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 2179

post #65341 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

I must try this raising the mic malarkey. Although TBH IDK why... my current response is within my target +/- 3dB. Just curiosity I guess. Glad you have found a good solution for you room, and added to the knowledge base for non-SOP mic positions.

 

 

The Audyssey Guide over on HTS advocates raising the mic 3" for two of the eight positions (the MLP, and one position 3" in front of the MLP).  I don't know how you could measure the difference between two calibrations, one with no height variations, and one with height variations, because the minor measurement differences are most likely attributable to slightly different mic positions in the horizontal plane.  So, we are left with listening tests.  Either it sounds better, or it doesn't, and if it sounds better, one must factor in expectation bias.

 

In Beast's case, he has made enough other changes that the simple mic height variation may not be contributing anything to the improved sound.  The ceiling treatments surely would make a significant difference, as I found when I added them several months ago.

 

 

IMO, this thread is obsessed with minor deviations in mic placement, as if this is resulting in huge differences in the calibration results.  Even for an obsessive personality like mine, I think this has gotten completely out of hand.  Where is Feri when we need him?  ;)

 

Edit:  I forgot to mention that "malarkey" is a perfect description, Keith.

post #65342 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Very nice! You don't have to share the sound with your wife or gf but you could at least give her a seat biggrin.gif
Honestly it looks good and best of luck on your room.

You are correct - i am not THAT selfish.
More seats coming.
post #65343 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bao01 View Post

You are correct - i am not THAT selfish.
More seats coming.



Great looking B&W's.
What kind of subs are they?
post #65344 of 70896
JL Audio Fathom f113 - they weigh a freakin tonne
Edited by bao01 - 10/3/13 at 10:41am
post #65345 of 70896
Nice! I've heard good things about them.
post #65346 of 70896
They can crack dry wall.
post #65347 of 70896
Lol
post #65348 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

I must try this raising the mic malarkey. Although TBH IDK why... my current response is within my target +/- 3dB. Just curiosity I guess. Glad you have found a good solution for you room, and added to the knowledge base for non-SOP mic positions.

 

 

The Audyssey Guide over on HTS advocates raising the mic 3" for two of the eight positions (the MLP, and one position 3" in front of the MLP).  I don't know how you could measure the difference between two calibrations, one with no height variations, and one with height variations, because the minor measurement differences are most likely attributable to slightly different mic positions in the horizontal plane.  So, we are left with listening tests.  Either it sounds better, or it doesn't, and if it sounds better, one must factor in expectation bias.

 

In Beast's case, he has made enough other changes that the simple mic height variation may not be contributing anything to the improved sound.  The ceiling treatments surely would make a significant difference, as I found when I added them several months ago.

 

 

IMO, this thread is obsessed with minor deviations in mic placement, as if this is resulting in huge differences in the calibration results.  Even for an obsessive personality like mine, I think this has gotten completely out of hand.  Where is Feri when we need him?  ;)

 

Edit:  I forgot to mention that "malarkey" is a perfect description, Keith.

 

Again, I agree with all your observations (other than one, which I will leave to your imagination to determine).  

;)

post #65349 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

 

I must try this raising the mic malarkey. Although TBH IDK why... my current response is within my target +/- 3dB. Just curiosity I guess. Glad you have found a good solution for you room, and added to the knowledge base for non-SOP mic positions.


The Audyssey Guide over on HTS advocates raising the mic 3" for two of the eight positions (the MLP, and one position 3" in front of the MLP).  I don't know how you could measure the difference between two calibrations, one with no height variations, and one with height variations, because the minor measurement differences are most likely attributable to slightly different mic positions in the horizontal plane.  So, we are left with listening tests.  Either it sounds better, or it doesn't, and if it sounds better, one must factor in expectation bias.

In Beast's case, he has made enough other changes that the simple mic height variation may not be contributing anything to the improved sound.  The ceiling treatments surely would make a significant difference, as I found when I added them several months ago.


IMO, this thread is obsessed with minor deviations in mic placement, as if this is resulting in huge differences in the calibration results.  Even for an obsessive personality like mine, I think this has gotten completely out of hand.  Where is Feri when we need him?  wink.gif

Edit:  I forgot to mention that "malarkey" is a perfect description, Keith.

Again, I agree with all your observations (other than one, which I will leave to your imagination to determine).  
wink.gif
And I'll concur as well.

The ONLY reason I developed the plumb bob method of OCD mic placement was SOLELY to test the claims some folks made that Audyssey was so variable that you could never get consistent calibrations on different days even with no changes to the system.

