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 2067

post #61981 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I don't think it is as cut and dried as you imply, Igor. There are other knowledgeable users in the 818 thread (eg Markus) who disagree with you on your findings, or more precisely on the cause.
The last measurements (in the way Markus asked) are clearly show the real acoustical F3, and what Audyssey thinks the F3 is (as it is correcting the rolloff also for satellites you can simply find the intersection of the almost straight lines above F3 and below F3). If Markus can't draw two lines to see the obvious it doesn't mean what can be seen from the graphs is not obvious. He is, as our lovely Feri, a religious fanatic and will newer accept and see the fact Audyssey is failing at something, the evidence is only seen if it is advantageous to Audyssey, or if it is 'officially' confirmed with the Jesus, sorry Chris. smile.gif Although he is very good professional and very helpful in most topics about Audyssey, he is biased at times. I might agree that the F3 is not the ROOT issue and is caused by something else, but it is the deepest traceable thing from the measurements, what is behind of it - only Audyssey developers know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

A couple of reports aren’t enough IMO to come to a definitive conclusion, especially in the face of opposing and well-considered opinions.  IIRC you also asked both Audyssey and Onkyo to investigate the problem and neither of them could reproduce it.
I doubt they even tried it hard enough... And there are no well-considered opinions really, except the fact that in other installations with different room (and/or other acoustic) conditions Audyssey happen to work well and correctly. I am accepting this fact too. What is unknown is if the problem correlates in any way with room only or with receivers brand/model also, as no one was able to test and measure something else with XT32 in the same room when 818 failed. The fact that same model receiver, similar room, different speakers/placements etc. creates the same problem with close to 100% probability means a lot of other users with just the similar rooms dimensions will have the same issue with quite enough probability, at least with the same receiver. Surely, two units in a row, even failing in similar condition, are not statistically representational but tells already a lot. At least for me it is good enough warning to verify any future Audyssey receiver for not having this problem in my room before committing to buying it without a chance to get money back in case it is also failing, as there is no hope it will be fixed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

The problem also seems to be easily worked around simply by raising the crossovers anyway.
I will repeat it millionth time - IT IS NOT WORKED AROUND THAT WAY. It is only easily worked around if you have F3 of your satellites at something like 30Hz or below and have a sub in the system. This is extremely hard or impossible to workaround if satellites F3 is close to 80Hz (actually anything higher than 40Hz) or for setups without a sub.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I don't really buy the idea that the problem may be common but the reports rare because people cannot be bothered to investigate or cannot understand the issues. That may be true of the general public but it is not true of AVS members
Absolutely most of the AVS members are still general public. There are only a few real advanced enthusiasts here. Even less experts. We know them all by names wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Even if the problem does exist in all 818 units, in the case of the OP above, the problem can easily be removed entirely from the equation simply by choosing the Denon unit. The Denon appears to have the edge on the 818 in any case in this instance.
Let's see... may be I will be able to test it some time in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

The main thing is that there are now two reasonably affordable routes to XT32 which is a great step forward for anyone on a tight budget or, as in your case, anyone who lives in a country where AV equipment is far more expensive than it is in the US.  I realise that the option of a Denon doesn’t help in your case and I also accept that you genuinely feel that you have this problem. I hope that you can find an acceptable way to make the 818 perform for you as you hoped it would when you bought it.
Good news about Denon, hopefully Marantz also will announce something interesting on this front soon... But I lost the hope for Onkyo, really.. probably the treatments will help (Markus have them an doesn't have the problem, so it is the last hope), and I'll need a second receiver anyway some time in the future, so will try another brands next time, but currently both options are not possible for me, I am totally out of money as I have bought a car (BMW) and it also still needs some investments... Sound is one of them, while it have "HiFi" option the sound is total crap there (and comparing to my old 1998 BMW there is no sound at all in the newer one, time only make bad things to audio tech it seems), and according to forums many (thanks god, not all) still think it is great there on new BMWs... I cannot even imagine how it sounds without HiFi option smile.gif
post #61982 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I don't think it is as cut and dried as you imply, Igor. There are other knowledgeable users in the 818 thread (eg Markus) who disagree with you on your findings, or more precisely on the cause.
The last measurements (in the way Markus asked) are clearly show the real acoustical F3, and what Audyssey thinks the F3 is (as it is correcting the rolloff also for satellites you can simply find the intersection of the almost straight lines above F3 and below F3). If Markus can't draw two lines to see the obvious it doesn't mean what can be seen from the graphs is not obvious. He is, as our lovely Feri, a religious fanatic and will newer accept and see the fact Audyssey is failing at something, the evidence is only seen if it is advantageous to Audyssey, or if it is 'officially' confirmed with the Jesus, sorry Chris. smile.gif Although he is very good professional and very helpful in most topics about Audyssey, he is biased at times. I might agree that the F3 is not the ROOT issue and is caused by something else, but it is the deepest traceable thing from the measurements, what is behind of it - only Audyssey developers know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

