"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 639

[quote=batpig;17266006]whoah there buddy -- as pepar said there is no conspiracy!

you have dramatically overextended the conclusion, it's unfortunate that you guys have defective units, but to then generalize that to the claim that all 1909's are defective is simply invalid. The 1909 thread is over 9,000 posts long!! It was one of the most popular AVR's of last year. I think we would know if there was some major problem, and even if there is, it's not really germane to this thread.[/QUOTE

See, for me it is not a show stopper. My PS3 decodes everything and since doing the test I always use PCM output for DD and DTS. From there on I don't experience overblown bass and I can enjoy the movie with DynEQ. ( This feature was the main selling point of the AVR-1909 - at least for me.)

It seems that my wording was not the best - it sounded like I'm a conspiracy theorist. I'm afraid that people not even notice the thing - they may think that yeah this is an extremely bass heavy soundtrack so this is why our windows rattle - perhaps there is something more to it. English is not my first language so forgive me if it came off as too harsh wording, it wasn't meant to be like that.

But I do think that this thing belongs to the Audyssey thread - after all only when Audyssey is turned on you can observe this - let's call it - phenomenon.

I'm a huge fan of anything Audyssey and I always propagate Audyssey tech and Denons for my colleagues. My best purchase was this AVR-1909 - I enjoy it every day. (Just search for my posts in the last few months.) I'd like to make these companies aware of a possible problem in one of their products. I think they would want people actually use their very good technology.

Well thats good to know, as for the question of being on the armrest location or the seat location, I don't think it's that big of deal, I think I would consider if you stay within the speakers sound field and do not go too far off axis it should be fine. You can try both and see which gets you a better result even.

Mic stand should not be on or touching a chair. Measurements should be taken within the front-to-back "column" bounded on the left by the left front speaker and bounded on the right by the right front speaker. (Ideally, all front speakers are aimed at the 3-dimensional geographical center of the listeners' ears.) Measurements should not be taken within 2' of a wall. Blah, blah, blah.

Guys, I understand how it's "fixing" your "too much bass" problem by turning down the LFE. If you want to "remove" the ".1" from your soundtracks, fine. But it's certainly changing the intended balance of the mix, which is all I'm pointing out, and why I wouldn't do it.

You don't (and can't) change the level of the main input channels -- speakers (output "channels"), yes, but that's the equivalent of the subwoofer (not LFE) -- so why LFE? Besides sub. level, I'd use anything else to compress/limit the dynamics/volume (not Dynamic EQ; or, Dynamic Volume, DRC, Night mode, etc.) since they at least maintain the mix's balance, before messing with the LFE level...

And what if you come across a soundtrack with too much bass from the main channels?

This discussion seems similar to the double bass/LFE+Main thing (what happens, "usually" happens, "may" happen), which I also wouldn't use.

It's called "advice." Whether you agree or disagree depends on your point of view. It is just one more weapon in the arsenal. No one is being forced to use it.

I would say it's throwing off the "balance of the mix" more to turn down the sub for ALL channels versus just the one (LFE).

Your criticism seems to be that the LFE will not be balanced with the other channels -- whereas the point you seem to be missing is that this is not a criticism, it is actually the GOAL! This "solution" is intended only for situations where you are happy with the overall balance of the mix EXCEPT for the very lowest, more powerful bass effects.


this is a valid criticism but, in my experience, only in theory. In practice, the LFE track is the real offender for the most powerful, floor-rumbling, inadequate-subwoofer-over-excursion-ing stuff. It specifically has additional maximum dynamic range which the other channels don't.

Remember that the LFE channel is a SUPPLEMENTAL channel that should not contain any of the "important" content in the primary channels. See this info sheet from Dolby -- "The LFE channel carries additional bass information to supplement the bass
information in the main channels."

What folks like me are saying is, "thank you sir, but my bass doesn't need supplementing or else my sub will blow up and/or my neighbor will kill me!" I think the "sin" of having the LFE out of balance with the other 5/7 channels is lesser than that of having the redirected bass from ALL channels be out of whack.

Of course I do not espouse this as "gospel" and any individual should employ the solution that works best for their setup. I am certainly open to counter-arguments and would happily revise this recommendation, as I am no expert. I have just found, again in practice, that cutting out the 10dB LFE "boost" can be an effective solution. Plus it also seems to me to be common sense to attack the problem (low frequency effects!) directly rather than changing the overall sub balance of the system for all types of content.

Ah, perhaps "common sense" to you, but uncommonly good sense IMHO. Well put yet again, bp.

And yes, it's also with redirected bass, not only LFE.


At first I thought you were saying that Denon "offed" the owners to silence them!


