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 2330

post #69871 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by lantis872 View Post

Now it seems I have another problem: I still finish the Audyssey measurements with a noise error frown.gif

my room is completly silence and I don't think I have elettrical buzz;

I think at this point you have to forget about Audyssey and do some deeper troubleshooting. There is the possibility that either your subwoofer or your receiver is defective. Or possibly the microphone. It sounds like Audyssey is trying to detect the subwoofer but can't do it.
post #69872 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by oval99 View Post

OK, I think this is the best place to ask this very simple question:

-Does Audyssey have the potential to do a better job at calibrating my HT than my current "calibration disc and SPL meter" approach? 

I ask for two simple reasons:
   
    1) I'm not satisfied with the acoustic imaging I'm getting with my current approach.
    2) I'd like to know if Audyssey has this potential before I take the significant investment of time to dive into the massive FAQ in this thread to answer my further questions.

Thanks so much for any answers, and thanks to the compiler(s) of that mammoth FAQ!   Looks like a stunning resource.

As Selden noted, Audyssey does a lot more than simply setting distances and levels. That part is child's play, what Audyssey really adds is the powerful equalization filters, especially for the subwoofer channel (bass is dominated more by the room due to the long wavelengths and it is difficult to acheive a flat response).

Secondarily, beyond the initial room correction and level/distance alibration, running Audyssey gives you access to the additional technologies like Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume which have the potential to yield greatly improved fidelity at typical, moderate listening volumes. If you listen really loud and/or have a system capable of great dynamics, these technologies are less important, but for the standard "moderately loud listening in a living room with poor acoustics" setup that most people have a calibrated setup with MultEQ + Dynamic EQ will sound dramatically better than one without.
post #69873 of 70896

Ok, I did a factory reset and now Audyssey works without noise error. So..thanx

 

However, the subwoofer is still not heard by the mic.

 

 how many chrips in the first step (2EQ) does it do? Mine does 3 groups of chirps as I described before: the first ones are very low, then the second and the third ones are louder. Is it normal??

 

Then in the second and third step the sub doesn't sound anymore

post #69874 of 70896
In normal operation, it should do only one set of chirps per speaker. What you describe -- 3 consecutive sets of chirps with increasingly louder volume -- means that Audyssey is trying to "hear" the subwoofer but can't do so. When Audyssey sends a set of chirps, and doesn't hear sufficient signal-to-noise ratio to measure properly, it will repeat the chirps at a louder level and try again, and then a third time. If it still fails to detect it after the third attempt, it gives up.

So, for whatever reason, Audyssey is not "hearing" your subwoofer even after raising the level of the test chirps considerably. So either the receiver or microphone is defective, or the subwoofer is defective (which it sounds like is not the case because you can hear it with a normal test tone), or perhaps there is some low level ambient noise which is confounding Audyssey's ability to achieve a proper SNR.
post #69875 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by lantis872 View Post

Ok, I did a factory reset and now Audyssey works without noise error. So..thanx

However, the subwoofer is still not heard by the mic.

 how many chrips in the first step (2EQ) does it do? Mine does 3 groups of chirps as I described before: the first ones are very low, then the second and the third ones are louder. Is it normal??

Then in the second and third step the sub doesn't sound anymore

What you described here by 3 groups of chirps getting louder and louder is normal behavior of Audyssey when it detects noise and sends a relevant error message. Unfortunately Audyssey detects noise in you ambient and then stops.

Just a few things to check:

1. HVAC, etc.: make sure everything is turned off. Some people even unplug the fridge in the nearby kitchen. Even light dimmers can cause inaudible noise, yet detected by Audyssey.

2. Noisy neighborhood. make sure to run auto setup when traffic is low, night or weekend.

3. For barking dogs you may wanna visit an online "barking dogs" forum for advise. LOL
post #69876 of 70896
When I run audyssey it seems like it is turning down a dip I have aound 67hz instead of up.. any idea why it could be doing this and what to do about it??
Back ground: I have two symettrical subwoofers in the front connected on sub 1 and a third subwoofer in the back connected to sub 2. I use a Denon 4311ci.


Edited by ahmedreda - 2/18/14 at 11:32am
post #69877 of 70896
What exactly are we looking at here? It's helpful to provide as much detail as possible. What are the three colored lines? Are they sub only measurements or sub + speaker? Are they single point measurements or spatial averages of multiple measurements? Remember that Audyssey is correcting problems it "sees" in the entire sample of measurement points, so if you are checking post-Audyssey response at a single point whereas you measured a much wider zone, you aren't getting the whole picture.

