# Audyssey XT vs XT32



## cavchameleon

Hi, I'd like to chime in on the XT vs XT32 comparisons (only brief, still have a lot of listening to do) and maybe get some answers on another issue with my setup. First the equipment. I had (still have) an NAD T-785 AVR with the AS-EQ1 setup (so XT with equivalent XT32 setup for the subs). This setup sounded pretty awesome, especially in the bass range. I purchased the Denon A100 (XT32 based) mostly for both the Audyssey upgrade (love Audyssey products, this will be my 5th one) and the other options (network capability, etc.). As for the AVR's Amp stage, I feel that I down graded (the NAD has two toroid trannys and the unit weighs 16lbs more than the Denon). I can really tell when playing at reference levels, but not at low to moderate levels (at reference, I used to be able to hit 109db on the peaks, with the Denon, only 105db). This is most likely to speakers that are not that efficient.

Now for the comparison (subjective at the moment, need to do some measurements to see what's happening), the XT32 seems to be much 'brighter', it seems to be boosting the treble much higher than the XT. Wondering if it was a mic problem, I used a mic from another Denon receiver I have (same model, so I assume it's calibrated the same way). I got the same results. The blending of the mid/treble range is incredible, but I'm just not used to the increase in level compared to the rest of the spectrum. Is this normal behavior or am I getting strange results? I did run the 8 series of mic positions several times and got the same results (and then compared them to the NAD XT version just to confirm). The XT32 over all gives a sense of greater envelopment than the XT version. I tried many movies that I've seen several times on the previous system and felt the same way. I have not tried the DSX capabilities yet (wides/heights) as my room is too small to accommodate them). 

As for the subs, I have another issue here. I'm using two subs, so did run the A100 with the 2 sub setup. When done, I seemed to have lost some bass (the sound is good, just 4 db lower than with the NAD/AS-EQ1 setup at the reference level). So, I wanted to check if the issue was with the way the A100 leveled the subs (taking into account coupling from 2 subs). I went ahead and put the AS-EQ1 in the chain, calibrated the AS-EQ1, then re-calibrated the A100 with the new setup. Yep, got the 4db back. This seems strange as the levels should be the same without the AS-EQ1 in the link. I re-calibrated the system again a couple times with and without the AS-EQ1 and got the same results every time (in fact, when I went back to calibrating the A100 without the AS-EQ1, it mentioned that the subs were too hot and had to drop each one by a couple db before moving onto calibration, when I went back to the AS-EQ1, I had to bump up each sub by the same amount to hit the 75db requirement). I 'really' wanted not to have to use the AS-EQ1 in the system (one of the reasons for getting the A100), but at the moment, it sounds better with it in the chain (even if I bump up the A100 sub levels to match when the AS-EQ1 is not in the system). I wonder if this is because of the additional EQ being done in the sub range by the A100 on top of the AS-EQ1 (I do have a dip in the 30Hz range that is not fully taken care of with the AS-EQ1, due to room dimensions). Also, I do use the 32 positions when calibrating the AS-EQ1. The A100 is limited to the 8 positions, so may be part of the 'sounding different' portions, but not the levels - this one is puzzling me.

Another question, will purchasing the Pro kit change this difference? If so, I can remove the AS-EQ1 from the system. 

Ray


----------



## recruit

Hello Ray, quite a lot going on in your system over I presume the last few weeks with the introduction of the Denon amp, now although the Denon maybe using the new Audyssey XT32 in theory when calculating the results with the ASEQ1 in the loop the Denon should not be looking at the subs otherwise you are adding another layer of EQ on top of it, I would still rate the standalone ASEQ1 to be the more powerful unit out of the 2 but tbh I have not looked at the full specs.

What I would imagine is happening is that the overall power of the amps in the Denon that is making the sound brighter, as 104db is relatively high in most systems volume and it is the amps in the Denon running ot of steam and making the sound brighter by the hardening of the amps straining to push to the same levels as you did with the Onkyo.

Have you considered getting a 5-7 channel poweramp to add to the Denon as it would be a shame as the processing and features are high on the Denon and would be a shame to loose them? I would think that you would be surprised by the results when adding the additional power and bringing your system back to the way you want it, and the brightness will disappear using the extra power, using something from Emotiva should not break the bank as they offer excellent VFM and have high power ratings.

By using the Pro calibration kit (depending on whether you can use it and I would check with your dealership first) I would of expected the results to be even more accurate as the PRO kit is quite a bit more money and calibrated with more accuracy so may well give better results, but as mentioned previously I would consider the power to be the main problem causing your system to sound brighter.


----------



## cavchameleon

Thanks Recruit! BTW, the previous AVR is the NAD T785, not and Onkyo. I was figuring out as much that the amp stage of the Denon just did not match the one in the NAD. I'm looking ad adding the XPA3 from Emotiva to the front three channels. As far as the processing being doubled, I can't disable the SubEQ from the Denon with the AS-EQ1 in the line, but the Denon should be doing minimal processing if the corrections are already pretty close to the flat target range that Audyssey is hitting. I already have the XPA3 driving my 2 subs and will move it to the front three once I get another amp for the subs (looking at the EP4000, it should do the job fine for the subs - unless there is another recomended amp, the XPA2 is a bit expensive, I could go with another XPA3, but it's pretty large to have another one.

Thanks for chiming in!
Ray


----------



## tcarcio

Excuse the off topic question but does the Aseq1 use XT?


----------



## recruit

tcarcio said:


> Excuse the off topic question but does the Aseq1 use XT?


Yes it is quoted as being Multi EQ XT form of Audyssey and after the recent firmware upgrade it calculates IIRC the same as the XT32 but for the sub channels only so it has some serious horsepower just for sub EQ.


----------



## recruit

cavchameleon said:


> Thanks Recruit! BTW, the previous AVR is the NAD T785, not and Onkyo.


Sorry my bad Ray :doh:


----------



## cavchameleon

recruit said:


> Sorry my bad Ray :doh:


Not a problem. I like Onkyo/Integra also! Was deciding on which route to go when getting the Denon.


----------



## tcarcio

recruit said:


> Yes it is quoted as being Multi EQ XT form of Audyssey and after the recent firmware upgrade it calculates IIRC the same as the XT32 but for the sub channels only so it has some serious horsepower just for sub EQ.


Thanks. I have A Marantz with MultEq now and I am debating whether to add the ASEQ-1 or not.


----------



## recruit

tcarcio said:


> Thanks. I have A Marantz with MultEq now and I am debating whether to add the ASEQ-1 or not.


It most probably work out extremely well seeing that the sub has its dedicated own powerful EQ leaving the Marantz to take care of the other channels :T


----------



## tcarcio

recruit said:


> It most probably work out extremely well seeing that the sub has its dedicated own powerful EQ leaving the Marantz to take care of the other channels :T


I had the Sms1 and the Antimode 8033 and didn't really hear a difference useing them or just useing the Audyssey in my Marantz. But with the SVS it measures so many more positions and has more proccessing so I am definitley considering giving it a try.


----------



## recruit

The SVS AS-EQ1 certainly is the creme de la creme of EQ devices :T


----------



## cavchameleon

tcarcio said:


> I had the Sms1 and the Antimode 8033 and didn't really hear a difference useing them or just useing the Audyssey in my Marantz. But with the SVS it measures so many more positions and has more proccessing so I am definitley considering giving it a try.


You should try it. There some folks that used the SMS1 before and sold it after trying the SVS. It's an amazing unit, especially if you are running 2 subs (still does wonders for one sub, but amazing at more than one). Just a note, nothing substitutes for correct placement first (or the best possible placement you can do considering space, furniture, and WAF). Then use the AS-EQ1. Even though you only do 32 positions, it actually has 10,000 taps of EQ and corrects the time domain. It's an absolutely powerful little unit IMO.


----------



## tcarcio

cavchameleon said:


> You should try it. There some folks that used the SMS1 before and sold it after trying the SVS. It's an amazing unit, especially if you are running 2 subs (still does wonders for one sub, but amazing at more than one). Just a note, nothing substitutes for correct placement first (or the best possible placement you can do considering space, furniture, and WAF). Then use the AS-EQ1. Even though you only do 32 positions, it actually has 10,000 taps of EQ and corrects the time domain. It's an absolutely powerful little unit IMO.


I am definitley considering it. I have the Danley DTS-10 and it is built into the wall, because of the size I really had no choice. It sounds great but I think it could sound better and maybe the SVS with as much processing power that it has can do that for me. I am giving it some serious thought but with Christmas coming it will be tight to fit it in the budget so it might have to wait a bit.


----------



## cavchameleon

tcarcio said:


> I am definitley considering it. I have the Danley DTS-10 and it is built into the wall, because of the size I really had no choice. It sounds great but I think it could sound better and maybe the SVS with as much processing power that it has can do that for me. I am giving it some serious thought but with Christmas coming it will be tight to fit it in the budget so it might have to wait a bit.


Yep, I understand the Christmas season shopping - got most of it out of the way already, but as you mention, funds get channeled to gifts. 

When you do have a chance, definitely try it (SVS has a good return policy should it not work for you, but I think you'll be amazed). I bet the Danley sub is pretty amazing, I've only read about them - don't have the room/wall to give up that much space. Enjoy the Christmas season, then get your own gift to try if you can swing it. They may have great after Christmas prices when a lot do not purchase during the month of July.\\


----------



## tcarcio

cavchameleon said:


> Yep, I understand the Christmas season shopping - got most of it out of the way already, but as you mention, funds get channeled to gifts.
> 
> When you do have a chance, definitely try it (SVS has a good return policy should it not work for you, but I think you'll be amazed). I bet the Danley sub is pretty amazing, I've only read about them - don't have the room/wall to give up that much space. Enjoy the Christmas season, then get your own gift to try if you can swing it. They may have great after Christmas prices when a lot do not purchase during the month of July.\\


Ya, The Danley is a great sub and the SVS could only make it better especially since I know it is not in it's optimal position but I really didn't have to many choices. You have a great Christmas too. I hope you get what you want...:T


----------



## cavchameleon

tcarcio said:


> Ya, The Danley is a great sub and the SVS could only make it better especially since I know it is not in it's optimal position but I really didn't have to many choices. You have a great Christmas too. I hope you get what you want...:T


Do you have any pics of your sub (curious to see one in an actual room - have only seen stand-alone pics on their site)? Hope you get what you want also for Christmas. Ours of course is centered around our 4yo. And, for the most part, Christmas is for all of use and our extended families to get together - this it the best gift of all. Toys are always fun though...


----------



## tcarcio

cavchameleon said:


> Do you have any pics of your sub (curious to see one in an actual room - have only seen stand-alone pics on their site)? Hope you get what you want also for Christmas. Ours of course is centered around our 4yo. And, for the most part, Christmas is for all of use and our extended families to get together - this it the best gift of all. Toys are always fun though...


Here are some different pics from right after I built it till the time I put it behind the wall.....


----------



## cavchameleon

tcarcio,

Wow, that thing is HUGE! Bet it hit's pretty low, 10hz? Pretty incredible. Are those classic B&W's from the 80's? Your sub's entrance into the room looks to be at the 1/4 space, that is actually a pretty good spot. You may be good with the Audyssey already built into you AVR. The AS-EQ1 will make it a lot smoother of course, especially since you can measure 32 positions. You'll have to decide it it's actually worth it when/if you are able to test it in your system. A lot depends on your actual room and seating positions. If they are fairly optimal, what you already have my be pretty awesome, especially since your room is treated.

Ray


----------



## tcarcio

They are original B+W 801 series 80"s from 1980 and I love them. This from Danley sound labs.......The way Mike Hedden of Danley puts it “Outdoors at one meter, one watt of input generates 90 dB at 12 Hz; 99 dB at 20 Hz; and 108 dB at 80 Hz. There simply isn't another sub that competes.” I know it can pretty much knock all the pics off my walls and really hits hard in the mids. I should be happy with what I am getting but you know how that goes....:heehee:


----------



## sub_crazy

I just ordered the Denon 4311, the A100's little brother.

