Why the need for all the bells and whistles?

Old Onkyo

Old Onkyo

Audioholic General
Prior to upgrading my HT system I was mystified by the fact that I preferred the sound of my old 2 channel setup for music, over listening in the Ht with subs room correction calibration etc. I thought it was a failure in the B&W speakers versus the Klipsch.

After connecting the B&W’s to an old Onkyo receiver I really enjoyed a great listening session, I later sat in front of the JBL/ SVS/ Denon system and wondered why it comparatively speak, didn’t sound as good. I mean, it sounded good, but something is lacking, and depending on the source, I can comfortably listen at -10 on the relative scale.

So I turned the subs off, went into the speaker/manual/2 channel setup menu and changed the speakers to large, turned the levels from -7.5 on the mains to zero, the authority came back to the JBL’s!

Why do we buy “quality” gear, then use room correction, filters, eq, and other “gimmicks”, to chase good sound? Shouldn’t two good to great speakers properly placed, good clean power, and good source material equal great results?

The other stuff I get for HT setups.

Thoughts....
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
It depends on what I'm listening to to an extent. I mostly prefer my setup with subs and even the processing/upmixing. Often 2.1 processing works quite well, too. I rarely turn off the subs, tho, but have fairly good thru-room response with those, too so they just add to the experience. This is going thru several different multich setups, too. Specific setups can of course vary but I've set mine up to work however I want for the most part and have some processing choices to back it up. My least used system is a simple 2.0 setup in a small room where it works quite well, but just isn't what I would call a go-to.

ps "need" may not be the operative word, either.
 
Last edited:
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
A lot of calibration can actually make things worse. There are a lot of systems that would be better off as just a simple 2 channel setup without any kind of extensive calibration. I think poor calibration is also a big contributor to speech intelligibility issues that crop up so much these days. So many people would be better off with just a 2 channel setup.
 
T

TankTop5

Audioholic General
Proper speaker placement is much more important than room correction and two different speakers may need very different placement. Also almost no speakers produce 20-20k hz so you are loosing information by not running a subwoofer.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Warlord
This is interesting and something I've been thinking about lately.

I had an old onkyo (irony) 809 that had MultiEQ XT for my first theater. It was a 7.2 setup, but with all cabinet speakers including three identical Pioneer SP-FS52 towers that dug down to about 50hz flat behind the screen. I also had two Infinity 1260w subs on either side of the screen. Those will put out some good chest punching bass, but nothing REALLY low. This theater room was around 13'x17'x8' and the back portion of the room had a closet so it was 11' wide. Font of the room is the 13' wide portion where the screen is.

That room sounded fantastic for how little everything costs.

My current theater is a Denon 4300h with MultiEQ XT32 with a 7.4.4 setup that has all in-wall speakers and four Infinity 1260w subs. One in each corner. Main three are still behind the screen and supposedly have an f3 of 35hz. They don't. In my wall they go down to around 80hz flat. Which is fine, but isn't ideal. I will tackle that issue at another time. The current room is around 15.5'x14.5'x8', so it's more square with the longer wall being where the screen is. Very similar in terms of cu ft, but very different shapes. This room sounds excellent as well, but I seem to remember the bass in my old room being...better? I'm not sure how, but something's missing. I had thought it was the deeper bass, but I can't rely on my memory simply because sonic memory isn't reliable.

So, is the room the difference? OR is the difference the AVR? Different manufacturers and different versions of Audyssey? With the main difference being bass, could the cabinet speakers have made that much of a difference?

Those same speakers are in my office now and I do have to admit that 4 towers that dig to 50hz and a center that goes to 70hz sounds pretty good. That's with a sub that isn't nearly as capable of my infinity subs. The room is much smaller though, so I'm betting the room is to blame.

I may take the time to find out when I finally pull the trigger on new flooring, but the amount of work getting the Onkyo setup in the theater just isn't really worth it. The theater sounds great, it's just missing something or I've gone nuts. Or I just need to build more robust subs.

So many variables.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Spartan
After connecting the B&W’s to an old Onkyo receiver I really enjoyed a great listening session
I would expect nothing less from someone with a handle of 'Old Onkyo' !

Why do we buy “quality” gear, then use room correction, filters, eq, and other “gimmicks”, to chase good sound? Shouldn’t two good to great speakers properly placed, good clean power, and good source material equal great results?
ahhhhhh music to my ears, 'straight wire with gain' baby !!
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Prior to upgrading my HT system I was mystified by the fact that I preferred the sound of my old 2 channel setup for music, over listening in the Ht with subs room correction calibration etc. I thought it was a failure in the B&W speakers versus the Klipsch.

