Official Classe SSP-800 thread. - Page 7

you endorse it ? you endorsing products now

hehe seriously now ! I wouldnt have seen it to add cost. and if it did it would be so neglible I suspect in the scheme of things given the value gained. Keeping in mind even the cheapest AVRs from onkyo seem to manage it on board and even budget av pre-pros like the nadt175. If can be managed within the budgetary constraints of such affordable products youd think classe would be able to slip it it without much impost.


AS some one passionate about music and 2ch I can tell you I could not hate with more passion those CDs, and LP produced under loudness wars where the dynamics are compressed to make it "sound" louder. However to suggest that audyssey is akin to what is taking place in the loudness wars and compressing sound to make it appear louder could not be more further from the truth.

Infact from what I know of audyssey it works over the freq spectrum including time and phase with accuracy of reproduction being the prime purpose. Their technology such as dynamic eq all about preserving the dynamic range and the eq curve regardless of volume. And certainyl my impressions of what it does as a technology supports that in my experience.

That you have these misguided beliefs that audyssey + loudness wars is unfortunate and obviously wettou's quite indepth explanations on htguide of the technology have also either passed you by or your understanding of the technology blinded by some other factors.

Inregards the fidelity of sound perhaps consider that a brand such as sim audio moon who if you are familiar with their products are all about accuracy of sound, have included audyssey as part of the specification of their upcoming pre.

anyways this thread is not inregards the benfits of audyssey. I dont need any convincing, you pehaps will continue to remain blinded. Anyone else unsure of the workigns of the technology would Probably be best to experience it I think than go on misguided beliefs. They can also refer to the audyssey webssite or the audyssey thread on this forum and other users experiences.

One can only hope classe understand the benefit of including the technology on board so it is an option for those that see it of value. Otherwise it jsut leaves those in need of the technology having to buy the standalone audyssey unit at quite considerable additional expense plus additioal cabling, associated insertion loss(3-10db!) and adding in the process another quite unnecessary ADC/DAC conversion.

You didn't answer my question. Your evasiveness and desire to counter with an attack is quite telling on your hidden agenda.

Well I sort of did when I said; "that no one here is saying that the Denon is better than the Classe."

Frankly I didn't get to to the bottom part because the top read like you were defending your mothers' honor.

But on the rather condescending inference that I worked my way up the Denon receiver food chain to end at the AVP. Well in fact that's close, except the longest I've had a Denon front end is two weeks.

As far as front ends go I used flagship receivers for about five years and pre-pros for the last two. Over the period that I've been in this hobby I've had quite a variety of manufacturers' gear including; Sansui, Luxman, B&O, Denon, HK, Yamaha, Panasonic XR series, Pioneer Elite, NAD Master Series, Integra, Anthem, Bertram's Audio, PS Audio and I'm sure I'm missing a few others.. I'm not brand loyal at all. I think one of the reasons is that I don't believe the differences between electronics to be as significant as they are hyped up to be, but I, just like most people in this hobby, am always trying to sniff out that last "nth" of performance that I can afford.

The belief that electronic components might sound different, but whether it's "better" is purely subjective in most cases, is what led me down the path to room acoustics. The biggest impact of any component change in my system was designing a properly treated room and adding bass EQ (Velodyne's SMS-1). Upgrading my speakers was next in terms of appreciable impact.

I posted here because of the search for "nth" keeps me on the look out, and I questioned the Classe's exclusion of REQ because of the above.

How's that for a hidden agenda?

All of your and Rebel's replies read like political lobbying, except for Rebels' recent reply to alebonau, which is a reply I would have expected to my first post.

Now we have somewhere to begin a dialogue. You are happy with Audessy, regardless of who implements it. I am happy with Classe. Why should either of us change?

You accuse me (and Rebelman) of drinking the Classe Kool-Aide, but could we not accuse you of just the same in regards to Audessy?

The last 13 years, I myself have traded up different levels of my system. Never in this time have I been more happy with my system than I was with my Classe SSP-600. In fact, if the only difference between the 600 and the 800 was the addition of HDMI, I would still be happy to make the upgrade. The fact that you are looking outside of your current Pre/Pro makes me question how happy you are with it?

In your search, you have identified one constant. You prefer equalization, specifically from Audessy. That is fine.

