Audyssey Editor App- With Screenshots!

[PENG]

There it is...

View attachment 33645

That's after Audyssey and possibly even after I did some more tweaking with the Mini because you can see that dip get smaller as I raise the crossover.

Just for the record this is what I ended up with...
View attachment 33646

Look pretty neutral to me!

 

[Pogre]

Look pretty neutral to me!

Those are both with the mini. I thought the top one was just Audyssey but I'm mistaken. I think it's time for me to bust out the gear again and experiment a little. I haven't really played with the app again since I repurchased it. My Mini might be facing obsolescence like yours...

 

[Jon AA]

I do not bump my sub trim. I have actually been struggling with the decision to lower it as I think audyssey runs ‘me a little too hot for my mostly music usage. I have not done that either, yet.

I assume you use DEQ? Anyway, you're good switching crossover points and comparing then, they should integrate correctly.

I do bump my sub level a few dB after I get a flat response. I'm using a MiniDSP for my subs too. Audyssey doesn't quite get me there on its own. The purple line on the 2nd graph is with no DEQ and the rest are with DEQ and the different offsets.

Yeah, most people do. This causes the sub to overlap the mains well beyond your crossover point (which can degrade sound quality if your main speakers sound better playing the lower mid-bass than your subs do) and when you change crossover points you change the tonal balance of the entire system, making apples to apples comparisons impossible.

You can use the app to get around this, I've posted the procedure a couple times elsewhere. Instead of typing it all out again, somebody has put together an FAQ for the App which incorporates the procedure (skip to page #8) : https://docs.google.com/file/d/1YH_eNHRCxKFCwXMddi28kzXqnUwYHfrD/edit?filetype=msword

You might find you like it. ;-)

 

[Pogre]

I assume you use DEQ? Anyway, you're good switching crossover points and comparing then, they should integrate correctly.


Yeah, most people do. This causes the sub to overlap the mains well beyond your crossover point (which can degrade sound quality if your main speakers sound better playing the lower mid-bass than your subs do) and when you change crossover points you change the tonal balance of the entire system, making apples to apples comparisons impossible.

You can use the app to get around this, I've posted the procedure a couple times elsewhere. Instead of typing it all out again, somebody has put together an FAQ for the App which incorporates the procedure (skip to page #8) : https://docs.google.com/file/d/1YH_eNHRCxKFCwXMddi28kzXqnUwYHfrD/edit?filetype=msword

You might find you like it. ;-)

Yes! Thank you! That is very nice and organized. I'll definitely be referring to that.

 

[KEW]

I do not bump my sub trim. I have actually been struggling with the decision to lower it as I think audyssey runs ‘me a little too hot for my mostly music usage. I have not done that either, yet.

I increase sub trim by ~6dB for HT and decrease it by 2dB for music.
My best guess on why I reduce it by 2dB for music is that different recordings vary in their bass content. Some are just too heavy and the -2dB keeps the too much bass from getting out of control without killing the bass for a well balanced recording. I am too lazy to change the setting for every recording, but this allows me a compromise that I can live with. I despise exaggerated bass for music. Some recording still are too bass heavy at -2dB, but that -2dB takes enough of the boom out of it that I have yet to "have to" change my compromise setting to -3dB.
For HT (action flicks especially) the extra sub output is just fun. Every now and then I will experience content where random artifacts (like an announcer pronouncing B's and P's over a mic) come out too hot and I turn it down, but that is rare.
One feature that I love and your Marantz has is maintaining different settings for different inputs. Thus, if you have a CD player and a DVD player (following my example) you can elevate the sub level for the DVD input (HT) and reduce it for the CD input (music). I use an Oppo for both functions, but being the wily kind of guy I am, I trick my hapless, unsuspecting AVR by setting up the optical connection to the CD input and HDMI to the BD input. You can also set the BD input to whatever surround sound config you like while keeping the CD input set to stereo mode.

 

[Jon AA]

Yeah, the circle of confusion sucks. I go back and forth between a curve with 4 and 6 db built in for periods of time and adjust to program material with the DEQ. Usually keeping it at Ref Level -10 or so, for a really bass heavy recording I'll turn it off. For bass lacking material I'll turn it back to Ref Level 0.

