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 2186

post #65551 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post
 
Not only are you benefitting below 20hz with the dual location placement, but you are also making your sub system more efficient. Reason? Because you are tackling other room modes by spreading them out, causing Audyssey to have to apply fewer, and less drastic filters to acheive a relatively smooth room response. This in turn will require less overall wattage from your amp if less boosting is needed in areas of the sub's passband. My guess is the differences in location would be more drastic if you measured the two locations WITHOUT running audyssey before hand.
 

 

Great point and the reason I asked bao01 to present his graphs prior to Audyssey RC (albeit that was in the REW thread).  The other implied benefit here is less EQ from Audyssey when using better sub positioning.

post #65552 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

Great point and the reason I asked bao01 to present his graphs prior to Audyssey RC (albeit that was in the REW thread).  The other implied benefit here is less EQ from Audyssey when using better sub positioning.

Which was the first part of my post smile.gif
post #65553 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

a lot of the new blockbusters are limiting content below 30hz on the blurays. I suspect it sounds better on the bose systems that way smile.gif

but yes, once i felt some ULF I 'got it'. makes my hair stand up.

Have any proof to back up that claim? I don't know of any minus the little "super8" debacle that I am aware of.

Well since you don't know...lol

But no, I didn't take a picture of the hairs on my arm standing up...

and tbh I haven't heard a bose system in quite a long time so I don't really know for sure if current mixes would sound better on it.

All I do know is from the industry insiders, and especially one of the big sound editors, speaking on the subject on another forum dealing with film technology. Although he didn't specifically say anything like 30hz etc, what he did say plainly is that they are mixing the levels to a lower volume, redoing the EQ for smaller spaces and specifically for home speakers, and changing the imaging for narrower spaces; he has to do this by contract on every movie they make right now and the feature track on the bluray has turned out to be this track. My 30hz is completely arbitrary and anecdotal based on the trends seen in the latest blockbuster graphs in the bass thread for some big movies that had big bass in some theaters. Also some of the insiders mentioned that some theater's are messing with the audio equalization in ways that the movie was not intended to be exhibitioned and in some theater's they are having issues with spaces not intended for speakers (chinese theater) starting to blow drivers to keep the sound correct. There's a lot of details I'm sure I'm missing, but you can always learn more by reading and asking questions of the experts.
post #65554 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post
 
 
another forum dealing with film technology. 

 

Mo - what forum is that?  I am very interested in the production side of movies and would like to take a look. if you don't feel it is appropriate to link to another site here, please PM me. Thx.

post #65555 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

Well since you don't know...lol

But no, I didn't take a picture of the hairs on my arm standing up...

and tbh I haven't heard a bose system in quite a long time so I don't really know for sure if current mixes would sound better on it.

All I do know is from the industry insiders, and especially one of the big sound editors, speaking on the subject on another forum dealing with film technology. Although he didn't specifically say anything like 30hz etc, what he did say plainly is that they are mixing the levels to a lower volume, redoing the EQ for smaller spaces and specifically for home speakers, and changing the imaging for narrower spaces; he has to do this by contract on every movie they make right now and the feature track on the bluray has turned out to be this track. My 30hz is completely arbitrary and anecdotal based on the trends seen in the latest blockbuster graphs in the bass thread for some big movies that had big bass in some theaters. Also some of the insiders mentioned that some theater's are messing with the audio equalization in ways that the movie was not intended to be exhibitioned and in some theater's they are having issues with spaces not intended for speakers (chinese theater) starting to blow drivers to keep the sound correct. There's a lot of details I'm sure I'm missing, but you can always learn more by reading and asking questions of the experts.

Hm. I would think perhaps that 30hz is a little too high, perhaps 20hz would be a little better. Unfortunately for those movies in the last few years, they are just losing market share to enthusiasts with capable systems. I mean OTOH there are still plenty of movies made in the last 5 years that have had solid content down into even the single digit hz arena. so potatoe-potahto, other mixers are still going hard in the pain when it comes to full bandwidth mixing.
post #65556 of 70895
I'm not sure how appropriate or not (so if not mod, please delete), but this one doesn't seem to really compete with this site anyway http://www.film-tech.com/main.php

appropriately named I'd say wink.gif
post #65557 of 70895
beast, I'll give you an example of one that was remixed in this way but managed to be done in a way as to enhance the original. I consider it the exception rather than the rule (micasa is a famous crew). Hellboy II. No one could say they took out the low end on that one and the dynamic range still seems right....but the fact is they did do a nearfield 7.1 job on it.

i've literally only in the last week started to use the DD5.1 mixes on my 'big sound' movies and started to realize the dynamic range I was missing.
post #65558 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

 
For example, NAD ....

