Do we really need Audyssey MultEQ xt32? Smart decision??? What I hear ...

[PENG]

First of all, this time you quoted me something I deleted. Now..

I manually adjust all the channel levels, including subs, AFTER I applied Audyssey, so volume level is not the issue. IOW my subs are HOT w/ or w/o Audyssey.

If you don't lower your sub volume I guarantee Audyssey would trim you main's level by quite a bit. If that ends up being too low, like -10 then it is not good.

I am conflicted because I just realized (thanks to RichB) that given the same master volume, same speaker channel levels, and same sub levels, Audyssey INCREASED the overall SPL level - in my 2 songs the volume increased by up to 4 dB !

So if Audyssey sounds better, is it ONLY because it is LOUDER by 4dB?

You absolutely need to find out the effect after level matching and report back to us asap.

And if I then level match Audyssey and PD mode, will they sound about the same? In which case, I would rather use Pure Direct 2.1 mode if they really just sound the same w/ the same exact volume levels (90dB vs 90dB).

I must agree, but even then at least you no longer find Audyssey mess up the sound, I mean flat + DEQ. Again DEQ is only effective at level below ref, I tried it and can confirm at high spl level DEQ is not quite audible.

I will compare PD vs Audyssey w/ the KEF today after work, but this time level matched w/ SPL.

Can't you just leave early to do it?

So if they sound the same, why would I use Audyssey?

You should ask Dr./Prof kyriakakis, he's got the quali and is the founder, should be able to answer such simple question.

I sound like a yo-yo here.

IRV got this one covered..

 

[Adam]

I doubt it. I think the Dynamic EQ changes the tonal balance or frequency response to make up for non linear hearing in humans ... that Fletcher-Munson curve thing.

It would be great if people just took a second to Google instead of doing the "I think" thing...(Fletcher-Munson? Hardly.)
Dynamic EQ from Audyssey - Rich Sound at Any Volume | Audyssey

You say it's "hardly" the Fletcher-Munson curve thing - but that's exactly the principle that they are using. Sure, they claim to be using updated curves based on more precise measurements, and they are adjusting for the difference between curves at different loudness levels...but it's still the same principle. An advancement, sure, but still based on non-linear hearing in humans.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

First of all, this time you quoted me something I deleted. Now..

If you don't lower your sub volume I guarantee Audyssey would trim you main's level by quite a bit. If that ends up being too low, like -10 then it is not good.

You absolutely need to find out the effect after level matching and report back to us asap.

I must agree, but even then at least you no longer find Audyssey mess up the sound, I mean flat + DEQ. Again DEQ is only effective at level below ref, I tried it and can confirm at high spl level DEQ is not quite audible.

Can't you just leave early to do it?

You should ask Dr./Prof kyriakakis, he's got the quali and is the founder, should be able to answer such simple question.

Oh, yeah, Audyssey turned down all the speaker channel levels to -3.0 and all the sub levels to -12.0!

So after I ran Audyssey, I manually changed the levels back up to 80dB for each speaker (+6.0) and 83dB for each sub (+3.0).

Oh, no, cannot leave work early. Money more important than Audyssey.

And I am sure Dr Audyssey will say that Audyssey ALWAYS sounds better.

Will need to listen more for sure.

I will say that I am extremely pleased w/ Salon2 + Funk18.0 w/ or w/o DEQ. If I sell all my speakers on local Craigslist and then get 3 more Salon2 from my buddy , I probably will just stick to Pure Direct LFE+Main.

 

[RichB]

The problem is, not being blind, this kind of comparison is riddled with bias. Just knowing you're going to something called "Pure-Direct"...yea, no bias in that nomenclature. It's impressive that someone would actually prefer anything over something called "Pure-Direct", ever.

Why wouldn't I select Impure Processed, the cheeze-whiz of sound

Seriously, so far I have found that Audyssey definiately increased the surround effect in upped the mid-bass in comparisson to the lower bass and raised the volume significantly. I have I MIC and software, I really have to find time to learn how to use it.
I'd like to see how the Salons are performing in my room. Adjust them using the crossover controls.
I recently turned off the rear-tweeters that operate 8K and above. They do increase the ambience but also emphasis the harshness of some recordings.

With the Marantz AV8801, I found a significant change to the imaging soundstage when engaging any processing, including just switching to Direct Mode. The sound moves from the high-center to flatter with the sound now becoming more direction, eminating from each speaker.