A couple of reports aren’t enough IMO to come to a definitive conclusion, especially in the face of opposing and well-considered opinions.  IIRC you also asked both Audyssey and Onkyo to investigate the problem and neither of them could reproduce it.
I doubt they even tried it hard enough... And there are no well-considered opinions really, except the fact that in other installations with different room (and/or other acoustic) conditions Audyssey happen to work well and correctly. I am accepting this fact too. What is unknown is if the problem correlates in any way with room only or with receivers brand/model also, as no one was able to test and measure something else with XT32 in the same room when 818 failed. The fact that same model receiver, similar room, different speakers/placements etc. creates the same problem with close to 100% probability means a lot of other users with just the similar rooms dimensions will have the same issue with quite enough probability, at least with the same receiver. Surely, two units in a row, even failing in similar condition, are not statistically representational but tells already a lot. At least for me it is good enough warning to verify any future Audyssey receiver for not having this problem in my room before committing to buying it without a chance to get money back in case it is also failing, as there is no hope it will be fixed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

The problem also seems to be easily worked around simply by raising the crossovers anyway.
I will repeat it millionth time - IT IS NOT WORKED AROUND THAT WAY. It is only easily worked around if you have F3 of your satellites at something like 30Hz or below and have a sub in the system. This is extremely hard or impossible to workaround if satellites F3 is close to 80Hz (actually anything higher than 40Hz) or for setups without a sub.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I don't really buy the idea that the problem may be common but the reports rare because people cannot be bothered to investigate or cannot understand the issues. That may be true of the general public but it is not true of AVS members
Absolutely most of the AVS members are still general public. There are only a few real advanced enthusiasts here. Even less experts. We know them all by names wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Even if the problem does exist in all 818 units, in the case of the OP above, the problem can easily be removed entirely from the equation simply by choosing the Denon unit. The Denon appears to have the edge on the 818 in any case in this instance.
Let's see... may be I will be able to test it some time in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

The main thing is that there are now two reasonably affordable routes to XT32 which is a great step forward for anyone on a tight budget or, as in your case, anyone who lives in a country where AV equipment is far more expensive than it is in the US.  I realise that the option of a Denon doesn’t help in your case and I also accept that you genuinely feel that you have this problem. I hope that you can find an acceptable way to make the 818 perform for you as you hoped it would when you bought it.
Good news about Denon, hopefully Marantz also will announce something interesting on this front soon... But I lost the hope for Onkyo, really.. probably the treatments will help (Markus have them an doesn't have the problem, so it is the last hope), and I'll need a second receiver anyway some time in the future, so will try another brands next time, but currently both options are not possible for me, I am totally out of money as I have bought a car (BMW) and it also still needs some investments... Sound is one of them, while it have "HiFi" option the sound is total crap there (and comparing to my old 1998 BMW there is no sound at all in the newer one, time only make bad things to audio tech it seems), and according to forums many (thanks god, not all) still think it is great there on new BMWs... I cannot even imagine how it sounds without HiFi option smile.gif

 

Igor, whatever the problem, I hope you eventually find a solution that works for you, in your room.  Good luck with the BMW too. My Mercedes came with a pretty good sound system as standard (I didn’t upgrade it, which is unusual for me) but I agree with you - most car audio systems are very poor - even in the better models in the range.

post #61983 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by asere View Post

I have two subs but I want to use one for mid and upper bass and the other for only low. Do I run Audyssey with both subs set to OUT and then flip one to IN to kick in for low frequencies or do I have one set to IN and the other to OUT before running Audyssey? My avr has no subeq ht.

