"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1501

Yes, you are correct. However, for my testing, I didn't touch the trim levels on the subs themselves, because I wanted to be able to revert to the "double-EQ" solution if it was the better result. If I had touched the sub trims, then I would have had to run the AS-EQ1 calibration again.

However, even with the trims left untouched, the levels were within the acceptable range for the Sub EQ HT calibration. It's not the sub levels that I am concerned with, it's the levels of the main speakers. I would expect each of the calibrations in my test to have resulted in close main speaker levels. The consumer calibration was significantly lower.

Thanks Jeff.

I was trying to refer to Al's question by pointing out that no test mic will work directly plugged into a PC/Laptop coz of lack of power supply train, therefore a pre-amp apart from other features is also meant to solve the power supply issue. In a phantom way.

How is this combo: M-Audio Fast Track II pre-amp + Behringer ECM-8000 mic?

I am curious, does everyone here always recommended using all 8 positions for XT32 - or are there situations where only like 6 are appropriate? I have heard it mentioned before that sometimes having too many spots (or ones too close together) can cause issues?

I really don't understand why this is such a hot and recurring issue on this thread. The maker (Audyssey) specifies the mumber of mic position for each flavor of their room correction system:

3 for 2EQ
6 for MultEQ
8 for MultEQ XT/ XT32

Just do it! You won't save time and effort by using less number of positions, will you?

Also there is a pattern for mic positions one may follow in the set-up guide.

Feri, are all measurement mics phantom powered? I must admit that I don't know of any that are not, but then I only have owned three.

Jeff

Not an issue at all for me, just seems to be conflicting info thrown around =X

I have a microphone, a very old one (Akai ACM-50), that does not need phantom power coz it shells 2 x AA batteries. Nonetheless, all condenser type mics need power because they have active electronics inside, whether it's phantom or not doesn't matter.

Don't believe everything you read on the "INNERNET".

There is Pro as well...

Thanks for the amendment rickardl, that clears up matters!

Thanks again for your efforts and for sharing your data. My main conclusion is that you can soon be richer by selling your EQ1.

Mark

Wow, thanks for posting that. Makes me feel better about not making the jump to Pro from Consumer XT32 just yet.


Max

Let's keep it in perspective. These are only REW measurements, and may not capture other benefits of using the Pro Kit. It's never too late to take the plunge!

It could be slightly different 1st measurement-point analyses of the pre-equalization variation in the 40HZ--100Hz range, leading to slightly different weighted-SPLs.

Also, thanks for sharing, AustinJerry.

Thanks for sharing! Very good stuff indeed!

I'm interested in the 3-4 db variance in treble between XT32 Consumer vs. XT32 Pro. That's about the amount I feel XT32 Consumer is over-boosting the treble in my setup when I follow the forum-linked setup guide to the letter. I have worked around it with a very simple tweak (which I'll keep to myself in this forum--learned that the hard way), but I wonder if that variance is potentially systematic or just random due to differences in the mic specs between Consumer and Pro. I guess 2.5 db of the difference could be explained by mic spec differences alone if the +/- 2 db vs. +/- 0.5 db holds true.

But, just to confirm your methodology, you're comparing the Reference curve to the Reference curve or the Flat curve to the Flat curve between Consumer and Pro, and not using one of the other Pro curves that attenuates high frequency more aggressively?

Finally, have you done any listening tests? Do you feel the Consumer calibration is in fact brighter than Pro in your room (as it measures), and if so, which sounds better to your ears? Because I believe we share the same AVR (Denon 4311CI), thanks in advance for any additional insight you may have on this topic.

For the Consumer XT32 calibration, I used the standard Audyssey target, not the Audyssey Flat target. For the Pro calibration, I chose the "High Frequency Rolloff 1" target curve with Midrange Compensation on, and did not use Audyssey Flat in the AVR.

Unfortunately, I did not do any listening tests after completing the Consumer XT32 calibration. I simply took the measurements, and proceeded to the Pro calibration. Since my initial write-up, I have been listening to the Pro calibration quite a bit, and it sounds very good. Good enough that I would not consider turning the AS-EQ1 back on.

LOL! Lead me not to temptation...

