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 1629

post #48841 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

The only problem is that Audyssey does not explain DSX that way at all, but instead choose to wear the cloak of science and research as a marketing device.

I take issue with that pejorative characterization. Are you suggesting there is NOT science and research behind their choice of speaker locations and processing methods?

You may disagree with the conclusions they draw but it's not a canard.
post #48842 of 70896
Rather than reading just 256x or 512x would like you to believe it does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

+1

While, on another note it seems MultEQ has reached its limits with XT32. Most probably an XT64 version will never appear owing to the simple fact that filter resolutions with several 100,000 taps would be meaningless for the human ear.

Long live XT32!! As the saying goes: "There are no old jokes, only old people, ...for a new born baby every joke is new!"
post #48843 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by moparfan View Post

Rather than reading just 256x or 512x would like you to believe it does.

Would you like to elaborate?
post #48844 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Yeah, thanks Keith, I just read Kal's article. You know what were the most interesting parts? The cases when Kal is comparing to Audyssey! Biased or convinced?

Kal? Where are you when we need you?

P.S. BTW, does Trinnov have something like DynEQ for folks listening below reference level? I didn't even see a word mentioning ref. level calibration!

I only know what I have read. I don't know how it compares with XT32 or even if it does - but I would enjoy those additional features such as the virtual speaker placement options if they were built into XT32. That's where I'd like to see XT32 going if it's true that they can't refine the filters any further - then let's have loads of these useful additional features!
post #48845 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by moparfan View Post

Rather than reading just 256x or 512x would like you to believe it does.

Hi there, care to expand on what you'd like to tell here?
post #48846 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Short of you being a film mixer, I don't see any way for you to make [the assessment that reference is not enough to give us what the mixers heard]. Honestly, aren't you just expressing an opinion like the rest of us?

Sure, but based on a naive understanding of acoustics rather than of corporate strategy

My point is that frequency response and even what MultEQ does in the time domain, whatever it is, are not the only relevant properties of audio. There's spectral balance (at different volumes), there's spatial balance (at different volumes), there's reflections (in and of themselves and when compared to direct sound), there's speaker location and orientation, and much, much more of lesser apparent importance.

EDIT: I wonder if the Schroeder frequency should have been included in the above list; does anyone know if and how we perceive a lower vs a higher Schroeder frequency? markus767?
post #48847 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I only know what I have read. I don't know how it compares with XT32 or even if it does - but I would enjoy those additional features such as the virtual speaker placement options if they were built into XT32. That's where I'd like to see XT32 going if it's true that they can't refine the filters any further - then let's have loads of these useful additional features!

Biased to A., eh? No wonder!
post #48848 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

the point Rene was making (I think) is that the "irony" only exists when people try to project their own conceptions of what Audyssey (the company) is ABOUT. It is not ironic at all unless you superimpose your own value judgement about the company's goals, which don't actually align with the reality of what the company is doing. The vast majority of the company's product offerings are NOT about "reference" anymore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

I take issue with that pejorative characterization.

Really? Because I have been objecting to your pejorative characterizations, but had the thought that pointing things like that out were out of line in a friendly discussion like this. Lighten up. No one is trying to offend your, apparently, delicate sensibilities.

Jeff
post #48849 of 70896
say what?

do you think Roger's characterization was NOT pejorative towards DSX or Audyssey?

trust me, my sensibilities are unoffended
post #48850 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

say what?

do you think Roger's characterization was NOT pejorative towards DSX or Audyssey?

I think his assessment was accurate. I would have said ... and did a page or so ago say ... it differently. Less involved customers might not notice or care, but most of us on this thread have had revelatory experiences with their room correction technology. To have lived and breathed "reference" (and striving for reference) for as long as many of us have, DSX comes as a surprise. Why would serious home theater lovers who have gotten as close to what the mixer heard as we ever will - short of being in the mixing stage - now want our theaters to sound like one of the great performance halls of the world?

I understand that Audyssey needed to pivot, but fixing a problem that didn't exist seems like an odd way to go. DEQ was a very "sound" addition to their reference product.

Jeff
post #48851 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

BTW, does Trinnov have something like DynEQ for folks listening below reference level?

Nope, and nor do other room correction systems like Dirac and ARCOS.
post #48852 of 70896
Bonjour Keith,

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

... It's a bit like going to the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa and preferring to look at it while wearing green-tinted glasses. One may like that look, but it is not the look that Leonardo intended you to see when he created the painting.