After connecting the B&W’s to an old Onkyo receiver I really enjoyed a great listening session, I later sat in front of the JBL/ SVS/ Denon system and wondered why it comparatively speak, didn’t sound as good. I mean, it sounded good, but something is lacking, and depending on the source, I can comfortably listen at -10 on the relative scale.

So I turned the subs off, went into the speaker/manual/2 channel setup menu and changed the speakers to large, turned the levels from -7.5 on the mains to zero, the authority came back to the JBL’s!

Why do we buy “quality” gear, then use room correction, filters, eq, and other “gimmicks”, to chase good sound? Shouldn’t two good to great speakers properly placed, good clean power, and good source material equal great results?

The other stuff I get for HT setups.

Thoughts....
Ideally, good equipment that has been installed and placed properly should sound very good, to whatever extent it can. Room correction software like Audyssey, etc are for the people who can't or don't want to move things around in order to have better sound, so the goal from these is to make a 'bubble' where the sweet spot is larger. Does it work? Depends on a lot of things.

FWIW, I have a two channel system because the room really isn't good for surround and that removes the motivation to attempt it when the results are unlikely to be 'great'. However, I really like the sound and I have been working in audio for over 45 years, have heard some incredible equipment and was there before digital sources became available to consumers- some source material is good, some not so good and some just makes me smile.

Good timing for this thread- I was trying to figure out how to post a link for a song that I really like WRT where it should go and have been playing often, in order to listen to all of the details. I'm using no equalization but I did place some panels in the room to fix some problems in the low end-

 
Last edited:
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Proper speaker placement is much more important than room correction and two different speakers may need very different placement. Also almost no speakers produce 20-20k hz so you are loosing information by not running a subwoofer.
I agree that placement is extremely important- placed properly, they can actually make most correction unnecessary, as long as the issues are in the range where we're most sensitive. I moved my speakers in small increments and noticed better dispersion and perceived placement of the instruments/vocals, but the problems in the low end were because of the room, so I installed some panels while I ran REW and watched the response change. Once I saw that the problem was gone, I listened very critically- I haven't felt the need to change anything since then and that's good because I hated the sensation that comes with phase cancellations- feels like a bad pressure imbalance and it's very uncomfortable. It's also good because I'm not a happy camper if I don't like the sound. The music comes first, but I want good sound when I can have it, too.

However, if there's limited info below 30Hz anyway, I would rather have great mid-bass and midrange than the last 1/2 octave if 'flat response' is the goal. WRT 20KHz, that's all upper harmonics, so it helps, but it's really for reference, only.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
So, is the room the difference? OR is the difference the AVR? Different manufacturers and different versions of Audyssey? With the main difference being bass, could the cabinet speakers have made that much of a difference?

Those same speakers are in my office now and I do have to admit that 4 towers that dig to 50hz and a center that goes to 70hz sounds pretty good. That's with a sub that isn't nearly as capable of my infinity subs. The room is much smaller though, so I'm betting the room is to blame.

So many variables.
I have heard bad, good and great speakers in bad rooms and none of them sounded as good as they did in rooms that didn't screw up the sound in some way, whether it was too much reflection/absorption, equal length walls, bad match for the size of the speakers, etc. Mine, as I posted, had phase cancellation & first reflection issues and the panels cured them- if moving equipment and furniture isn't an option, panels can help. High SPL also makes problems appear when the duration of sound reflections exceeds a certain point and that's where a lot of smaller rooms show a shortcoming. That's not to say the room needs to be covered by soft materials- it's a matter of finding the balance between SPL and better sound. If it can't be louder than a whisper, correction is needed but equalization isn't the best way because its effects aren't limited to high SPL.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Spartan
Ideally, good equipment that has been installed and placed properly should sound very good, to whatever extent it can. Room correction software like Audyssey, etc are for the people who can't or don't want to move things around in order to have better sound, so the goal from these is to make a 'bubble' where the sweet spot is larger. Does it work? Depends on a lot of things.

FWIW, I have a two channel system because the room really isn't good for surround and that removes the motivation to attempt it when the results are unlikely to be 'great'. However, I really like the sound and I have been working in audio for over 45 years, have heard some incredible equipment and was there before digital sources became available to consumers- some source material is good, some not so good and some just makes me smile.

Good timing for this thread- I was trying to figure out how to post a link for a song that I really like and have been playing often, in order to listen to all of the details. I'm using no equalization but I did place some panels in the room to fix some problems in the low end-

Love Ahmad Jamal, 'Heat Wave' being one of my favorites !
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Love Ahmad Jamal, 'Heat Wave' being one of my favorites !
That's a great example of musicians listening and communicating well- we used to have a Jazz club that brought some excellent musicians to MKE and I really miss it. Many from MKE left for New York City, a couple went to Toronto, others to California- if you have heard of a club in San Francisco called Yoshi's, that's where the guy behind the club here went.
 
newsletter

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