Heh, I don't think that all 1909s have the problem, and in fact may have just thought I had one odd unit until I got the second unit that behaved exactly the same. I'd say that's pretty weird. Either I have really bad luck, or it does affect more of them, and people simply don't realize it. I mean if they have the same processing thingies (technical term), firmware, code, and all that, why wouldn't there be a lot more of them? Nothing else appears to be broken with the AVR's operation, so how would this behavior just randomly and magically appear in a couple units?


Like I said in the thread I created, I'm not sure that PCM is correct either, since our volume setting seems too low for the high output levels we're getting. With Dynamic EQ more boost is applied as a result of the lower volume setting, and so when comparing the correct AVR-590 to the 1909 with PCM and Dynamic EQ On, the bass still sounds overblown -- though it's tame compared to bitstream.


Right. And I hadn't actually watched a single movie since I've had the PS3/Denon (was waiting to finish configuring other stuff! ), just HD TV shows, where I knew I basically could never use Dynamic EQ/Volume because of too much "boom." I just figured it was because they were TV mixes, not realizing it was the decoding of Dolby Digital bitstreams with MultEQ getting screwed up.


I did hear back from Chris about my AVR, and he measured a bitstream/PCM difference even with MultEQ Off! See my next post soon...

The only time I heard a difference (slight overall level) without MultEQ is when comparing TrueHD lossless.


+1

Audyssey FTW.

Not if the sub is turned up too high -- whether actually (shouldn't be if set by Audyssey) or perceived. And I'd tend to think one of those is true if there's too much bass when trying to play the mix with its intended balance.


I'm not missing any point. If someone wants to turn the LFE down as a "preference" thing, like I said, fine. But once you're at the point of changing things "just because you want to," might as well do whatever...

Are people talking about leaving the LFE turned down all the time? So for most other movies that sounded fine, they'll be unbalanced too "just because?"

And if just adjusting adjusting LFE on a per-movie basis, why not just adjust sub level instead?



I know.


I know it's supplemental, and of course gets dropped 2-channel downmixes from sources (which people could also use instead ). However, most systems playing a downmix wouldn't have the capability to output that bass, no matter where it came from. But since LFE is still being heard in the cases we're talking about, here's an example of the mix being unbalanced by turning LFE down (but still reproduced instead of being dropped): some bass sound in the main channels that's supposed to be quieter than something in the LFE channel could then be louder after the LFE is turned down, drowning it out or such. I'm sure you realize that, and it would be argued that the LFE could be absent anyway (and I wouldn't disagree ), and it could also be argued that playback on systems without LFE wouldn't be capable of playing that "competing" bass anyway. e.g. On [our] systems that can reproduce those bass frequencies are probably LFE-capable, hence it becomes an issue of how it will be balanced with main channel bass...

Finally, what about a soundtrack that's [poorly] mixed with too much (all?) of the sound effects you want in the LFE channel and not enough in the mains (assumption that systems capable of that bass have LFE anyway)? Stuff would sound kinda weak then...


Well, I understand what you guys are saying (practicality) and you understand what I'm saying (technicality), so it's all cool.

Yes, Chris gave me an update after testing my 1909 yesterday. Don't guess he minds me posting it here:


Glad someone else was able to see it firsthand! Denon engineering in Japan has been contacted again -- Chris did when I initially reported the MultEQ factor a couple months ago, and the Denon support people (or "senior management") supposedly did a month ago Thursday. Curious to see what comes from them this time...

Another weird thing now, to me, that he measured bitstream being wrong even with MultEQ Off, when what I heard and measured indicated it was identical to PCM without MultEQ. So either something was wrong with my measurements, or some other variable is changing things with Chris' setup.

Here's the measurement graphs from his tests:
MultEQ On-Off (PCM)
MultEQ On-Off (Bitstream)
MultEQ On (PCM-Bitstream) (Seems to be the same flipped/mirror-image response I measured.)

An entire lab full of more sophisticated equipment, maybe?

Ok, here's my Denon 1909 experiment:

I have Audyssey Mult on, dynamic volume on (day), dynamic eq on.
Put Spiderman 3 in my Samsung bdp1500. Set to PCM' and bass is good, not too much. Put the Samsung into Bitstream Audiophile' mode and the bass is the same: good, not too much.

Leaving Audyssey on with the same settings as above, while the movie is playing, I switch the soundtrack audio from lossless to #3 French regular dolby digital 5.1 and now have 10 times the bassdistortion, etc. This is exactly what I kept complaining about whenever I ran Audyssey (it's weird that my test material was always regular Dolby digital 5.1). I try other movies and every time it's old fashioned Dolby digital or DTS: way too much bass. Anytime it's lossless (bitstream or PCM) it's just great.

