"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1111

Hi Mike,

With regard to the highlighted item, there are a few devices that have independent processing of the subwoofer connections, and some of these can handle up to three subwoofers.

Larry

Cool. I actually was going to qualify that.
I'll got back and edit.
Thanks. Like I said, I'm also learning.

Mike

Here is my situation I am trying to resolve...
I have several problems, and would appreciate any advice.
My current setup:
Harman Kardon 2600
DT Mythos 6 L/R
DT Mythos 7 Center
DT Mythos Gem XL positioned wide L/R
DT Super Cube II Sub
(see photos)
Problems and Questions.
As you can see from the pics, I have a huge loft style great room. Probably 20x20 with 20 ft. ceilings. The sound I am getting just is not filling the room, its just not a full rich sound. I just purchased this setup last year and really don't want to replace the whole thing. What I am considering is going to the Onkyo 1008 receiver (Audyssey Equiped) which has 135 watts per channel as opposed to the 65 watts of the HK. With that I would add the new DF Mythos XR 20BP as high front speakers Following the Audyssey 7.1 setup. These are bi-polar speakers that are flush mount. Looking at the pic I sent, I would mount these above the tv in the corners of the alcove. I am hoping these moves will greatly improve the sound in the room. In hindsight, I would have went with the Mythos 2's and 3, which are much larger, but oh well.
So my questions are:
Do you think the transition to the Onkyo 1008 with the additional watts per channel is a good move?
Do you think the Mythos 20's are a good choice for my high fronts?
The Mythos 20's are flush mount so I can't angle them, as suggested. But they have bi-directional speakers, would you suggest that I mount them horizontally or vertically?
Considering my ceiling is 20ft. How high should I mount them?
My room is about 6,500 cubic feet, would the addition of a second Super Cube II improve the fullness of the sound?
Mythos 20 link
http://www.definitivetech.com/produc...ythos%20XTR-40
Any other advise would be appreciated.

In response to the AVS-EQ1 "helping" correct further with XT32 from the Denon 4311...

Chris stated that each device has the EXACT SAME filter resolution in the sub channels so "technically" this isn't even exactly what you'd call double eq'ing, right? Because you are using the "SAME" EQ twice??

I am not disputing your end results, yet I don't see how this is possible and can't figure out (tiny brain ) how this is possible.

Personally I find it very interesting and important though because quite frankly I have a Denon 5805CI (MultEQ XT only) that I am about to sell and literally until these last few posts was about to pull the trigger on the Integra 80.2 or Onkyo 5508 (Thanks to CraigJohn and several others for being the guinea pigs and for their extensive reviews across a few threads and even pretty before/after graphs!!) but.... If there is a difference (still want to know HOW though, Chris??) then I have an opportunity to get the Denon 4311 and a SubEQ but I can't afford an Integra (Or Onkyo) plus AMPS - PLUS a SubEQ/AVS-EQ1 so.....

Could you guys give me some theories (and please chime in Chris as you've been silent today - You don't get days off this time of year!) on what's happening and how so I can better decide what to purchase? I wish Santa would allow for the 80.2/amps/SubEQ but since I'm married to Santa she (Yeah, you heard me ) might have an issue with that and I get by with so much!!!

Anyway, again, I HAVE to have XT32 and Pro support and have very few choices anyway but honestly through reading the 34 pages (And thanks to CraigJohn several pages on the Seaton Sub thread now too, relevant to Audyssey though) and the last 50 or so pages on this thread over only the last 3 days... I am ready to get the 80.2 but if I can just figure out how the AVS-EQ1 can still make a difference and confirm it can/does (and same results CANNOT be achieved without it) then I will have to go for the 4311.

Help!!! (Insert "smiley pulling hair out")

--J

It is always a good idea to upgrade but since this isn't something you'll replace all the time I'd go with the best model your budget allows. Look around and try to go with at least the 3008 (Preferably 5008 but realize that may be out of your price range right now) for MultEQ XT32 and some other features which are likely to save you money in the long run by you being able to keep this receiver longer.

