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 2090

post #62671 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Well, have you tested for the -10dB bass loss when using DSD?  Did you browse the thread I linked?  It's there, trust me.  If there really is a difference in the DSD decoding (which I am not convinced of), I think I would choose proper bass reproduction over a slight quality difference.  That's why I always run my Oppo 93 in PCM mode.

Remember, this is for SACD's only.  For DVD-A and Blu-ray, allowing the 8801 to receive and decode DSD is perfectly fine.

Not on the 8801, could be someone finally got it right wink.gif
post #62672 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Well, have you tested for the -10dB bass loss when using DSD?  Did you browse the thread I linked?  It's there, trust me.  If there really is a difference in the DSD decoding (which I am not convinced of), I think I would choose proper bass reproduction over a slight quality difference.  That's why I always run my Oppo 93 in PCM mode.

Remember, this is for SACD's only.  For DVD-A and Blu-ray, allowing the 8801 to receive and decode DSD is perfectly fine.



I did look over the thread and I just can't buy into it. Some agree and some disagree. So if the SACD is from a PCM master recording (which some are) doesn't that whole theory go out the window? I think that with all the advancement in technology in the last decade or so that they could fix a little problem like that. With that said if I'm wrong here I want to use the correct setting, I just don't hear a bass loss on multi channel SACD's while letting my 8801 do the PCM conversion.
Edited by comfynumb - 6/14/13 at 3:26pm
post #62673 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I did look over the thread and I just can't buy into it. Some agree and some disagree. So if the SACD is from a PCM master recording (which some are) doesn't that whole theory go out the window? I think that with all the advancement in technology in the last decade or so that they could fix a little problem like that. With that said if I'm wrong here I want to use the correct setting, I just don't hear a bass loss on multi channel SACD's while letting my 8801 do the PCM conversion.

It is fairly easy to test. Simply play an SACD track heavy in bass, and switch back and forth in the Oppo between DSD and PCM. If it is indeed fixed in the 8801, that would be good news. It is not fixed in the 4520 and, AFAIK, the 4520 and 8801 share many of the same components.
post #62674 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

It is fairly easy to test. Simply play an SACD track heavy in bass, and switch back and forth in the Oppo between DSD and PCM. If it is indeed fixed in the 8801, that would be good news. It is not fixed in the 4520 and, AFAIK, the 4520 and 8801 share many of the same components.



I just tried that for about 20 minutes the Floyd DSOTM SACD of course biggrin.gif
Wow it was very hard to tell any difference at all. I did almost think that when I set the Oppo to PCM it did have more bass. The mind is a powerful thing though, more powerful than my ears. The only way to tell is with an SPL meter. I don't think the Denon and Marantz are as much alike as we were led to believe.
post #62675 of 70896
Quote:

Do you have Steely Dan's Gaucho? The first track, Babylon Sisters, is a great test. It starts out with a punchy, throbbing bass line. As you switch back and forth between DSD and PCM, the track starts over. So it is a nice A-B comparison, since it happens pretty quickly. The difference in bass level is obvious to me when making this test. The key to doing this test is finding a track with good bass right at the beginning, since audio memory is so short.

Hey Nineteen is an equally good test, besides being one of the greatest MC Music demo songs ever.
post #62676 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Do you have Steely Dan's Gaucho? The first track, Babylon Sisters, is a great test. It starts out with a punchy, throbbing bass line. As you switch back and forth between DSD and PCM, the track starts over. So it is a nice A-B comparison, since it happens pretty quickly. The difference in bass level is obvious to me when making this test. The key to doing this test is finding a track with good bass right at the beginning, since audio memory is so short.

Hey Nineteen is an equally good test, besides being one of the greatest MC Music demo songs ever.