I am not sure what you mean by "In" and "out" unless you are referencing something on the sub itself, but I will give you my findings here. Even though I have sub EQht, and the ability to measure two different subs, when I attempted using two air pumps down low for the ultra low stuff and two boxes with high efficient midbass drivers for the upper range, I found it was best to eq them together before audyssey and let audyssey run them as a single "sub." If I didnt do that it just absolutely slaughtered the response and never got them sounding right together. When I say I eq'd them before Audyssey, I used a standalone unit (DCX2496) to put my own crossover points between the LOW sub and the MID sub and time aligned everything manually.

Might I ask why you want to go this route splitting the sub duty like that? From my experience, it never really worked out to how I wanted everything to sound so I ended up scrapping that method after extensive tweaking. Are your subs not capable of doing the low and mid stuff on their own?
post #61984 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

I am not sure what you mean by "In" and "out" unless you are referencing something on the sub itself, but I will give you my findings here. Even though I have sub EQht, and the ability to measure two different subs, when I attempted using two air pumps down low for the ultra low stuff and two boxes with high efficient midbass drivers for the upper range, I found it was best to eq them together before audyssey and let audyssey run them as a single "sub." If I didnt do that it just absolutely slaughtered the response and never got them sounding right together. When I say I eq'd them before Audyssey, I used a standalone unit (DCX2496) to put my own crossover points between the LOW sub and the MID sub and time aligned everything manually.

Might I ask why you want to go this route splitting the sub duty like that? From my experience, it never really worked out to how I wanted everything to sound so I ended up scrapping that method after extensive tweaking. Are your subs not capable of doing the low and mid stuff on their own?

By IN and OUT if mean the low pass filter on the subs. One is sealed and the other ported. The sealed has more power for the mis and upper bass so that is why I want to set the ported one to IN so the sub can handle 30hz and lower and OUT for the sealed so the avr can manage the sub. I just don't know if I need to have both on OUT prior to running Audyssey and then after Audyssey set one to IN or have one IN and the other set to OUT before Audyssey?
post #61985 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post

Markus can't draw two lines to see the obvious it doesn't mean what can be seen from the graphs is not obvious. He is, as our lovely Feri, a religious fanatic and will newer accept and see the fact Audyssey is failing at something, the evidence is only seen if it is advantageous to Audyssey, or if it is 'officially' confirmed with the Jesus, sorry Chris. smile.gif

Wow. I think that is the first and only time I will ever hear Markus described as an Audyssey religious fanatic who can't ever accept that Audyssey is doing something wrong. eek.gif

I'm sure neither one of them is too happy to be shoved into that particular box together tongue.gif

(also, on a side note, it doesn't reflect well on you to describe anyone who disagrees with you as a "religious fanatic"... you did the same thing in your prior discussions of compression and this weak attempt to delegitimize those who disagree with you just makes people less receptive to listening to what you have to say. You are not the only "expert" on these forums and it would help to have a little more respect for those who happen to disagree with your arguments and/or conclusions.)
post #61986 of 70896

+1.  While I highly respect Markus' opinions, and certainly consider him knowledgeable on a wide range of audio topics, I would never have characterized him as an Audyssey zealot.  As for our friend Feri, well, 'nuff said.  wink.gif

post #61987 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post

Markus can't draw two lines to see the obvious it doesn't mean what can be seen from the graphs is not obvious. He is, as our lovely Feri, a religious fanatic and will newer accept and see the fact Audyssey is failing at something, the evidence is only seen if it is advantageous to Audyssey, or if it is 'officially' confirmed with the Jesus, sorry Chris. smile.gif

Wow. I think that is the first and only time I will ever hear Markus described as an Audyssey religious fanatic who can't ever accept that Audyssey is doing something wrong. eek.gif

I'm sure neither one of them is too happy to be shoved into that particular box together tongue.gif
 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

+1.  While I highly respect Markus' opinions, and certainly consider him knowledgeable on a wide range of audio topics, I would never have characterized him as an Audyssey zealot.  As for our friend Feri, well, 'nuff said.  wink.gif

 

Hehe. I let that go but thought exactly the same. In fact, Feri and Markus don't exactly see eye to eye and had a spectacular bust-up here not so long ago ;)  I had always thought that Markus was in the 'Audyssey-skeptical' camp and, while recognising that Audyssey can do a very good job, he seemed to challenge all of its operating principles at one time or another (when he was active in this thread). 