The 7.1 analog inputs has a fuller sound than the HDMI so it starts at a disavantage.

I spent the morning listening to the first watt of A51 powering the salons and I love the clarity and the bass was fine.
I like the tonality of the bass produced by the salons in my room. It is never boomy and when I crank it up, the foor and walls are shaking.

My First step is to get my MIC working then I will try Audyssey working.
I suppose, I will have to give Audyssey another go.

Fuzz, Are you using REW to take those measurements?

- Rich

 

[RichB]

I will say that I am extremely pleased w/ Salon2 + Funk18.0 w/ or w/o DEQ. If I sell all my speakers on local Craigslist and then get 3 more Salon2 from my buddy , I probably will just stick to Pure Direct LFE+Main.

I use the Voice Center and Studio Rears.
I wonder if the Voice2 might be better for video.
Is your Revel room audio only ?

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I use the Voice Center and Studio Rears.
I wonder if the Voice2 might be better for video.
Is your Revel room audio only ?

- Rich

I play around and mix + match.

Like I would use the 2 Salon2 for L/R, and use the 3 KEF for C/SL/SR.

My original first thought was to use 5 KEF for 5.1 movies and use the 2 Salon2 for 2.1 music. And everything else (802D2, Orion3) would just be fancy extras. Like they say, often times the first answer is the right one.

I don't think you need to change anything regarding speakers. I really doubt the Voice2 or future Voice3 will do anything significant. Don't waste your money.

 

[RichB]

I play around and mix + match.

Like I would use the 2 Salon2 for L/R, and use the 3 KEF for C/SL/SR.

My original first thought was to use 5 KEF for 5.1 movies and use the 2 Salon2 for 2.1 music. And everything else (802D2, Orion3) would just be fancy extras. Like they say, often times the first answer is the right one.

I don't think you need to change anything regarding speakers. I really doubt the Voice2 or future Voice3 will do anything significant. Don't waste your money.

Ha ha. I am all set.
I was wondering why you were looking at 5 Salon2's versus a mixture of the 2 series Revels?

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Ha ha. I am all set.
I was wondering why you were looking at 5 Salon2's versus a mixture of the 2 series Revels?

- Rich

I think I am set too. KEF 201/2 x 5 for 5.2 movies and Salon2 x 2 for 2.2 music.

 

[cpp]

I think I am set too. KEF 201/2 x 5 for 5.2 movies and Salon2 x 2 for 2.2 music.

sounds like a winning combination

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Last night I watched "Under the Dome" on Amazon Prime in DD 5.1 and "Dark Knight Rises" BD in DTS-HD MA with KEF 201/2.

I compared PD vs FLAT/DEQ. Even with the volume reduced on FLAT/DEQ, the difference was substantial. I could hear more details and bass w/ Flat/DEQ than PD mode.

I think music also sounded better w/ Flat/DEQ. I think I will continue to compare Flat/DEQ vs PD.

 

[PENG]

I think music also sounded better w/ Flat/DEQ. I think I will continue to compare Flat/DEQ vs PD.

I used my 8801 based HT system to do the comparison for movies and the AV7005/R900 system in the other room for 2.0 music in stereo mode. In 2.0 music, after many comparison sessions, I definitely feel Flat/DEQ sounds slightly more transparent and the bass better defined even with the speakers only a few inches from the wall. In 5.1/7.1 the difference is huge at low volume. I think I am going to use it more often now, as I typically listen at well below reference level.

Good to know you finally are using Audyssey, but you still won't upgrade your AVP and/or 5308 to XT32 will you?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I used my 8801 based HT system to do the comparison for movies and the AV7005/R900 system in the other room for 2.0 music using the AV7005 temporarily until it's sold. In 2.0 music, after many comparison sessions, I definitely feel Flat/DEQ sounds slightly more transparent and the bass better defined even with the speakers only a few inches from the wall. In 5.1/7.1 the difference is huge at low volume. I think I am going to use it more often now, as I typically listen at well below reference level.

Good to know you finally are using Audyssey, but you still won't upgrade your AVP and/or 5308 to XT32 will you?

XT32 Would be nice. But no, I am not spending another dime.

Maybe when they come out with XT64 as a separate outboard component, I may buy it.

But, yes, I think I am finally on board w/ DEQ.

 

[PENG]

XT32 Would be nice. But no, I am not spending another dime.

Maybe when they come out with XT64 as a separate outboard component, I may buy it.

But, yes, I think I am finally on board w/ DEQ.