I mainly ordered it for the XT32 to try out. At the audyssey site there is a question asked and answered that the SubEQ in XT32 is the same as the standalone SubEQ which is surprising to say the least. 

How is the XT32 working out so far and are you able to bump up the subs 4db higher to match the level of the SVS AS-EQ1?

Was thinking about getting the Onkyo 80.2 to get the XT32 but some bugs reported and wanted to try out a Denon anyway.


----------



## cavchameleon

tcarcio said:


> They are original B+W 801 series 80"s from 1980 and I love them. This from Danley sound labs.......The way Mike Hedden of Danley puts it “Outdoors at one meter, one watt of input generates 90 dB at 12 Hz; 99 dB at 20 Hz; and 108 dB at 80 Hz. There simply isn't another sub that competes.” I know it can pretty much knock all the pics off my walls and really hits hard in the mids. I should be happy with what I am getting but you know how that goes....:heehee:


Way cool! I knew they were from the early 80's but was not sure of the model number. I remember hearing them back then, pretty amazing speakers (also at the time, I loved the Apogee's - full range ribbons but very hard to drive, that were in the same room.

That sub is more amazing than I thought!. Now I want something like that.

I very much understand your statement, "should be happy"... I'm always in that same boat, always looking for that holy grail of sound (within my affordable price range of course, which makes it never truly reachable, but one can only wish and strive...).


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> I just ordered the Denon 4311, the A100's little brother.
> 
> I mainly ordered it for the XT32 to try out. At the audyssey site there is a question asked and answered that the SubEQ in XT32 is the same as the standalone SubEQ which is surprising to say the least.
> 
> How is the XT32 working out so far and are you able to bump up the subs 4db higher to match the level of the SVS AS-EQ1?
> 
> Was thinking about getting the Onkyo 80.2 to get the XT32 but some bugs reported and wanted to try out a Denon anyway.



Hi Sub_crazy! Well, just to make you feel better, the 4311ci is not the A100's little brother, but more like it's clone. It is pretty much exactly the same thing with some trim differences and some upgraded connectors (which really do nothing to the sound IMO). When I purchased the A100, I was on the fence wanting to get the 4311 instead, but as mentioned in my previous post, I'm always trying to 'extract' the most for the money - not sure I can agree that I did it in this case.

Anyway, as for the XT32, yes - it is MUCH better than the XT. It creates a much better sound stage and blend across the freq spectrum. Somehow all the speakers seem to work together, completely enveloping you in sound. As for the built in SUBEQ, yes, you can bump it up - after you finish the Audyssey setup, go to the next menu item (manual settings), then speaker settings and to speaker levels and just adjust it. You can use an SPL meter, or REW with a calibrated mic if you want to be more accurate. Also, if you have speakers that can play fairly low, you need to re-set the speakers to 'SMALL'. All of my speakers were set to large by Audyssey. Once set to small, go to the crossover section and choose 'advance' settings. You then can change all the crossovers to each speaker set, dependent on the speakers capabilities. 

If you have any questions on this unit, just ask. I've been playing with it for several weeks now and am becoming fairly familiar with it's capabilities. The network part can be a bit slow, but does work (Pandora and linking to your server if you have one setup to play files stored there). 

Have fun!!!


----------



## sub_crazy

Thanks for the detailed reply Ray.

At first I wasn't sure you liked it that much more than your other receiver but now it looks like your pretty happy.

Any bugs pop up or has it worked relatively bug free?


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> Thanks for the detailed reply Ray.
> 
> At first I wasn't sure you liked it that much more than your other receiver but now it looks like your pretty happy.
> 
> Any bugs pop up or has it worked relatively bug free?


A couple things why I was not initially sold on it:

1) the treble is a bit more hot than I was used to, I remembered then that I was using the NAD curve, not the Audyssey curve (the Audyssey curve is pretty flat, with as slight roll off in the upper end, the NAD curve is the same as the Audyssey curve with a bit more roll off in the upper end). I have gotten used to it and like the extra envelopment that XT32 gives.

2) the Denon does not have the muscle of the NAD. I can only tell this when driving it at reference levels, not below reference - they sound the same then. The NAD has an amp stage equivalent to a stand alone amp with a true 200 watts per channel, all channels driven at the same time. I can only tell when driving the system loud (the Denon gets pretty hot, the NAD barely gets warm and never strains). I'll be taking care of this by driving the front three channels with an XPA3.

I have not had any glitches yet, I know that there are some that are getting audio dropouts and some video issues (blue rain). So for, no glitches. The couple I thought I had were just learning about the system, this unit can do a LOT. 

Now that I've been satisfied, I'm getting my NAD ready to sell (pretty hard to do since I still love the unit, but can't hold onto the Denon and NAD at the same time) - and possibly the AS-EQ1, but not absolutely sure about this one yet.

There are a couple things with the Denon unit, the network portion is sometimes a bit slow, but not really an issue once you connect (this is compared to something like Apple TV or other set to boxes made for network streaming, like Roku). For the most part, I've pretty much run through all the options available and am pretty comfortable with the unit. If you have any questions once you get your unit, I'll be glad to help as best as I can. This is my 5th Denon AVR, so I'm pretty familiar with them (along with NAD and Onkyo).

Ray


----------



## recruit

I think well find in time that Audyssey will get better and better with more resolution on EQ'ing all speakers and subs, so in all honesty XT32 maybe enhanced even further down the line, and I think what really sets the PRO version apart from the normal receivers is the fact that the PRO microphone gives better results because of how well it is calibrated and its sensitivity which therefore gives better results.


----------



## cavchameleon

recruit said:


> I think well find in time that Audyssey will get better and better with more resolution on EQ'ing all speakers and subs, so in all honesty XT32 maybe enhanced even further down the line, and I think what really sets the PRO version apart from the normal receivers is the fact that the PRO microphone gives better results because of how well it is calibrated and its sensitivity which therefore gives better results.


Agreed! Plus the Pro version allows 32 measurement positions, which is why I'll most likely off-load the AS-EQ1 and use the funds to get my own pro kit.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Hi Sub_crazy! Well, just to make you feel better, the 4311ci is not the A100's little brother, but more like it's clone. It is pretty much exactly the same thing with some trim differences and some upgraded connectors (which really do nothing to the sound IMO). When I purchased the A100, I was on the fence wanting to get the 4311 instead, but as mentioned in my previous post, I'm always trying to 'extract' the most for the money - not sure I can agree that I did it in this case.
> 
> Anyway, as for the XT32, yes - it is MUCH better than the XT. It creates a much better sound stage and blend across the freq spectrum. Somehow all the speakers seem to work together, completely enveloping you in sound. As for the built in SUBEQ, yes, you can bump it up - after you finish the Audyssey setup, go to the next menu item (manual settings), then speaker settings and to speaker levels and just adjust it. You can use an SPL meter, or REW with a calibrated mic if you want to be more accurate. Also, if you have speakers that can play fairly low, you need to re-set the speakers to 'SMALL'. All of my speakers were set to large by Audyssey. Once set to small, go to the crossover section and choose 'advance' settings. You then can change all the crossovers to each speaker set, dependent on the speakers capabilities.
> 
> If you have any questions on this unit, just ask. I've been playing with it for several weeks now and am becoming fairly familiar with it's capabilities. The network part can be a bit slow, but does work (Pandora and linking to your server if you have one setup to play files stored there).
> 
> Have fun!!!


Hi Ray,

Got the 4311 installed on Monday and so far so good.

I did notice it seamed a little bright so I changed Audyssey to flat and it sounds better. What's weird is the normal Audyssey is what rolls off the highs and flat doesn't so it doesn't make sense that Flat sounds smoother to me. I still have to play around with it more as I have only had a couple of hours to mess with it so far. 

So far I can't really say I hear a difference between XT32 and regular XT from the Onkyo 886P pre-pro i still have. The 4311 seems to sound a little leaner on first listen, I am using it in pre-amp mode so the amp is the same.

I did do the 8 Audyssey mic positions using a tripod in as close to the same positions as possible to the 886P. I also did a firmware update, do you know what that update did or were I can find out more info about updates?

So since you are a seasoned veteran of the A100 any tips you have come across that help? 

Thank you.


----------



## recruit

Hi Mike, It may take a few runs of Audyssey before you are happy with the sound, I would measure the different points quite close together and avoid taking measurements against a back wall if you have a seating position there, do you have dedicated theatre or is it your lounge?, I have always had best results when using a Tripod also.

The room is obviously affecting the response curves preset in the Denon.


----------



## sub_crazy

If the offer I made tonight is accepted then I will have a dedicated theaterraying:

The house I have right now has a big living room that is open to the kitchen so it's about 15 X 40 feet with 8 foot ceiling. I have always had good results with XT in this same room, now that I think about it though I did run Audyssey prior to the firmware update so that could have included an Audyssey update. Luckily the Audyssey calibration in the Denon runs a lot quicker than the Onkyo/Integra, have to re-run it this weekend.

The main listening position is in the middle of the room so no back wall to worry about, just have to worry about breaking dishes in the kitchen from the massive bass:devil:

Thank for the tips recruit.


----------



## recruit

I'm sure you will get sounding right in the end as you have one of the most advanced versions of Audyssey :T


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> Hi Ray,
> 
> Got the 4311 installed on Monday and so far so good.
> 
> I did notice it seamed a little bright so I changed Audyssey to flat and it sounds better. What's weird is the normal Audyssey is what rolls off the highs and flat doesn't so it doesn't make sense that Flat sounds smoother to me. I still have to play around with it more as I have only had a couple of hours to mess with it so far.
> 
> So far I can't really say I hear a difference between XT32 and regular XT from the Onkyo 886P pre-pro i still have. The 4311 seems to sound a little leaner on first listen, I am using it in pre-amp mode so the amp is the same.
> 
> I did do the 8 Audyssey mic positions using a tripod in as close to the same positions as possible to the 886P. I also did a firmware update, do you know what that update did or were I can find out more info about updates?
> 
> So since you are a seasoned veteran of the A100 any tips you have come across that help?
> 
> Thank you.


Hi Mike,

First off, I wouldn't consider myself a season veteran of the A100, I've only had it for just shy of 2 months. I've set up everything and am testing it fully (pretty familiar with Denons, this one does have options that past ones don't though). I still have to give my full review on this AVR, but am waiting to see if problems crop up as some have noted in the AVS forum thread on this AVR having some issues after a couple months. 

As Recruit mentioned, try re-running Audyssey. If your room is corrected well with XT, I doubt you'll hear much better with XT32 in the midrange/high-freq region as there would not be much more to correct beyond what XT is doing. I think where it's much better is in the bass region, especially if you have more than one sub connected as this unit has SUBEQ. 

I think the firmware update is dealing with some audio-drop out issues the units are having (mostly due to the HDCP handshake issues with specific source units). I've been lucky so far with my sources. 

A couple things I'd like to note. When I ran Audyssey, I noticed that the highs were much more pronounced than previous AVR's I've had/have. As mentioned much earlier, I thought it was the mic, so tried another Denon mic that I have (same model, so same calibration curve I'm assuming) and got the exact same result. I found that the height of the mic matters a LOT. I put it in the listening position at ear height as you are supposed to and this, for me, produces exaggerated highs. So, I put the mic in the listen position for the first measurement and put the height of the mic so that the top is just under the height of the tweeter of the main speakers for all measurements. This help in the upper freqs.

Now for the bass, you mentioned it's a bit 'leaner'. I noticed this also as mentioned before and found I had to bump up the bass a bit. I used both a calibrated SPL meter and REW with a calibrated meter. In my case, I had to bump it up 4db and it took care of leveling it out (the other speakers were reading 74db with the meter and the subs were reading only 70). Note, when bumping up the subs, make sure you do it in the AVR's menu and attenuate the levels of both subs at once (there is an option for Sub1, Sub2, and Sub1 + Sub2), that way the relative levels of your subs will remain intact. The individual sub levels will of course sound lower as the combined subs are increased by acoustical coupling of multiple subs.

