# MultiEQ XT - is it worth anything?



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

Hi

I am looking to upgrade my surround processor to one with the good-quality RC for the "ultimate movie experience".

I current own audiolab 8000AP, and while it lacks some common features, it has a very clean, detailed sound.. accordingly to many reviews - better of Onkyo 5509, Marantz 7701, etc.

The problem so far I see is that the MultiEQ XT shipped as-is does nothing good and if I opt to use the graphic EQ - not possible either (frequencies of 63, 128hz only)


Do I need to get an Audyssey PRO calibration unit?


On the other side, I can still have the 8000AP, do not upgrade anything, but configure J.River for example to reduce few modal peaks in the bass area I am aware of. [ I am a long-time user of REW ]


What do you say?


----------



## hjones4841 (Jan 21, 2009)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

Audyssey is a very useful tool that can help optimize your system in the room. There are several versions available but all are built into receivers or preamp/processors. XT32 is the latest and most powerful version.

To say that it does nothing good is not true. Audyssey has many filters that modify the frequency response and timing of all channels to provide the best sound at one or more listening locations.

Audyssey Pro is available in some higher end receivers and processors, but it requires extra equipment and a license per receiver or processor. It is a more powerful tool, but it is not something that can be added on to any system - the receiver or processor must be able to use Pro.

I have had several "flavors" of Audyssey over the past several years, including Pro. I find it a very useful tool that provides significant enhancement to my system's sound. However, other things like proper speaker placement should be done before adding any electronic processing.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

Hi

I personally watch a blu-ray rip once/twice a week + couple of movies with my wife, the rest if the cinematic experience is of my daughter watching Disney's etc.

I do have quite a high-end stereo system (using same speakers, amps, but different preamp)

My HT preamp is audiolab 8000AP. It is built using a very puristic approach, with minimal processing.
Is is a very clean analog preamplifier with 192/24 HDMI inputs.

I have relatively good 'deal' on the Marantz 7701, which comes with the MultiEQ XT.
XT32 is in the 8801 that is significantly more expensive and I don't want to spend that much.

I've read some reviews this week where actually 7701 is being compared to audiolab 8200AP (which is basically the same as mine 8000AP), and the latter exceeds performance mainly in sound quality.

I just feel that I trade Ferrari from 50s to Mazda from 90s.


Hence, the question is about RC.


Is MultiEQ XT good enough as RoomEQ Wizard (with which I work for few years already)+ Parametric EQ in J.River?
I've read some not very favorable reviews about automatic calibration.

I know my room very well. I have around 9db boost on 45Hz on the left channel. 
However, when I see the 'Graphic EQ' options it has just 63Hz ans 128Hz..


My only source is a computer, so if there are no benefits of this Marantz 7701, what would be the purpose of an upgrade?


-- Michael


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

Automated EQ tools - like MultEQ - can give good results, but the "high expectations" user will want to measure the results to be sure. MultEQ does some time correction - some say that is worthwhile, some say it is not. Even the pickier users who insist on hand tuning can use MultEQ as a starting point, with time correction, and finish the tuning by hand. How worthwhile it is as a tool depends on user requirements and how it is put to use.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

thanks,
"tune by hand" I assume I need to buy a PRO package..

The question for me is where the J.River + REW stands comparing to MultiEQ XT (without a PRO package and with a PRO package).


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



michael123 said:


> I know my room very well. I have around 9db boost on 45Hz on the left channel.
> However, when I see the 'Graphic EQ' options it has just 63Hz ans 128Hz..


The 'Graphic EQ' display shows you very little information about what Audyssey is doing because it is limited by the crude resolution of the graphic EQ. I would not judge Audyssey by that.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

There are very few EQs that can achieve what Audyssey does, mainly because there is much more than just EQing going on under the hood. Bypassing Audyssey and doing in manually negates many of the features that it will do when done correctly. 
A receiver with Audyssey EQ2 is very basic however when you step up in flavor to XT and XT32 your getting a very powerful tool.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



Kal Rubinson said:


> The 'Graphic EQ' display shows you very little information about what Audyssey is doing because it is limited by the crude resolution of the graphic EQ. I would not judge Audyssey by that.


