Living Room System

[dolynick]

My living room system pulls duty for "fill the house with music" and more casual/lazy HT viewing, or if I just want to watch something on the QD-OLED instead. It's just gone through a round of up upgrades in the last few weeks as well.

Current Equipment:

Television: 65" Samsung S95C QD-OLED
Receiver: Anthem MRX 540 8k
Power Amp (fronts): Musical Fidelity A308 Integrated (HT passthrough)
Sources: PC, Apple TV 4k Gen 3, Panasonic BD-85 bluray player
Fronts: Paradigm Studio Reference 100 v2
Surrounds: Kanto Yu Passive
Sub: REL s/510

The room is 25' x 13' and open on both sides of the central section where the system is set up. The floors are hardwood with an area rug and stippled ceiling. It is not treated and has a slightly higher RT60 of 350-500. I have been toying with the idea of something like a large 8' x 6' hanging aborber for the center of the ceiling but it probably wouldn't do all that much on it's own for the price it would likely be (I might try DYI though).

Recent changes:

-The MRX 540 8k replaced an Anthem AVM 50v. I wanted something to do centralized 4k 120Hz switching and the Anthem x40s have pretty good digital front ends. Being 15-20 years newer, I didn't think I'd be giving up anything from the 50v and I didn't feel like spending over double for another AVM 70 8k separate. This also gives me ARC Genesis and network control which is much easier and more convenient to tweak and upload than the old serial based ARC on the AVM 50v.

-The REL s/510 replaced an old Energy 12" EPS-150. The Energy was going on 25 years old or more and would occassionally hum for no apparent reason. I put a little REL T/Zero MkIII in my office/bedroom system using a high level connection and I have been enjoying the results up there with that integration. I decided to give a larger REL a shot in this system since sub 20 Hz bass wasn't really a concern in this room. It's running high-level on the mains and LFE input for the surrounds.

-The surrounds were added because the MRX 540 gave me extra channels of amplification and I had the Kanto's in storage already. I picked them up 60% when the modest local shop closed out in the fall. They roll off a lot more than the mains but I'm not noticing any major tonal mismatch so I'm quite happy with the results - expectially for what was essentially a $100 CAD pair of speakers.

The placement of the sub isn't ideal but I don't really like the other options I have considered. There's a fairly nasty drop-out around 25-27 Hz in the room (at the MLP measurment position at least), but the fronts and the sub working together do a pretty good job of filling each others dips in. ARC tames the peaks where the additives go up a bit high and REW reports decent output down to about 17 - 20 Hz (although I only measured at a 75db reference). I'm pretty happy with the bass sound overall. I'm still trying to tweak the LFE side of things but any issues remaining there aren't really apparent while watching so far.

Things are tuned for an MLP at the center of the couch, but I almost never actually do critical listening from there. It's more of a lay down and enjoy kind of room for me.

Probably not the usual type of set up among users here, but that's the tour.

 

[duranarts]

Solid setup. Wondering if you get clear sound from the back speakers given they aren't directed near ear. Reason I ask is I have 2 back speakers setup but they are way too high. I still hear them but I think I'll benefit from lowering near ear level.

 

[dolynick]

Solid setup. Wondering if you get clear sound from the back speakers given they aren't directed near ear. Reason I ask is I have 2 back speakers setup but they are way too high. I still hear them but I think I'll benefit from lowering near ear level.

Thanks.

ARC shows a steeper than usual roll-off on the surrounds given the positioning. They still add a really noticeable "rear of the room" effect to the sound that I'd much rather have them or not. I was actually kind of shocked at the difference they made once I had them set up. You are correct that it's not the pristine, precise positioning effect of a proper Atmos setting though. But like I said, this is more "lazy/casual" HT

 

[dolynick]

Added one of these between the PC and the MRX 540 8k:

https://www.smsl-audio.com/portal/product/detail/id/808.html

The goal was to see if I could get DSD signal to the Anthem and recognized as such as there is no way to do that directly from a PC via HDMI/TosLink. I know the Anthem would then do a PCM conversion internally for Room EQ, but it was more the principle of the matter and prefering to keep formats intact as long as possible before resampling. It is spec'd to support DSD64 over opitcal and coax. The price of the P0100 Pro is only about $60 USD so it was a fairly low cost experiment.