Have you tried out other features besides standard sources (such as internet/pandora, control of your media files from your computer server if you are using one, iPod control, etc.)? This AVR is packed with them.

I'm still going back and fourth with adding the AS-EQ1 in the mix and am still happier with it in - just seems to make the bass smoother. I'm going to try re-run Audyssy in slightly different positions to see if it makes a difference (of course, the main LP has to be constant for level matching).

Ray


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> If the offer I made tonight is accepted then I will have a dedicated theaterraying:
> 
> The house I have right now has a big living room that is open to the kitchen so it's about 15 X 40 feet with 8 foot ceiling. I have always had good results with XT in this same room, now that I think about it though I did run Audyssey prior to the firmware update so that could have included an Audyssey update. Luckily the Audyssey calibration in the Denon runs a lot quicker than the Onkyo/Integra, have to re-run it this weekend.
> 
> The main listening position is in the middle of the room so no back wall to worry about, just have to worry about breaking dishes in the kitchen from the massive bass:devil:
> 
> Thank for the tips recruit.


Congrats on your new place! It'll be great to have a dedicated space!:clap:


----------



## cavchameleon

recruit said:


> I'm sure you will get sounding right in the end as you have one of the most advanced versions of Audyssey :T


+1.


----------



## cavchameleon

Just an FYI, someone on the AVS thread was in contact with Denon who mentioned that there will be a FW update on or near the 22nd of this month to address the audio dropouts that some are experiencing with this unit.


----------



## recruit

Technology is moving on so fast that everything we own for AV usage requires software updates we just have to get on with it when required.


----------



## Wull

I've enjoyed reading this thread, as I have just brought an Audyssey Sub EQ + Pro Installer Kit. So I'm really looking forward to seeing what results I get from it now when it turns up :bigsmile:


----------



## cavchameleon

recruit said:


> Technology is moving on so fast that everything we own for AV usage requires software updates we just have to get on with it when required.


Yep! It's difficult to keep up with all the equipment out there. Imagine being a manufacture having to keep up with all the new 'rules of the game' and staying within the boundaries in order to talk well with all other manufactures. Must be difficult, especially with HDCP not always cooperating. IMO HDCP handshake issues has really been the greatest problems since the invention of HDMI. Unfortunately, it won't go away, so everyone will have to live with it.

Ray


----------



## cavchameleon

magicj1 said:


> I've enjoyed reading this thread, as I have just brought an Audyssey Sub EQ + Pro Installer Kit. So I'm really looking forward to seeing what results I get from it now when it turns up :bigsmile:


Sweet :clap:. Keep us posted. What AVR and speakers are you mating it with? Are you using it with and AVR or between a processor/amp setup? It'll be nice to hear your impressions. I'm seriously thinking of getting the pro kit for my system, but pretty expensive with both the kit and license and have to justify it's addition.


----------



## Wull

cavchameleon said:


> Sweet :clap:. Keep us posted. What AVR and speakers are you mating it with? Are you using it with and AVR or between a processor/amp setup? It'll be nice to hear your impressions. I'm seriously thinking of getting the pro kit for my system, but pretty expensive with both the kit and license and have to justify it's addition.


At the moment I am using a Lexicon MC-1/bryston 9bst, but will be replacing the Lex with an Audiolab 8200AP in the new year.'on pre-order'
I am running dynaudio audience speakers, 82's are my main. I have recently finished building an IB, this is kicking out so much bass it's taking some taming in my room, I had been using an antimode, this really helped things a lot, but there is only so much this can do. I have also installed a few bass traps, again these have helped, but theres tighter bass to be had.

The Audyssey Sub EQ + Pro Installer Kit is a bit of a gamble, I managed to pick one up in the classifieds so I didn't pay the full price, but it still cost more than a new SVS AS-EQ1. The Audyssey seems to offer more in the long run, such as the better mic from what I have read sounds promising, also if I wished to add another sub I can do so with out more expensive. My main worry is that it does such a good job I will start thinking about the audyssey multi eq - how much :yikes:


I was hoping to have it delivered next week, but the weather in the UK has brought everything to a standstill. I will let you know how I get on when it shows up :scratch:


----------



## recruit

You will have quite a system there once finished magicj1 :T


----------



## Wull

recruit said:


> You will have quite a system there once finished magicj1 :T


Thanks John. :T I'm hoping this audyssey will be the icing on the cake.


----------



## cavchameleon

magicj1 said:


> At the moment I am using a Lexicon MC-1/bryston 9bst, but will be replacing the Lex with an Audiolab 8200AP in the new year.'on pre-order'
> I am running dynaudio audience speakers, 82's are my main. I have recently finished building an IB, this is kicking out so much bass it's taking some taming in my room, I had been using an antimode, this really helped things a lot, but there is only so much this can do. I have also installed a few bass traps, again these have helped, but theres tighter bass to be had.
> 
> The Audyssey Sub EQ + Pro Installer Kit is a bit of a gamble, I managed to pick one up in the classifieds so I didn't pay the full price, but it still cost more than a new SVS AS-EQ1. The Audyssey seems to offer more in the long run, such as the better mic from what I have read sounds promising, also if I wished to add another sub I can do so with out more expensive. My main worry is that it does such a good job I will start thinking about the audyssey multi eq - how much :yikes:
> 
> 
> I was hoping to have it delivered next week, but the weather in the UK has brought everything to a standstill. I will let you know how I get on when it shows up :scratch:


Awesome speakers and amp you have! Keep us posted. I think you'll be impressed with Audyssey (unless you like specific freq real hot, it's not for that purpose - you can create come curves within a specific range, but Audyssey is made more for reference EQ and not preference EQ). IMO, once you get used to reference (give it a couple weeks), then the 'hot' settings just seem less detailed.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Just an FYI, someone on the AVS thread was in contact with Denon who mentioned that there will be a FW update on or near the 22nd of this month to address the audio dropouts that some are experiencing with this unit.


The update went up yesterday. I didn't have any audio drop-outs before but just noticed the other day that my SMS-1 I use to check response is snowier than Alaska. I wonder if the video rain problem people have experienced is just related to composite and S-video connected components? I have to double check with a different composite/s-video component though since the SMS-1 acted up with a different pre-pro before so it could be the cause of the problem.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> A couple things I'd like to note. When I ran Audyssey, I noticed that the highs were much more pronounced than previous AVR's I've had/have. As mentioned much earlier, I thought it was the mic, so tried another Denon mic that I have (same model, so same calibration curve I'm assuming) and got the exact same result. I found that the height of the mic matters a LOT. I put it in the listening position at ear height as you are supposed to and this, for me, produces exaggerated highs. So, I put the mic in the listen position for the first measurement and put the height of the mic so that the top is just under the height of the tweeter of the main speakers for all measurements. This help in the upper freqs.
> 
> Ray


Hey Ray,

Thanks for the tips on mic placement to tame the brightness. I lowered the mic a bit on the tri-pod and re-ran audyssey for 8 positions and it sounds MUCH better now. I have to admit that at first I was not to crazy about the sound but tonight it sounds like I want it to.


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> Hey Ray,
> 
> Thanks for the tips on mic placement to tame the brightness. I lowered the mic a bit on the tri-pod and re-ran audyssey for 8 positions and it sounds MUCH better now. I have to admit that at first I was not to crazy about the sound but tonight it sounds like I want it to.


Awesome! I'm glad it worked for you. Are you finding you have to bump up the subs levels a bit? I have to raise mine 4db to match the same levels as the mains.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Awesome! I'm glad it worked for you. Are you finding you have to bump up the subs levels a bit? I have to raise mine 4db to match the same levels as the mains.


I had to bump my subs about the same as yours, I have never really had an automated system that got the sub levels right. 

I am sure your the same way, we can tell when are subs are not at the proper level by just hearing some of our favorite discs. I actually spent the extra dough to get a Galaxy CM-140, I figured with as much invested in this hobby this is not too much more. 

I am really thinking about getting this:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=390-790

I have the ability to run REW but having to get out all the items then putting them back has gotten to cumbersome that I just use my SMS-1 to get a quick look at what's going on. I haven't used REW in such awhile that I would have to give my-self a refresher course on how it works again.


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> I had to bump my subs about the same as yours, I have never really had an automated system that got the sub levels right.
> 
> I am sure your the same way, we can tell when are subs are not at the proper level by just hearing some of our favorite discs. I actually spent the extra dough to get a Galaxy CM-140, I figured with as much invested in this hobby this is not too much more.
> 
> I am really thinking about getting this:
> 
> http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=390-790
> 
> I have the ability to run REW but having to get out all the items then putting them back has gotten to cumbersome that I just use my SMS-1 to get a quick look at what's going on. I haven't used REW in such awhile that I would have to give my-self a refresher course on how it works again.


Yep, I agree that we know what our systems sound like in the bass region. I've been using Audyssey products for quite a few years now (this is my 5th AVR with it, and 6th unit if I count the AS-EQ1). With my NAD T785 and the AS-EQ1, it did get the sub levels right - actually very impressive! And, if I keep the AS-EQ1 in the link with this Denon, it gets it right also (somehow the extra 4db is there). But, not an issue on just bumping up the levels after Audyssey setup. I also have a calibrated mic for use with REW and have to re-learn and re-load the program (the laptop I used it on in the past crashed and was replaced). 

I have seen that mic from Parts Express - seems like an awesome turn-key system! I'm thinking about getting one. There's actually a thread on it in the AVS Forum site. Might be nice to start one here, maybe you should (hint....). I'll work with REW for now and will sit on this new mic for a bit to see how it actually pans out (and the price just might drop a bit also).

Ray


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Yep, I agree that we know what our systems sound like in the bass region. I've been using Audyssey products for quite a few years now (this is my 5th AVR with it, and 6th unit if I count the AS-EQ1). With my NAD T785 and the AS-EQ1, it did get the sub levels right - actually very impressive! And, if I keep the AS-EQ1 in the link with this Denon, it gets it right also (somehow the extra 4db is there). But, not an issue on just bumping up the levels after Audyssey setup. I also have a calibrated mic for use with REW and have to re-learn and re-load the program (the laptop I used it on in the past crashed and was replaced).
> 
> I have seen that mic from Parts Express - seems like an awesome turn-key system! I'm thinking about getting one. There's actually a thread on it in the AVS Forum site. Might be nice to start one here, maybe you should (hint....). I'll work with REW for now and will sit on this new mic for a bit to see how it actually pans out (and the price just might drop a bit also).
> 
> Ray


Good idea, I will start up a thread for the omni-mic soon. I won't be today though as I am running a system recovery on this pc right now, posting using the mobile app.
I did contact PE about getting a group buy going on the omni-mic but they declined.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to everyone!


----------



## cavchameleon

Same from our family to all. MERRY Christmas and have a Safe Holidays!!!!


----------



## steve1616

cavchameleon,

Are you keeping your AS-EQ1? If not I would be a willing buyer. I am thinking about buying one from SVS reguardless. I bought a new sunfire TGR-3 last year for a basement price of $1200. I thought I was getting such a good deal on a $5,000 MSRP receiver, and now everyone keeps telling me I screwed up because it doesn't have Audyssey. It wasn't a big deal that it didn't have Dolby true HD or DTS HD, but that might be a big deal also since not many blue rays are offered with multichannel analogue outputs anymore. 

Would you guys rather have audyssey in a cheaper receiver, or a very nice receiver like my sunfire that doesn't have audyssey?


----------



## sub_crazy

^^^^^

Ummmmmmm, I would rather have a very nice receiver that has Audyssey XT32.

Sunfire is a fine brand but DTS-HD and TrueHD are worth it alone to upgrade, add in Audyssey XT32 and it's hard to do better.

If you are interested in a Denon 4311 then let me know and I can get you my dealers info via PM. I think you will be surprised how affordable it can be.


----------



## recruit

I thought Sunfire included Audyssey in there AV units or do they have some other EQ?