However, since I own a complete Definitive Reference set myself (Have been a customer since 1998 starting with BP2000's) I can tell you (In looking at your speakers, much is the same in this regard) that it doesn't take much to drive them, especially the ones with built in amps for the Supercube subs. You're really only driving the midrange/tweeters and again, that doesn't take much.

I do think you need an upgrade from your HK (Until my Denon 5805CI Purchase in early '07 I had been an exclusive HK receiver customer/fanboy from their AVR-80 to the 7700 and a few other models) as 65wpc isn't allowing for much headroom, if any, AT ALL.


Hmmm... I would STRONGLY consider doing a WIDE before HEIGHT setup especially if doing away with rear surrounds and sticking with a 7.1 setup.

My thinking is not only has Chris and others stated a more beneficial
benefit from phantom imaging to an actual derived/matrixed channel but you can also then move your "side surrounds" a little behind you for the greatest overall benefit.

I haven't looked at this specific model, but please verify the Mythos are "Bi-Polar" as I don't believe they are. Bi-Polar means they have a duplicate set of exact matching drivers firing both forward and rear firing and I don't believe that would be possible/probable in a flush or in-wall setup.

For instance, using my Reference BP7000SC's I find that at LEAST 12" from the wall is necessary (Currently at 18" from wall and going to experiment with 24" from the wall as the previous 6" extension made a huge difference) for the Bi-Polar "effect" in addition to having them toed in at about 35 degrees. (I'm ready for people to start arguing with me on everything I've said so far, but I'm only trying to help, lol.... Ahem... Gary?? )

I understand why you can't angle them and to answer your question about horizontal/vertical placement, it depends. If you insist on "Height" DSX Setup, then "I" say Vertical for even greater height. If, however, you decide to take my (and many others) advice and go with a "Wide" setup, I say horizontal due to the way these speakers are manufactured and because the side of your room for better imaging with no "holes." However, with a "Wide" setup and these particular speakers mounted horizontally, you may encounter a poor WAF Also, if you use them as Wides, you should be able to properly "angle" them, too.



YES. Yes. And........ YES!

Look at Gary's HT Setup and just try to count how many sub-woofers he has.

While, at the risk of sounding....ummm...Jealous?? It may seem overkill, if properly integrated into your room you can alleviate all kinds of Room modes and if you're considering this and it's an option for you financially, GO FOR IT!

(I'd also STRONGLY recommend some Acoustical treatment. ESPECIALLY in that room!) You can do a search for different types, but look up Owens Corning 703/705 and "ATS Acoustics" for very affordable yet very effective absorption panels and bass traps if you don't want to DIY.)

Your speakers/equipment are 50% of your end resulting sound and the room is the other 50% yet most people (Well, maybe not in this thread) seem to forget about that!

It may be hard to make that initial leap of faith since there is nothing to plug in, no new toys, OSD's, or "electronics" involved (It was for me) but it can make all the difference in the world! I moved my BP7000's w/ two Supercube Reference's in them, 2 BP7001's with Supercube 1's in each of them, C/L/R 3000, and BPVX's from my treated room to a new home in my unfinished basement (Getting ready to start construction on my new HT ) and it sounds like I went from a $25,000 system to a $1500 HTIB!!


I gave my $.02 above but figure others will chime in now!

Good luck and don't hesitate to ask more questions. If you have any other questions not related to Audyssey MultEQ XT (Hopefully you'll go with XT32), DSX, or other Audyssey related topics and how it might specifically benefit you, look around at the other threads for room treatment advice and feel free to PM me, too!

--J

Thanks for the great advice. I wish I could afford the 5008 right now, but I am going to have to settle for the 1008. Also, really add accoustic material, I dont think as it is a rental townhouse.

Here is the info on the new Mythos. I would think they would be called bidirectional, but this is what they say...

Thanks again, I will probobly have questions when I get the items and start setting things up.