The post Audyssey graph (assuming that's the second one labeled "audon") looks considerably flatter overall, so I'm not sure exactly what the problem is.

Your pre-Audyssey response also is fairly lumpy, with three subwoofers I would hope you could get a better pre-calibration freq response which would make Audyssey's job easier. But that's besides the point.

You may want to check out the REW help thread here, which specializes in helping new REW users learn to measure properly, interpret those measurements, and also to use the measurements to optimize the pre-calibration state as much as possible to let the "icing on the cake" of automatic REQ have an easier job of polishing things: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1449924/simplified-rew-setup-and-use-usb-mic-hdmi-connection-including-measurement-techniques-and-how-to-interpret-graphs

Also, congrats on having flat response to 10Hz and below! eek.gif
post #69878 of 70896
Thank you for your reply! The three colored lines are ( back sub only, front subs only , all three subs). The measurements are all subs + speakers. They are single point measurements at the MLP. FWIW, I ran audyssey with all 8 points within a few inches of the MLP. I ran it with just one measurement at MLP and it still didn't fix the dip but it was not as bad. Where should I take my mic readings if I am mainly concerned about the just the MLP. I don't want to compromise the response there for the other two seats that barely get used.

I have 3 rythmik FV15HPs!
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

What exactly are we looking at here? It's helpful to provide as much detail as possible. What are the three colored lines? Are they sub only measurements or sub + speaker? Are they single point measurements or spatial averages of multiple measurements? Remember that Audyssey is correcting problems it "sees" in the entire sample of measurement points, so if you are checking post-Audyssey response at a single point whereas you measured a much wider zone, you aren't getting the whole picture.

The post Audyssey graph (assuming that's the second one labeled "audon") looks considerably flatter overall, so I'm not sure exactly what the problem is.

Your pre-Audyssey response also is fairly lumpy, with three subwoofers I would hope you could get a better pre-calibration freq response which would make Audyssey's job easier. But that's besides the point.

You may want to check out the REW help thread here, which specializes in helping new REW users learn to measure properly, interpret those measurements, and also to use the measurements to optimize the pre-calibration state as much as possible to let the "icing on the cake" of automatic REQ have an easier job of polishing things: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1449924/simplified-rew-setup-and-use-usb-mic-hdmi-connection-including-measurement-techniques-and-how-to-interpret-graphs

Also, congrats on having flat response to 10Hz and below! eek.gif
post #69879 of 70896
I would recommend you head over to that thread I linked for more expert guidance than I can provide. But a few thoughts:

1. When you say "The measurements are all subs + speakers" do you mean you have all three subs + the satellite speakers (front, center, etc) playing simultaneously? If so what is the crossover freq? That adds another layer of confounding variables so you might just want to measure the subs alone for now until you have them dialed in as flat as possible, and then worry about the transition to the other speakers.

2. I think you need to work on pre-Audyssey sub placement a little more to flatten the response and make Audyssey's job a little easier. For example, in the "audoff" graph that dip just below 70Hz is there with the back sub only, the front subs only, and with all three subs playing together. Same with the dip just below 50Hz. In other words, the addition of the third sub in the back isn't doing much to counteract those room modes prior to calibration.

I think, ideally, you would position that third sub to try and fill in at least one of the huge dips in the front subs' response prior to calibration, again making the job of the auto REQ easier to create a flat final response. The purple line on the first graph (front subs if I'm reading right) shows a very broad, deep dip between 30-50Hz, and then another sharp dip between 60-70Hz. The addition of the third sub (green line all playing together) shows that these problems haven't been mitigated much before you even get to the auto EQ.

3. If you are only concerned with one seat, clustering your measurements tightly around that seat is the best approach. You should give some latitude to the fact that you have two ears and don't sit clamped in a vice, so probably more than a few inches is good, but I think most who aim for that approach go for a small box (e.g. 2ft square) for measurements.

All in all though that's still a pretty good looking post calibration response, looks like you are nearly ruler flat from 7-8Hz up to almost 60Hz, and then there's that little dip you are trying to conquer. It might happen that you eventually need to add mechanical solutions (bass traps) to fix it for good.
post #69880 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by oval99 View Post

OK, I think this is the best place to ask this very simple question:

-Does Audyssey have the potential to do a better job at calibrating my HT than my current "calibration disc and SPL meter" approach? 

