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 1729

post #51841 of 70896
Check my sig for how we could differentiate the FAQ and Setup Guide ...
post #51842 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

I
But it seems the OP is under the impression that the subs need to be equidistant to the LP with XT and that's why he has limited placement options. Not too clear though. To the OP: the subs do not have to be equidistant to the LP.

As XT can't set individual delays for two subs independently, if they are not equidistant from the MLP, how does one get around this limitation? Levels can be adjusted with reference to the MLP regardless of where the subs are placed, but delays can't.

This will be a FAQ question so I am interested in the definitive response - I have always been in the 'equidistant' camp so far...

EDIT: I quickly checked this on Ask Audyssey and Chris advises setting the subs equidistant with XT.
post #51843 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by D Bone View Post

I think a mention in the FAQ to adjusting the sub trim only in the AVR, and not the sub itself would be a great addition.

Done - thanks. In fact it’s the same wherever you do it - but doing it in the AVR trim settings enables an easy return to a known starting point later, if you want to go back. Chances are if you change it on the sub itself you'd have to re-do the calibration to get it back to reference.

EDIT: there are also Dynamic EQ issues of course. I *think* DEQ 'knows' if you have changed the trims. Anyone able to elaborate? Thanks.
post #51844 of 70896
Are two subs located in a room strictly on aesthetics better than one single sub (also placed for aesthetics)? If not, then two subs should collocated at the best single spot allowed/dictated by those aesthetics.

I'm askin'.
post #51845 of 70896
FAQ updated. 3 new questions. I'd appreciate it if someone would look at the "how do I set up dual subs" question near the end and comment on it for me.

I will number the questions for easier reference once the guide is more or less finished. Not doing so now because I may change the order about to perhaps group similar topics together. Ultimately the questions will be hyperlinked (thanks jdsmoothie).
post #51846 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

FAQ updated. 3 new questions. I'd appreciate it if someone would look at the "how do I set up dual subs" question near the end and comment on it for me.
.

?? How do I connect two subs?? ? That one?

"Connecting" would be a subset of "setting up" ...
post #51847 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post


Likely in the Audyssey Setup Guide ....

III. Dual mono (LFE) Subwoofer Setup

A. Place the subwoofers symmetrically within the room, if at all possible.

B. Place the subwoofers at identical distances from the primary listening position, if at all possible.

Yep, I think that's where he got it from. Perhaps helpful if no measuring gear but irrelevant otherwise.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


As XT can't set individual delays for two subs independently, if they are not equidistant from the MLP, how does one get around this limitation? Levels can be adjusted with reference to the MLP regardless of where the subs are placed, but delays can't.

This will be a FAQ question so I am interested in the definitive response - I have always been in the 'equidistant' camp so far...

There are different approaches out there and the number and similarity(identical vs. not) of subs will impact the approach.

Delays are dealt with by measuring and adjusting distance in the AVR and phase on the sub to optimize the crossover.
post #51848 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post


Delays are dealt with by measuring and adjusting distance in the AVR and phase on the sub to optimize the crossover.

Gooddoc, care to expand on the issue highlighted above before it goes into the FAQ. IIRC, general consensus it that the phase on the sub should be defeted, or at least set to 0 degrees.
post #51849 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Are two subs located in a room strictly on aesthetics better than one single sub (also placed for aesthetics)? If not, then two subs should collocated at the best single spot allowed/dictated by those aesthetics.

I'm askin'.

What do you mean by "placed for aesthetics?".

If you mean what I think, which is they are just placed wherever they look good, then it's pure luck if it works out. Could make things far worse or far better. It's easy to get 30+ dB nulls at the LP with 2 poorly placed subs.

As to colocating a 2nd sub with an existing sub, in this Audyssey thread I assume that the greater good is the best response over multiple seats. My sample size is small, but having had the opportunity to setup and measure several very different rooms that went from single to dual subs, I can say definitively that the improvement to SQ over the seating area after adding the 2nd sub was far greater than what Audyssey XT or XT32 was able to do to with the single sub.

As I said, I'm no expert, just reporting my experience to date. Of course YMMV.
post #51850 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by [Europe]Boogiem View Post

1. I dont mean line of sight to listener is blocked. Door will be closed I mean that there is not a free line of sight from the front speakers to the wide speakers and since it is supposed to handle room reflections I guess if the reflection from the front bounce in the oven there will be a timing issue (i refer to wide speaker on the left side in picture A between oven and door). If i raise it the tweeters for fronts and wides will be at different heights (about 30-40cm) which is not acc to DSX spec, so wonder what is worst

2. Out of intrest, which reciever do you have. I plan on the Integra 80.3 pre, could be that there is a difference in how good it handles assymetrical setups?