The 1/4" or less accuracy provided by that method proved to me that with identical mic placements, I got identical results. I then realized (as Keith has) after measuring with REW, that in MY setup, roughly similar placements (eyeballed to within a 3" radius for each mic position) produced similar enough results that pinpoint precision was unnecessary.

That led me to explore, from trying close grouped positions all the way to my current 3-pt calibration, each time, measuring the results in the area of my MLP with REW, as well as running some listening tests. The 8-pt close group produced better results in the MLP zone than the standard 8-pt pattern, and the 3-pt pattern (***in MY room with MY setup) produced a measurably and audibly great result comparable to the close grouped 8-pt.

Once again though, I would stress that I don't recommend ANYONE else using my 3-pt calibration method UNLESS they have measuring equipment and can confirm that it works well compared to the measured results for the more common 8-pt patterns IN THEIR OWN ROOM. Just because it turns out to work well in my room doesn't mean it will in someone else's, AND I'm calibrating solely for MY seat.


Max
post #65350 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post
And I'll concur as well.

The ONLY reason I developed the plumb bob method of OCD mic placement was SOLELY to test the claims some folks made that Audyssey was so variable that you could never get consistent calibrations on different days even with no changes to the system.

The 1/4" or less accuracy provided by that method proved to me that with identical mic placements, I got identical results. I then realized (as Keith has) after measuring with REW, that in MY setup, roughly similar placements (eyeballed to within a 3" radius for each mic position) produced similar enough results that pinpoint precision was unnecessary.

That led me to explore, from trying close grouped positions all the way to my current 3-pt calibration, each time, measuring the results in the area of my MLP with REW, as well as running some listening tests. The 8-pt close group produced better results in the MLP zone than the standard 8-pt pattern, and the 3-pt pattern (***in MY room with MY setup) produced a measurably and audibly great result comparable to the close grouped 8-pt.

Once again though, I would stress that I don't recommend ANYONE else using my 3-pt calibration method UNLESS they have measuring equipment and can confirm that it works well compared to the measured results for the more common 8-pt patterns IN THEIR OWN ROOM. Just because it turns out to work well in my room doesn't mean it will in someone else's, AND I'm calibrating solely for MY seat.


Max

 

+1. Especially your last paragraph. I have been at pains to stress this too - once we go away from SOP then we need to be careful, and to measure if possible to confirm the results obtained objectively. You, me, Jerry and others all seem to be very happy with our non-standard mic patterns, yet we all do it somewhat differently, so the best advice has to be that contained in your final paragraph above. 

post #65351 of 70896
I just built a riser for three Berkline home theater chairs. My riser is 10" high and is in back of a sectional. I am running 7.2 system with two in-ceiling speakers in the rear and two in-wall speakers on the side. I have a Denon 1913 receiver and I ran Audyssey. The first three mic positions were on the sectional, the second three positions I placed on top of the riser at ear level on the home theater chairs. I put in World War Z and it was a completely different listening experience. Surrounds are very pronounced and sound wipes from one side of the room were very notifiable. Bass was not quite as deep as the front row, but the hanggernade scene shook the whole room. There was a scene when they are on the airplane leaving Israel. Brad Pitt is walking up the row and someone behind him coughs on the plane. I jumped and looked behind me.

I like the back row sound during movies, but TV is a different matter. On broadcast TV, the rear surrounds are either all or nothing. The crowd noise during football games is unlistenable. I am still experimenting with mic position with two rows, but so far, I like the settings I got with Audyssey with two rows.

Any suggestions on how I should position the mic on my next Audyssey calibration?
post #65352 of 70896
Broadcast TV is like that, great surround usage on one game and then the next has no crowd noise; very annonying. Follow the setup guide positions that are listed at the start of this thread or what is outlined in the user manual for your receiver.
post #65353 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

+1. Especially your last paragraph. I have been at pains to stress this too - once we go away from SOP then we need to be careful, and to measure if possible to confirm the results obtained objectively. You, me, Jerry and others all seem to be very happy with our non-standard mic patterns, yet we all do it somewhat differently, so the best advice has to be that contained in your final paragraph above. 

