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 2062

post #61831 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

Trinnov in it's fullest form is a $20,000 plus system. That is why Audyssey won't be able to do the same thing

 
They put a serviceable Trinnov system in a mid-priced Sherwood AVR a few years ago, so it is doable.

yep, almost scooped one of those when they went on sale around the $500 to see what it does. It is still not the full suite that Trinnov has to offer however, but from the reviews and folks that have tried it, they say it is pretty spectacular even in its slimmed down form biggrin.gif
post #61832 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Think of it this way: Audyssey is setting your speakers to "flat" reference baseline. If, after calibration, you want to deviate from that reference, it won't hurt anything. It just means your starting point is a known "reference" that you can always return to.

I assume the PUNCH/DEPTH settings are just EQ settings that change the "shape" of the subwoofer response, so using them after calibration (which will give you that "flat" starting point) is fine, but turning them on BEFORE running calibration means Audyssey will just be working against them.

Depending on the sub, it's possible that a "depth" setting pre-cal would be a useful work-around to the normalization issue. Hsu's "official" recommendation for Audyssey is basically this (then going back to a normal setting post-cal.) The Hsu controls lend themselves to this approach though.
post #61833 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjames View Post

Depending on the sub, it's possible that a "depth" setting pre-cal would be a useful work-around to the normalization issue. Hsu's "official" recommendation for Audyssey is basically this (then going back to a normal setting post-cal.) The Hsu controls lend themselves to this approach though.

True, but note that the guy asking that question about the Klipsch sub is NOT the same guy who is having the issue with excessive boosting below 20 Hz smile.gif
post #61834 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

True, but note that the guy asking that question about the Klipsch sub is NOT the same guy who is having the issue with excessive boosting below 20 Hz smile.gif

Yeah, I just thought it was an interesting coincidence wink.gif
post #61835 of 70896
So far I been unhappy with my sound output on my onkyo 818 and Martin Logan motion setup. I re ran audyssey and where the part days to set subwoofer to 75 db. I turn my sub off and its reading 45db. I think it might be because my projector is pretty close to it. Do you think this could mess up te while process
post #61836 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post


yep, almost scooped one of those when they went on sale around the $500 to see what it does. It is still not the full suite that Trinnov has to offer however, but from the reviews and folks that have tried it, they say it is pretty spectacular even in its slimmed down form biggrin.gif

I thought so.  It was not the full suite and its imperfections but impressive, nonetheless.

http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround/music_in_the_round_42/index.html

post #61837 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday121 View Post

So far I been unhappy with my sound output on my onkyo 818 and Martin Logan motion setup. I re ran audyssey and where the part days to set subwoofer to 75 db. I turn my sub off and its reading 45db. I think it might be because my projector is pretty close to it. Do you think this could mess up te while process

If I understand correctly, the Audyssey sub level reading is showing 45dB when the sub is not playing the tone? That would mean that 45dB is the noise floor in your listening room, which is a pretty typical reading for most rooms. Nothing to worry about.

So tell us more about why you are unhappy with the sound output.
post #61838 of 70896
It's like my dialogue is real weak and hard to understand [IMG][IMG]
post #61839 of 70896
U turned my center channel up some but it still doesn't sound that good. Maybe I'm expecting to much. I have 2 Martin Logan motion 12s in the front with a motion c center channel
post #61840 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

Have some bad news to report about Audyssey's sub management.

Background: have a HRS 12 Sunfire 1000watt sub thats rated 18hz-100hz. I noticed some 'rattle' like sub distortion during 'the impossible' tsunami sequence. My sub is set to 3 out of 10 on the gain and the audyssey trim applied is -0.5db.

I contacted the sub company and we've been troubleshooting for the past few days. What we found was startling. The 'distortion' only happened in the 10-15hz sound spectrum. With audyssey off, there was no distortion at all during the bass sweeps. With it on, the rattling/gurgle was back. The technician re did the audyssey setup and the 'distortion' came back in the same range. Turns out Audyssey is boosting the subsonic 20hz region significantly.

The 'distortion' wasn't distortion at all either, it was the spider coil slamming into the cone and even just seconds of this type of abuse can damage my expensive subwoofer.


I've written to Audyssey and am waiting on a response on how I can enjoy Audyssey room correction in a way that doesn't damage or distort my subwoofer.