 

As baptig says, I'd doubt very much if either of them would like to be characterised as 'similar' to each other, even in this one suggested way :)

 

Nevertheless, Igor and Markus had a terrific ongoing 'discussion' in the 818 thread which raised many interesting points on both sides. I still believe the jury is out on Igor's issue, but I respect his tech savvy enough to know to give him the benefit of the doubt.

post #61988 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by asere View Post

By IN and OUT if mean the low pass filter on the subs. One is sealed and the other ported. The sealed has more power for the mis and upper bass so that is why I want to set the ported one to IN so the sub can handle 30hz and lower and OUT for the sealed so the avr can manage the sub. I just don't know if I need to have both on OUT prior to running Audyssey and then after Audyssey set one to IN or have one IN and the other set to OUT before Audyssey?

By all means try it out, however, this almost seems bass-ackwards as the ported sub handling 30hz and down is REALLY going to limit it's range as my guess it is only tuned to around 18-20hz if I had to guess and then the response will drop off a cliff due to the nature of a ported design. The sealed on the other hand will have a gradual roll off down low and more than likely will extend deeper, at the expense of additional output. I would say a much better way to optimize your setup is keep both full range and make sure that they are phase and time aligned.
post #61989 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorZep View Post

I would really recommend you to try the receiver in your room to check how the calibration works before committing to buying. Especially if you are considering 818. While complaining about the issue is rare, there is no guarantee that the issue itself is rare, many people just don't care or can't compare (and it really sounds better than any boom-box even with this issue, it is just far from how it should actually sound). About the rarity, just the first other owner of 818 who measured it confirmed that he also have the issue, the similarities between our setups are just the 818 and the room size/layout and lack of acoustic treatments. And within that room it is 100% repeatable and on all satellites independent on placement, so I really doubt it is so rare you shouldn't worry about it at all. Better test in your room and compare with some other receiver if possible.

I appreciate you concern, but luckily both receivers are (or will be, in case of the x4000) available at big box retailer in Canada. This will give me some time (usually 30 days) to return the product in case of any problems. Having a return window, and of course a warranty, it's the main reason I don't buy in the US, even though US prices are very tempting now and then. smile.gif

If / when I get the new receiver, I'll use REW to check how Aydyssey is working. I think a comparison with my current Yamaha RX-A1000 receiver, which uses YPAO, could be interesting.
post #61990 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

By all means try it out, however, this almost seems bass-ackwards as the ported sub handling 30hz and down is REALLY going to limit it's range as my guess it is only tuned to around 18-20hz if I had to guess and then the response will drop off a cliff due to the nature of a ported design. The sealed on the other hand will have a gradual roll off down low and more than likely will extend deeper, at the expense of additional output. I would say a much better way to optimize your setup is keep both full range and make sure that they are phase and time aligned.

It has 1 port open Crossover 30 - 90 Hz, By passable .
post #61991 of 70896
How about a link to the actual sub's parameters. What I was saying is if you put the low pass xover at 30hz, they you are literally limiting the usable operating range of the sub to 20hz up to a little above 30hz where the low pass starts to cut off the upper range. That is a VERY narrow operating range and neutering your overall performance a good bit I would assume.
post #61992 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

How about a link to the actual sub's parameters. What I was saying is if you put the low pass xover at 30hz, they you are literally limiting the usable operating range of the sub to 20hz up to a little above 30hz where the low pass starts to cut off the upper range. That is a VERY narrow operating range and neutering your overall performance a good bit I would assume.

Here is info for HSU. http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/manual/VTF-3MK4manual.pdf
Infor for Kreisel http://www.kreiselsound.com/subDXD12012.php

How about if I leave the Hsu at 50hz IN?
post #61993 of 70896
honestly the best way to get those two subs to fit together is to seal up the HSU so you then have TWO sealed subs, and let them both run full range, "OUT" or whatever. If you want to keep it ported, then still run it full range "out" and try adjusting the phase to see if you get improved overall response from the system.
post #61994 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

  As for our friend Feri, well, 'nuff said.  wink.gif

Do you Guys really know why I like Audyssey? It's very simple! Coz I've never had "issues" with MY Audyssey, ever. No below -3 dB point boosts, no subwoofer damage, no harsh highs, no DEQ surround boosts, etc., etc., etc.

My Audyssey works for me as advertised. My Denon AVR + Dali speakers are giving me multiple hours of enjoyment. I even quit the "simplified REW" thread due to loss of interest in it. My system works just fine both for movies and for music. I do not apply RLO for music anymore coz I've come up with a solution that has put an end for me to the well known phenomenon of music not being recorded to known reference. Curious? Send me a PM, but be warned it's a tedious job to do!