Will Denon fix this. Thanks to LarryDrPepper, I discovered I've had this less than the 2 year warranty expiration date.

Thanks for any replies. (please forgive if this appears twice; I posted it earlier but it never appeared)

Well, your first mistake was listening to the French sound track (Apologies to any Francophiles out there. Its only a lame joke.).

Seriously, though, I think this is a different issue than what the good Dr. is dealing with.

My setup is using Audyssey, the Rythmik F12G subwoofer is tuned to "0", so I believe my setup is correct.

[/quote]I'm not missing any point. If someone wants to turn the LFE down as a "preference" thing, like I said, fine. But once you're at the point of changing things "just because you want to," might as well do whatever...

Are people talking about leaving the LFE turned down all the time? So for most other movies that sounded fine, they'll be unbalanced too "just because?"

And if just adjusting adjusting LFE on a per-movie basis, why not just adjust sub level instead?[/quote]

I am using a -10db setting just for the LFE track, and JUST on the "TRUEHD" codec, don't understand why you believe that changing the entire sub level would be a better option. After trying this -10db LFE setting for "TrueHD", all other bass sounds the same from my mains and surround speakers (7.1), the only difference I can hear, is the distortion and severe subwoofer blowing is much less, but still conveys the intent. While some may call this "preference", I assume my little 12" music first subwoofer just can't handle what the studio mixer may have intended for a huge theatre or more capable subs. The only drawback I can see, is of course the -10db TrueHD LFE setting, is now engaged for all TrueHD sources, until I change it. But I want it in engaged for any LFE tracks that like Ironman or Batman movies, and doubt I would miss out on any LFE effects for movies that are non-action oriented.

I have yet to hear of a viable suggestion that is better then simply addressing the LFE track alone. In some ways, your advice sounds like that of a "purest", and no offense intended. If ones speakers and gear cannot handle what one believes is the PURE mix or signal that was intended, then one needs to find the best solution. Even if I did not have apartment building neighbors, my subwoofer would not last long if left at the unaltered LFE setting, nor does the distortion sound proper either, I can now get close to "0" reference level playing Ironman, and can hear the dialog properly as well as music tracks. My "preference" is to keep my investments in gear working for a while, regardless of any heavy handed mixer in the studio that may have stayed out too late the night before he jacked up the LFE track on the movie. While my goal is to stay as pure as possible, it gets SILLY after a while considering all the DSP processing and other goodies going on.

I guess I am starting to understand why some just go for simple 2.0/2.1 audio, but movies are a different beast. Since many have reported back on Ironman and Batman as movies with, lets say extra LFE, then it's an issue that for some like me with a single subwoofer or a crazy expensive one, then I am open for a better solution. I'm NOT locked into what one may perceive as the "original intent" of the audio mixer, which I have only some confidence in the first place.

The mystery is solved!! I just heard back from Denon engineering. The reason they (and we) could not initially reproduce the problem is that it was happening with AVRs that shipped early with the first batch of firmware. The problem was later fixed and the units they (and we) were testing did not have this issue.

Denon service does have the new firmware for some time, but wasn't aware that it addresses this issue. Denon will be issuing a note to their customer service in the coming days to make sure they are aware of the issue and the the solution: to update the firmware with the latest version they already have. The issue affects all the models in this platform (1609, 1709, 1909, 2309).

A BIG thanks to Matt who kept this problem "in the news" and persevered even though we all thought he was crazy It also shows again how useful this forum and this thread can be to help find and solve problems.

Another question here, but this time about the crossover settings. My FR/FL/SR/SL speakers are rated at 60Hz as lowest and for my SBR/SBL my speakers are rated at 90hz, but the MultiEQ measures them at 40hz for the fronts and 50hz for the surrounds and 50hz for the surround backs?! If I would manually change them to their rated specs in the settings, would this mess with the MultiEQ room distortion corrections?
Besides the point if manually changing crossovers mess up teh MultiEQ, are my speakers better than the specs say because the Audyssey measurements are good enough to decide this?

I already changed my LFE LPF to 120hz, as Chriss mentioned in a post that it should be at that setting anyways, as it only affects the LFE signal which goes to the sub anyways and does not affect the MultiEQ for sure, but about the above question I don't know tbh.

Thanks again all!

Thanks for posting this Dr P. A couple of questions, if I may (answers may have been given before, but I'm not finding them this morning).

As far as you know, is the MultEQ on and off JUST MultEQ, or is it dynamic EQ?

Do I recall correctly that all your experiments happened to involve Dolby encoding? Do we know either from Chris or your investigations whether DTS suffers from the same errors?