Now here is what I keep saying that continuously gets over-looked. Classe has decided to forgo it this time around. No matter what you say, it won't be implemented at time of launch. No matter how much you chastise Rebelman or myself, it is not going to be added. You are putting way too much stress into it. Is that a deal breaker? For me, no. For you, yes.

What they have said is that if there is consumer interest, they will implement it. Now the fact that its a license and "should" be cheap to add, I say look at all of the other Intellectual Property companies that have built their empire on licensing (Microsoft comes to mind first). Do you know first hand that there is/ is not an significant cost that would not have to be handed down to the customer? If so, please share what it is.

The thing is, we don't have to be attacking each other over a decision that none of us made. Classe is selling the 800 in unprecedented numbers for their company. People are buying it, even if you aren't. If you are mad at Classe, take your frustration out on them, not on me!

I still want to know if you have heard the SSP-600 in a fully balanced system? Have you A/Bd it against any of your current or previous systems? How did you come to find out about Classe? From Eric's thread?

Its one thing to look at a list of spec's and say its features are what you are looking for or not, but it is another thing to actually listen to it and make your own opinion. How do you know that the 600 or even 800 isn't equal to your current setup in audio quality? As someone who is happy with the Classe sound, I recommend you find a local dealer, if you have one, and listen to the SSP-600 if you can. If you don't like that, you won't like the SSP-800.

To sum up, please, quit holding Rebelman and myself accountable for Classe's decision. We stated they are not doing it currently. Either you like the product as it is, or you don't. It is as simple as that.

And I thought drama only took place in the lower end products

Another Denon groupie? You are enjoying your Denon aren’t you? You're not starting to have doubts now are you?

I am aware of the content that wettou copied directly form the Audssey website. It didn’t offer anything new over the marketing message. What the Audyssey is doing in the time domain has a direct impact on the dynamics of the signal across the entire audible range. There are problems that I see associated with this approach.

As much as they like to tout you cannot correct room born anomalies at every point in space and maintain signal purity. In the sweet spot the chances improve but predictability remains a sore area as the signal is constantly changing. The Audyssey has to continuously react to variables in the room that are in a constant sate of flux. It has to predict (based on a set of predetermined scales) the effects that an impulse at +1 millisecond will have in a room on an impulse at 0 milliseconds and calculate a response in order to fit the desired curve. Because there are inaccuracies inherent in the prediction model for a given room associated with a changing signal the results will be imprecise and inconsistent.

I for one do not see EQing as a first line of defense but rather as a tool to be used only when all other options have been exhausted. Unfortunately, many people do not share the same view and naively abuse its power. I cannot explain why the mass market chooses to adopt this feature with the greatest of ease but I suspect it has more to do with marketing appeal than it does problem solving. Room correction efforts whether they are exercised by hand or by computer should not be trivialized but too often are. It takes considerable care and serious desire to optimize the performance of a system in a given room and this takes a lot of time and effort. With some diligence and a lot of tenacity it can be quite rewarding. I think Classe’s approach to the problem is sound, tried and true and people are welcome to disagree.

I have a new question in regards to Room EQ.

When you EQ a room, do objects in the room dramatically effect the ability of the device to properly EQ the system? If so, how do you accomodate for different numbers of people being in the room at any given time? Lets say when you EQ the system, are you sitting in the prime listening spot, so your body is bouncing waves around the room like it will when you are listening? Lets say your wife sits down to watch, and each time she sits down, she sits on the opposite end of the couch. How does the EQ account for that? Or you have the in-laws over and now you have 5 - 10 people in the room. How can the EQ accomodate for these variables?

[quote=sikoniko; Now we have somewhere to begin a dialogue. You are happy with Audessy, regardless of who implements it. I am happy with Classe. Why should either of us change?

[B]I did begin this dialog already and promptly got a roll eyes response.[/b]

You accuse me (and Rebelman) of drinking the Classe Kool-Aide, but could we not accuse you of just the same in regards to Audessy?

Probably, but I also know it's not the only kid on the block which is why I stated in my original post "or any other REQ". I've only had Audyssey in my last three products including the stand alone unit and tried many variations of REQ, including the Behringer/REW combination. Nothing supllied the same level of performance - except the TaCT that I heard in a store demo.

