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 1977

post #59281 of 70896
Thanks guys for the initial responses. The "middle of the room" mic position was relative to the sub crawl. The response curves shown above are with the sub in the MLP and the mic in the locations noted. I was basically just trying to convey the results of the crawl and solicit opinions about the best location.
post #59282 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

Thanks guys for the initial responses. The "middle of the room" mic position was relative to the sub crawl. The response curves shown above are with the sub in the MLP and the mic in the locations noted. I was basically just trying to convey the results of the crawl and solicit opinions about the best location.

 

Thanks for clarifying.

post #59283 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Looking at the 85 Hz null, I wonder if it is a result of a time delay issue between the mains and the sub. First off, it is impossible to perfectly time align a sub with 3 front speakers at 3 different distances (let alone all the surrounds), so the "splice" will look different for each case. Luckily, 80 Hz is a long enough wavelength that a sub timed to blend optimally with the center speaker will not cause a total null with the L or R.

To eliminate the possibility that the 85 Hz null is an interaction with the mains, try turning them off when you make the OM plot. If the null is gone, then try varying the delay time to the sub to see if you can make the null go away.

If the null remains even with the mains turned off, then finding a better location for the sub makes sense. The one in the middle of the room looks best, but as that is not an option, I like the Right Mid wall next. The narrow null at 28 Hz will rarely be an issue, and the general smoothness from 30-100 Hz will be easy for the EQ to handle, giving bass with little coloration, at least in the single seat where you take the measurements.

If you find that bass quality varies a lot as you audition different seats, you might consider adding a second sub in a different location. This can really help unify the response results around the seats, and can even help cancel room modes.

On a side note, you're about to reach 7000 posts!
post #59284 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

80Hz for fronts and surrounds.

Should he not find the ideal crossover for the room before making a crossover change. I know in my case (fully treated sealed room), REW says my best crossover is 50 hz and XT32 set my center at 55 hz. I tried 80 hz in it sounded too bass heavy with the audio. I ended up leaving the crossovers and trim settings to what XT32 set.

Bill
Edited by bsoko2 - 1/20/13 at 4:45pm
post #59285 of 70896

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

To eliminate the possibility that the 85 Hz null is an interaction with the mains, try turning them off when you make the OM plot. If the null is gone, then try varying the delay time to the sub to see if you can make the null go away.

If the null remains even with the mains turned off, then finding a better location for the sub makes sense. The one in the middle of the room looks best, but as that is not an option, I like the Right Mid wall next. The narrow null at 28 Hz will rarely be an issue, and the general smoothness from 30-100 Hz will be easy for the EQ to handle, giving bass with little coloration, at least in the single seat where you take the measurements.

If you find that bass quality varies a lot as you audition different seats, you might consider adding a second sub in a different location. This can really help unify the response results around the seats, and can even help cancel room modes.

 

Ok, I wasn't quite sure if you wanted me to try the sub crawl FR curves again with sub only or go back to my post Audyssey setup and measure only the sub?  So, I did 3 things:

 

Measured the front right position with the sub only in MLP and mic in front right (same as I did for the crawl):

 

 

Measured the front right sub location with the sub only and the mic at MLP with no Audyssey (same as my red pre-Audyssey plot except sub only):

 

 

Same as above except with Audyssey engaged (which is my post Audyssey result with the sub only):

 

post #59286 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

Should he not find the ideal crossover for the room before making a crossover change. I know in my case (fully treated sealed room), REW says my best crossover is 50 hz and XT32 set my center at 55 hz. I tried 80 hz in it sounded too bass heavy with the audio. I ended up leaving the crossovers and trim settings to what XT32 set.

Bill

I guess I should've stated that XT32 set my center to 80Hz and the L and R to 100 Hz (all 3 are MK Sound S150 MKII's) and my surrounds (in ceiling Speakercraft AIM Wide One's) to 40Hz. I bumped the surrounds up to 100Hz for no other reason than 40Hz seemed way too low and to match my L and R.
post #59287 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

80Hz for fronts and surrounds.

Should he not find the ideal crossover for the room before making a crossover change. I know in my case (fully treated sealed room), REW says my best crossover is 50 hz and XT32 set my center at 55 hz. I tried 80 hz in it sounded too bass heavy with the audio. I ended up leaving the crossovers and trim settings to what XT32 set.

Bill

In an ideal world, Bill, I'd agree entirely. But many users here don't have measuring gear and so can’t apply the process you went through. For them, the advice to go with a higher crossover is usually the best. 