AVR list updated to include NAD.

Audyssey AVR Versions 5.pdf 37k .pdf file

Great resource Keith!


There's also Integra, so I took the liberty of slapping this together:

Integra

DHC-80.3 9.2 Channel Network A/V Controller - MultEQ XT32 Pro enabled

DHC-60.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Controller - MultEQ XT32 (ex. Sub EQ HT)

DTR-80.3 9.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ XT32 Pro enabled

DTR-70.4 9.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ XT32 Pro enabled

DTR-60.5 9.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ XT32 (ex. Sub EQ HT)

DTR-50.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ

DTR-40.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ

DTR-30.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ

DTR-20.4 5.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - 2EQ


Also, recent additions from your neck of the woods: wink.gif

Cambridge Audio

Azur 751R Upsampling Home Cinema Receiver - 2EQ

Azur 651R Home Cinema Receiver - 2EQ


Hope that helps...
post #65559 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Mo - what forum is that?  I am very interested in the production side of movies and would like to take a look. if you don't feel it is appropriate to link to another site here, please PM me. Thx.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1333462/the-new-master-list-of-bass-in-movies-with-frequency-charts
post #65560 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

Great point and the reason I asked bao01 to present his graphs prior to Audyssey RC (albeit that was in the REW thread).  The other implied benefit here is less EQ from Audyssey when using better sub positioning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

Which was the first part of my post smile.gif

ok - i will post the pre Audyssey ("Direct" mode) up tonight or this wkend.

thanks for input
post #65561 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post
 

 

I previously agreed with you, but check out measurements from my new Onkyo 818.

 

Green trace is Reference curve, Purple trace is Music (flat) curve.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by garygarrison View Post

Thanks, SoundofMind, Primetimeguy, Mo949, and AustinJerry!

I wonder if Audyssey has changed its decision about midrange compensation. The links SoundofMind so graciously provided were from 2009 and 2010. In them Chris said that Audyssey Flat incorporated the 2K dip. I bought my Marantz AV7005 pre/pro in March 2011, and it showed something like a 1.5 dB difference at 2K. Primetimeguy ran curves on the frequency response of his new Onkyo 818, and Audyssey Flat v. Reference showed approx a 2.5 dB difference around 2K. Could this be a case of "creeping flatness" on the part of the almost flat Audyssey Flat curve?

I prefer Audyssey Reference on almost all movies, but on a lesser proportion of CDs. The weird thing is that it seems that, especially with movies, I can hear more of the very high frequencies (probably above 8K) that convey sparkle, shimmer and air -- with Audyssey Reference. That is not only counter-intuitive, but counter-rational, given that the very high frequencies are louder in Audyssey Flat. Perhaps, if Audyssey Flat on newer components really does not have the 2K dip, the added harshness at 2K prevents me from "listening through" to the delicate frequencies two or three octaves above.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post
 

I guess you could ask Chris-I believe the current way to do that is through Audyssey's facebook page.

 

Or how about get some other folks with your model and the capability to measure accurately enough to confirm or refute whether MRC is present with Flat.  Oh and irt detecting the dip, wouldn't  measuring at the preouts rather than in the room be a more accurate way to answer the question?

 

OK, here is a pre-out measurement on a Denon 4520 w MultEQ XT32 (Edited to fix measurement anomaly):

 

 

 

 

 

According to these measurements, the mid-range comp is still being applied in Audyssey Flat mode, which is in agreement with the information from Audyssey.  While these measurements are from a different AVR model, I would not expect the behavior to vary from one manufacturer to another.

 

If you are not familiar with taking REW pre-out measurements, the instructions are contained in the REW guide referenced in my signature, pp. 72-74.


Edited by AustinJerry - 10/10/13 at 12:25pm
post #65562 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

I hear Facebook is the new ask audyssey. Or at least provides better results.
It's another gripe I have with Audyssey. The proper way for a company to support its customers is through its own website. Not everyone has, or wants, a Facebook account which effectively denies them official support. To me, it's another example of how Audyssey has gone from being one of the most customer-focussed companies to one of the least. 

