"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1781

No, what he is saying is have you checked that Dynamic Volume wasn't automatically enabled at its highest setting? Have you?

I completely agree!

When I first installed my 80.1 with XT I never even heard of the AVS Forum, let alone this Audyssey thread. I initially performed the Audyssey calibration according to the sparse directions that came in the Integra owners manual. My initial impression was that while Audyssey was a definite improvement over no REQ at all my results were somewhat lacking.

So I performed a Google search and found this forum and this thread. This was about two years ago, when Chris was still on the thread and answering questions on a daily basis.

I have to say that every time questions were asked and answered I gleaned a little more information that helped me understand Audyssey, and more importantly to me, helped me to achieve a better Audyssey calibration. I went from placing the Audyssey mic on cardboard cartons, to an inexpensive Sony camera tripod that I found at Wally World, to the popular Amazon.com boom & mic stand (with an additional telescoping boom) that lots of us are now using. I also learned the benefits of isolating the feet of my mic stand from the hardwood floor in my HT room using a few pieces of foam from an Auralex Mo-pad kit. I discovered the importance of proper mic positioning. I learned about tweaking the distances for my 2 subs and my height speakers. I discovered DEQ and learned how to use the RLO's. All in all there have been some invaluable lessons learned here and I'm happy that I've stuck around, even though it appears that there have been some negative posters on the thread whose only purpose seems to be to argue, find fault, and otherwise attempt to spoil a very helpful and positive thread.

At this point in my journey I would never have a HT system without Audyssey (or something very similar) and am seriously contemplating an upgrade to XT32 (or its next iteration) as my next system improvement.

I'd like to add that I've never experienced the HF "brightness" in my 3400 cu ft room (with three open hallways to additional space), so I have a hard time believing that this is an endemic "problem". Perhaps there's quite a bit more in the respondents system (or setup) than meets the eye? Also, the question was raised about why Audyssey had several different curves available in its pro form while its consumer version only offered one curve. Could it be possible that the individual AVR's or Pre-Pro's just do not posess enough internal computing power to allow multiple curves? Remember that the pro setup makes use of the vastly superior ability of the users external laptop.

All in all, the question remains - are we better off with Audyssey than without it? I say - HELL YES

Call me a fanboy if you will,
SB

I will post a pic when I get home, as for the price, is was a sealed box and sold to me as a new unit, it looks new and packaged like new, but I'm no pro, as this is my first new denon in ten years. The mike was in a box as as you noted. As for wiring there clearly marked, I'm good at that stuff, there was no phase problem as per setup. The sound is good, it just sounds cheap in the Audyssey sound modes. I will read your link, to see if I missed a thing or two, I like the idea of Audyssey, but as of now I see I need to put some real effort into this. THXs for all the feed back and will update on my results. I don't have as much time as I would like, but this weekend should be good for me.

Keith,

My Integra stores settings exactly the same way as an Onkyo.

Cheers,
SB

I am not a fanboy. I do think that those who are complaining about their Audyssey results should not be assumed to be typical Audyssey users. They are the squeaky wheels who come here to get the grease, which is a great reason for having AVS and other forums around.

Yes, a Tandy 1000RL HD was my first computer, which I also used for GW Basic. And Deskmate...a predecessor to Windows in many respects. Those were the good old days, with Prodigy, 2400 baud modems, 128KB RAM upgrades, local BBSs, and 20MB hard drives.

Now we have XT32! Hail progress!

Keep us posted on his response.

Keep in mind that Audyssey has had a great deal of exposure over the years and their is no way that everyone who uses it will like the results.Dirac and Trinnov haven't really had as much exposure and their current products are mostly out of the price range of most of us.There isn't really a whole lot of feedback on their products and years of exposure to the typical HT crowd that Audyssey has had.

Their products,in time, will be loved and hated just like Audyssey.It's all about what works best for you.

How far do you sit from your speakers?

I've been taking an informal poll from folks who have a "large" room on which curve they are using and how far they sit from their main speakers, which may give some insights into direct vs. reflected sound (i.e. sitting close in a large room allows default curve to work better than sitting far in large room, where the default curve can become too bright. In a small room, on the other hand, you can't get far enough away from the speakers for it to become relevant. That's my current hypothesis.)

Hopefully Chris chimes in with a good scientific explanation beyond what's in the pro kit user guide.

I think it should say, while pushing and holding in the setup button, push enter. I did this and it worked sorry for not reading it your way.

The mike that was packed with my Denon 4311 came in a white box marked "DENON DM-A409 AUDYSSEY" is this the right mike? I hope its not the right mike, it would make my life that much simpler if the problem of poor SQ was that easy to fix just by exchanging the wrong mike for the right mike.

