"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1956

As a side note batpig, can you explain in plain English why only the front speakers + sub are important? Once there is the measuring gear why the rest of the speakers in the system are not needed to be "looked at"? (Even up to an 11.x setup!) The well-known method of cross-over splice setting/blending by way of sub distance tweaking comes to mind. But with the newly discovered PNP measuring gear each and every speaker + sub splice can be identified, eh!? Could it be that after the measurements the "well-known" method may be changed to tweaking each speaker's distance while keeping the sub distance unchanged? Just thinking out loud!

No, I can't really, but it does seem obvious to me that the surrounds are less important than the front main speakers.

For me, it's simply an issue of practicality, as I don't have a laptop with HDMI output and am not going to go through the hassle of upgrading simply for this feature. I have only a 5.1 setup and my surrounds are small speakers with limited placement options. I am mostly interested in being able to measure in order to understand and optimize sub location and the mains/sub splice, plus also see about optimizing my center channel positioning. And also (down the road) possibly tweaking some room acoustics issues with some tasteful acoustic treatments.

I'm certainly not going to argue that, for someone who is interested, they should NOT try and pursue measurements / optimization on all channels. But for ME this is the most practical and efficient way to get started on the stuff that's most important.

A quibble: I think that how much weight you should give to the audio response of the surround speaker channels depends on what source material you like to listen to. Some multichannel music discs place the listener in the middle of the musicians. As a result, they make extensive use of all channels.

FWIW, before I moved my center channel to a different stand (where it was placed about 4" higher, and due to stand location, probably about as much physical distance closer to the MLP), I found that tweaking the center's distance helped me more in the crossover than additionally manipulating the sub distance per se, when I tested the calibration with OmniMic. However, that was after moving the (roughly equidistant) two sub distances from 6.1 to 10.3 and 8.2, respectively, in examining the mains/sub splice. By moving in the center from 16.3 to 15.7, I got about 2-3 db lift on the center in the crossover region as a result, but I didn't need that tweak after moving the speaker onto my new stand (a TV stand where the center sits on an open shelf, below our mounted Panny VT50).

I agree with Selden that if you listen to MC music (probably 30% of our listening, whether BluRay, DVD, or DVD-Audio/SACD), being able to fine-tune placement of the surrounds, and determine whether treatments might help, is worth the effort. IMO it's always been a 'missing link'. Besides, the corners where our Gem XL surrounds are might be one of the few areas when I can get away with traps/treatments due to that pesky WAF. There's a room driven peak at about 200 Hz to 400 Hz for the pre-calibration surrounds, but since we're limited on room placement, I didn't prioritize getting rid of it with the EQ.

Not that I've bothered testing, but how much actual bass response are you going to really get for surrounds below, say, 150 Hz on MC music, let alone movies? With our Gem XLs, I've never gotten an Audyssey Pro recommendation below 120 Hz, and if I really went with the optimal recs, I'd do closer to 200 Hz.
Edited by sdrucker - 1/2/13 at 2:40pm

I would like to think that audio response of a speaker (be it a front, center, surround, height , wide, whatever) should be least dependent on source material. An acoustically well setup speaker system in a room should perform well with any material, coz the speaker does not know, nor does it care what the source material is. It just performs,...well or not so well.

Hi Stuart, me thinks the amount of actual bass response one can get in the surround channels with a given program material is hard to predict, surely depends on the recording engineers' intentions. Meantime, Audyssey Pro's recommendations for a crossover of 120 Hz is another thing, speaker and placement and room dependent. In my case with a living room setup and with the commercial version of Audyssey the AVR set my surrounds to a 60 Hz crossover which I could easily change to 80 Hz. Playground fixed, so "let the music play".

And that is why I swap in an "alternate" pair of surrounds that are identical to LCR, are mounted at 110 degrees and get their own Audyssey calibration loaded when I listen to hi-res MCH.

As long as you don't mind swapping calibrations by using save/load on your AVR...

