Audyssey MultEQ Room Correction Interview With Chris Kyriakakis

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The frequency response should be flat at the speaker, not at the seating position.

A lot audiophiles think that it is good if their speakers measure +/-2dB from 20Hz-20kHz at their listening position.

So the FR should be flat at the speaker (similar to anechoic measurement), but it's okay for the FR to be +/-20dB at the listening position?

IOW, no one should be measuring at the listening position because it doesn't matter? Just do anechoic measurement to eliminate the room from the equation?

 

[TLS Guy]

I disagree. If you first get all subs to properly sum and level match and then apply a global EQ, you can really improve things. This is NOW how Audyssey does it. It's how Harman's SFM system does it and it works. My experience with MCACC is the same as the poster here, it doesn't do much of anything for bass frequencies which is were EQ is needed most.

I would agree that Audyssey probably has a place in dealing with room modes. However it does not, and should not, preclude the use of equalizers in the sub to make it perform properly in the first place.

The other issue is that you can't equalize a bad speaker into a good one. You can equalize it flat, but listening and other measurements will uncover the fools gold, especially measurements revealing retained energy.

My personal beef with Audyssey is with what it does to the top end, which is not correct in my systems, not by a long shot.

 

[crossedover]

Ran a sweep below reference levels with eq off and MCACC on both with no sub eq on. Keep in mind my room is treated.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

By the way, it is a plus that in that example you show, that the Pioneer system does practically nothing especially to the high end response.

If the room correction does NOTHING, then why bother using it in the first place? Why not just bypass it or don't use any EQ at all?

 

[gene]

View attachment 13895

Ran a sweep below reference levels with eq off and MCACC on both with no sub eq on. Keep in mind my room is treated.

200 dB scale. Come on man! Also is that a graph you generated from a measurement system or derived from the Room EQ software? If the latter, don't believe it.

Audio Measurements: The Useful vs. the Bogus in Consumer Audio | Audioholics

 

[Adam]

My experience with MCACC is the same as the poster here, it doesn't do much of anything for bass frequencies which is were EQ is needed most.

They have added Sub EQ on some of this year's models, so hopefully you'll get a chance to try one of those out for your article.

 

[crossedover]

200 dB scale. Come on man! Also is that a graph you generated from a measurement system or derived from the Room EQ software? If the latter, don't believe it.

Audio Measurements: The Useful vs. the Bogus in Consumer Audio | Audioholics

Generated from HOLMImpluse and measurement mic. Ill run full reference sweeps tonight and post in the EQ thread.

 

[TLS Guy]

A lot audiophiles think that it is good if their speakers measure +/-2dB from 20Hz-20kHz at their listening position.

So the FR should be flat at the speaker (similar to anechoic measurement), but it's okay for the FR to be +/-20dB at the listening position?

IOW, no one should be measuring at the listening position because it doesn't matter? Just do anechoic measurement?

First of all the speaker system is excellent what you suggest is very unlikely to happen.

The interaction of speaker and room is complex. However lets take one issue. As you move further away from the speaker, the ratio of reflected to direct sound shifts increasingly to the indirect reflected sound. The reflected sound is not flat and in particular shows increasing HF loss. This is what the ear expects. If you correct for this it does sound worse.

I think this is also the reason why properly set up Dolby PL 2x is a benefit. This algorithm is good at picking up reflected sound and feeding it to the surround and back speakers.

In my system, if a listen front row, I get the impression of being in the lower level Orchestra section of the hall. When I'm in the back row, I'm in the Mezzanine or may be the lower circle. Properly set up it really does work.

As I pointed out in Herbu's post, DIY allows me to do things other users can't. Another addition is that BSC for the front three is active, and so can be set precisely for speaker location. Getting this right is absolutely vital for realistic reproduction. I have been obsessional to the point were I have tweaked the passive crossovers in the surrounds because one speaker is flush with the wall and the other stands out from the wall.

A big problem is that BSC is not only speaker dependent, but highly dependent on room and in particular the speakers spacing from boundaries. Designing for this makes for a quantum leap in realistic reproduction.

I know you hate active speakers, however if you had a speaker with active BSC and a built in system so the user could easily optimize it for each speaker, I can assure you the benefits would be highly significant.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

As you move further away from the speaker, the ratio of reflected to direct sound shifts increasingly to the indirect reflected sound. The reflected sound is not flat and in particular shows increasing HF loss. This is what the ear expects. If you correct for this it does sound worse.

I know you hate active speakers...

Do you assume that it would sound worse to EVERYONE?

Audyssey has 2 curves. The Reference (default) curve leaves the HF roll-off alone, which is what you like.

The 2nd curve is called the Audyssey FLAT curve. It increases the HF to flat. Some people (like you) may not like it. But others (like me) do love it.

