Audyssey Questions

[yepimonfire]

Make sure you turn off dynamic volume, it boosts the very low end. Do that and see if the issue disappears

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[PENG]

Alright so here's the latest update in the Audyssey saga..

This afternoon I did the following:

1. Reset all AVR channel settings back to their default factory values before I even hooked the mic up. Turned off all Dynamic EQ, etc. Anything that could potentially color the sound.
2. Slid the mains out a bit further trying to get them at least 1 foot off the wall and also toed them in slightly more than what they were.
3. Used a laser pointer to determine the exact axis of that center channel tweeter. Followed that out to the LP, placed the mic in that exact spot which turned out to be pretty damn close to ear level. Kept the initial mic position about 1.5 foot from the rear of the couch back.
4. Dialed the sub's gain knob down to 1/4, ensured AVR sub LP filter was set to 120Hz.
5. Removed all grills from my speakers, ensured all x-over settings were at 80Hz
6. Ran Audyssey
7. Mic positions were kept very tightly clustered, not moving more than a few inches to either side, front and back. Performed the last two of 8 measurements back at the initial LP.
8. Turned Dynamic EQ back on, replaced grills.
9. Adjusted surround levels about -3dB
10. Boosted sub level in the AVR (versus gain knob) by about +4dB

Then I put in Mad Max Fury Road. I chose this because a) I know the audio content on this disc is superbly mixed b) It has a LOT of LFE content along with plenty of sound effects in all frequencies up to the top, c) it is a very demanding audio track - I figure if I can get this to sound good other movies will definitely sound good as well, and d) it's just an awesome flick.

(Drum roll....)

Wow. Immediate improvement was observed! The punch is back in the soundtrack, vocal harshness was definitely tamed and sounded much more natural. Both front and rear sound stages blended well with one another provinding a very spatial listening field. The rumble returned to my seat bottom (that good vibration at close to 20hz ), and no noticeable distortion in any of the speakers. Loud. Clear. Defined. So much better.

Now, there's still some room for improvement on that sub.. parts of the soundtrack did remain a bit boomy and overwhelming at times but that may just be a simple level issue. I'll nudge that back down towards the direction Audyssey put it, see if I can retain the punch but lose the boom.

Overall I'm starting to not feel quite as frustrated with Audyssey. Seems to definitely lack some low end corrections that my previous MCACC applied but the whole system took a giant leap forward today in terms of overall sound quality. Well Ill see how it does with many other sources before making the final call but I'm definitely feeling hopeful at this point.

It was a good idea to reset the AVR and you did that, but after that there would have been no need to do anything else including setting crossover to 80 Hz because all such settings would be ignored anyway in the process. Obviously no harm done either way.

I think you can improve further by doing sub crawling as the photo shows you can move it in any directions an inch at a time for up to a few inches. The problem is, when you are getting so close to the best you can do with your system, it is going to be tough to make further improvements without being guided by the frequency response plots. Time to get the free REW and the $75 Mic.

Lastly, the golden seems a little too close to the sub potentially adding to your muddy bass problem.

 

[PENG]

Once you get the REW plots, you can send the graph and the photo of your set up to SVS and see if they can suggest something to help minimizing the muddy bass. You can also try changing the XO to 60 Hz, 90 Hz etc.

 

[Halon451]

Lastly, the golden seems a little too close to the sub potentially adding to your muddy bass problem.

Nahh she's actually quite an effective bass trap LOL.

Agreed on the REW/mic. It's a relatively inexpensive next step. Good suggestion on sending the results to SVS hadn't even thought of that. I've always had a great experience with them and they've always been extremely helpful so it makes good sense. After all they know their own subs better than anyone.

 

[PENG]

Nahh she's actually quite an effective bass trap LOL.

Agreed on the REW/mic. It's a relatively inexpensive next step. Good suggestion on sending the results to SVS hadn't even thought of that. I've always had a great experience with them and they've always been extremely helpful so it makes good sense. After all they know their own subs better than anyone.

One more suggestion, we can help more if you post your Audyssey settings, all them including levels, distance, xo, large/small, etc for all channels including the sub woofer channel. I mean the settings made by Audyssey and the AVR, before you made any manual adjustments after.

 

[Halon451]

One more suggestion, we can help more if you post your Audyssey settings, all them including levels, distance, xo, large/small, etc for all channels including the sub woofer channel. I mean the settings made by Audyssey and the AVR, before you made any manual adjustments after.