3. Ok, good to know. Think his name was only DjBlu (not Max in the end)

Thanks
Boogie


1) A 30-40cm height difference will be less noticeable. The DSX Wide speakers basically reproduce what the Front speakers are playing, but with a slight delay (and perhaps a slightly different frequency response (not sure about the last, but with separate amplification, I can turn off the amps for my front speakers separately, and what the Wide speakers are playing sound like the Front speakers). BTW, in placement A, would it be possible to place the speakers along the DSX lines, BUT place them equidistant to the MLP? Basically, the Wide speaker would end up at about the corner of the oven. In particular, I would place the front speakers so they are even instead of the pictured placement where the Right speaker is closer to the listener than the Left etc.

Actually, looking at the door placements, if you could potentially move your couch closer to the screen, it appears you would potentially be able to place the speakers on either side of the oven.

2) I'm using an Onkyo 5008, so essentially, an 80.2 with built-in amps and the 5008 is not Audyssey pro-capable. The XT32 is the same though (as are the DACs), so unless Audyssey Pro is better at handling asymmetric speaker placements, they would be about the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Max - this is a great reply to a question I have seen here on a fair number of occasions in one guise or another. With your permission, I would like to lift your excellent reply wholesale and add it to the FAQ.

No problem, and my mistake on the 20db headroom. That's what I get for posting late at night and not proofreading while 20db of headroom and -30db test tones are bouncing around in my head as I type.


Max
post #51851 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post


Gooddoc, care to expand on the issue highlighted above before it goes into the FAQ. IIRC, general consensus it that the phase on the sub should be defeted, or at least set to 0 degrees.

I certainly will, but I'm off to see Lorax in the theater with my kids and if I don't stop writing in this thread my wife is threatening to smash my phone ...but she has to catch me first .
post #51852 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

What do you mean by "placed for aesthetics?".

If you mean what I think, which is they are just placed wherever they look good,

Yes, where they look good .. according to someone in the household with veto power over such things.
post #51853 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

What do you mean by "placed for aesthetics?".

If you mean what I think, which is they are just placed wherever they look good, then it's pure luck if it works out. Could make things far worse or far better. It's easy to get 30+ dB nulls at the LP with 2 poorly placed subs.

As to colocating a 2nd sub with an existing sub, in this Audyssey thread I assume that the greater good is the best response over multiple seats. My sample size is small, but having had the opportunity to setup and measure several very different rooms that went from single to dual subs, I can say definitively that the improvement to SQ over the seating area after adding the 2nd sub was far greater than what Audyssey XT or XT32 was able to do to with the single sub.

That's my point. Adding a second sub, and not placing BOTH of them for optimal room mode smoothing .. loses yardage. Someone adding a second sub under these circumstances might (would?) be better off collocating with sub #1 rather than placing the second sub aesthetically. If my thinking is correct, then this is basic and unrelated to Audyssey. But it would simplify life for less-than-XT-32 owners.
post #51854 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

That's my point. Adding a second sub, and not placing BOTH of them for optimal room mode smoothing .. loses yardage. Someone adding a second sub under these circumstances might (would?) be better off collocating with sub #1 rather than placing the second sub aesthetically. If my thinking is correct, then this is basic and unrelated to Audyssey. But it would simplify life for less-than-XT-32 owners.

Look at it this way:

Best = Duals optimally placed, (requires measurements)
Luck of the Draw = Duals, randomly placed, (without measurements, statistically likely to be better, but possible to be worse)
Last Resort = Co-located, (only for the unlucky, or measurement-challenged)



Craig
post #51855 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

Basically, the THX Reference standard calls for average SPLs of 85db with 30db of headroom for a maximum per-channel SPL of 105db in the satellites (+10db for a maximum of 115db for the LFE channel).

Audyssey originally used an 85db test tone for the calibration, but received numerous complaints about how loud the calibration tones were (especially since many users performed the calibrations at night when their room was quietest), so Audyssey switched to using a 75db test tone for the calibration (perceptually half as loud and much more tolerable).