Audyssey will almost certainly give you the runaround and deny that their technology could damage the sub by boosting it below its capabilities. During the measurement they calculate the lower limit (F3) of the sub and the filters taper off below that point to avoid boosting the sub below its lower limit. However, the subwoofer can still be boosted below this frequency due to the "normalization" problem that has been amply discussed in this thread (also something else which Feri will deny exists despite the large body of evidence). One thing you didn't mention is what receiver you are using? There seems to be some evidence that Audyssey corrected the normalization problem in more recent models.

I do think the suggestion of moving the sub and re-running Audyssey could be effective. As some background, the "normalization" issue is caused by Audyssey re-leveling the sub channel to match the levels of the other speakers after its EQ correction is applied. After EQ correction, Audyssey looks at a narrow frequency band in the subwoofer's response (centered around 60Hz according to Chris K) and then raises/lowers the sub level to compensate for any major cuts/boosts in the frequency response. For example, if the sub level is set to 75dB to match the other speakers, but there are some giant peaks in the sub response in the 40-80Hz range that need to be tamed, after EQ the perceived level of the sub will now be well below 75dB because of the removal of those peaks. To maintain perceptual balance with the EQ filters enabled, Audyssey will "normalize" the subwoofer channel to the other speakers by globally boosting the subwoofer level to keep the perceived level the same with Audyssey on vs. off. Unfortunately, the global level boost when normalizing does NOT get filtered below the F3 of the sub, so if there is a large boost needed it will end up providing a lot of extra energy below the sub's F3. Relocating the sub to a different spot in the room may mean that Audyssey's EQ filters don't have to do as much cutting and lead to a more moderate normalization which won't overtax the sub.


See this post for some more info and links to other posts discussing the issue: http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/50430#post_21653246

And here is a graph from this post which shows a worst-case-scenario situation for this problem.




You can see some huge cuts in the 45-70Hz range in the equalized pre-out measurement (blue line) and then Audyssey raises the global level to match the un-EQ'd pre-out measurement (purple line).... but unfortunately this in a giant boost below 15Hz.

 

Nice explanation of the problem Batpig. With your consent I will create a new FAQ answer on this topic, as it has come up several times (I will also see what I can get from the discussion you linked to as well). I'll use some of your wording above if you don't mind (credited of course) as it is, IMO, a very easily understood explanation of the problem.  This will have to wait now until next week as I am away for the weekend.

post #61841 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Why not? What harm would be caused by using an HPF at 20Hz to cut off the subsonic frequencies if his sub can't handle it?

May cause attenuation even in the pass area, i.e. above 20 Hz. I just checked Harrison Labs homepage, but there is no mentioning about that which makes me curious why? That will mean the sub trim will need to be rechecked and readjusted by at least an SPL meter or maybe sublte, I dunno. And can cause unwanted phase issues. Any curve that is not flat will shift phase (in Laymans), which means in this case below the 20 Hz limit. I know this may sound like a pedantric approach, but think about it a bit, please. You may have valuable extention of your excellent sub even below 20 Hz which might play loud, but not flat and can be out of phase.

 

All of that becomes entirely irrelevant, Feri, if the sub gets destroyed by the huge additional boost below frequencies it cannot handle. The first job is to ensure the safety of the sub.

post #61842 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

Trinnov in it's fullest form is a $20,000 plus system. That is why Audyssey won't be able to do the same thing

 
They put a serviceable Trinnov system in a mid-priced Sherwood AVR a few years ago, so it is doable.

yep, almost scooped one of those when they went on sale around the $500 to see what it does. It is still not the full suite that Trinnov has to offer however, but from the reviews and folks that have tried it, they say it is pretty spectacular even in its slimmed down form biggrin.gif

 

Yep - the problem is, it's in a Sherwood AVR ;)

post #61843 of 70896
My center channel is located below the screen in this pic. Do you think moving it closer and putting on a stand would help
post #61844 of 70896
^ I was not familiar with the Motion 12's, so I read a review from Sound+Vision. According to the reviewer, the sound is very sensitive to placement, and that if the speakers are anywhere near a reflective surface, there could be issues. You might experiment with placement alternatives to see if there is a difference. Also, the article emphasized the importance of aiming the speakers directly at the MLP.
post #61845 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday121 View Post

My center channel is located below the screen in this pic. Do you think moving it closer and putting on a stand would help

 

I have a similar setup and found...