I'll have to do that later when I get back home. I can regurgitate a rough idea of where each of those levels ended up from the calibration from memory, but not the exact numbers.

For example:

Roughly recalled from memory:

Speaker size was set to small (good)
XO was set to - 80Hz L/C/R, 60Hz surrounds (odd bc they are actually smaller speakers with a higher rolloff than the MTM's used up front)
Distances: About 8.5' on the Center, 8.7' for both L/R, 9.1' for the sub, and around 5.5' for the surrounds (I measured the sub's distance to the MLP with a tape measure at exactly 8.6' so Audyssey did extend that distance a bit)

Levels:
Left Front: +1.0
Center: -1.5
Right Front: +3.0
Surrounds: +3.5 (not sure why it set these so high, I had to dial them back to about -1.0 to -1.5 cause they are quite close to the MLP)
Sub: -6.0 (I currently have it dialed up to about -2.0 from the Audyssey recommended setting)

I know these are more or less pretty close if not exact, but I'd have to look at them again when I get home to be sure. Plus since I've changed some of those levels I may not be able to recall where exactly they were set by Audyssey even when I do look at them. I haven't touched the distance controls at all.

 

[Halon451]

Make sure you turn off dynamic volume, it boosts the very low end. Do that and see if the issue disappears

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

I left that off.

 

[PENG]

I know these are more or less pretty close if not exact, but I'd have to look at them again when I get home to be sure. Plus since I've changed some of those levels I may not be able to recall where exactly they were set by Audyssey even when I do look at them. I haven't touched the distance controls at all.

The numbers look good and are indicative of a successful run. The surrounds were set higher to compensate for their lower sensitivity. I don't low if they are in fact less sensitive than the SC-01 (M) and I can find their specs online. If you have the manual you can verify that yourselves.

Even after you made manual adjustments, you can still view the "before" settings by going to the "check results" page.

 

[Halon451]

The numbers look good and are indicative of a successful run. The surrounds were set higher to compensate for their lower sensitivity. I don't low if they are in fact less sensitive than the SC-01 (M) and I can find their specs online. If you have the manual you can verify that yourselves.

Even after you made manual adjustments, you can still view the "before" settings by going to the "check results" page.

Ah, good to know thanks. I'm still learning this receiver so that's a good tip.

The SC-01's (I think, without looking it up) are right around the 87.5 dB mark +/- a half a dB or so, and I don't know about the SB-01's.. my guess is probably less, so that's a good point. But I guess that begs yet another question: I thought the AVR set levels according to actual SPL output as measured at the mic, not how much power it had to feed the speaker to achieve a certain level. The latter I could see being a function of its sensitivity, but the former - it seems that it should set it to whatever level achieves the proper loudness for that given mic placement. Am I wrong on that?

 

[lovinthehd]

The levels are set by a combination of the distance from the speaker as well as the speaker's sensitivity, and particular placement can play a role if the crossovers were higher than your mains as it is a measured f3 in-room rather than just an anechoic spec for the speaker. Not sure what you're asking....as "spl output as measured at the mic" and "how much power it had to feed the speaker to achieve a certain level" are essentially the same thing.

 

[PENG]

Ah, good to know thanks. I'm still learning this receiver so that's a good tip.

The SC-01's (I think, without looking it up) are right around the 87.5 dB mark +/- a half a dB or so, and I don't know about the SB-01's.. my guess is probably less, so that's a good point. But I guess that begs yet another question: I thought the AVR set levels according to actual SPL output as measured at the mic, not how much power it had to feed the speaker to achieve a certain level. The latter I could see being a function of its sensitivity, but the former - it seems that it should set it to whatever level achieves the proper loudness for that given mic placement. Am I wrong on that?

You are correct but as as lovinthehd's is alluding to, you seemed to be saying the same thing in your last post. The SBS-01's sensitivity is only 85 dB/1m/2.83V, so everything else being equal, the AVR will have to increase the level for the SL and SR in order to get the same SPL from them as the FL and FR speakers that may be 2 to 3 dB higher in sensitivity.

Now, everything is not equal because as you said the SL and SR speakers are closer to the mic, but then they may not get the same room gain the FL and FR are getting. From the picture, the FL should be getting a good boost from corner placement, but we don't know about the FR. Likewise, the SL should get some reinforcement too but probably not as much the FL is getting. Again we don't know if the SR is getting the same benefit.

I suggest you use the as found setting (except for the sub level) for a few days before making changes to suit you own taste.