So, IMHO, issues are mostly related to user error or lack of understanding principles of HT setup, while as a rare case, there may be cases beyond the control of the end user. That is the time to chime in here or ask Audyssey! smile.gif

And lastly I'm gonna keep enjoying my setup to the brim, no matter how much anyone else is bashing it. It's not my problem!biggrin.gif

Take care! Have a nice weekend all! smile.gif
Edited by mogorf - 5/10/13 at 4:00pm
post #61995 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post


And lastly I'm gonna keep enjoying my setup to the brim, no matter how much anyone else is bashing it. It's not my problem!biggrin.gif

Take care! Have a nice weekend all! smile.gif

Feri, I don't recall anyone ever bashing your setup. Quite the contrary, you have received many compliments on what is obviously a well-designed and comfortable listening room. I hope you have a nice weekend as well!
post #61996 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Feri, I don't recall anyone ever bashing your setup. Quite the contrary, you have received many compliments on what is obviously a well-designed and comfortable listening room. I hope you have a nice weekend as well!

My bad Jerry. What I wanted to say was "anyone bashing Audyssey" when I used the word "it". Sorry for mis-communication.
post #61997 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Ong View Post

Hi, sdurani

Just curious. Why given the choice between wides and heights, you would do the latter, i.e. Heights?

Thanks.
I think he meant in my case. Anyway, probably I am going with the Heights. He is right, i dont see how the wides could be placed in a good position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


Ezrangel, I am in a similar position and cannot really accommodate wides - but I find heights really add to the experience. My room is a little wider than yours and in such a restricted environment I even question whether wides would add much to the overall experience.  TBH, I would work on the WAF and see if you can get her to accept the couch being much further into the room. If the room is dedicated to HT only, then it should be easier - if it is a multipurpose room and doubles as your living room, I can see the problem though wink.gif  Whatever you decide to do, good luck!
Thanks.
The good news is that I working on the WAF and maybe... maybe... I might be able to move the couch 2.5 ft... It's gonna cost me a lot. I'm gonna trade it for some changes in our bedroom that I didnt want it!
post #61998 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezrangel View Post

I think he meant in my case.
I meant in general, I would do heights before wides, for the reasons mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezrangel View Post

i dont see how the wides could be placed in a good position.
You already posted a diagram showing that the wides can be placed at the angles Audyssey recommends. The speakers that aren't placed at good angles are your L/R mains.
post #61999 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarracudaDelGato View Post

If / when I get the new receiver, I'll use REW to check how Aydyssey is working. I think a comparison with my current Yamaha RX-A1000 receiver, which uses YPAO, could be interesting.

 

That would indeed be an interesting side-by-side comparison. If you do it, please come back and post the results from REW.

post #62000 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

  As for our friend Feri, well, 'nuff said.  wink.gif

Do you Guys really know why I like Audyssey? It's very simple! Coz I've never had "issues" with MY Audyssey, ever. No below -3 dB point boosts, no subwoofer damage, no harsh highs, no DEQ surround boosts, etc., etc., etc.

My Audyssey works for me as advertised. My Denon AVR + Dali speakers are giving me multiple hours of enjoyment. I even quit the "simplified REW" thread due to loss of interest in it. My system works just fine both for movies and for music. 

 

Hi Feri - yes, my experience with Audyssey has also been very positive. I too have not had any issues with Audyssey overboosting the bass, no harsh highs, no surround problems etc etc.

 

I don't know what measuring you have done on your system using REW and a calibrated mic. If you do measure, you will see that Audyssey is far from 'perfect' and there is considerable room for improvement sometimes in the results which it gives. An example is the sub-satellite splice which Audyssey never gets right (unless by chance) because it never measures the combined response of the sub+satellites. Some careful measuring and adjustments can make a huge difference to the overall sound quality - but it is more or less impossible to do properly without the use of independent measuring tools. Unless you have used these tools you have no way of knowing if this parameter is optimised or not. 