Kal,

I've read almost every your article.. which is basically the only source everywhere regarding the EQ and RC mechanisms available..

I know you like Audyssey and more specifically the latest XT32.
The question is if I, however, opt for Marantz 7701 pre/pro with Audyssey MultiEQ XT, will it be capable (without the PRO kit) to provide proper treatment in below 120Hz region? As I mentioned before, one major peak I have is at 45Hz, another is at 110Hz..

Another candidate - which I think you will like more - is Onkyo 5509 - but I am not sure I will be able to get one for various reasons.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

Im sure Kal will respond soon but just to give you an answer from what I know. XT will add filters were it thinks is needed right down to 20Hz XT 32 just has more filters available than XT but for many XT is more than enough to tame most rooms.


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



tonyvdb said:


> Im sure Kal will respond soon but just to give you an answer from what I know. XT will add filters were it thinks is needed right down to 20Hz XT 32 just has more filters available than XT but for many XT is more than enough to tame most rooms.


What he said.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

Kal,

What is difference between XT32 and XT, if refer to the main front left/right speakers, and given that the speakers are full range?

attached are the measurements


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



michael123 said:


> Kal,
> 
> What is difference between XT32 and XT, if refer to the main front left/right speakers, and given that the speakers are full range?
> 
> attached are the measurements


What are those measurement of?

The difference is the greater filter resolution in the bass and mid bass.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

These are the measurements using RoomEQ Wizard,
Left, Right channels

the question is if I have to use XT32 to handle the bass peaks.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

MultEQ Comparison Chart
Features-----------------------MultEQ XT32--- MultEQ XT---MultEQ---2EQ
Filter resolution (satellites)---------512x------------16x---------2x-----N/A
Filter resolution (subwoofer)--------512x-----------128x--------128x---N/A
Number Measurement Positions------8*-------------8*----------6------3
Adaptive Low Frequency Corr-------Yes------------Yes---------Yes-----N/A
Crossover, Polarity, Delays, Levels---Yes------------Yes---------Yes-----Yes

Full details here


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



michael123 said:


> Is MultiEQ XT good enough as RoomEQ Wizard (with which I work for few years already)+ Parametric EQ in J.River?
> I've read some not very favorable reviews about automatic calibration.
> 
> -- Michael


Best system I ever heard in someone's home was computer based J. Rivers with REW to guide setup. 

I returned to this gentleman's house a couple of years later, he had completely different speakers and subs. HTPC, amps and J. Rivers was the only thing the same. THAT became the best I've ever heard in a home.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.


----------



## scrarfussi (Nov 15, 2012)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

audyssey does a great job for me


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



scrarfussi said:


> audyssey does a great job for me


I will probably get a pre/pro with XT32 (either Onkyo 5509 or Marantz 8801), measure with REW after the calibration, and post the results...


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

Bought Onkyo PR-SC5509 yesterday, delivery in ~ a week


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

BTW..

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/proc...v7701-7-2-a-v-preamp-processor/all-pages.html




> Here's the interesting graph for our readers, and this isn't a problem specific to the AV7701, but to all current Audyssey receivers and processors. The DSP used by all of them to handle Audyssey processing requires that you downsample the signal to 24 bit, 48 kHz, so all information beyond that is lost if you use Audyssey. So if you're playing back a Blu-ray disc with a 24/96 soundtrack, or listening to a lot of high resolution downloads, you might want to consider performing some A-B comparisons of Audyssey on and off to see which you prefer. I imagine for a lot of people, the benefits of room correction out-weigh the loss of some resolution, but I also think it is something that everyone can test themselves. Hopefully we will see someone implement a DSP that does Audyssey at 24/192, because from my discussions with Audyssey it can work at that sample rate, it is just up to the vendor to use a more expensive DSP to implement it.













My rubbish 300$ Behringer from B&H does correction on 24/96.. and very transparently I have to say..

