"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 591

Originally Posted by soul embrace

i've ran the set up for my denon 1610 and i have some questions: am i suppose to leave the high cut knob set to the highest setting and the volume at half way after i run the test?

Originally Posted by SoundofMind

Did you miss my response yesterday morning?
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post17043549

ps no need to quote the guide here, we all have it memorized

Originally Posted by SoundofMind

The high cut knob is never moved from the highest setting. Once you set the volume knob, you leave it there (unless you need to adjust it and rerun Audyssey). If the sub reads 2' further than the physical distance, that is nothing to worry about. How's it sound?

Originally Posted by tratliff

Excellent points. Yes, the center speaker does have a horizontal mid/tweeter layout. My installer cautioned me about that but I didn't want to got with a much larger, more expensive speaker. My fault.
Would you increase the center channel level?

Originally Posted by Roger Dressler

What about a horizontal midrange/tweeter hurts dialog intelligbility? Is the problem mainly for the off-axis seats?

Originally Posted by tratliff

This isn't really an audyssey question. . but.

Dialog during movies is often hard to understand. It is the common problem where you have to turn up the volume during soft talking parts of the movie.

I thought Audyssey would help this issue. While Audyssey certaintly has greatly improved the overall sound, it hasn't helped the dialog problem.

I currently have Integra receiver and Triad speakers. Was previusly using a different reciever with same results. I have had a professional Audyssey calibration (MultEQ Pro) and tried regular consumer MultEQ - both with similar results.

My center channel is below the display, 25 inches from the floor. While not ideal, I wouldn't think the position would have that much of a negative impact on dialog would it?

If I bump up the level of the center channel that may help the dialog intelligibilty problem but that would cause a lot of other problems wouldn't it?

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Originally Posted by DS-21

What people don't seem to understand is that one doesn't just hear the direct on-axis sound.

Originally Posted by DS-21

What people don't seem to understand is that one doesn't just hear the direct on-axis sound. In fact, the quote-unquote "on axis lobe" is a very small portion of what one actually hears in a regular room (as opposed to an anechoic chamber). And a toppled-MTM has exactly the wrong dispersion pattern for use in a domestic living room. It has very wide vertical dispersion, which means one gets all kinds of early reflections off of nearby furniture, protruding stands, TV frames, and so on that indelibly muddy the sound. But a toppled-MTM also has very erratic horizontal dispersion, which leads to sonic issues right at the frequencies most prevalent in male voices. So the bottom line is, stay away from toppled-MTM centers if fidelity to the source material is even at the bottom of one's list of goals.

Originally Posted by Gary J

My money is on Roger Dressler, Director, Technology Strategy at Dolby Laboratories Inc., understanding what he is talking about.

Originally Posted by Gary J

Should I delete?

Originally Posted by pepar

It's not unusual to have to make some compromises, which "toppling" an MTM certainly qualifies.

Originally Posted by toddRiffic

Hey tratliff,

Do you ever use Dynamic Volume? Dialog intelligibility is one of it's biggest reasons I use it for movie watching.

Originally Posted by DS-21

Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question.

Originally Posted by DS-21

Except that it's not really a compromise, but an abject waste of money. Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question. IMO, the reason multichannel audio hasn't taken off as it should have over the past decade - because it is much more closer-to-real sounding than 2-channel when done right - is because we've been plagued by badly-designed, bad-sounding center channels that ruin the whole thing.

And regardless of who the gentleman who asked the question was, my points are substantively correct. Every measurement ever published of the polar or power response of a toppled MTM speaker shows it. And the measurements look better than the listening sounds...

Not that any of this stuff has anything to do with Audyssey, who after all don't design, make, market, or even certify speakers. (Except, I guess, for small subs or shelf systems.) Except in that even really amazing technology - which I have found MultEQ XT and Dynamic EQ to be - cannot be expected to wholly overcome fatal flaws in system design such as toppled-MTM center channels.

Originally Posted by jlachanc

Hi,
I find that while the sound is much clearer and pleasing with MULTEQ engaged is just is not quite loud enough for me, even at max volume, during action movies. If I turn off MULTEQ, it is plenty loud at -20db on the volume control.

