C

cgarlock

Audioholic Intern
I'll tell you what, you inspired me to call my insurance company on Tuesday to make sure all of my gear is covered. I need to put a list together of all my stuff. I'd be devastated if something happened to my stuff and insurance didn't cover it...

Well that's one thing I hope everyone takes away from this thread!

Call your insurance companies and make sure you're covered. I'm working with mine now to get a specific rider policy so that it becomes a no questions asked situation IF it ever happens again.
 
C

cgarlock

Audioholic Intern
I've been having fun this weekend playing around with the new Prepro and projector. I really like the sound coming from the Yamaha. To my ears it seems to have tamed the high end which I'm always sensitive too. With the XMC-1 it always played very bright which I really don't like. I do love to hear the higher end sounds but not at the sacrifice of my ear comfort. It might have just been in the way the XMC processed. The Yamaha reminds me of my older Rotel RSP which always had a warm soft sound with very little equalization options.

Which brings me to my next thoughts. I had to treat my room and use REW with my Rotel, sounded very good to me. When I bought the XMC-1 it came with Dirac so I used that and spent a lot of time measuring, moving etc. In the end I simply believed that possibly this was the way it is supposed to sound. We still liked it but it lacked something and who am I to argue with Dirac algorithms right??!?!!!

So enter the Yamaha 5200. It has a lot of newer features so I start to take my manual measurements, writing them all down(that's the key). I then run YPAO. Can someone explain why they even include this LOL? It measured all my distances incorrectly, changed speakers, and really made a mess of things. I went to REW and measured the response it set and it wasn't that good. I went ahead and took measurements with the FLAT, NATURAL, DIRECT EQ settings and started to tweak here and there. In the end I settled on two curves. One is just straight unequalized DIRECT and one MANUAL PEQ. I'll watch some movies now an compare the two. It's funny though because talking with @AcuDefTechGuy we both agreed that we spent roughly $100 on a microphone to tell us that our unequalized speakers sound really good!

Live and Learn
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I really like the sound coming from the Yamaha...With the XMC-1 it always played very bright...The Yamaha reminds me of my older Rotel RSP...I had to treat my room and use REW with my Rotel, sounded very good to me. When I bought the XMC-1 it came with Dirac so I used that and spent a lot of time measuring, moving etc. In the end I simply believed that possibly this was the way it is supposed to sound. We still liked it but it lacked something
So, IOW, the REW FR graphs from Dirac looked flat, but it still lacked something that you just couldn't "see on paper"?

When it comes to various auto room corrections, there is one elusive saying that's difficult to prove - "There is more than just the frequency response curve that improves the sound SUBJECTIVELY, even if we can't see it".

So the Auto Room Correction isn't just making the REW FR graphs look flat. If 4 different Auto Room Corrections make 4 flat FR graphs (+/-2.5dB),they could still all sound different - one may sound good subjectively, another may sound bad subjectively.

How do we prove this intangible subjective sound quality that can't be seen?

There are opposite opinions for all these auto room corrections. Some like them subjectively, some dislike them subjectively.

And BTW, I think there is excellent reason why many audio experts believe that we shouldn't be equalizing the 200Hz-20kHz region. Just because it looks better on paper doesn't guarantee that it will sound better in real life. :D

Remember that Infinity P360 vs B&W 800D FR comparison years ago? How the P360 had much better on-axis and off-axis? Who's going to believe that the P360 actually sounds better? :D

When I had the Revel Salon2 and B&W 802D2 in my house and people listened to them (Direct Mode, Denon AVP-A1HDCI, ATI AT3002),the preference was 50/50 in "single-blind" comparisons (Adcom speaker switcher).

Whether we are talking about true anechoic or REW In-room, the FR graphs are good guidelines, but they don't guarantee better sound.
 
Last edited:
C

cgarlock

Audioholic Intern
Yes, they appeared "flatter" but still didn't sound great. I'm not sensitive like some are to low end peaks and valleys what gets me are harsh highs.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Yes, they appeared "flatter" but still didn't sound great. I'm not sensitive like some are to low end peaks and valleys what gets me are harsh highs.
That’s a good sign that we don’t have hearing impairment in the high frequencies. :D

Maybe I'm also sensitive in the treble since I don't like FLAT, which seems to boost the treble to get it flat.

We can see that both Manual and Through, which sound best to me, have lower treble amplitudes than FLAT.

FLAT, which does have a nicer flatter FR, just sounds "Bright" to me.

 
Last edited:
C

cgarlock

Audioholic Intern
It would make sense that the treble gets boosted because my graphs show the treble gradually falling off. I did notice that the YPAO did sound harsher to me(that's just me though possibly) and I prefered it off.

