Two questions for Gene (or any other member) of Audioholics...

[Wellz]

Good day Gene,
Big fan of your site and I appreciate the info that you and your team provide! I have two audio related questions that I would love for you to answer.

1. With regards to AV receivers and their calibration software, it seems like the advice most given by you is to simply use it for channel gain level setting and distance calculations, but beyond that, just turn off any of the additional EQ settings etc that the auto-calibration has done. In 2018, it seems like most AVR manufacturers continue to incorporate some version of an auto-calibration software, with claims to make adjustments that will provide optimal sound in one's particular room. In my own case, my Pioneer Elite SC-99 (the last AVR made by Pioneer before the merger with Onkyo) uses a version of MCACC PRO that was engineered/tweaked with the help of AIR Studios in London. It seems like the auto-calibration tech continues to evolve and hopefully improve, especially now that we have Dolby Atmos and DTS:X. So in 2018 do you still recommend just doing the basics of gain level and distance and discarding the rest?

2. With regards to Front Speakers (and all other non subwoofers) in a surround sound setup, I've wrestled with finding optimal speaker placement as it relates to distances from the walls and listening positions based the rules that are suggested. In my case, the room is not a perfect rectangle. It is a barn shaped room where the side walls are 18 ft long, the front and back walls are 13 ft wide and the ceiling is 7.3 ft in height (but only in the middle 3ft of the ceiling). To the left and right of the 3ft flat portion of the ceiling, the rest of the ceiling is pitched down at roughly 35 degrees and meets the side walls at around 4.5 ft. These measurements along with a 7.2.4 setup and two rows of seating, make it very difficult to adhere to the rules. I've lost myself in reading about the rule of 1/3, rule of 1/5 and standing waves and their frequencies based on room dimensions, all of which I think would certainly play a major role if all I had was a stereo L&R setup with no subwoofers. However, I am using two separate subs (a pair of SVS SB-12 NSD currently positioned midwall to the left and right of the seats) which are supposed to handle all of the frequencies below 80hz. So with the Subs handling those frequencies (which I believe represent the bulk of standing wave frequencies), how much does it matter how far or close to the wall my other speakers are if they will not be reproducing these lower bass frequencies?

Regards,
Wellz

 

[TLS Guy]

Welcome to the forum and very apt questions you posed.

To your first. Auto calibrations programs are "Fools Gold". I regard this as a dead end approach and likely to do much more harm than good.

Here is my 3 part article on Audyssey.

Part 1.

Part 2.

Part 3.

A post today seems to raise an issue as to whether Audyssey is even a good tape measure, as it can't tell whether it is optimal to set timing by the sub woofer arrival signal or the port for optimal results.

Certainly in my systems Audyseey results in a massive downgrade of audio quality. So I have turned off and locked it out. The latter is important as other otherwise it seems to have a habit of reinfiltrating your system.

On question 2 there is more to speaker placement than room modes. If fact the bigger issue is the compensation within a speaker to equalize below the frequency where a speaker transitions from being a half space radiator (mono pole) to an omni directional radiator. The onset is related to the front baffle width. Inadequate compensation produces a thin sounding speaker. Unfortunately the optimal compensation is affected by room boundaries. Generally speakers are designed to be optimal in this regard no closer than 14" to any boundary. Even so this effect has a big effect on how a speaker sounds with changing position and room to room. I have developed a way of making baffle step compensation totally adjustable as you will see in my articles.

Now your room does not sound as if should be a bad room on the face of it. The ceiling in particular should result in reflections with a wide variety of time paths.

Pictures of your room would be helpful.

Lastly nothing is written in stone about where you should set the crossover. It does not have to be 80 Hz. Experiment is encouraged. In my room having all speakers set to large and bringing in the sub signal below 60 Hz is optimal.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

To question #1: Keep in mind that using Auto room calibration is still better than using no adjustments what so ever. In most cases, it does measure speaker distance correctly and adjusts for levels without the need to invest in an spl meter. I highly value Mark's/TLSGuy input and definitely take in consideration his experience with Audyssey, but you have to keep in mind that his system is literally is unlike any other you may EVER come across. All custom speakers - all purposely built for his specific rooms. Practically everyone else would no have such situation. I have seen heard huge improvements by Audyssey on my crappy speakers, especially with human dialog clarity - this is very common and huge issue for many home surround systems, often due to crappy center and speaker/room interaction. This guide was very helpful to get the most out of Audyssey calibration: http://www.willowville.net/ht/Audyssey Setup Guide.pdf

TL;DR: I say try it for yourself and make your own decision about it. YMMV.

 

[Wellz]

Thank you both for your answers. I've attached some pics of the room for reference. With regard to the 7.2.4 system etc, here are the specs.