I stand corrected, I disconnected all of my speakers except my sub and you are definitely right PCM has more bass than DSD on multi channel SACD biggrin.gif I bought a cheap SPL meter for my iPhone and although it only registered about 4 DB higher, I suspect a real meter would have registered a bigger difference.
post #62677 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post


Audyssey will listen to the test sweeps and determine the point at which the subs are three dB down in-room. It will not correct below the F3 point. It will not know that you want to reduce the midbass towiden/ shift the flat spot in your response lower. You have to do that with something else. If you have done that already, I don't recall if thereis a lower frequency at which Audyssey stops applying EQ regardless of test results . . . but somebody else is sure toremember if CHris K held forth on the topic.

Any idea if XT32 is smart enough to determine the actual F3 in room and not just a 3db bass null ? This is all just theory right now because the amplifier is being shipped from a few provinces over. I am very interested in seeing the before and after corrections made with these subs. I haven't seen any before-after frequency plots with XT32 with capable subs yet that weren't using some sort of additional processing like MiniDSP.

If anyone has any plots that they could point me to, please do!
post #62678 of 70896
I also found out my supercube 1 sounds really bad and think it's half blown. Now I have to work on the 2 sub setup I've always wanted.
post #62679 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I stand corrected, I disconnected all of my speakers except my sub and you are definitely right PCM has more bass than DSD on multi channel SACD biggrin.gif I bought a cheap SPL meter for my iPhone and although it only registered about 4 DB higher, I suspect a real meter would have registered a bigger difference.

I'm glad we are seeing the same thing now. I go back to my original statement--the slight quality difference using DSD (if any) is not justified if you lose 10dB of bass. Thanks for sticking with me on this.
post #62680 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I also found out my supercube 1 sounds really bad and think it's half blown. Now I have to work on the 2 sub setup I've always wanted.

I am running four 15" sealed subs, so any bass difference stands out pretty quickly. You have a lot of fun ahead of you--researching the high crossover setting, re-running the calibration, buying new subs... I am jealous! Enjoy yourself, and share your progress with us.
post #62681 of 70896
Is everyone in agreement that the difference between the XT and XT32 with Sub EQ HT is worth the cost difference? Does this stand true even in a dedicated theater room?
post #62682 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

I'm glad we are seeing the same thing now. I go back to my original statement--the slight quality difference using DSD (if any) is not justified if you lose 10dB of bass. Thanks for sticking with me on this.



There was an undeniable difference even with my apparently over used sub. When I'm wrong I'm wrong and my ears don't lie, even without a meter my son goes dad that setting has a lot more bass. Your welcome and thank you for inspiring me to check it out smile.gif
Edited by comfynumb - 6/14/13 at 5:38pm
post #62683 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

I am running four 15" sealed subs, so any bass difference stands out pretty quickly. You have a lot of fun ahead of you--researching the high crossover setting, re-running the calibration, buying new subs... I am jealous! Enjoy yourself, and share your progress with us.


I would love to hear your setup! I'm thinking about 2 sealed passive 15's, possibly from parts express and a pro amp. I know some pro amps don't go down below 20Hz so maybe you could recommend one around the 5-700 WPC range that does.
Edited by comfynumb - 6/14/13 at 5:40pm
post #62684 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I would love to hear your setup! I'm thinking about 2 sealed passive 15's, possibly from parts express and a pro amp. I know some pro amps don't go down below 20Hz so maybe you could recommend one around the 5-700 WPC range that does.

Sorry, not my area of expertise. I'm sure you could get good advice in one of the sub threads.
post #62685 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Do you have Steely Dan's Gaucho? The first track, Babylon Sisters, is a great test. It starts out with a punchy, throbbing bass line. As you switch back and forth between DSD and PCM, the track starts over. So it is a nice A-B comparison, since it happens pretty quickly. The difference in bass level is obvious to me when making this test. The key to doing this test is finding a track with good bass right at the beginning, since audio memory is so short.

Hey Nineteen is an equally good test, besides being one of the greatest MC Music demo songs ever.