----------



## cavchameleon

Hi Steve1616,

I also would prefer a receiver with XT32 for all speakers, at the moment the Denon 4311 or A100 fit that bill (there is an Onkyo model also, but I'm not familiar with that one). These also have SubEQ that basically does what the AS-EQ1 can do. Now, you mention a 'cheap' receiver with Audyssey - I would go (for the same price that you paid) the Denon 3311CI with Audyssey MultXT (not any lower version of Audyssey). This is not as good as XT32, but does the job, especially if you only have one sub. With more than one sub, then you really need the SUBEQ capability IMO to get the best blend of the subs with each other and with the mains. That's where the AS-EQ1 shines (again, if you don't have XT32 with SUBEQ already). Sunfire makes great amp sections, but for me personally, I would prefer having an Audyssey based receiver.

I've tweaked my A100 as much as I can and am pretty happy overall with it. I'm using an outboard amp for my front three channels (Emotiva XPA3) to take care of reference level listening. So, because of this, it does look like I'll be putting up the SVS unit for sale. Would this fit your bill - well, I'd say it depends. If you have two subs, then most likely. But, IMO, I would go for a receiver first with at least Audyssey MultXT (like the 3311 or Onkyo equivalent), then decide if you need the AS-EQ1, or get a better receiver like the 4311 with XT32 / SubEQ (or Onkyo equivalent). I'm not knocking the AS-EQ1 at all, it's an AMAZING piece of equipment (very well built, does what it's suppose to do, and for me one of the best investments I ever made for my subs), just that I'd rather have Audyssey capability with all the speakers first as a priority, then fine tune the subs as a second (and always keep in mind that speaker/sub placement comes first - and if possible, room treatments second, then electronic treatment).

Ray


----------



## steve1616

My sunfire is the TGR-3. It doesn't have any kind of EQ in it. I appreciate the advice. I love my sunfire, but I do feel that the amp sections aren't nearly as important as they use to be since subwoofers have taken the place of big power hungry front speakers. Since the receiver is only powering the mids and highs it doesn't seem to take near as much power anymore. 

Now the problem is that I don't know if anyone will buy my sunfire from me. I might see if I can give it a try on ebay. Does anyone have an idea what I should ask for it?


----------



## steve1616

Oh, I forgot to ask if it was an option for any audio shops to add audyssey to my sunfire internally? If not, the Denon 4311 looks awesome. If I could sell my Sunfire for a decent price, and then add the money I was going to pay for the AS-EQ1, I could probably be really close to buying this Denon. I saw that it can be bought for $1700 and I have only looked online for about 5 minutes. What are your thoughts?

Thanks,

Steve


----------



## sub_crazy

Audyssey can be added via the external unit but it is pricey, I just don't recall the price. I do not know of any way to add Audyssey internally to you Sunfire, I have never heard of a service that does that.

Ray makes excellent recommendations on placement, and room treatments. You can get excellent results with placement that should be done first before any form of eq or room treatment. You never know, with correct placement you could get a great response from your subs with no eq.

For ease of use I find that having XT32 in my receiver makes for a much quicker fix after I have optimized placement. If you enjoy tweaking out the response then maybe another solution would work best but of all the solutions I have tried in the past Audyssey XT or better has made a dramatic improvement for me. 

EQ all depends on your room and placement, I have had a good room were proper placement that gave me a better response without EQ than my current home with XT32. 

Don't think that you can't get excellent results with your Sunfire, the room and placement are going to make a bigger difference than any receiver of EQ will ever make.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

steve1616 said:


> Oh, I forgot to ask if it was an option for any audio shops to add audyssey to my sunfire internally?


Not possible. 



> If not, the Denon 4311 looks awesome. If I could sell my Sunfire for a decent price, and then add the money I was going to pay for the AS-EQ1, I could probably be really close to buying this Denon. I saw that it can be bought for $1700 and I have only looked online for about 5 minutes. What are your thoughts?


Good luck. If you hook someone with a yen for the Sunfire, fine, but expect to take a hit.



sub_crazy said:


> Audyssey can be added via the external unit but it is pricey, I just don't recall the price.


$2500 for the unbal/RCA version: http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround/307mitr


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

Is there a general rule of thumb on where to place a sub. I wouldn't know the first thing about sub placement, but I will try anything if it will help.


----------



## tcarcio

steve1616 said:


> Ray,
> 
> Is there a general rule of thumb on where to place a sub. I wouldn't know the first thing about sub placement, but I will try anything if it will help.


Best thing to do is crawl for it. If you put the sub where you sit and then crawl, yes crawl, around the room and see where the bass sounds best. Once you find that spot then put the sub there. It is a great starting point. http://www.audioholics.com/tweaks/speaker-setup-guidelines/crawling-for-bass-subwoofer-placement


----------



## cavchameleon

tcarcio said:


> Best thing to do is crawl for it. If you put the sub where you sit and then crawl, yes crawl, around the room and see where the bass sounds best. Once you find that spot then put the sub there. It is a great starting point. http://www.audioholics.com/tweaks/speaker-setup-guidelines/crawling-for-bass-subwoofer-placement


Yes, I agree with tcarcio - try out the advice. Sometimes it puts the subs in a place where you really cannot put them (too far out in the room and WAF). Read this paper multiple sub placement. If you have more than one sub, I prefer them at the half spaces on opposite walls of the room, or 1/4 spaces on the same wall - then EQ from there. This worked best for my room.


\
View attachment multsubs[1].pdf


----------



## recruit

steve1616 said:


> Now the problem is that I don't know if anyone will buy my sunfire from me. I might see if I can give it a try on ebay. Does anyone have an idea what I should ask for it?


Don't forget you could always advertise it for sale on here as we have a classifieds section also :T

Not too sure the value on it though, sorry.

 Audio Equipment Classifieds


----------



## steve1616

Thank you guys for the help. I will try this, and see if I can't help my cause. Also, I was just wondering, I have always heard that the equalizers are so much more important on the bottom end. Do they help that much on the mids and treble. Everything sounds so great in theory, but if I can clean my sub up a little, maybe I should just enjoy the music, and not worry about replacing my sunfire. 

I remember when everyone was telling my how much better certain amps were, yet in double blind tests I couldn't tell a 10,000 dollar amp from one that was only $500. I am hoping that is the same case with the audyssey on mids and highs. I could tell a difference when I switched from my old receiver to my sunfire just because my old receiver would clip at high volumes. Do you think I could hear a difference between my sunfire and the Denon 4311. I have read some reviews that said the new receivers are very bad with speaker loads. They said the new denons in particular have upped the rail voltage to get higher watt ratings on resistive loads, but aren't putting out the current that they should under low impedances. What is everyones opinions on this?

If the amp sections on the Denon aren't very good, would it still make a good preamp?


----------



## Dave Upton

Audyssey does make a large difference, but I would prefer a better receiver myself. That said, I'll always recommend separates over a nice AVR, more for your money, and your amplification is great even if you get a cheaper avr with pre outs and the new bells and whistles.


----------



## sub_crazy

With any EQ the difference it will make is entirely dependent on the room provided you have well designed speakers. If you happen to have a very good room then Audyssey will make little to no difference.

I use the Denon 4311 in pre-amp mode and it works great. I am going to test out the internal amps but have not found the time yet.

I am with Dave as I also prefer separates over receivers but for the time being there are no separate pre-amps that make me want to switch. I had the Onkyo DHC-80.1 pre-pro which sounded great but the relay clicks and occasional speaker pops were too aggravating, I hear the 80.2 can have the same problems. I have considered the ADA Cinema Rhapsody and Classe SSP-800 but both of these are Big $$$ and neither includes Audyssey which in my current room makes a big difference. I would spend the money if there was a high end pre-pro that included Audyssey XT32, maybe this coming year we will see something new.


----------



## cavchameleon

As mentioned, the speakers/placement and room come first. Will Audyssey make a big difference? Well, really depends on the correction needed. And yes, you are correct that the lower registers are much more difficult to correct and where you'll hear the biggest difference. I'll have to agree with Mike and Dave on getting a new receiver though - and try it out to see if the internal amps are good enough for your situation. When I changed out my AVR, I went from and NAD (very good amp section) to this Denon. At moderate and low levels, I can't hear a bit of difference. But, at reference levels, yes I could - when playing at 85db, the Denon was only hitting 104db on the peaks while the NAD would hit 109db (and sounded much cleaner). I added an Emotive XPA3 for the front three speakers and that took care of it (and like mentioned, separate amps are good bang for the buck, so you can change out your AVR in the future and keep the power). 

To answer your other questions, the Denon is a great Pre, you can actually set it up as a total Pre/Processor if you want to use only outboard amps. I didn't go this route since the current setup is working great.


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

Earlier you said that you liked the sound of your system better with the AS-EQ1. Have you gotten to the point where the xt-32 with its version of the sub equalizer sounds just as good. I am definately leaning toward the idea of the 4311 receiver. If I added the emotiva xpa-2 I would still have my good 2 channel performance also. This wouldn't even be such a hard thing for me if my sunfire wasn't so powerful. In 2 channels my sunfire can swing more current than a lot of seperates. Sound and vision makes very conservative ratings on their test bench, but to give a comparison the NAD 785 rates at 174 watts into 8 ohms and 218 watts into 4 ohms with 1 or 2 channels driven. The sunfire puts out 252 watts into 8 ohms and 377 watts into 4 ohms. 

Home theater labs rates the sunfire at 294.6 watts into 8 ohms and 437.7 watts into 4 ohms with 2 channels driven. In fact, the emotiva xpa-2 does a few watts better into 8 ohms, but no better into 4 ohms. From a performance point of view on output characteristics, I am drastically taking a step back with the Denon so the Audyssey absolutely has to be amazing. Otherwise I would just add the AS-EQ1 to my receiver. You can see my delema.


----------



## steve1616

Dave,

When you said that audyssey makes a huge difference, but you would rather have the better receiver, were you meaning that you would take a better receiver like my sunfire that doesn't have audyssey rather than a receiver like the denon that is decked out with audyssey to the gills.


----------



## sub_crazy

Honestly I would upgrade just to add the new codecs like DTS-HD and TrueHD which IMO make a big difference, the Audyssey is just the icing on the cake.

For music the Denon's amps would probably be just fine unless you listen at reference levels. It's movies that really need all the extra power for the dynamic swings. Most of the time for 2 channel music your only listening to a few watts no matter if you have a 50 watt amp or a 500 watt. The amount of current that is available in an amp is more important IMO, this is were the Sunfire probably has the edge. Current is the torque were watts are the horsepower so high current amps usually have better control over a speaker. 

I really need to try out the amps in the Denon to see how they compare, I actually have it hooked up to an amp that puts out 400 into 8 and 700 into 4. I am interested in seeing if the amps are bad or people are just making a big fuss since the denon is not heavy enough for them. I am going to guess that the Denon's amps are fine but the proof will be in the listening.


----------



## steve1616

Mike,

I have multi-channel inputs which would allow me to have DTS-HD or TrueHD, but at a price premium. It cost an average of 100 to 200 dollars more to get the blue ray players that have multichannel outs. A year ago it was only about $50 price premium. I don't even mind this setup because I would rather have my video signal go straight into the tv without any other interferance. The Denon amps actually look better than a lot of receivers I have seen, just very puny compared to my sunfire. I agree that the current is what is important. Any amp can up its rail voltage and test out great, but not any amp can swing the amperage into low impedance loads.  

I firmly believe what the audio critic has been saying for many years. If an amp has a linear frequency response, low distortion, low output impedance, and can do well on the cube test, then you can't tell a difference in listening performance unless there is clipping present. I have done some double blind tests on some very low end and high end amps, and I sure couldn't pick A from B. My speakers say that they are a 8 ohm impedance, but measure at 3.6 ohms static resistance. They take a decent amount of power at high listening levels only. I really think the Denon might be able to handle this, especially if you can bridge 2 channels. I am only scared of the scenario where the Denon can't handle them. Otherwise, it is a no brainer because I save $600 by not having to buy the AS-EQ1. If I could sell my sunfire for $1200 and put the money I was going to spend on the AS-EQ1 towards the Denon, I would still have $350 extra in my pocket that I could put towards the XPA-2. 