 

[Jon AA]

I've posted the procedure a couple times elsewhere. Instead of typing it all out again, somebody has put together an FAQ for the App which incorporates the procedure (skip to page #8) : https://docs.google.com/file/d/1YH_eNHRCxKFCwXMddi28kzXqnUwYHfrD/edit?filetype=msword

OK, I changed my mind. That FAQ could disappear someday or the link become broken, etc, which would suck for those who find this in the future using the search feature--they wouldn't know what the heck I'm talking about. So here's a mostly cut and paste, I think the individual I was helping had pretty large, bass capable main speakers and liked they way the sounded in "Pure Direct" mode much better for music than what Audyssey did to them.

This is one of the areas where the App gives a real gain in the capability of Audyssey.

So, your mains have good bass and are getting a nice amount of room gain at the bottom end. They sound better than the subs in the lower-midbass region for music. The problem with just running Audyssey reference is that it will neuter the bass of the mains, removing all the room gain, making them "flat" which generally doesn't sound good. Most compensate for this by bumping up the Sub level a few db...but as you have noted, it's just not the same.

With the App, you can correct your mains to a curve that will maintain their bass at the bottom end (maybe smooth it out a little) so they'll sound much better when set to "Large" and they'll integrate with the sub at various crossover settings better when both are corrected to the same curve to begin with.

Try this (easiest to just type them into Ratbuddy):

Front L&R Control Points:

20 Hz 6 db
55 6
150 0

Sub Control Points:

20 Hz 6 db
55 6
150 0

Those are just a baseline suggestion, one can tweak those to whatever sounds the best to them. You could do 1 db boost or more than 6...you could slide the control point at 150 hz up or down to make it more gradual or more sharp, etc.

That'll give you a sub curve like this:

Now, Audyssey will correct your sub to that curve, but it won't just boost the low end 6db--it'll lower the entire curve (as shown below). To put the curve where it should be to match the mains, you need to boost sub level from the level Audyssey sets 6db.

Here's my left front:

As you can see, my left front doesn't have the extension needed to even reach +6db at the bottom end as it's starting to roll off when the curve is still rising. That's OK! The idea is just to get them on the same curve as soon as possible.

While it may seem silly to be typing in +6 db of boost at 20 Hz for a small speaker, it's just easier to type in the same curve for both. Audyssey will figure it out--don't worry, Audyssey won't try and blow your bookshelves by blasting them at 20 Hz. It sees the natural rolloff of the speaker and adjusts the target curve to have a nice, gradual rolloff below the point your speaker is capable of following the curve. And once you find the overall tonal balance you like, go ahead and add the same curve to your center and surrounds. The good thing about this method is you can do that and not have bloated bass from the sub with a higher crossover with small surrounds.

With those settings, both will be corrected to the same curve. Your mains set to large should sound as good or better than they do in Direct mode in the bass region. And when you add the sub, you can try crossover settings anywhere from 40 to 100+ hz (his speakers, not mine) without changing the overall response curve, you'll simply be trading sub power for main speaker power at certain frequencies--but they'll integrate properly since they're set to the same level at whatever frequency you select (something that does NOT happen when both are corrected flat and the sub is boosted in level, as overlap will increase/decrease depending upon the frequency you choose).

Anyway, give that a try and I think you'll be pleased.

 

[Jon AA]

And the reason to do all this....

When you select the crossover point in the receiver, it rolls off the sub and main speaker and theoretically they should "cross" (play the same volume) at that frequency. That only happens when the levels of both are the same. When you boost the sub, it and the main speaker still roll off at the same points, but the sub has a "head start" in SPL so it continues to play louder than the main speaker above the crossover point that was set.

Pics are worth 1000 words.... Here are a few measurements I took a while back as an example that can demonstrate this. This is my left front channel only, playing the same signal for all measurements. (Smoothed 1/3 octave to make them easier to read.)

Here is a calibration corrected to the standard Reference curve (flat bass) but with the sub boosted 6 db afterward:

The black curve is the main speaker set to Large. The brown curve is the sub only--main speaker set to small, crossover set to 250 and main speaker unplugged.


As you can see, at 80 hz the sub has a 6 db head start on the main speaker in level. So when you apply an 80 hz crossover, this is what you get:

At 80 hz, the sub is still playing significantly louder than the main speaker and they don't actually "cross over" until nearly 100 hz. So the sub is playing as loud or louder nearly all the way to 100 hz. In addition to not sounding as good (setup dependent) that can also make the sub more easy to localize. Just imagine what it looks like with a 100 Hz crossover!