The next time I go into Louvres, you can be sure I'll stop by la Joconde and I'll put by brown tinted glasses on - as and I'm sorry -, I prefer this color for sun glasses... and I'll post a report here as to how people looked at me...

Bon WE Ã* Toi,

Hugo
post #48853 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Nope, and nor do other room correction systems like Dirac and ARCOS.

Then Audyssey is best buy! On another note, IMHO even if there was no MultEQ, DynEQ alone would be worth a million by itself! I know, I know what you'd like to say, I'm just theoretical!

On a third note, I always wonder how such highly reputed makers like Yami and Pio with their less capable Room Correction systems are able to survive on the market? No need to reply!

Well, on a last note for today, ever since I got engaged with Audyssey, my amazement has always been focused on DeQ! IMHO, while EQing by MultEQ is a rather simple and obvious approach, the things DynEQ does to our listening environment is a kinda magic, especially when it does it in real-time, i.e. putting program materials on the proper loudness curve at a given Master Volume setting in regards of being loud or soft. Kudos to Audyssey!
post #48854 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

I take issue with that pejorative characterization.

My comments were in no way intended as pejorative. That they may cast a negative light on DSX or Audyssey is the consequence of hyperbolic advertising. That was their deliberate choice.

Quote:


Are you suggesting there is NOT science and research behind their choice of speaker locations and processing methods?

Not in the least. I only take issue in their claims that it enhances accuracy, which is patently absurd once one simply listens to it.

Quote:


You may disagree with the conclusions they draw but it's not a canard.

If it walks like a duck...
post #48855 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Why does this matter if you optimize to a one person preference in a one person listening position?

It may not in that case. I would submit that most home theaters have multiple seats. Furthermore, it is also the case that even the sound quality in the lone MLP can be significantly improved with the proper coordination of multiple subs.
post #48856 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

It may not in that case. I would submit that most home theaters have multiple seats. Furthermore, it is also the case that even the sound quality in the lone MLP can be significantly improved with the proper coordination of multiple subs.

Right. And you seem to be about about your preferences in your MLP. Hence the confusion.
post #48857 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

Right. And you seem to be about about your preferences in your MLP. Hence the confusion.

Sorry. If you are making a point, it is lost on me.
post #48858 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Then Audyssey is best buy!

Doesn't it makes you wonder why no other room correction system has such a feature?
post #48859 of 70896
sigh... not to belabor this, but since you asked:

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

To have lived and breathed "reference" (and striving for reference) for as long as many of us have, DSX comes as a surprise. Why would serious home theater lovers who have gotten as close to what the mixer heard as we ever will - short of being in the mixing stage - now want our theaters to sound like one of the great performance halls of the world?

and this is the part about "superimposing your own value judgement" on what they are doing. What you think DSX is supposed to do doesn't fit into what you feel "serious home theater lovers" should want and/or enjoy, so you don't understand why they would even do it. There is clearly an implied value judgement there. Thus, the "irony" that you perceive exists only within that context of your projected values/desires.

to me (or Rene or presumably the many many folks who love their DSX setups), it doesn't seem ironic at all. It's just another step in Audyssey's stable of offerings to give kick-ass sound to their customers, any of which you can choose to use or not. There are probably plenty of "purists" who think the same thing about Dynamic EQ.


Quote:


I understand that Audyssey needed to pivot, but fixing a problem that didn't exist seems like an odd way to go.

see, that's where the disagreement is, and I don't think Roger (not to put words into his mouth) agrees. But using Roger's words to describe the "problem":

Quote:


BTW, I happen to agree with the premise: Research has shown that accurate spatial sound rendering requires more information than what 5.1 surround sound systems provide.

he just doesn't happen to think Audyssey's solution does a good job or is the right approach.

so the "problem" does indeed exist, it just may not FOR YOU... which is totally cool BTW It doesn't bother me at all that you don't want to use DSX in your system.

the problem, as Audyssey's marketing copy on the DSX page states it, is how to make the home theater experience "more immersive and lifelike" and to increase the "perceived sense of envelopment".

You may have the (rare) luxury of a fabulous setup in a great room with perfectly positioned speakers, so may not feel this is a problem FOR YOU, but there are many rooms and setups where this is a problem, where it feels like you aren't fully immersed and you get distracted by "gaps" between the fronts and surrounds, where the speakers are too localized and get "distracting" when effects pan around the room. DSX and the "surround envelopment processing" in my experience really does a great job of mitigating this, and the many happy users would agree as well. What Keith perceives as a "negative impact on the surrounds" for many people makes the surrounds disappear and become less distracting, allowing them to be more "immersed" or "enveloped" by the movie.