Introducing the XTR-20BP bipolar surround speaker

The perfect speaker solution when you want big, high definition sound from compact, easy-to-use speakers
Only 2-1/2 inches (6.4cm) deep for unobtrusive high performance
Perfect appearance and timbre match for Mythos XTR series front speakers
Bipolar driver array disperses surround sound over a wide area for enveloping effects
Two high-definition XTDD 3-1/2 inch mid/bass drivers for life-like clarity
Wall mount bracket and vertical table support stand included
The XTR-20BPs are yet another astonishing breakthrough for Definitive Technology. The XTR-20 matches the distinctive XTR series look - a gorgeous hand-polished, aircraft grade Aluminum enclosure. Because they use the same active drivers and tweeter as the rest of the XTR series they're perfect for use as compact, convenient surround speakers in a system made up of larger XTR main speakers.

The XTR-20BP comes with an easy-to-use wall mount bracket and a convenienet support foot when you want to use it on shelf or table. State-of-the-art engineering technology delivers the classic level of Definitive Technology sound quality: wide, dynamic soundstage, pinpoint imaging, and superb realism. Packed into the compact enclosure are proprietary damping technologies that ensure total rigidity, angled mid/bass drivers in PolyStone baffles, and a sophisticated Crossover Network.

Superior Performance Components
Each Mythos® Gem contains two 3-1/2 inch XTDD mid/bass drivers that are angled in opposite directions to broaden the midrange dispersion for the kind of diffuse soundfield sought after by home theater enthusiasts for surround loudspeakers. Use the XTR-20BPs for surround channel duties and you'll be rewarded with spacious and enveloping surround effects that will make you feel like you're in the cast of the movie.

The array's 1 inch Pure Aluminum dome tweeter produces extended highs that reveal nuance and shimmer without a trace of edginess.

Rock-Solid Enclosure
Mythos Series enclosures are hand-polished gloss Black aircraft-grade extruded aluminum with proprietary damping technologies that ensure total rigidity. All components are mounted on a resonance-free PolyStone baffle. These rock-solid construction technologies along with state-of-the-art drivers and tweeter serve to deliver classic Definitive Technology sound quality: wide soundstage, spacious imaging, high dynamic impact, and superb realism.

It's nice to know someone read my posts, and found some value in them.

I don't know why you think you need an outboard AS-EQ1 or SubEQ to supplement the Integra DHC-80.2. It seems like the "benefits" attributed to using a supplemental device as described above are simply better level settings. You can do that with an SPL meter and the subwoofer trim controls. I am not using a supplemental outboard EQ and have no intention or desire to do so. XT32 has the exact same filter density and resolution as either of those outboard devices, as you noted.

I will also say that, at this point I have no pressing need or desire for a Pro calibration. The 3 benefits of a Pro calibration are :

• better mic
• more measurement points
• ability to edit the target curve

The better mic should result in more accurate level and distance settings, but I highly doubt it will result in a better EQ result. If you're using the *same* mic for all the measurements, the *same* mic errors are seen in all the measurements, and they should be compensated for in the *same* way for all the EQ filter sets. So if the EQ results are ultimately the same, then the only benefit of a better mic is more accurate level and distance settings.

I have described a way to get those better level and distance settings with another method: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=4777
After doing that, I don't feel any need to run a Pro calibration for that aspect.

I only have 8 positions to measure. Doing more than that would just be redundant, so I don't need a Pro cal for that.

The ability to adjust the target curve is totally unneeded in my current system. I can't think of *anything* I would want to edit to try to improve.

So a Pro cal is not in the cards for me.

IMO, an 80.2 with XT32 is all you need. Add a good amp and you're in "bidness".

http://emotiva.com/xpa5.shtm

Just my $0.02.

Craig

Had you used your new XT 32 system without Pro before doing the Pro cal? If so, did you notice any improvements?

Jeff

Yes I have my front mains toed in.


Re: adding subs (YES. Yes. And........ YES! ) I'll admit you have me totally confused now. From your first post here I got the idea you had no standalone subs.

Chris has always maintained "more is better". How much better may be a moot point.