So there you have it. The avr sends a series of 75db chirps to each speaker and subwoofer. It measures the actual SPL received by the calibration mic at the MLP (Main Listening Position). If the result at the MLP for a particular speaker is 71db, the avr's trim for that speaker will be set at +4db. If the mic reads an SPL of 77db for another speaker, the trim value is set to -2db.

Since subwoofers usually have volume knobs, the calibration process asks the user to set the sub's volume knob to a position where the mic reads closest to 75db at the MLP before continuing the calibration.


Max

Ok, I understand this and appreciate the response very much. However, there is still something I do not understand -

I have read in several places that "reference level" is 83db...one of those places being the Ask Audyssey website, and it was written by an Audyssey rep. So, since we set the subwoofer to 75db, does it mean that Audyssey is actually not calibrating to reference level, but instead 75db, which is less than reference level?
post #51856 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by KtrainHurricane View Post


I have read in several places that "reference level" is 83db...one of those places being the Ask Audyssey website, and it was written by an Audyssey rep. So, since we set the subwoofer to 75db, does it mean that Audyssey is actually not calibrating to reference level, but instead 75db, which is less than reference level?

With due respect, whenever an Ask Audyssey website it quoted it is essential to provide a link, unless otherwise it might be considered as something that did not happen. Agree?
post #51857 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by KtrainHurricane View Post

Ok, I understand this and appreciate the response very much. However, there is still something I do not understand -

I have read in several places that "reference level" is 83db...one of those places being the Ask Audyssey website, and it was written by an Audyssey rep. So, since we set the subwoofer to 75db, does it mean that Audyssey is actually not calibrating to reference level, but instead 75db, which is less than reference level?

Audyssey test "chirps" (or beeps, boinks, whatever) are output at 75dB, but Audyessey calibrates its setup so that 0 volume on the master volume control equals "Reference Level" which you say is 83dB, while others say 85dB.

Cheers,
SB
post #51858 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by KtrainHurricane View Post

I have read in several places that "reference level" is 83db...one of those places being the Ask Audyssey website, and it was written by an Audyssey rep. So, since we set the subwoofer to 75db, does it mean that Audyssey is actually not calibrating to reference level, but instead 75db, which is less than reference level?

Perhaps you are referring to the two different volume scales?

Relative volume scale: -81db to +18db (reference = 0db)
Absolute volume scale: 1 to 99 (reference = 82)

From Chris (Audyssey):

For the record, the SMPTE reference is 85 dB SPL (C, Slow) for –20 dBFS. There is SMPTE RP 200 that mentions –18 dBFS so that it matches the EBU standard.

In any case, MultEQ uses 85 dB for –20 dBFS as the intended level.
post #51859 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by KtrainHurricane View Post

Ok, I understand this and appreciate the response very much. However, there is still something I do not understand -

I have read in several places that "reference level" is 83db...one of those places being the Ask Audyssey website, and it was written by an Audyssey rep. So, since we set the subwoofer to 75db, does it mean that Audyssey is actually not calibrating to reference level, but instead 75db, which is less than reference level?

Can you post a link to the page on the Audyssey site referring to it?

I think you're still not understanding things.

When studios record and mix audio to the THX film standard, the standards call for average SPLs of 85db with 20db of headroom for a maximum possible SPL of 105db from any satellite speaker measured at the listening positions (made a mistake in the other post stating 30db of headroom, but the maximum SPL of any speaker channel is 105db except the subwoofer LFE channel which has a maximum allowable SPL of 115db).

So when they say Reference level is 85db, they mean an average of 85db, with swings that could be as loud as 105db, but a quiet movie could very well have average SPLs below 85db for the majority of the movie.

In order to calibrate the system for this, Audyssey originally encoded the test tones at an 85db digital level. When you're talking about digital levels, bear in mind that all data is encoded as 1's and 0's, meaning that there is an absolute maximum level that can be encoded. This maximum absolute level, when played back on a sound system, requires the sound system to be calibrated so that it produces 105db at the listening position.

You could of course, have a system with gigantic speakers and 2000watt amplifiers to produce whatever SPL you'd like. You could make the system so loud that it hit 140+db (instant hearing damage), but to reproduce audio to THX Reference standards, the maximum possible SPL from a single channel cannot exceed 105db at any seating position.

In order to calibrate the system to do this, you can digitally encode a signal that is -30db from the maximum. As mentioned, in binary form of 1's and 0's, there is an absolute maximum level that can be encoded. Likewise, depending on the resolution, you have X amount of steps that you can encode for the volume. You thus can encode an audio signal so it is 30db below the maximum possible volume.