I ask for two simple reasons:
   
    1) I'm not satisfied with the acoustic imaging I'm getting with my current approach.
    2) I'd like to know if Audyssey has this potential before I take the significant investment of time to dive into the massive FAQ in this thread to answer my further questions.

Thanks so much for any answers, and thanks to the compiler(s) of that mammoth FAQ!   Looks like a stunning resource.

The way that Audyssey can help with imaging is to set the speaker-to-listener distances precisely anjd to adjust speaker levels to within 2 dB of each other. But Audyssey doesn't compensate for other things that can mess up imaging, such as room reflections, front speakers too far apart or too close together or too close to the back wall (unless intended to be placed there). Or front speakers placed inside some kind of audio cabinet or shelving.

Room treatments can make a huge difference in imaging. These would include some kind of absorption at the points of first reflection on the side walls and on the floor in front of the speaker, and no coffee table in front of the MLP.

What I do is to adjust imaging before running Audyssey:
1. I make sure that my front speakers and the main listening position are the corners of an equilateral triangle.
2. I make sure that the speaker distances for those two speakers are set to be the same distance in the AVR. At this point, the actual distance setting doesn't matter as long as they are the same number.
3. I point both front speakers directly at the main listening position. I use a laser pointer aimed at a target that's taped where my head will be smile.gif
4. I use a calibration disc to make sure the speakers are connected in phase. I might check with the SPL to make sure they are playing at the same level from the MLP.
5. I make sure the AVR is playing in Stereo and not Dolby Prologic or some other surround sound mode.
6. While playing a mono CD, I will adjust toe-in until I have a signal that is precisely focused to come from between the fronts.
7. Now I will toe each speaker out the same amount, a little at a time, testing between each adjustment. I will STOP toeing out when the mono signal starts to sound divided between two sources instead of seeming to come from between the fronts.

OK, now I have the best imaging I can get in my setup. At this point, I will put away the calibration disc and run Audyssey. Audyssey will set the speaker distances (delays) and levels, in addition to applying a room correction curve that attempts to smooth things out at the MLP and in its vicinity, and to compensate when possible for timbral differences between the various speakers in your setup.

After doing all of this, I'll check out the imaging with a CD that I know has good imaging and was recorded with minimal multi-miking (my favorites are the Maazel/Cleveland Rite of Spring and any of the Ravel recordings with Skrowaczewski/Minnesota). When my system is set up right, I can precisely pinpoint where the different woodwind players seem to be sitting, and that the winds are clearly behind the strings. In these and certain other recordings, the width of the soundstage will seem to extend beyond the width of the distance between the speakers.
post #69881 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

The way that Audyssey can help with imaging is to set the speaker-to-listener distances precisely anjd to adjust speaker levels to within 2 dB of each other. But Audyssey doesn't compensate for other things that can mess up imaging, such as room reflections, front speakers too far apart or too close together or too close to the back wall (unless intended to be placed there). Or front speakers placed inside some kind of audio cabinet or shelving.

Room treatments can make a huge difference in imaging. These would include some kind of absorption at the points of first reflection on the side walls and on the floor in front of the speaker, and no coffee table in front of the MLP.

What I do is to adjust imaging before running Audyssey:
1. I make sure that my front speakers and the main listening position are the corners of an equilateral triangle.
2. I make sure that the speaker distances for those two speakers are set to be the same distance in the AVR. At this point, the actual distance setting doesn't matter as long as they are the same number.
3. I point both front speakers directly at the main listening position. I use a laser pointer aimed at a target that's taped where my head will be smile.gif
4. I use a calibration disc to make sure the speakers are connected in phase. I might check with the SPL to make sure they are playing at the same level from the MLP.
5. I make sure the AVR is playing in Stereo and not Dolby Prologic or some other surround sound mode.
6. While playing a mono CD, I will adjust toe-in until I have a signal that is precisely focused to come from between the fronts.
7. Now I will toe each speaker out the same amount, a little at a time, testing between each adjustment. I will STOP toeing out when the mono signal starts to sound divided between two sources instead of seeming to come from between the fronts.

OK, now I have the best imaging I can get in my setup. At this point, I will put away the calibration disc and run Audyssey. Audyssey will set the speaker distances (delays) and levels, in addition to applying a room correction curve that attempts to smooth things out at the MLP and in its vicinity, and to compensate when possible for timbral differences between the various speakers in your setup.