The last 13 years, I myself have traded up different levels of my system. Never in this time have I been more happy with my system than I was with my Classe SSP-600. In fact, if the only difference between the 600 and the 800 was the addition of HDMI, I would still be happy to make the upgrade. The fact that you are looking outside of your current Pre/Pro makes me question how happy you are with it?

Don't know, don't have it yet. I wasn't at all unhappy with the 9.8 but the Denon offers me three independant sub outputs that I can run in a L/R + LFE configuration among other features that are important to me. Good for you on liking Classe - never doubted that.

In your search, you have identified one constant. You prefer equalization, specifically from Audessy. That is fine.

Actually not until Audyssey Pro. I was always a purist and refused to even use tone controls. Once I started to learn about room acoustics in general here about two thousand posts ago I started experimenting with various iterations. I immediately appreciated what EQ had to offer in the lower end but until Audyssey in a treated room completely avoided using EQ on the top end like the plague.

Now here is what I keep saying that continuously gets over-looked. Classe has decided to forgo it this time around. No matter what you say, it won't be implemented at time of launch. No matter how much you chastise Rebelman or myself, it is not going to be added. You are putting way too much stress into it. Is that a deal breaker? For me, no. For you, yes.

I really don't care if they have it or not - that's what you guys don't get. I was stating an OPINION that I think it's a mistake not to have SOME form of quality auto REQ in todays' market. Plus in my experience with Audyssey, Classe's statement on the reason for its' exclusion seems weak at best. After that post you guys started your Classe defense strategy.

What they have said is that if there is consumer interest, they will implement it. Now the fact that its a license and "should" be cheap to add, I say look at all of the other Intellectual Property companies that have built their empire on licensing (Microsoft comes to mind first). Do you know first hand that there is/ is not an significant cost that would not have to be handed down to the customer? If so, please share what it is.

Why would they implement it after calling it unreliable? Cost is not the point,the feature is, wether it's Audyssey or not. But if you do want to talk cost, hell, Audyssey "Pro" is available in the $1K Denon 3808, how can it be cost prohibitive at Classes' price point?

The thing is, we don't have to be attacking each other over a decision that none of us made. Classe is selling the 800 in unprecedented numbers for their company. People are buying it, even if you aren't. If you are mad at Classe, take your frustration out on them, not on me!

I didn't go on the attack against you guys, I was questioning Classe and you guys took it as though I had soiled the Virgin Mary. I'm sorry but a "roll-eyes" repsonse simply wasn't warrated.

I still want to know if you have heard the SSP-600 in a fully balanced system? Have you A/Bd it against any of your current or previous systems? How did you come to find out about Classe? From Eric's thread?

Dude, 2500 posts, this is a HOBBY to me, I read every just about every thread that peaks my curiousity. All the local A/V stores know me by name cause I loiter so much. I never called Classe's sound quality into question - so what's the point of the comparison question?

Its one thing to look at a list of spec's and say its features are what you are looking for or not, but it is another thing to actually listen to it and make your own opinion. How do you know that the 600 or even 800 isn't equal to your current setup in audio quality? As someone who is happy with the Classe sound, I recommend you find a local dealer, if you have one, and listen to the SSP-600 if you can. If you don't like that, you won't like the SSP-800.

Again - I never called the Classe's quality into question and this misinterpretation of my inent is also what fueled my anger - you continue to defend when you're not in a fight. Why?

To sum up, please, quit holding Rebelman and myself accountable for Classe's decision. We stated they are not doing it currently. Either you like the product as it is, or you don't. It is as simple as that.

I'm not holding you two "accountable" for Classe's decision. I'm pissed that I've been taken out of context and attacked for daring to suggest Classe made a mistake IN MY OPINION. And for the fact that you both seem to read what you want to read instead of taking the time to understand it.

[quote=rnrgagne;14062133]
The difference here is that I'm not upset. And I'm not on the defense. I'm merely going tit-for-tat on your points. I rather am enjoying this, to be honest.

You still didn't state whether you have heard Classe or not?

BTW, I don't disagree that they should have just thrown it in. But it isn't going to stop me from buying it. I speculate that they would wait for the new dual dac's before implementing any such feature. I also speculate that the lack of inclusion is more based on their timeline to market for the product and their ability to add the feature after released.

I appreciate you for sharing with us your evolution to Audessy. I also found it interesting why you moved from the 9.8 to the Denon. I've often wondered what the value add for the Denon is over the 9.8.