 

Quote:
So, IMHO, issues are mostly related to user error or lack of understanding principles of HT setup, while as a rare case, there may be cases beyond the control of the end user. That is the time to chime in here or ask Audyssey! smile.gif
 

 

IMO, this is where you switch from being a sensible guy to an Audyssey 'fanboy'. It is simply not the case that all Audyssey issues are related to user error or lack of understanding. Some are, of course - and maybe it is true that 'most' are. But the refusal to accept that not all problems are user error is naive to say the least. There are many, many issues where the user is a skilled operator and knows very well what he is doing - one such issue is the sub-satellite integration at the splice which I just mentioned. The fact is, Audyssey usually gets that wrong. Other issues such as the overboost of the bass as reported here recently are well-documented and supported by objective graphs, and it is clear from the exchanges with the user that it is not user error that is causing the problem. Markus and Igor have also reported problems with Audyssey and they are highly knowledgeable individuals where 'user error' or 'lack of understanding' is certainly not relevant. To invariably take the stance that 'user error' is the cause of the problem diminishes the credibility of the person taking such a stance IMO. This blind faith in Audyssey leads to the sort of biased approval-seeking from Chris that creates questions that start from the position that Audyssey is invariably perfect and use such phrases as "we know this is an urban legend", which is not, IMO, the way to get a good answer from someone.

 

This also raises the issue of why this is the longest thread on AVS. Audyssey is meant to be an 'automated room correction system'. It is not meant to require any in-depth knowledge from the user. It is meant to be 'plug and play', where Joe SixPack can take his new AVR home, read a paragraph or two of simple instructions, plug in the mic and run half a dozen sweeps and get a calibrated system. The fact that there are well over 60,000 posts here demonstrates beyond doubt that Audyssey is failing in at least this aspect of usability. So even if all problems were 'user error' I would still take Audyssey to task on the basis that their system is flawed if it is so difficult to use properly that it has spawned the longest thread in AVS history!  The very existence of the long and complex Setup Guide and the 60+ screen-page FAQ/101 demonstrates the difficulties users find in getting the best from Audyssey. You say that problems other than user error are 'rare cases' but not so rare that there hasn’t been a need for 62,000 posts in this thread to deal with these 'rare' cases :)

 

Just because you personally have not had any issues is not proof that no issues exist. You may have been lucky or your room may not be too demanding or, of course, <shudder> your system may not actually be performing as well as it could and you don't realise it. I don't say that last point in any sort of patronising way - but it is difficult to know for sure if a system is performing as well as it can unless one has the opportunity to hear similar systems in other rooms (not easy) or makes good use of independent measuring equipment to verify what the ears appear to be hearing. I am not sure how much measuring you have done - you rarely (never?) post any graphs of your room and you say you have 'lost interest' in learning to use REW anyway.

 

None of this is meant in any way to be a criticism of you or your system or your room. It is clear from your posts that you are a very nice guy and I am sure I would enjoy a beer or two with you (the ultimate test for me!) if we lived closer to each other. But you havent acquired your reputation of 'Audyssey fanboy' for nothing you know ;)

 

 

Quote:

And lastly I'm gonna keep enjoying my setup to the brim, no matter how much anyone else is bashing it. It's not my problem!biggrin.gif

Take care! Have a nice weekend all! smile.gif
 

 

I haven’t seen anyone bashing your setup. In fact, you have received many compliments here on how comfortable and nice your room appears to be. If it also sounds as good as it looks, then you truly have achieved a fine result. So yes, keep on enjoying it to the brim - it is the reason we are all here on AVS, to get the best result we can.  And have a great weekend yourself too!

 

EDIT: Just seen your clarification of 'it'.  I don't think anyone is 'bashing' Audyssey though. Justified criticism isn’t 'bashing'. It is quite possible to be an enthusiastic supporter of Audyssey (as I am myself) while also recognising that it has faults and limitations.


Edited by kbarnes701 - 5/11/13 at 3:26am
post #62001 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezrangel View Post


Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


Ezrangel, I am in a similar position and cannot really accommodate wides - but I find heights really add to the experience. My room is a little wider than yours and in such a restricted environment I even question whether wides would add much to the overall experience.  TBH, I would work on the WAF and see if you can get her to accept the couch being much further into the room. If the room is dedicated to HT only, then it should be easier - if it is a multipurpose room and doubles as your living room, I can see the problem though wink.gif  Whatever you decide to do, good luck!
Thanks.
The good news is that I working on the WAF and maybe... maybe... I might be able to move the couch 2.5 ft... It's gonna cost me a lot. I'm gonna trade it for some changes in our bedroom that I didnt want it!