• Pioneer Elite SC-99 AVR driving the Left, Center, Right, Side Surrounds and 4 atmos enabled speakers (it's 11 channels but only 9 channel with amplification).
• the Surround Back speakers are driven by an AudiSource AD 1002 amp.
• The speakers are Andrew Jones Pioneer Elite SP-EFS73 Mains , SP-EC73 Center, SP-EBS73-LR Rear Surrounds, SP-BS41-LR Side Surrounds & Dual SVS SB12-NSD Subs
• ELite Screens Edge Free Aeon Series 100 inch Cinewhite Screen & Epson 5040UB Projector.
  
• The sources are Nvidia Shield (2017) streaming box, SONY UBP-X800 4K UHD disc player

 

[TLS Guy]

Thank you both for your answers. I've attached some pics of the room for reference. With regard to the 7.2.4 system etc, here are the specs.

• Pioneer Elite SC-99 AVR driving the Left, Center, Right, Side Surrounds and 4 atmos enabled speakers (it's 11 channels but only 9 channel with amplification).
• the Surround Back speakers are driven by an AudiSource AD 1002 amp.
• The speakers are Andrew Jones Pioneer Elite SP-EFS73 Mains , SP-EC73 Center, SP-EBS73-LR Rear Surrounds, SP-BS41-LR Side Surrounds & Dual SVS SB12-NSD Subs
• ELite Screens Edge Free Aeon Series 100 inch Cinewhite Screen & Epson 5040UB Projector.
  
• The sources are Nvidia Shield (2017) streaming box, SONY UBP-X800 4K UHD disc player

View attachment 23755 View attachment 23756 View attachment 23754

That looks like I thought. That type of room usually has excellent acoustics.

 

[shadyJ]

Those Pioneer speakers are probably competently designed, so I wouldn't be so sure that Audyssey could help anything. You can try it both with and without Audyssey and just keep whatever you like the most, but don't assume that Audyssey will necessarily make things better. Audyssey is a band-aid for flawed speakers, not a magical upgrade in room acoustics.

 

[lovinthehd]

I don't have any particular issues with Audyssey or MCACC, have used them both on their own and on my own without and I prefer what they do over what I can do by ear alone, and not all my setups use other EQ as an alternative. Most of the complaints come from not what these REQ products can do in the bass frequencies but rather upper frequencies. The newer Audyssey avrs/pre-pros have a separate editor app to customize further. MCACC has long had (and assume still does) many ways to customize to taste.

I'm more with BSA than TLSG or Shady. While TLSguy has immense knowledge, he also sees red on the mention of avrs or Audyssey or certain brands of speakers or tastes in music. TLSG also has a very custom system and very particular tastes. I'm more with BSA as to usefulness of these types of programs, particularly for typical users. I'd really like to try Trinnov or Dirac but that's going to take some significant changes in hardware for me. YMMV.

One thing you haven't mentioned is what particular issues are you having now?

Do you have measurement gear or other gear to implement any implementation of eq you may want to do based on measurments?

 

[TLS Guy]

Those Pioneer speakers are probably competently designed, so I wouldn't be so sure that Audyssey could help anything. You can try it both with and without Audyssey and just keep whatever you like the most, but don't assume that Audyssey will necessarily make things better. Audyssey is a band-aid for flawed speakers, not a magical upgrade in room acoustics.

One thing needs emphasis. Audyssey tries to current nulls, which is a crime, especially as that is a really good way to damage and destroy speakers.

Peaks are another matter. On a bad speaker I suppose you might be lucky and have some benefit. However speaker peaks are so often the result of retained energy and even if you make it look better it won't likely sound a lot better.

I agree with Shady that these correction systems are really a band aid for bad speakers dressed up as room correction. The weakest link in the speakers is almost always centers. There are very few good ones about and they are an enormous design challenge. I think Audyssey tries to cheat here and add a degree of shout. In fairness that does increase intelligibility and it is better to hear the speech than not! However natural speech it is not. Getting the speakers to be natural enough to kid you you are eavesdropping on the conversations is the goal, but a mountain of a design challenge.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

One other thing to keep in mind @TLS Guy is what your direct experience with Audyssey system, even though generally considered as a leading one, is not same as OP has - ie: MCACC Pro - thus it's not exactly apples to apples.
Here's a very good read on the subject - highly worth reading:
https://hometheaterreview.com/room-correction-revisited/
One thing they could be corrected is REW doesn't necessarily require a professional audio interface, it would be fine with USB measurement mics like UMIK-1 or Dayton Audio UMM-6 USB

 

[Wellz]

Good morning all. Thanks again for all your input. I will read through all of the suggestions you guys posted.