This is from a Denon AVR2212, Audyssey XT, Red is Pure Direct, Green is Audyssey Reference, Blue is Audyssey Flat.


At 9kHz, no EQ is @ 64dB, Audyssey Reference is 68dB, Audyssey Flat is 70dB, which is still -5dB down from the standard 75dB. So it's not as if Audyssey Reference or even Flat goes ABOVE the 75dB level of flat.

As far as active speakers, I do own the Linkwitz Orion, which is 100% active (quad amped per speaker). I don't hate active speakers.

 

[TLS Guy]

Do you assume that it would sound worse to EVERYONE?

Audyssey has 2 curves. The Reference (default) curve leaves the HF roll-off alone, which is what you like.

The 2nd curve is called the Audyssey FLAT curve. It increases the HF to flat. Some people (like you) may not like it. But others (like me) do love it.

This is from a Denon AVR2212, Audyssey XT, Red is Pure Direct, Green is Audyssey Reference, Blue is Audyssey Flat.


At 9kHz, no EQ is @ 64dB, Audyssey Reference is 68dB, Audyssey Flat is 70dB, which is still -5dB down from the standard 75dB. So it's not as if Audyssey Reference or even Flat goes ABOVE the 75dB level of flat.

As far as active speakers, I do own the Linkwitz Orion, which is 100% active (quad amped per speaker). I don't hate active speakers.

I personally don't like the any of the curves and so called "Flat" is the worst.

As I said earlier, this problem may well be part of the classical/pop divide issue.

The issue for me, is as Peter Walker pointed out so many years ago, that for satisfying reproduction, the system must play back with a believable acoustic. We are now way beyond what he could achieve back then.

I know the Minneapolis Orchestra Hall really well. When I play back the multichannel BIS SACDs if I sit in the front seats, I'm in the Orchestra seats, which have a known slightly too up front/bright acoustic. If I sit in my back row, I'm in the Mezzanine, where the sound is superb. So in that hall those are the expensive seats. Osmo Vanska has said that is where he goes to check balance and says those are the best sounding seats in the hall.

I often refer to my system, as my "magic carpet." This Proms season, it really has taken me to the RAH.

For me Audyssey is a slayer of the illusion and rips a hole in my "magic carpet."

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I personally don't like the any of the curves and so called "Flat" is the worst.

As I said earlier, this problem may well be part of the classical/pop divide issue.

The issue for me, is as Peter Walker pointed out so many years ago, that for satisfying reproduction, the system must play back with a believable acoustic. We are now way beyond what he could achieve back then.

I know the Minneapolis Orchestra Hall really well. When I play back the multichannel BIS SACDs if I sit in the front seats, I'm in the Orchestra seats, which have a known slightly too up front/bright acoustic. If I sit in my back row, I'm in the Mezzanine, where the sound is superb. So in that hall those are the expensive seats. Osmo Vanska has said that is where he goes to check balance and says those are the best sounding seats in the hall.

I often refer to my system, as my "magic carpet." This Proms season, it really has taken me to the RAH.

For me Audyssey is a slayer of the illusion and rips a hole in my "magic carpet."

Everyone has a different preference for sure. Some people like the HF roll-off, some people like the HF flat. I may not PREFER your magic carpet sound experience, but others may.

What is "believable" to one person may not be "believable" to another person.

 

[TLS Guy]

Everyone has a different preference for sure. Some people like the HF roll-off, some people like the HF flat. I may not PREFER your magic carpet sound experience, but others may.

What is "believable" to one person may not be "believable" to another person.

I actually doubt that. I think more likely than not you would like it. I have had enough experienced musicians hear it now, and been astonished that the system does realistically reproduce intimate music and a huge symphony orchestra. I had one professional horn player say she had never heard instruments placed and sound in their correct acoustic space with reproduced sound It does work, and and works well.

The problem is with pop music there is no valid point of reference. For the music I primarily listen to there most certainly is. That point of reference is strongly now imprinted in my acoustic memory and those of many others who have heard this system.

I really believe that to be the basis of the pop/classical divide. I believe there is one, and modern practices are making it wider.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I actually doubt that. I think more likely than not you would like it. I have had enough experienced musicians hear it now, and been astonished that the system does realistically reproduce intimate music and a huge symphony orchestra. I had one professional horn player say she had never heard instruments placed and sound in their correct acoustic space with reproduced sound It does work, and and works well.

The problem is with pop music there is no valid point of reference. For the music I primarily listen to there most certainly is. That point of reference is strongly now imprinted in my acoustic memory and those of many others who have heard this system.

I really believe that to be the basis of the pop/classical divide. I believe there is one, and modern practices are making it wider.