Even though we all have our own flavor around here, the basics are what we all have in common. Proper seating position, speaker position, room treatments where possible, etc. This obviously yields and much more consistent result in post audyssey calibrations than improper mic placement would ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sojodave View Post

I just built a riser for three Berkline home theater chairs. My riser is 10" high and is in back of a sectional. I am running 7.2 system with two in-ceiling speakers in the rear and two in-wall speakers on the side. I have a Denon 1913 receiver and I ran Audyssey. The first three mic positions were on the sectional, the second three positions I placed on top of the riser at ear level on the home theater chairs. I put in World War Z and it was a completely different listening experience. Surrounds are very pronounced and sound wipes from one side of the room were very notifiable. Bass was not quite as deep as the front row, but the hanggernade scene shook the whole room. There was a scene when they are on the airplane leaving Israel. Brad Pitt is walking up the row and someone behind him coughs on the plane. I jumped and looked behind me.

I like the back row sound during movies, but TV is a different matter. On broadcast TV, the rear surrounds are either all or nothing. The crowd noise during football games is unlistenable. I am still experimenting with mic position with two rows, but so far, I like the settings I got with Audyssey with two rows.

Any suggestions on how I should position the mic on my next Audyssey calibration?

Perhaps you have dynamic EQ on all the time and you would only prefer it on movies? I would give this is a shot and disable it while watching broadcast signals biggrin.gif
post #65354 of 70896
Quote:
Perhaps you have dynamic EQ on all the time and you would only prefer it on movies? I would give this is a shot and disable it while watching broadcast signals biggrin.gif

That's a great suggestion, I'll have to try it tonight.
post #65355 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

IMO, this thread is obsessed with minor deviations in mic placement, as if this is resulting in huge differences in the calibration results.  Even for an obsessive personality like mine, I think this has gotten completely out of hand.  Where is Feri when we need himwink.gif

Feri is out there somewhere enjoying his system to the brim without the slightest affection of OCD, ever. smile.gifsmile.gifsmile.gif

Also Feri is astonished when he reads so much "stuff" having nothing to do with "intended use" of Audyssey room correction system that he just keeps silent (until now) when a respected member like Jerry from Austin, TX also comes up with an "enough of all the BS, Guys" warning.

To the new comers of Audyssey: please read the recent posts of this thread with a grain of salt, and instead try to follow the makers descriptions for best results.

With compliments! smile.gif
post #65356 of 70896
Pretty sure my Klipsch RC64 center is faulty. I've had it for about 60 days, and there's always been an unatural curve below 80Hz, however that curve has now moved up to 110-120Hz. I re-ran Audssey a dozen times, tried different mic positions, move the center around. Nothing has really changed in the room. I even tried a different mic of the same model.



Should I file an RMA with Klipsch? There's no reason a speaker of this price should have these problems (My old RC62 didn't, and my RS52 surrounds don't!).
post #65357 of 70896
Are you basing this on the EQ graph shown in your post? It is quite normal for the EQ graph to show a sharp low frequency attenuation below the crossover point, which is what you are seeing. Above the crossover point, it looks quite normal.

Edit: What is the center crossover?
post #65358 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrindor View Post

Pretty sure my Klipsch RC64 center is faulty..

Hi Tyrindor, if you're pretty sure your Klipsch RC64 center is faulty, why not have it repaired,...and then run Audyssey.eek.gifsmile.gifcool.gif
post #65359 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Are you basing this on the EQ graph shown in your post? It is quite normal for the EQ graph to show a sharp low frequency attenuation below the crossover point, which is what you are seeing. Above the crossover point, it looks quite normal.

Edit: What is the center crossover?

It set it to 120hz, which is insanely high to my knowledge for such an expensive speaker. 4x 6 1/2 inch cones should be able to produce 80Hz accurately. My old RC62, which is a major step down, was able to do 60Hz. I just moved the mic 1 foot back, and it set my Center to FULL BAND... Then I moved it 6 inches closer and it set it to 250Hz (Cranked everything below this point all the way to the minimum). These are exact opposites over a mere 6 inch difference in mic position.
post #65360 of 70896
Quote:
I just moved the mic 1 foot back, and it set my Center to FULL BAND... Then I moved it 6 inches closer and it set it to 250Hz (Cranked everything below this point all the way to the minimum). These are exact opposites over a mere 6 inch difference in mic position.

This clearly indicates the issue is ROOM ACOUSTICS and not a defective speaker.

The place where your measurements are clustered is clearly in some sort of weird null that is causing these variable measurements.
post #65361 of 70896
In my 5.2 (dual mono subs) system, I'm thinking of moving around my main L&R speakers to try and improve soundstage depth and imaging for stereo music listening. This will undoubtedly change the speaker distances from the MLP (one of them is closer to the MLP than the other, and I'm going to change that).