 

HST, I am not sure I fully understand what is going on there - at 80Hz XO you were delegating the range between 80 and 55Hz to the sub (ignoring slope). Now you are delegating that range to the mains. If both mains and subs were equally capable in that range, there should be no difference in SQ - both will reproduce the 55-80Hz range properly. But generally, a good sub will always outperform a regular speaker in the bass department, so when you say that the bass was too 'heavy' when you crossed over at 80Hz, this would imply to me that the sub is reproducing something that is now absent when you direct that bass to the mains. 

 

Of course, all that really matters in the end is that the listener likes what he is hearing more than the alternative(s) and in this case you seem happy with the result, so you are good to go. 

 

FWIW, with enormously capable subs like my dual Submersives, I now cross over at the unprecedented (for me) setting of 100Hz to the mains and 110Hz to the surrounds and heights. Extensive listening tests confirmed this to be better than my former 80Hz. It was Mark Seaton who suggested the 100Hz XO (with my M&K S150 mains and M&K SS150 Tripoles) and he was definitely correct in this case.

post #59288 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

To eliminate the possibility that the 85 Hz null is an interaction with the mains, try turning them off when you make the OM plot. If the null is gone, then try varying the delay time to the sub to see if you can make the null go away.

If the null remains even with the mains turned off, then finding a better location for the sub makes sense. The one in the middle of the room looks best, but as that is not an option, I like the Right Mid wall next. The narrow null at 28 Hz will rarely be an issue, and the general smoothness from 30-100 Hz will be easy for the EQ to handle, giving bass with little coloration, at least in the single seat where you take the measurements.

If you find that bass quality varies a lot as you audition different seats, you might consider adding a second sub in a different location. This can really help unify the response results around the seats, and can even help cancel room modes.

 

Ok, I wasn't quite sure if you wanted me to try the sub crawl FR curves again with sub only or go back to my post Audyssey setup and measure only the sub?  So, I did 3 things:

 

Measured the front right position with the sub only in MLP and mic in front right (same as I did for the crawl):

 

 

Measured the front right sub location with the sub only and the mic at MLP with no Audyssey (same as my red pre-Audyssey plot except sub only):

 

 

Same as above except with Audyssey engaged (which is my post Audyssey result with the sub only):

 

 

Did you have Dynamic EQ turned off?

 

It would make the graphs easier to look at if, for the bass range analysis, you restricted them to 20-300Hz. Can you confirm the smoothing too?

post #59289 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by djoberg View Post

 
On a more relevant note for this thread (and to those who have been following my dilemma with my SVS sub and the trouble I had calibrating it with Audyssey), I was contacted by SVS today and they are shipping me out a replacement amp for my SVS sub first thing in the morning. If you have never done business with SVS, I'm here to tell they are a first class online company that has no equal. I have NEVER dealt with a company of this caliber, with Customer Service second to none!!

 

I'd second that, from personal experience too. When I had a problem with a slow delivery, in winter, from Norway (the EU distributor for SVS) to the UK, Gary Yacoubian himself (the CEO of SVS) stepped in personally to help me out, and gave me a discount without me asking too. Brilliant company, fabulous subs.  Now I have Submersives I get similar attention from Seaton Sound too - also second to none. 

post #59290 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

 

Did you have Dynamic EQ turned off?

 

It would make the graphs easier to look at if, for the bass range analysis, you restricted them to 20-300Hz. Can you confirm the smoothing too?

 

Yes, Dynamic EQ was turned off.  Smoothing was 1/24th.  I'll keep the bass range restricted on future measurements (sure wish I was using REW now!).

 

Do you know which measurement applies to what Roger asked for in his response?

post #59291 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

In an ideal world, Bill, I'd agree entirely. But many users here don't have measuring gear and so can’t apply the process you went through. For them, the advice to go with a higher crossover is usually the best. 

HST, I am not sure I fully understand what is going on there - at 80Hz XO you were delegating the range between 80 and 55Hz to the sub (ignoring slope). Now you are delegating that range to the mains. If both mains and subs were equally capable in that range, there should be no difference in SQ - both will reproduce the 55-80Hz range properly. But generally, a good sub will always outperform a regular speaker in the bass department, so when you say that the bass was too 'heavy' when you crossed over at 80Hz, this would imply to me that the sub is reproducing something that is now absent when you direct that bass to the mains. 

