or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › "Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779) - Page 56

post #1651 of 70886
I am really curious to understand why before running Audyssey we need to set the amp gain of the sub to half way or however in a way that will make Aduyssey set the gain of the sub close to 0.
In my system the sub signal is sent to a stereo amp capable of 200 RMS watts per channel on 8 ohms. The amp is connected to a subwoofer with stereo coil. I have wired in series the stereo coil and used the Mono connection on the power output. The resistance of the stereo coil in series is abot 12 Ohms)
The amp has four input plug R & L fixed or variable so you can adjust the gaing form the front of the amp if using variable or not if using fixed.
For mono signal a switch is provided and a single cable can be connected to the L input.
If I use fixed and run Audyssey, the sub is set to about -11 dB.
I have tryed to use the variable and I got to 0 dB sets by Audyssey, but I have a problem with this setting because the gain knob can be turned while sweeping dust and other weird occasions like this.

I wonder why it is better to set the amp on variable. I could understand it if Audyssey sets the sub to the lower limit so you have not other adjusments possible, but beeing -11 dB I have all the room needed to decreas the sub signal using the avr control.

Can some one explain this to me?
Also, if with fixed on the amp Ausyssey sets the sub to -11 does this means that I have all the power for bass that I need for my room, or Audyssey finds that my sub over a certain level suffer distortion and so limits it?

Thanks a lot for your anwers.
post #1652 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordo View Post

Dave
I don't think Audyssey does test the f3 of your sub and apply a high pass filter to it.

I wasn't suggesting that it may apply a HPF to the sub. I was suggesting that it may simply not provide any equalisation below a particular point and simply allow the sub to roll off naturally without trying to extend usable low frequency response. That would not require a HPF.
post #1653 of 70886
And I am reiterating that, regardless of what an EQ is doing, it really is only our EARS and volume control that keeps us from blowing gear downstream from our pre-amps/pre-amp sections.
post #1654 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Chris,

"Our recommendation is to always try and cover an approximately oval shape that is centered at the main listening seat and extends out to about the width of the front L and R speakers."

This is different than what I had understood you to recommend for two rows of seats, where the centroid of the measurement positions would be between the two rows.

So how about these 8 positions:

L spk--------------C spk--------------R spk

<----------------- 11 ft ----------------->


---------------X------------X


-----------X---------1------------X


-----------X---------X------------X

Hi Noah,

I don't see how this is any different. If you just move the number "1" measurement position to where you will be seated most of the time then the oval shape still holds. The first position is important because of the delays and trims that are calculated from there. The other positions do not have to be so exact. Just move the mic to the approximate locations you have indicated and things will work out fine.

Chris
post #1655 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by enzo-ita View Post

@drSheeas,
Thanks for your comments.

I used HPF because I read that the difference between xover and HPF or LPF is that xover means a Y separation were one signal is separated into two different signals and sent to different devices, while HPF or LPF cuts above or below not sending the cutted signal anywere.


This is a doubt I have and it comes from a statement made by Chris.
If you do not mind, I prefer to wait until Chris or someone else confirms it.

ciao



A crossover consists of two filters: (1) a highpass that pass high frequencies to the satellite and (2) a lowpass that passes the remaining low frequencies to the subwoofer. Several considerations go into designing a proper crossover so that the summation of the acoustical signals coming from the satellite and subwoofer remains intact, but that is a topic for another time.

The definition of a "Large" speaker is that it is not crossed over to the subwoofer. This is just a confusing way for receiver manufacturers to say: "do not apply a highpass filter to this channel and do not send the frequency range below the highpass frequency to the subwoofer".

Chris
post #1656 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayreonaut View Post

How does Audyssey MultEQ identify and deal with the low frequency limitations of a subwoofer?

I have no circuitry to prevent over excursion, etc.

[Denon 888 - BFD (cuts only) - 1800W amp - 4 x 18" IB sub]

It deals with it in the same way it deals with the low frequency limitations of a main speaker: by finding the rolloff and not applying boost correction below that point.

Chris
post #1657 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by matnick2127 View Post

I guess for the MultEQ pro installation. The 885 has that feature and the 705 doesn't. Is it really worth going through the trouble of getting rid of my 705 and buying the 885 with a power amp?

Or simply buy another AVR that has all the features you want. Frankly, I do not understand why you think you need AudysseyPro. It is better in a number of ways but not everyone needs it.
post #1658 of 70886
Chris,

I posted this a few days ago and a couple of fellow AVS members gave me some input but I wanted to get your feelings on my Ausyssey setup .



