"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1110

Originally Posted by jevansoh

Just the Audyssey Pro kit and included software. You'll need a license for your 4311CI too and is available directly from Audyssey for $150.

You're all set!! Post some before and after graphs for us though

--J

Originally Posted by jevansoh

Hi Larry,

Thanks! I read that post again and it does specify the European version, though.

I went to the Onkyo site and the Onkyo Pro site and notice that the 5508 has XT32 (But doesn't say anything about Pro) and on the Onkyo Pro site it says there is a 5508P "shipping soon" but doesn't clearly state the differences in the "P" designation nor can I find the differences in the EU/USA version?? (The only thing I can see for sure on the "P" designation that will supposedly ship soon are the rack mount ears.)

I did see the Audyssey bug was fixed on the Integra 80.2 and was just about to pull the trigger on it then a user in this forum posted yesterday (I believe) it was real buggy in other areas and am up to page 22 of 33 on the Official 80.2 thread, so...... A lot of research is going on now, and I'm about to pull my hair out trying to figure out what to do, lol. (What's left of it )

May I ask what you use and if you have XT32/Pro??

PS Looked at your HT page and am impressed!! (Just curious if your equipment list [specifically pre-pro] is up to date and which pre-pro is currently working/you're currently using )

Onkyo PR-SC886 Preamplifier (when it works)
Lexicon MC-8 Digital Controller and Surround Processor (back-up preamplifier)

Originally Posted by Mike_WI

Mark -

You may have 4 subwoofers (or more) but I doubt you are running "x.4".
The 4311 doesn't have 4 separate subwoofer controls -- or any AVR (that I am aware of).
I know it seems like semantics, but I think in a forum like this we should be accurate and if people don't understand what the x.# means, to educate them.

If I'm wrong, then I'll take some education...

Mike

Originally Posted by streetsmart88

I fully agree with you but the confusion seems to be quite prevalent and it seems that the manufacturers themselves propagate it.
Mark

Originally Posted by streetsmart88

The Denon 4311 is labeled as 9.2 and the Denon 4810 is labeled as 9.3 but in reality, I think they're all just 9.1 because the signal sent to the multiple subs is exactly the same.

Originally Posted by Mike_WI

Mark -

You may have 4 subwoofers (or more) but I doubt you are running "x.4".
The 4311 doesn't have 4 separate subwoofer controls -- or any AVR (that I am aware of).
I know it seems like semantics, but I think in a forum like this we should be accurate and if people don't understand what the x.# means, to educate them.

If I'm wrong, then I'll take some education...

Mike

Originally Posted by streetsmart88

I fully agree with you but the confusion seems to be quite prevalent and it seems that the manufacturers themselves propagate it.

The Denon 4311 is labeled as 9.2 and the Denon 4810 is labeled as 9.3 but in reality, I think they're all just 9.1 because the signal sent to the multiple subs is exactly the same. As another example, a Denon 3808 has the option to have 2 pairs of surrounds but each pair has the exact same signal so my understanding is that you wouldn't really label the extra pair of surrounds as another pair of distinct channels (LCR + 2 pairs of surrounds is 5.1, not 7.1).

To be really accurate, I guess I should say I have an 11.1 system with 2 pairs of y-connected subs hooked to each of the sub channels in the 4311, which both play the same sub signal but whose distance and level are independently measured and set by the SubEQ HT of Audyssey MultEQ XT 32. Just kidding!

Is my understanding correct?

Mark

Originally Posted by noah katz

The 4810 is 9.1 and the 4311 is 9.2.

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

I don't think Denon consistently labels even the same device.

Originally Posted by SoundofMind

You said it! This in response to my inquiry to an authorized dealer about MultEQ32:
"I just got off the phone with Denon support. I could not find anything in Denon's lit that mentioned the term "32" in conjunction with Audyssey MultEQ so I called them. A man there named Sam was very helpful. He said that this feature is present on the 5308A and that it allows for microphone measurements at up to 32 locations in the theater environment."

Originally Posted by noah katz

I was saying what it is, not what Denon says it is, by the definition that the x in .x designates the max number of different sub signal outputs.