This way definitely seems more future proof. The only thing that would scare me a little is that there are sunfire followers that will always give some money for my sunfire receiver. After the technology is dried up in the Denon, who would want it?


----------



## steve1616

Then again, the performance on the Denon might make it so that I want it. It has enough things on it that I would think that it would hold up for a long time in the technology department. Maybe 3D sound is coming, but who knows. 






steve1616 said:


> Mike,
> 
> I have multi-channel inputs which would allow me to have DTS-HD or TrueHD, but at a price premium. It cost an average of 100 to 200 dollars more to get the blue ray players that have multichannel outs. A year ago it was only about $50 price premium. I don't even mind this setup because I would rather have my video signal go straight into the tv without any other interferance. The Denon amps actually look better than a lot of receivers I have seen, just very puny compared to my sunfire. I agree that the current is what is important. Any amp can up its rail voltage and test out great, but not any amp can swing the amperage into low impedance loads.
> 
> I firmly believe what the audio critic has been saying for many years. If an amp has a linear frequency response, low distortion, low output impedance, and can do well on the cube test, then you can't tell a difference in listening performance unless there is clipping present. I have done some double blind tests on some very low end and high end amps, and I sure couldn't pick A from B. My speakers say that they are a 8 ohm impedance, but measure at 3.6 ohms static resistance. They take a decent amount of power at high listening levels only. I really think the Denon might be able to handle this, especially if you can bridge 2 channels. I am only scared of the scenario where the Denon can't handle them. Otherwise, it is a no brainer because I save $600 by not having to buy the AS-EQ1. If I could sell my sunfire for $1200 and put the money I was going to spend on the AS-EQ1 towards the Denon, I would still have $350 extra in my pocket that I could put towards the XPA-2.
> 
> This way definitely seems more future proof. The only thing that would scare me a little is that there are sunfire followers that will always give some money for my sunfire receiver. After the technology is dried up in the Denon, who would want it?


----------



## Kal Rubinson

steve1616 said:


> Maybe 3D sound is coming, but who knows.


It has been here for a while. :bigsmile:


----------



## recruit

Kal Rubinson said:


> It has been here for a while. :bigsmile:


Yes and instead of glasses you get Headphones instead :bigsmile:


----------



## Kal Rubinson

recruit said:


> Yes and instead of glasses you get Headphones instead :bigsmile:


No need for the headphones since, unlike 3D video, there's no time-sharing involved.


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

No, I haven't gotten the system to sound 'just as good' in the bass as with the AS-EQ1 in the mix. I think the difference is with the Denon, I can only take 8 measurement positions and with the AS-EQ1 you can take 32 (and I use all of them). It just sounds a bit smoother. My thought is that if I get rid of the AS-EQ1 and purchase the Audyssey Pro Kit, then I can do the 32 positions, choose modifications of the curves, and will have better resolution not just in the bass, but across the bandwidth. So, that is the position I'm inclined to go with this and I know I'll always have receivers or a processor with Audyssey which means in the future I only need to purchase the license for that unit as I'll already have the kit. I change things around a lot and re-run Audyssey multiple times so having my own kit would be beneficial (with just the comparisons of my NAD and Denon unit, I re-ran Audyssey over 10 time each within a month).


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

I like your thinking. That makes a lot of sense to me. I thought that the licensing had to be purchased with the kit. I thought the kit ran about 500. What does just the licensing cost? I have talked to a couple of people locally that bought the pro upgrade of audyssey, and they said that it is night and day difference over what came standard in their receiver, but I don't know if their receivers had xt 32 or just multi eq xt or if it even matters. Ed Mullen at SVS said that the pro version is amazing, and that it is a huge upgrade in receivers. 

I just wish my sunfire had audyssey because I took my cover off of my amp sections, and they are quite impressive. They have the same amount of output devices per channel that the original 400 watt/channel sunfires had. The later 400 watt sunfires came with double, but this is quite impressive for a receiver. I just know that it would be easy to install audyssey in an older receiver along with codecs, and etc, but it is better for the audio world not to so that new products will sell.


----------



## steve1616

Ray

I was also wondering why you couldn't have just added audyssey pro to your Nad. Does the pro kit come with a way to calibrate 2 subs on a pre xt 32 receiver?


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

Sunfire has always made great amps, have always liked them a lot. I also like NAD, but the price becomes prohibited at times. Yes, you only have to buy a license per unit once if you have a access to the pro kit. I want my own pro kit as if you hire someone to do it, they will charge you the license fee (that goes to Audyssey) and appropriate service fee to do the service. With as many times as I will be doing the calibrations, it's smarter for me just to purchase a kit.

The pro kit does not add SubEQ to a non SubEQ receiver, which is why I purchased the AS-EQ1 (I have two subs and it makes a HUGE difference with more than one sub). At the time, the only units that could do this is the SVS unit and the equivalent one from Audyssey. No pre- XT32 receiver can do this. With XT32 and SubEQ added, a pro-kit would add a lot of resolution to the calibration process. If only the subs need that resolution, then the AS-EQ1 will do the job just fine (some have pretty impressive rooms that won't need that much correction - but there is no 'perfect' room out there in the real world, so IMO everyone can use the power of Audyssey EQ (or Trinnov -which I heard is very good but have not listened to yet, supposed to correct in both the freq and time domain like Audyssey with more choices in preference room curves). I've gotten very used to the corrected room with Audyssey that I no longer prefer 'preferences', there's just more detail IMO in the music and movies when the room is corrected with Audyssey (of course, physical correction first - placement/room treatment). 

Let us know what route you go. It'll be interesting to see what you choose and what you think of it.


----------



## cavchameleon

HAPPY NEW YEAR to you all!!! Have a very safe one!!!


----------



## steve1616

Thanks for the information Ray. It sounds like the XT 32 is a huge bargain compared to older versions of audyssey. It looks like XT-32 not only offers way more resolution, but it also comes with many more features such as sub eq. I agree that it is cost prohibitive to upgrade to anything newer for my sunfire. That is why I am so disheartened that my best route probably involves giving up my Sunfire. The insides of my sunfire are far superior to the Denon, but the denon has the processing I prefer. I have waited my whole life to have a piece of equipment like my Sunfire. I only have it because I found a great deal on it. Its not often that you get to buy a high end piece of equipment for about 1/5th of the normal price. I have seen the inside of the Denon 4311 from pictures on the internet, and it uses the common day cheap mosfets and hexfets whereas my sunfire uses high grade discrete circuitry with bipolar transistors, and high grade capacitors. In fact this is my first piece I have really wanted from sunfire because they have finally gotten a lot cleaner with the amps outputs, and they finally used higher grade circuitry than their past preamps. I think audioholics is to thank for this for pointing out how cheap some of the components were in their past pre amps. An oppo BDP-93 would give me my high resolution audio formats, but nothing can be done about audyssey. That is why I am going to see what I can get from my sunfire, and if it is enough, I will buy the Denon with plans to upgrade to pro audyssey, and probably get an emotiva amp to suppliment its power if I am not satisfied with the internal amps. 

This thread has been very helpful to me because I can see just how important XT-32 is over previous versions of audyssey.


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

I'm in the same boat at you. I went from the NAD T785 which weighs 65lbs compared to the 32lbs of the Denon. And, yes, the insides are much better (2 toroidal trannys, built very well) and it was upgradable with new cards. The catch was that the cards are more expensive than just buying the Denon. So, my NAD is going up for sale, along with the AS-EQ1. I'll miss it a lot, like you, it was one of my 'dream machines' built like a tank. Take a look at the NAD site, there are pics of the inside - like you Sunfire, it's pretty impressive. Even the metal casing of the NAD is much more stout than the Denon (feels a bit flimsy on the top). But, it came down to processing - the Denon is very hard to beat in that area for the price. I did augment the front three speakers with an Emotiva as I mentioned earlier. It'll depend on your speakers sensitivity. Mine are not so sensitive, so it makes a difference at reference levels.

I have the BDP-83 as my main source unit (am looking at the 93 also). Very impressive unit - it's served me well for almost a year.


----------



## sub_crazy

There is someone on the AVS selling a Audyssey sound eq here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/vbclassified.php?do=ad&id=14861

The problem is you still have to buy the Pro kit for about $500 on top of the price for this so it will be close to $1,000 total. Still much cheaper than buying new though.


----------



## steve1616

It says that this will work with pre ins. So can I put it between lets say the oppo bdp-93 and my analogue inputs? I can then run everything through the oppo.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

steve1616 said:


> It says that this will work with pre ins. So can I put it between lets say the oppo bdp-93 and my analogue inputs? I can then run everything through the oppo.


You can but it will only process from that source and not any others.


----------



## steve1616

Does this sound equalizer have the same resolution for the subwoofer as the as-eq1, and then also allow to room correct for the other speakers as well? I can run everything through the Oppo bdp-93 very easily because it has built in bass management and time delay and it is basically a media center. The Oppo can handle dvds, blu rays, flash drives, computer hookup, netflix, etc. so I can't think of anything that I can't run through it other than video games which isn't a big deal to me. It would also future proof me because it is easier to upgrade the blu ray player rather than a preamp or receiver.

Also, is $500 a great deal on the sound equalizer? It looks like you don't need a license for the sound equalizer so does this mean I can update it to all the newest filter resolutions?


----------



## Kal Rubinson

steve1616 said:


> Does this sound equalizer have the same resolution for the subwoofer as the as-eq1, and then also allow to room correct for the other speakers as well?


Nope. I use mine with the Audyssey BassEQ (equivalent to the AS-EQ1). 



> Also, is $500 a great deal on the sound equalizer?


Yes, if it suits your needs.



> It looks like you don't need a license for the sound equalizer so does this mean I can update it to all the newest filter resolutions?


It is what it is and no updates, AFAIK. You will have to buy the Pro kit to run it.

Kal


----------



## steve1616

Thank you very much for the informative reply. I was only interested in the sound equalizer if it provided for the resolution of the AS-EQ1 for the sub along with capability to pro equalize the other speakers as well with that same high resolution.

One thing I am starting to notice is that I am too interested in specs that should theoretically be way better, but in reality are not what I am wanting. For example, last night my family and I watched two movies. One was a blu ray and the other was just a DVD. I played both of them on my playstation 3. Even my wife commented that she thought the blu ray was suppose to be better quality, but it just wasn't in the case of the 2 movies we watched. The blu ray version of the movie "salt" seems to be a poor quality recording, while the movie "despicable me" seems to be a good quality dvd. I did many comparisons last night, and for the most part I could tell that the blu ray was a lot better in quality when I was 3 feet away from my 46" tv. The problem is that my recliner and sofa are 10 feet and 13 feet away from the tv, and I wasn't able to pick one from the other consistently at all. My wife was also getting tired of switching back and forth. 
I also wonder how much cheaper these room eq's will be in 5 years when there is more competition, and more features. I am sure all this stuff are good upgrades, but will I ever miss it if I don't experience it. I have changed my mind at least a dozen times, but maybe I should just be happy with what I have. I have found a way to get a brand new AS-EQ1 very cheap, and I know that equalizing the bass is the biggest improvement just from using the PEQ on my SVS PB13-ultra. I am not found wanting in any way with my current setup, and the biggest improvement that I could make would be a better set of front speakers so I will probably just save for those. 

I am very interested in the audyssey full room correction, but I think I will just enjoy my sunfire for now. I listen at very high volumes for movies, and my sunfire never gives it a second thought where my previous receivers liked to clip at these levels.


----------



## sub_crazy

That's a big upgrade right there that we could all learn from, just being satisfied with what we have instead of always chasing better. 

Good for you Steve, I should use you as an example to cure my upgraditus:T


----------



## tcarcio

steve1616 said:


> I have found a way to get a brand new AS-EQ1 very cheap .


Care to share how?????


----------



## steve1616

I probably used the wrong wording because it still isn't super cheap, but way cheaper than normal. I know someone who bought one on black friday with 2 subs for the $499 special. He already has an AS-EQ1 so he will sell the new one to me, and if I don't like it, he will take it back. I think on black friday the ad said 599 as-eq1 if bought with a plus sub or higher, and a $499 as-eq1 when bought with 2 subs. SVS won't budge on their prices except for this black friday deal. This is a good deal, and a price I can live with. I think this will help my current setup a lot, and I will be done spending for the year.