This is the case regardless of source and I have the all source trims (‘Intellivolume’ on the 9.9) settings maxed at +12db

I have an Integra 9.9 unit paired to an Outlaw 200 watt/ch amp running 7.1 setup. Speakers are the Axiom Epic 80 series with an EP600 sub. My room has acoustic treatments designed by one of the experts found here at AVS.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Jason

Originally Posted by tratliff

I use MultEQ XT (of course) and Dynamic EQ. I haven't used Dynamic Volume because I didn't want to compress the intended dynamic range of the movie's audio. But now that I think about it, if I'm raising and lowering the volume that's what I'm doing anyway. I turn on Dynamic Volume and give it a try. Thanks.

Originally Posted by pepar

Jason, you are probably experiencing what is being discussed here.

Originally Posted by pepar

Everyone draws the line at a different place depending on one's situation. You obviously have strong opinions - who among us doesn't? - but applying your weighting system to someone else's criteria is . . well, it makes for short discussions without ever understanding the other person's situation.

Originally Posted by DS-21

Except that it's not really a compromise, but an abject waste of money. Running a toppled-MTM center costs more than just going phantom, while sounding worse. Now, is phantom a compromise over a proper front trio of identical speakers used in at the same elevation and orientation? No question.

18.4.2 Horizontal Center-Channel Loudspeakers

A direct-view video display is a challenge for the center loudspeaker. Some people give up in frustration and use the stereo "phantom" center. DON'T DO IT! (See section 9.1.3.) Most people use a horizontal loudspeaker system commonly configured in one of the two options shown in Figure 18.18. The simple one, often called the "midrange-tweeter-midrange" or MTM, arrangement is usually found in entry-level products but also, occasionally, in some expensive products. In this basic configuration both woofers operating in parallel, crossing over to a tweeter--a two-way design--it is not optimum because of off-axis acoustical interference. In Figure 18.18a it is seen that this interference is symmetrical, so both lateral reflections suffer from the same flaw, affecting sound quality.

These designs also show up in vertical arrangements, in which case the acoustical interference is heard after reflection from the floor and ceiling. An intermediate configuration, sometimes call the 2-1/2-way, rolls off one of the woofers at a low frequency, allowing the second unit to function as a midrange. The result is a slight improvement in overall performance, but the horizontal-plane interference is then asymmetrical and still not what is needed. The real solution is to add a midrange loudspeaker allowing both woofers to be crossed over at a frequency sufficiently low that the acoustical interference is avoided.

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

Hi,

Well, at least we can agree that a phantom image is a serious compromise from a physical center channel speaker.

So, spacing the drivers horizontally a few inches in a toppled-MTM arrangment is going to sound much worse than spacing the drivers horizontally several feet in the case of a phantom stereo image? Why would that be?

Larry

Originally Posted by craig john

As DS-21 says, 3 identical speakers, mounted at identical heights, (ear level) is the gold standard. Anything else is a compromise.

Craig

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

Hi Craig,

Thanks for your response, but I don't believe I was disagreeing with the "gold standard". What I was questioning was DS-21's preference to use a phantom center over a real speaker, albeit a toppled-MTM.

As Jeff mentioned these compromises are best determined by the individual's particular situation.

Larry

Originally Posted by craig john

Of course... either choice is a significant compromise outside the central "sweet spot". Phantom CC "imaging" collapses outside the sweet spot. An MTM CC exhibits lobing and comb filtering outside the sweet spot. Pick your poison.

Craig

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

Hi Craig,

Exactly.

However, a phantom center stereo image also suffers from comb filtering outside the sweet spot in addition to seriously pulling the image off-center.

So for folks with home theaters with audience members sitting off-axis and with displays that are not acoustically transparent, it really does make sense to use a physical speaker, even if it's design is "flawed".

Larry

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

No doubt you are correct that there are off-axis problems with toppled-MTM center channels speakers, but there are also serious problems with "phantom" stereo imaging.

Originally Posted by goonstopher

This topic is probably making a ton of members (like myself) panic about their center channels.... I really can't afford to keep reading this board and haviong to buy something new

Originally Posted by DS-21


However, I stand by my original thought that the poster's problem with dialog intelligibility stems from that toppled-MTM center, and there is nothing Audyssey's formidable correction software can do to fix it.

Originally Posted by audyssey

Unfortunately it has a big impact. Having the speaker so close to the floor causes a boomy midbass (around 250 Hz) and that makes voices sound chesty and difficult to understand. MultEQ helps, but fixing the location will help even more. Tilting the speaker up so that the tweeters point to your ears is a good first step if you can't move it further from the floor.