"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1816

Makes sense. I was hoping it was inactive.

Why hope it was inactive? Wouldn't it be nice to have an AVR/Pre-Pro that can EQ 3 zones separately? No price talk here!

Interesting reads, in case you don't subscribe to Playback Magazine:

 

PSB's Paul Barton takes Playback on a Tour of Canada's NRC Acoustics Labs--Part 1

 

PSB's Paul Barton Treats Playback to a Blind Listening Session at Canada's NRC Acoustics Labs--Part 2

There seems to be a problem with these links Jerry.
Edited by mogorf - 6/11/12 at 1:14pm

Because it's for my outdoor speakers. (I still haven't decided if I like XT32 for music anyway)

You didn't mention the other zone was outside. Well outside is a different case. One thing for sure is that you won't need a Room Correction system outside, eh? No room modes, no reflections, etc. need to be treated. On the otherhand, XT32 (or any flavor of Audyssey) does not know whether the program material is music or film, it treats them equally once the ROOM is EQ'd. Of course we already know that Audyssey was designed to treat film sound tracks coz they are the ones that were recorded to known reference, but RLO (Reference Level Offset) is always there for you to discover how it works for music recordings in a closed environment (aka= room).

^ Thanks fjames.  Sorry, Feri, I tested the links in "preview post", and they worked.

 

Here is Part 1

Test of link in FAQ = please ignore.

Does anyone know the answer to this?

^ Chris answered your question. What are you asking here?

Based on Chris K's response ....

... the change in Stage Width would indeed correlate to "db" (ie. changing this setting to +5 would increase the LFW/RFW speakers by 5db).

Ciao,
Thank you smoothie, so +1 = 1db I see...

@austin, your reply was a waste, why even bother with such reply? Is not my question? This is years old!

I found Chris reply when i bing phrase "DSX soundstage" but the answer was vague to me.

Chris make no relative relationship between stage slider and db. Maybe +1 on slider is equilvalent to .1 db increase. I not no for sure, so I ask for clarification.

I don't understand some Internet attitude, people would not be so rude in person!

Thank you again JD,
@austin... Get out more and meet people, your social skills are appaling!

Sorry for broken sentence, English is not my native and I translate some phrases on google!

You think?

Hi Chris, and others,

I'm helping a couple plan their home entertainment systems, and a few of the locations (e.g., small office, large bathrooms, etc.) won't require subwoofers. What is required, however, is Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume. For those setups, would they be ably served by 2EQ room calibration? I know that one of the main weaknesses of 2EQ is that there's no correction for the subwoofer channel, so I figure if the left/center/right speakers can do well enough on their own (60Hz +), a subwoofer channel won't be missed much, and the entire range of the speakers (60Hz-20kHz) will be corrected for by 2EQ, at least where 2EQ feels it can spend its relatively fewer correction points compared to MultEQ/XT/XT32. By the way, how many correction points does 2EQ have, and is it happy enough to spend those at low frequencies, provided the speakers are detected as handling those frequencies with aplomb?

Well post old mic calibration my GF now likes music with Audyssey lol.

 

Hi SB,

 

Well, the resources are there but I guess we can't force people to make use of them - horse to water etc. I suspect your conclusion is correct - for every user who ignores all the help that is available in the Guide and the FAQ, there is one who makes the most of them. I hope so anyway!  I think we have just had a flurry of inexperienced users, all at once, and it's given a bad impression.

 

Thanks for that, Jeff. Much appreciated, amigo.

 

It's not just the lack of bass correction that makes 2EQ a very basic implementation of Audyssey. Take a look at the FAQ answer wrt to MultEQ differences for an example of the different filter resolutions between the different versions of MultEQ:

 

http://new.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/51780#user_h2

 

 

 

MultEQ corrects (creates filters) down to the -3dB response of the speakers in the room. If Audyssey detects that the -3dB in-room response of the speakers in question is 60Hz, then it will create filters for the entire FR down to 60Hz. The main problem with 2EQ is that the lack of filter resolution (compared with the other versions - see the chart in the FAQ answer) gives a fairly 'coarse' correction to the room issues detected. FWIW, I would pass on 2EQ personally and go for at the very least MultEQ. Given that XT is available in fairly low cost AVRs, a unit which features XT would be the best investment where subs are not an issue, IMO.