----------



## tcarcio

steve1616 said:


> I probably used the wrong wording because it still isn't super cheap, but way cheaper than normal. I know someone who bought one on black friday with 2 subs for the $499 special. He already has an AS-EQ1 so he will sell the new one to me, and if I don't like it, he will take it back. I think on black friday the ad said 599 as-eq1 if bought with a plus sub or higher, and a $499 as-eq1 when bought with 2 subs. SVS won't budge on their prices except for this black friday deal. This is a good deal, and a price I can live with. I think this will help my current setup a lot, and I will be done spending for the year.


That is a great deal. If you decide not to buy it and he still wants to sell it let me know. Or if you buy it and decide you don't like it I would be interested in taking it off your hands. Thanks.


----------



## steve1616

I'll let you know. I am definitely going to try it out, and see if I like it. I am hoping it is as good as everyone has been saying. I have been wanting to buy one for 2 years, but just couldn't justify the price. I'm going to pick it up in a couple of days, so I will pm you and let you know if I am going to keep it.


----------



## tcarcio

steve1616 said:


> I'll let you know. I am definitely going to try it out, and see if I like it. I am hoping it is as good as everyone has been saying. I have been wanting to buy one for 2 years, but just couldn't justify the price. I'm going to pick it up in a couple of days, so I will pm you and let you know if I am going to keep it.


Great, Thanks. I really don't have much doubt that you will like it though.


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve, good thinking! Yes the bass is the most important part to correct, I think you'll like the AS-EQ1 a lot once you get it all set up. I agree with Mike that it's good to be satisfied with your current setup, keeps from spending too much money. 

On another note, not all bluray discs use the newer codecs. Also you need to compare the same movie on DVD and Bluray at the same time to compare (I did this with a couple movies and yes, you can notice the difference on some movies but not all. Some do not even use the newer codecs (like Swordfish - just plane Dolby Digital on their bluray version). I have a few DVDs that I upgraded because I like them a lot and got the blurays for pretty cheap on sale, so comparing was pretty fun.

I also have to agree with your thinking on saving up on better speakers - they should come first if the ones you have are lacking, much better upgrade than room correction. It should always be speakers first (including correct placement), decent equipment (you already have this), room treatment, then electronic correction. It could be argued that room treatment should be first, but I put it 3rd as it's not always possible, especially with WAF. 

TC, if you are not able to acquire an AS-EQ1 (i.e. Steve want's to keep his or you find one elsewhere), PM me interested as I'll be selling mine - less than a year old and kept in a dedicated HEPA filtered room. Since I have XT32 with SubEQ, it's a bit redundant.


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

I never compared the audio between DVD and blu ray. I only compared the video because I need to get a blu ray player with analogue outs to take advantage of the new audio codecs. I also feel that my eyes are less deceiving than my ears. The blu rays that we have also came with a DVD copy so I was comparing the same movies. Some of the movies I compared were Ice Age, Iron man, Transformers 2, and another kids movie which rains food out of the air that I can't think of right now. The only problem that I noticed is the blu rays take some time to load which can skew perception a little so I eventually just put the DVD in my pioneer DVD player so that I could toggle back and forth quickly. I did notice that most of the blu rays were better in quality from a couple feet away, but I never could tell them apart consistently from where I sit. I could tell Ice age apart for some reason a couple of times, but it was because the color red was a different shade in the blu ray player. 

This comparison of video is what brought things into perspective for me because it is suppose to be a huge jump in quality from blu ray to DVD, and I couldn't tell the difference from where I sit. I remember testing this before when I first got my playstation 3. I can remember concluding the same thing back then, also. This is why we seem to stay with DVD's. If I can't tell the difference (or much of a difference) from where I sit, then I might as well take advantage of the fact that I can make backups much cheaper for the DVDs and I can buy the DVD cheaper as well. Backup copies come in handy with four young kids.

It isn't that I don't think that I will gain performance with all around room eq's or updated codecs. It's just that I want to spend the money where the jumps in performance are the biggest. I also am a bit of a research nut before buying anything, and I just need to enjoy the music and my kids instead of spending so many hours on the internet researching when most of the information that I get will be only opinions. Since my next purchase will be speakers, hopefully I can keep my research to a minimum. I will say that I went to an audio shop years ago and was absolutely impressed with some speakers called anthony gallo 3.1.

I was very impressed also with some B & W speakers, but then I saw the price. I have also noticed the the sunfire ribbon speakers have gotten some high praise. 

I really appreciate everyones advice because that is the only reason I feel confident about trying out the 
AS-EQ1.


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

What are you using for your display? Is it 1080P? When I had a 50" display, the difference was harder to tell (so for most family and friends, I do mention to them that if the display is under 50", 1080p is not really necessary - 720P looks just as good). Now, when I changed over to a 65" display (1080P plasma), the difference was pretty noticeable, even at our seating distance which is 8 feet (and very noticeable if using a non-bluray DVD player, if using something like the OPPO BDP-83 which has excellent upscaling, then some DVD movies approach the bluray quality). Like you, I used another DVD player (a Denon which upscaled to 1080p and toggled between that and the bluray version. The biggest differences were on dark scenes and also those with a lot of vibrant colors. 

I agree with your philosophy - if you can't really benefit from the difference, save the money and have greater convenience (I know my brother when your route as he puts all his DVD's on a server and streams it to the rest of the house - makes a big difference when streaming only 4.7gb compared to 25-50gb). I also still purchase DVD versions unless I can get the bluray for real cheap (I've purchased many for $5 and even some big ones like Iron Man for only $8, so worth it). 

I also agree that it's best to spend money on the biggest jumps in performance and speakers are really at the top of the list. Those you will need to spend some time listening to as there is a lot of subjectiveness in speakers. I have listened to both Anthony Gallo and B&W's (there is a good dealer here for them). Like you, I the price was a bit steep and I ended up with NHT's, Classic series for now. I found the Classic Fours to match the B&W's in sound pretty close (at a fraction of the <$10,000 for the pair that I compared them to, the 802Ds). For me, the difference in sound was not that big (IMO). And yes, they were compared to each other in the same room on the same equipment - level matched. Now, the B&W's were beautiful pieces of art and well made, much more expensive materials - but the bottom line for me was price to performance ratio and I pretty much got the performance I wanted at a fraction of the cost.

As for ribbon speakers, I like the sound of a lot of them, but most of them I have listened to have smaller 'listening windows'/dispersion in the vertical plane. Many are extremely nice though - I haven't listened to the Sunfires. Martin Logans are very impressive (Audio Advisor has them on sale at the moment if you are looking at these). 

Good luck on your search - it can be a fun one. Family is more important to spend time with (I know I love to spend time with my 4yo son), so working around that and 'work', it can be hard to find time for hobbies. My son already loves listening to music so I can drag him to shops at times (he's already becoming a techie :laugh.


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

I just saw your post and wanted to let you know that my screen is 1080P, but it is only a 46". This is definitely probably the reason for my experience as that would make a lot of sense. , I wonder if that is the real reason I went with a 46". I viewed some 55" tvs, and they all seemed so pixilated. Maybe that was because the source material wasn't good enough that was playing through the tv. I also wanted to keep it a bit smaller so I didn't bring out any more motion blur in the LCD. I could see this plainly with special test cds. All this being said, Wallmart had a special store deal that had the good Sony 46" tv ( a higher grade than walmart carries) and the ps3 combo for $850, and I like cheap. The tv in the package was retailing at sears and online for about $1700. 

This story actually relates very well because my 15 year old 27" tv blew up last year, and I researched for a few weeks and found that reviews rated the plasma as being superior to any lcd. When I got the combo deal from walmart, I wasn't satisfied and was thinking about taking it back because all my research indicated that the plasma was far superior. So off I went to sears to test the exact panasonic tv that got all the great reviews, and I was very lucky because the tv I got from walmart was right beside it. I played many test cds, and some source material and was very suprised by the outcome. The sony lcd showed a small amount of blur on the tests, but the plasma showed just as much blur with phosphor trail. I did notice that some lcds were very blurry in comparison to either of these tvs so it seemed that lcds can be very different in quality. I guess my big point is that there was suppose to be a big advantage for the plasma over the lcd in my research, but in this case I couldn't see a gain at all. In fact the plasma I wanted had a very weird green color that looked bad. I would not have ever bought this tv from my research, but I am very happy that this is what I ended up with. I wish I had an audio store close to me so that I could just go listen to speakers, but the closest one is almost 2 hours away.

I will start a separate thread about speakers later, because I have already gotten off the subject of what this thread was originally about. Sorry! My brother ended up with NHT speakers also, good bang for the buck. I am very skeptical of the sunfires because they are so small, but have gotten great reviews. I haven't ever heard any Martin Logans, and I wonder how svs speakers compare because the PB13-ultra I bought 2 years ago changed the way I watch movies. What a great experience. I don't believe anything will ever make as big of a difference on my audio experience as my subwoofer has made.


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

That's strange that the Plasma had a green color, it might not have been calibrated correctly. Also, most Plasmas do not have motion blur. I have several LCD's in house and the one Plasma. Yes, LCD's do very greatly in quality. When comparing, I did prefer the Plasma for movie watching, but for the most part I think the majority of people can use either and be totally happy with what they have. You got a Great deal on yours, so that's a keeper! And, at 46", you most likely won't see any difference between bluray and standard DVD (from your viewing position). With good material, you might. I know with the plasma, I can be a couple inches away from it, and it's very clear with bluray material. But, if you're looking at over-the-air standard channels (I don't do that, but tried it), since everything is 'bigger' the picture actually looks terrible. So the point is, IMO, if you have a large display (>50"), you really need decent source material: bluray or DVD upscaled correctly.

Not a big deal being off topic as it's all related. Speakers are definitely part of this thread as they are the bottom line in the end (the correction with Audyssey in your room). I love my NHT's, but there are many other choices and you may prefer something else. SVS does make great speakers (high quality drivers and build) so I'm sure you'll do well with them. Both NHT and SVS have good return policies if you want to try them out. Yes, the sub really does add that 'theater' experience! I can't argue with that. ML speakers are very 'transparent', but can be harder at placement and room contribution. Since the sound comes from the front and back, the back wall can make a huge difference (material, treatment, furniture, etc.). But, when dialed in, they are amazing! Were you able to listen to your brother's NHT's much? Also, how about other ID companies (since you are not close to any dealers) - such as AperionAudio or Accend Acoustics, and others. Good luck in your search and keep us posted.

Ray


----------



## steve1616

I know that plasma tvs don't have motion blur, but when I was testing, I could see a phosphor trail so it didn't seem like as big of an advantage as I had hoped it would be. I never saw any blur of any kind on either style of tv in normal program material. 

I have heard my brothers NHT ST-4 speakers many times and they sound pretty good. I compared them to my DCM KX12 series 2, and they sound very similar. My DCM's are very bright and were a touch more bright than his NHT speakers on the tweeter. My DCM's have better bass, but this isn't a big deal with a good sub. I do like his speakers, but feel like his speakers are very similar sounding to mine. My brother felt ripped off when he bought his speakers because I brought my speakers up to his house to compare, and he was amazed how similar they sounded. I definitely prefer his tweeter, but the similarity in sound is amazing. High end reviewers would probably hate my speakers because they bring out every detail and can be annoying, but they do everything well except for imaging. I bought a center channel and rear surrounds from DCM a couple of years later to complete my set, but DCM had changed speaker designs. The center and surrounds that I have are absolutely terrible. Voices seem hard the understand and unclear with my center channel. I have heard that dolby hd and dts hd make the center channel better, but my center channel just needs to be replaced. 

