"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1818

Thanks Jeff. They still don't display properly though - see below. I can’t figure out why - my knowledge of html coding is pretty much less than zero.

 

[URL="http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/51780#user_f7"]f)7. What is ‘LFE + Main’ or ‘Double Bass’ and should I use it? (click here)[/URL]

 

What Chris was saying is that when people set their speakers to 'Large' they do so because they mistakenly believe they will handle the low frequencies and so by setting them to 'Small' and using bass management they are somehow 'wasting' the true capabilities of their main speakers. It stems from a complete misunderstanding about bass management and what 'large' and 'Small' really mean.

Absolutely. 80Hz is just a good starting point for most people, in most circumstances. For some a somewhat lower XO will be better and for others a somewhat higher XO. Measuring and listening will usually reveal which is best.

the funny thing about this is the idea that you are "wasting" the speakers' performance because you aren't pushing them to their absolute extreme limits of performance. I mean, are you "wasting" your BMW because you aren't pushing it to the redline constantly? The speakers are covering, what, like 8-9 octaves? And all you are doing is relieving them of the very lowest one which is the most difficult to produce..... and, of course, it's also the octave for which you dropped hundreds (or thousands) of dollars on a subwoofer!

@JEFF:

 

Jeff - I can do links using the editor - the one below works  for example. But if I look at it using 'Source' in the editor, there are reams of html code! It would make the Linky doc absurdly long-winded - surely it doesn't take all that code to do a simple link??

 

 

f)7. What is ‘LFE + Main’ or ‘Double Bass’ and should I use it? (click here)

Edited by kbarnes701 - 6/14/12 at 10:11am

this probably has more to do with room acoustics than speaker quality. Many, many of the folks in this thread have speakers that can play down to 40-60Hz and lower with ease, but use an 80Hz crossover because you get better overalls system response. As Chris noted a few posts up, that region is dominated by modal issues with the room.... so if things sound better with a 60Hz crossover than 80Hz it's probable that the REAL reason is the interaction of the speakers with the room at those frequencies, not because your speakers can "handle" it better.

I would agree.

With my Denon 3808, I can sit at the MLP and toggle the crossover up and down on the fly while playing various music tracks with known good bass quality. I used Steely Dan's "Gaucho" when I last did this.

Going up and down through the crossover choices yields very different perceived in-room bass response. I found that in my room with my gear (NHT Classic 3, 3C, Classic 2, HSU 1225 sub) I preferred 100 hertz.

Brian

Gotcha, hopefully shortly I will find out as I am getting together some stuff to do REW of my system so I can see what kind of room treatments I need and just see how my system performs as a whole.

Also want to get these graphs before I upgrade my AVR to either one with Audyssey XT or MCAAC so I can see what differences there are in room response with the different EQ's.

I have JTR Triple 12-HT LP speakers (rated down to 65 Hz) in the L, C, R, Wide, and Surround speaker locations crossed over at 80 Hz to four Seaton Sound SubMersive HP's. While I would probably have set the crossovers higher myself, Mark Seaton performed the audio calibration, and I trust his judgement. My previous speakers (Mirage OM-5's) were crossed over at 100 Hz to the SubMersive HP's.

Mark

ya always gotta make us feel inadequate, dontcha?

Yeah, but every day he is seriously weakening the structure of his house. We'll have the last laugh when it finally falls down

I think I see what is happening. Pls stand by ...

Don't click any icons at the top of the window where you enter your post. Just paste the line into the window as is -

f)7. What is ‘LFE + Main’ or ‘Double Bass’ and should I use it? (click here)

If you want to go back after pasting and change the text color or emphasis, you can. But otherwise this is a straight paste operation.

f)7. What is ‘LFE + Main’ or ‘Double Bass’ and should I use it? (click here)
Edited by pepar - 6/14/12 at 11:42am

 

I am agog with wonder...

 

I'm not clicking any icons Jeff - just copying the link from the Word document and pasting it. When I do, this is what I get:

 

[URL="http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/51780#user_A "]A. General Audyssey Issues (click here)[/URL]

 

What's occurring??

Audyssey set my Quintuple crossovers at 60 hz but the audio sounded a little thin to me. I tried the 80 hz and 100 hz crossovers and at 100 the audio was a little too heavy (bass). At 80 hz it sounded just right. Tried various BD clips and everthing came in perfect with the 80 hz crossover. Triple 8 surrounds were also at 60 hz and also changed them to 80.

In my case, "waste" means real money. My speaker manufacturer (PSB) makes a tower and a bookshelf speaker that are essentially the same, except for the number of bass drivers and the rated low end. The difference in cost is $1,500 per speaker. I purchased the tower model. Above 80 Hz, the two models perform essentially the same. So, since I set the crossovers at 80 Hz, I could have had the same results using the bookshelf model, saving myself $3,000... Hindsight is a bitch.

I remember Chris saying he didn't understand why anyone would buy tower speakers any more (for home theater, that is).