 

  • Overshooting the center helps (a little). By pointing the center way over your head instead of directly at it.
  • The Sherwood R-972 will remap the center vocals to the other speakers with its 3D remapping.
  • The higher-end Yamaha's feature Dialogue Lift that directs the vocals to the surrounds. You can control to what degree and the center still anchors them.

 

Both of the remapping methods tend to defuse their location more so than lift. I doubt moving it closer would help... might actually hurt. In my case the Sherwood did a great job and the Yamaha worked as well but lost a bit of its directionality (by not using the fronts). For me the remapping greatly benefits the experience and is highly recommended.

post #61846 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday121 View Post

My center channel is located below the screen in this pic. Do you think moving it closer and putting on a stand would help

Hard to tell from that pic but if it is up against the wall, I'd definitely try moving it off the wall... At least 1-2 ft if possible. Then rerun audyssey and see if it sounds any better to you. Angle it to point at your head too if it's positioned lower than that.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
post #61847 of 70896
Hi - I did not know where to ask this question but since it has to do with Audyssey i figured I would ask here. I am connecting an Oppo BDP-105 to a Mcintosh MX121 via Balanced inputs. When playing 24/192 Flac files using the USB-DAC via the analog balanced connections to the MX121:

1- Would I be able to use Audyssey and by doing that is the signal going through additional A/D conversion and then again through D/A conversion to a sample rate that is lower than 192 that was decoded by the Oppo?
2- Is it recommended to apply Audyssey to the analog connection or should I just go digital at this point if I want to use room correction?

thank you.
post #61848 of 70896
^Hi, welcome.
1. Assuming the Mac allows you to digitize the balanced inputs, yes if you send analog from player to processor, an A/D conversion has to be performed in the processor to apply Audyssey, as that is done in PCM format in the digital realm. Then of course another D/A conversion must be done prior to sending the signal to the amps. I don't know the details (sample rates etc) of your processor but perhaps someone on the thread for your model:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1383227/mcintosh-mx-121-any-thoughts

2. IME it is questionable that sending analog using the Oppo's vaunted DAC would be of much value over simply sending digital out. You could do a BAB level-matched comparison yourself. I have done so; with my gear I found no benefit to analog as I apply Audyssey to everything, but YMMV.
post #61849 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Why not? What harm would be caused by using an HPF at 20Hz to cut off the subsonic frequencies if his sub can't handle it?

May cause attenuation even in the pass area, i.e. above 20 Hz. I just checked Harrison Labs homepage, but there is no mentioning about that which makes me curious why? That will mean the sub trim will need to be rechecked and readjusted by at least an SPL meter or maybe sublte, I dunno. And can cause unwanted phase issues. Any curve that is not flat will shift phase (in Laymans), which means in this case below the 20 Hz limit. I know this may sound like a pedantric approach, but think about it a bit, please. You may have valuable extention of your excellent sub even below 20 Hz which might play loud, but not flat and can be out of phase.

Those are fair points, but as Keith noted above I think the "lesser of two evils" here compared to blowing up his subwoofer. Obviously in a perfect world he could affect another solution (e.g. relocating the sub) which would obviate the need for the alternate solution, but if the sub location is inflexible then he has to work with what he has.

I don't think the sub trim would be an issue at all though with a 20Hz HPF in the chain. How much does <20Hz content affect the perception of overall SPL anyway? I don't even think Audyssey uses this frequency range when calculating channel levels to begin with. Regardless, this potential problem is easily remedied by a simple tweak of the channel level if needed. As an experiment, he could run Audyssey with the filter in the chain and see if the channel level calculation comes out different. If, for example, he finds that with the filter in line he gets a channel level of -2, but without the filter he gets a level of +1, then he would know that a +3 adjustment would be necessary with the filter inserted in line after Audyssey.

I'm also not sure how much a phase shift below 20Hz would hurt thing audibly. Does phase really matter below 20Hz? The wavelengths are so long down there that it's mostly tactile anyway. As above, this is something he might be able to test as well by running Audyssey with the filter in line and seeing if it affects the subwoofer distance/delay calculation.
post #61850 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Nice explanation of the problem Batpig. With your consent I will create a new FAQ answer on this topic, as it has come up several times (I will also see what I can get from the discussion you linked to as well). I'll use some of your wording above if you don't mind (credited of course) as it is, IMO, a very easily understood explanation of the problem.  This will have to wait now until next week as I am away for the weekend.

