Yamaha RX-A3070 vs RX-Z9 did I make a mistake ?

[JOHN FICKEL]

As far as YPAO I just didn’t care for how it sounded. Seem to mess too much with the bass, with all of my speakers and subs, I like the way it sounds without Using the EQ

 

[lovinthehd]

As far as YPAO I just didn’t care for how it sounded. Seem to mess too much with the bass, with all of my speakers and subs, I like the way it sounds without Using the EQ

Do you use YPAO Volume? What do you mean mess too much? Accentuates it? Reduces it?

 

[Andrein]

As far as YPAO I just didn’t care for how it sounded. Seem to mess too much with the bass, with all of my speakers and subs, I like the way it sounds without Using the EQ

I also prefer how my system sounds without eq. The only thing i use is ypao volume. In my case after enabling this i got a better bass at lower volumes. I even trimmed static bass level by 2db. Overal I like ypao volume. Worth to try if you havent already.

Edit. Used ypao to get distances/levels too.

 

[JOHN FICKEL]

I also prefer how my system sounds without eq. The only thing i use is ypao volume. In my case after enabling this i got a better bass at lower volumes. I even trimmed static bass level by 2db. Overal I like ypao volume. Worth to try if you havent already.

Edit. Used ypao to get distances/levels too.

Me too. Just distance and level. YPAO volume is awesome!! And the music enhancer I love it

 

[lovinthehd]

Me too. Just distance and level. YPAO volume is awesome!! And the music enhancer I love it

YPAO volume is eq.....

 

[JOHN FICKEL]

Do you use YPAO Volume? What do you mean mess too much? Accentuates it? Reduces it?

No YPAO volume is great. However even Gene has said, EQ above the rooms transition frequency it’s just not worth it. Are ears do not hear like a microphone. Running through the different EQ settings I just did not care for what they did to the bass . I feel that I have such a good speakers in my system. Their great especially for the music I listen to and home theater the RF-7ii do not need any help they are so in your face and dynamic they are incredible

 

[JOHN FICKEL]

YPAO volume is eq.....

Yeah I seen that in the instructions, but it still sounds better than the flat or the natural settings

 

[JOHN FICKEL]

Which that brings me to my next point why would you want to EQ twice use the EQ settings of YPAO AND YPAO volume ? Doesn’t seem to make sense to do that

 

[lovinthehd]

No YPAO volume is great. However even Gene has said, EQ above the rooms transition frequency it’s just not worth it. Are ears do not hear like a microphone. Running through the different EQ settings I just did not care for what they did to the bass . I feel that I have such a good speakers in system, Their great especially for the music I listen to and home theater the RF-7ii do not need any help they are so in your face and dynamic they are incredible

As I just mentioned YPAO Volume is eq. Probably does both low and high frequencies, too. I was more interested in what you thought about YPAO and bass (where it is not usually acknowledged as being as good as Audyssey for example)

 

[lovinthehd]

Which that brings me to my next point why would you want to EQ twice use the EQ settings of YPAO AND YPAO volume ? Doesn’t seem to make sense to do that

It's not twice, it's complementary....

 

[JOHN FICKEL]

It's not twice, it's complementary....

I just prefer the way the bass sounds without any type of equalization, it seemed it reduced the bass with those settings

 

[lovinthehd]

I just prefer the way the bass sounds without any type of equalization, it seemed it reduced the bass with those settings

The YPAO Volume thing is a loudness contour type of eq. Better version than many old receivers had with their "loudness contour" buttons. Sometimes lesser bass after running a program like Audyssey or YPAO is more about bass level preference. Try raising sub level in the avr....many do with Audyssey, somewhere between 2-6dB dependent on preference

 

[TLS Guy]

I just prefer the way the bass sounds without any type of equalization, it seemed it reduced the bass with those settings

I think you have found your way to a truism. That is that these modern AVRs and I have to say Pre/pros are loaded up with useless junk that are massive quality spoilers. I suspect this has to do with the ghastly modern pop culture that has nothing to recommend it. All of these Eq programs and especially the dynamic ones undo the musicians tonal balance.

All of these auto Eq programs are dead end quality spoilers. If they do seem to improve things its luck and you must have lousy speakers.

Lastly this concept of always crossing speakers over at 80 Hz is wrong. If possible all capable speakers should be set to large and subs used gently to supplement the last octave. Best staring point is F3 of mains plus 50%. So if the F3 of the mains is 40 Hz then bring the sub in at 60 Hz.