 

[Halon451]

I did leave it as calibrated for a while, but those surrounds were so loud I literally couldn't even make out the front sound stage during some portions of the test track. It may be that this is just how Fury Road was mixed though, so eh who knows. I know that turning them down produced a much more pleasing and balanced audio environment. It may not be very apparent from the photo but FL is actually about a good 5-6 feet from that corner, not sure how close it needs to be to it to receive a boost. FR is along the same wall of course, but that wall empties into a hallway and my dining room which would definitely explain the higher level setting for the FR.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I left that off.

Good call.
I think he meant dynamicEQ though.

 

[Craig Gordon]

My experience with Audyssey has been pretty good. However, I have found the XT and XT32 versions to be very different. Clearly that makes no sense, but thats what I have found. When I had the XT version the bass levels were, for no good reason, way too high causing a very muddy sound. When I had Dynamic EQ on, the bass levels at my favorite listening level were even higher and boosted. The whole system sounded muddy. When I turned off the Dynamic EQ, everything sounded better. Now, when I got the XT32 (Both were Marantz, but with the AV8802 VS the AV7701) the bass settings suddenly insisted that I start by setting the exact same SVS subwoofer in the same location down 20 db to start. I assumed right then and there that there was a problem, but I continued with the setup. What I learned was that for some reason, the XT version had the bass too high. Whether this was intentional or error I do not know. But the XT32 version ended up being far superior. Thus my own personal findings were that the XT32 version set the bass properly (always lower than you might think from just listening) and that the XT version was, in a word, ineffective. In fact, I actually now keep the Dynamic EQ on at a "low" setting because I do like the slight bass boost at lower volume. I have heard other Audyssey XT systems and I personally think they boost the bass too high, while the XT32 seems more correct. I have just purchased a Umik mic and REW software and plan to do some actual measurements to see exactly what is going on, but I first want to set up some acoustic absorption and bass trapping in my room before i start the testing.

 

[yepimonfire]

I did leave it as calibrated for a while, but those surrounds were so loud I literally couldn't even make out the front sound stage during some portions of the test track. It may be that this is just how Fury Road was mixed though, so eh who knows. I know that turning them down produced a much more pleasing and balanced audio environment. It may not be very apparent from the photo but FL is actually about a good 5-6 feet from that corner, not sure how close it needs to be to it to receive a boost. FR is along the same wall of course, but that wall empties into a hallway and my dining room which would definitely explain the higher level setting for the FR.

I haven't checked the specs of the speakers in question, but it's possible the surrounds may have more spl across the midrange or treble, therefore sounding louder. I have the same issue with my front heights. My Klipsch R-15ms are relative flat, but the polk Owm 3s I have mounted up top gain some serious steam starting at the upper midrange, continuing up to 10khz where it levels out, so even with everything set to 75dB they sound louder.

Corner placement may or may not increase the overall spl or it may just increase the spl on the low end at the room modes. It really depends on how wide or narrow the dispersion pattern is above the bass region combined with how reflective the adjacent surface is. Use rew's spl meter to double check. It might not be accurate without calibration but if the surrounds are the same relative to the fronts it's likely they're correct. Do the same with the sub on z weighting. More than likely audyssey has you pretty close to 75dB so just use the fronts as a reference point. It always set my surrounds to loud. I had the same set of speakers for fronts and surrounds, but the surrounds were half the distance and right next to a reflective wall, it would set them the same level as the fronts, and they would always measure about 5dB louder. Also set my center way too loud.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Halon451]

Question on the Dynamic EQ: what does the offset actually do? I have it on currently but the offset slider is set to 0. There is a 5db, 10db and 15db offset available but I haven't yet looked this up to see what's taking place there and which are more appropriate given whatever other circumstances.

 

[Halon451]

I haven't checked the specs of the speakers in question, but it's possible the surrounds may have more spl across the midrange or treble, therefore sounding louder. I have the same issue with my front heights. My Klipsch R-15ms are relative flat, but the polk Owm 3s I have mounted up top gain some serious steam starting at the upper midrange, continuing up to 10khz where it levels out, so even with everything set to 75dB they sound louder.