After doing all of this, I'll check out the imaging with a CD that I know has good imaging and was recorded with minimal multi-miking (my favorites are the Maazel/Cleveland Rite of Spring and any of the Ravel recordings with Skrowaczewski/Minnesota). When my system is set up right, I can precisely pinpoint where the different woodwind players seem to be sitting, and that the winds are clearly behind the strings. In these and certain other recordings, the width of the soundstage will seem to extend beyond the width of the distance between the speakers.

+1. Fantastic write up pbarach. Things well defined to follow when it comes to so-called "cold setup" prior to running Audyssey. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. smile.gif
post #69882 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Honestly, the Movie vs. Music thing is a misnomer. The high frequency roll-off in the Audyssey curve isn't relevant to the type of content, it's about translating a soundtrack to the reverberant characteristics of a typical living room vs. the drastically different acoustics of the large movie theater or dubbing stage in which the film was mixed. Because, in a typical living room, you are going to hear a much greater proportion of reflected / reverberant sound than in a well treated professional room, the roll-off reduces the amount of high frequency energy to recreate the perception of a flat high end so the soundtrack doens't sound TOO bright.

As pbarach notes, in a small well treated room the proportion of direct vs. reflected sound will be more ideal, so it might not be necessary to add additional high freq roll off.

NEITHER curve is really meant for music per se, as there are no reference mixing standards so the concept of "translating" it to your room isn't as clear cut. So at that point, it's more about prefernece. Denon / Marantz models don't even call it "Music" vs. "Movie", they just go with the more literal "Reference" and "Flat" terms, which is more sensible and less confusing than the "Music/Movie" distinction Onkyo uses.

... and, the preference decision varies with the program material. While I have found only one modern movie that clearly sounds better (more balanced, etc.) with Audyssey Flat, I have found quite a few music disks that do (10 to 20 %???).
post #69883 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygarrison View Post

... and, the preference decision varies with the program material. While I have found only one modern movie that clearly sounds better (more balanced, etc.) with Audyssey Flat, I have found quite a few music disks that do (10 to 20 %???).

Gary, care to share the titles of those modern movies and music discs for our reference. Though I know YMMV may apply to whatever our own rooms sound like. Nonetheless. Maybe subject for further discussions. Thanks. smile.gif
post #69884 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

+1. Fantastic write up pbarach. Things well defined to follow when it comes to so-called "cold setup" prior to running Audyssey. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. smile.gif

Thanks, Feri, but of course none of what I wrote is original. I just put together stuff I've read here, on Audioholics.com, and elsewhere.
post #69885 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

Thanks, Feri, but of course none of what I wrote is original. I just put together stuff I've read here, on Audioholics.com, and elsewhere.

Sure thing Peter, ...Worry not! ...Meantime please allow me to quote Michaelangelo (1475-1564), once he said those who have never had an own idea are not even able to use others' ideas. Great quote isn't it? smile.gif
Edited by mogorf - 2/18/14 at 4:26pm
post #69886 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by oval99 View Post

OK, I think this is the best place to ask this very simple question:

-Does Audyssey have the potential to do a better job at calibrating my HT than my current "calibration disc and SPL meter" approach? 

Chances are your SPL meter sucks in its measurement of frequency response. Mine certainly does. Affordable SPL meters are O.K. for measurement of
relative levels (as between two channels), and may be O.K. in measuring absolute (well, "near actual") levels.
If you are going to measure and adjust the frequency response from just one listening position, you would be better off with REW, which is FREE (you would need to supply a calibrated microphone ~~~ $80. See the REW thread, BUT ...
Even if you are going to listen from one position only, and listen alone, moving your head and body posture a little can make a difference, so, in theory, it would make more sense to measure from the many mic positions -- for solo listening, clustered around your one listening position, and for group listening, with the mics spread out. Audyssey claims to offer a way to get a more complete picture of your room and speakers, from 2 to 5 or so listening positions (8 or more mic positions) with sophisticated weighting and review of common and different characteristics of the positions (with the possibility of some favoritism -- it's up to you when you place the mics).

So, yes, Audyssey has the potential, IMO. It seems to be better in moving the frequency response in the direction of optimum -- or, at least, in the direction of Reference -- than in optimizing imaging, at least in our room. Fortunately, I think imaging has been overrated by advertisers and high end reviewers, compared to several other aspects of music perception, and certainly compared to other aspects of film sound.
post #69887 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Sure thing Peter, ...meantime please allow me to quote Michaelangelo (1475-1564), once he said those who have never had an own idea are not even able to use others' ideas. Great quote isn't it? smile.gif

Nice quote. My watchword has always been that I would be satisfied if I had one original idea in a lifetime (which I have had), then I'd be happy. But my original idea has nothing to do with music or audio.
post #69888 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

Nice quote. My watchword has always been that I would be satisfied if I had one original idea in a lifetime (which I have had), then I'd be happy. But my original idea has nothing to do with music or audio.