If they're supposed to be 2 ft. apart, and you only have one row of 3 seats, how many "useful" measurements positions can there be without redundancy? In my theater, 8 is just about the limit.

Craig

Two feet apart is appropriate for 8 measurements, closer together is appropriate when using more.

FWIW, I'd say that there are a few additional benefits of a MultEQ Pro calibration:

1. The MultEQ Pro system will recommend the optimum crossover frequency for each satellite speaker (not necessarily the lowest in frequency) and then rank the succeeding recommended crossovers. When you select a particular crossover, Pro will create a filter which is optimized for that crossover. XT 32 doesn't do this.

2. With regard to mic positions, my understanding is that no matter how limited your seating may be, it is always better to take more readings so as to provide the software with more data. This follows the law of diminishing returns, however, and I've read somewhere in this thread that around 15 to 16 mic positions is fine. I'm also guessing that the poorer the acoustic treatment in your room, the more problems you will have and the more mic readings you should take.

3. The Pro system can save your mic readings. This is useful if you want to experiment with speaker positions, listening positions, new subs, etc. You can do a Pro calibration and if the result is not to your liking, just recover the old mic readings. The same thing applies if you want to experiment with crossovers and target curves. You can create a filter for a particular setting and if you don't like it, just revert to the old setting. No need to re-run MultEQ.

Mark

Did you try the AS-EQ1 with the same positions (and number of them) as the A100?

If you have a Fry's Electronics near you, (no shipping available) this 1007 is an incredible value. It even has MultEQ XT and the 1008 just has MultEQ.

http://www.frys.com/category/Outpost...A_V+Receivers/

I would really like to understand why using the AS-EQ1 or the Audyssey sub equalizer with XT32 yields better results, since I am about to sell my AS-EQ1. In theory, Sub EQ HT should be yielding similar results. Other than "it sounds better", why do you think it is better? Perhaps Chris has an opinion as well?

Jerry

I would add that I believe the individually calibrated mic would yield better timbre-match and produce better integration of surrounds with fronts and with subs and mains. Regardless how good it is already, I believe it would improve.

Jeff

Sorry Jerry... I'm not an audio/video expert by any means. Its just a hobby for me. I explained my findings the best I could in the Denon 4311 thread, which I believe you have already read.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post19486354

I have yet to read anyone not liking Audyssey MultEQ Pro over the consumer version of MultEQ. Most even state Pro made big improvements in their rooms... one way or another.

[quote=pepar;19585594]I would add that I believe the individually calibrated mic would yield better timbre-match and produce better integration of surrounds with fronts and with subs and mains. /QUOTE]

How so, since any errors in the mike response would show up in the correction for all of the speakers,

[quote=aquaftm;19584598]Here is my situation I am trying to resolve...
I have several problems, and would appreciate any advice.
My current setup:
Harman Kardon 2600
DT Mythos 6 L/R
DT Mythos 7 Center
DT Mythos Gem XL positioned wide L/R
DT Super Cube II Sub
(see photos)
Problems and Questions.
As you can see from the pics, I have a huge loft style great room. Probably 20x20 with 20 ft. ceilings. The sound I am getting just is not filling the room, its just not a full rich sound. I just purchased this setup last year and really don't want to replace the whole thing. What I am considering is going to the Onkyo 1008 receiver (Audyssey Equiped) which has 135 watts per channel as opposed to the 65 watts of the HK.

The 1008 is THX select 2 which is recommended for 2000 cubic feet or less, so it may be a bit weak for your room. The 3008 is THX ultra 2 which is recommended for rooms your size. Having said that, with your speakers I would be willing to bet that the 1008 would be enough

With that I would add the new DF Mythos XR 20BP as high front speakers Following the Audyssey 7.1 setup. These are bi-polar speakers that are flush mount.

I think that Chris had recommended that front highs or wides be monopoles, not bi-poles, but I could be wrong on that point.

Dunno, but that's what I heard on my system. Maybe Chris can fill in the science to this?