Jerry,

Excellent disc suggestion for checking the bass output for the DSD to PCM comparison smile.gif. I'm not sure if it is the updated FW of the 103 but when I switch between DSD and PCM the songs do not start over. That alone is a good reason to update to the 103 or the 105 biggrin.gif.
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I disconnected all of my speakers except my sub and you are definitely right PCM has more bass than DSD on multi channel SACD biggrin.gif

I'm not sure if you meant that you physically disconnected the speaker cables. But the easiet way to do this in the future is to just shut off your MCH amp.

Bill
post #62686 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

Jerry,

Excellent disc suggestion for checking the bass output for the DSD to PCM comparison smile.gif. I'm not sure if it is the updated FW of the 103 but when I switch between DSD and PCM the songs do not start over. That alone is a good reason to update to the 103 or the 105 biggrin.gif.
I'm not sure if you meant that you physically disconnected the speaker cables. But the easiet way to do this in the future is to just shut off your MCH amp.

Bill

Hey, Bill, nice to hear from you. Regarding the upgrade to the 103, I'll get right on that! wink.gif
post #62687 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

Jerry,

Excellent disc suggestion for checking the bass output for the DSD to PCM comparison smile.gif. I'm not sure if it is the updated FW of the 103 but when I switch between DSD and PCM the songs do not start over. That alone is a good reason to update to the 103 or the 105 biggrin.gif.
I'm not sure if you meant that you physically disconnected the speaker cables. But the easiet way to do this in the future is to just shut off your MCH amp.

Bill



Ok I feel really dumb right about now. There's only 62,000 posts on this who could possibly see it? biggrin.gif
post #62688 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Ok I feel really dumb right about now. There's only 62,000 posts on this who could possibly see it? biggrin.gif

Don't feel bad I've done much worse smile.gif. I can't recall what those miscues were as I have conveniently forgotten them wink.gif.

Bill
post #62689 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Do you have Steely Dan's Gaucho? The first track, Babylon Sisters, is a great test. It starts out with a punchy, throbbing bass line. As you switch back and forth between DSD and PCM, the track starts over. So it is a nice A-B comparison, since it happens pretty quickly. The difference in bass level is obvious to me when making this test. The key to doing this test is finding a track with good bass right at the beginning, since audio memory is so short.

Hey Nineteen is an equally good test, besides being one of the greatest MC Music demo songs ever.


I have this in the DTS version and even that recording is fantastic, but these were good to begin with period!

You have good taste Sir wink.gif
post #62690 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post

Wow, I didn't expect such unequivocal support for XT32 over XT, particularly factoring in price difference!!! The thing is, as part of my speaker purchase, I can get a Marantz receiver at nearly an extra $400 off. To go to XT32, I'd have to get the 7008 though, which comes in then at a similar price as the Denon mentioned. Or should I just get the Denon, but also the discounted Marantz (say 5008) and try to flip it? I'm still inclined to pick up an Emotiva 3-amp at least (25% off right now), but maybe it's overkill with one of these receivers?

 

Just to add my comment wrt to XT32. Yes - it is a huge step forward from XT. I would never go back to XT.

 

WRT to the Emo amp - unless you have identified a real need for an external amp, it will contribute very little over and above what the AVRs you are considering will do. 

 

Real needs might include the following:

 

  • You have very low impedance speakers and/or speakers that are difficult to drive for whatever reason.
  • The SPLs you require, combined with inefficient speakers and/or a seating distance some considerable way from the speakers, means you are clipping the internal AVR amps.
  • You need to introduce additional processing of some sort between the preamp and power amp.

 

If none of the above apply, then the Emo amp will add very little, if anything. It is certainly not likely to make any audible difference to sound quality.

 

What were your reasons for considering external amplification?

post #62691 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by geodon005 View Post

AustinJerry:

Any thoughts as to my original question - would 100Hz for my ceiling speakers be better than 80Hz, or does it not make much difference with XT32?