My brother took me to an audio shop a long time ago because he wanted to better his NHT's. We went to several rooms, and the anthony gallo speakers were the only ones that just really stood out. I have always wondered if the reason they stood out was because of the electrostatic tweeter. The problem is that "standing out" can just be a difference and can make something seem better even if it is not. I have always liked the audio critic because he seemed to point out so many misconceptions in the audio industry. Naturally I would like to try the speakers that he fell in love with, but I don't think I could ever pay that kind of money for the Orion speakers. They make the Anthony Gallo speakers seem cheap since I think they want like $8,000 for a pair of the Orion speakers. 

I have thought very hard about making my own speakers, but how do I take them back if they don't sound good? I saw that Dayton audio sells a ribbon tweeter that looks exactly like the one used in the sunfire ribbons. I know that peerless makes the woofers for SVS MTS series, and I can buy those also, but I am worried that I will screw everything up with the crossover network or mismatch dimensions to the woofers and tweeters. I would really love to make my own speakers if I could make something way better than I can buy already put together at a similar price.


----------



## steve1616

I forgot to add that my brother's mother in law and father in law just bought the sts-02s from SVS, so I will get a chance to hear those up close to my brother's NHT's. They are suppose to get their speakers tomorrow.


----------



## JohnJSmith

I got my Denon AVR-4311ci in today, and I had big hopes for the SubEQ. I have a pair of MFW-15's, and making them work together was challenging. Here's where I started with my old Onkyo HT-RC160 and Audyssey 2EQ:










There was a null right around 60 hz. Through trial and error with the phase adjustments, I eventually dialed it out. Still not pretty:










So today I hooked up the 4311, put the subs back in phase, and ran the XT32 setup. I played the first few minutes of Iron Man and immediately noticed the bass response was way down. Here's why:










It looks nice under 30 hz, but goes downhill from there. The 60hz null is back, and I got an even bigger one at 48 hz.  So XT32 is not magic for dual subwoofers, and I will go back to trial and error with the phase adjustments.


----------



## steve1616

I wonder if something is wrong? It looks like your onkyo was doing a better job.


----------



## JohnJSmith

steve1616 said:


> I wonder if something is wrong? It looks like your onkyo was doing a better job.


Yeah, I'm a bit surprised. I put the phase back where I had it on the subs and got rid of the 60 hz null again last night. It improved the 48 hz null, but didn't eliminate it. I'll re-run the XT32 setup tonight with the manual phase adjustment in place and see how it looks.


----------



## cavchameleon

Wow John, 

That looks pretty bad at the 50Hz range. Let us know if re-running it helps. Audyssey is suppose to take care of any phase anomalies (all settings of the sub are supposed to be at '0' before running Audyssey). Seems strange. Let us know how it pans out.

Ray


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

That would be great for you to hear the SVS system, great opportunity. Also, I had the ST4's back then (with the SB's for the other speakers) from NHT. The new Classic series is a big step up from that series, so if you have a chance to listen to some it would give you a better idea of the new NHT's (when I listened to the Classic series, I right away put my ST4's up for sale).

Now, if you have the time and equipment to build your own speakers, then go for it. It's been a while since I've made my own. There are many here that can guide you if you want to go that route. With the current software available, it's much easier now, especially with the crossover design (I would consider this to be the most important part of the speaker to sound right) and also box design. The DIY route can really be rewarding, even though trying at times. I don't have the time myself to jump in, especially to make speakers that would pass the WAF tests (and probably not for much cheaper than the NHT's). But, when it comes to using very high end drivers and making a good crossover, I'm sure you can make a great speaker for a fraction of the cost of a lot of high end designs out there.


----------



## laser188139

JohnJSmith said:


> ... So XT32 is not magic for dual subwoofers, and I will go back to trial and error with the phase adjustments.


There are some situations where Audyssey doesn't quite get the distance/time calculation right for single subs. I don't think they have enough data yet to understand exactly what about the sub construction, position, and room situation can make this happen. I found this after I moved my Hsu sub to a new position, and I used REW to do some tuning of the distance. 

It wouldn't surprise me if the same could happen with two subs, that something about the room or sub could give Audyssey an impulse response that is misleading it into a distance that is slightly off. 

Bill


----------



## cavchameleon

^^^ Good Post! Yes, speaker position, measurement position, room boundaries, furniture (reflective/absorptive), can all create issues with correction.


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

I will give the new NHT's a listen to. I want to build my own speaker, but I know that my time is hard to come by, and I have learned that I am better off paying for certain things. I remodeled my whole bathroom, and I was proud of myself for saving all that money. I then realized that I could have put the 50 man hours toward my own job, and made more money than it would have cost to hire a professional who could have done the bathroom remodel in half the time. I am sure my quality of work is better, but I sure didn't save the money I initially thought.


----------



## JohnJSmith

I did some more debugging tonight. 

I tested each sub individually, and the right one seems to be the source of the problem. I turned on the real time analyzer and played a tone at the null point while turning the phase adjustment knob, but it didn't have any significant impact.

With both subs running, I was a bit surprised to see that the null was still there even with Audyssey disabled, but then I remembered one more change. During the setup, Audyssey had me turn the gain down quite a bit on the right sub. When I put it back at the previous level with both subs at the same gain, the curve went back to where I expected it.

Here's what it looks like with the right sub hot. 










I don't think the peak at 60 hz will sound great, so I set the LPF at 60 hz and got this, which I think I'll like better:










That doesn't look great to me, but at least there isn't a 36 db drop in the middle.  I'll have to plug the fronts back in and run a couple of blu-rays through to see how it sounds now. I think my next step will be to order a really long RCA cable and put the right sub in the back of the room.

Side note for AVR-4311ci users: when testing with REW and the aux input, you'll need to go to Manual Setup -> Audio Setup -> 2ch Direct/Stereo, and change the setting to "Custom." From there change SW Mode to LFE+Main and set the crossover, which defaults to 40 hz. I assume that's so you can keep your subs on LFE-only mode for digital inputs and still have the subs play for stereo inputs.

Also, the manual eq is kind of lame. You can copy settings from Audyssey, but only the "Audyssey Flat" curve, which isn't what I want. Also, 63 hz is the lowest frequency you can adjust.


----------



## Sonnie

Interesting thread... being that I previously owned the NAD T785 and just ordered the 4311 to try out with my XPA-1'a and XPA-3. I am very interested in how well the XT32 with the Sub EQ HT will fair with my quad sub setup, two front and two rear.



Ray... that A100 looks sweet... :T

How big is your room? You stated you have not tried the DSX since your room is too small. This is something else I think will be interesting to experiment with in my room, being as large as it is.



John... I am curious as to how that response sounds. It doesn't really look that bad to me. I may have missed it, but have you ran a sweep with your mains on to see if that might effect that area in the 60-70Hz range? Granted, if you could knock that down you would have a pretty good looking house curve if you are looking for that, but with that bump there, it might add a bit of kick and punch to the bass. Again... looking forward to your findings.

Now you guys got me following yet another thread... thread subscription #116 :rolleyesno:


----------



## JohnJSmith

Sonnie said:


> John... I am curious as to how that response sounds. It doesn't really look that bad to me. I may have missed it, but have you ran a sweep with your mains on to see if that might effect that area in the 60-70Hz range? Granted, if you could knock that down you would have a pretty good looking house curve if you are looking for that, but with that bump there, it might add a bit of kick and punch to the bass. Again... looking forward to your findings.


It actually sounds pretty good now! When I plugged the mains in, the SPL between 100 and 150 hz was peaking higher than the SPL from 35-55 hz, which I didn't want for a house curve. The perceived volume from the subs was too low in relation to the perceived volume from the fronts. Audyssey had set the subs at -8 and -8.5, so I bumped them up to 0 and -0.5, then lowered the master volume until the bass curves were pretty close again.

I could have adjusted the master around a bit to line the bass curves up better, but this illustrates what I'm talking about pretty well. The green line is where I left off last night.










The punch is back in the explosion at 2:30 of Iron Man, and the ship's entry into atmosphere at 10:00 of Serenity is just mind blowing.

I should also say that while I'm having trouble with the subs, the rest of the system does sound excellent. The surround effects are noticeably more immersive than with the old receiver. Overall I'm pleased with the purchase.


----------



## cavchameleon

John,

I'm glad you were able to resolve your issue and are happy with the results. It's actually hard to truly compare the finding so REW and Audyssey since Audyssey does an averaging over all the measurement points.

Also remember that Audyssey corrects in the Time Domain, which IMO is just as important than the EQ portion, if not more so. In any case, your real world curve looks pretty good. Enjoy!!!


----------



## cavchameleon

Steve,

I agree with you. I also don't have a lot of time to have fun with DIY projects (put enough time just playing with what I have already). I'm actually in the middle of a bathroom re-model myself (yes, DIY) and am almost finished. I'm also wondering if I just should have hired someone. I have to do our other bathroom once done with this one and may just hire it out.

Let us know what you finally end up with in your speaker quest...


----------



## cavchameleon

Sonnie,

Yep, XT32 and SUBEQ are pretty sweet. I'm sure you'll find it very useful for your room. The good thing about this unit is that you can set it in full 'Pre-Amp Mode' since you'll be driving your speakers with the Emotivas, so you'll only be using the unit as a pre-processor. It's great for that purpose.

My room is pretty small, only 12' x 11' which is why I heavily treated it. I actually did some re-arranging of the room's front last night, so funny that you asked about DSX. I'm actually going to try the Wides using some extra NHT's I have (Classic AZ's that will match the rest of the system). From what I've been reading, Wides offer the best improvement (over Rears or Heights). I should have it dialed in by tomorrow if I can have time to finalize the setup (some re-arranging of the room in order to fit these in). I'll give my views on it once I have time to play with it enough on both movies and music. 

Good to have you on this thread!

Ray


----------



## Sonnie

Ahhh... yeah... that is somewhat small, but at least you got a man room, which is what counts. :bigsmile:

I am not sure how feasible it will be for me to place speakers on the sides for the wides... with me having to plug in an electrostatic speaker and no receptacle nearby. I would have to get creative. DSX may be a moot point for me.

Do you know if anyone has verified for a fact that the mic in the Pro Kit is actually any different than what is included with the 4311? Even at my cost of $325, that is still a lot for that kit when really the only benefit would be the mic, if that is even a benefit.


John... have you tried Dynamic EQ and measured it? If you get a chance to post some Audyssey graphs on the graph thread, that would be great. Maybe a before and then after Audyssey, Flat and Dynamic EQ. --- Did you say something about moving one of your subs to the back? What are their current locations?


----------



## cavchameleon

Sonnie,

Yes, small room (do have pics here so you can actually see how small). But, with the treatment, sounds great and I 'do' have a dedicated man cave, so I love it.

Not sure DSX would really be of benefit for your setup since your ML's have incredible dispersion - your front sound stage is most likely already completely filled in (and sounds awesome). That would be a question for Chris from Audyssey (you can actually ask him on the Audyssey web site).

As far as the Pro Kit, I'm also thinking of getting one. The mic is not the same, much better (it's a boom mic that is calibrated to be accurate within 1db) and you also have the ability to take 32 measurements (as opposed to only 8) and ability to choose different curves with some tweaking (since you use a computer for processing power). From others who have used it, they say it's a very noticeable difference and worth the costs (and for most of us, it's $500 for the kit + $150 for the license).


----------



## eugovector

John,

As you found out, Audyssey isn't magic. At the end of the day you need to start with room treatment and placement, and use Audyssey to iron out the wrinkles.

Conventional wisdom with two subs is exactly what you have done. Identify a couple locations that will work. Starting with one sub, through placement and measurement, get that as flat as you can. Then add the second sub and with both running, position the second one to give you the best results.

Welti gives some recommendations: http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Documents/White Papers/multsubs.pdf

...but most of us have non-rectangular rooms and limited placement options. I've seen a few people recommending a starting point that should work with most rooms: 2 subs, one each placed against the front wall, 1/4 the length of the front wall away from the side walls.

After placement is dialed in, Audyssey XT32 will get you as close to flat as is possible with current EQ technology.


----------



## JohnJSmith

cavchameleon said:


> The good thing about this unit is that you can set it in full 'Pre-Amp Mode' since you'll be driving your speakers with the Emotivas, so you'll only be using the unit as a pre-processor. It's great for that purpose.