John Ashman (Alimental), a former NHT dealer who used to post at AVS quite a lot used to always say "You should only pay for your bass once". I always thought that was a great way to look at it.

Brian

And then we could tell those "My speakers are Large and I paid for them" folks that:

1. Modern AVRs don't have power outputs for subs, only line outs, coz AVR makers know people will buy powered subs will a built-in high power plate amp. To generate high SLP at low frequencies requires a lot of energy.

2. Having bass redirected to the sub(s) makes the in-room placement of the sub(s) not just much more easier (sub-woofer crawl), but also independent of the satellites leaving them in charge of imaging (directional), while subs are in charge of the rumbling (non-directional).

3. 80 Hz (or so) is not just an arbitrary number, it has been set as a target after a lot of experiments when the 5.1 system was introduced that shows our ears start to loose directionality below that frequency. We can still hear the deep tones but can not point out its location.

Because tower speakers tend to go lower than monitors which
A) allows the user to select the crossover that sounds best to them. You don't really want a speaker that starts rolling off at 80Hz with an 80Hz system crossover as it will probably start distorting at high SPLs, affecting the crossover region
B) as has been discussed in THIS very thread, some folks can localize below 80Hz.
It's always nice to simply ignore data that doesn't support our own biases isn't it? Makes our own points seem so much more valid.

The 80Hz figure is no different than the movie industry's 24fps. They selected it as the number with minimal objections that is easiest to obtain.

In the film industry case, 24fps was the lowest frame rate they could use that most folks could view as creating an acceptable illusion of movement without too much objection to the motion artifacts it causes. They chose it to save money. Lower frame rate = less filmstock used = lower costs on filmstock and processing said filmstock. They did NOT select it because it was 'the best'.

In the case of audio, similar reasons were used. 80Hz was determined to be the point where most speaker manufacturers should be able to easily produce z speaker that can play fairly flat at reasonable levels, and the point where people didn't find localization too objectionable. As I mentioned above, we've already discussed in THIS very thread, that studies have shown that stereo bass IS discernible and that the actual lowest frequencies for localization are probably around 45Hz. In my own system, with speakers that can all play flat in the 20-30Hz range in-room at Reference, I find a 40 Hz crossover preferable. But as I said, it's always easier to cite the info that supports one's viewpoints and ignore the ones that don't.

I've personally found that I can localize bass below 80Hz in stereo and multichannel setups. In fact, I never thought about it before that particular discussion but I realised that I can locate the subs in nightclubs even when they're hidden, because I can hear the difference in where the upper and lower frequencies of the bass beat is coming from.

Sometimes I hate this hobby because ignorance is bliss. Once my conscious mind is aware of something, I can't help but be distracted by it. Before avsforums, I didn't know I could localize below 80Hz, had no idea what 'dirty screen effect' was, or 'vertical banding', 'rainbow effect', posterization, high frequency ringing and edge enhancement etc. etc. Sure, all this info and knowledge about proper grayscale tracking, color fidelity and gamma curves, frequency response, modal ringing and reverberations, energy time curves and first reflection points, have all served to help me optimize my own setup and improve its results and my enjoyment of it, but it's also made me much more aware of any deficiencies in ANY setup now.

As far as psychological bias goes, it swings both ways. It's true that some folks may not be able to localize anything below 80Hz (or maybe even higher), and simply prefer to use a lower crossover with their capable speakers 'because they paid for it'. On the flip side though, it's also possible that there may be folks who might be able to localize below 80Hz who would benefit from trying lower crossovers but who refuse to consider the notion because they DON'T have speakers that can play flat that low and don't want to even think about how much it would cost to replace all their satellites with speakers capable of Reference volumes flat down to the 20's or 30's, because as we're all aware, those ARE expensive, and within the same manufacturer's line, speakers that can play flat to 105db down to the mid-20's (if a particular manufacturer even makes speakers that play that low) are going to be far larger and anywhere from 2x to 10x the price of speakers that can play flat to 70Hz. So rather than entertain the possibility that a lower crossover might produce a discernible improvement to them, they prefer to not even consider it so they won't chance learning that their own system may turn out to be less than ideal for their own hearing acuity.

Either case, using lower crossovers simply because you paid for the more expensive, bigger speakers, or dismissing lower crossovers without ever trying them because one's own speakers can't do it, and the prospect of an extremely expensive upgrade is daunting, are both less than ideal. But we all have our own psychological biases.


Max
Edited by djbluemax1 - 6/14/12 at 3:28pm

The stand alone audyssey processor has about 2x the resolution of XT, perhaps a little more. I now have a Denon 4311 with XT32 so I no longer need the external processor (sold it) and I get much more resolution on all channels. It does, in fact, give me very good resuts with just my main speakers that go down to about 32hz (NHT 2.9's) and I'm trying to figure out if I like the multiple sub effect (I have a james sub) or if the system sounds better routing everything below 80hz to the sub alone. It seems to depend on the content...