The notion that they cannot even provide a list of AVRs which use their technology in its various forms would be laughable if it were not so indicative. i simply do not believe that they do not have a centralised record of their own customers and which technology they have licensed. i am equally certain that they manage to collect royalties from them!  What they appear to mean when they will not provide such information when requested by a potential Audyssey user is "we can't be bothered to tell you."  
This wouldn't surprise me. Apparently, Chris has bigger fish to fry than bother with the consumers. IIRC, it was Sanjay who was snubbed at CES when he approached Chris to talk about Audyssey.


Max
post #65563 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

Great point and the reason I asked bao01 to present his graphs prior to Audyssey RC (albeit that was in the REW thread).  The other implied benefit here is less EQ from Audyssey when using better sub positioning.

Which was the first part of my post smile.gif

 

Yeah, sorry about that! :cool:

post #65564 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

I'm not sure how appropriate or not (so if not mod, please delete), but this one doesn't seem to really compete with this site anyway http://www.film-tech.com/main.php

appropriately named I'd say wink.gif

 

Thanks. I'll schlep over there and take a look.

post #65565 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

beast, I'll give you an example of one that was remixed in this way but managed to be done in a way as to enhance the original. I consider it the exception rather than the rule (micasa is a famous crew). Hellboy II. No one could say they took out the low end on that one and the dynamic range still seems right....but the fact is they did do a nearfield 7.1 job on it.

i've literally only in the last week started to use the DD5.1 mixes on my 'big sound' movies and started to realize the dynamic range I was missing.

 

The last Bourne movie (Legacy) was like this. The 7.1 mix was emasculated compared with the 5.1 mix (UK version - US may differ).  At least they had the grace to comment on the differences (obliquely) in the menus - many don't and you are left to just guess which to use, or to experiment).

post #65566 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIEGAR View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkasanic View Post

 
For example, NAD ....

AVR list updated to include NAD.

Audyssey AVR Versions 5.pdf 37k .pdf file

Great resource Keith!


There's also Integra, so I took the liberty of slapping this together:

Integra

DHC-80.3 9.2 Channel Network A/V Controller - MultEQ XT32 Pro enabled

DHC-60.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Controller - MultEQ XT32 (ex. Sub EQ HT)

DTR-80.3 9.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ XT32 Pro enabled

DTR-70.4 9.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ XT32 Pro enabled

DTR-60.5 9.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ XT32 (ex. Sub EQ HT)

DTR-50.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ

DTR-40.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ

DTR-30.5 7.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - MultEQ

DTR-20.4 5.2 Channel Network A/V Receiver - 2EQ


Also, recent additions from your neck of the woods: wink.gif

Cambridge Audio

Azur 751R Upsampling Home Cinema Receiver - 2EQ

Azur 651R Home Cinema Receiver - 2EQ


Hope that helps...

 

Brilliant, Giegar - thanks!  I'd totally overlooked Integra!  I will update the FAQ with the additional info immediately.

 

FAQ UPDATED with this document:

 

Audyssey AVR Versions 6.pdf 38k .pdf file  


Edited by kbarnes701 - 10/10/13 at 12:40pm
post #65567 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

beast, I'll give you an example of one that was remixed in this way but managed to be done in a way as to enhance the original. I consider it the exception rather than the rule (micasa is a famous crew). Hellboy II. No one could say they took out the low end on that one and the dynamic range still seems right....but the fact is they did do a nearfield 7.1 job on it.


i've literally only in the last week started to use the DD5.1 mixes on my 'big sound' movies and started to realize the dynamic range I was missing.

The last Bourne movie (Legacy) was like this. The 7.1 mix was emasculated compared with the 5.1 mix (UK version - US may differ).  At least they had the grace to comment on the differences (obliquely) in the menus - many don't and you are left to just guess which to use, or to experiment).

i didn't realize that and that is one I saw on bluray via rental. Back when I saw it I would have been naive/ignorant of the issue and just blindly went to the 7.1 mix like I was accustomed to.
post #65568 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

I hear Facebook is the new ask audyssey. Or at least provides better results.
It's another gripe I have with Audyssey. The proper way for a company to support its customers is through its own website. Not everyone has, or wants, a Facebook account which effectively denies them official support. To me, it's another example of how Audyssey has gone from being one of the most customer-focussed companies to one of the least. 

The notion that they cannot even provide a list of AVRs which use their technology in its various forms would be laughable if it were not so indicative. i simply do not believe that they do not have a centralised record of their own customers and which technology they have licensed. i am equally certain that they manage to collect royalties from them!  What they appear to mean when they will not provide such information when requested by a potential Audyssey user is "we can't be bothered to tell you."  
This wouldn't surprise me. Apparently, Chris has bigger fish to fry than bother with the consumers. IIRC, it was Sanjay who was snubbed at CES when he approached Chris to talk about Audyssey.