When you play this -30db signal, you then measure the actual SPLs at your seating position. If it is higher than 75db, then your speaker is playing too loud, and the sound system's trim/gain needs to be reduced (eg, if the system measures what should be a -30db or 75 db signal, and reads an actual level of 79db, then it needs to reduce the speaker trim by 4db), to bring that speaker in line with the THX Reference standard. If the SPL measured at the seating position is too low, then the trims/gain need to be increased.

You can encode a calibration signal at whatever level you like to calibrate the system. You could encode a signal at the maximum 105db and see if it measures 105db at your listening position. No one does that for several reasons,
a) 105db is ridiculously loud, and a test tone at that level would scare the heck out of most people, wake everyone in the house if you do this at night, and wake the neighbors if you live in an apartment.
b) you need a VERY capable sound system to reproduce 105db across the frequency range. Encoding a calibration signal at those levels can easily lead to blown drivers on less capable systems.

You could also encode a signal at 45db and measure to see if your system is reproducing it at 45db at the MLP. The problem here is that the ambient noise floor in most dwellings is around 40db, so you wouldn't be able to reliably confirm that your sound system is reproducing the level accurately because it's too close to the level of the background noise.

Audyssey initially used a test tone encoded at -20db from THX Reference maximum, so it should measure at 85db at the listening position, but this was considered too loud by the original users, so Audyssey switched to using a test tone encoded at -30dbfrom maximum, which should measure at 75db at the listening position.

As far as 83db Reference goes. The only time you usually hear of this figure is the few folks like Bob Katz advocating it for standardizing levels in the music recording industry. Unfortunately, as of this time, the music recording industry has NO official standardization for levels. If all the studios conformed to a set standard, you would never need to change the volume levels on your equipment, since once it was set, your system would reproduce the levels as the audio engineers meant it to be heard.


Max
post #51860 of 70896
^^^^^^ so I gotta ask....r u saying Audyssey is right or wrong ?
post #51861 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by toofast68 View Post

^^^^^^ so I gotta ask....r u saying Audyssey is right or wrong ?

I must not be explaining it clearly enough. I'll try to simplify it further.

OK, first off, as has been noted by other posters, there are 2 distinctly separate questions/issues here. Unfortunately for those looking for answers, asking a question with an incredibly vague "somebody somewhere said something" is of ZERO value.

So here are the 2 DIFFERENT possible questions

1) You're discussing the difference between the Relative and Absolute volume settings in the avr. The Relative setting means 'Relative to THX Reference'. The scale goes from a -ve number on the low end, to a +ve number on the high end. The reason for this is that once a sound system is properly level calibrated, at the '0'db setting, you are hearing volumes as they are supposed to be heard at THX Reference levels. You can choose to turn the volume down, and the volume will read in -ve numbers, i.e. -10db means '10db below THX Reference volumes'.

Using this setting allows different folks with different calibrated setups in different rooms to have a pretty good idea of what someone else is hearing, since every properly calibrated setup (that can properly reproduce audio adequately, i.e. NOT some underpowered Bose HTIB useless little cube system) should sound pretty similar at similar volumes (so they should all sound equally loud at the '0db' THX Reference, and they should all be roughly equally softer at '10db'. 2 people listening at '-5db' on calibrated systems in two different houses in different countries are hearing pretty much the same thing.

The Absolute setting on the other hand, simply gives you numbers from 0-99. Higher number = louder. This could mean a calibrated OR uncalibrated system. If someone is listening at 70, is that louder or softer than what you're hearing in your own system? Who knows? If the system has been Audyssey calibrated, then the THX Reference level that is equivalent to THX '0db' is at ~82 IIRC. But if you have calibrated your system to THX Reference, then why aren't you using the Relative volume setting where everything is displayed 'relative to THX Reference'?


b) The second issue is what I've been explaining and is HOW a system can be calibrated to reproduce THX Reference levels. If you didn't understand that, then reread my post about 40-50 times more and it should be clear.

When you understand this, you'll realize that there isn't anything about 'Audyssey being right or wrong' in my posts.