Doesn't matter from where an original self idea comes from. Hey, Michaelangelo didn't have Audyssey, did he? smile.gifsmile.gifsmile.gif
post #69889 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Gary, care to share the titles of those modern movies and music discs for our reference. Though I know YMMV may apply to whatever our own rooms sound like. Nonetheless. Maybe subject for further discussions. Thanks. smile.gif

The one modern movie that sounds better (to us, with our sound system, in our room) with Audyssey Flat is The Walker. The dialog, in particular, doesn't sound crisp enough in Audyssey Reference. We started watching that movie in Reference, stopped, changed to Flat, and it was a lot better.

Two music disks that sound better in Audyssey Flat are Arthur Rubenstein's Chopin Nocturnes, and Yo Yo Ma's Bach Suites for Unaccompanied Cello (also called Inspired by Bach, after the 6 part film -- the CD and the soundtrack for the film used the same original recording). Playing the Bach CD or listening to the broadcast of the film produce different results, in the same room, over the very same equipment, except for the TV station's equipment, and my TV tuner v.s. the CD player. The CD is much duller -- with Audyssey Flat it is brought toward the same balance as the broadcast, but still is not quite as bright, and less bright than my other Yo-Yo Ma recordings. There is a tendency for the RCA Living Stereo SACDs to sound better with A. Flat.
post #69890 of 70896

Thanks to everyone for their great feedback!  I think I have more than enough here to persuade me to dive into the Audyssey FAQ.  And another thanks to pbarach for those excellent and practical tips for Audyssey prep!

post #69891 of 70896
I have an Integra DHC-80.3 pre-pro with XT32.
I just tried to use XLR connections to my Parasound Halo A51 amp for the first time.
XT32 set all my speakers to -12.0 trim levels.

The old RCA trim settings were:

Front Left -7.0 dB
Center -6.0 dB
Front Right -7.0 dB
Surround Right -4.0 dB
Surround Left -4.5 dB

Here are Integra DHC-80.3 specs:

Rated RCA Output Level and Impedance
1 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)

Maximum RCA Output Level and Impedance
5.5 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)

Rated XLR Output Level and Impedance
2 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)

Maximum XLR Output Level and Impedance
11.0 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)


So for Front Left speaker which was -7.0 dB with RCA, does going from RCA 1V to XLR 2V mean -7.0 dB x 2 = -14.0 dB?

I don't know if XLR with attenuation pads is better than RCA with no pads.

thanks
post #69892 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by bao01 View Post

I have an Integra DHC-80.3 pre-pro with XT32.
I just tried to use XLR connections to my Parasound Halo A51 amp for the first time.
XT32 set all my speakers to -12.0 trim levels.

The old RCA trim settings were:

Front Left -7.0 dB
Center -6.0 dB
Front Right -7.0 dB
Surround Right -4.0 dB
Surround Left -4.5 dB

Here are Integra DHC-80.3 specs:

Rated RCA Output Level and Impedance
1 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)

Maximum RCA Output Level and Impedance
5.5 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)

Rated XLR Output Level and Impedance
2 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)

Maximum XLR Output Level and Impedance
11.0 V/470 Ω (PRE OUT)


So for Front Left speaker which was -7.0 dB with RCA, does going from RCA 1V to XLR 2V mean -7.0 dB x 2 = -14.0 dB?

I don't know if XLR with attenuation pads is better than RCA with no pads.

thanks

To be honest I wouldn't bother with XLR cables. As the result shows now you have run into a problem where you will need additional attenuator pads. Actually XLR cables (aka: symmetric or balanced) are only needed when distances are very long like in a concert hall or stadium due to the less sensitivity of XLR balanced cables to noise than asymmetric cables. In a home environment you won't need hundreds of feet of cable length, meantime I doubt you would hear an audible difference between the two types of cables in your setup. Why not go back to RCA and call it a day! smile.gif

BTW, does your sub have XLR input?
post #69893 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygarrison View Post

The one modern movie that sounds better (to us, with our sound system, in our room) with Audyssey Flat is The Walker. The dialog, in particular, doesn't sound crisp enough in Audyssey Reference. We started watching that movie in Reference, stopped, changed to Flat, and it was a lot better.