Jeff

Hi Doug,

I had a similar problem, but I was able to solve it without a Pro calibration or a second EQ. In fact, I don't think the problem is related to XT32, because I had this same problem with XT. I think it's related to how the system measures subwoofer distance in a multi-sub system.

I also have a multi-sub system, and my subs are not equidistant to the LP. Audyssey/Integra, (A/I), found my subs at 10.4 ft., which is very close to the distance of the closest sub. I measured my response using that distance setting and found a big hole in the response around the crossover point:



I then took a 3-position measurement to ensure I wasn't seeing an anomaly related to just one measurement position. The following is a weighted average of 3 seats, Left, Primary and Right, with them weighted at 30%, 40% and 30% respectively:



The above graphs were taken with the L/R speakers playing along with the subs. I then wanted to verify that it wasn't related to a phase issue with just those speakers. For the next graph, I put the system in Dolby PLIIx Cinema mode. Identical signals were fed to the L/R inputs, and in PLIIx Cinema Mode, correlated information is redirected to the CC. Since both the L and R signals were correlated, (identical), the entire signal was sent to the CC. I verified by ear that the only speaker outputting sound during this test was the CC. Here are the superimposed graphs with two different Distance settings. The blue trace is the A/I recommended Distance of 10.4 ft. The green trace with the Distance adjusted to 13.8 ft.:



Since the dip of almost 30 dB was centered around the crossover point of 80 Hz, it seemed plausible that it could be corrected by getting the phase more properly aligned. I played around with the Distance setting and finally achieved a much better response with a setting of 13.8 ft., which is about the average of the physical distance of all 3 of my subs. (I actually measured about 30 or 40 different Distance settings, and 13.8 ft. yielded the flattest response.) Here is that graph with the L/R speakers playing:



The difference in *sound* between these two settings is night and day. The 13.8 ft. setting sounds full, rich and articulate; the 10.4 ft. setting sounds thin and lifeless. There is no doubt in my mind, or my ears which is the *correct* setting.

With multi-subs systems like ours, Doug, I think it's possible for A/I, (or in your case A/D), to get the Distance setting wrong, especially if not all the subs are the same physical distance from the listening position. AFAIK, A/I measures the Distance on the first chirp, and never actually *measures* the splice between speakers and sub(s). Therefore, verification of this setting with measurements is beneficial. At least, that what I've found.

With the Pro calibration, since it is recommending crossover points, it must perform some other analysis on the splice between speakers and subs, and therefore it can yield a better splice. I don't know exactly what it does, but it may be able to optimize the Distance setting better as well. That *may* be why you've found better results with the Pro cal and the SubEQ kept in the mix.

Do you have the ability to measure the response of your system?

Craig

I have an Onkyo tx sr607 and tried the audyssey setup but when I run it I get a speaker error. If I change the speaker setup to biamp and run the setup then it goes through the whole process without the error. The problem is that I don't have biamp speaker connected. I don't get it!!!

After searching through this thread I am trying to confirm best practice for installing 2 JLAudio f113's along with an Integra DHC-80.2 with XT32 now and pro in the future.

Do I read Chris's responses to mean that I should not use ARO at all from the subs and let Audyssey take care of all the correction?

Thanks
Paul

Did you find a big difference with using Audyssey Pro (with the Sub EQ in the mix) much better than with just on onboard 8 measurements? Trying to justify if it would be worth purchasing.

Thanks,
Ray

Craig John,

Thanks for the explanation and graphs!

IIRC, the Audyssey set-up guide found on the first page of this thread specifically says to disable all DSP and crossovers built into your sub and let Audyssey handle everything.

Cheers,
SB

Which speaker is giving the error? Do you have a 5.1 or 7.1 setup. And if it is 5.1, do you have the side surrounds in the correct input (these are surrounds, not rears).

If everything is hooked up correctly, temporarily swap that speaker with another from your setup and see if the error follows. You may have a problem with the speaker.

Thanks Dave,
I have a 5.1 setup and have speakers in rear and they come on during the testing. I have no sides to input. Should I use the rears as sides instead?? I didn't think that was the way to hook it up. As you can tell I am new at this ht stuff