 

Compromise is the essence of marriage in many ways. Happy wife = happy life. Go for it!

post #62002 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

..... Audyssey is far from 'perfect' and there is considerable room for improvement sometimes in the results which it gives. An example is the sub-satellite splice which Audyssey never gets right (unless by chance) because it never measures the combined response of the sub+satellites.

Keith, this is the first time for me to hear Audyssey never gets the sub-satellite splice right. biggrin.gif Since when is Audyssey in charge of Bass Management and especially setting the smoothness of the sub-sat splice? Please don't spread out wrong information, especially to newbees who might be discuraged by reading such (other wise wrong) info. Audyssey EQ's each speaker channel independently and reports the low frequency -3 dB roll-off points to the AVR so that the Bass Management Department can set a crossover. Right? cool.gif
post #62003 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

..... Audyssey is far from 'perfect' and there is considerable room for improvement sometimes in the results which it gives. An example is the sub-satellite splice which Audyssey never gets right (unless by chance) because it never measures the combined response of the sub+satellites.

Keith, this is the first time for me to hear Audyssey never gets the sub-satellite splice right. biggrin.gif Since when is Audyssey in charge of Bass Management and especially setting the smoothness of the sub-sat splice? Please don't spread out wrong information, especially to newbees who might be discuraged by reading such (other wise wrong) info. Audyssey EQ's each speaker channel independently and reports the low frequency -3 dB roll-off points to the AVR so that the Bass Management Department can set a crossover. Right? cool.gif

 

Here we go again. Audyssey informs the AVR of the F3 and then the AVR sets the crossover. For most people that is the same as saying "Audyssey sets the crossover" and that is how most people refer to it - although technically we know that it is the AVR which sets the crossover, based on the information supplied to it by Audyssey. You know very well that I know this.

 

You raise the issue of bass management, but the optimisation of the splice is not a bass management issue in the normally accepted use of the term. The problem with the lack of optimisation at the splice is one of the delay (distance) being set incorrectly. As you know, Audyssey sets the delay (distance) for the subs - not the AVR - and it almost always sets it incorrectly. I feel that most people would describe the setting of a parameter incorrectly as "wrong" or, as I said. "never getting it right".  So your raising of the crossover and which bit sets it is, I am afraid, a complete red herring. The actual crossover that is set is nothing at all to do with the issue I raised and when optimising the splice one does not need to touch the crossover at all. 

 

Clearly it is very important that the crossover from the satellites to the sub (the splice) is handled impeccably so that the actual crossing over from one physical speaker to another (satellite to sub) is as seamless as possible. It doesn't actually make a fig of difference whether Audyssey sets the crossover or whether the AVR sets the crossover - the point here is one of the setting of the delay not the setting of the crossover.  Audyssey measures the sub's response and the satellite's response but it never measures the two combined responses, so it cannot offer any relevant information to the AVR. This, IMO, is a fault with Audyssey. The only way to overcome this fault is to independently measure while at the same time adjusting the delay on the sub channels and observing the resulting graph - then by adjusting the delay one can achieve the smoothest response at the splice, which in turn results in optimised performance and sound quality. Audyssey promises us an optimised system but in fact it does not deliver an optimised system as everyone who has measured the frequencies at the splice will attest to. In fact, those who have used the 'sub distance tweak' have universally (with just one exception) reported a substantial improvement over what Audyssey alone can do when they manually correct the delay/distance set by Audyssey.  The one exception I can recall is Jeff (pepar) who reported that Audyssey had set his delays accurately (as it will sometimes just by pure chance). And yes, Audyssey DOES set the delays (distances) NOT the AVR and it is solely the incorrect delay that causes the lack of optimisation at the crossover/splice. 

 

It is interesting that you choose to split this particular hair from my post and, sadly, yet further evidence of your Pavlovian reaction to anyone suggesting that Audyssey is less than perfect in any way. I gave this as one example. There are many other examples of Audyssey's flaws (and I gave the optimisation issue as one and/or the bass overboost caused by apparent other issues than optimisation) but again you will no doubt come up with a refutation of this too because it doesn't chime with Audyssey's alleged 'perfection'. 

 

I believe you have very neatly proved my point for me :) 

 

BTW, I'll be happy to accept your apology for accusing me of spreading 'wrong information'.

post #62004 of 70896
^^ Turning the question on its side--is there any (semi) automated room correction that _does_ optimize the delay for the crossover/splice correctly, as implemented in AVRs on the consumer HT market?

i know the only real test is post-calibration external measurement using REW or similar, but AFAIK it hasn't been documented for ARC, MCACC, or YPAO either.