Finally, a comment. While the 2 base curves (no Audyssey) clearly are different, I struggle to put together expactly how the Audyssey changes flow from the different FRs. Maybe it's partly because of smoothing (even though it's 1/12 octave). Maybe I'm just not fully thinking it through. But since all Audyssey sees is the PCM, the FR differences must be the explanation.

We are told that it affects MultEQ and only in the subwoofer filter.


It apparently only affects the Dolby bitstream, although it has nothing to do with the Dolby process itself. It has to do with a microcontroller issue that was not presenting the correct signal to the MultEQ filter after decoding it.

Does this affect all Denon AVR-1909?

Thanks so much for the answers, Chris.

Any chance that microcontroller's name is HAL? Seems it has a mind of its own.

wow, that is awesome. Thanks to both of you!

I'm wondering now how many of the complaints of excessively "boomy" or "overwhelming" bass in the Denon '09 owner's threads was due to this? Thinking about it now, it does seem (anecdotally at least) that the number of these complaints has diminished greatly this year.


just to be clear, it doesn't affect 2809 right (since this model has two DSP's and uses MultEQ XT)? only the single DSP, "regular" MultEQ models from last year?

if you could get the specific firmware version info from Denon it would be awesome. That way if someone "suspects" they have the problem, or if we get a complaint about "boomy" bass, it could be confirmed/disconfirmed rather easily by checking the firmware version (assuming it is possible for the user to do so on these models).



yes, absolutely. thanks to all, good to close the book on this one!

No, only early batches, Chris mentioned this in his response:

Also wondering if this includes the 789 flavor?

I would assume that it also implicitly includes the 3-digit variants since they are identical "internally", but Chris would have to confirm.

No. We were told that this was only in the "first batch" and that later ones are shipping with the correct firmware. But, I don't have the version numbers. Probably best to check with Denon Service.

Great to hear! Yeah, as I've mentioned before, mine was one of the first from J&R's preorder...

Does this mean they knew that this problem existed, if it was later fixed? And then they just "don't care" about the affected units out there? (No notice, etc.) And they "forgot" that it had been fixed when you asked about it the first time?

Or did it get fixed "accidentally" somehow and they didn't know it existed previously?


I'd think one of the first things they could do anyway when a unit comes in is update the firmware -- why not...? Whether they actually diagnosed the problem on mine or were just taking a shot in the dark wanting to replace the "HDMI Power Board," amazing that they had the solution right there, but instead there was a delay while they were going to wait for the part, and then I lost my original , when I could have had it back, fixed, sooner than the refurb. Obviously the early firmware refurbs are still sitting around...

Actually, I wondered if the refurb had slightly different firmware anyway because of an operational difference I noticed -- on the original when I wanted to cycle through surround modes ("STD" button), I had to press it twice to get it to change, which was annoying. The refurb went through them as you'd expect, with one press (after the first)... *shrug*


OK, like I suspected and batpig mentions, it doesn't affect the 2809 with its different architecture -- MultEQ XT and 2 DSPs.

Also, like JonHan asks, what about the 3-digit models? Or was their firmware different?

I'll still have to see what happens next with my unit, to finally have fixed one in my hands. For others, I guess they'd have to be sent in, as there's no way for a user to do the update? Maybe with the 2309CI...


Crazy?! Hah, no I was wondering about that... Even when I sent it to you, I thought, "Well what if it somehow works correctly then?"

Anyway, BIG THANKS to you Chris for your above-and-beyond help! Wow, that was fast. Less than a week after you received it and 2 days after testing, you got a real, definitive answer. Don't get what Denon support is waiting for so long, after supposedly also contacting engineering. Maybe they contacted the wrong people.

Is it possible to get some part numbers or part names or service bulletin reference for this fix?
I want to get my AVR-1909 repaired and I need something for reference.
I'm afraid the service will not know what I'm talking about...

It's funny how so many of us (1909 owner here) thought our Denon AVRs were fine, but now that we know there is a possibility the AVR may have an issue (depending on when one bought it), we all want ours fixed - and then start to question the "boomy base" issue bp mentioned... it kind of goes to show how many of us don't really know what to listen for in the first place. I am one of those.

I'm humbly grateful to DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR for sticking this through, even if my 1909 turns out to be fine.

Hey bp - sounds like an update to your Denon setup guide is forthcoming, and perhaps a crosspost to these recent posts in the 1909/789 forum thread?

absolutely. however, before we "sound the alarm" and have dozens of panicked '09 Denon owners, I want to have some firm details, including:

1. what firmware version numbers are affected (and for what models)
2. how the end-user can check their firmware to verify that they are/aren't affected
3. what to tell the Denon tech support people so they won't give the user a hard time