Two music disks that sound better in Audyssey Flat are Arthur Rubenstein's Chopin Nocturnes, and Yo Yo Ma's Bach Suites for Unaccompanied Cello (also called Inspired by Bach, after the 6 part film -- the CD and the soundtrack for the film used the same original recording). Playing the Bach CD or listening to the broadcast of the film produce different results, in the same room, over the very same equipment, except for the TV station's equipment, and my TV tuner v.s. the CD player. The CD is much duller -- with Audyssey Flat it is brought toward the same balance as the broadcast, but still is not quite as bright, and less bright than my other Yo-Yo Ma recordings. There is a tendency for the RCA Living Stereo SACDs to sound better with A. Flat.

Thanks for your description Gary. smile.gif
post #69894 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by lantis872 View Post
 

Ok, I did a factory reset and now Audyssey works without noise error. So..thanx

However, the subwoofer is still not heard by the mic.

 how many chrips in the first step (2EQ) does it do? Mine does 3 groups of chirps as I described before: the first ones are very low, then the second and the third ones are louder. Is it normal??

Then in the second and third step the sub doesn't sound anymore

AFAIK 2EQ does not EQ the sub channel at all.  I've never seen a report of 2EQ behavior during Autosetup so although odd, what you're experiencing may be normal.  You could inquire directly from "Ask Audyssey" on their FB page. 

post #69895 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

To be honest I wouldn't bother with XLR cables. As the result shows now you have run into a problem where you will need additional attenuator pads. Actually XLR cables (aka: symmetric or balanced) are only needed when distances are very long like in a concert hall or stadium due to the less sensitivity of XLR balanced cables to noise than asymmetric cables. In a home environment you won't need hundreds of feet of cable length, meantime I doubt you would hear an audible difference between the two types of cables in your setup. Why not go back to RCA and call it a day! smile.gif

BTW, does your sub have XLR input?

Yes - going back to RCA is where i am leaning now.

Yes - my two subs are connected to 80.3 using XLR. They are set at -1.0 dB and -1.0 dB. It seems to only be an issue with the speakers connected to my Parasound Halo A51 amp with XLR. When i use RCA to Parasound Halo, the trim numbers are reasonable. But Parasound assures me it is not on their end. Strange that subs would have good trim levels but not my speakers - both on XLR. Both (speakers and subs) should be 2.0 volts at 80.3.

confused.gif
post #69896 of 70896
Subs have adjustable gain knobs though. The fixed gain on the Parasoind is probably higher than the variable gain setting you dialed into the subs.
post #69897 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by lantis872 View Post

 
Ok, I did a factory reset and now Audyssey works without noise error. So..thanx
However, the subwoofer is still not heard by the mic.
 how many chrips in the first step (2EQ) does it do? Mine does 3 groups of chirps as I described before: the first ones are very low, then the second and the third ones are louder. Is it normal??
Then in the second and third step the sub doesn't sound anymore
AFAIK 2EQ does not EQ the sub channel at all.  I've never seen a report of 2EQ behavior during Autosetup so although odd, what you're experiencing may be normal.  You could inquire directly from "Ask Audyssey" on their FB page. 

It doesn't EQ the sub but it still needs to ping it to set level and distance. It's probably normal to not hear the sub pings on the 2nd and 3rd measurements but the problem is that audyssey isn't even detecting his sub at all.
post #69898 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post

Subs have adjustable gain knobs though. The fixed gain on the Parasoind is probably higher than the variable gain setting you dialed into the subs.

yes - of course - that was dumb on my part - XT32 asks me to set subs to 75 dB before proceeding
post #69899 of 70896
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
It doesn't EQ the sub but it still needs to ping it to set level and distance. It's probably normal to not hear the sub pings on the 2nd and 3rd measurements but the problem is that audyssey isn't even detecting his sub at all.

Ahh, I see your point. I hadn't read his post carefully enough. 

post #69900 of 70896

I’m having trouble with male voices. I’ve run Audyssey with my new SR5008 a number of times and I can’t get rid of this one issue. I’ve tried changing mic location, height and number of positions. The bottom range of male voices is being boosted so much that it almost sounds like a second voice or some kind of echo. I don’t know if that makes sense but it’s quite distracting. With dynamic eq turned on at 0db it’s the worst and gets better as I change the eq to -5, -10, etc. Is there any kind of easy fix?

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)