Originally Posted by mechx

MultiXT vs MultiXT32...

Anyone here who has recently upgraded to XT32 that has noticed improvement over just Multi or MultiXT?

Curious, I haven't really seen any comparisons/opinions...

Originally Posted by cavchameleon

I 'really' wanted not to have to use the AS-EQ1 in the system (one of the reasons for getting the A100), but at the moment, it sounds better than with it in the chain

Originally Posted by cavchameleon

I wonder if this is because of the additional EQ being done in the sub range by the A100 on top of the AS-EQ1 (I do have a dip in the 30Hz range that is not fully taken care of with the AS-EQ1, due to room dimensions).

Originally Posted by audyssey

Running XT in the AVR after the AS-EQ1 has been calibrated won't have any effect on the response since the filters have already "captured" the highest resolution they can.

Originally Posted by Gary J

A little confused. Did you mean to say like the above?

audyssey says this -

Originally Posted by Gary J

The curve is never perfect. In fact the curve in the AS-EQ1 is 1/6 smoothed per octave so it looks a lot better than it really is.

Originally Posted by cavchameleon

Yes, I understand that, hence, me wondering if there is more correction from piggybacking the calibration of the Denon on top of the AS-EQ1

Originally Posted by Gary J

Unless I am misunderstanding Chris he is saying no.

Originally Posted by eieio

I noticed that folks have had issues with digital snow with Panasonics. Any experience of either Onkyo receivers with Epson projectors like the 8500 or the newer 8700?

Originally Posted by mechx

MultiXT vs MultiXT32...

Anyone here who has recently upgraded to XT32 that has noticed improvement over just Multi or MultiXT?

Curious, I haven't really seen any comparisons/opinions...

Originally Posted by audyssey

The .1 track is.. well it's a track created by the content makers. It has nothing to do with how many subs are in the playback system....

Adding a number other than "1" after the "." is pure marketing and has no technical basis until the film makers decide to make content that has more than one LFE tracks.

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

Hi Noah,

I don't think Denon consistently labels even the same device.

Here in this web page they label it as 9.3.

AVR-4810CI

However, in the user's manual they state it can handle up to 11.1 channels and and it can be connected to up to three subwoofers, but the same signal is output from each subwoofer terminal.

Go figure.

Larry

Originally Posted by noah katz

I was saying what it is, not what Denon says it is, by the definition that the x in .x designates the max number of different sub signal outputs.

Originally Posted by streetsmart88

Noah, I don't think the Denon 4311 is a true 9.2 channel AVR. The signal sent to the 2 sub outs are the same, although Audyssey MultEQ XT32 sets their individual levels and distances. The 4311 should really be labeled 9.1.

Mark

Originally Posted by LarryChanin

Hi Mark,

Yes, I'd say you've got it right, and I agree there is a lot of confusion on this point and the manufacturers aren't helping to dispel it.

If the .x designation is supposed to indicate a discrete channel then its easy to say that the "x" will always be 1 because there is only a single LFE channel no matter how many subwoofer connections are provided.

However, as you suggest in some cases the .x designation is telling us something else besides the number of LFE channels. In some cases it tells us how many independent subwoofer connections are provided. For example, the Denon AVP-A1 preamplifier is designated as .3. The three subwoofer connections maintain separate signals, a right subwoofer signal, a left subwoofer signal and the LFE channel. In fact, I believe that Audyssey independently calibrates each subwoofer connection separately.

However, to confuse matters Denon inconsistantly designates the 4810 as a .3 device as well. The problem is that in this case all three connections are internally connected and are playing the same signal.

So to summarize what you already know, technically no matter how many subwoofer connections are provided there can not be more than x.1 channels. However, sometimes the .x designation denotes how many separate circuits are maintained, and confusingly in other cases it merely means how many external subwoofer connections are provided even if they are connected internally. Duh.

Larry

Originally Posted by audyssey

The .1 track is.. well it's a track created by the content makers. It has nothing to do with how many subs are in the playback system. A 5.1 movie can be played on a system that has 10 subwoofers (say, in a very large room). That most certainly does not make it 5.10. Similarly, you can play 5.1 content (including the LFE track) over a system with no sub--the LFE track is mixed into the front speakers in that case.