Some (you, Keith, Roger) don't like it, and that's fine too. And certainly an alternate solution is to work on room acoustics and optimizing your "standard" 7.1 layout, which probably can also achieve the same goal when well executed.

But it just strikes me from your "irony" comment and other jabs at DSX that your feelings go beyond "I don't like it" to "I don't think they should have even done it in the first place because it's antithetical to what *I* feel the company is supposed to be about". And that distinction is what I think rubbed Rene the wrong way to begin this "brouhaha".
post #48860 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

sigh... not to belabor this ..

You're right. I'm wrong.

Jeff
post #48861 of 70896
well jeez, now who's the one getting offended and not wanting to have a friendly discussion?

necesitas otra cerveza, amigo!
post #48862 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Kal? Where are you when we need you?

What?
post #48863 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Don't touch the gain after running Audyssey. You just need to set the SPL to 75dB (not minus 75dB which you said before) on the screen. To set it to 75dB adjust the sub gain control until it is reading 75dB. If you were setting it to -75dB before it's no wonder you got no bass

My apologies, its 75dB not minus.
Yea i read on the manual that after setting up the auto-cal not to touch the settings on the sub.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

How do you mean "when you turn down the gain on the amp to 75dB"? The 75dB figure you are looking for is on your screen - it's the first step of the Audyssey measurements.

How can you have an amp for your sub (which I assume is therefore a passive sub) and also have a gain control on the sub itself (which would make it an active sub)? Just do exactly what Markus suggested earlier and you will be good to go.

I have a THT subwoofer, its a huge 36x36x24 subwoofer. They are like the Danley DTS-10 subs, the THT is considered a monster in the world of Folded horned loaded Subwoofers. The sub does not have an inbuilt amp, but is powered by an external amp the Dayton SA1000.

Now when i turn on the Audyssey auto-calibration, during the very first step at Subwoofer Level Matching, I start the SW Test after which the subwoofer roars for few seconds and then i get a message saying
"Please adjust the level of your active subwoofer unit so that the level indicates approx. 75dB
In this case do i have to turn down the gain knob on my external amp? And when i do turn it down to bring down the value to 75dB (which is initially 98d marked in a red box), when i bring down the gain knob on the amp the numbers slowly start falling, and by the time it shows 75dB, the gain knob on the amp is almost 1 on a scale of 10. Thus making the sound from speakers and subwoofer like a hand held radio after tha auto-calibration.

I used to have an Onkyo SR-TX604 amp earlier, which also used audyssey calibration, but with that.. the speakers/subs sounded better than the imax theater.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

When running Audyssey and the first screen asks you to set the sub level to 75dB, it has to be set on the sub itself. You can't access the trims at that stage for obvious reasons.

Again, as i said, i cannot set the gain on the sub, as there is no knob or control of the amp on the sub. My subwoofer has an external Rack mountable amp the Dayton SA1000.



And here's the picture of the subwoofer.



I am not sure, is it cos the sound coming from the subwoofer is so massive the audyssey reads it as above reference level??

I do get a feeling I am doing something wrong, audyssey has tuned many a THT subs, i am not sure where i am messing up.
post #48864 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by holyindian View Post

My apologies, its 75dB not minus.
Yea i read on the manual that after setting up the auto-cal not to touch the settings on the sub.



I have a THT subwoofer, its a huge 36x36x24 subwoofer. They are like the Danley DTS-10 subs, the THT is considered a monster in the world of Folded horned loaded Subwoofers. The sub does not have an inbuilt amp, but is powered by an external amp the Dayton SA1000.

Now when i turn on the Audyssey auto-calibration, during the very first step at Subwoofer Level Matching, I start the SW Test after which the subwoofer roars for few seconds and then i get a message saying
"Please adjust the level of your active subwoofer unit so that the level indicates approx. 75dB
In this case do i have to turn down the gain knob on my external amp? And when i do turn it down to bring down the value to 75dB (which is initially 98d marked in a red box), when i bring down the gain knob on the amp the numbers slowly start falling, and by the time it shows 75dB, the gain knob on the amp is almost 1 on a scale of 10. Thus making the sound from speakers and subwoofer like a hand held radio after tha auto-calibration.

