"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 192

Altering any of these Xovers or the gain trims won't alter the MultEQ filters.

Definitely raise your LFE filter to 120Hz.

For the LCR Xovers, I would initially try 80Hz for all of them for a while until you get used of the sound, then try them at 60Hz. BTW, I'm assuming the centre is designed to be mated to the mains.

After you've sorted out the fronts,listen to the system for a few days before altering the loudness of the sub. If you do alter it, then do so with the gain trim (even though you've managed to get it to 0dB). You can quickly and easily bring it back to where it was if you want to.

I posted a few weeks ago with the same results from Jeff .I am not against Audyssey but heard better results when calibrated by Jeff.I had been running Audyssey for at least 5 months and calibrated the way every one on this post says to with good results.I am hearing better results from my calibration with Jeff.This does not mean i do not like Audyssey but that in my home theater i like these sounds much better and i am not trashing your points or Audyssey.

Actually, I calibrate to SMPTE 222M which is the same target house curve as Audyssey EQ.

Some of the reasons I can beat it follow.

1. More flexibility to fix problems than Audyssey including moving speakers, changing subwoofer settings and correcting source settings
2. Much higher quality microphones and preamplifiers than Audyssey and the ability to listen to how the various settings are working
3. The ability to listen to the sound and isolate problems that Audyssey cannot including things like loose speaker grills and wires
4. I can find all wiring errors unlike Audyssey
5. I can identify failed drivers and have them repaired
6. The impulse model correction method used in Audyssey EQ adds audible distortions to the sound

I have also worked on many Audyssey and other automated systems. None have been superior to a high quality manual system adjustment.

Yes many of us can move speakers, change settings, find wiring errors and failed drivers. And maybe you can get that extra 1%. If you are targeting the same house curve I'd rather upgrade my sub.

The difference is much greater than 1% and the cost is much less than a subwoofer. The minimum fee is $100 to fix peoples audio.

It was noted in the write-up that raising the speaker crossovers does not affect the calibration. Should I emphasize the statement?

Mark

It should be emphasized that people should read your write-up.

Thanks. I will change it to 120Hz.


Do you mean center Xover should be in line with main?
As per JBL spec. Ec25 freq. response is 80Hz-20Khz, hence I thought I would set it to 90Hz.


I know it is loud, as while watching TV (with DD), at -40db, the things were shaking (while watching Live free or Die hard)

Mark,
Yes. This will help.
Again thanks for the steps.

What is this referring to?

I believe it refers to post #5701:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...95421&page=191

I have a Klipsch 5.1 setup with the RW-10d sub.
Audyssey set my sub at 24 feet, while the actual distance to position #1 is 11 feet.
Is 24 feet a reasonable distance setting?

Is there a way to get the numeric values of the EQ settings?

When I use the check setting option on Denon 1909, I get the bar graph for all the channels. I tried to derive the numeric values, but it was hard.

Does anyone know?

Thanks

I have the Denon 3808 and my system is 5.0 without a sub. Does the Audyssey work with my environmet and is there anything that I have to take into consideration using the Audyssey ?

Thanks in advance

Kullervo

Anyone knows if Marantz AV8003 is prepared for a Audessey Dynamic EQ update (as the Denons?). Thanks in advance.

Not sure what source settings would need to be changed that one would not have already changed, and sub settings are dealt with prior to running Audyssey. As for moving speakers as far past the home theater design stage as most are is usually not an option. Subs, maybe, can be moved a bit, but again decor and aesthetics usually dictate.


A big 10-4 on this one. Which is one of the big benefits of the Audyssey Pro kit.

Yeah, me too and most of us here for that matter.


This really does not seem to be part of the "competition" between you and Audyssey, does it? It is a service you offer/perform, but you aren't hanging your hat on these as to the reason the two posters here that mentioned you like your results better than Audyssey's, are you?


I would like to know more about this. Chris??

Well. I'll agree that you can add value by moving things around in the room and fixing problems with broken speakers. It's not always easy for the HT owners to hear those things (as has been documented on this thread a few times), so having an expert in who can tell you that your midrange is busted is very helpful. And I agree that it is likely that you use better mic and preamp than is included with most AVRs - although a lot of the potential problems with the mic are obviated by at least the calibration that is built in to the AVR MultEQ system.