This is pure silliness by the AVR industry trying to create features out of something that doesn't exist. Obviously .2 sounds better than .1 on a brochure so they are going with that.

Allowing for more than one subwoofer outputs is great. Allowing them to be individually time and level delayed to get better blending is also great. This is all part of bass management that is getting more and more advanced.

Adding a number other than "1" after the "." is pure marketing and has no technical basis until the film makers decide to make content that has more than one LFE tracks.

Originally Posted by noah katz

I concede that strictly speaking the .x should indicate the number of encoded channels, but for I bass I'd rather have multiple subwoofer drives from Audyssey et al processing of a mono signal than multichannel bass.

The latter is ideal for venues big enough to have high modal density in the bass range and fully capable subs for each channel, but that's not applicable to the vast majority of home installations.

For consumers a mono bass signal feeding multiple subs is our best hope of getting smooth and ample bass response.

Originally Posted by craig john

I recently upgraded from an Onkyo Pro 885 with XT to an Integra DHC-80.2 with XT32. The difference between the two is astonishing. It's hard to say whether the main differences are in XT32 or the other parts of the signal processing, DAC's, etc. Nonetheless, whatever it is, I wholeheartedly endorse the Integra DHC-80.2. Here's what I hear differently:

Bass: The bass on XT was already very good. In fact, this was the area where XT really shined, IMO. With XT, the bass went from loose and sloppy to tight and articulate. XT32 made the bass a little tighter, but it wasn't as noticeable as the rest of the improvements... because the bass was already excellent. (BTW, at the same time I changed my pre/pro, I also upgraded the amps in my subs from 1,000 watts to 2,400 watts. The new amps also have a second DSP program that extends the LF extension to 16 Hz. Any improvement in the bass is likely as attributable to that as to XT32.)

Upper Bass: I use 80 Hz crossovers and the bass above the crossovers was always "better" with XT, but the upper ranges of bass guitar still seemed like they could use a little "more". XT32 took that part of the spectrum to the next level. Fast finger work on the upper registers of the bass guitar are now much more articulate. Also, the lower range of saxophones and other horns, which always seemed a little "thin", now sounded much more natural and full. These sounds are primarily produced by the dual 8" woofers in my speakers. I think the increased filter density of XT32 is primarily responsible for the improvement in this area.

Midrange and Treble: WOW! This is the area where the new Integra is an order of magnitude better than the older Onkyo. The Onkyo always seemed a little "rolled-off" and muted in the highs, and slightly restrained in the midrange. The Integra is much more extended sounding and the detail and resolution of the mids and highs is vastly superior to the Onkyo. I actually asked a few pages back if XT32 changed the HF target curve because it sounds so different, (I was told by Chris that there was no change.) Nonetheless, in spite of the increased mid and high frequency energy, there is no harshness, shrillness or brittleness, (unless the recording has these properties.) There is just much more detail and body to the mid's and highs.

Like I said, I don't know what caused the improvements, whether it was XT32 or better other "stuff" in the pre/pro, but whatever it is, I am really lovin' the Integra with Audyssey MultEQ XT32. If it fits your budget, I can highly recommend it.

For reference, my system:
Atlantic Technology 8200e THX Ultra2 speakers
Seaton Sound Submersive HP subwoofers, (3 each)
Integra DHC-80.2 Pre/Pro
Earthquake Cinenova V power amp, (300 wpc x 5)
Emotive RPA-1 (200 wpc) for the rear surrounds
BenQ W10000 projector
Seymour AV 128" AT screen, 2.35:1
Panamorph lens
Crowson Tactile Transducer w Buttkicker BKA1000 amp
Oppo BDP-83 BluRay Player

My room is extensively treated with absorption and bass traps, especially on the audio system end of the room. The other end is more reflective, but there are still traps and treatments back there.

Craig

Originally Posted by cavchameleon

I 'really' wanted not to have to use the AS-EQ1 in the system (one of the reasons for getting the A100), but at the moment, it sounds better with it in the chain (even if I bump up the A100 sub levels to match when the AS-EQ1 is not in the system).