Max

 

Really?  I didn’t know that, or I missed it somehow. That is disgraceful, considering the considerable help and support Sanjay has provided, free and gratis like all of us, in this thread.  Totally shameful. Personally, for example, I don't expect any reward for compiling and maintaining the FAQ, but if I approached Chris at an exhibition and told him I had compiled such a FAQ and asked for a few minutes of his time, I would not expect to be snubbed. I am truly shocked by this revelation wrt to Sanjay but it bears out what I have thought for some time: Audyssey no longer GAF about us enthusiast users of their product. I wonder how many XT32-equipped units we have collectively helped sell due to our comments in this thread?  In fact, ANY customer should, of course, be treated with courtesy and respect, not just 'us lot'.  I say all this in sadness rather than in anger.

post #65569 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

beast, I'll give you an example of one that was remixed in this way but managed to be done in a way as to enhance the original. I consider it the exception rather than the rule (micasa is a famous crew). Hellboy II. No one could say they took out the low end on that one and the dynamic range still seems right....but the fact is they did do a nearfield 7.1 job on it.


i've literally only in the last week started to use the DD5.1 mixes on my 'big sound' movies and started to realize the dynamic range I was missing.

The last Bourne movie (Legacy) was like this. The 7.1 mix was emasculated compared with the 5.1 mix (UK version - US may differ).  At least they had the grace to comment on the differences (obliquely) in the menus - many don't and you are left to just guess which to use, or to experiment).

i didn't realize that and that is one I saw on bluray via rental. Back when I saw it I would have been naive/ignorant of the issue and just blindly went to the 7.1 mix like I was accustomed to.

 

Yep - it's what I did. Then soon after the movie had started I thought that the bass was a little subdued and possibly the DR was a little restricted. I went back and switched to the regular 5.1 track and the soundtrack came alive (and yes, I did do my best to achieve the same level on both tracks, aware that possibly the 5.1 track was a little louder).  My Region 2 copy of 'Hero' is similar - the 7.1 DTS-HD MA track is inferior to the DD 5.1 track!  (Not to mention the 7.1 track is dubbed while the original Chinese track is the DD 5.1).

post #65570 of 70895
I wouldn't be upset about it if I didn't find that some of the bluray 5.1 mixes that have the full dynamic range also are in lossy formats and the compressed remix is lossless - that makes me want to cry when I see this.

I'll have to revisit Hero. Also, the only movie I've ever found that had both the nearfield mix and theatrical both in same lossless format and with the same amount of channels is 'the game'. not that it would be representative of all nearfield or theatrical mixes, it would surely be a much more A/B worthy mix.

ok, i'll make this my last post on the subject since its not really audyssey related.
post #65571 of 70895
jkasanic is pretty much right about the excuses I came up with. I was thinking that each individual manufacturer (selfishly) would like to make it hard for you to learn what their competition has and what their own plans are in order to maximize sales of their current products.

Another manufacturer which includes Audyssey is Cambridge. They provide 2EQ in their two top-of-the-line receivers.

Edited to add: oops. someone beat me to the latter.
post #65572 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

I wouldn't be upset about it if I didn't find that some of the bluray 5.1 mixes that have the full dynamic range also are in lossy formats and the compressed remix is lossless - that makes me want to cry when I see this.

 

Agreed. I have quite a few discs where the DD 5.1 is a superior track to the DTS-HD MA or TrueHD track.  I think the one people know the best is Master and Commander.

 

 

Quote:

 I'll have to revisit Hero. Also, the only movie I've ever found that had both the nearfield mix and theatrical both in same lossless format and with the same amount of channels is 'the game'. not that it would be representative of all nearfield or theatrical mixes, it would surely be a much more A/B worthy mix.

 

I have The Game on BD but have not yet watched it. I love the movie though. 

 

Quote:

 ok, i'll make this my last post on the subject since its not really audyssey related.

 

When it's quiet wrt to Audyssey questions, the guys cut us a bit of slack... but yeah...

post #65573 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

jkasanic is pretty much right about the excuses I came up with. I was thinking that each individual manufacturer (selfishly) would like to make it hard for you to learn what their competition has and what their own plans are in order to maximize sales of their current products.

Another manufacturer which includes Audyssey is Cambridge. They provide 2EQ in their two top-of-the-line receivers.

Edited to add: oops. someone beat me to the latter.