Quote:


I just purchased a new set of rear speakers, so I re-ran Audyssey
at seven different locations all within about two to three feet of
each other, starting with the main seating location first.

I have a fairly small room: 13x10 (10' ceilings) - no accoustic treatment
of any kind - just furniture.

I'm using an Onkyo PR-SC885P Pre-Pro.

My speakers and specs. are as follows:

Definitive Technology Mythos ST's(fronts) 14Hz-30KHz
Definitive Technology Mythos Ten(center) 31Hz-30KHz
Definitive Technology Mythos One's(rears) 20Hz-30KHz
SVS20-39PCI Subwoofer 20Hz-100Hz (+/-3db)

After Audyssey calibration settings:

Subwoofer: Yes
Mythos ST's: Full Band
Mythos Ten: 100 Hz
Mythos One's: Full Band
LPF: 120Hz
Double Bass: Off


I watched 300 after calibration and was very impressed with Audyssey's results. My only concern is the Full Band setting on the fronts and rears.
I have read numerous times on this thread about changing the speakers
to small regardless of the Full Band setting from Audyssey/Onkyo.

Is this accurate? If the speakers are capable of a Full Band signal
shouldn't the above settings apply?


I think Definitive Technology is a little generous when it comes to
their frequency range regarding the Mythos line. I just don't want
to damage my speakers by sending them a full range signal when
in reality they can't handle it, but my system sounded the best it
ever has last night with the above settings.

Am I just being paranoid?

Thanks in advance.

I have since set my rears to small(X@ 80hz) and turned double
bass to "On". I was afraid of damaging my rear speakers by leaving
them at Full Range. After the change it seems that the front of the
room is more bass heavy now. My subwoofer is located directlly behind
my front right speaker.

I actually liked the original Audyssey settings of Full Range for fronts
and rears with double bass "off". The sound was much more dynamic
and the bass did not sound localized.

Any thoughts or ideas?
post #1659 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Or simply buy another AVR that has all the features you want. Frankly, I do not understand why you think you need AudysseyPro. It is better in a number of ways but not everyone needs it.

My Denon 3808CI has Audyssey Pro, but I'm having problems finding anyone in San Diego that actually performs the Pro calibration. I sent an e-mail to Audyssey and they said they are 'researching' it. A couple of days has passed and no information yet.

My HT is cozy, 10x12, and I've installed super chunk bass traps in all four corners, 2x4' OC703 panels at all FRPs, and one panel along each side at 45 degrees where the wall meets the ceiling.

Do you think given my room, that the "Pro" level calibration would make a noticeable difference over the built-in self EQ wizard? If not, then I won't stress about not fully using all MultiEQ XT features, although I am a geek at heart and would like to maximize the use of my gear.
post #1660 of 70886
Quote:
The Marantz SR7001/SR8001 arrived the year after those models came out. Do the Marantz models already have built-in this new method for high subwoofer resolution although it is only MultEQ and not MultEQ XT?

Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

No, but the next round will as will all MultEQ and MultEQ XT products from now on.

Chris

So the Marantz xxx2 series has a better Audyssey than the xxx1 series ?
If so is it just with the sub, or is there more involved ?


thanks
post #1661 of 70886
Chris,

"I don't see how this is any different."

Maybe I just missed it, but I don't recollect the part about position 1 being at the center of the set of measurements; until that last recommendation I would have only done measurements even with or behind it.
post #1662 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Chris,

"I don't see how this is any different."

Maybe I just missed it, but I don't recollect the part about position 1 being at the center of the set of measurements; until that last recommendation I would have only done measurements even with or behind it.

Hi Noah,

Far be it from me to speak for Chris, but it is my understanding (as Chris said) that position 1 is uniquely handled only in that the speaker delays are calculated from it. Otherwise, it is a measurement, like any other, that goes into the Audyssey spatial averaging algorithm. Therefore it makes sense to have it:

1. At the most used listening position, and
2. Near other possible listening positions, so that the sound arrival times from the different speakers are not far off from optimum.

Regards,
Terry
post #1663 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by yngdiego View Post

My Denon 3808CI has Audyssey Pro, but I'm having problems finding anyone in San Diego that actually performs the Pro calibration. I sent an e-mail to Audyssey and they said they are 'researching' it. A couple of days has passed and no information yet.

My HT is cozy, 10x12, and I've installed super chunk bass traps in all four corners, 2x4' OC703 panels at all FRPs, and one panel along each side at 45 degrees where the wall meets the ceiling.

Do you think given my room, that the "Pro" level calibration would make a noticeable difference over the built-in self EQ wizard? If not, then I won't stress about not fully using all MultiEQ XT features, although I am a geek at heart and would like to maximize the use of my gear.