Contrast that with this:

Here I used the method described above to get a 6 db boost on the bottom, correcting both the main speaker and the sub to the same curve and matching the levels. As you can see, the levels are matched pretty well from about 60-140 hz. A crossover setting anywhere in there should work well and not change the shape of the overall curve--it's a matter of what sounds better at what frequencies--the sub or the speaker. When you do that you can change crossover settings and see what sounds the best without changing the overall tonal balance (which overwhelms what you hear from different crossover settings).

With an 80 hz cross over setting as an example:

The actual point at which they cross lands almost exactly on 80 hz. Right where you set it. By 100 hz, the main speaker is playing 6 db louder than the sub.

Even though the two overall response curves are nearly identical and the overall tonal balance is nearly identical, they sound quite a bit different--mostly noticeable with music. Even though my current front speakers aren't very big and don't dig very deep, they are sensitive and capable of high output--by 100 hz they are rockin'. They simply sound more "impactful" in that range than my current sub which gives a softer, smoother sound in that range.

It won't be the same answer for every system--some people will have subs that sound better than mine at higher frequencies and/or have main speakers that can't play very loudly without distortion at 100 hz...in that case the method I describe above still works just fine--just set the crossover to a higher point--100, 110 hz or whatever sounds the best.

But the biggest benefit is for those with speakers that can play well and sound good to lower frequencies (80 or lower crossover setting) at music listening volume. This allows them to set the crossover lower without removing the bottom end bass boost because it's built into the curve of the main speaker as well. If the main speaker is corrected flat with the Audyssey reference curve and the sub is boosted, lowering the crossover removes a lot of bass and probably won't sound as good. My speakers weren't the best example for this as 80 is about as low as I'd want to go with them. Mains that will maintain the target curve down to 30-40 hz (instead of falling away significantly at 60 hz) would have made for a better graphic example. I should have some of those soon......

And as said above, if both are corrected to flat bass but you boost the sub, if you have smaller surrounds, etc, they'll have WAY too much bass and won't tonally balance the main speakers. If you apply this method to all the speakers, they'll maintain a matching tonal balance even if you have to use higher crossover settings for the small ones.

 

[PENG]

And the reason to do all this....

When you select the crossover point in the receiver, it rolls off the sub and main speaker and theoretically they should "cross" (play the same volume) at that frequency. That only happens when the levels of both are the same. When you boost the sub, it and the main speaker still roll off at the same points, but the sub has a "head start" in SPL so it continues to play louder than the main speaker above the crossover point that was set.

Pics are worth 1000 words.... Here are a few measurements I took a while back as an example that can demonstrate this. This is my left front channel only, playing the same signal for all measurements. (Smoothed 1/3 octave to make them easier to read.)

Here is a calibration corrected to the standard Reference curve (flat bass) but with the sub boosted 6 db afterward:

The black curve is the main speaker set to Large. The brown curve is the sub only--main speaker set to small, crossover set to 250 and main speaker unplugged.


As you can see, at 80 hz the sub has a 6 db head start on the main speaker in level. So when you apply an 80 hz crossover, this is what you get:

At 80 hz, the sub is still playing significantly louder than the main speaker and they don't actually "cross over" until nearly 100 hz. So the sub is playing as loud or louder nearly all the way to 100 hz. In addition to not sounding as good (setup dependent) that can also make the sub more easy to localize. Just imagine what it looks like with a 100 Hz crossover!


Contrast that with this:

Here I used the method described above to get a 6 db boost on the bottom, correcting both the main speaker and the sub to the same curve and matching the levels. As you can see, the levels are matched pretty well from about 60-140 hz. A crossover setting anywhere in there should work well and not change the shape of the overall curve--it's a matter of what sounds better at what frequencies--the sub or the speaker. When you do that you can change crossover settings and see what sounds the best without changing the overall tonal balance (which overwhelms what you hear from different crossover settings).

With an 80 hz cross over setting as an example:

The actual point at which they cross lands almost exactly on 80 hz. Right where you set it. By 100 hz, the main speaker is playing 6 db louder than the sub.

Even though the two overall response curves are nearly identical and the overall tonal balance is nearly identical, they sound quite a bit different--mostly noticeable with music. Even though my current front speakers aren't very big and don't dig very deep, they are sensitive and capable of high output--by 100 hz they are rockin'. They simply sound more "impactful" in that range than my current sub which gives a softer, smoother sound in that range.

