confused with Audyssey

[GIEGAR]

Considering the restrictions of the doorways, that positioning looks pretty good to me.


Very nice floorboards, by the way.

 

[Acoustat]

Considering the restrictions of the doorways, that positioning looks pretty good to me.


Very nice floorboards, by the way.

Thank you GIEGAR, the cant or toe on the speakers may change a tad
could even drop back but I think I'm ready to Audyssey up and see what happens.

I put ~6,000 nails in the flooring, Amendoim (a men doo um)
I have a 3 piece ornately carved marble table my bro inlaw got some thugs to help move
and they ground a huge divot in one floor board even though I had placed papdding
throughout and asked them to use it grrrrr. It looks to be 19th century Roman
with a different face carved into each of the 4 sides and eagle claws for feet.
Anyway, thanks for noticing, if something is to be done, do it right with pride aye?
That's why I am here, to learn to do it right

 

[PENG]

I have the sides at ~90-110º to the seat, with the couch as far back as possible now. Not sure on toe inº.
This setup provides the best unobstructed sound, and without any elevation or tilting for a channel, for a listener.
This does however, impede some with doorways but not as bad as when the couch was more forward away from the back wall.
Here is how we are ATM…
The RS allows the door to open with passage, but the door hits the speaker and some sort
of buffering of the contact point is necessary.
The LS 5 way binding post and wires could be an issue if care is not taken in the middle of the night or whatever (see pic 2).

110 degrees is very good but don't hesitate too much if 120 degrees is more practical for you. Just toe them to have the tweeter aiming to your ears. If you want to approach perfection some more then you should try to elevate the surround towers, I think even 6 inches will be better than the way they are now.

 

[Acoustat]

110 degrees is very good but don't hesitate too much if 120 degrees is more practical for you. Just toe them to have the tweeter aiming to your ears. If you want to approach perfection some more then you should try to elevate the surround towers, I think even 6 inches will be better than the way they are now.

Sounds good. Especially elevating them. Rethinking my actual position
the toeing exaggerates the actual position. I bet I'm closer to 85º at the tweeter and the back edge
of the speaker is closer to 105-110º but that's not so critical I reckon.
Less toe and strighter firing I ran an Audyssey test
trim levels
FL+2.5
FR + 1.0
SL -12.0
SR -8.0
guess which is more sensitive? Big audible difference always shows up.

Crossovers
Fronts Full Band
Surrounds 40Hz as advertised

Distances are screwy
Fronts share 12.9'
SL 2.7'
SR 6.7' (probably based on #1, which is 7.7 actual feet away to RS)

 

[GIEGAR]

trim levels
FL+2.5
FR + 1.0
SL -12.0
SR -8.0
guess which is more sensitive? Big audible difference always shows up.

FYI, a lot more than speaker sensitivity. This is where the calibration gets to take all variables in the signal chain into account by setting up the trims such that a digital input signal of known amplitude (-30dBFS) measures a target SPL at the MLP (75dBC), for each channel. This includes the nett of pre-amp and amp gain, speaker sensitivity, attenuation with distance and room reinforcement etc.... basically everything between the DAC and measuring mic.

Also, it looks like the Denon has pegged the SL trim (I think -12dB is the lower limit), due to the close distance. Just check with the internal pink noise that the surrounds are about the same volume.

Distances are screwy
Fronts share 12.9'
SL 2.7'
SR 6.7' (probably based on #1, which is 7.7 actual feet away to RS)

Yes, it's based on #1 position. It could have fluffed the SR distance, but at 1130ft/sec it's of no consequence.

 

[Acoustat]

FYI, a lot more than speaker sensitivity. This is where the calibration gets to take all variables in the signal chain into account by setting up the trims such that a digital input signal of known amplitude (-30dBFS) measures a target SPL at the MLP (75dBC), for each channel. This includes the nett of pre-amp and amp gain, speaker sensitivity, attenuation with distance and room reinforcement etc.... basically everything between the DAC and measuring mic.

Also, it looks like the Denon has pegged the SL trim (I think -12dB is the lower limit), due to the close distance. Just check with the internal pink noise that the surrounds are about the same volume.

Yes, it's based on #1 position. It could have fluffed the SR distance, but at 1130ft/sec it's of no consequence.

Cool beans. Yes I noticed the SL maxed at -12db again this keeps in line with the #1 position.

I'm digging the Martin Logans for surrounds, and know I made the right call, auditioning the bookshelfs prior
because by the numbers alone, I would've purchased the Motion 15 bookshelfs. I could not believe the mid range
tonal mismatch between the two. The Motion 40's colour some piano, but not all, plus I'm just beginning to begin
the break in period, (72 hrs). I come home from work and play some DTV radio with just the surrounds via the AVR.

If you recall, I started a poll thread, and the 1st of the only 2 votes out of 4 choices that were cast for rear/surrounds,
was the Sunfire Cinema wall mounted surrounds, though no reason to back up the vote was stated.
They would have had to have been mounted on the back wall with only lateral shifting in placement + elevation.
This would have been rears, without surrounds, or as surrounds (same difference). So…hopefully, some can understand my quandary
and misunderstanding of rears without surrounds, or more like rears as surrounds.

Also, it is very evident, that the Denon is more than capable at driving the ML speakers despite the 4 ohm rating
due to a nice 92 db sensitivity which makes me wonder if my mains might hoover around 83-84db sensitivity.
Doesn't really matter, Audyssey has performed up to my hopes and expectations in blending the two.
Looking forward to following their instructions from the link you provided. Right now I just ran the "bubble"
you suggested, but couldn't help but wonder if there was one misprint in the "bubble" I overrode for even balance, or chi.

#5 & #6 @ 18" forward of the midpoints between #3 & #1 and #1 & #2;

The #6, shouldn't that be between #2 and #4 rather than 1 & 2?
Between 1 & 2, would be in the middle of the couch and account for the only single central measurement
and offset the trending balance in previous measurements.

Or is this the attempt to...

In this case with the measurement positions slightly skewed towards the critical listener (you).

I will look in the attic tomorrow for my db meter and check the pink noise if I removed the batteries.
I ran PN yesterday, and it was "ok". The FL speaker emitted the noise at what was perceived to be
maybe 10" to 1' lower in elevation than the FR, no doubt room flaws. FR is in a corner where the FL is not.

 

[GIEGAR]

.
.
Right now I just ran the "bubble" you suggested, but couldn't help but wonder if there was one misprint in the "bubble" I overrode for even balance, or chi.

#5 & #6 @ 18" forward of the midpoints between #3 & #1 and #1 & #2;

The #6, shouldn't that be between #2 and #4 rather than 1 & 2?
Between 1 & 2, would be in the middle of the couch and account for the only single central measurement
and offset the trending balance in previous measurements.

Or is this the attempt to...

In this case with the measurement positions slightly skewed towards the critical listener (you).

Yes, that's what I was attempting to do. The two forward and two aft positions were centred on you, giving six positions around #1 and four positions around #2 (with four shared). If you've changed it, and are happy with the result, that's perfectly fine.

What Audyssey apparently does is uses its proprietary "fuzzy logic" to identify patterns in the measured room responses and groups them for the purposes of determining it's FIR filters. The idea being that the best overall result for the listening area is achieved, rather than aggressively treating a single position at the detriment of all others. So symmetry is not that critical, and you can attempt to give "weight" to preferred positions.