Not that your argument concerning Audyssey isn't otherwise correct -- again.
post #62005 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

^^ Turning the question on its side--is there any (semi) automated room correction that _does_ optimize the delay for the crossover/splice correctly, as implemented in AVRs on the consumer HT market?

i know the only real test is post-calibration external measurement using REW or similar, but AFAIK it hasn't been documented for ARC, MCACC, or YPAO either.

Not that your argument concerning Audyssey isn't otherwise correct -- again.

Stuart, according to my information Audyssey would be ready to do this during auto setup (somewhere Chris once made a hint on that), but the AVR makers don't want to give up Bass Management, for the time being at least. When time comes Audyssey will probably be among the first ones to implement such a feature. But it's the marketing Gods at the AVR makers who are controlling the salami slicing machine! cool.gif

On another note, in the current hierarchy of AVRs where Audyssey is only EQ'ing the speaker channels, but not setting crossovers IMHO and with my logic, it would be impossible to do it automatically, coz when each channel EQ is finished the mic would need to be placed back to the exact same location again for a second sub-sat combined "chirping". With Audyssey taking over the Bass Management Department a one time "chirping" would be enough, probably the calculation time would need to be extended. But we can wait a bit, eh? wink.gif

P.S.: To whom it may concern! Let's keep our discussions limited to technical topics only, and refrain from getting personal! Deal? cool.gifsmile.gif Thank you! smile.gif


P.S.2: Just found the quote. The topic of the discussion was that it is not Audyssey but the AVR that sets crossovers. Here's Chris's comment: "This is a sore point with us. We have been trying to convince AVR makers to have more control over the crossovers and bass management, but it hasn't happened yet."
Edited by mogorf - 5/11/13 at 12:35pm
post #62006 of 70896
Like Feri, I have had no problems with Audyssey (combo of MultiEQ XT and an AS-EQ1), but I did get much clearer movie dialogue when I redid Audyssey using a boom mic in place of a trripod.
post #62007 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Turning the question on its side--is there any (semi) automated room correction that _does_ optimize the delay for the crossover/splice correctly, as implemented in AVRs on the consumer HT market?
Not in consumer AVRs (Audyssey, YPAO, MCACC, etc). Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that feature is in high end room correction systems (Dirac, Trinnov, Lyngdorf) either, except for ARCOS.
post #62008 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

Like Feri, I have had no problems with Audyssey (combo of MultiEQ XT and an AS-EQ1), but I did get much clearer movie dialogue when I redid Audyssey using a boom mic in place of a trripod.

Glad to year you are finally also a satisfied customer pbarach. smile.gif

Now this has lead me to the idea to start a sub-topic in this Audyssey thread where we could discuss how satisfied or unsatisfied we are. How about setting up groups as follows:

1. I'm satisfied from the beginning.
2. I'm not satisfied at all.
3. I was not satisfied, but now I am, coz ...(put description/solution here).
4. I was satisfied, but not satisfied now, coz...(put description/headache here).
5. Join this group in case you think you do not fit into any of the above,...and give reason, please.

Let's discuss. smile.gif
post #62009 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Not in consumer AVRs (Audyssey, YPAO, MCACC, etc). Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that feature is in high end room correction systems (Dirac, Trinnov, Lyngdorf) either, except for ARCOS.

How about stopping here for a moment Guys? Who said the solution as a new feature is adjusting the subwoofer delay? That IMHO is just a workaround. Moreover, it is just supposed to work for one single mic position only. It's not just Audyssey, but other Room Correction systems that are also working on multiple measurement principles, even if there is only one listener at the MLP (with a tighter multiple measurement scheme). smile.gif
post #62010 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Keith, this is the first time for me to hear Audyssey never gets the sub-satellite splice right. biggrin.gif Since when is Audyssey in charge of Bass Management and especially setting the smoothness of the sub-sat splice? Please don't spread out wrong information, especially to newbees who might be discuraged by reading such (other wise wrong) info. Audyssey EQ's each speaker channel independently and reports the low frequency -3 dB roll-off points to the AVR so that the Bass Management Department can set a crossover. Right? cool.gif

Actually IIRC it wasn't too long ago somebody posted a quote from Audyssey's Chris K to the effect that Audyssey has the "test the speakers plus sub" step built, but receiver manufacturers don't want it. Can't put it in if they won't let 'em.
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)