Next Level?

[speakerman39]

Folks, as some of YOU know that I just recently got back into the game so to speak. That is, I now have my avr, speakers, and subs established. Well, soon to have dual Hsu ULS-15 MK2 subs. So, my question involves sub EQ.

First, a little history. Don't worry I will do MY best not to bore YOU to death. Lets just say that I have owned many subs. For example, have owned a SVS PB10-NSD/PB12-NSD, Acoustic Research AR8's, 10" Velodyne, Cerwin Vega 10", Paradigm PDR10, Paradigm ?????, Hsu VTF 3.3, and dual Outlaw Audio LFM Pluses. These are the ones that I can remember as there have been others.

Fast forward to today I have the Hsu ULS-15 MK2. Soon to have a second. So, my question here is what is the best way to take it to the next level? I am aware that to get to the next level will require some form of sub EQ.

Been reading a lot about this lately. Many here and on other forums use REW. In doing so requires the purchase of a mic. But, I found if YOU buy a usb mic, then YOU do NOT have to calibrate YOUR sound card. Also, REW only measures the frequency response in YOUR room. It does NOT apply any fixes. It just exposes the problematic areas right?

Speaking of problem areas, I have learned that a typical graph will have both peaks and dips. I remember Ed Mullen mentioning that to me when he was nice enough to call me on a couple of occasions. It appears to me that the peaks in said room is what robs me of good quality bass. So then, the goal with REW is to identify the peaks right?

The dips in the frequency response can NOT be addressed for the most part. Hence, the goal then is to minimize the dips by perhaps trying different placements options right? In other words, trying different placement options may lead to less dips and/or peaks. At least, that is how I understand it.

Okay so we minimized our peaks and our dips now what? We need something to correct it to achieve a flatter response right? So, then the question becomes what to use. To me this looks like a viable choice:

https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/umik-1

https://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4

With this plugin:

https://www.minidsp.com/products/plugins/2way-advanced-detail

Okay so far so good. Still others find this more useful:

http://www.powersoundaudio.com/products/anti-mode-8033s-ii

That is, the anti-mode yields nearly the same results as the others but with much less work. I like that-simple is good! But, it is also more expensive. The Anti-imode also comes with a mic. But, there is some confusion regarding multiple subs. Since I will soon have duals, then do I need to buy (2) Anti-mode 8033 S-II's?

My avr is a Marantz SR6009. It has the Gold Audyssey package whatever that means. Basically, it say Multi EQXT 32 Pro. Something like that. The online manual says that it adjust the sub and NOT sub(s). So, does that mean my avr will only account for a single sub then? How on earth do I EQ the other sub? Is that where the minidsp or the anti-mode comes into play?

Lastly, if my SR6009 will EQ both subs then is the minidsp/antimode even needed? Keep in mind, my room is very small coming in at 1,440 ft.^3. Placement is rather limited. Why are small rooms difficult to treat? Sorry, for so many questions but I really need some clarification and guidance. It would be most appreciated.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[Auditor55]

Taking measurements, via REW, is good if you have various placement options. I think if you have Sub EQ within the receiver than external EQ like the Anti-mode isn't necessary, although you could experiment with both. BTW, is your room closed or open. Also, if you have limited to space, why did you select ULS-15, those subs are going to limit your placement options do to their size. The nulls in a room are very hard to deal with when you are trying to get even bass, sometimes placing multiple subs are even more difficult than a single sub.

 

[speakerman39]

Taking measurements, via REW, is good if you have various placement options. I think if you have Sub EQ within the receiver than external EQ like the Anti-mode isn't necessary, although you could experiment with both. BTW, is your room closed or open. Also, if you have limited to space, why did you select ULS-15, those subs are going to limit your placement options do to their size. The nulls in a room are very hard to deal with when you are trying to get even bass, sometimes placing multiple subs are even more difficult than a single sub.

My goal was to get as a musical sub as I could get given my budget. The ULS-15 MK2 fulfills my need perfectly. Yes, it is a little BIG for MY room. But, I have it upfront in between my left front speaker and my tv stand. The other will go on the other side close to a corner, just like the one I have is located now. Also, have another option and that is to place the second sub more near field next to my seating position also on the left side.