Well, most guests and friends are polite, so they will no doubt give you the best compliments.

I'm sure your system is nice. So are other people's systems. But it is quite premature to think that I (or others) would unequivocally prefer the sound of your system.

For one thing, I do NOT prefer the sound of the HF roll-off that many audiophiles prefer. That is why I absolutely love Dynamic EQ, which flattens the treble even more than Audyssey Flat. It is NOT black and white. It's NOT right or wrong.

People have different PREFERENCES.

 

[TLS Guy]

Well, most guests and friends are polite, so they will no doubt give you the best compliments.

I'm sure your system is nice. So are other people's systems. But it is quite premature to think that I (or others) would unequivocally prefer the sound of your system.

For one thing, I do NOT prefer the sound of the HF roll-off that many audiophiles prefer. That is why I absolutely love Dynamic EQ, which flattens the treble even more than Audyssey Flat. It is NOT black and white. It's NOT right or wrong.

People have different PREFERENCES.

What you say is true in the pop world, not so in the classical/opera arena. Its either a close approximation to the original performance, or it isn't.

I think you are right in the fact the the goal of the "Closest Approach to the Original Sound" is a goal that only strictly is required for the type of program I'm referring to.

Part of the issue is is that pop and classical program are mixed and monitored very differently. Pop is mixed with the speakers close at high volume. So I can at least see an argument for trying to achieve flat response at the listening position for that genre. I can assure you that goal for classical music is way down the wrong road and sounds awful.

Listening to the Ring on a flat at your seat system, would make you climb the walls fast. That I guarantee.

 

[ira]

While predicting what any specific individual would like is problematic, hasn't previous research indicated that, across a population of listeners, the response most people are likely to prefer is the B&K house curve, and a similar curve as researched by Sean Olive?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

While predicting what any specific individual would like is problematic, hasn't previous research indicated that, across a population of listeners, the response most people are likely to prefer is the B&K house curve, and a similar curve as researched by Sean Olive?

Most people? Perhaps "most" people in that particular group of individuals. I don't know about most people in the world.

 

[TLS Guy]

While predicting what any specific individual would like is problematic, hasn't previous research indicated that, across a population of listeners, the response most people are likely to prefer is the B&K house curve, and a similar curve as researched by Sean Olive?

You mean this curve?

This curve is used to equalize studio speakers to the listening position. That is pretty much the curve you will get at the listening position from speakers that measure well. That is my point, Audyssey corrects it, and I maintain it shouldn't. But if what you like is flat at the listening position go ahead.

 

[TLS Guy]

Most people? Perhaps "most" people in that particular group of individuals. I don't know about most people in the world.

That's why we can't take it any further. I highly doubt any classical listener would want his system equalized to flat at the listening position.

Classical recordings are made with microphones that capture the bulk of the sound and are either over or just behind the rostrum. Spot mikes are used generally sparingly, just cracked open.

It works best to have the mikes closer to the performers than audience members.

Engineers assume good speakers in a satisfactory room, and NOT an over treated one.

Now the aim is to hope that the HF loss related to distance, coupled with the distance of the listener from his speakers will give a natural frequency balance and perspective.

In skilled hands it usually works out well.

I have never met an engineer in the classical field who would countenance equalizing to flat at the listening position. He would not engineer based on that assumption.

I don't know what the current thinking is in the pop world, but judging from what I have observed in the Twin Cities, I don't think there is much, or any thinking. So in that respect you are right, anything goes.

 

[gene]

Audyssey and High Frequency Correction

I thought I'd chime in here to correct a few misconceptions being thrown around about Audyssey.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><![endif]--> If you select the Audyssey curve it does NOT try to make the response FLAT to 20kHz. The Audyssey curve starts a gentle roll off around 4 kHz and it down –2 dB at 10 kHz and –6 dB at 20 kHz. I asked Audyssey about this and they said "This shape comes from countless hours of listening and measuring studios and home rooms (we have a database of home listening rooms that exceeds 3000 rooms—largest in the world)."


With the Pro version, you can make personal preference adjustments and limit the amount of correction to your desire.

I hope this helps.



<!--[if gte mso 9]><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <![endif]-->

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The Audyssey curve starts a gentle roll off around 4 kHz and is down –2 dB at 10 kHz...

The graph I posted shows that Audyssey curve is down about -6dB @ 10kHz (~69dB, Reference is 75dB). At 20kHz, it is down -10dB. I assume it varies with speakers/rooms?

Green is the Audyssey Curve, Reference level is 75dB:


But yeah, I think all the Audyssey graphs I've seen showed a roll-off in the treble, unless you use Audyssey Flat + Dynamic EQ.

Here is one example, where 70dB is the reference level. Purple graph is FLAT + DEQ, Green graph is FLAT only.