"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #1) - Page 1979

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fischer 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbarnes701 

There is no known bug that causes variations in results from different measurements taken in the exact same circumstances. Move the mic 1 inch and you may get variations.

What, specifically, are you referring to by way of variations?

As I described earlier, I feel that the sound is shrinking dramatically and that it has lost this sense of the sound floats freely in the room and the sound is perceived as compressed and lifeless.
But then in between I get a perfect calibration (or whatever it is) where everything opens up again, I had the same phenomenon on my previous preamp (Onkyo PR SC 5507)

I am not sure I am following you. If you got a calibration result that was "perfect", why did you do the calibration again?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fischer 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbarnes701 

I am not sure I am following you. If you got a calibration result that was "perfect", why did you do the calibration again?

Have made some small changes in the room and thought I would calibrate after the new conditions!

OK that makes sense. It's always a good idea to make some notes about mic placement etc when running Audyssey so that you can repeat known good circumstances if necessary.

I'm surprised you are getting very big differences between one calibration and another if you are using essentially similar mic positions for each run and if nothing of any great  significance has been changed in the room (speaker/sub placement etc). Usually there are differences but they are fairly small if a second calibration has been made while using the same mic spots, number of measurements and so on. It's a pity you don't (I assume) have any form of measuring gear so that we could see what is really happening. In the absence of that, all I can suggest is you run Audyssey again, following the Audyssey 101 (linked in my sig) as closely as possible and see if you can recapture that terrific result you had before.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pepar 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fischer 

Have made some small changes in the room and thought I would calibrate after the new conditions!

That is appropriate if the changes involve moving speakers or changing acoustical treatments. It's probably not necessary if the changes were something like moving furniture a little.

Jeff

:)  I think that depends on his degree of Audyssey Obsessive Syndrome... advanced patients report re-running Audyssey because someone borrowed a book from one of the shelves at the back....

Quote:

Originally Posted by asere 

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbarnes701 

 I think that depends on his degree of Audyssey Obsessive Syndrome... advanced patients report re-running Audyssey because someone borrowed a book from one of the shelves at the back....

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now that's funny. I remember when I first got my avr with Audyssey during Christmas we had decorations around the family room and even though Chris with Audyssey told me there was no need to rerun after the decorations are put up I went ahead and reran Audyssey just for peace of mind.

I think you qualify for treatment in the Audyssey Wing of the Neurosis Center LOL!!  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selden Ball 

*sigh*
I wish I had the opportunity to make those kinds of changes....

You and me both, Selden....

I hope the little girl moved out the way before the initial speaker test. I guess she did - I didn't spot her plastered onto the back wall :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by EVT 


Thanks batpig,

I calibrated both systems but for testing I turned off Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume and used the exact same source to test to minimize the variables. I don't have a reliable SPL meter on hand that I can use (just an iPad app) so I didn't conduct any measurments. However, the difference in volume is obvious.

The rooms are in fact very different but it is the larger room with taller ceilings that sounds much louder - that's what's suprising. The larger room 2,650 cubic feet and has hardwood floors, I'm running 8ohm Polk RTi towers with a matching centre, dipole surrounds and back surround speakers. The quieter room is about 1,000 cubic feet but it's carpeted, I'm running 8ohm Energy RC towers with a matching centre and dipole surrounds. Both setups are powered by Denon 331x receivers and I have a 12" Velodyne sub in each room.

Even though I expect the room with the hardwood floors to be livelier I'm surprised at how much louder it actually sounds at the same volume level, is this normal?

Carpets absorb the sound, ever seen carpet in a concert hall, not!  Hardwood floor and wood on the walls check out the "LA Disney Concert Hall"

Audyssey Announces DSX 2

http://www.audyssey.com/about/press-releases/2013/01/10/audyssey-announces-dsx-2-stereo-surround-expansion

I am looking forward to see how good that is! I bet Onkyo will be the first one with it :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wse 

Carpets absorb the sound, ever seen carpet in a concert hall, not!  Hardwood floor and wood on the walls check out the "LA Disney Concert Hall"

1.  Carpets absorb HF sound but do little/nothing for the LF.

2.  Not a valid comparison since the concert hall is a place for music production/creation while the home room is for music reproduction/recreation.  What you are suggesting is analogous to those who make speakers in the materials and shape of a musical instrument with the expectation that it will sound like the instrument when playing recordings.  Illogical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson 

1.  Carpets absorb HF sound but do little/nothing for the LF.

2.  Not a valid comparison since the concert hall is a place for music production/creation while the home room is for music reproduction/recreation.  What you are suggesting is analogous to those who make speakers in the materials and shape of a musical instrument with the expectation that it will sound like the instrument when playing recordings.  Illogical.

Hello Kal

1.  Carpets absorb HF sound but do little/nothing for the LF. Agreed 

2.  Not a valid comparison since the concert hall is a place for music production/creation

I am sorry to disagree.  I am not suggesting anything! I am saying that concert halls are made with a lot of wood that's all, and yes I prefer the sound of a concert hall than a cinema.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wse 

Carpets absorb the sound, ever seen carpet in a concert hall, not!  Hardwood floor and wood on the walls check out the "LA Disney Concert Hall"

That is true, but they generally have absorption and/or diffusion on the ceiling then to compensate. If you have a bare ceiling and a bare floor in a domestic room then you are likely to have problems with reflections. For most of us, with carpeted floors, the floor acts as the absorber and the ceiling is left untreated, giving a balance. If you have a bare floor at home, then it may be worthwhile to treat the ceiling at the major reflection points.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EVT 

Thanks Kal. I suppose it's possible that my perception that the playback volume is lower has to do with the absorption of high frequency sounds. I guess I'll have to pick up a sound meter to see if there is a real difference in volume. I didn't feel the need to get one given that I had just relied on Audyssey to set everything up but the volume disparity in my two HT setups has me curious.

A treated room will usually require a higher setting on the MV than an untreated one - by treating the room you are removing energy from it (absorbing it) so it's logical to expect that it will 'not sound as loud'. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by EVT 

Hey guys, I bought a Denon AVR-3313 about a week ago and I'm quite happy with the SQ. It seems to capably drive my 7.1 setup consisting of 8 ohm Polk RTi towers and matching centre, surrounds, and surround back speakers. The AVR doesn't seem to have any problems delivering clean sound at the reference level.

However, not having heard what Audyssey XT32 can do I was wondering whether those of you who have moved from XT to XT32 feel it would be worth it to spend an additional $850+tax to move up to a 4520. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

BTW, my setup is not in a dedicated HT room, it's in a family room that is not in anyway treated and includes furniture such as a coffee table between the MLP and the center channel. As well, speakers are not necessarily placed in optimal locations (e.g. the sub is off in the front left corner - a full 6 feet away from the front left main speaker). I guess I'm wondering whether upgrading to a better version of Audyssey is worth if the room is never going to be ideal, or in other words, in such a setting is the jump to XT32 likely to be more or less beneficial than for those looking to squeeze the last bit of performance from their speakers in an otherwise ideal environment?

XT32 is a substantial step up from XT, especially in the way it equalises the bass. One could argue that the less ideal the room, the better the electronic EQ you need. 

Here is the difference between the various flavours of MultEQ:

h)2.   What is the difference between the various versions of MultEQ?

Only you can say if it is worth spending the extra, but there is no doubt that XT32 is a significant upgrade over XT (I did that exact upgrade myself FWIW). I heard immediate and obvious benefits to the bass. This was before I treated my room - the difference would, I expect, be more subtle now.