 

There is nothing wrong with setting crossovers to a higher value, and it really has nothing to do with XT32.  As Beast says, try both settings to see which you like better.  Since your sub is probably more capable of handling the lower frequencies, my guess would be that the 100Hz setting will provide better overall sound.

 

+1

post #62692 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathanc View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post


Audyssey will listen to the test sweeps and determine the point at which the subs are three dB down in-room. It will not correct below the F3 point. It will not know that you want to reduce the midbass towiden/ shift the flat spot in your response lower. You have to do that with something else. If you have done that already, I don't recall if thereis a lower frequency at which Audyssey stops applying EQ regardless of test results . . . but somebody else is sure toremember if CHris K held forth on the topic.

Any idea if XT32 is smart enough to determine the actual F3 in room and not just a 3db bass null ? This is all just theory right now because the amplifier is being shipped from a few provinces over. I am very interested in seeing the before and after corrections made with these subs. I haven't seen any before-after frequency plots with XT32 with capable subs yet that weren't using some sort of additional processing like MiniDSP.

If anyone has any plots that they could point me to, please do!

 

There are many graphs showing the effect Audyssey XT32 has on bass, all over AVS.  Here is one of mine, from a period when I was experimenting with sub placement etc. My subs are dual Seaton Submersives. The graphs are 1/48th smoothed to make comparison easier. Bear in mind I have a heavily treated room, so Audyssey makes less impact for me than it does for others with untreated rooms, which is where the big Audyssey win is found.  Green is Audyssey ON.

 

Since making those graphs, I have experimented with additional treatments and sub and speaker placement and have eliminated that nasty suckout at 60Hz, and made other improvements. 

 

 

Audyssey's inability to deal with the 60Hz problem shows the value of getting the subs in the right place before running Audyssey. Audyssey (nor any other form of electronic EQ) cannot correct for room-induced nulls. 

 

post #62693 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isantus View Post

Is everyone in agreement that the difference between the XT and XT32 with Sub EQ HT is worth the cost difference? Does this stand true even in a dedicated theater room?

 

There is no doubt that XT32 is superior to XT. I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

 

In a dedicated room with properly applied acoustic treatments, the impact of electronic EQ will be diminished.

 

However, even dedicated rooms have problems, some of which might include:

 

  • Issues arising from the basic shape and/or size of the room.
  • Problems with construction type of the room.
  • Poorly applied acoustic treatments.
  • User inexperience with measuring and applying the results.
  • Wrong type of treatments used.
  • Poorly designed treatments.
  • Difficulties in locating speakers and subs in the optimum location.
  • Etc.

 

Because of this, Audyssey might be expected to do the final 'clear-up' of any remaining issues that have not been resolved and in this sense it is the icing in the cake and a very worthwhile tool in the armoury. Audyssey cannot replace a well-designed and well-treated room (nor is it designed to do so) but it is still very worthwhile to run Audyssey after everything that can be done with the room has been done. Indeed, the better the room to start with, the better the final Audyssey result you will obtain.

post #62694 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Mark Seaton (of Seaton Submersive fame) agrees with and recommends that procedure. Mark knows a bit about subs wink.gif

You have to remove the effect of the room to gain match. Remember this isn’t level matching we are talking about here. Audyssey will level match the subs when it calibrates, including the impact of the room. There are then two choices: the conventional approach is to 'split the difference' between the trims Audyssey sets, thus preserving the gain match. Jerry has found i his case that leaving the levels as set by Audyssey gives him a superior result, but strictly speaking his subs are no longer gain matched if their trims are different. None of that matters though if the measured response Jerry;s way gives him a better result.

Well, I would never disagree with Mark when it comes to subs. I think moving the subs to a common spot is the most precise way to do it. However, to put my own mind at ease, I actually did it both ways and measured to see if there were any differences. I did not see any. HST, the results may be different for others, depending on the room and the placement.

