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

[fuzz092888]

Which miniDSP are you referring to?

The 88A has can bypass the filters which is not the same as bypassing the circuitry.
Here is a post that attempted to measure the effect of a miniDSP with filters (flat):

https://www.minidsp.com/forum/diy-hifi-projects/1173-re-minidsp-sound-quality-test?limitstart=0#1272

The XMC-1 has a Stereo Reference mode which does bypass the DSP circuitry and the sound difference between Stereo/Direct and Stereo Reference is quite evident on digital sources. On analog sources, it is obvious.

I am not saying that these REQ products are not useful, but they may have a cost and that I prefer comparing the effects against a "pure" source, whenever possible.

- Rich

I wasn't referring to a Dirac unit. Either one of their HT units or a basic 10x10 unit. The 10x10 uses the REW software to generate the correction biquads and the nanoAVR's look like the have similar but miniDSP software.

So why not simply remove the unit from the signal chain? Regardless of the miniDSP unit you can simply remove the unit from the signal chain, or switch to a different HDMI input in the case of the NanoAVR. I have a 2x4 miniDSP and a 10x10 that I've done this with. A nanoAVR would be even simpler to remove.

I'm not saying these units are a must, but I'll say they are very good at what they do, especially if you have the experience to make use of all their features.

One last thing I'll mention, if Siegfried Linkwitz and John Kreskovsky don't feel that these miniDSP units (at least the 10x10, 2x4, etc) cause any unnecessary additions to the signal chain, that's good enough for me.

 

[Peja]

I don't even like Audyssey. So no, it isn't absolutely necessary in my view.

The more important question is whether or not to use room calibration at all. The answer to that, of course, lies in the acoustics of your room and neither you nor I know what that is in your case. So without getting into a long drawn out discussion let me simply suggest you spend some time listening to your system with it and without it. Whichever sounds best to you will be the way to go.

That's exactly what Denon dealers told me today: Trust your ears.
Also, they have never use Audyssey calibration on AVRs in their show room to achieve best possible sound!?
For me, sound on my Denon is perfect, my only dilemma is why Audyssey measurement can’t finish speaker setup and be able to compare sound “with or without Audyssey”.

They said “it's probably something trivial”. Like, central speaker is deeper in the shelf than it should be or front speakers are too close to the window or wall, living room door blocking rear speaker, etc…

Maybe I should go to the store with my receiver and let them do the measurement just to be sure that is nothing wrong with my Audyssey.


At the end, they told me
that if I am satisfied with sound that I have achieved -than I should just forget process of automatic calibration.

 

[RichB]

At the end, they told me
that if I am satisfied with sound that I have achieved -than I should just forget process of automatic calibration.

Words of wisdom

- Rich

 

[fmw]

Obviously I agree with them. Ignore the measurements. There seems to be a passion for room measurments lately but I think it just confuses and complicates the issue. I run my room calibration and then go back and readjust it manually. The main benefit for me is the quick adjustment of levels. I normally don't care for the equalization.

 

[PENG]

I refused to use Audyssey in the beginning for a long time because I like to do my own manual calibration of the subwoofer and prefer as "pure" as possible for the front left and right for stereo listening, not that I could hear much difference other than the bass. Since I acquired the mindsp mic and tried REW, I became a believer, almost anyway, as I couldn't argue with the consistent results I was getting in my room using the minidsp mic and REW. Simply put, if if works for you, use it and if not, ignore it. There is no harm trying.

I have no idea why Rich was getting those "ugly" (sorry Rich) plots. Then I took a chance and tried DEQ, and the rest was history.. I mentioned that to ADTG who did not like Audyssey at the time, but now he said he had DEQ on all the time but still set front left/right to bypass.

My next experiment will be Dirac, as they do have a free trial offer. Science is wonderful, when done right!!

 

[RichB]

Peng,

Are you equalizing the full-range or just the bass?

I am curious because looking at the MiniDSP for REQ, they quote a 2 to 4 ms delay. However, for MiniDSP Dirac 24 to 40 ms. I don't know if that would be an issue for gamers, but it would not be suitable for subwoofer equalization.

- Rich

 

[PENG]

Peng,

Are you equalizing the full-range or just the bass?

I am curious because looking at the MiniDSP for REQ, they quote a 2 to 4 ms delay. However, for MiniDSP Dirac 24 to 40 ms. I don't know if that would be an issue for gamers, but it would not be suitable for subwoofer equalization.

- Rich

I did both full range and 15-200 bass, results we're consistent, repeatable.

 

[RichB]

My results were as well.
I plan on measuring again and was toying with the idea of placing a mini-dsp before the bass channels. That would not work with Dirac but would probably be OK with PEQ.

I suppose all subs with built in DSP's must also have delay, effectively placing them further back in time relative to the mains.

- Rich

 

[PENG]

I suppose all subs with built in DSP's must also have delay, effectively placing them further back in time relative to the mains.

- Rich

I don't think so. All my subs, main and surround speakers were detected at distance within a couple inches of the physical distance. That has been the case through 3 AVRs and 2 prepros. The way you describe your room, I think it probably post a challenge to any EQ systems. In fact looking at how jagged and significant magnitude fructuation in your freq response plotts, I was wondering how you could still tell the difference between your electronics. Any difference you picked up would have to be things (e.g. THD, IMD etc) other than frequency response.

 

[RichB]

I don't think so. All my subs, main and surround speakers were detected at distance within a couple inches of the physical distance. That has been the case through 3 AVRs and 2 prepros. The way you describe your room, I think it probably post a challenge to any EQ systems. In fact looking at how jagged and significant magnitude fructuation in your freq response plotts, I was wondering how you could still tell the difference between your electronics. Any difference you picked up would have to be things (e.g. THD, IMD etc) other than frequency response.