Yeah I don't think that higher resolution is worth the $1,099 they charge but I am really impressed by the fact that they are even upgradable. I think those two Denon units are the only gear that can be upgraded to XT32 and even include Audyssey Pro, absolutely amazing indeed.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Yeah I don't think that higher resolution is worth the $1,099 they charge but I am really impressed by the fact that they are even upgradable. I think those two Denon units are the only gear that can be upgraded to XT32 and even include Audyssey Pro, absolutely amazing indeed.

If there were a Denon Service center in my city OKC, I might have it done. If I lived in Dallas (there are like 3 centers near Dallas), I might have it done. But I don't like the idea of shipping 60lb AVP and risk getting some shipping damage by FedEX or UPS.

 

[RichB]

So here is Step one where I measured my room with the fast sweep track and OmniMic V2.
The first is holding the mic where my ears are when I am sitting on the couch.
The second with the mich on the cushion with its little stand.

These measurements are not solid since it is constantly measuring the sweep so they wiggle a bit +/- a few DB.
Places where there are dips on one sweet not there on another.

View attachment 12206
View attachment 12207

It consistently looks a little bass heavy, but I probably like that

- Rich

 

[M Code]

Interesting sweeps...
I would be concerned about that 8dB drop @ 1kHz..
That range is very crucial to the vocals and can significantly affect the positioning of the dialog..
For our customers, when we use our Audyssey Pro kit for system setups, we strive to minimize any similar dips and/or peak to no more than 3dB...
I don't know your room or loudspeakers but can tell you in a system with proper sound damping materials and high resolution loudspeakers, any peak/dip more than 3dB will be audible.
However we start 1st for the low frequencies as if these aren't smoothed out they will mask the rest of the system's frequency response..

Just my $0.02...

 

[RichB]

Interesting sweeps...
I would be concerned about that 8dB drop @ 1kHz..
That range is very crucial to the vocals and can significantly affect the positioning of the dialog..
For our customers, when we use our Audyssey Pro kit for system setups, we strive to minimize any similar dips and/or peak to no more than 3dB...
I don't know your room or loudspeakers but can tell you in a system with proper sound damping materials and high resolution loudspeakers, any peak/dip more than 3dB will be audible.
However we start 1st for the low frequencies as if these aren't smoothed out they will mask the rest of the system's frequency response..

Just my $0.02...

My Speakers are Revel Salons.
I sit 15 feet back in a room that is 33 feet long.
There is an 6 foot opening at the back to another room and a 12 foot opening on one side.
The ceiling and ranges from 8 feet to 12 feet from the left to right side of the room.
I would describe the room as in the middle. There are not obvious echos primarily due to rugs on the floor.

View attachment 12208View attachment 12209

These curves are taken like from Track 2 on the OmniMic disc and they really move around so I am not inclined to put too much into their accuracy.
I would prefer a measurement that took a single sweep and did a plot from it.

Can OmniMic software do that or should I get REW?

- Rich

 

[Irvrobinson]

So here is Step one where I measured my room with the fast sweep track and OmniMic V2.
The first is holding the mic where my ears are when I am sitting on the couch.
The second with the mich on the cushion with its little stand.

These measurements are not solid since it is constantly measuring the sweep so they wiggle a bit +/- a few DB.
Places where there are dips on one sweet not there on another.

View attachment 12206
View attachment 12207

It consistently looks a little bass heavy, but I probably like that

- Rich

Good in-room curves slope down like that. Actually, they look very good.

 

[Irvrobinson]

These curves are taken like from Track 2 on the OmniMic disc and they really move around so I am not inclined to put too much into their accuracy.
I would prefer a measurement that took a single sweep and did a plot from it.

Can OmniMic software do that or should I get REW?

- Rich

OmniMic can't do that, and it wouldn't be accurate anyway. I find that my best measurements are done with the microphone mounted in a boom on a floor stand, and I am well off to the side (like four feet) and not moving around. In the bass octaves the curves will move around more as the room loads up, which isn't what happens in music.

 

[M Code]

The Revel Salons are excellent full-range loudspeakers, we have known Mark the chief Revel engineer for many years.
My concern would be the accuracy of the Omni Microphone...
As you know the Audyssey Pro kit is 10x higher in cost. It would be informative to see a frequency response for the Omni Mic itself taken in an open field or anchoeic chamber. But in reviewing their website (Omni Mic) we failed to find this information. I like the various options in their software but its accuracy really starts with the microphone..

Just my $0.02...