The room is open to my bedroom/bathroom and my kitchen/doorway. I reside in a 1BR apartment. Have posted a few pics here:

And here:

This is the other side I am referring to when placing a second ULS-15 MK2 sub. That is, I will move that stand in the corner and place the second sub in between my ty stand and the front right speaker. Have NOT gotten my RTi8 towers set up just yet. The RTi6's YOU see here are going up on my side walls.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[shadyJ]

You are correct that the best way to EQ subs is to trim the peaks and fill the nulls by placement. And yes, you do not have to calibrate the soundcard with a USB mic. REW measures the room, but can also apply fixes if you have a compatible equalizing device. MiniDSP will do a good job of equalizing the subs. Your 6009 receiver only equalizes one sub, not two. I would see what kind of response you get before buying something that equalizes both. You may not need anything, but you need to see the response first.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Are these Polk (RTi6?) bookshelf speakers??
If you're looking to take your system to next level, I'd start with new LCRs like Ascend CMT340SE.
As for Sub - do the crawl first, AutoEQ later and don't overthink this.

 

[KEW]

The SR-6009 comes with MultEQ XT. See the chart in this link:

http://www.audyssey.com/technologies/multeq/flavors

It doesn't have the resolution of XT 32, but IME, XT still does a very good job.

As far as the ability to handle dual subs, that is not included in XT 32; however, most manufacturers have seen fit to include SubEQ with XT 32 (Onkyo being the rare exception) - it is like an add-on/plugin for XT 32 (except you cannot add it if your AVR doesn't have it).

Before XT 32 proper starts, SubEQ does two things to allow Audyssey to handle dual subs:
1) Level matches the two subs
2) Time/phase alignment - the distance adjustment.

After that XT 32 treats the dual subs as one sub for all calibrations (just as your XT will when you hook two subs to the SR6009).

Ideally, you could locate the dual subs equidistant from your LP (judging by your photos, it looks like you may be good on this!). Then the phase/time alignment should be very close.
The levels can be matched using an SPL meter and pink noise. If equidistant, it seems reasonable to trust the same model sub to be equal levels if you position the gain knob the same.

So once you get your second sub, level match them. Position them as close to equidistant as your space allows. Then run Audyssey XT.

It is a given that your time/phase/distance will be off by a little bit. Although I like the idea of it being matched, I wouldn't be overly concerned about it, just yet. Three feet at the speed of sound is 2.66 miliseconds. If it was your midrange or high frequencies, I would be much more concerned.

Play some familiar music or HT with just the sub playing and tell me how much "impact" you hear or how strong the attacks are. Higher frequency sounds to excite our reflexes from the standpoint of timing. Bass gives the soundscape strength and solidity. That said, I have had several subs that made the sound sloppy/muddy. I have to admit bass/subs are somewhat enigmatic for me. When I listen to sub alone, they all sound sloppy because there is no apparent "tightness". However, listening to a 2.1 system, which sub absolutely makes a difference. I think it is more a matter of room nodes or over-hang from previous sounds masking the higher frequency attack information for the next sound, but I am guessing.

Sorry to digress. Back to the task at hand. I hope the better understanding of SubEQ helps you tune your setup a little before running Audyssey XT.

For music, I would definitely set your sub to EQ2:

The reason is EQ1 is tuned to give you a flat response in an anechoic chamber:

The reason is, unless you have a "non-residentially huge" room, you will get substantial room gain. In your not so large room it is a safe bet you will have well over 10dB of room gain by the time you are at 20Hz. Understand that is the avg. across your room, if you happen to be in a node where your LP is, it gets worse! Audyssey is not capable of suppressing such a huge bloom in bass (I have seen numbers like 8 to 10dB thrown around as max adjustment capability for Audyssey - but have never seen anything "official" on this).