Those measurements were taken with REW. I will retake them soon. If they still show these aberrations, then this is all some with REW calibrated MICs, then it must be a REW measurement related. Dirac and the OmniMic software produce much less erratic results above 100Hz.

I also discovered that MiniDSP Dirac introduces 20 to 40ms of delay. In order to keep time aligned, it must apply the delay to the entire frequency range.

Using the XMC-Dirac curtains to limit processing to below 40Hz, there was a significant change in the sound-stage. The frequency plots clearly show that above 40Hz there is no appreciable alteration, yet it sounds very different. I assume this is due to phase changes (timing between channels).

I remain a purist at heart, so I am bothered by processing that colors the sound in areas where it should not. My experience thus far, is the PEQ is better than REQ.

- Rich

 

[PENG]

Those measurements were taken with REW. I will retake them soon. If they still show these aberrations, then this is all some with REW calibrated MICs, then it must be a REW measurement related. Dirac and the OmniMic software produce much less erratic results above 100Hz.

I also discovered that MiniDSP Dirac introduces 20 to 40ms of delay. In order to keep time aligned, it must apply the delay to the entire frequency range.

Using the XMC-Dirac curtains to limit processing to below 40Hz, there was a significant change in the sound-stage. The frequency plots clearly show that above 40Hz there is no appreciable alteration, yet it sounds very different. I assume this is due to phase changes (timing between channels).

I remain a purist at heart, so I am bothered by processing that colors the sound in areas where it should not. My experience thus far, is the PEQ is better than REQ.

- Rich

For under $100 I still highly recommend you get the minidsp mic for use with REW. I believe those things are very accurate, enough for what we need.

 

[fuzz092888]

For under $100 I still highly recommend you get the minidsp mic for use with REW. I believe those things are very accurate, enough for what we need.

Especially if you get them from CSS. What's nice about CSS is that not only do that provide the on axis, but they also provide 45 and 90 degrees. IIRC, the 90 degree angle is used to capture more of the room and captures more closely what the Audyssey mic's get.

 

[Zach_N85]

Hello guys, first post here.

I'm thinking of getting a new Denon AVR to replace my old Yamaha RX-V471.

I've noticed that the main difference between the 2 models is that the 3300 has 7.2 preouts and Audyssey MultEQ XT32 compated to MultEQ XT on the 2200.

I will be using this AVR with the following speakers:

Fronts: Paradigm Monitor 7 v7
Center: Paradigm Cinema v3 (Will be replaced soon)
Surrounds: Morel SP-2 satellites
Sub: SVS PB-1000

Will I gain any noticeable difference by getting the 3300W which uses MultEQ XT32 or can I live happily with the one available in the 2200? Power wise they are almost identical and I don't really see myself needing preouts anytime soon.

Thanks

 

[RichB]

No one can say what provides "happiness" but I always recommend pre-outs to allow you to add an external amp. I am not really an REQ person, but XT32 was a step up from XT.

- Rich

 

[lovinthehd]

Yep agree XT32 is a step up from XT (I have both). Having a pre-out is a nice option....maybe you'll have active speakers someday if not an external amp? Another difference between the x200 and x300 series is you get the new Audyssey app (android or ios) for extra customization.

 

[Zach_N85]

Thanks, let's for a moment put pre outs out of the equation. Is the difference between XT and XT32 worth the upgrade from the 2200W to 3300W? For my system, which is pretty basic mid-range, I think the regular XT will do fine? I understand that the main differences between them is a resolution of x512 vs x32 on the XT and the ability to EQ the subwoofer.

The difference is about $300 so it's quite a lot of money. Thanks

 

[lovinthehd]

Depends how much $ the difference is and what that means to you I suppose. I thought it worth at least a hundred or two when I went shopping for a new avr. The addition of the x300 series to be able to tweak the resultant curves on an app (the only other way would be via adding Audyssey Pro and usually you need XT32 for that feature) is another nice feature over the x200 models and I would add a little value for that.

With the whole Audyssey MultiEQ series (MultEQ, XT, XT32) you get sub eq; with XT32/SubEQ you get more filters than MultEQ/XT plus the ability to set delay and level for two subs prior to eq, so that feature can be worth more if you have multiple subs.

You might be perfectly happy with older XT and no preouts, YMMV Good luck!

 

[RichB]

^
Does the new Audyssey app allow limiting the correction frequencies?

This is available in Anthem ARC and Direct Pro. If it does, then the XT32 option would be well-worth considering.

- Rich

 

[lovinthehd]

^
Does the new Audyssey app allow limiting the correction frequencies?

This is available in Anthem ARC and Direct Pro. If it does, then the XT32 option would be well-worth considering.

- Rich

Haven't used it as I have an older unit, nor have seen much specifics as yet (don't think the app's available quite yet, at least I don't see it in the Google Play Store yet), but my understanding is you can tweak the curves and save them, and while aimed at the installers, is user friendly; eventually replaces Audyssey Pro kits.

 

[KEW]

^
Does the new Audyssey app allow limiting the correction frequencies?

This is available in Anthem ARC and Direct Pro. If it does, then the XT32 option would be well-worth considering.

- Rich

As I read lovinthehd's posts, I understood this to be a feature of the x300 models (i.e. 2300, 3300, or 4300), not necessarily requiring XT32!
Damn! I was planning to keep my Denon 4520 for the long haul, but if it turns out easy to tweak the EQ on the fly, this is a big enough deal to push me in to an upgrade in a year or two.
You guys hurry up and "Guinea Pig" it for me so I'll know!