autocalibration vs avia and SPL meter

[jbliz]

I'm planning on buying a Denon 3805 and I'm curious what everyone's thoughts on autocalibration. Should i spend the $60 on a denon mic, or just pick up a $40 SPL meter from radio shack and use an avia disc to calibrate. Which method will give me a more accurate setup?

John

 

[Shinerman]

Can't speak for the Denon Auto Calibration but YPAO on my Yamaha works great. Sucks that Denon charges $60 bones for the mic. I would probably get the Mic. It does more than an SPL meter. It's checks to make sure everything is set right, sets speakers to large or small and other things. It calibrates your system. I would try it out and see how it works. You can always get the SPL meter later, but I bet the Auto Cal. will work fine. Some may disagree. Plus the meter is $40 or so bones plus the cost of the disk, unless you can rent or borrow.

Shinerman.

 

[neznarf]

Don't know about Denon calibration, but have read that
Yamaha does it the best (better than HK, for example).
Check with your local Hi-Fi Buys expert and ask how Denon
compares to Yamaha. (They sell both.)

 

[dmoss]

Depends on how picky you are. I used the mic on my yamaha and it did a nice job. If you really want to fine tune you might want to consider the disk and meter . It's something that you can always use. I just bot both the disk and a SPL Meter just to double check the system and learn about it. I think that setup is some of the fun so it was an easy decision for me.

 

[Access Denied]

I have the Denon AVR-3805 and the Denon DMS-305 mic. I also have a Radio Shack SPL meter. I hooked up the SPL meter to the 3805 using the aux port on the Radio Shack meter and it worked but I got more accurate readings using the DMS-305 mic. Hope this helps.

 

[rgriffin25]

I used the auto calibration on my Pioneer Elite and I felt that it also did a good job. In addition to the MCACC EQ settings I have two custom eq settings that I can use in addition to the auto calibration. So I can have the best of both worlds. The mic came with my receiver for no additional cost.

Pioneer Elite
VSX-53TX

 

[hopjohn]

Radio Shack SPL Meter

I couldn't say which method would be better, but buying the SPL meter wouldn't be a bad idea. It can be used for so many other small tests that it's well worth the cost, even if you do decide to get the mic for the 3805 also.

 

[JAB]

I am a Z9 owner, and after checking on the frequency response that YPAO corrects (nothing below 60 hz.), I used the SPL meter with the Yamaha test tones. Most speaker / room problems are in the low bass area. YPAO is the first crack by Yamaha and I am sure in future models this system will cover the lower frequencies also. My advice, use the Avia & SPL meter.

 

[Unregistered]

The point thou is that this feature is used very rarley I mean once you do it once that's it, how often is your room going to change!!
cheers laurie

 

[jbliz]

Thanks for all the input everyone. I think I'm gonna go with the SPL meter and avia disc. I've read that the Denon autocal is having a hard time determining the speaker size (large or small), and that you can't go back and manually tweak the autocal settings without resetting everything. I like to tweak things, so I'm gonna just do it all manually. Hopefully denon will fix this problem next year. I've heard that the Pioneer MCACC also has problems determining speaker size, but can easily go back through and make changes. Man I wish the Pioneer 55TXi had PLIIx.

John

 

[Ross]

Jab,

I would suggest using an (seperate) external EQ method for any sub, in any system. A dedicated parametric EQ analysis/implementation unit will do better than any built-in wonder on a receiver, flagship or not. The bass is usually the hardest part to get right. Some of the new Sunfire and Velodyne subs have this feature built in...SWEET!

One really has to be carefull if using a full parametric EQ device in their system when implementing "full-range" mains that will actually use the EQ-ing on the low end, possibly resulting in a detrement across other parts of the sound spectrum in the upper octaves...bass is very hungry. I believe one should always EQ the sub seperate from the rest of the system, thus I see no big problem with what Yamaha and others are doing.

An all-in-one unit like a receiver (that has the processing and power built in), will not have the control, dynamics, and headroom as a seperate amp, or even perhaps bi-amping(preferred), in a system that is parametrically EQ-ed. It just doesn't have the capabilities, so why force it? You will be playing a game of trade-offs and compromise... Just do it right and get a seperate EQ device for the sub(s).

For a good blend between the sub and the mains, one or more octaves between the two should be present for a smooth transition. If a sub is doing 20-60hz (like it should), then what would be the problem with yamaha's approach?

What kind and how many subs are you implementing? How do you have them configured and integrated into your system?

best,