Audyssey not so good in bad rooms?

D

Drunkpenguin

Audioholic Chief
Audyssey has always done a great job in my fully sound treated theater, but my 2.1 (in wall) living room system has always sounded bad. It's a horrible room for acoustics. Large, 10' ceilings, wood floors, open to many other rooms, very little absorption. The system always just sounded weak and non amplified. I'm using Polk V85's for the inwalls and an older 15" sub. The sub always sounds great, but the inwalls were just not impressive at all. For years I had an el cheapo receiver running it, but after a theater upgrade I moved the old Marantz SR7002 into the living room thinking it would increase the quality. Ran Audyssey for the first time and it really didnt change anything at all. The $200 receiver sounded just as good as the Marantz. I was sad.

Fast forward to last night and I had some time to kill so I started manually playing with the EQ on the Marantz since the old receiver didn't have the ability. I ended up increasing the lower frequencies by 4-5 db on the left and right. I did this by ear not with any measuring equipment, but I must say I really got it sounding great in there. The voices are finally deep and powerful and not tinnie and weak like theyve always been. Just wondering why. I mean, Audyssey was built for bad rooms, but it seems like it doesn't handle them that well.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Audyssey has always done a great job in my fully sound treated theater, but my 2.1 (in wall) living room system has always sounded bad. It's a horrible room for acoustics. Large, 10' ceilings, wood floors, open to many other rooms, very little absorption. The system always just sounded weak and non amplified. I'm using Polk V85's for the inwalls and an older 15" sub. The sub always sounds great, but the inwalls were just not impressive at all. For years I had an el cheapo receiver running it, but after a theater upgrade I moved the old Marantz SR7002 into the living room thinking it would increase the quality. Ran Audyssey for the first time and it really didnt change anything at all. The $200 receiver sounded just as good as the Marantz. I was sad.

Fast forward to last night and I had some time to kill so I started manually playing with the EQ on the Marantz since the old receiver didn't have the ability. I ended up increasing the lower frequencies by 4-5 db on the left and right. I did this by ear not with any measuring equipment, but I must say I really got it sounding great in there. The voices are finally deep and powerful and not tinnie and weak like theyve always been. Just wondering why. I mean, Audyssey was built for bad rooms, but it seems like it doesn't handle them that well.
The SR7002 probably has the most basic mullteq that does not do much. XT32 is much better but I still have to pick the best sounding crossover manually and bump the sub level a couple dB.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Well Duh, you gotta get sozzled first. Hello! :D

You should know better than that given your screen name. ;)
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I haven't been in every room. But of the rooms I've been in, I've never heard any room correction software made the sound significantly audibly better to brag about.

The only thing that will help is to put a big thick rug on that wood floor. I mean put as much rug in that room as possible in addition of the sofas and pillows.
 
L

Leemix

Audioholic General
Did you use dynamic eq?
Without that bass will be too low unless running pretty loud. Increasing the bass 3-6dB in setup will usually help a lot wether or not you use audyssey (unless dynamic eq is active then it can be too much).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top