 

I agree they won't want us to know their future plans - and that is fair enough. But IIRC the question was asked about current AVRs. Either way, we have done Audyssey's work for them and there is a FAQ answer now which I will do my best to keep updated (on which front it will be immensely helpful if people PM me with any changes etc as they come up).  It really wasn't very difficult to compile the FAQ answer, which makes nonsense of the official "we do not have sufficient resources" line IMO.

 

I want to be at pains to point out that my negativity is towards Audyssey the company, not Audyssey XT32...

post #65574 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I didn’t know that, or I missed it somehow.
You didn't miss it, but almost a year later it has slipped from memory (not surprising since I didn't make a big deal of it aside from mentioning it in one post, which you replied to immediately). As a refresher:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

First day at CES, tried to get a demo of DSX 2 in the Audyssey room, but was told to leave (along with 5 other people) since Chris was giving a private demo. We asked Chris if we could come back later, but he just said "you have my e-mail, make an appointment". Wow. After that, none of us had any desire to go back for a listen.
I don't blame you. I have long thought that Audyssey has lost its way wrt to customer care - it seemed to start when they expanded into all that Bose-ish gimmicky stuff. I got a similar brush-off from Luke when they forgot to include the preamp power supply with my Pro Kit, the preamp then being destroyed by my own power supply. I had legitimate questions about the need to return the preamp (which is a calibrated item) but not the (also calibrated) mic. I was just told "not to worry" like I was a 5 year old. Since then, Audyssey's reaction to various bug reports in Pro haven't exactly filled some of us with delight either. It all seems a long, long way from the days when Chris used to be a major and valued contributor in this thread.
Some discussion followed, not too different from today's discussion:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/58830#post_22803892
post #65575 of 70895
If I may chime in re emasculated sound mixes, the UK (original...only?) lossless mixes of Casino Royale (the D. Craig one) and Transporter 3 were like that compared to the North American mixes. Still good (T3 was incredibly smooth) but generally impactless. I guess it's obvious that one potential reason if this does in fact occur is they tend to have smaller rooms "over there".
post #65576 of 70895
OK so this is my return to this thread after 5 years plus when back then Audyssey helped to destroy my subwoofer with an inappropriate boost at the low end...

I've recently upgraded to a 'modern' amp (from a legacy processor) and I've done my first 8 position calibration, taking care to set everything up very carefully. So far the sound is fantastic, with the surrounds really blending well with the fronts (all MK set up with MP150 at the front, S150T tripole sides and some older M&K K4 tripoles at the back). The bass now gives that 'kick in the chest' too despite me currently using mismatched subs. cool.gif

Speaking of subs: The first time I ran Audyssey set up the THX subwoofer setting was to 'OFF'. I then changed this to 'ON' since my front sub at least conforms close enough to THX requirements. When I re ran Audyssey tonight it was with this setting to 'ON' when I started. What I'm wondering is if it makes any difference to the way Audyssey EQs the sub(s)? Since I only did the 3 position set up last time for speed there could be other reasons why it all sounds better, but I just wondered...

FWIW I'm using an Onkyo 818 (with external power amp).

PS. I'll be adding a pair of 15" sealed DIY subs later this month, so they will definitely meet (and hopefully exceed) THX subwoofer requirements.
post #65577 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfraser View Post

If I may chime in re emasculated sound mixes, the UK (original...only?) lossless mixes of Casino Royale (the D. Craig one) and Transporter 3 were like that compared to the North American mixes. Still good (T3 was incredibly smooth) but generally impactless. I guess it's obvious that one potential reason if this does in fact occur is they tend to have smaller rooms "over there".

Care to expand a bit on how you got to that "obvious" conclusion that you explain by room size "over there"? Just curious! wink.gif
post #65578 of 70895
^ Because he said the mixes were apparently made for smaller rooms and "near field", the mixes I noticed were "lamer" were from the UK, I have lived in the UK, I read the Financial Times, and small "houses" there are outrageously expensive by the standards of "over here". Maybe not Manhattan, but pretty much everywhere else. Is that what you meant?
post #65579 of 70895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Care to expand a bit on how you got to that "obvious" conclusion that you explain by room size "over there"? Just curious! wink.gif

Uh-Oh !!
Why do I feel a thread derailment coming eek.gif
post #65580 of 70895
I dunno...my UK living room is bigger than quite a few US ones when I've seen dimensions quoted. tongue.gif

Damn, page roll over means my THX sub question is going to get over looked. rolleyes.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)