I used to have an Onkyo SR-TX604 amp earlier, which also used audyssey calibration, but with that.. the speakers/subs sounded better than the imax theater.



Again, as i said, i cannot set the gain on the sub, as there is no knob or control of the amp on the sub. My subwoofer has an external Rack mountable amp the Dayton SA1000.



And here's the picture of the subwoofer.



I am not sure, is it cos the sound coming from the subwoofer is so massive the audyssey reads it as above reference level??

I do get a feeling I am doing something wrong, audyssey has tuned many a THT subs, i am not sure where i am messing up.

XT32 on my 4311 sets the gain on my Submersive HP to a few clicks from off as well, and I have seen alot of similar posts questioning whether this is typical, so that's not so shocking. I am curious whether Audyssey set the crossovers and speaker levels like it did in the pictures you posted, or did you manually adjust afterwords? After I run Audyssey on my system, its sets all my speakers to large and crosses them all over at 40Hz, then I need to manually adjust them to small and then cross them over at like 80 or 90 hz after the set up is complete. If you have capable full range tower speakers I would wonder why its crossing them over so high and crossing over the main L/R channel the highest.
post #48865 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjackkrash View Post

XT32 on my 4311 sets the gain on my Submersive HP to a few clicks from off as well, and I have seen alot of similar posts questioning whether this is typical, so that's not so shocking. I am curious whether Audyssey set the crossovers and speaker levels like it did in the pictures you posted, or did you manually adjust afterwords? After I run Audyssey on my system, its sets all my speakers to large and crosses them all over at 40Hz, then I need to manually adjust them to small and then cross them over at like 80 or 90 hz after the set up is complete. If you have capable full range tower speakers I would wonder why its crossing them over so high and crossing over the main L/R channel the highest.

No, i have not made any manual adjustments after the auto-calibration, infact after the auto-calibration, i am sitting on the internet looking all round for tips completely dejected with the audyssey output.

Yes the speakes are full tower, and extremely capable, they are Definitive Technology Mythos ST. After auto-cal they were automatically set to small. I did not do anything.
What is the point of high end sub eq calibration when Audyssey turns down the entire sub bass. its as good as hearing audio on a hand held radio.
post #48866 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by holyindian View Post

No, i have not made any manual adjustments after the auto-calibration, infact after the auto-calibration, i am sitting on the internet looking all round for tips completely dejected with the audyssey output.

Yes the speakes are full tower, and extremely capable, they are Definitive Technology Mythos ST. After auto-cal they were automatically set to small. I did not do anything.
What is the point of high end sub eq calibration when Audyssey turns down the entire sub bass. its as good as hearing audio on a hand held radio.

I am not an Audyssey expert but I think there is something funny going on. Maybe someone else can chime in, but I think its weird where it has your crossovers set. If they are full range speakers, IIRC, it should be setting them to large and then crossing them at 40 Hz, and then you manually reset them to small and cross them over higher. IMO, this merits some investigation.
post #48867 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post


On a third note, I always wonder how such highly reputed makers like Yami and Pio with their less capable Room Correction systems are able to survive on the market? No need to reply!

I have an MCACC system and I've switched it out for Audyssey XT, and I can't tell a difference. Both setups sound equal to me. Both sound better than no processing. Part of this could be that I am rather lucky to have a good sounding room as far as bass goes. The room design more or less has it's own bass traps as a side effect of the strange architecture. Maybe Audyssey would do better with a more troublesome room, but in my setup, it doesn't sound any different from my Pioneer setup.
post #48868 of 70896
I didn't see any new preamp/processors with XT32 announced at CES. Did I miss an announcement?

Steven
post #48869 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

well jeez, now who's the one getting offended and not wanting to have a friendly discussion?

I was summing up what I read in your post.

I had explained my position on DSX, and even allowed that others may like it. Your post, tome that it was, not only explained why you were right, but why I was wrong.

That is not the way to discuss or have a friendly discussion.

Quote:


necesitas otra cerveza, amigo!

Creo que no, senor.

Jeff
post #48870 of 70896
Quote:


That is not the way to discuss or have a friendly discussion.

well I'm sorry you feel that way but that's a total mischaracterization of my post. No need to be petulant. As you say -- I "even allowed" that you can still NOT like it if all you got out of it is that you feel I think you are "wrong" for not liking DSX, then you aren't even trying to read what I'm saying.

obviously when you accused ME of being the one who has delicate sensibilities you were accidentally looking in the mirror
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)