I think the question you want to ask is "what is this dynamic volume of which you speak?" Since clearly you are unfamiliar with the feature. It'll be described in your owner's manual, on the Audyssey site, easily researched via Google and pros and cons are much discussed here. I will let you choose your own way to learn about it if you desire understanding beyond what I mentioned.

My MLP is is 10 feet from the front speakers and the distance is 17 feet from the MLP to the back wall. FWIW my surround speakers are set to the dipole mode, while the rear surrounds (same models) are configured as biploes.

Your hypothesis is interesting. I hope that we can learn something

Cheers,
SB

Yup, Denon rebadges the Audyssey mike and names it the DM-A409 plus gives it a black paint job (instead of the normal silver). However, it is the same mic as the ACM-1H.

I too have a 4311 and XT32 has performed well for my room. I'm not sure why you are getting poor results with XT32.

Thanks SB. I thought it would be so. I wonder what is going on with the OP then? EDIT: I saw the OP's reply now - he wasn't using the procedure quite right - I have amended the wording to make it more clear.

OK - glad you sorted it. 'Push and hold the setup button' then 'push enter' seems to me to mean that you would be holding the setup button when you pushed enter I have amended the FAQ to make it more clear. Thanks for the feedback.

OK. Please follow the FAQ and the issues I raise in my earlier post. They have been distilled from the experience of many Audyssey users and solve most of the common problems. Please come back of course with any additional questions (and the info requested). Audyssey is complicated if one is going ti get the best out of it and there are many variables that can upset a calibration, even though they don't always seem obvious to the user.

Great post SB - your Audyssey journey mirrors my own almost exactly.


I am sure that that is the answer you know.


I too say 'Hell yes!'

I have seen some elaboration from Chris somewhere (Audyssey site probably) which supports your theory. Chris wasn't specifically mentioning room size at the time but was addressing this issue of how close one sits to the speakers and the corresponding issue of direct vs reflected sound. Those who sit very much in the near field have fewer issues with reflected sound and so the HF brightness being mentioned just doesn't arise for them. Thus, perhaps the 'small room curve' vs 'big room curve' should have a caveat or additional qualifier something like 'near field seating' and 'far field seating'.

Sorry for getting your hopes up - jchong has just confirmed that Denon rebadge the ACM1H mic to DM-A409. The quest for good sound for you continues...

Agreed. It is also covered in the FAQ:

1. What is Dynamic Volume? (click here)

I don't see computing power being a factor in determining the number of curves that can be saved.

After all isn't a curve just a set of data? And a user will be loading/using only one curve at a time. More relevant is the available storage space to store multiple curves. I don't know how many KB each curve takes up, but storage is ridiculously cheap these days... just look at those 2GB or 4GB thumb drives.

I think the only reason to have AVRs save only one curve is product differentiation, to reserve some of these benefits for the higher priced Pro version.

I think Audyssey's algorithms make certain assumptions which don't always pan out in practice. It's a fantastic leap of logic to predict phase issues near the XO when you are measuring the left main, right main and sub separately... and especially if the user later sets the XO to say 80Hz (which is so often suggested) instead of what Audyssey itself has calculated.

What would be great is if after measuring the speakers individually, Audyssey actually does a second verification by simultaneously pinging the left main, right main and sub and making a second round of adjustments if necessary. We can hope right...

Hi Jeff,
Feri asked me this on Facebook Audyssey Tech Talk. It could be that they have a damaged mic (humidity or static spark can kill the HF mic response resulting in a boost). Or it could be that the speakers are set to Large and so the sub is not doing anything. Without data it's hard to say.

There is nothing specific about a big room that would cause the algorithm to behave this way.

Best,
Chris

May 02, 2012 10:13 pm
User photo
pepar

Hi Chris,

After over-thinking and re-parsing Feri's question and your reply, it was thought that the question should be asked a different way.

The context for the mulligan is Pro's initial curve options based on room volume, comments regarding Audyssey Reference being a translation of X-Curve for the average residential-sized space and the user's space being considerably larger than that.

So Pro allows fine-tuning, but the absence of this in the consumer version is not a possible factor in what the user is experiencing?

Thanks,
Jeff

May 03, 2012 05:05 am
User photo
Chris Kyriakakis
Audyssey

The standard Audyssey target curve rolls off the highs so it wouldn't be causing a boost unless the starting (before) response has severely rolled off highs. That would not be due to the large room, but to the speaker or the measurement (far off axis).

