"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1731

Thanks Gooddoc for the confirmation. (And SoM too I see - I've been away and only skimmed the intervening posts).



I would think you are probably correct too. I'd say they should "ideally' be equidistant but I go along with your thesis that the second sub benefits are so considerable that they outweigh the lesser benefits of equidistance. This will be especially so if measurement shows that the best performance is achieved by sub placement that also happens to NOT enable equidistance.

The thing is that equidistant very well may NOT be ideal at all. I have seen far too many reports of measured improvement at the crossover and audible improvement to SQ when the distance/delay is manipulated when using XT32 to believe that it is a metric adequately solved by Audyssey. I suspect time coherence of subs and satellites has importance, I'm just not sure exactly what it is at this point. Of course the usual disclaimers/heresy regarding measuring discrete locations when evaluating Audyssey apply.

Does anyone know how to add a TABLE to a post in AVS's editor? There is a 'wrap table' option in the advanced editor and I can get it make nice rows but can't get it to make columns. I am trying to do a comparison table for the different versions of Audyssey for the FAQ. Thanks.

I was referring to XT. With XT32 it doesn't matter if the subs are equidistant or not because they are pinged separately of course.

I think tweaking of the sub distance to try to improve the splice is a separate thing (for the purposes of the discussion re how to set up dual subs with XT, I mean).

Thanks for the advice. In the meantime, I solved the issue: the ONKYO was also connected through RS232 for the remote control. I think there was in conflict with Audyssey trough LAN.

Well, not really. My point is that moving the sub (XT) or changing the distance (XT32) is really the same thing as regards distance/delay and has a bearing on the "equidistant" recommendation for XT. That particular guideline could steer many XT users away from a potentially big benefit of using dual subs.

Most subs have level controls which leaves distance/delay as the only real pre-EQ benefit of XT32 over XT and if moving subs and changing distance/delay are the same thing(is it? I'm asking) then we can potentially(within the bounds of potential room locations) achieve the same benefit moving subs with XT as we can changing distance with XT32.

FAQ updated. Two new questions. Comments, corrections etc welcome.

IKWYM but it's still the official Audyssey advice to use similar or identical subs equidistantly from the MLP. Changing the delays/distances to try to improve the splice is 'esoteric Audyssey' I think it absolutely demands measuring equipment, and some knowledge of how to use it and how to interpret the results, if one is going to change the Audyssey-set distances. Not that that doesn't make it potentially worthwhile but for most Audyssey users and those without measuring gear, I still say that equidistant is ideally the best way to go. I don't think we are fundamentally in disagreement about this.


I don't think so - moving the sub will affect the way it interacts with room modes. Changing the distance setting won't, or not in the same way because the sub is still in the same physical position? (Just speculating).


Maybe. XT32 will still be way superior to XT though simply because of its far higher filter resolution - 512x vs 128x. Not to mention the VASTLY superior filter resolution for the satellites of course - 16x with XT, 512x with XT32, although that's a different issue.

IMO the FAQ is not for cutting-edge controversial tweaks like improving a single sub's response by tweaking the distance setting in the processor. What could be stressed is that regardless of Audyssey version, to get the most (by that I mean smoothest, tight, punchy bass) out of your 2subs, you have to do a "measured sub haul".
If I have XT, I'll try to find reasonably good spots that yield a fairly flat FR and are equidistant to MLP. With XT32 I'm not under the latter constraint.

It's still time. The mic really only sees the level going up or down because of the contribution of later arriving waves. The impulse is emitted by Audyssey, and it patiently waits until the mic hears the impulse. If something other than the first arrival is used to define distance, IDK how it could work. In a large room, or if a person had raised his sub, the input of the second arriving sub will not look different to the mic from the later arriving floor bounce or wall bounce. Audyssey's mic doesn't know if what it hears comes forom 2 subs at different distances, or one sub with multiple pathways to the mic (direct, off the floor, off the back wall, off the ceiling, side wall to back wall to mic, etc). Which of these arrivals should define the delay time for distance setting?

The comparison between wave length and distance (time of delay) controls whether the multiple arrivals sum in phase, or slightly out of phase for a slighty smaller increase, or 180 degrees out of phase for complete cancellation. Doesn't change when the first arrival occurs or whether distance is determined at first arrival or at some later time defined we know not how . . .

Oh most definitely. This discussion with Gooddoc is well outside the scope of the FAQ. Interesting though nonetheless.

Agreed to all. My comments were specifically limited to distance delay. Of course all other XT32 benefits apply

Agreed aside from the fact that if I have XT, I'll try to find the absolute best positions of both subs that produce the best FR and least variation across seating positions and I could care less whether they're equidistant.

If no measuring gear then yes, I guess the guideline makes sense.

^Interesting point. YMMV, but I've found there are a number of spots that have similar flatness (or lack of it) and so I could reasonably balance room aesthetics/WAF into the "best" placement equation as well. With XT, I suggest the same balanced approach for equidistant spots, or lack thereof. If indeed all equidistant spots were awful but some non-equidistant ones were wonderful, I might then have to listen to compare them to see whether the timing being off was an issue. If it was, I'd have to chose the lesser evil until XT32 came to my HT.