@ Jeff:

 

Jeff - the Linky links are not coming out right. Look at this one for example, copied and pasted from Linky-9:

 

[URL="http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/51780#user_h2"]2. What is the difference between the various versions of MultEQ? (click here)[/URL]

 

The url is correct and clicking it takes the user to the relevant FAQ section - it's just displaying wrong.

 

I couldn't figure out what to do to fix it - any ideas?

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

Edited by kbarnes701 - 6/13/12 at 4:22am

There is a factual problem with that section of the FAQ. Apparently the version of MultEQ XT32 provided in some of this year's new Onkyo AVRs does not include subwoofer equalization.

Care to share some Onkyo model numbers? Your statement needs urgent verification, I believe.

^^^

yup... for some reason (probably financial) onkyo did not implement sub eq on the new 818...

i had always thought that xt32 included sub eq, but i was incorrect... it's just that nobody had implemented it that way before....

xt32 without sub eq is half a loaf, imo...

edit: it eq's the sub channel... what it does not do is set independent delays and levels (what "we" think of as sub eq)...

second edit: there will likely be a few surprised new owners when they find this out... they don't exactly go out of their way to advertise this shortcoming...

Too many people are making way too much of a big deal out of the 818 not having Sub EQ HT. I was initially very surprised that the 818 even had XT32 and although I do agree that Onkyo probably should have included Sub EQ HT, they haven't and there's nothing anyone can do about it now.

I think the major issue is that many people don't understand what Sub EQ HT is and therefore don't realise if they need it or not. The misunderstanding has provoked some silly rumours/speculation that the 818 doesn't EQ the Sub channel, but this is not true at all.

It will only affect people with 2 Subwoofers that don't have them an equal distance from the MLP. If you need Sub EQ HT, don't buy the 818. How difficult is that?

 

Not as far as I know. Are you perhaps thinking of the Onkyo 818 which has XT32 but which does not EQ two subs as one?  It still EQs the bass of course with the full 512x filter resolution. AFAIK there is no version of XT32 which excludes sub equalisation. A little fact-checking prior to posting goes a long way ;) If you are convinced that you are correct, then please post the evidence and I will update the FAQ as needed.

 

The 818 is specifically referenced in the FAQ section dealing with dual subs.

Edited by kbarnes701 - 6/13/12 at 5:19am

Just a misunderstanding .... the 818 will EQ the sub just as "XT" does, only with far more sub filters, whereas the SubEQ HT in the 3009 and 5009 can EQ "dual" subwoofers.

I suspect he is thinking of the Onkyo 818 which does have XT32, does of course EQ the bass but does not EQ two subs together. As you know, XT32 measures the levels and delays of each sub independently but then EQs the two subs together, as a pair. The 818 EQs the bass but does not EQ the two subs together, so it requires the 'Y-cord' solution referenced in the FAQ. It is quite wrong of the OP to say that there is a version of XT32 which excludes sub EQ, and just as wrong to say there are factual errors in the FAQ. My view is that the 818 has been much maligned for this minor exclusion - it represents fantastic value at about $1,000 with XT32. Anyone with only one sub lacks nothing at all of course, and those with two subs lack very little IMO - if the two subs are similar and roughly equidistant from the MLP, then the Y-cord solution works very well indeed. This was all done to death a while back in the thread as you will recall.

The 818 will EQ 2 Subwoofers as one, they just need to be an equal distance from the MLP and level matched before running the calibration.

 

100% concurred. The 818 is fabulous value at about a grand for a unit with XT32. Audyssey doesn't make a fantastic job of setting sub distances anyway, which is why many of us have to manually tweak the sub distances post-EQ to get the bass to perform properly. And of course, as distance is measured only once, during the first measurement, and from the MLP, it is correct only for one seat in any case. Anyone sitting in another seat will, by definition, have a 'wrong' sub distance/delay for their seat.

 

I agree totally with your conclusion: if you believe that you need to EQ two subs which are at very different distances from the MLP, then you need a different unit, and one which will cost you double what the 818 costs. If, OTOH, you don't need to do that, you are WAY better off buying the 818 with XT32 than a comparably priced unit with just XT. It seems like the 818 is a massive bargain to me. (Although I'd spring a few extra bucks for the Denon 4311 personally).