I'd actually thought about doing that with my Mythos ST fronts, so I could run them "full range" for two-channel stereo and Redbook CDs, but I personally prefer listening with Dolby PLIIx Music with the center and real subs involved for almost all of my music listening. I'd figured that with a powered center, I'd get more even (e.g. flatter) bass response by having the psuedo-sub in the center help with bass and mid-bass. YMMV of course...

It's "worse" than that; I reload Audyssey calibrations with Pro. My prepro doesn't have a feature to save/load multiple cals. But there's no doubt that the 5 identical monopoles (surrounds at 100 degrees) are the best for MCH and the tripoles at 90 degrees are the best for everything else.

Jeff

How long does that take? And do you have separate Curve Editor files, and post-Pro distance tweaks you keep handy each time you switch speakers?

Ouch indeed....it would almost, but not quite justify separate AVRs if you wanted to stay outside of the 4311/4520 world.

Okay. I'm likely to annoy people by asking a repeat question. But........ how much better is MultEQ XT over 2EQ, subjectively. Read the Audessey site looked at the graphs.... etc. But I bought a new Denon with considerable weight favoring the Audessey upgrade in my decision: with Bass correction especially. I want tight sexy comfortable bass, not the boom boom in my zoom zoom ear shattering of a less than perfect room! I want to be impressed: will I be!?!? thanks guys!

Hi mogorf, thanks for the quick respond. Got the same answer from Jason over at HTS.

2EQ is the lowest most basic level of Audyssey EQ. To my knowledge 2EQ does not include any bass EQ, but the MultEQ XT has it.
Additionally the better Audyssey EQ has more correction points available in the calculation of its filter curve (per channel) allowing for better correction results.
Thus MultEQ XT is much more preferable over 2EQ.

Well all this talk about PNP access to REW has gotten me interested in wading into the measurement waters. I was able to successfully navigate the Service Menu of my Plasma yesterday, so I have new found faith in my technological abilities! I did notice that the DSP UMIK-1 appears to also be on back order as of today. From their website: "This product is currently not available.It will be available again on: 29.01.2013" Looks like AVSers are storming the gates and manufacturers of both microphones can't keep up with the demand
Edited by ggsantafe - 1/4/13 at 5:52am

Yes, several of us are foaming at the mouth.. .

Yes, several of us are foaming at the mouth.. .

I'm sure many of you are aware of this thread here on AVSForum: New mic option from the good people at Minidsp

Just in case someone missed it.

Thanks, Feri. All things considered, this seems like a better option due to the built-in PNP, at least since REW support is something the MiniDSP folks are aware of. For us "laypeople", can someone explain what the practical consequences of the UMM-6 having "truly individual calibration", 0/45/90 degree axis, and Polar Response (as per jevansoh) would have over the UMIK-1, if anything, for typical use on a mic stand?

Looking forward to working with our new room assessment paradigm some time in February

(not that REW is that new, but being on the ground floor of an evolving "best practice" methodology for pre and post-Audyssey (Pro) runs is exciting - hopefully I won't "REW" the day I did this, pun intended)
Edited by sdrucker - 1/3/13 at 11:31am

How do the microphones themselves compare? Assuming built-in support will come for the UMM-6 in REW, which mic would be the better choice?

Some people measure by pointing the mic straight up (fine for lower frequencies) while others measure by pointing the mic at a speaker (better for higher frequencies), so it helps to have cal files for 0 degrees and 90 degrees (in case you fall into either category or want to do both).

Interesting...I've always focused primarily on the lower (<200 Hz) frequencies with OmniMic, particularly post-Audyssey calibration adjustments to the crossover points with the distance tweaks, so I've done almost exclusively the straight-up mic. However, it makes me wonder if I'm understating the impact that I'm getting from adjusting the Curve Editor (where I've focused more on mid and higher frequencies) that way, when examining a more full-range FR plot. OTOH, I'd think that "straight-up" not only better matches what is recommended for Audyssey, but with multiple speakers, is less confusing.