Max
post #51862 of 70896
^^^^So I think I get the reference concept, clear on that. I was really wondering about your whole sub at 85 vs 75 concept.....and I am just learning....so I am certain my questions at this piont really don't matter...meaning I am not even sure I am qualified to ask smart questions.
post #51863 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by toofast68 View Post

^^^^So I think I get the reference concept, clear on that. I was really wondering about your whole sub at 85 vs 75 concept.....and I am just learning....so I am certain my questions at this piont really don't matter...meaning I am not even sure I am qualified to ask smart questions.

Well, if you think of it, it's really pretty simple, especially if you break it down in steps:

1) Audio signals can be recorded at any level up to the digital maximum level. An audio engineer can therefore record a signal at -30db from maximum, or -40db from maximum

2) To calibrate a system to reproduce THX Reference levels, the speaker channels must each reproduce a maximum SPL of 105db at the seating positions. The LFE (Low Frequency Effects) channel must reproduce a maximum SPL of 115db.

3) So to calibrate a sound reproduction chain to THX Reference levels, you simply perform these two steps:
a) encode test tones at -30db for the speaker channels, and at -40db for the LFE channel
b) Play back those test tones on the sound sytem and measure them at the seating positions to see if the -30db test tone measures 75db at the MLP=Main Listening Position (-30db from a maximum 105db = 75db right?) from each speaker, and 75db from the subwoofer (-40db from 115db = 75db right?).

Voila, all speakers measure 75db, and your sound system is now calibrated to THX Reference. If the audio mixer who is mixing the soundtrack for a movie encodes it at maximum volume, it will produce 105db from your speakers, and 115db from your subwoofer (IF your Main Volume is set to THX Reference '0db' AND if your system can actually play that loud). And just in case anyone asks, those SPLs for INDIVIDUAL channels. The total SPLs from all speakers plus subwoofer(s) playing simultaneously can easily hit mid-120 db.


Max
post #51864 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

As XT can't set individual delays for two subs independently, if they are not equidistant from the MLP, how does one get around this limitation? Levels can be adjusted with reference to the MLP regardless of where the subs are placed, but delays can't.

This will be a FAQ question so I am interested in the definitive response - I have always been in the 'equidistant' camp so far...

EDIT: I quickly checked this on Ask Audyssey and Chris advises setting the subs equidistant with XT.

I wondered the same thing when I had XT and was able to chat with someone at Audyssey about it. First, Audyssey will hear the mix of both subs and will correct what it hears as though it was generated by just one sub. The correction will be beneficial, but not optimal since the correction will go to both subs without regard to the contribution each is making to the composite sound in the listening bubble.

Equidistant is best with XT because the contribution of each of the two subs to the sound in the bubble will be somewhat similar. I.e., the direct waves will be in phase and typically those two waves will be fairly dominant. Reflected waves from the two subs will not be similar and will prevent optimal correction but those too are more likely to have amplitude and phase similarities if the subs are equidistant.

When I had this situation I used Audyssey to check the before pattern at several listening positions in the bubble to see how different my two equidistant sub locations were (amplitude-wise). I was lucky, they were not dramatically different (but different enough that a sub eq did soon come into the picture).

Harrison
post #51865 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Best = Duals optimally placed, (requires measurements)
Luck of the Draw = Duals, randomly placed, (without measurements, statistically likely to be better, but possible to be worse)
Last Resort = Co-located, (only for the unlucky, or measurement-challenged)

And I'd suggest opposite midwall duals as the starting place for measurement and above Luck of the Draw without measurements. With XT, if opposite side walls makes them equidistant from MLP that's a big plus.
post #51866 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by hclarkx View Post

I wondered the same thing when I had XT and was able to chat with someone at Audyssey about it. First, Audyssey will hear the mix of both subs and will correct what it hears as though it was generated by just one sub. The correction will be beneficial, but not optimal since the correction will go to both subs without regard to the contribution each is making to the composite sound in the listening bubble.

Equidistant is best with XT because the contribution of each of the two subs to the sound in the bubble will be somewhat similar. I.e., the direct waves will be in phase and typically those two waves will be fairly dominant. Reflected waves from the two subs will not be similar and will prevent optimal correction but those too are more likely to have amplitude and phase similarities if the subs are equidistant.

When I had this situation I used Audyssey to check the before pattern at several listening positions in the bubble to see how different my two equidistant sub locations were (amplitude-wise). I was lucky, they were not dramatically different (but different enough that a sub eq did soon come into the picture).