In this system, I have a separate input on the Anthem setup for TosLink from the motherboard when running headless for stereo. The QD-OLED TV does background panel maintenance when off and blips the HDMI signal, causing audio sync loss periodically and is generally just a pain. So the HTPC outputs HDMI for the OS and video playback, but the Music player is configured to use an alternate (and immune to HDMI shennanigans) audio path in exclusive mode for stereo.

Long story, the SMSL did report native DSD received and output but the Anthem wouldn't recognize it over coax. So failure on that front.

I'm still keeping it in the system though as
A) It does support 88.2 & 176.4 kHz whereas the motherboard TosLink does not. The is simply me being finnicky and preferring not to have another resample in place for stuff using those rates.
b) Measurements on ASR show the P0100 Pro's output to be state of the art and essentially perfect. I didn't have any real audible complaints about the motherboard TosLink, but it's also a bit of an unknown quality too.

In listening, I think I do hear little more clarity with it but I make no claim to having "golden ears" and this is just a purely subjective observation made off the cuff. Improved or imagined, I'm pleased with the sound it's putting out.

So a tiny little update for this system. I will have to sit down and re-run ARC and REW measurements yet as I have managed to eliminate the LFE hum and might try giving it a little more raw signal to EQ from but no other major changes planned for now.

 

[dolynick]

I re-ran ARC this afternoon. Things are a little bit more different than expected now that the xmas tree and some other stuff is out of one side of the room. In some ways I liked the previous sets of measurements better, but in other ways, there are improvements here too.

Mains + Sub 14Hz - 300Hz:

I asked for +6db room gain from 250Hz down, with a 3rd order roll-off from 20Hz. I did adjust the sub level up a couple notches after ARC (I had done this on the previous run too) but this time it gave me a bit more of a peak at 43Hz than previously. It also helps fill in the area ahead a little bit better so I'll probably leave it. I am getting less extension from 15-20Hz than on the last config though (it was 78db @ 20Hz before, 75db @~15.5Hz) - but a dip at 27Hz has been filled in this time so I think it'll be fine.

The blue trace here is before the couple extra notches on the sub level:

The last set of measurements put the peak about where the blue trace is, so I may back off yet. I haven't had a chance to really judge by ear yet.

Mains + sub 14Hz - 20kHz:

For some reason on this set of REW measurements, I'm getting more wobble in the upper treble than previously. The REW mic is slightly lower than the ARC mic was, so maybe that's part of it. I did correct out to 10kHz.

And just for comparison, this is what ARC measured and what was set for the target curve:

The ARC Genesis mics have both a 90 degree and front facing mic face, which might account for why it hears things a bit smoother.

 

[lovinthehd]

Have you tried pulling that sofa out from the wall some?

 

[dolynick]

Have you tried pulling that sofa out from the wall some?

I have not. The room isn't all that wide so I couldn't see it sitting out more than a foot or so anyways before it would start to cause problems. The area rug fills the space pretty much perfectly where things are so I'm content with the balance of "living space" and audio in that regard.

You're thinking more in terms of the surrounds? Or just rear wall reflections for stereo?

 

[lovinthehd]

I have not. The room isn't all that wide so I couldn't see it sitting out more than a foot or so anyways before it would start to cause problems. The area rug fills the space pretty much perfectly where things are so I'm content with the balance of "living space" and audio in that regard.

You're thinking more in terms of the surrounds? Or just rear wall reflections for stereo?

It's just not a good place for your ears acoustically being so close to a boundary. I know rooms have limitations, but for me I tend to optimize for audio first (but am single, too).

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

How does it actually sound?
I think the peak in the 40’s and the dip from 80 to about 200 would be fairly annoying. The 40ish peak I think would be overpowering and I’d want to pull that down to smooth out the overall response and also not cover up any chance experiencing ulf. IMO there’s nothing happening below 25hz.

 

[dolynick]

It's just not a good place for your ears acoustically being so close to a boundary. I know rooms have limitations, but for me I tend to optimize for audio first (but am single, too).

Yes I get that. But this is also not typically used for critical listening. 99% of the time I'm listening while in the room, I'm laying down on the couch anyways. Or it's filling house with music while I move about.

If I'm looking for soundstaging and being in the sweet spot, I head downstairs to the theatre room which is set up much better for that sort of thing. Although, with the latest changes to the living room system, it's sometimes just comes down to what I'm listening to (or mood/ears on the day) as to which sounds better.

 

[lovinthehd]

OTOH I'd still experiment with the seating....