It won't be the same answer for every system--some people will have subs that sound better than mine at higher frequencies and/or have main speakers that can't play very loudly without distortion at 100 hz...in that case the method I describe above still works just fine--just set the crossover to a higher point--100, 110 hz or whatever sounds the best.

But the biggest benefit is for those with speakers that can play well and sound good to lower frequencies (80 or lower crossover setting) at music listening volume. This allows them to set the crossover lower without removing the bottom end bass boost because it's built into the curve of the main speaker as well. If the main speaker is corrected flat with the Audyssey reference curve and the sub is boosted, lowering the crossover removes a lot of bass and probably won't sound as good. My speakers weren't the best example for this as 80 is about as low as I'd want to go with them. Mains that will maintain the target curve down to 30-40 hz (instead of falling away significantly at 60 hz) would have made for a better graphic example. I should have some of those soon......

And as said above, if both are corrected to flat bass but you boost the sub, if you have smaller surrounds, etc, they'll have WAY too much bass and won't tonally balance the main speakers. If you apply this method to all the speakers, they'll maintain a matching tonal balance even if you have to use higher crossover settings for the small ones.

That's excellent work, and thanks! I think the FAQ is good as it is downloadable. If the linked failed in future, and if you are still around here, then I suppose you wouldn't mind posting the doc as a downloadable attachment right here on AH.

I do take some minor exceptions to your write up, such as:

-

I run Audyssey with the app, turn off DEQ and limit MultiEQ to 500hz. That’s it. Works like a dream now. Bass just sounds right now and my speakers are far clearer without EQ.

I am sure you are right that a lot of users would feel that way, but it is mostly a subjective thing. Objectively and theoretically speaking, DEQ is based more on science; and it seems to work very well based on my REW graphs, whether people like its effect or not is, again a subjective thing. As alternative to or in combinations with what you suggested, it may work better to some people's preference if they simply experiment with different offsets.

-

The problem with just running Audyssey reference is that it will neuter the bass of the mains, removing all the room gain, making them "flat" which generally doesn't sound good.

Again, this is subjective, and I am sure a lot of users will agree with you, me as well but probably to a minor extent only. In theory, the effects of room gain should have already been captured in the recording/mastering process so the room effects on speakers used at home should be "neutered" if the goal is to get close to the "live" effects. Besides, room effects are definitely going to be dependent to the specific rooms that would in all likelihood be different than that in the recording venue, so it wouldn't even be doubling up the room effects if not neutered, but sort of a random messed up.

This has nothing to do with the way you suggested to "bump" the bass, and I think yours is a better way then to simply bump the gain up by x dB across the board, for reasons you cited.

 

[Jon AA]

That's excellent work, and thanks! I think the FAQ is good as it is downloadable. If the linked failed in future, and if you are still around here, then I suppose you wouldn't mind posting the doc as a downloadable attachment right here on AH.

I do take some minor exceptions to your write up, such as:

Thanks, but to clarify, that's not my FAQ. I didn't write it and have no control over it. The guy who did write it just quotes me a lot in it.

Again, this is subjective, and I am sure a lot of users will agree with you, me as well but probably to a minor extent only. In theory, the effects of room gain should have already been captured in the recording/mastering process so the room effects on speakers used at home should be "neutered" if the goal is to get close to the "live" effects.

Yeah, I think we've gone 'round on this before and I disagree. That's just not what the science shows. It's not just Floyd Toole but pretty much anybody I've heard from who has done any amount of research into the subject in the last 20 years or so (most of whom do spend a lot of time quoting Floyd Toole--there's sort of a trend there). If you EQ a system for a flat in-room response, most people simply won't like it--not as well as they would following a curve similar to the one above in the bass region. If you do like it, that's all that matters for your system. Rock on.

Besides, room effects are definitely going to be dependent to the specific rooms that would in all likelihood be different than that in the recording venue, so it wouldn't even be doubling up the room effects if not neutered, but sort of a random messed up.

It's true, no amount of EQ is ever going to fix the "Circle of Confusion." Even Dr. Toole himself advocates the use of broad "Tone Controls" to adjust for program material that seems lacking in one way or another to make it more pleasing to the individual listener.

I'm simply saying people are more likely to get pleasing results if they aim for a target studies have shown is closer to what most people prefer with most material, instead of aiming for a target studies have shown most people won't like. After that, fine tune/adjust for personal preference.