Corner placement may or may not increase the overall spl or it may just increase the spl on the low end at the room modes. It really depends on how wide or narrow the dispersion pattern is above the bass region combined with how reflective the adjacent surface is. Use rew's spl meter to double check. It might not be accurate without calibration but if the surrounds are the same relative to the fronts it's likely they're correct. Do the same with the sub on z weighting. More than likely audyssey has you pretty close to 75dB so just use the fronts as a reference point. It always set my surrounds to loud. I had the same set of speakers for fronts and surrounds, but the surrounds were half the distance and right next to a reflective wall, it would set them the same level as the fronts, and they would always measure about 5dB louder. Also set my center way too loud.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

The SVS's have similar tonal characteristics all around which is why I went with the same line for my entire setup. I'd really like to get new batteries in my old SPL meter and check the actual loudness at the MLP using the Audyssey settings (pre-self adjustments) and see what it's reading there.

 

[PENG]

My experience with Audyssey has been pretty good. However, I have found the XT and XT32 versions to be very different. Clearly that makes no sense, but thats what I have found. When I had the XT version the bass levels were, for no good reason, way too high causing a very muddy sound. When I had Dynamic EQ on, the bass levels at my favorite listening level were even higher and boosted. The whole system sounded muddy. When I turned off the Dynamic EQ, everything sounded better. Now, when I got the XT32 (Both were Marantz, but with the AV8802 VS the AV7701) the bass settings suddenly insisted that I start by setting the exact same SVS subwoofer in the same location down 20 db to start. I assumed right then and there that there was a problem, but I continued with the setup. What I learned was that for some reason, the XT version had the bass too high. Whether this was intentional or error I do not know. But the XT32 version ended up being far superior. Thus my own personal findings were that the XT32 version set the bass properly (always lower than you might think from just listening) and that the XT version was, in a word, ineffective. In fact, I actually now keep the Dynamic EQ on at a "low" setting because I do like the slight bass boost at lower volume. I have heard other Audyssey XT systems and I personally think they boost the bass too high, while the XT32 seems more correct. I have just purchased a Umik mic and REW software and plan to do some actual measurements to see exactly what is going on, but I first want to set up some acoustic absorption and bass trapping in my room before i start the testing.

Interestingly when I switched from the AV7005 to AV8801 I also had to turn the subs vol down but XT did not play the sub louder relative to the other channels. I confirmed that with my RS SPL meter and test tones, also REW graphs.

I think XT32 and/or the AV8801 uses a louder test tones, that's all. In the end, the older AVR/prepro and/or XT would set sub level to -5 or lower whereas XT32 would set it to around 0 if I follow the onscreen instruction (the green/red thing).

You have the new models but I can't see why Marantz, or Audyssey would have XT exaggerating the low frequencies. Prior to the AV7005 I have the AVR4308/XT and the sub level wasn't any higher either, and I have plotted quite a few graphs for all 3 of them. I find XT and XT32 very similar except in the 20-100 Hz range where XT32 SubEQ HT is much better in flattening the dips and bumps, not perfect but I can't beat it no matter how hard I tried to do it manually.

 

[PENG]

I haven't checked the specs of the speakers in question, but it's possible the surrounds may have more spl across the midrange or treble, therefore sounding louder. I have the same issue with my front heights. My Klipsch R-15ms are relative flat, but the polk Owm 3s I have mounted up top gain some serious steam starting at the upper midrange, continuing up to 10khz where it levels out, so even with everything set to 75dB they sound louder.

Corner placement may or may not increase the overall spl or it may just increase the spl on the low end at the room modes. It really depends on how wide or narrow the dispersion pattern is above the bass region combined with how reflective the adjacent surface is. Use rew's spl meter to double check. It might not be accurate without calibration but if the surrounds are the same relative to the fronts it's likely they're correct. Do the same with the sub on z weighting. More than likely audyssey has you pretty close to 75dB so just use the fronts as a reference point. It always set my surrounds to loud. I had the same set of speakers for fronts and surrounds, but the surrounds were half the distance and right next to a reflective wall, it would set them the same level as the fronts, and they would always measure about 5dB louder. Also set my center way too loud.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

I guess I must have a very good room because I just don't get the issues you guys are getting with levels and distance; and I don't even have the same speakers for the surrounds though they are all made by Energy. Whether it was Denon or Marantz, AV or AVR, XT or XT32, levels and distance have been always spot on within an inch or two. Okay the sub distance does vary a little more but that's quite normal. Very interesting indeed, no wonder I don't find it hard to resist the MRX or external REQ systems, yet...

 

[lovinthehd]

Question on the Dynamic EQ: what does the offset actually do? I have it on currently but the offset slider is set to 0. There is a 5db, 10db and 15db offset available but I haven't yet looked this up to see what's taking place there and which are more appropriate given whatever other circumstances.

https://audyssey.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/212347383-Dynamic-EQ-and-Reference-Level