Welcome long as you don't mind being insulted that is.

[quote=sikoniko;

The difference here is that I'm not upset. And I'm not on the defense. I'm merely going tit-for-tat on your points. I rather am enjoying this, to be honest.


[I]No you're not, and you're proving my point that you read what you want to read. You continue to bring up Classe's native sound quality when IT IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to my intended discussion.[/i]

You still didn't state whether you have heard Classe or not?


See above. And yes I heard the 600 in a demo theater when I was auditioning a projector, it was in an all Classe set up powering B&W 800's as the mains. Sounded like crap.

BTW, I don't disagree that they should have just thrown it in. But it isn't going to stop me from buying it.


At this point I don't think Superman could.
Oh, and I was kidding about the Classe sounding like crap - I wasn't really paying attention to the audio that day.

[quote=rnrgagne;14062378]
So it could sound like a tin can, and as long as it had audessy PRO, you'd buy it?

What you are telling me is that the #1 feature you look for is Audessey Pro? That audio quality has absolutely no bearing in purchasing a product?

As much as I agree to disagree with ssapiro, I agree with with his choice of sticking with his AVP, because he likes the sound quality over dumping it for something just because it has Audessy... just a thought.

denon ? jees. did I even mention denon or any brand in my post, have a read will ya.


you'll see its audyssey I was talking about. and as mentioned audyssey is a system used by quite a few brands as outlined in my post. I am very happy with what I have right now. well actually over the moon especiually with the audyssey that my av pre-pro has.

why is it you attack people. its issues we're discussing here, you dont like the issue for some reason so start attacking the person !

That you are so classe brand blinded I or no one else cant do any thing about, but it is sad anytime anyone says some thing in this thread you think they want to attack your brand for some reason . you call me a denon groupie ? if you go to my home forum, you'll see I've owned many brand products, I've been quite vocal and critical about denon as well and over the last 4 years I've been on there, I call it as it is. I dont see any reason not to. I'm not a brand slut if I see a flaw in design and implementation I will acknowldege and say it is so

and for your info. I have demoed & evaluated classe products over the years both in the 2ch and av realm. my cousin owns an classe pre-pro I hear regularly. Infact if anything my interest here is for him. and dissapointed audyssey is not in the mix.

this thread has taken a very sad turn. pity really I would think we would be mature enough to talk the issues !

can you understand it is audyssey I am talking about.


it is a real pity you have this misguided view. one question have you ever actually experienced what a modern audyssey equiped processor can achieve ?

I am still amazed that at one stage you acknowledged it would be a great idea for audyssey to be included by classe and now for what ever reason you seem so vehemently opposed. very hard to understand really unless there are some other reaosns behind. In the end it will be the end user that misses out. with lack of the capability, and also clase that will miss out with sales of the product to people looking for the capability. Hardly a win win. and for those so vehemently opposed to having the CHOICE of havign the capability, I will shake my head wondering why on earth they would oppose choice !

What I find the most amusing here is that Rebelman and I both think Classe should add Audyssey, if for no other reason than to appease the nay-sayers. But that is not good enough. People have to continue to be on the defense.

Please address my question:

Actually since Rebel's gotten into discussing the merits of room EQ instead of defending Classe to the death, I'm beginning to see we're not that far off in our thinking I agree with most of his points except I've had nothing but excellent and desirable results with the Audyssey Pro. I wonder if he's actually tried it...

[quote=sikoniko;14062484]
Are you just pulling my leg to get a response? If so good on ya, ya got me.

If not, and that's a serious response then WOW I don't know what to say..

I'd certainly consider this piece and likely would not use the Audyssey at all.

It can if you measure/compute the EQ with these variables. It doesn't account for temperature and humidity, though.

OK, since there is literally hundreds of different combinations people could be sitting, body sizes and shapes, does it use one setting or do you have to switch eq everytime someone new walks in the room?

I can see it now.. your friend comes over to hear the new system... "WAIT! before we can listen, I have to EQ you!"

I've been in mixing rooms when engineers are doing final mixes to audio... most EQ to a flat response to get the most out of any system. How is the average person going to know their room is 'EQ'd' properly based on the results of this device? If I am depending on the system to tell me my "room curve", how do I know it isn't lying to me or that it is accurate?