 

[dolynick]

How does it actually sound?
I think the peak in the 40’s and the dip from 80 to about 200 would be fairly annoying. The 40ish peak I think would be overpowering and I’d want to pull that down to smooth out the overall response and also not cover up any chance experiencing ulf. IMO there’s nothing happening below 25hz.

That peak is only a coule db over the desired curve target at 43 Hz (and is only high because I adjusted a bit after doing EQ, it's effect was different than the last time so I may go back yet). The dip around 115 Hz is the room. We don't hear dips as much as peaks, so I doubt it's going to stand out much but I haven't had time to do much listening yet.

I'm not sure how you can conclude that there's nothing happening below 25 Hz. The reference level of the measurements was 75db and it's 17-18 Hz before it hits that. It's not holding the room gain all the way down, but it's hardly "not there". I'm not chasing flat +6 db down to 15Hz (especially in this system) if that's what you're getting at.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Well it’s a little different interpreting the graphs. They should be scaled from 45-105. That’s the typical 60db window. But beyond that, in my interpretation, there’s a “knee” at 25, and the peak at 43 is almost 10db higher. That’s very significant. More what I meant was it would seem as though there’s nothing happening below 25hz since the peak is so high. I know you’re not chasing 15hz with a small rel sub, but pulling down that peak would make it seem much more balanced and linear.
While writing my first post I see you had some posts with HD and that the system here is much more casual.

 

[dolynick]

Well it’s a little different interpreting the graphs. They should be scaled from 45-105. That’s the typical 60db window. But beyond that, in my interpretation, there’s a “knee” at 25, and the peak at 43 is almost 10db higher. That’s very significant. More what I meant was it would seem as though there’s nothing happening below 25hz since the peak is so high. I know you’re not chasing 15hz with a small rel sub, but pulling down that peak would make it seem much more balanced and linear.
While writing my first post I see you had some posts with HD and that the system here is much more casual.

It sounds like you're referring to the ARC shot. That's the raw measurement, un-EQ'd. The black line is the actual target the software will aim for. I specified a +6db rise for "room gain" 20 - 250 Hz in the target - the modes in the room worked against that in a few spots but the general elevation in the bottom end is intended.

The REW measurements are post EQ. I made a small increase to the sub level afterwards, which exagerated it a bit over the target by 3-4 db, the other trace is without the adjustment and is just 1 db over target (but a little more under target elsewhere). The REW graphs are 35-95 db and a 60db range.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

So what does it look like without the +6?

 

[dolynick]

So what does it look like without the +6?

I would have to re-apply ARC and re-measure.

Ruler flat 20-20k bores me though. I most definitely prefer a bump on the bottom end.
Would I prefer it to be as smooth and consistent as the target curve in ARC? Sure. I don't think that's realistic though - at least not without a lot of work on the room itself. The sub is also surely not in an optimal spot. There's a null in the room in the low 20s and the previous sub also showed that dip too.

You asked earlier how it sounded. The graphs prior to today were a little differnt in their peaks/dips (I'd say this one overall is smoother on the bottom end, but has a slightly higher than expected peak after extra tweak), but I was very happy with the bass performance. Not as "surrounded by a shaking room" as the theatre downstairs with far more watts thrown at it, but also very pleasing in sound. If I were try to describe it, it feels like there's more tonality and texture to the bass in the living room system and it the impacts are sharper and more forward into the chest. It's outright thunderous when called upon (more so than the ported 12" that was replaced, just a lot more headroom I'd say). Both systems have, in my opinion, different but very engaging bass performance.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

So it’s working it seems!
I agree flat is…flat, booooring. My house curve rises from 100-14hz by probably 7db(have to look), but fortunately is flat. Living rooms are tough for sure.

 

[dolynick]

So it’s working it seems!
I agree flat is…flat, booooring. My house curve rises from 100-14hz by probably 7db(have to look), but fortunately is flat. Living rooms are tough for sure.

Not so different really then. I'm just starting my bump higher.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Not so different really then. I'm just starting my bump higher.

I guess. I can’t find the graph with the knee, but this will give an idea. Just imagine a rise to the left.

I can say, it does sound very linear and without peaks.

 

[dolynick]

RT60 as measured yesterday:

278ms to 494 ms. Definitely a bit more on the live side, which I would expect in a room with hardwood and no treatments and the highest overall of the three systems. Still within recommended range on the upper end though. Might help with the "house filling" job this system is tasked with some of the time.