AFAIK, the Pro kit doesn't have additional tricks up its sleeve as far as time domain corrections go. IIRC, its main benefits are in more measurement positions available allowing Audyssey to collect more data for the corrections, and the ability to customize a little (adjusting the curves etc.), but your frequency response measurements look good enough in both that I don't feel the need to upgrade from the 5008 for the time being. Perhaps the Onkyo 5510 might have something interesting prompting an upgrade.


Max

Waterfall graphs would've given more information.

You know you can change the colors of curves in REW? Instead of having them all in a different shades of green...

The main thing I don't 'get' is that the EQ1 allows for up to 32 mic positions whereas XT32 allows for only 8. I use 12 positions for my EQ1 run, and have used 16 in the past, and I do get a superb result, confirmed by my ears and my Omnimic . If XT32 is capable of giving the same result with only 8 mic positions, why are we constantly assured by Audyssey (et al) that the more positions, within reason wrt room size etc, the better the result? Anyone?

Kind Regards,

Keith

If you think about the differences between a consumer Audyssey calibration and an Audyssey Pro calibration, it is mainly the mic. The consumer mic is within +/-2dB of the batch calibration file while the Pro mic is within +/-.5dB of the accompanying individual calibration file.

The way tolerances work, any single consumer mic could be, to use the technical term, dead nuts on the money and have a +/-0dB variance from the batch file. So, if the mic is "golden" it could give MultEQ the same data as the Pro mic supplies MultEQ Pro.

If this is the case, I would expect no visible differences between the graphs or the two calibrations.

OK, but what about the relatively limited number of measurements of consumer MultEQ XT 32 compared to Pro? How might that affect the calibration differences? And how about Pro's ability to calculate filters based on the crossover selected while the consumer code calcs filters based on the "detected" crossover?

These are all thought to bring improvements, but I'd be surprised if they could be measured ... or more correctly ... seen in our measurement graphs. Are the differences audible? I would think so, but they would be subtle.

But subtle improvements are real, and we frequently make system changes that bring subtle improvements. Plus, every Pro mic is "golden" ensuring that every calibration will be as good as it can be. Also, calibrations can be saved, edited and re-loaded.

What's my conclusion? I will own the Pro kit and a Pro-capable pre/pro for as long as they are available - or until something better comes along.

Jeff

OK, so here's a rough picture of what my room looks like:

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/hpim0798.jpg/

The front right is big stuffed bear, and the subwoofer sits on the front left facing out (with the three inches or so of space). The room is rectangular, we sit about 10' away on a couch, with a chair on the right making an "L". Sides are mounted on the wall in-line with the couch, and rears are approximately 3' behind us and mounted on the wall 4' or so apart. The fronts are slightly angled to face the center cushion.

I can't really do a lot of wholesale changes with our setup nor can I afford at this point a lot of new gear. I will run Audyssey again when I move my new plasma upstairs (a 65VT30), I just want to some tips as to what I should do (I will drop the sub one notch below middle and see what happens there).

Thanks for any and all help!

Tips,

I'm sure it does! Thank you for all the additional info.

One last question/request...if you ever decide to measure the L or R pre-out to explore how Audyssey Pro is altering your signal in the frequency domain, please share that with us as well. I would be curious to see both the level and width of the boosts and cuts being made, particularly in the upper frequencies.

OK so I found the Dayton EMM-6... very reasonable.

But the USB module with phantom power... OUCH!: http://www.parts-express.com/pe/show...umber=245-8688

So this is the combination I need?

There are lower cost ways to power the mics that need it. Such as this $40 XLR to USB Mic Convertor/Mic Preamp, there are also other brands available.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001EW5YQS/...560_pe_ace_dt2

Thanks for the suggestion, unfortunately virtually nothing can be shipped from Amazon to Canada...

update, I found it on the Canadian site...$50 now grrrrr.

So is this best bet?

Figured I'd post it here. Maybe someone thought about this before me, but here goes.

This is a CHEAP, easy way to use an Audyssey mic and boom stand.

Weird - I have heard a few reports that people get better response with using six positions instead of 8 for XT/XT32 (apparently that's what Denon recommends?)

I have not heard of that brand, Al. I think most use M-Audio or Tascam. New, they run about $150; I had always bought used on eBay and usually paid $100.

If you don't need phantom in the pre-amp, there are less expensive models. I don't know if they are still sold, but my first USB "soundcard" was a $30 Sound Blaster part.

Jeff