I think I'm falling in to the camp of NOT preferring auto room corrections. Probably the best approach if you were new to home theater would be to play the system and note what you like and don't like. Then run Dirac, YPAO, Audyssey etc etc and see what the difference is.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I think I'm falling in to the camp of NOT preferring auto room corrections. Probably the best approach if you were new to home theater would be to play the system and note what you like and don't like. Then run Dirac, YPAO, Audyssey etc etc and see what the difference is.

Yeah I would apply Auto Room Correction first. Then toggle between the different modes (Direct/Through vs other modes).

Then choose the mode that sounds best BEFORE knowing what the REW FR graphs look like. :D

If I had seen the graphs first and saw that FLAT produced the best FR, I might be biased toward FLAT even before I heard any sound. :D
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Warlord
Well that's one thing I hope everyone takes away from this thread!

Call your insurance companies and make sure you're covered. I'm working with mine now to get a specific rider policy so that it becomes a no questions asked situation IF it ever happens again.
I did, and I am. I Inventoried everything, looked up all the prices online then tallied it all. That was a bit of an eye opener. It took me 2 years to piece everything together and I never kept a running total. It's enough that it definitely warranted a phone call for some piece of mind. She told us it's all covered under our current policy.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
it definitely warranted a phone call for some piece of mind. She told us it's all covered under our current policy.
Is it in writing or just some spoken words?
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Here is the statement I took exception to:
AVR are designed to power just the right amount of speakers they are intended for - a 7Ch AVR will power 7 speakers, 9Ch AVR will power 9Ch, etc., just fine without needing extra amps IN THE REAL WORLD as long as you don’t require extremely loud volume and listening distance isn’t too far (> 18FT).
My response:
Does the MX-A5000 properly drive his Status Acoustics T8's?!
If so, color me impressed!

I think you should add a qualifier along the lines of:
"Assuming speakers of typical efficiency".
Speakers like Maggies and Gene's 8T's require a special diet!
Now keep in mind it depends on how you set up the 8T.

If you set the 8T up like I do (top cabinet set to Small, XO 100Hz, let the bottom subs handle all the bass with dedicated amps),then I am 100% confident the MX-A5200’s 150WPC will be more than enough since the sub cabinets require most of the power, not the midrange and tweeter.

For the bottom cabinet, I would use either the RBH 500W sub amp or an ATI amp.:D
So now you are saying the MX-A5200 will drive the less demanding portion of the 8T's as long as you add an external amp for the more demanding bass modules.
I can buy that, but that is a totally different statement from your original statement that I disputed!
 
Last edited:
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
So now you are saying the MX-A5200 will drive the less demanding portion of the 8T's as long as you add an external amp for the more demanding bass modules.
I can buy that, but that is a totally different statement from your original statement that I disputed!
I am too lazy to look at my original statement. But I assume I said the MX-A5200 could single-amp-power the entire 8T Tower (top and bottom cabinet as a single speaker).

It probably could depending on the volume and distance.

We would have to use one of those SPL calculators to estimate.

But to keep things simple, I would say it’s a good idea to BI-AMP all these RBH Modular Towers (8T, SVT Tower, SX-T2).

Actually both my SX-T2/R towers and SVT standard towers have to be bi-amped. So I have no choice but to use 2 amps for each tower.

The question is, could the bottom cabinet of the SX-T2 and SVT tower be powered by the MX-A5200?

I have used the ATI AT6012 60 WPC 12CH amp to power the 5 bottom cabinets of the SX-T2/R towers. But I have never tried the MX-A5000.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
The question is, could the bottom cabinet of the SX-T2 and SVT tower be powered by the MX-A5200?

I have used the ATI AT6012 60 WPC 12CH amp to power the 5 bottom cabinets of the SX-T2/R towers. But I have never tried the MX-A5000.
No, the question is about the 8T, which I cited as an exception to your general statement.

In his review of the 8T, Gene lists "Challenging load impedance" as a "Con". No such comment was made regarding his review of the T2, so I am not at all comfortable concluding that what works for the T2 transfers to the 8T. I commented that you needed to qualify your statement to limit it to speakers that present a "typical" load.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
No, the question is about the 8T, which I cited as an exception to your general statement.

In his review of the 8T, Gene lists "Challenging load impedance" as a "Con". No such comment was made regarding his review of the T2, so I am not at all comfortable concluding that what works for the T2 transfers to the 8T. I commented that you needed to qualify your statement to limit it to speakers that present a "typical" load.
If it’s only about the 8T and MA-A5000 being powered with just one amp (not bi-amped), then I say use a more power amp than the MX-A5000 if the volume is high enough.

If it’s about the 8T and the MX-A5200 and you bridge the MX-A5200 to get 450W x 2Ch with a 4-ohm Speaker, then I say that’s enough power.

Maybe Gene tried powering the 8T with the MX-A5200 in Bridged Mode in his review. But if not in Bridged mode, then I say probably not enough power if the volume is high enough.
 

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