. Both channels have the same capabilities.

We've gone over this already. It is mis-matched subs that are the problem and then that is compounded by your processor not having dual, independently adjustable subwoofer outputs allowing you to use dual in/dual out on the AS-EQ1.

I still maintain that while your LF performance will not be quite what it would be if you could use dual/dual, it will be better with the AS-EQ1 than without it.

pepar,

Yes a Typo. Sorry for the confusion. I was discussing the AS EQ1 (One in Dual out) configuration and typed it in the wrong order.

pepar,

Thanks for the clarification. To summarize, the AS EQ1 does not exhibit reduced filtering when employing Dual in to Dual Out versus One in to Dual out configuration. That was my original question.

Affirmative.

Does anyone know where I can get one of these units shipped to me in Australia?

Have you contacted SV Sound?

Australia has a local dealer: Deep HZ Audio

Yes Im aware of that but there expensive over here compared to the States.

Will do, thankyou

While they are working on a new version, perhaps they can modify the SubEQ so that you can defeat the fixed latency delay for those who have a 2-channel system or, like me, are using a passive 2-channel preamp for my two channel listening (phono, CD, etc.) so I wouldn't have to buy the DCX2496 in addition to the SubEQ.

Ideally add an IR window so it can be switched on/off when a user switches to their AVR and the 2-channel preamp goes into HT bypass or add an RS232 port on the back...then I can write a macro into the remote and keep my ass on the couch!

I know, I know, I'm an even smaller minority than those folks that want balanced IOs....guess I'll have to pony up for the Behringer

For those of you who were using a SE already, was there a big improvement adding the SubEQ?


ChrisG
Seattle, WA

Unfortunately, there's no way to eliminate latency. Takes time to process audio.

Could put the sub next to your seat, and have the L/R mains 10' away. That ought to about compensate for it.

The latency is due to the time it takes to process the signals, not something they added that can be turned off with a switch.

For listening with a stereo pre-amp - upstream from your AVR as a "source" right? - there is no LFE channel and bass management can easily be defeated. How have you connected the pre-amp to the rest of your system.


Cool, they already don't have enough units to go around.

I did the dual discreet setup last night to fine tune my dual subs as outlined originally in post 3110.

I did something a tad differently though.

First thing I did was a tech version of a sub crawl.

I set up my EQ so it thought I had one sub, I ran the test and measurements until I had perfected the sub placement on SUB A. Then I switched to SUB B as a single and did the same tests and measurements until I had used the placements of the subs for the flatest (least need of adjustment) placement.

I then centered my microphone measurements all within a 6 foot radius of my seat in the center of the theatre seating.

Then added 4 more measurements at the edge of the seating for my guests, I have three large seats with mine being the seat centered to the screen in a slight fan shape.

A total of 10 measurements, after doing proper sub placement on each of two subs, then I ran the final measurements and saved the results.

I had two nearly 8db fluctuation from sub to sub even after proper placement in the 50hz range!

I then turned the subs away from each other so I wasn't getting a cancelling effect, turned one in one out, put them both straight etc until I found the right placement AGAIN.

It turns out the subs placed straigh ahead with just inches off center worked best.

I re-ran all of the tests and I am 100% certain my subs have the best sound as of right now.

I had 3db spikes in the 20hz range as opposed to initial pre-EQ days of 10db spikes at 20hz.

I had one sub down 10db at 50hz and one down 5db in reference to the flatline "after" adjustment of the EQ.

I had as much as 12db difference at 100hz from sub to sub, all with proper calibration and room placement.

I am going to summize that even with the most careful room placement and the most careful directional placement, the EQ STILL made my system smoother with less peaks and valleys.

In the end, I am pretty much done with fooling around and fiddling with it all.

I just wanted to mention that at 6 different frequencies there was as much as 12db of variation that was corrected.

This with two "identical" (for mass production anyways) subs....

The bass is incredible!

I watched T2 ROTF and the chairs and my chest shook for the entire movie, I might just sell my massage chair

Jeff

Wow jeff great info!

Couple questions:

How did you use as-eq1 for testing placement?
Do you run the minimum mic spots needed then calculate to see the before graph? Is that the fastest way?

Does your avr have dual distances inputs or did you sum/average the distances and enter it? Did you use any internal eq'ing after or before as-eq1?

When you run the tests to measure for the EQ adjustment it gives you a summary before you choose to save the EQ's setting. By moving my sub I could see how placement was effecting how the room was responding....just like doing a sub crawl on your hands and knees, but using the microphone and graph instead of my perceived gains or gut feeling.

I ran the minimum amount to get a quick baseline, then finetuned by doing more mic placements.

My yamaha 6190 receiver had been previously tuned for speaker placement and I kept the internal settings as is, then fine tuned the sub to what the receiver had set for room sound.

Hope that clears it up

Jeff

The answer to my dumb post came to me this morning -- like you say, the latency is caused by the processing so it can't be turned off. Sorry for taking up bandwidth!

As for how I have things set up, because I have speakers that are not full range, I am currently running my system with the subs as well as the mains from the Wyred 4 Sound STP SE preamp. It has two outputs per channel for speakers. So the preamp is sending a full range signal to both the mains and the subs and I manually set the cross over on the sub. Yes, I know, this then screws up the Audyssey settings on my 886 since the sub cross over is supposed to be set all the way up. It is a short term problem.

I am going to upgrade my speakers to full range soon, so I'll take the subs off the STP and problem solved when listening to 2-channel sound.

Guess I'm joining the club...sorry!

ChrisG
Seattle, WA

I'm probably still missing something here, but .. is the preamp hooked to the 886 as a source? If so, you could use the 886's bass management and equalization.

Jeff

Four subs spread around the room ... are three AS-EQ1s the answer ?

Use one AS-EQ1 on each pair, and then use the third AS-EQ1 upstream of them.

Any reason this wouldn't work ?

I'm sure it would work for SVS sales, but you might only need one AS-EQ1.

Is there Audyssey MultEQ XT in your processor? Are the subs identical? Is your room symmetrical and would the subs be placed symmetrically within it?

I have four subs, but they are placed in pairs, one pair in the rear of the room and the other pair behind my false screen wall. As such, they act as two subs. If you did likewise, then only one AS-EQ1 is needed. Answers to the above questions are needed if they are not used in pairs.

Jeff

Pepar, it would really work fine if he did the sub placement steps I outlined on each sub as well.

Jeff

Hello

I own a AS-EQ1 and bought a Onkyo 5507 ,as the Onkyo have 2 sub out and and the Audyssey calculation for it ,I would like to know what is the best way to connect and calibrate both units .I used to have before Onkyo's 886 and used the AS-EQ1 ,but now with 2 subs out is there anything different in the setup procedure ?

Thanks for the help
Herbert

Herbert, you have the option of using dual in/dual out mode on the AS-EQ1. From what I've read that may be an advantage if you have two dissimilar subs. With identical subs, the advice is to use a single sub output to the AS-EQ1 and use dual out.