It is a safe bet that the EQ2 curve, after room gain, provides a much flatter "net" frequency response!
You should go ahead and try this if you are currently using the EQ1 curve.
We get trapped into the rut of thinking we want a flat FR curve - well, we do, but that curve needs to be for in our room. For non-bass speakers, anechoic is a fair measure, but for bass, anechoic flat response is not going to be flat when you get it in your home.

So, to your main question, "Hold your horses" and see what you get out of what you've got before spending any more money. If you are discontent with it, I would go the REW measurement approach and post your results along with room layout for the experts here and on AVS to evaluate before springing for DSP mini or anti-mode. Audyssey XT is no slouch; it may be room treatment (or rethinking sub locations) is a better solution. If your room has nulls, pumping more watts into (EQ'ing) them only increases the magnitude of the null while putting an insane demand on your amplifier.

Hope this helps you!

 

[speakerman39]

You are correct that the best way to EQ subs is to trim the peaks and fill the nulls by placement. And yes, you do not have to calibrate the soundcard with a USB mic. REW measures the room, but can also apply fixes if you have a compatible equalizing device. MiniDSP will do a good job of equalizing the subs. Your 6009 receiver only equalizes one sub, not two. I would see what kind of response you get before buying something that equalizes both. You may not need anything, but you need to see the response first.

Shady. it looks like REW would be quite beneficial no doubt. But, what do YOU recommend for EQing? If I understand things correctly, the anti-mode 8033 S II can take care of any peaks in my room w/o needing anything else, no? REW, basically could show me if dips/nulls can be corrected via placement, no?

Minidsp 2X4 and the Umik 1 w/the plug-in is certainly cheaper than the anti-mode 8033 SII. Which of the two, would do a better job? What about a BFD? Is it better? Personally, I would rather NOT use the BFD. Are there any other EQ's out there that are just as good but comparatively priced? What about this one:

http://www.xtz.se/product/room-analyzer-ii-pro

How does the room analyzer compare to REW?

Cheers,

Phil

 

[speakerman39]

Are these Polk (RTi6?) bookshelf speakers??
If you're looking to take your system to next level, I'd start with new LCRs like Ascend CMT340SE.
As for Sub - do the crawl first, AutoEQ later and don't overthink this.

Yeah, they are the Polk RTi6's. But, I will soon have my RTi8 towers up and running. Have owned the 340's across the front 8-years ago. They were good. But, I also like my Polks. Especially, for what I gave for them.

There is no need to do the sub crawl as placement options are rather limited. The sub sounds great right where it is. I am impressed more and more every single day.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[speakerman39]

The SR-6009 comes with MultEQ XT. See the chart in this link:

http://www.audyssey.com/technologies/multeq/flavors

It doesn't have the resolution of XT 32, but IME, XT still does a very good job.

As far as the ability to handle dual subs, that is not included in XT 32; however, most manufacturers have seen fit to include SubEQ with XT 32 (Onkyo being the rare exception) - it is like an add-on/plugin for XT 32 (except you cannot add it if your AVR doesn't have it).

Before XT 32 proper starts, SubEQ does two things to allow Audyssey to handle dual subs:
1) Level matches the two subs
2) Time/phase alignment - the distance adjustment.

After that XT 32 treats the dual subs as one sub for all calibrations (just as your XT will when you hook two subs to the SR6009).

Ideally, you could locate the dual subs equidistant from your LP (judging by your photos, it looks like you may be good on this!). Then the phase/time alignment should be very close.
The levels can be matched using an SPL meter and pink noise. If equidistant, it seems reasonable to trust the same model sub to be equal levels if you position the gain knob the same.

So once you get your second sub, level match them. Position them as close to equidistant as your space allows. Then run Audyssey XT.

It is a given that your time/phase/distance will be off by a little bit. Although I like the idea of it being matched, I wouldn't be overly concerned about it, just yet. Three feet at the speed of sound is 2.66 miliseconds. If it was your midrange or high frequencies, I would be much more concerned.