Anyway, I planned the pre/pro for blu-rays where most information is 48KHz anyway


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

I challenge anyone to actually hear the difference between 24/96 and 24/48 if that is even factual information. Im not sure I believe it.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

I did some comparison of 44.1 KHz vs 48 KHz music files awhile back using a DAW so I knew exactly what was happening to the signal chain all the way through. In the first place, it is not always easy to tell what is even going on within a computer-based audio system, much less within a modern AVR. That said, I thought the difference between 44.1 and 48 was perceptible, but BARELY, and at times I was not sure about that. The 48 to 96 or 192 difference... let's just say it's a stretch to believe there is a readily perceptible difference. Even finding a way to to test it, knowing precisely what is happening all the way through the signal chain, would be a challenge.

At the same time, being a bit of an obsessive perfectionist about _certain things,_ I will probably be one of those spending extra for 24/96 files and playback capability at some point, just because I want to have it. The heart wants what it wants.


----------



## phazewolf (Feb 5, 2012)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*

So it has been a wile sense you have had your new setup. What do you think of how it sounds and were you happy with it compared to your old setup?


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



AudiocRaver said:


> I did some comparison of 44.1 KHz vs 48 KHz music files awhile back using a DAW so I knew exactly what was happening to the signal chain all the way through. In the first place, it is not always easy to tell what is even going on within a computer-based audio system, much less within a modern AVR. That said, I thought the difference between 44.1 and 48 was perceptible, but BARELY, and at times I was not sure about that. The 48 to 96 or 192 difference... let's just say it's a stretch to believe there is a readily perceptible difference. Even finding a way to to test it, knowing precisely what is happening all the way through the signal chain, would be a challenge.
> 
> At the same time, being a bit of an obsessive perfectionist about _certain things,_ I will probably be one of those spending extra for 24/96 files and playback capability at some point, just because I want to have it. The heart wants what it wants.


The difference is due to downsampling and other algorithms (every filter is audible)


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



phazewolf said:


> So it has been a wile sense you have had your new setup. What do you think of how it sounds and were you happy with it compared to your old setup?


In terms of SQ, the difference between my former audiolab 8000ap and onkyo is significant - 8000ap is much more dynamic, with more clarity. With Onkyo, if I stand close to the tweeters I hear some hum noise, with 8000ap there was dead silence.

I don't know what is the factor for the sound - maybe that's the Audyssey (probably it is), but that's why I needed the new pre/pro - to cure the room modes primarily .. which it does.

I had a good deal on the Onkyo, maybe Marantz 8801 is in completely different league (that I doubt).. worth checking

I have a very good stereo setup, so I use Onkyo 5509 for movies and blu-ray music shows.
Overall I am satisfied with the switch, although again the leap in sound quality is very disappointing..


----------



## phazewolf (Feb 5, 2012)

It is odd that you have noise with the 5509. I run a prsc-5508 and have no noise or him at all are you using Rca connectors or Balance between the amp and pre amp?


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

RCA.. Go into RCA bypass terminals of stereo preamp, and from there via XLR to the amp.


----------



## KelvinS1965 (Feb 6, 2011)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



michael123 said:


> In terms of SQ, the difference between my former audiolab 8000ap and onkyo is significant - 8000ap is much more dynamic, with more clarity. With Onkyo, if I stand close to the tweeters I hear some hum noise, with 8000ap there was dead silence.
> 
> I don't know what is the factor for the sound - maybe that's the Audyssey (probably it is), but that's why I needed the new pre/pro - to cure the room modes primarily .. which it does.
> 
> ...


Thanks for this feedback...I've been agonising over whether to replace my old but loved Arcam AV9 processor (plus Arcam power amps to biamp the front three) so I could have room EQ and perhaps try the extra front heights/wides. However, since I already have an antimode 8033 for my sub (IMHO probably the most important speaker to EQ) it's not as if I don't have any EQ.

I've also been playing around with the new room simulator in REW and it's pretty accurate for my set up since I've actually measured very similar response in my room to that which it calculates. Adding a second sub at the back of the room seems to be more worthwhile than upgrading my processor, but your experience seems to underline this. I was considering a 5508 or 5509 that were both available secondhand.

Think I'll stick with my AV9. :T


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

*Re: MultiEQ XT - does it worth something?*



KelvinS1965 said:


> Think I'll stick with my AV9. :T


:T


----------



## ilok (Jul 20, 2013)

I went from a Yamaha V473 to a Denon 1713 with XT, it was like night and day. I would not buy a receiver without at least MultiEQ XT from now on.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

ilok said:


> I went from a Yamaha V473 to a Denon 1713 with XT, it was like night and day. I would not buy a receiver without at least MultiEQ XT from now on.