I used the smiley intentionally. On the micro level, yes, one should re-EQ for each and every change. In practice, it is generally not necessary. One of the nice things about some devices is that handle more than one EQ profile and you can switch easily. Of course, you'd have to hire 10 people to sit still during the measurement phase, so you could make an EQ profile for that situation. For me it's easier: I EQ for me. No one else cares as much.


Independent measurements, of course.

So, would it be fair to say that you would recommend having someone with experience measuring the room (be it with that product you linked to or hiring a professional) even if you use Audessey?

Depends who you are. I prefer to do it myself but I try to commit the time and effort needed. Others might be better off hiring an expert. The fringe benefit of the latter is that he/she will be able to do more that simply EQ by providing advice about other issues the consumer might not be aware of. The downside is you need to hire him/her back whenever you change anything of acoustic significance.

There's no substitute for knowledge and experience.

like kal, I got a great result doing it myself. I didn't call in any proffesional. the prcess is pretty simple, you just plug in the mic and the onscreen instructions lead you through. for the critical positioning and sequence of mic measurements I took advice from chris of audyssey's whose support on this forum is second to none.

thers no harm in calling in a proffesional if its assistance & advice you need in not just audyssey but other aspects of system & room tuning & optimisation.

No substitute for knowledge and experience, even if it's borrowed from Chris.

hehe absolutely. chris from audyssey is a real credit to this forum. the audyssey support thread he runs a real hallmark of AVS

theres a few from my home forum he's really helped out as well both online and offline. I'm sure theyd concur as well "absolutely no substitute for knowledge and experience even if borrowed from Chris"

I know this is a Classe thread but I have to chime in that his patience is un-paralled. The amount of times he answers redundant questions like "Audyssey set my speakers to large, why?" is incredible. As you suggest a real asset to this forum. He's not the only one though, but he does stand out in the crowd.

The warm reception you showed me in your first post opened the door for a little sarcastic humor.

It’s not blindness that draws me to Classe’ it’s nirvana. Many if not most will sadly expend much of their energy in the pursuit of nirvana and never find it. I am fortunate not to be counted as one of them.

I understand but it’s a little off topic don’t you think?

I have experienced what a bad implementation of EQing can achieve. The era of technology is irrelevant. Have you ever experienced reel-to-reel? It maybe old, but remains untouchable!

I apologize for the confusion. I do not support Audyssey. I merely stated that it probably would have been an easier sell for Classe’ to include it. You may disagree with their decision to drop the feature but the choice they made is rational.

The less a signal is subjected to along the signal pathway the greater its purity will be preserved. This is why you’ll not find tone controls or loudness compensation features on any of Classe’s equipment. Classe’ could have easily added the feature but the choice would have gone against the grain of their purist position. They tested the feature and determined that it doesn’t work. Classe’ is not in the business of packaging features that will disrupt the quality of the signal. Had the opposite been true then the pursuit of audio perfection would essentially lead to nowhere. When given the choice Classe’ will compromise an option rather than compromise quality. Giving you the choice would have been a compromise on quality and their integrity.

Classe' has REQ just not the one you are looking for and this thread was not interested in your Denon promotion.


A misstatement of facts and a pump for Denon warranted it.


That wasn't the case and I wouldn't have taken exception to your comments had you done your homework and not made a case for Denon.

You opinion is welcome but not your bias.

Sounds like this has gone full circle.
Those of us interested in the ssp-800 (usually those already using Classe equipment) are more concerned about sound quality rather than worrying about Audyssey, however there is no reason why the SEQ cannot be purchased, which in theory should be better than the Audyssey provided on AV receivers.
At least with the SEQ and the pro kit you do not need to worry about calling out an engineer whenever you play around with layout and speakers, furthermore sounds like Chris in the Audyssey topic would be more than helpful as well.

While ssp-800 does not have HBR, films on blu-ray should be watchable using uncompressed PCM (via HDMI) that is equal (subjective I guess) in quality.

So I cannot see any problems, as long as the ssp-800 lives up to the sound quality that the company is known for
So the product may not convince those who are currently using top of the line Denons/etc, but then it could be argued they do not fit the Classe customer profile used for designing the ssp-800.

Edit:
One other nice feature of the SEQ is that it can be switched off easily, so can appeal to those who at times want correction or not, maybe switching from surround for films/sacd/etc to 2-channel listening.

Cheers
DT