The big headliner is that the Editor App has made this level of calibration/tuning/integration possible to the consumer on gear costing a fraction of what needed to be spent in the past. D&M deserves serious props for making it available. When I see people ask if the app is worth $20, it makes my head explode.

 

[PENG]

Thanks, but to clarify, that's not my FAQ. I didn't write it and have no control over it. The guy who did write it just quotes me a lot in it.


Yeah, I think we've gone 'round on this before and I disagree. That's just not what the science shows. It's not just Floyd Toole but pretty much anybody I've heard from who has done any amount of research into the subject in the last 20 years or so (most of whom do spend a lot of time quoting Floyd Toole--there's sort of a trend there). If you EQ a system for a flat in-room response, most people simply won't like it--not as well as they would following a curve similar to the one above in the bass region. If you do like it, that's all that matters for your system. Rock on.



It's true, no amount of EQ is ever going to fix the "Circle of Confusion." Even Dr. Toole himself advocates the use of broad "Tone Controls" to adjust for program material that seems lacking in one way or another to make it more pleasing to the individual listener.

I'm simply saying people are more likely to get pleasing results if they aim for a target studies have shown is closer to what most people prefer with most material, instead of aiming for a target studies have shown most people won't like. After that, fine tune/adjust for personal preference.

The big headliner is that the Editor App has made this level of tuning/integration possible to the consumer on gear costing a fraction of what needed to be spent in the past. D&M deserves serious props for making it available. When I see people ask if the app is worth $20, it makes my head explode.

If he quoted you a lot, its still your credit. Yeah it does sound like a repeat of something.. So again we have to agree to disagree on a couple points then, that's normal I guess.. though it seems a little funny that we perceive what is science differently. Dr. Tools must be right about a lot of things related to audio but he is human too... He is a treasure for us Canadians.

 

[thepiecesfit]

Peng was getting good results from Audyssey before he tried the miniDSP!
If you are getting poor results from Audyssey, you are much more likely to benefit from miniDSP/REW!
However, you might get the Mic and REW first so you can see what you can do using sub location.
The non-technical approach is called the subwoofer crawl:

Unrealated, but I saw in the Rythmik Owners thread you had two E15's. Can you share your calibration chart and REW frequency perhaps? I'm curious how they compare. Do you still have these subs?

 

[KEW]

Unrealated, but I saw in the Rythmik Owners thread you had two E15's. Can you share your calibration chart and REW frequency perhaps? I'm curious how they compare. Do you still have these subs?

Sorry, I never used the app or took measurements with these subs.
I rotate speakers as a hobby and often don't run a sub since I am evaluating/comparing the speakers.
Most recently, I have been running Outlaw X13 when I run a subwoofer. That is not to say the X13 is a better sub (for music as I listen to it). Although I cannot say that I like the X13 less for music (they are both very good for music). The X13 definitely has more output for HT in my large room (including connected spaces).

 

[Pogre]

Oh I'm so busting out my gear this weekend and sleuthing out what's going on with Audyssey cutting the 63 hz band by so much. I can't find any "before MiniDSP" charts with my towers by themselves. Looking at what I can find, like with some of the pure/direct measurements is a huge dip close to that region.

 

[PENG]

Oh I'm so busting out my gear this weekend and sleuthing out what's going on with Audyssey cutting the 63 hz band by so much. I can't find any "before MiniDSP" charts with my towers by themselves. Looking at what I can find, like with some of the pure/direct measurements is a huge dip close to that region.

If you are to start the process again (it is tempting for me too..), please include the following before re-running Audyssey, unless you have made changes to the speakers/placements since your last run.

a) FL/FR only, Audyssey On vs Off
b) Same as a) but with Sub(s) on., do it for XO = 40,60,80,90,100 Hz.

If you have time:

c) All speakers including sub (using all channel stereo mode), Audyssey On vs Off
d) FL only, and FR only, Audyssey On vs Off (Don't see much point doing single speakers but just good to have..)
e) Same as d) but with Sub(s) on, do it for XO=40,60,80,90,100 Hz

I suspect Audyssey cut the 63 Hz response because your tower speakers have a huge peak there that may happen to reinforce the Sub(s) output at that same point and in determine the magnitude of cut, Audyssey might have to make a compromised calculations to spread the difference so that if wouldn't have too much of a peak when used in 2.0 or 2.1. I think it is a good question for "Ask Audyssey", but I think (will do a search) that site may no longer be active.