What I don't buy is your last point about the distortion. Do you have any measurements to back that claim?

Yes, and how does one raise that possibility tactfully with someone complaining about a technology intended to duplicate the sound heard by the mixdown engineer and the producer/director? No one wants to think that they don't know what is "right", much less prefer something "wrong."

This first step in the troubleshooting done when someone has problems has to be the most thankless task that Chris has to do to help members correctly set up - and appreciate - Audyssey.

just my $.02.

- Jeff

I left his very last point off of my reply because I probably already sound like I'm badgering him, and I certainly would have sounded like that if I had addressed it.

Hi Jeff,


Actually, the Audyssey curve is not SMPTE 222M, nor should it be for home theater environments. It has too dramatic of an HF roll off and is intended for studios. An additional translation is needed for the more typically reverberant home environment. It can work for properly treated rooms, but most are not.



True, the software can not move speakers.


The provided mic may look cheap, but it is within ±2 dB of the industry-standard B&K 1/4". We had to create a special manufacturing process at the factory to reject those that don't meet this spec.


Yes, these are good points


This is completely wrong. I will be happy to discuss the math behind it over a beer at CEDIA and can also send you a copy of our publications and point you to our text book on the subject. It is precisely the opposite: Parametric EQ filters add distortion because they can't control the phase response. The narrower they get the more audible the phase distortion. FIR filters on the other hand control both time (phase) and frequency response and do not add such distortions.

Furthermore, simplistic approaches that take a single position measurement or an average of a few measurements don't work very well. Imagine measuring two positions where one has a 200 Hz bump and the other has a 200 Hz dip. The simplistic averaging method will look at that and say: "the response is flat at 200 Hz" and the filter will do nothing. So, the right way to approach that requires weighting of the filters after examining how many locations have the problem and with what severity.

Finally, let me say that we believe strongly in the value of qualified installers and have never promoted a strategy of "automatic EQ will make installers obsolete". In fact, we have established a strong installer program that provides much more powerful tools for capturing room data and customization. This is being enhanced even more at this upcoming CEDIA.

I hope you can find some time and stop by.

Chris

Yes, because your sub has built-in filters that add electrical delay to the signal in addition to the acoustical delay from the actual distance.

Chris

Hi,

Yes, it will work just fine.

Chris

One more question about tweaking my set up, if I may.
After auto setup and then adjusting crossovers, etc., do we re-enable LPF on the sub itself (the Klipsch RW-10d fetures an LCD with digital setting options)or leave it set to off because 120hz is now set in the receiver?

Leave it off.

I felt the need to put in my $.02 here about the perceived Jeff Meier vs. Audyssey "shootout". Jeff calibrated my Sony SXRD TV and my audio system last year (with a Yamaha RX-V1400 receiver at the time) and did a FABULOUS job. He has also been a valuable reference about different types of equipment that I have looked at upgrading.

Jeff steered me toward the Denon and Onkyo receivers, and I am now the proud owner of a Denon 1909. The Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume features are everything I expected them to be, and I am very happy with the MultEQ calibration. That being said, I have no doubt that Jeff could make my system sound even better than my manual calibration.

Isn't it wonderful that we have both options: great technologies from Audyssey and excellent calibrators like Jeff Meier and others?

Don Price

Hi Don,

I couldn't agree more. It's not about shootouts. It's about providing installers and consumers with the right tools to fix the problems that prevent good sound from happening. We spent the past 12 years researching the fundamental acoustical and signal processing problems behind room acoustics. Jeff (and other good installers) have spent at least that, if not more, calibrating real-world rooms and have huge experience. I can't imagine a better combination to achieve great sound.

Chris

You're referring to the automatic Audyssey setup or a manual calibration using onboard parametric filters as what you're very happy with?

I was referring to the Audyssey MultEQ setup.

I thought so, but wanted to be sure before I asked you why you have no doubt that he could make your system sound even better?

That is odd because I find your target curve matches 222M variant that I use. Here is an example of an average result from Audyssey with this compensation that makes a flat line if you a following that house curve. 222M of course has three different variants.

 

Initial.pdf 58.42578125k . file