What speakers do you have and where are they placed, especially the subwoofer.
post #1664 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

What speakers do you have and where are they placed, especially the subwoofer.

I have Energy Veritas v2.4 mains, v2.0 center, and v2.0 rear surrounds. The subwoofer is a SVS PB-12 Plus. The speakers are placed pretty close to the Dolby 5.1 recommendation configuration, and due to room limitations the subwoofer is behind the primary listening area.
post #1665 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by yngdiego View Post

I have Energy Veritas v2.4 mains, v2.0 center, and v2.0 rear surrounds. The subwoofer is a SVS PB-12 Plus. The speakers are placed pretty close to the Dolby 5.1 recommendation configuration, and due to room limitations the subwoofer is behind the primary listening area.

IMHO, the only reason you might want to consider AudysseyPro is because of the sub placement. OTOH, if you are happy with the sub's integration/performance, you might not.
post #1666 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

IMHO, the only reason you might want to consider AudysseyPro is because of the sub placement. OTOH, if you are happy with the sub's integration/performance, you might not.

Ok thanks for the input! I probably won't sweat it then if I can't find a good local Pro calibrator.
post #1667 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyssey View Post

It deals with it in the same way it deals with the low frequency limitations of a main speaker: by finding the rolloff and not applying boost correction below that point.

Thanks, Chris!

I guess that means that Audyssey finds the roll off frequency based on room response?

If I first use a BFD to tame some room peaks, does it help Audyssey to recognize the LF roll off frequency that I choose?

In my room, I have peaks near 45 Hz before EQ.
After BFD EQ, my LF roll off is around 17 Hz.
Does this help Audyssey?

My BFD equalization: Attachment 103329
LL
post #1668 of 70886
I just confirmed my appointment to have the Audyssey Pro setup done on my Integra 8.8. I am assuming the tech is very capable, but it has been interesting as initially my dealer rep said that the tech would read 3 locations. Thanks to Chris' input and others from this forum they agreed that they would do as many I needed to be done to do a good job. If I remember Chris' advise this should be 12-16 points. I have a Integra 8.8, Def Tech Mythos ones for my front. Mythos three center, Super Cube 1, Gems for side rears and Paradigm in-walls for back rears in a 7.1 setup. Again, I trust the tech, but what should I make sure happens? My setup is in a 23 X 20 basement room with 7.5 ft. ceiling.

Thanks for your help and input!
post #1669 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Aiken View Post

I wasn't suggesting that it may apply a HPF to the sub. I was suggesting that it may simply not provide any equalisation below a particular point and simply allow the sub to roll off naturally without trying to extend usable low frequency response. That would not require a HPF.

Sorry. Yes I see what you meant now. Problem with my subs below f3, is currently they move well beyond their rated excursion, and that really worries me.
post #1670 of 70886
I'm running my Onkyo 875 with the Audessey for quite some time without any complaints .... I tought!

I hooked my 5.0 (DefTech ProMonitor 1000's) with the SVS PB13 Ultra sub on the Onkyo and ran the calibration.

All sounds well, BUT it actually sound a bit "boomy'
I changed the EQ setting from Audessey to "none" on the Onkyo and altough I loose a part mid-range, the bass much more subtile, it actually sounds good too.

Basically 2 question :

1) CAN Audessey make a sub sound "boomy" ? Shouldn't it do the opposite ? It should measure room-response and apply accordingly ? So attenuate and enhance certain freq's to try to flatten the response ?

2) IF by audible test the sub sound "ok" without Audessey in that particular room, did anyone try to run audessey WITHOUT SUB and then just activate it later and set the setting to "subwoofer yes" with all X-over settings.

Audessey certainly improved on the overall sound image, just the low-end bass was noticable more boomier WITH then WITHOUT....

Any hint & tricks on this ?

Thanks!
post #1671 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvanhambelgium View Post

Audessey certainly improved on the overall sound image, just the low-end bass was noticable more boomier WITH then WITHOUT....

Any hint & tricks on this ?

Thanks!

I have a similar issue with my Denon 3808 and SVS PB-12 Plus. After the first calibration the bass did sound boomy. Audyssey put the sub at -11dB and I normally run the sub 3-5dB hotter than the rest of the channels.

After re-running the setup a couple of times, I don't notice the boom as much. This is still with adding 3-4 dB to the sub over what Audyssey setup.

I didn't notice the same boom when I used Audyssey on my Onkyo 905. So I think it just needs a bit more tweaking and re-running the setup to really get it dialed in properly.