Play some familiar music or HT with just the sub playing and tell me how much "impact" you hear or how strong the attacks are. Higher frequency sounds to excite our reflexes from the standpoint of timing. Bass gives the soundscape strength and solidity. That said, I have had several subs that made the sound sloppy/muddy. I have to admit bass/subs are somewhat enigmatic for me. When I listen to sub alone, they sound sloppy because there is no apparent "tightness". However, listening to a 2.1 system the sub absolutely makes a difference. I think it is more a matter of room nodes or over-hang from previous sounds masking the higher frequency attack information for the next sound.

Sorry to digress. Back to the task at hand. I hope the better understanding of SubEQ helps you tune your setup a little before running Audyssey XT.

For music, I would definitely set your sub to EQ2:

The reason is EQ1 is tuned to give you a flat response in an anechoic chamber:

The reason is, unless you have a "non-residentially huge" room, you will get substantial room gain. In your not so large room it is a safe bet you will have well over 10dB of room gain by the time you are at 20Hz. Understand that is the avg. across your room, if you happen to be in a node where your LP is, it gets worse! Audyssey is not capable of suppressing such a huge bloom in bass (I have seen numbers like 8 to 10dB thrown around as max adjustment capability for Audyssey - but have never seen anything "official" on this).

It is a safe bet that the EQ2 curve, after room gain, provides a much flatter "net" frequency response!
You should go ahead and try this if you are currently using the EQ1 curve.
We get trapped into the rut of thinking we want a flat FR curve - well, we do, but that curve needs to be for in our room. For non-bass speakers, anechoic is a fair measure, but for bass, anechoic flat response is not going to be flat when you get it in your home.

So, to your main question, "Hold your horses" and see what you get out of what you've got before spending any more money. If you are discontent with it, I would go the REW measurement approach and post your results along with room layout for the experts here and on AVS to evaluate before springing for DSP mini or anti-mode. Audyssey XT is no slouch; it may be room treatment (or rethinking sub locations) is a better solution. If your room has nulls, pumping more watts into (EQ'ing) them only increases the magnitude of the null while putting an insane demand on your amplifier.

Hope this helps you!

Thanks Kurt as this is very helpful. So, YOU believe placing the second sub more near field is NOT a good idea? Would it help any, if at all, to place my subs closer to the corners on each side? In other words, put the subs in each corner, then place my towers right next to them closer to my tv stand?

What about the frequencies above 80 hz? Audyssey will do a good job without needing any other EQing? Sorry, but still kind of learning my way around. Appreciate YOUR help.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[KEW]

I just checked PSA's site, they used to sell both, but discontinued the Mini DSp.
I asked about them and he said:

we just never sold many of them

I think we have one or two here though

still new

in boxing

the miniDSP is manual. You need to take various measurements and set it with your PC

the Anti Mode is completely auto matic

If you want to talk to someone who knows subs and both systems, he would be the ideal contact.

 

[speakerman39]

I just checked PSA's site, they used to sell both, but discontinued the Mini DSp.
I asked about them and he said:


If you want to talk to someone who knows subs and both systems, he would be the ideal contact.

Thanks Kurt will check it out. Also, will chat with Tom V. and see what he recommends for my room. Will be ordering my second ULS-15 MK2 sub very soon. My RTi8 towers will be up and running soon too. Just been very hectic here as of late. Plus, going to eat the Prime Rib Buffet at Golden Corral here shortly. Appreciate the help.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[KEW]

Thanks Kurt as this is very helpful. So, YOU believe placing the second sub more near field is NOT a good idea? Would it help any, if at all, to place my subs closer to the corners on each side? In other words, put the subs in each corner, then place my towers right next to them closer to my tv stand?

What about the frequencies above 80 hz? Audyssey will do a good job without needing any other EQing? Sorry, but still kind of learning my way around. Appreciate YOUR help.

Cheers,

Phil

The disadvantage of near-field for one would be conflicting time alignment, however, the immediacy of a near-field sub is probably quite nice. I don't know which would be better and would try and compare both options!
If you are more about music, I would keep them out of the corners to avoid excessive room gain. Put them inside your speakers. However, that is not considering nodes and nulls which can be much more important. You still need to do the sub crawl even if it is just checking 4-5 viable placement options you have.

How well Audyssey works is largely dependent on your room. I am saying to be sure to give what you already have a fair chance before buying more.