Of course, all that really matters in the end is that the listener likes what he is hearing more than the alternative(s) and in this case you seem happy with the result, so you are good to go. 

FWIW, with enormously capable subs like my dual Submersives, I now cross over at the unprecedented (for me) setting of 100Hz to the mains and 110Hz to the surrounds and heights. Extensive listening tests confirmed this to be better than my former 80Hz. It was Mark Seaton who suggested the 100Hz XO (with my M&K S150 mains and M&K SS150 Tripoles) and he was definitely correct in this case.

Another factor that might be coming into play, Keith, is the placement of the sub relative to the mains. Depending on which is reproducing a specific range of frequencies, the room may be emphasizing or de-emphasizing that range at a particular spot.
post #59292 of 70896

I think I should also mention for the benefit of anyone following my FR issues post Audyssey that the difference that XT32 makes is still very significant in my room.  After stressing about the null in my post graph, I watched Thor last night and couldn't believe how well it sounded knowing I still have a lot of room for improvement.  I'm truly jealous of those members that have their rooms dialed in with a relatively flat FR (as well as all the other good stuff that I still need to learn about...waterfalls, ETC etc.).  Anyway, I think the benefits to someone just doing an 8 pt XT32 cal could easily be lost in the ensuing analysis that OM, REW etc. afford us.  I think it's akin to overanalyzing what test patterns look like on your projector screen rather than watching actual content!  Of course, "ignorance is bliss" also comes to mind! biggrin.gif

post #59293 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

Should he not find the ideal crossover for the room before making a crossover change. I know in my case (fully treated sealed room), REW says my best crossover is 50 hz and XT32 set my center at 55 hz. I tried 80 hz in it sounded too bass heavy with the audio. I ended up leaving the crossovers and trim settings to what XT32 set.

Bill

Was this directed at my question?
post #59294 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

Should he not find the ideal crossover for the room before making a crossover change. I know in my case (fully treated sealed room), REW says my best crossover is 50 hz and XT32 set my center at 55 hz. I tried 80 hz in it sounded too bass heavy with the audio. I ended up leaving the crossovers and trim settings to what XT32 set.

Bill
Did you ever measure to find out why it *sounded* bass heavy?

When I use Audyssey Pro, which analyzes different crossovers and offers the best ones, I will still go down the list for a higher crossover than the usually-offered 60Hz (or Large). Even if I didn't have THX-certified speakers that are designed to be crossed at 80Hz, I would still move down the list to select 80Hz. And, if offered and not too far down the list, I select 100Hz. I do this solely to lighten the load on my 7-ch main amp. But my subs are flat to 150Hz, and are happy handling more from the mains.

With consumer MultEQ, and no deeper analysis performed than passing the measured -3dB point along to the manufacturer's algorithm, I don't think there is any reason to not pick at least 80Hz as the crossover.

Maybe you have speakers and amps quite capable of pressurizing your room to reference and don't need to be concerned about running out of gas at high SPLs'. However there are factors that an REW measurement isn't displaying and that is the quality of the sound. Subs are "specialists" designed to reproduce 80Hz - 100Hz and even higher (down to 20-ish) while main speakers reproduce from 20KHz down to 50-40-30 or so. Which do you think will do the best job of reproducing 80Hz?

Jeff
Edited by pepar - 1/21/13 at 7:45am
post #59295 of 70896
Hi there!

Have any noticed that it can differ a lot in different rounds of calibrations even if you do exactly the same.
Some times the sound image shrinks considerably even if I increase the volume, and other times it opens up and it feels like the sound floats freely in the room, what is causing this? Is it a bug in the software or what?
I can also mention that I have a Onkyo PR SC 5509 with MultEQ XT32.
Edited by Fischer - 1/21/13 at 8:26am
post #59296 of 70896
Have you read and followed the Audyssey FAQ? There are guidelines for, mostly, where to NOT measure. Placing the mic in "non-recommended" spots can cause varying results.

Beyond that, sometimes small variations in mic placement from run to run (it is unavoidable) can produce different results.
post #59297 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Have you read and followed the Audyssey FAQ? There are guidelines for, mostly, where to NOT measure. Placing the mic in "non-recommended" spots can cause varying results.

Beyond that, sometimes small variations in mic placement from run to run (it is unavoidable) can produce different results.