The "Ask Audyssey" website contains the following information about the FLAT target curve, which notes that there are other good reasons to use the FLAT curve besides in a THX mode--very small or highly treated rooms, and nearfield listening situation:

"The Audyssey Flat setting (also called Music in some products) uses the MultEQ filters in the same way as the Audyssey curve, but it does not apply a high frequency roll-off. This setting is appropriate for very small or highly treated rooms in which the listener is seated quite close to the loudspeakers. It is also recommended for all rooms when the receiver is in THX processing mode. This allows THX re-equalization to operate exactly as it was intended."

Hi pbarach, while I fully agree with your above suggestion on adding Flat/Target issue to the FAQ I think a bit of explantion/reasoning would do wonders for the understanding of the principles behind. Not thinking of anything deeply scientific, just probably a bit above Layman's terms. I think like saying: "THX re-eq will operate as intended" is a bit vague even for a FAQ. Whaddaya think all?

Audyssey - How do you maintain the best balance between loudness fluctuations and sound quality?

Is it better to use lowest Dyn Vol setting (ie: Day) and watch movies around -15db, or or use the Dyn Vol on Evening and watch movies at 0.

Also - Is reference Level offset Literal?
ie: Should -10 be used if you watch movies at -10?

Actually, loudness "fluctuation" is called "dynamic range" and in this respect has no direct impact on SQ (sound quality). Classical music typically has wide dynamic range, while titles of the group Metallica are not recorded to that degree owing to the nature of their genre. Film can be another example, there can be "fluctuations" from dialog whispering to explosions in the same film.


IMHO, there is no good recipe, need to do a bit of experimenting by yourself to find what works best for you.


Ref. level offset is not supposed to be literal, what ever you mean by literal, eh? There is no such correlation between RLO an MV (Master Volume) setting. Film is recorded to a known Ref. level, therefore should be watched at RLO = 0. Some set RLO for film to -5 dB, so, again, your best option is to experiment and see what sounds best for you.

Hope I could help.

FAQ updated. Now with hyperlinks.

This is dealt with in the Audyssey FAQ Linked Here

I like it!!

Wow Keith, looks wonderful,...I think your next assignment will be an Onkyo 5509 FAQ!!!

Do you mean fluctuations like when the commercials come on and the sound is much louder, or do you mean the balance between, for example, a whisper and an explosion in a movie?

If you turn on Dynamic Volume it will compress the dynamic range of the content, so the ratio between the loudest sounds and the softest sounds will be less. This is useful if you are watching Die Hard 4.0 and your children are asleep in bed. You can use more or less Dyn Vol according to your requirements - just experiment with the settings. There is no right or wrong setting.

It has nothing to do with where you set the master volume really, although obviously the higher the MV setting, the louder the system will play - but the dynamic range will still be compressed by Dyn Vol.

Thanks. I've found that when watching a movie and switching between Dyn Vol Day and Evening - Day sounds much more louder, crisp, and clear. Maybe I'm performing the wrong tests but I definitely can hear a degradation of sound quality by going with Evening. I'll try again at near reference level.


I thought the "boosts" of Dyn Vol were directly affected by the volume your listening at.


0 being "reference level" on my receiver. So my question is, I'm listening at -15 should the RLO setting math (at -15?)

Thanks Feri... I may just pass on that



Thanks. It's very much a work in progress, but it will get there hopefully.

FAQ Updated - three additional questions. Comments and corrections very welcome.

I think the FAQ answers these questions - along with the links in the answers. This is dealt with in the Audyssey FAQ Linked Here

I've read it, although still unclear.

If unclear, then send a question. Feel free.

OK. WRT to your 1st question above, there are no right and wrong settings for DV, so choose the one that you prefer. There isn't a degradation of the sound quality - as the FAQ explains, DV does not affect the tonal balance, and it can't change the SQ in any other way. I suspect you just prefer one setting over the other. This link takes you directly to the relevant part of the FAQ: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...count=51803#g1

Q2 - I don't know how to explain it more clearly than the FAQ. DV compresses dynamic range. The amount of compression depends on the setting you choose (Day, night etc). DV attempts to 'equalise' the soft and loud sounds to keep them in the range you have chosen when you set the MV. In that sense, the MV setting obviously affects the way DV's adjustment is made. I'm not sure what you want to know. Pick a MV that you are comfortable with and set DV to Day. If that smooths out the soft and loud sounds to your liking, you're done. If you want to smooth them out even more, set Night and DV will be more aggressive in the way it works.

Q3. Where you set RLO has nothing really to do with the MV setting - they are not directly linked in that sense. As the FAQ says, when you set a RLO of 10dB, then DEQ ceases to have any effect at -10dB on the MV, If you set RLO of 15dB then DEQ ceases to have any effect at -15dB on the MV.

If you usually listen at -15dB and you set a RLO of 15dB then you may as well have DEQ turned off because it is not doing anything. The RLO is designed to adjust DEQ for content not mixed to movie reference level. For movies leave it at 0dB. For other content, see the FAQ here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...count=51803#g3

It may be that the FAQ doesn't properly answer the question of course. Over time, user feedback like Lou99's will be incorporated into the FAQ. In this particular case, I personally can see the answers to his questions in the FAQ as it stands, but if he can't then it's the FAQ that is at fault, not Lou99!

Of course the FAQ isn’t intended to answer every query anyone could make, nor to answer in great depth, and as you rightly say, everyone is free to ask a question if they need further elaboration. I've had another go at Lou99's questions but I am still not quite sure what he is asking.

I like the way we can hyperlink directly to the relevant question number in the FAQ - cool eh?