Let's hold it for a moment Max. Problem comes when we believe in and accept the term "what sounds best for them". The starting point of getting subjective. Meantime, agree, nobody wants speakers rolling off at 80 Hz, but speakers would be hard to be found on the market today that would comply to that lousy spec. Agree?


Hard to believe some folks can localize below 80 Hz, we all share the same ears, don't we? Anyhow, how low can they localize below 80 Hz?


What's the problem with selecting the 24 fps? Any fps above would just be a waste of "machinery", our eyes will benefit nothing.


Speaker makers today can make excellent speakers that can easily go way under 80 Hz. Isn't this the topic discussed here when some folks get hurt for mentioning their speakers should be set to 'Small"? Go figure!

And then such studies on stereo bass have been given up and discontinued. IIRC, Denon 5308 had a feature to route bass from L and R speakers to L & R placed subs, but even that feature did not show up in newer models. Following the model numbering system of Denon this means a model from 2007.

Please feel free to enjoy your system as per your setup.

IMHO, localizing subs and localizing sounds under 80 Hz(ish) is two different things. You know what I mean, eh? On the other hand, since when can an audio system of a night club reach the pinnacle of the carefully set up HT systems of members frequenting this Audyssey thread? Come on, Max! Are they using 5 channel stereo for everyone on the dance floor to hear all the mess?

No more hard to believe than some folks having different vision than others. We don't all share the same ears, nor the same eyes. Given up? David Griesinger and Robin Miller have separately demonstrated the detectability of stereo bass. Since their research hasn't been refuted, what would you have them do? Repeat the same studies and publish their AES papers all over again?

Please provide data or links with tolanrences, say down to 45 Hz, Sanjay.
Did they succeed to sell their science to Denon, Onkyo, Marantz, etc.?

^^^

Most importantly- how is this bass handled at the mixing stages of the big studios? Is it mixed in stereo all the way down, is it summed below a certain frequency and directed to the LFE channel, or what?

Cheers,
SB

This is simply a case of trying to blow smoke. The point is that I can not only localize bass below 80Hz in my own optimized system, I can localize it in other types of setups meaning it's not the perfect or specific placement in my own HT that I can localize, it's the frequencies. If I had stated that I can only localize it in my room, you would have pulled a different argument stating that it's possibly because I know where all the speakers and subs are placed in my own HT.


Replies in bold and underlined


Feri simply likes to forget anything that contradicts Chris, calls Audyssey into question or contradicts his own preconceptions. We're all aware that he follows this thread quite devoutly, and was himself, involved in the discussion about stereo bass, but as is evident from the 2 separate occasions where the discussion came back around AFTER the first time, he has conveniently chosen to forget everything that anyone has referred to including the studies that you linked to. Not much point discussing anything that would contradict Chris K.'s "don't know why anyone would buy tower speakers anymore" with Feri.

Feri, if you REALLY wanted evidence, you can search this very thread. I'm not wasting the time to point you to it YET AGAIN.


Max

P.S. The main reason I chose to post about this is because the same folks keep on repeating the '80Hz' mantra, citing only the stuff that supports their position. They never bring up the fact that there is evidence to support other options/configurations. My posts are simply to even out the playing field so folks can see that there are not only other possibilities, but factual reasons to support them, and they can look it up and choose for themselves
Edited by djbluemax1 - 6/14/12 at 8:26pm

As FilmMixer has already stated (for anyone who isn't aware, Marc is an award winning audio mixer, hence the SN FilmMixer), many/most studios mix film soundtracks with full range front LCRs and subs for additional reinforcement for the LFE and surrounds.


Max

Already provided links to papers by both Miller and Griesinger the last time this discussion came up. It's obvious you didn't read them last time. If you are truly interested this time, do a thread search. They weren't trying to sell their science to Denon, Onkyo, Marantz, etc., just publish the results of their research.

No, no, Sanjay, i wasn't talking about stereo bass, but wanted to know any evidence of the ability of our ears to localize bass below 80 Hz, e.g. even down at 45 Hz. And whether there is really such a huge difference between people's ears or not. If you know of such published research I'd be glad to read it, just like I read all about stereo bass when you posted links.

I see. Thanks.

The same year Miller presented his paper to the AES Convention (2005), a research team from Australia was publishing concurring results:

Localization and Image Size Effects for Low Frequency Sound

"Using four subwoofers, this study investigates auditory image characteristics for one-third octave bands of pink noise in the frequency range 25 Hz to 100 Hz. The subwoofers were located at 90 degree intervals: 45 degrees to the left and right, and in front of and behind the subject. Single noise bands, coherent pairs, incoherent pairs and different frequency band pairs were subjectively assessed. Subjects drew the auditory image as an ellipse on a response sheet. Results indicate that left-right discrimination occurs even at the lowest frequencies of human hearing – a finding consistent with other recent research. ASD and ASW are correlated, increasing at low frequencies for the stimuli tested, and for simultaneous presentation of coherent or incoherent signals."

The paper can be purchased here: http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=13041