Yes I am very familiar how to position the microphone, my room is quite large (50 square meters) and the nearest wall(back) is about 3m from the main position, and I have not the microphone near the back of the sofa
post #59298 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fischer View Post

Yes I am very familiar how to position the microphone, my room is quite large (50 square meters) and the nearest wall(back) is about 3m from the main position, and I have not the microphone near the back of the sofa

I don't think I have ever read any definitive reason for variations in results when using ... as near as is humanly possible ... the same set of mic positions. Slight variations in those positions is the only explanation I have ever seen. Sooo, since you know what is "right" in your room, and you know what results don't meet that, stop doing calibrations when you achieve the former. Then relax and enjoy. smile.gif

Jeff
post #59299 of 70896
I've run Audyssey in the past and have had my subwoofeer distance measured long. I more or less understand why (and the FAQ in this thread did a nice job of explaining it). I have never had a subwoofer measure short, however, my new sub did. Is that odd? Should I change it? Is Audyssey wrong?
post #59300 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody777 View Post

I've run Audyssey in the past and have had my subwoofeer distance measured long. I more or less understand why (and the FAQ in this thread did a nice job of explaining it). I have never had a subwoofer measure short, however, my new sub did. Is that odd? Should I change it? Is Audyssey wrong?

Longer is quite common as it is not actually a distance measurement but a TIME measurement, and some subs have circuitry that introduces delay. But a distance setting that is less than the actual physical distance is wrong. Are you using a mic stand with a boom arm?

(switching over to iPhone under a palapa .. by a bar ... tongue.gif)
post #59301 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Longer is quite common as it is not actually a distance measurement but a TIME measurement, and some subs have circuitry that introduces delay. But a distance setting that is less than the actual physical distance is wrong. Are you using a mic stand with a boom arm?

(switching over to iPhone under a palapa .. by a bar ... tongue.gif)

No, just the Audyssey mic on top of a box to get it at ear level in my listening position. I've never had it come up shorter than the actual distance.
post #59302 of 70896
^^

Fischer, does your AVR have Dynamic Volume? If so, and if it's turned on, the relative volume of your surrounds will be higher (compared to the mains) at low volumes, which can sound like a bigger soundstage at lower volumes than at higher volumes. Maybe that's part of what you're noticing.

What materials are you listening to when you notice these various changes in soundstage at different volumes?
post #59303 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody777 View Post

No, just the Audyssey mic on top of a box to get it at ear level in my listening position. I've never had it come up shorter than the actual distance.

Read the part of the FAQ on mic stands and boom arms ... and not sitting the mic on a seat. Even though you did not .. "come up short" .. before, there is a good chance that that rig sitting on the seat is the cause. It would be the first thing I investigated.

Jeff
post #59304 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

 

Did you have Dynamic EQ turned off?

 

It would make the graphs easier to look at if, for the bass range analysis, you restricted them to 20-300Hz. Can you confirm the smoothing too?

 

Yes, Dynamic EQ was turned off.  Smoothing was 1/24th.  I'll keep the bass range restricted on future measurements (sure wish I was using REW now!).

 

Do you know which measurement applies to what Roger asked for in his response?

 

He was asking for sub only IIRC - so 20-300Hz.

post #59305 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

In an ideal world, Bill, I'd agree entirely. But many users here don't have measuring gear and so can’t apply the process you went through. For them, the advice to go with a higher crossover is usually the best. 

HST, I am not sure I fully understand what is going on there - at 80Hz XO you were delegating the range between 80 and 55Hz to the sub (ignoring slope). Now you are delegating that range to the mains. If both mains and subs were equally capable in that range, there should be no difference in SQ - both will reproduce the 55-80Hz range properly. But generally, a good sub will always outperform a regular speaker in the bass department, so when you say that the bass was too 'heavy' when you crossed over at 80Hz, this would imply to me that the sub is reproducing something that is now absent when you direct that bass to the mains. 

Of course, all that really matters in the end is that the listener likes what he is hearing more than the alternative(s) and in this case you seem happy with the result, so you are good to go. 

FWIW, with enormously capable subs like my dual Submersives, I now cross over at the unprecedented (for me) setting of 100Hz to the mains and 110Hz to the surrounds and heights. Extensive listening tests confirmed this to be better than my former 80Hz. It was Mark Seaton who suggested the 100Hz XO (with my M&K S150 mains and M&K SS150 Tripoles) and he was definitely correct in this case.

Another factor that might be coming into play, Keith, is the placement of the sub relative to the mains. Depending on which is reproducing a specific range of frequencies, the room may be emphasizing or de-emphasizing that range at a particular spot.