Like a lot of the audio stuff we do, a perfectionist will go to great lengths to eek out the last bit of performance from his system--I know! But do all the little perfectionist things make a worthwhile difference? Each of us must make that decision ourselves.

 

Concurred, Jerry.

post #62695 of 70896
Just got at new Integra 80.3 that has MultiEQ XT32. Trying to set it up. My older version would let me repeat a step. So if I was doing seating position #4 for example, I would just do it over if there were outside noises (cars, kids, etc).

This new version doesn't seem to have a way to repeat a seating position and you have to start all over from the beginning if you dont like the reading from a position.

Is this true? Is there a work around?
post #62696 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post

For pre/receiver now I'm looking at the difference between, say, a Marantz 5008 (w/XT) + Emotiva 3-channel amp compared to a used (from Audiogon) Integra DHC 80.2 (w/XT32) + Emotiva 5-channel amp.!

If I were you, I'd look at the Denon AVR-X4000 receiver.

It's a value priced receiver, that comes packed with all the latest features, including the flagship version of Audyssey: MultEQ XT32 with Sub EQ HT.

Click here to read the full review.
post #62697 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamond Dog View Post

Just got at new Integra 80.3 that has MultiEQ XT32. Trying to set it up. My older version would let me repeat a step. So if I was doing seating position #4 for example, I would just do it over if there were outside noises (cars, kids, etc).

This new version doesn't seem to have a way to repeat a seating position and you have to start all over from the beginning if you dont like the reading from a position.

Is this true? Is there a work around?

Doesn't have anything to do with the version of Audyssey, just how the mfgr implemented it. What brand was your previous receiver? That behavior seems to be an Onkyo thing, on every Denon I've used you can just hit cancel and repeat that measurement if you need to. But when I helped a friend install an Onk 3009 a couple of years ago I noticed that I couldn't do it, hitting cancel would take me back to the beginning.
post #62698 of 70896
I had the same brand INtegra, but a DTC-9.8 before and I could redo a "seating" without having to start over
Edited by Diamond Dog - 6/15/13 at 12:50pm
post #62699 of 70896
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete

Now, the question is, would XT32 be THAT much better than XT for my purposes, assuming I don't intend to get a second sub?!

A while back I upgraded from a Yamaha RX-V667 receiver to a Onkyo receiver with MultEQ XT32 with Sub EQ HT.
I was totally blown away by the 10 fold improvement in sound quality in my HT!
I never knew my budget speaker system was capable of sounding this good.

MultEQ XT32 is indeed worth the extra money you have to spend to get it.

Having watched several movies now on my new Denon 4520, the same movies I watched just a week or two ago with my old 4310, I have to concur - XT32 has improved the sound stage and especially the center channel sound ( crisper dialog ) by far over the version in my 4310 anyway - I am extremely pleased so far !! smile.gif
post #62700 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post


What were your reasons for considering external amplification?

I plan on getting Triads, which are 4 ohms nominal. But it seems like higher end receivers can still handle it fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcat4843 View Post

If I were you, I'd look at the Denon AVR-X4000 receiver.

It's a value priced receiver, that comes packed with all the latest features, including the flagship version of Audyssey: MultEQ XT32 with Sub EQ HT.

Click here to read the full review.

That would definitely be my choice, except I can get the brand new Marantz flagship (SR 7008) for a similar price with my speaker purchase. I thought for sure it would be a silly question, as I was under the impression the main benefit of XT32 was two-sub calibration. Now I'm incredibly glad I asked, as the consensus is overwhelming!

So, I think I will get the 7008, Triads, and no external amp (oh, and probably an SVS PB12-NSD). It still seems almost ridiculous to me to buy such a powerful receiver for what will likely be a 5.1 theater with precisely one source (a bluray player) and not much else. But sound quality is paramount, I suppose. smile.gif
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)