It depends on the room acoustics, the content you're listening/watching and the device you're (supposedly) upgrading..


----------



## phazewolf (Feb 5, 2012)

In my case it helped a lot and I have no noise when it is sitting idle what so ever. Have you tried a different amp to see what it would do?


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

I think it depends on the speakers.

The noise level is annoying but it is when I'm standing close to the tweeters.
When my stereo preamp (which is costing 6 times more than Onkyo and beats it in every technical parameter if anyone cares) is connected instead to the same amp, there is no any noise.

Onkyo is a 3U monster with zillions of audio/video connections, christmas-style illuminations on LCD, etc.
Instead of investing into power supply lines and quality audio paths, they went for the features (who needs them?)

I do not want to go back since there were number of reasons I needed the new SSP , but things could be better.. Obviously they could be if audiolab for same price sounds differently


----------



## ilok (Jul 20, 2013)

michael123 said:


> It depends on the room acoustics, the content you're listening/watching and the device you're (supposedly) upgrading..


Yeah, my "room" is horrible. But the dynamic eq thing is also extremely awesome. It's no longer necessary to turn the volume up. Yamaha's Adaptive ARC tries to do it, but is slightly unnatural.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

The XT32 is doing fine.
For my stereo equipment I do have active room treatment so I know clearly how it should sound after the correction.

Yet, the point is with XT32 the fidelity is also going down (which is NOT happening in my stereo, I have very narrow filters on each channel to handle the room modes)


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

michael123 said:


> The noise level is annoying but it is when I'm standing close to the tweeters.
> When my stereo preamp (which is costing 6 times more than Onkyo and beats it in every technical parameter if anyone cares) is connected instead to the same amp, there is no any noise.


Noise can be caused by many things, It could be that you did not have the level trims set right on the Onkyo or that you were using mis matched connections (unbalanced to balanced for example)



> Onkyo is a 3U monster with zillions of audio/video connections, christmas-style illuminations on LCD, etc.
> Instead of investing into power supply lines and quality audio paths, they went for the features (who needs them?)


 You said it yourself you payed 6x the amount for the preamp your using, not everyone has $3000 to plop down on a boutique pre pro. And in many cases the extra money does not equal a noticeable audio/video improvmant difference.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

I did not understand balanced/unbalanced.. How it could be?
Onkyo replaced audiolab, both used RCA.

They're connected to bypass terminals of my stereo preamp and from there via balanced cable to the amp.

Regarding trim levels - could you plz clarify?
Maybe it indeed could be the case


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

In the menu there will be a setting for speaker levels. if you had these set above 0db you can be boosting any noise thats in the signal chain. 
If both used RCA connectors than it would be unbalanced.


----------



## ilok (Jul 20, 2013)

I actually just received my UMIK-1 today, and let me just say MultiEQ XT has really done a miracle with the 10-300hz range, maybe I should post some charts latter.


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

yes, it works - in terms of room correction. Sadly that it needs to resample everything..
I've heard Lyngdorf multiple times - THAT device is much more transparent (although it has ADC/DAC)
I personally didn't want another box (DEQX, Lyngdorf, or whatever), already had too many on the shelves.

Yet - for movies - it is nice (to my taste) if I choose THX-something


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

michael123 said:


> yes, it works - in terms of room correction. Sadly that it needs to resample everything..


Totally a curiosity question, do you have audio going through your AVR with no DSP in use other than Audyssey ("having to resample"), like music from an analog source?


----------



## michael123 (Jul 26, 2008)

Audio is going through another preamplifier, Onkyo processor is OFF in this case


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

michael123 said:


> yes, it works - in terms of room correction. Sadly that it needs to resample everything..


??? If you mean that most implementations will require the AVR to downsample >48kHz rates down to 48kHz, that is true but it does not resample _*everything*_. Also, that is a limitation of the DSP built into the AVR (or prepro), not one imposed by Audyssey.


----------