By the way, are you sure you attached the right graph? I don't see the 6 dB cut at 63 Hz, or it was only there only when you used the AVR instead of the App?

 

[Pogre]

If you are to start the process again (it is tempting for me too..), please include the following before re-running Audyssey, unless you have made changes to the speakers/placements since your last run.

a) FL/FR only, Audyssey On vs Off
b) Same as a) but with Sub(s) on., do it for XO = 40,60,80,90,100 Hz.

If you have time:

c) All speakers including sub (using all channel stereo mode), Audyssey On vs Off
d) FL only, and FR only, Audyssey On vs Off (Don't see much point doing single speakers but just good to have..)
e) Same as d) but with Sub(s) on, do it for XO=40,60,80,90,100 Hz

I suspect Audyssey cut the 63 Hz response because your tower speakers have a huge peak there that may happen to reinforce the Sub(s) output at that same point and in determine the magnitude of cut, Audyssey might have to make a compromised calculations to spread the difference so that if wouldn't have too much of a peak when used in 2.0 or 2.1. I think it is a good question for "Ask Audyssey", but I think (will do a search) that site may no longer be active.

By the way, are you sure you attached the right graph? I don't see the 6 dB cut at 63 Hz, or it was only there only when you used the AVR instead of the App?

I will. I already warned my wife, lol. This post is a great guideline for me to get started.

Now, having the Mini inline, if I reset all values to "0" on it will that be the same as not having it in the loop at all? Or should I disconnect the Mini altogether and do some sweeps without it in the loop?

 

[PENG]

I will. I already warned my wife, lol. This post is a great guideline for me to get started.

Now, having the Mini inline, if I reset all values to "0" on it will that be the same as not having it in the loop at all? Or should I disconnect the Mini altogether and do some sweeps without it in the loop?

I would temporarily disconnect the mini, just to avoid any confusion.

 

[Pogre]

I would temporarily disconnect the mini, just to avoid any confusion.

That's what I was thinking. I was also thinking, like you suggest, that maybe Audyssey is choosing a lesser evil type situation to deal with a peak somewhere else.

 

[PENG]

That's what I was thinking. I was also thinking, like you suggest, that maybe Audyssey is choosing a lesser evil type situation to deal with a peak somewhere else.

Yep, we don't write the codes and we don't know their algorithm. All we know is, the fact that:

a) If Audyssey EQ each speaker independently as though it is the one one making sound, then when the speakers, for example left and right are playing together, the FR could be quite different in the low band.

b) If it EQ them together, based the data collected from all the mic positions, well then there will be many combinations in a multi-channel set up, for example, 7.1.4.to allow for/integrate, and compromise for sure would have to be made, like to average out the results for the overall smoothness.

So to me, it may be easier to do the compromise the stereo 2.0 and 2.1 situations as it would be infinitely difficult to try and optimize even the 5.1 situation. Again, I am only talking about the low frequencies and I really have no idea how Audyssey, or their competitors would do/have done to get the best of all worlds, or focus on specific situations.

Edit: Got a response from Audyssey, they confirmed EQ is applied to each channel individually. That, to me, means it is important to try different XO points if you want to see which one would get you the best scenario in terms of smoothness and linearity but obviously I can be wrong. I am somewhat disappointed that their algorithm/codes couldn't try and optimize the situation when more than one channel are playing the same frequency.

By the way, I agree mostly with the points Jon AA has made so far, but I think he misunderstood my point relating to "EQ for flat in-room response.." I never said or even guessed that people would prefer such response, but I think it is probably a good starting point (emphasis, we are talking about the bottom end low band only) and imo it would make it easier for users to customize things to their liking after. The point we disagree on is around what he said about "...removing all the room gain, making them "flat"..............." as though it is a bad thing when it really isn't necessarily so.

I remember reading it somewhere long time ago when the Audyssey MultEQ site was still active, that Audyssey's goal was to let the user hear the way the music is recorded (something like that...). As for the App, as quoted by Marantz: "Chris Kyriakakis, Chief Technology Officer, Audyssey Laboratories, Inc., states: “The Audyssey MultEQ Editor app enables users to enjoy reference sound that is free of room acoustics problems and also apply their own listening preferences...." So the key is, EQ to flat first, then apply your own....

 

[PENG]

Looks like the Ask Audyssey website is still in business.