I think major room effects start around 200Hz and below. But I believe Audyssey does a good job across the spectrum (except Audyssey 2EQ which did not EQ the subs!).

 

[speakerman39]

The disadvantage of near-field for one would be conflicting time alignment, however, the immediacy of a near-field sub is probably quite nice. I don't know which would be better and would try and compare both options!
If you are more about music, I would keep them out of the corners to avoid excessive room gain. Put them inside your speakers. However, that is not considering nodes and nulls which can be much more important. You still need to do the sub crawl even if it is just checking 4-5 viable placement options you have.

How well Audyssey works is largely dependent on your room. I am saying to be sure to give what you already have a fair chance before buying more.

I think major room effects start around 200Hz and below. But I believe Audyssey does a good job across the spectrum (except Audyssey 2EQ which did not EQ the subs!).

Will do Kurt. Will do the crawl when everything is up and running. Once settled, then time for fine tuning. Plan to also clean up my wires, and etc. Down the road, perhaps some room treatments. Physics is fascinating!

Cheers,

Phil

 

[fuzz092888]

I admit to only skimming this thread, but I've used a few different flavors of Audyssey, I have two different MiniDSP's, I've tried Dirac, and also have an Anti-mode dual core 2.0. Currently this is with 4 18" subs in the basement.



Here is another measurement from the subs, I believe this was at the last place I was living



No room treatments, mediocre placement, just good subs and EQ.

 

[KEW]

... I've used a few different flavors of Audyssey, I have two different MiniDSP's, I've tried Dirac, and also have an Anti-mode dual core 2.0.

No room treatments, mediocre placement, just good subs and EQ.

So which form/brand of EQ did you settle on, and why?

Your results defy my understanding in that you seem to have no nulls, and unless "mediocre placement" includes eliminating nulls, a good sub or EQ should not do that.
Any ideas?

 

[shadyJ]

Shady. it looks like REW would be quite beneficial no doubt. But, what do YOU recommend for EQing? If I understand things correctly, the anti-mode 8033 S II can take care of any peaks in my room w/o needing anything else, no? REW, basically could show me if dips/nulls can be corrected via placement, no?

Minidsp 2X4 and the Umik 1 w/the plug-in is certainly cheaper than the anti-mode 8033 SII. Which of the two, would do a better job? What about a BFD? Is it better? Personally, I would rather NOT use the BFD. Are there any other EQ's out there that are just as good but comparatively priced? What about this one:

http://www.xtz.se/product/room-analyzer-ii-pro

How does the room analyzer compare to REW?

Cheers,

Phil

Personally I would go with the miniDSP and umik mic, but I have not used anti-mode or BFD. With only two subs, they are probably all going to do similar things. All you have to do is cut the peaks, and make sure their phase it optimal. But first things first, you have to measure the room to see your response, to even see what else can be done if anything. Make sure the subs' phase is not in conflict with each other, and make sure they are not in conflict with the mains. You may want to get the subs right, then run audyssey on top of that to get them right with the speakers.

 

[fuzz092888]

So which form/brand of EQ did you settle on, and why?

Your results defy my understanding in that you seem to have no nulls, and unless "mediocre placement" includes eliminating nulls, a good sub or EQ should not do that.
Any ideas?

True, you cannot eliminate nulls. With multiple subs it's relatively easy to eliminate any major nulls if you have a rectangular room, especially if you use the REW room sim and/or the REW or other measurement system. The optimal places for my subs are not possible, so I had to go with a different placement scheme, which included stacking two of the subs. This wasn't a simple drop them in place, run an auto EQ and be done with it.

The dual opposed has individually power drivers and each has 6 bands of EQ added to them. Same with the 2 LMS Ultra subs. Plus Audyssey as well. Previously I also had the the Antimode Dual Core 2.0 in the signal chain, which was necessary at the apartment. However, at the new place I was able to achieve nearly the same result without it which allowed me to move the Antimode to the Testarossa's which have no EQ because Audyssey was run with the Triline towers.