As far as issues in the room, I don't exactly know that I have any, however I haven't been formally trained in listening to speakers in perfect rooms ect., so I don't have a reference point. I have visited a local place called Audio Den where they have listening rooms, and i try to compare what I heard there, to what I hear at home. One of my concerns is that having spent the money that I did on the entire system, I want to make sure that I am getting the best sound that I can from it, and I find that contrary to conventional wisdom the MCACC PRO in my opinion seems to do a lot more than I would be able to do without it... from phase correction, Full band phase alignment and other things, especially as it applies to the Atmos speakers and the rest. For those who have not kept up with some of the changes to this type of software, a simple search in YouTube can provide some information on various systems can now do. In my case, when I don't use the auto calibration in my room, movies don't sound as alive. The stage and sound Immersiveness just gets bigger (it seems) with the results of the auto calibration (YMMV). So I'm left wondering if the conventional wisdom of ignoring the auto calibration may no longer apply in 2018 when it comes to systems like mine. I could understand how back in the day maybe that was the way to go (especially for 2 channel listening) but with all of the advances to auto calibration software and the increase in speaker count for things like Atmos and DTS:X, I wonder if that should still be the conventional wisdom today? I have invested in a UMIK-1 microphone and MiniDSP 2x4 (to tweak the Subs if needed) and I am learning to use the REW software. However I do not want to over complicate things if the auto calibration software has done a good job already. It would be great if I could get someone at home to listen to the room who is well trained, and could point out areas that could be tweaked.

 

[TLS Guy]

Good morning all. Thanks again for all your input. I will read through all of the suggestions you guys posted.

As far as issues in the room, I don't exactly know that I have any, however I haven't been formally trained in listening to speakers in perfect rooms ect., so I don't have a reference point. I have visited a local place called Audio Den where they have listening rooms, and i try to compare what I heard there, to what I hear at home. One of my concerns is that having spent the money that I did on the entire system, I want to make sure that I am getting the best sound that I can from it, and I find that contrary to conventional wisdom the MCACC PRO in my opinion seems to do a lot more than I would be able to do without it... from phase correction, Full band phase alignment and other things, especially as it applies to the Atmos speakers and the rest. For those who have not kept up with some of the changes to this type of software, a simple search in YouTube can provide some information on various systems can now do. In my case, when I don't use the auto calibration in my room, movies don't sound as alive. The stage and sound Immersiveness just gets bigger (it seems) with the results of the auto calibration (YMMV). So I'm left wondering if the conventional wisdom of ignoring the auto calibration may no longer apply in 2018 when it comes to systems like mine. I could understand how back in the day maybe that was the way to go (especially for 2 channel listening) but with all of the advances to auto calibration software and the increase in speaker count for things like Atmos and DTS:X, I wonder if that should still be the conventional wisdom today? I have invested in a UMIK-1 microphone and MiniDSP 2x4 (to tweak the Subs if needed) and I am learning to use the REW software. However I do not want to over complicate things if the auto calibration software has done a good job already. It would be great if I could get someone at home to listen to the room who is well trained, and could point out areas that could be tweaked.

May be MCACC Pro does a better job than Audyssey. Setting distance and phase etc, is one thing. It is how it mucks about in the frequency domain that is the big spoiler of these systems.

What frequency corrections were made? And can you defeat just the EQ and give it a listen?

I would have thought by the look of the room and the quality of the speakers, that no EQ would be required and certainly not in the higher frequency bands.

Audyssey which I evaluated made a mess of the crossover points and a total dogs dinner in the frequency domain.

 

[Wellz]

My AVR allows for 6 independent Memory slots where you can save different calibrations, and cycle through them at the press of a button. MCACC PRO is customizable. I can have it do a Full Auto Calibration and/or I can select which areas I want it to calibrate. It also includes the ability to have it calibrate the speakers in matching pairs under a setting called Symmetry, or adjust each speaker independently to, or leave the front L&R speakers untouched EQ wise and then EQ the other speakers to try to match the sound characteristics of the Front L&R speakers. For Stereo 2 channel listening, it has a setting called Pure Direct which allows for the front L&R speakers to play in full range without any coloration nor filters even if they are set to Small in the main settings. in Pure Direct mode, is where I think optimal placement of the front L&R speakers would be most beneficial.

So there are options for tweaking more than just EQ, or ignoring it all. So far I prefer the sound of what MCACC PRO has done. I will take some pics of the adjustments that it has done for my room, and post them here later on. If you guys have a technique that you would like me to test with the UMIK-1 mic and REW, let me know and I'll take some measurements. I would love to have a clear guide of how to use this gear to measure the room and then compare it with what the AVR is doing or not doing.

 

[mtrycrafts]

One comment on the projector. Where is the exhaust on it? Does the exhaust get sucked into the intake being so close to the rear wall?

 

[Wellz]

One comment on the projector. Where is the exhaust on it? Does the exhaust get sucked into the intake being so close to the rear wall?

The exhaust on this projector is in the front. If you look at the pic there are two grills in the front, one of them is the exhaust. The other is the intake and filter. Also directily in front (though not visible in the pics)is an air conditioning return duct that sucks up the heat.