 

Good point AJ.

post #59306 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

I think I should also mention for the benefit of anyone following my FR issues post Audyssey that the difference that XT32 makes is still very significant in my room.  After stressing about the null in my post graph, I watched Thor last night and couldn't believe how well it sounded knowing I still have a lot of room for improvement.  I'm truly jealous of those members that have their rooms dialed in with a relatively flat FR (as well as all the other good stuff that I still need to learn about...waterfalls, ETC etc.).  Anyway, I think the benefits to someone just doing an 8 pt XT32 cal could easily be lost in the ensuing analysis that OM, REW etc. afford us.  I think it's akin to overanalyzing what test patterns look like on your projector screen rather than watching actual content!  Of course, "ignorance is bliss" also comes to mind! biggrin.gif

 

Yes XT32 does a terrific job. But not a perfect job.... so there is always room for improvement ;)  One of the best things you can do with Audyssey is to get everything set up as good as possible before measuring/calibrating. Eg speaker placement, getting rid of coffee tables between centre speaker and MLP etc...

post #59307 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

Should he not find the ideal crossover for the room before making a crossover change. I know in my case (fully treated sealed room), REW says my best crossover is 50 hz and XT32 set my center at 55 hz. I tried 80 hz in it sounded too bass heavy with the audio. I ended up leaving the crossovers and trim settings to what XT32 set.

Bill
Did you ever measure to find out why it *sounded* bass heavy?

When I use Audyssey Pro, which analyzes different crossovers and offers the best ones, I will still go down the list for a higher crossover than the usually-offered 60Hz (or Large). Even if I didn't have THX-certified speakers that are designed to be crossed at 80Hz, I would still move down the list to select 80Hz. And, if offered and not too far down the list, I select 100Hz. I do this solely to lighten the load on my 7-ch main amp. But my subs are flat to 150Hz, and are happy handling more from the mains.

With consumer MultEQ, and no deeper analysis performed than passing the measured -3dB point along to the manufacturer's algorithm, I don't think there is any reason to not pick at least 80Hz as the crossover.

Maybe you have speakers and amps quite capable of pressurizing your room to reference and don't need to be concerned about running out of gas at high SPLs'. However there are factors that an REW measurement isn't displaying and that is the quality of the sound. Subs are "specialists" designed to reproduce 80Hz - 100Hz and even higher (down to 20-ish) while main speakers reproduce from 20KHz down to 50-40-30 or so. Which do you think will do the best job of reproducing 80Hz?

Jeff

Absolutely agreed, Jeff. Since adding the dual Submersives and moving from 80Hz XO to 100Hz XO I have been very, very happy indeed. Mark S actually suggested I might try 120Hz XO as well but so far I haven't tried it. I must get a round tuit for that.

post #59308 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fischer View Post

Hi there!

Have any noticed that it can differ a lot in different rounds of calibrations even if you do exactly the same.
Some times the sound image shrinks considerably even if I increase the volume, and other times it opens up and it feels like the sound floats freely in the room, what is causing this? Is it a bug in the software or what?
I can also mention that I have a Onkyo PR SC 5509 with MultEQ XT32.

 

If you mean that different calibrations can produce different results, the answer is yes they can - but it is almost always due to changing the mic positions each time. Even small movements of the mic can produce different results, as is expected. If you ran a calibration xxx times without moving the mic at all, you would get the same result each time.

post #59309 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody777 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Longer is quite common as it is not actually a distance measurement but a TIME measurement, and some subs have circuitry that introduces delay. But a distance setting that is less than the actual physical distance is wrong. Are you using a mic stand with a boom arm?

(switching over to iPhone under a palapa .. by a bar ... tongue.gif)

No, just the Audyssey mic on top of a box to get it at ear level in my listening position. I've never had it come up shorter than the actual distance.

 

There's your problem right there most likely. Check out this FAQ answer:
 
post #59310 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

^^

Fischer, does your AVR have Dynamic Volume? If so, and if it's turned on, the relative volume of your surrounds will be higher (compared to the mains) at low volumes, which can sound like a bigger soundstage at lower volumes than at higher volumes. Maybe that's part of what you're noticing.

What materials are you listening to when you notice these various changes in soundstage at different volumes?

Hi !

I have the Dynamic Volume off, I experience it both when I listen to music and run regular stereo and with movie and multi-channel audio,
I experienced the same variations on my previous preamp Onkyo PR SC 5507, so that is why I ask if there is some kind of known software bug of Audyssey!
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)