But I'd like to know if there's something more scientific I can change to help with the response.
post #1672 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvanhambelgium View Post

1) CAN Audessey make a sub sound "boomy" ? Shouldn't it do the opposite ? It should measure room-response and apply accordingly ? So attenuate and enhance certain freq's to try to flatten the response ?

It should be better than when bypassed IF you did the calibration well.

Quote:


Any hint & tricks on this ?

This thread is full of them. That's what it is for.
post #1673 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Any hint & tricks on this ?

This thread is full of them. That's what it is for.

The first post has a FAQ link that doesn't work,,,,I don't look forward to reading an encyclopedia sized thread...

I would like to see a link on the first post with all the TRICKS/HINTS..

I'm trying to decide between a Denon [AVR-3808CI] & [AVR-2808CI] to be used as a Pre and I'm running into a dead end street, as far as trying to figure out which version of Audyssey is worth the money or is over kill.

HH
post #1674 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by HuskerHarley View Post

The first post has a FAQ link that doesn't work,,,,I don't look forward to reading an encyclopedia sized thread...

I would like to see a link on the first post with all the TRICKS/HINTS..

Someone's gotta wanna do the work.

Quote:


I'm trying to decide between a Denon [AVR-3808CI] & [AVR-2808CI] to be used as a Pre and I'm running into a dead end street, as far as trying to figure out which version of Audyssey is worth the money or is over kill.

OK. Well, I do not think that any version is overkill, I would recommend MultEQ XT as optimum for most users, regardless of whether it is Pro-compatible or not.
post #1675 of 70886
Hi Terry,

Not sure I get your point, as you didn't say anything about the recommendation that position 1 be at the center of the cluster of measurements.

What do you mean by optimum arrival time?

Only position 1 is used to set distances/delays, so the farther other listening positions are from it, the bigger the arrival time discrepancy they have, and I don't see anything that can be done about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Montlick View Post

Hi Noah,

Far be it from me to speak for Chris, but it is my understanding (as Chris said) that position 1 is uniquely handled only in that the speaker delays are calculated from it. Otherwise, it is a measurement, like any other, that goes into the Audyssey spatial averaging algorithm. Therefore it makes sense to have it:

1. At the most used listening position, and
2. Near other possible listening positions, so that the sound arrival times from the different speakers are not far off from optimum.

Regards,
Terry
post #1676 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

I would recommend MultEQ XT as optimum for most users, regardless of whether it is Pro-compatible or not.

Thank-U,,,This is the kind of info I like,,,Short and to the point.

HH
post #1677 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Hi Terry,

Not sure I get your point, as you didn't say anything about the recommendation that position 1 be at the center of the cluster of measurements.

What do you mean by optimum arrival time?

Only position 1 is used to set distances/delays, so the farther other listening positions are from it, the bigger the arrival time discrepancy they have, and I don't see anything that can be done about it.

Right, I phrased that badly. By "optimum arrival time" I simply mean that there are no time discrepancies, and this will only be true for position one.

As for clustering, you don't need to provide a center. The clustering process finds its own. The Bharitkar and Kyriakakis algorithms (as I understand them -- please correct me if I am off base, Chris!) find multiple clusters. If one were to use a single cluster, then this would be just like using an ordinary average of all the measurement positions. But you can derive a better filter if you use multiple clusters, where a single measurement can have fuzzy set membership in more than one cluster.

This is all in the public literature, if you would like to wade through it!

Regards,
Terry
post #1678 of 70886
I have just got my Denon 3808 with my Monitor Audio Silver speakers and ran the Audyssey config at 8 locations. Distance and trim all seems to be spot on I guess i just want to double check that the eq on my speakers seem pretty normal? THey all seem to dip around 100hz and at the high end but i assume this is just my speakers? Anything to do with sub bass/phase or looks normal?

Below are some Audyssey EQ screenshots:





post #1679 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by HuskerHarley View Post

I would like to see a link on the first post with all the TRICKS/HINTS..

HH

There is an excellent Audyssey summary in post #2 of the Onkyo 705 thread. The summary is sufficiently general to apply to other receivers, aside from the Onkyo 705.
post #1680 of 70886
Quote:
Originally Posted by uforia View Post

I have just got my Denon 3808 with my Monitor Audio Silver speakers and ran the Audyssey config at 8 locations. Distance and trim all seems to be spot on I guess i just want to double check that the eq on my speakers seem pretty normal? THey all seem to dip around 100hz and at the high end but i assume this is just my speakers? Anything to do with sub bass/phase or looks normal?

It looks pretty normal. The dips are likely caused by the room modes.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › "Official" Audyssey thread (FAQ in post #51779)