Depending on how large and reverberant the room is it could certainly need more high frequency roll off to balance the response perceptually. This is something one could do with the Pro software by, for example, selecting the SPMTE 202M preset or manually adding the roll off.

However, the way it was presented to me earlier it was implied that Audyssey is actually boosting the highs because the room is so large. That is not the case unless there is something wrong with the mic.

Best,
Chris

SO in this case, shall I send the mic to Odyssey or contact Onkyo support? I had sent a graph to Chris already. The speakers were not large, in fact I had bumped my crossover from Audyssey recommended 40 to 60 htz. The speakers are towed in to LP. I keep my mic in the same bubble-wrap and box that came with the processor.

PS- Another helpful member here advised me to adjust the tone control and lower treble using Onkyo's home menu. I have done that and it's not that fatiguing anymore, but I really want Audyssey to flatten that curve. I'm not sure which band the tone control adjusts. I have also installed an ATS acoustic panel behind the LP. I need to calibrate again with these changes. Will try to post some info during the weekend.

You should not need to adjust tone controls for anything more than a preference adjustment, and this sounds like something is amiss.

Pardon if this has already been posted, but have you put your ear at all of the drivers while the processor produces the speaker level test noise to verify proper operation of the individual drivers?

If they are all working properly, and you are sure that the speakers are aimed - horizontally and vertically - at the center of the MLP/listening area, and your mic positions have not been way off axis, trying another of the same mic is what I would suggest at this point.

Jeff

Probably not. But before you can save a curve you first have to create it and in the consumer versions of Audyssey this has to be done in the AVR. I’d guess that computing the curves not storing them is where the AVR falls down.


I doubt it is a storage issue. One thing you notice when running Pro is how long it actually takes to calculate the filters - it is waaaaaay longer than XT32 for example. And this is using the latest Windows laptop and OS, with a fast CPU. It's clear that far more 'crunching' is going on than is the case with XT32. For this reason alone, I doubt that any AVR will be able to come close to having sufficient grunt in its CPU to do the calculations which Pro needs, and thus for doing even more calculations to produce different curves. Even using an advanced PC, it takes about 2 hours to do a 12 point calibration - imagine how long it would take to do it in an AVR with its puny little processor. That 2 hours does include all the faffing about with the mic etc, but you also have to do that with XT32, albeit for only 8 positions. But there's no doubt that Pro needs considerably more computing power.


I'd stake a dollar that that isn't the case - maybe Chris will confirm it in the answer to Jeff's question. There does have to be a difference between Pro and Consumer versions as you suggest - but I'd bet that the curves issue isn't one of them. Just speculating though....

EDIT: Consumer versions of Audyssey already store two curves of course - the Music/Flat curve and the Movie/Reference curve.

Plus 1 here really glad i found it and this forum

I think you are on the money there.


I don't think changing the XO in Pro is an issue here - when you change the XO, Pro recalculates the filters, so it ought to then take account of the splice.


I think the main problem is that Audyssey (Pro or Consumer) never, at any stage, measures the combined output of the sub and the mains, so it never has any empirical evidence on which to base its decisions - they have to be computed (not measured) as you say above, and this involves assumptions which will often be right and sometimes be wrong. In my own case recently, they were very wrong indeed and the resulting LF was awful. Only independent measuring of the mains and the subs all playing together enabled me to fix the problem manually. This has also been the case for many other users. I may have been harsh before in describing this as a 'fault' with Pro - it is how it is designed to work and we have to accept its limitations.

Like you, I'd wish for it to ping the mains and the subs working together and then base the final decisions on those measurements, but I’d guess there is a good reason it doesn't do that. Not that I have any idea what that reason might be of course

The receiver/processor isn't capable of pinging multiple speakers. We'll never know if Audyssey requested that and was turned down.

Jeff

Now I DO have an idea what that reason might be

Thank heavens for OmniMic/REW etc then which does allow us to measure the subs and the mains playing together. It seems to be the only way to ensure that dual subs (especially) are performing at their best. I was truly shocked at my experience, described ad nauseam in the Pro thread, where my bass was emasculated so much until I discovered the phase problems and corrected them (I salute the AVS Gurus once more). I have never had bass as good as I currently do.

Incidentally, I have done further tweaking of the sub distances. Not only have I ironed out (last week) most of that huge 27dB dip that was occurring before, but look at this latest graph and notice the way that the dB level has been boosted by a few dB (and brought closer to flat at the same time) between 20 Hz and about 60 Hz (and especially between 30 Hz-55 Hz). This has resulted in a truly terrific bass output now - but at the same tight nice and controlled and tight.



That dip at about 180Hz still irks me though...