Harrison

True that equidistant subs' direct output will be in phase. But at lower frequencies, the room's effect swamps what the sub does. Otherwise you'd never see deep nulls and big peaks, but they exist in room frequently because the wavelengths exceed the rooms dimensions.

This is AFAIK why Dr. Geddes recommends semirandom sub placement - - on the assumption or finding that it tends to equal out the peaks and nulls pretty well. I assume (but could be wrong) that if two subs are not equidistant from the listening position, Audyssey will hear the closest one as the delay time from which to set the distance . . . The arrival of the second sub, as well as any delayed arrivals from room interference, become part of the frequency response measurement, not the distance measurement.
post #51867 of 70896
At the risk of not simplifying things.

The reference level is simply a way to calibrate every mixing stage, and every theater, to be the same loudness so that what the mixers and director heard and chose as levels are heard at reproduction.

The reference level does not define how loud any passage or the average of an entire movie ought to be. As it happens, mixers tend to put dialog between 80 and 85 dB at reference, but that's not required by the reference level, and some movies are lower. V for vendetta springs to mind.

It's not really accurate to say that any sound is encoded at 75, 80 or 85 dB. Because how loud it plays back depends on both the level encoded on the disk and where the volume control is set by the listener.

So I'll say again, I actually don't know what the digital level of the first Audyssey sweep is, but clearly Audyssey will sweep at a higher level if there is too much noise. Whether the first run is -30 dBFS is pretty much irrelevant. AFAIK most modern AvRs have their internal do-it-yourself pink noise at -30 dBFS. But it's not a 75 dB sound. It's a -30dBFS sound. It might reasonably be anywhere between 63 and 87 dB at the listening position. That's why you calibrate the system to reference by adjusting the levels of each speaker so the -30 dBFS signal yields 75 dB at the listening positon.

According to FilmMixer (and probably other sources) movie mixing stages are calibrated to 85 dB with a -20 dBFS bandwidth limited pink noise for the left right and center. The surrounds are each calibrated at 83 dB with the same tone. Because there are multiple surrounds on the mixing stage, the general assumption is that calibrating our surrounds at home to the same level as the fronts works out to be equivalent.
post #51868 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

1) A 30-40cm height difference will be less noticeable. BTW, in placement A, would it be possible to place the speakers along the DSX lines, BUT place them equidistant to the MLP? Basically, the Wide speaker would end up at about the corner of the oven. In particular, I would place the front speakers so they are even instead of the pictured placement where the Right speaker is closer to the listener than the Left etc.

Actually, looking at the door placements, if you could potentially move your couch closer to the screen, it appears you would potentially be able to place the speakers on either side of the oven.

Max

Hi Max

Thanks for the input.
I am having a bit of a struggle getting it good if I keep it all centred and still want to be able to:
1. Keep a viewing cone for the projection screen that is not to wide since the firehawk G3 then gets problem with hot spotting
2. Not ending up with the sofa convering the entrance of the room.

I did make a try though where I prefer the B soution for 2 reasons:
1. The viewing cone is kept as small as possible vs A
2. The sofa covers less of the opening (of course I could shift the sofa on step right and sit on the leftmost seat but then the guest sitting at the right most would have a speaker blocinkg the right part of the screen )

This is the two reasons why I want to have a listening positions shifted right and back as in first proposal. And also to prevent blocking the upper left door.
But this just could work even though it will be a bit more crammed and I will need to lock the upper left door.
But hey what dont you do for good sound

The next problem is that I will not be able to fit all speakers on the "circle" and the high speakers will be at smaller angle than DSX 45 degrees.

The B proposal keeps somewhat of a oval placement but seems to be better than A. But the LW speaker will not be able to "see" L spealer. Still I dont think that should be an issues since the sound radiates towards the MLP.
Of course the L speaker room reflections will be mostly in the oven since the height of the oven is about the same as the L speaker.
Hmmm tricky....

Any Ideas or comments?



Thanks for allt the input
Boogie
LL
post #51869 of 70896
Damn rain has stalled my calibration haha
post #51870 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by allsop4now View Post

Bump.

Any opinions as to buy an extra sub-woofer using XT but restricted placement, or a new receiver with XT32?

Thanks for all the responses to my question.

For now I think I'll forgo adding a second SW as the SW placements I have are restricted (essentially one SW beside each front speaker). I do have a SPL meter for measurements, though.

When I have an XT32 capable receiver I think I will revisit buying a second SW, but then it might be harder to get an identical SW to the one I have today.
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)