I have set up enough systems now, mine and others to be certain that is the best approach. Current wisdom as expressed on forums like this is just wrong.

Signal paths need to be kept as simple as possible and not mucked with.

As far as the loss less codecs are concerned they are better but it is not immediately night and day. In large orchestral works those lossy codecs seem to smooth over the sound. The DTS MA on the other hand sounds incredibly realistic on a good recording with brass and percussion having significantly more impact. I think of all sources that show the difference the most it is grand opera.

 

[3db]

I think you have found your way to a truism. That is that these modern AVRs and I have to say Pre/pros are loaded up with useless junk that are massive quality spoilers. I suspect this has to do with the ghastly modern pop culture that has nothing to recommend it. All of these Eq programs and especially the dynamic ones undo the musicians tonal balance.

All of these auto Eq programs are dead end quality spoilers. If they do seem to improve things its luck and you must have lousy speakers.

Lastly this concept of always crossing speakers over at 80 Hz is wrong. If possible all capable speakers should be set to large and subs used gently to supplement the last octave. Best staring point is F3 of mains plus 50%. So if the F3 of the mains is 40 Hz then bring the sub in at 60 Hz.

I have set up enough systems now, mine and others to be certain that is the best approach. Current wisdom as expressed on forums like this is just wrong.

Signal paths need to be kept as simple as possible and not mucked with.

As far as the loss less codecs are concerned they are better but it is not immediately night and day. In large orchestral works those lossy codecs seem to smooth over the sound. The DTS MA on the other hand sounds incredibly realistic on a good recording with brass and percussion having significantly more impact. I think of all sources that show the difference the most it is grand opera.

Its not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. Room EQ has its uses and even a great speaker will sound bad in a poor acoustic environment. If one has a spouse who is dead set against adding room treatments, especially in a family room environment, then room EQ will push from awful to acceptable.

 

[TLS Guy]

Its not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. Room EQ has its uses and even a great speaker will sound bad in a poor acoustic environment. If one has a spouse who is dead set against adding room treatments, especially in a family room environment, then room EQ will push from awful to acceptable.

There are very few rooms, including untreated ones, that good speakers will sound bad in.

I'm yet to have to treat any room. When making recordings I monitored with my speakers in a huge variety of rooms over the years and had no issue that I can recall.

I do know that bad speakers plus bad rooms can act synergistically to make make a real catastrophe.

 

[3db]

There are very few rooms, including untreated ones, that good speakers will sound bad in.[/QUOTE ]


I disagree that few rooms exist. I think its more common than you realize. An overly bright room will emphasize treble causing listener fatique and throw off the balance in sound. Overly bright rooms are very easy to come by especially with those that prefer the minimalist look. In cases like this, an AVR room EQ will be beneficial.

 

[lovinthehd]

Maybe most people don't have great speakers like TLS? Or rooms or whatever. Let alone music he approves of....opera, seriously. Yuck. Blending subs? Yuck.

 

[-Jim-]

Now that you are certain you are listening to a lossless codec, grab a Concert BluRay of your favorite Artist or Band => sit back and have a listen. It's fabulous!

 

[gene]

True I think I was expecting too much, in the Audioholics videos Gene mentions more than once how lossless is way better than compressed audio. So I was just kind of curious why I’m not hearing that same difference with Klipsch speakers and a McIntosh amp. And everything is set up the way it supposed to be set up with bass management and leveled and distances are accurate. I do not use any equalization I keep it set to through, I don’t see any advantage and just like they’ve mentioned many times on this website before, EQ above the rooms transition frequency is just a waste

Lossless is WAY better than DD 5.1 which almost always sounds intolerable for music. DTS is close to lossless but you owe it to yourself to get some,high res multi-ch Blu-rays from Pure Audio and others. Lossless audio rocks.

The RX-a3070 amp section isn't as robust as the Z9 which may or may not matter depending on your speakers.

 

[JOHN FICKEL]

Lossless is WAY better than DD 5.1 which almost always sounds intolerable for music. DTS is close to lossless but you owe it to yourself to get some,high res multi-ch Blu-rays from Pure Audio and others. Lossless audio rocks.

The RX-a3070 amp section isn't as robust as the Z9 which may or may not matter depending on your speakers.

Yea I have RF-7ii. And all the matching speakers. My mains are powered by my McIntosh MC-252