Consent granted smile.gif although I would definitely recommend going back and reading posts by Craig John, Rickardl, MACCA350, etc. from the original discussion to make sure you capture the concept properly. I think I gave a good "layman's" summary but their posts are more technical and there may be some good nuggets to include (or posts to which you could provide links). It's also good to note some of their dialogue with Chris K during these early discussions, especially the parts where Chris K concedes the issue for the skeptics wink.gif
post #61851 of 70896

Regarding the normalization issue, the referenced discussions take place back in 2009.  Can we assume, or is there evidence to support, that this issue has since been resolved by enhancements to MultEQ XT and/or AVR firmware updates since then?  Are we certain that normalization is the issue being experienced by the OP?

post #61852 of 70896
I honestly don't know the answers to those questions. I already said that I wasn't certain that was the issue, I was just presenting it as a hypothesis that sounded reasonable considering the symptoms described.
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Just to be clear, my theory is just that, a hypothesis based on the experience of others. It's possible that's NOT the issue. If you had some way to measure the subwoofer pre-out and produce a graph like the one I posted above, that would help to confirm/disconfirm the cause.
post #61853 of 70896
Sorry, I wasn't questioning your hypothesis. I was more interested whether the issue has since been resolved.
post #61854 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

I have a similar setup and found...
  • Overshooting the center helps (a little). By pointing the center way over your head instead of directly at it.
  • The Sherwood R-972 will remap the center vocals to the other speakers with its 3D remapping.
  • The higher-end Yamaha's feature Dialogue Lift that directs the vocals to the surrounds. You can control to what degree and the center still anchors them.

Both of the remapping methods tend to defuse their location more so than lift. I doubt moving it closer would help... might actually hurt. In my case the Sherwood did a great job and the Yamaha worked as well but lost a bit of its directionality (by not using the fronts). For me the remapping greatly benefits the experience and is highly recommended.

I don't think my onkyo 818 can remap though so that would not be a option for me
post #61855 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by benunc View Post

Hard to tell from that pic but if it is up against the wall, I'd definitely try moving it off the wall... At least 1-2 ft if possible. Then rerun audyssey and see if it sounds any better to you. Angle it to point at your head too if it's positioned lower than that.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

I am going to try to move it forward this weekend and just put it in a stand and rerun. Hopefully it helps
post #61856 of 70896
Hi everyone! I am about to install some DSX Heights in my system. Below is a picture of my room. I got some Axiom M2 In-wall/on-wall speakers that sit flush against the wall. Chris at Audyssey said to install them as high to the ceiling as possible and angle down. However, they are in-wall speakers and don't angle down. I've seen a few pictures here and there of DSX setups with on-wall speakers that are positioned flat against the wall up high. My only concern is that since the tweeter won't be pointing at the listener, it won't sound good. I called Axiom Audio and they said just to mount them up high, flush and that since the DSX heights are mostly ambient sounds, it should still sound good.

My only other option (besides getting different speakers, which I won't do because I got these at a very good price) is to try to somehow mount them to wall brackets and try to angle them downward. I won't go into the details of how I would do this, but it is do-able.

Thoughts anyone?

Anyone with flush mounted DSX heights want to report on your listening experience for me? Do they sound good flush-mounted up high?

Thanks!

post #61857 of 70896
Do you have room to mount them in the ceiling?
post #61858 of 70896
I guess, but they would be angled toward each other. It would be very bad. If I could put them on brackets, I might be able to put them on the ceiling. But, that doesn't really answer my question.
post #61859 of 70896
My ceiling is similar to yours, but angled the other way. My Heights are traditional speakers, flush mounted on a high bookshelf, a foot & a half from the ceiling & sound fine in PLIiz & A-DSX Height.
post #61860 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Regarding the normalization issue, the referenced discussions take place back in 2009.  Can we assume, or is there evidence to support, that this issue has since been resolved by enhancements to MultEQ XT and/or AVR firmware updates since then?  Are we certain that normalization is the issue being experienced by the OP?

Audyssey did write back once and asked if the receiver had other options that could be triggering it. I told them it didn't. Since then I've never received a followup. If it were a firmware update that fixed my issue I'd be happy with that especially since when I find a good receiver to upgrade to I could be assured this wont be an issue for me.
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)