I also did some quick reading on UMIK and REW, on the MiniDSP UMIK sub-forum and the dedicated REW forum on Hometheatershack respectively. On second thought, the learning curve looks steep enough that I might buy the USB mic, but hold off putting much time into it until the hard-core tweakers (I mean you, AJ and Keith ) get some experience with the USB Mic and REW working together with the ASIO4All software, and the growing pains are worked out on AVS in context for us less DIY types that are primarily interesting in augmenting our Audyssey setups than generating DSP filters. It certainly doesn't look as "plug and play" as OmniMic.

Of course, we won't really know until there's more hands-on experience .
Edited by sdrucker - 1/3/13 at 5:35pm

I have a calibration file for each of the two spkr configs and ONE edited target curve that I apply regardless. Remember, it is only the sub distances/levels that need to be verified and all other channels are loaded correctly. From start to finish it probably takes 10-12 minutes. But I don't swap configs that often ... maybe 2-3 times a month.

Jeff

FWIW, I always thought that whether a mic was flatter at grazing angle versus pointing at the source disappears when you apply an appropriate calibration file. If the mic picks up highs better
"head on" and the cal doesn't correct as appropriate, then the system hears a hyped treble and turns it down, no? SO you get darker corrected response?

If you are using the mic "straight on" then the 0 degree cal file should be loaded. Ditto the 90 degree usage/file.

Jeff

Absolutely, Jeff!

I can teach you all you need to know!

I'm more than happy to help you. Remember, it's thanks to you and your posts that I got started down this route, and ever since I bought your old AS-EQ1 I've spent hours a day every day on learning about all this stuff and applying it to my system.

So I have you to thank for changing my life and causing me, a lively and young person who used to spend time amongst the living and outdoors, to become a recluse and spend all my time in my basement, err..dedicated HT performing measurements and tweaking things all day long!

Let me know when you're ready, and let's DEFINITELY put all this in the new thread.

--Jason

Perfect!

The only things I'd like to add is a FAQ and a common misconception list with the "correct" answers and I feel your points should be in the first post or two because threads like this become long and can also become the perfect forum for trolls and folks that just want to argue and I do not want any part of that, and I'm sure the rest of you feel that way, too.

I also want to take this opportunity to apologize for my lack of responses yesterday. I had a previous engagement and just couldn't get back on here until now.

Hopefully tomorrow we can get the new thread going. Now we just need a title. Suggestions??

--J

Sure! After re-reading what I typed, I can see how it may be a bit confusing.

Before I begin, I must re-state that I am in talks with JohnM the author of REW and as soon as I can get him a UMM-6 mic (they're on backorder right now) I believe he will put it in the drop-down list of supported/PNP mics in a new beta release.

I cannot guarantee this or speak for him, but I do feel he is responsive to this and very willing to accommodate as soon as he can get his hands on one. He's in Europe and so I have to get one and ship it to him, but will do this as soon as they are available again hopefully at the end of this month.

Now, the differences are few, but there are differences.

First, strictly speaking about setup of the two mics in REW, if you get the Mini-DSP mic, you will literally just fire up REW and in the preferences page you'll select the Mini-DSP mic as the mic you're using. At that point it will automatically ask you for the path to your calibration file that came with the mic. That's it! You're set up and ready to go.

If you get the UMM-6 mic, you will have to manually load the calibration file(s) that Herb sends you, which is literally the matter of a few extra clicks.

However, there is one more step with the UMM-6 mic (at this time). You must ALSO set the mics SPL readings (calibrate the mic) against an SPL Meter. As long as you have an SPL meter (any kind will work and the most common is a RatShack model) you're good to go.

The cool thing about the Mini-Dsp Mic is the SPL calibration data is already loaded in REW for this mic. So no SPL meter is necessary.

As long as you have an SPL meter though, it is an extremely easy/simple process and REW literally walks you through each step. When you go into preferences to set your inputs/outputs (mic/speakers) you will be reminded to calibrate the SPL and it will walk you through each and every step and offer help/a tutorial along the way with each step spelled out.

It literally takes less than five minutes to set up the UMM-6 Mic but it takes less than 5 seconds to set up the Mini-DSP mic.

In the interest of being complete, I'll also identify the differences in the mic's again.

The prices are the same within a few dollars either way.