Everybody says you should get the best placement for your speakers for imaging before you run Audyssey. Well, of course I have already run Audyssey before, which means I'd turn Audyssey MultiEQ off in my Denon 4310 while experimenting with new speaker positions and aim. But what should I do about the speaker distance settings in the AVR while I'm playing around with their distance from the MLP and each other, and with toe-in? Of course, I will rerun the Audyssey calibration after I get these speakers where I like them.
post #65362 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

This clearly indicates the issue is ROOM ACOUSTICS and not a defective speaker.

The place where your measurements are clustered is clearly in some sort of weird null that is causing these variable measurements.

Alright so if is my room acoustics, how should I go about tweaking the crossovers after running Audyssey? I normally set an overall crossover of 80Hz, LFE of 120Hz, and all speakers to Small. However, if it's cranking the DBs down on the 80-120Hz range, I'm not sure if it's wise to set the center lower than what Audyssey recommends.
post #65363 of 70896
@Pbarach:

The left and right speakers are the most important when it comes to imaging. Since your objective is to have the two speakers equidistant from the MLP, then temporarily set the distances in the AVR to the same value while you are assessing the imaging. The actual distance isn't important, just that the distances are the same. Once you are happy with the placement, run Audyssey and the correct distances will be calibrated.

BTW, I have reported before that I use Audyssey to determine whether the left and right speakers are indeed equidistant from the MLP. Simply place your Audyssey mic carefully at the MLP, run a single-point Audyssey measurement, click the Calculate button, and observe in the results screen whether the speakers are equidistant. If not, adjust the physical speaker distance and repeat the procedure until the distances are exactly the same. Then complete the process by running your full eight-point calibration. The result will be a precisely centered soundstage, especially for stereo music sources.
post #65364 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bao01 View Post

They can crack dry wall.

Lol -- humor, I guess, but I can't be sure. Our old walls (drywall on studs) seemed to move 1/8 (or 1/4 ?eek.gif) of an inch. You could put your hand on the wall and it would bounce your hand off. Our newer walls have drywall on 3/4 plywood (screwed/glued/staggered) on studs, and nothing moves, except the couch and our pants legs, Remember the ad that showed the guy's hair blowing in the wind (TDK??)? EDIT: It was Maxell, the competing tape company.
Edited by garygarrison - 10/4/13 at 1:12am
post #65365 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrindor View Post

Alright so if is my room acoustics, how should I go about tweaking the crossovers after running Audyssey? I normally set an overall crossover of 80Hz, LFE of 120Hz, and all speakers to Small. However, if it's cranking the DBs down on the 80-120Hz range, I'm not sure if it's wise to set the center lower than what Audyssey recommends.

Easy. If the center is set to Full Range, then you can set it to Small and use whatever crossover you like. If the center is set to 120Hz, then you are stuck with that crossover (don't lower it), or you can move the center and re-run Audyssey until you get a lower crossover value.
post #65366 of 70896
on this forum it isn't unheard of to have subs make whole staircases come off the wall eek.gif
post #65367 of 70896
^^
Thanks, that makes good sense.
post #65368 of 70896
Hello guys i need your advice. I just finished my aud. Is my result are just fine? Seems like my subwoofer result is too way high? Thanks for the feed back
post #65369 of 70896
Questions...

If you use Manuel EQ and "copy" curve. What curve are they talking about?

Audyseey

Or

Audyseey Flat

Or

Neither?



Question 2. When I use audyseey or audyseey flat and then try to run my system at reference, I clip the signal on the highs... Popping noises from my speakers. I can remove then by running 5 DB under reference or doing Manuel EQ / Copy Curve / and manually dropping the 16K band down to 0DB

I have to use an exstention cable to get to my MLP, do you think this is causing the mic to read the Highs wrong, and it is raising the db to high in the 13khz range up? Or is my mic bad?
post #65370 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOWK View Post

Questions...

If you use Manuel EQ and "copy" curve. What curve are they talking about?

Audyseey

Or

Audyseey Flat

Or

Neither?



Question 2. When I use audyseey or audyseey flat and then try to run my system at reference, I clip the signal on the highs... Popping noises from my speakers. I can remove then by running 5 DB under reference or doing Manuel EQ / Copy Curve / and manually dropping the 16K band down to 0DB

I have to use an exstention cable to get to my MLP, do you think this is causing the mic to read the Highs wrong, and it is raising the db to high in the 13khz range up? Or is my mic bad?

 

d)7.   Can I extend the Audyssey mic cable?

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)