Overall the measurements needed to achieve and the placement options I explored took about 3 days and 14 hours. The problem was any adjustment made to one of the bands of EQ required a remeasuring to ensure it didn't screw with anything else, and that was with some of the auto settings REW provides. This was to ensure not only a good response at the LP, but also when reclined and across the other seats. So right now miniDSP and Audyssey are what I'm using, although the Antimode is also a great unit.

Dirac is an interesting solution and it offers a lot of flexibility, however the Antimode dual core 2.0 and Dirac both have the same issue IMO. I'm not sure the cost justifies the result. Like many things it boils down to do you want to pay more and do a little less or pay less and put in a little more legwork.

 

[speakerman39]

I admit to only skimming this thread, but I've used a few different flavors of Audyssey, I have two different MiniDSP's, I've tried Dirac, and also have an Anti-mode dual core 2.0. Currently this is with 4 18" subs in the basement.



Here is another measurement from the subs, I believe this was at the last place I was living



No room treatments, mediocre placement, just good subs and EQ.

Wow Fuzz-(4) 18" subs? Holy smokes man!!!! Those graphs look very flat to me. So, of all the dsp's you have used which one did YOU prefer? Hope I can get the same type of response in my small room. YOU have had a lot of experience with exactly what I am trying to learn about. Now I know who to look to when I am so lost.....LOL!!!!!

Cheers,

Phil

 

[speakerman39]

Personally I would go with the miniDSP and umik mic, but I have not used anti-mode or BFD. With only two subs, they are probably all going to do similar things. All you have to do is cut the peaks, and make sure their phase it optimal. But first things first, you have to measure the room to see your response, to even see what else can be done if anything. Make sure the subs' phase is not in conflict with each other, and make sure they are not in conflict with the mains. You may want to get the subs right, then run audyssey on top of that to get them right with the speakers.

Yeah, I will work on doing just that Shady. It will be awhile because have NOT even gotten my second ULS-15 MK2 sub yet. However, will be ordering very soon. Also, have to get my RTi8 towers up and running. Then, a friend is coming to help me get my RTi6's on my side walls AND the RTi4's on the front wall. Plan to clean up my wires, and etc. too. Once all this is done, I will order a mic and download REW and go from there.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[speakerman39]

True, you cannot eliminate nulls. With multiple subs it's relatively easy to eliminate any major nulls if you have a rectangular room, especially if you use the REW room sim and/or the REW or other measurement system. The optimal places for my subs are not possible, so I had to go with a different placement scheme, which included stacking two of the subs. This wasn't a simple drop them in place, run an auto EQ and be done with it.

The dual opposed has individually power drivers and each has 6 bands of EQ added to them. Same with the 2 LMS Ultra subs. Plus Audyssey as well. Previously I also had the the Antimode Dual Core 2.0 in the signal chain, which was necessary at the apartment. However, at the new place I was able to achieve nearly the same result without it which allowed me to move the Antimode to the Testarossa's which have no EQ because Audyssey was run with the Triline towers.

Overall the measurements needed to achieve and the placement options I explored took about 3 days and 14 hours. The problem was any adjustment made to one of the bands of EQ required a remeasuring to ensure it didn't screw with anything else, and that was with some of the auto settings REW provides. This was to ensure not only a good response at the LP, but also when reclined and across the other seats. So right now miniDSP and Audyssey are what I'm using, although the Antimode is also a great unit.

Dirac is an interesting solution and it offers a lot of flexibility, however the Antimode dual core 2.0 and Dirac both have the same issue IMO. I'm not sure the cost justifies the result. Like many things it boils down to do you want to pay more and do a little less or pay less and put in a little more legwork.

Fuzz, I am a bit confused about the anti-mode 8033 SII. Will this dsp work for both of my subs OR will I need two of them? Also, can YOU explain a bit more about Dirac? Keep in mind that I am looking for simplicity AND cheap. I know these two do NOT go together well very often. But, I just need something that will give me the most that is also simple to some extent. Don't mind doing some work, but I am in an apartment. So, there are some limitations. BTW, do YOU have any pics of YOUR set-up?

Cheers,

Phil