The BIG difference is the UMM-6 Mic is hand calibrated against a specific reference mic at 0, 45, and 90 degrees by a human who knows his stuff and takes his time. He gives a detailed report of what he's done and each calibration file is separate and easy to load.

The Mini-DSP Mic is "supposedly" calibrated, but they don't specify any details other than that it is only calibrated to 0 degrees. What this means is, when taking measurements, you will point the mic towards the speaker, or in the case of taking a measurement of the L/R speakers plus sub, at the same time, you'd point it towards the center channel.

This doesn't compare well to the way we take Audyssey measurements, at 90 degrees, by pointing to the ceiling.

So... If you don't mind a few extra steps and have (or have access to) an SPL meter, the UMM-6 Mic is clearly the way to go, especially for all you get for the same price.

However, if you want quick and easy, plus if you don't want to wait, as the Mini-DSP Mic is in stock and ready to ship as of the time of this post, you can get that mic and do measurements at 0 degrees "calibrated" or you could still perform 90 degree measurements, but make sure you do NOT load the calibration file when you do that.

Condenser mics are pretty accurate except for the very low lows and very high highs most of the time, so this isn't necessarily a "huge" deal unless you need absolute accuracy or really want to know exactly what's going on.

For comparative measurements only, you cannot go wrong with either one.

You can always send the Mini-DSP Mic back to Herb at CSL at any time to have him do a calibration on it for a nominal fee, so if you do want quick-n-easy and don't want to wait, that may be a good option to get started.

Hope this helps and hope it clears things up a bit.

--Jason

Oops, forgot to answer this other question...

You will need an RCA cable and a 1/8" (3.5mm) male to 2 RCA female splitter or y-cable.

You can get these at Radio Shack for about $5.00 or Monoprice for about $1.00.

You will plug that into your line out connection on your Netbook then plug ONE RCA cable into the splitter/y-cable and the other end into the AUX connection on your AVR/Pre-Pro leaving the other RCA jack open/not used.

That's it! It's that simple. You'll be able to easily run measurements on your L/C/R speakers this way.

--J

Not BP, but there is one very important reason, Feri, that folks may only wish to concentrate on the front speakers.

When you get into treating your room, you must start with a goal.

Just putting up a bunch of fuzzy stuff (insulation/treatments) is NOT the way to go and could easily cause more problems than it fixes.

You must pick (we'll talk more about this in the new thread, as quite honestly this is the FIRST step, even before plugging in the mic for the first time) from several different acoustical models so you establish a goal in which to achieve.

Here is a great article from RPG which describes the different models and gives some examples. http://www.rpginc.com/docs%5CTechnology%5CPresentations%5CStudio%20Design%20From%20Mono2Surround.pdf

If, for instance, your room is set up like mine, where you "critically" listen to 2-Channel audio but also have a 7.1 setup as you watch movices/tv in the same room, you may want to design to LEDE or RFZ standards (Note: This does NOT mean a live end and a dead end; in fact, there are very strict standards with this model), which is what I've done.

If, however, your room is mainly geared towards multi-channel music/movies, the LEDE/RFZ concept may not necessarily apply.

In my case, I only measure and treat for the front L/R speakers as I know that whatever "bad" may come from my treatment to get my stereo music to sound just right wouldn't be nearly as bad as a totally untreated room, so overall there is improvement in all channels/speakers.

This is definitely something which we should talk more about in the new thread and if the consensus is that I should start it, I'll do so as soon as we all agree on a title.

If, however, one of the pros, who can dedicate more time on a regular basis like you, Keith, Jeff, AJ, etc would like to start the thread, by all means go ahead and do so.

I promise to contribute as much as I possibly can each and every day, no matter who starts it.

Looking forward to discussing this more...

--J

This makes total sense to me and is one reason I am hesitant to give up my Denon 5805CI because I can easily switch between surr a or b and I'm looking to implement a similar setup as I'm getting more and more multi-channel music.

If you guys haven't checked out the Pink Floyd Immersion boxed sets of Dark Side/Wish You Were Here, I strongly recommend it.

--J