The pre-amp outs were a huge factor for me in buying the 4311. I wanted room to grow. You get another two channels by using the pre-outs as well. It's 9.2 with the internal amps and 11.2 with the pre-outs.


----------



## JohnJSmith

Sonnie said:


> John... have you tried Dynamic EQ and measured it? If you get a chance to post some Audyssey graphs on the graph thread, that would be great. Maybe a before and then after Audyssey, Flat and Dynamic EQ. --- Did you say something about moving one of your subs to the back? What are their current locations?


I'll post up some more graphs tonight. :T

This is the front of my living room:










The subs sit on the far left and far right. Those are bass traps in the corners above them. Unfortunately the setup occupies the entire wall, so there's no room to move the subs sideways. The next thing I'd like to try is moving the right sub to the rear of the room. I like the way is sounds now, but it's fun to experiment.


----------



## Sonnie

cavchameleon said:


> Sonnie,
> 
> Yes, small room (do have pics here so you can actually see how small). But, with the treatment, sounds great and I 'do' have a dedicated man cave, so I love it.
> 
> Not sure DSX would really be of benefit for your setup since your ML's have incredible dispersion - your front sound stage is most likely already completely filled in (and sounds awesome). That would be a question for Chris from Audyssey (you can actually ask him on the Audyssey web site).
> 
> As far as the Pro Kit, I'm also thinking of getting one. The mic is not the same, much better (it's a boom mic that is calibrated to be accurate within 1db) and you also have the ability to take 32 measurements (as opposed to only 8) and ability to choose different curves with some tweaking (since you use a computer for processing power). From others who have used it, they say it's a very noticeable difference and worth the costs (and for most of us, it's $500 for the kit + $150 for the license).


You are probably right about the wides with ML's... they indeed present a very wide sound stage now... and already give me a broad presence.

On that Pro Kit... I may be able to help with that... and will check and see.





JohnJSmith said:


> I'll post up some more graphs tonight. :T
> 
> The subs sit on the far left and far right. Those are bass traps in the corners above them. Unfortunately the setup occupies the entire wall, so there's no room to move the subs sideways. The next thing I'd like to try is moving the right sub to the rear of the room. I like the way is sounds now, but it's fun to experiment.


The first time I ever tried moving one of the subs that we had in a dual front sub setup to the back of the room, yielded the flattest response I have ever experienced without any correction applied. You may have to experiment with the phase on the rear sub. It could be a revelation for you.


----------



## JohnJSmith

eugovector said:


> Welti gives some recommendations: http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Documents/White Papers/multsubs.pdf


That's a really good read. So I just need 48 more subs, and I'll be good to go. 

Seriously, though, it looks like opposing corners is one of the better dual sub setups if you can't have them dead center opposing. It will be interesting to see how the openings in my walls affect that. The front left wall has an opening to the dining room, and my rear wall has an opening to the foyer.

Here's what I have now:










And what I'll try:


----------



## steve1616

Sonnie, where did you move my post to. I can't find it in the SVS forums.

Thank You,

Steve


----------



## Sonnie

That my friend... is a very good question. I guess I becoming incompetent in my abilities to do a simple task.

Here is your first post, but I suppose I lost the second one with the images, which hopefully will not be too much trouble for you to upload again... I apologize.


----------



## steve1616

No trouble at all. Thank you for moving it for me. I found out how to post the graphs now, so it will be super fast this time around.


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

I wanted to report that I got the AS-EQ1, and have had mixed problems. I wonder if some software has some bugs on these new units because the sub eq level matches my sub 18 decibals lower than it should. I am definitely concerned, and not happy with this unit so far. I know you said your xt-32 level matched your sub lower than your older AS-EQ1. I am thinking that something is wrong. My brother got a unit just like me from the same batch at SVS. His unit is doing the same thing when we tried it on my system. He hasn't used it on his system yet because he hasn't had time yet.


----------



## steve1616

I forgot to add that the audyssey mic agrees with my SPL meter when using it on the front page of the software, but it strongly disagrees once it is in the calibration process. That doesn't make any logical sense at all.


----------



## JohnJSmith

Just to add some confusion to the fire, I re-ran Audyssey with the subs a bit out of phase, and I got completely different results. The red line in this graph is what XT32 did with both subs at 0 phase. The blue line is running XT32 with the right sub phase adjusted where I had it manually with my old setup. Further phase adjustments after running XT32 have almost no effect.









So if you don't like what XT32 does to your bass response, try adjusting phase prior to running it. 

Whether or not the first curve sounds better than the second, I can't say yet, but at the very least I'm really impressed by just how dramatically XT32 can affect the response.


----------



## Sonnie

You may have to adjust your phase when you move the one sub to the rear, especially if it will be closer to you than the front sub.


----------



## Moonfly

I always advocate the best possible manual setup possible before using Audyssey. This means that if you can use something like REW and having options on your amp for variable phase, and PEQ's, I recommend using them to improve your pre Audyssey response before running the auto eq. In my experience, this always improves the results you will get from Audyssey.

In a multi sub setup, its always important to gain match the subs manually at the seating position to ensure they are properly balanced with each other, and the phase setting can also become more important.


----------



## JohnJSmith

Sonnie said:


> You may have to adjust your phase when you move the one sub to the rear, especially if it will be closer to you than the front sub.


Yeah, no doubt. Fortunately I'm really enjoying playing around with this stuff. 



Moonfly said:


> I always advocate the best possible manual setup possible before using Audyssey. This means that if you can use something like REW and having options on your amp for variable phase, and PEQ's, I recommend using them to improve your pre Audyssey response before running the auto eq. In my experience, this always improves the results you will get from Audyssey.
> 
> In a multi sub setup, its always important to gain match the subs manually at the seating position to ensure they are properly balanced with each other, and the phase setting can also become more important.


I was a bit surprised because I assumed Audyssey's time shifting could make the same magnitude of adjustment as the phase knob and do a better job of it. I assumed I'd see no difference at all in running the configuration with different phase knob settings. These experiments show that's not really the case, though. Too bad there aren't some Audyssey engineers hanging around here to explain the science. 

Getting a bit off topic, how do you go about manually adjusting your subs? I've just been doing trial and error. I leave one sub alone and take multiple measurements at different phase settings on the other one. Ideally I'd get a measurement for every permutation of both subs' knobs, but that would take more patience than I have.

It seems like there should be a way to optimize each sub individually, but there wouldn't be a way to predict how they'd interact with each other. Is there a way to look at the whole frequency range in the RTA so I could move the knobs and watch the results on the screen? I've done that with individual frequencies to try and mitigate nulls, but that doesn't help for the rest of the band.


----------



## cavchameleon

steve1616 said:


> Ray,
> 
> I wanted to report that I got the AS-EQ1, and have had mixed problems. I wonder if some software has some bugs on these new units because the sub eq level matches my sub 18 decibals lower than it should. I am definitely concerned, and not happy with this unit so far. I know you said your xt-32 level matched your sub lower than your older AS-EQ1. I am thinking that something is wrong. My brother got a unit just like me from the same batch at SVS. His unit is doing the same thing when we tried it on my system. He hasn't used it on his system yet because he hasn't had time yet.


Hi Steve,

Yes, when I ran the Xt32 on the AVR, it was lower than running it with the AS-EQ1 (by 4db). The AS-EQ1 balanced all my speakers and subs, verified by using a calibrated SPL meter at the LP. All I'm doing with the XT32 is, after doing the calibration process, I re-set the crossovers (the AVR sets them too low - actually sets my speakers to 'full band', this is not Audyssey's choice, but the maker of the AVR) and then I use my SPL meter to re-set the sub levels (the speakers are within 1db, but the subs are 4db low). 

I'm not sure why you AS-EQ1 is setting it low, did you contact SVS? I don't think that's a deal breaker though, IMO the AS-EQ1's main job is to get the EQ and Time Domain correct. The levels can be easily adjusted in your AVR/Processor to match your mains (or increased above them if you prefer 'hotter bass'). Once I level matched my subs, I like the sound (before that the AVR seemed anemic in the bass). 

I'll check your other thread that Sonnie set up so see you comments there so I can get a better picture of your issue.


----------



## cavchameleon

JohnJSmith said:


> Yeah, no doubt. Fortunately I'm really enjoying playing around with this stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> I was a bit surprised because I assumed Audyssey's time shifting could make the same magnitude of adjustment as the phase knob and do a better job of it. I assumed I'd see no difference at all in running the configuration with different phase knob settings. These experiments show that's not really the case, though. Too bad there aren't some Audyssey engineers hanging around here to explain the science.
> 
> Getting a bit off topic, how do you go about manually adjusting your subs? I've just been doing trial and error. I leave one sub alone and take multiple measurements at different phase settings on the other one. Ideally I'd get a measurement for every permutation of both subs' knobs, but that would take more patience than I have.
> 
> It seems like there should be a way to optimize each sub individually, but there wouldn't be a way to predict how they'd interact with each other. Is there a way to look at the whole frequency range in the RTA so I could move the knobs and watch the results on the screen? I've done that with individual frequencies to try and mitigate nulls, but that doesn't help for the rest of the band.



John,

From what I recall from Chris (one of the founders of Audyssey who frequents the Audyssey thread in the AVSForum site - very large thread) is that the phase settings should always be set to '0' prior to running Audyssey as the software will correct in the Freq and Time Domain. But, you have to remember that Audyssey does an averaging of all measurements points, so in order to get a close equivalent with REW (which would be very hard to compare since the Time Domain is just as important) in the freq range, you will need to take measurements in all the same spots as you did with running Audyssey. Then you would need to average all your plots.

Now, other factors should be taken care of before running Audyssey, mainly: sub and speaker placement (nothing can replace good placement) and room treatment if able to. There has been some discussion here on sub placement and I also in the past read the Welti paper. In my room I found the two best places for 2 subs were: one on each mid-point on opposite walls of the room (but did not work for placement of other equipment/furniture) and 1/4 spaces on the same wall. I chose this configuration and placed the subs on the wall behind the LP at the 1/4 spaces. This worked well, but my room is standard rectangular room as discussed in the Welti paper. If you have odd shapes (L-shaped, valted ceilings, one all opened to another room-then the whole space counts, rounded corners, etc. then I think all bets are off and you'll really need to experiment with other software like REW to optimize the placement. The main issue I see here is you can find a good placement for a lot of freqs, but not all - fixing one by placement can easily ruin another. And when adding more than one sub, it becomes extremely difficult with coupling (both cancellation and additions at specific freqs) although, over all, more than one sub will always help smooth out the bass response IMO. According to the Welti paper, two subs gets pretty close to maximizing the smoothing, 4 subs pretty much gets you there (only by a small margin), and more reaches the point of diminishing returns (not for over all SPl, but for smooth bass response in a rectangular room). I tried 4 in my room and it didn't help at all and since I could already hit reference levels with 2, there was no reason for keeping more boxes in such a small room (if I had a bigger room - then definitely, more would have stayed:bigsmile:.


----------



## cavchameleon

Here's another update on this AVR, now with the DSX portion. I finally tried out adding wides, which are the same speakers as used for my rears (all from the same line of speakers so the timber matches). I tried scenes from many movies and switched back and forth, playing each scene over with wides in and out (it's just a button push - there is a dedicated button for this on the remote). All I have to say is WOW!!! You have got to try this! It really does add a lot to the front sound stage (at least in my setup). You feel totally enveloped in the sound -a much better addition than rears! Now for music with surround (SACD's and DVD Audio discs with surround recorded) it really depended on the music. Sometimes is sounded better and sometimes is distracted (loss in pinpoint imaging - like a slight echo). I did not notice this with movies, the experience was always enhanced with the wides. I'm sold on it. My room is small and it works great. I'm sure with a larger room it may even be more pronounced. I have not tried the heights and probably won't as I don't think I can accommodate them. 

If you have large planar speakers (like ML or Maggies) I'm not sure how this technology would work. Rooms such as Sonnies with large ML may not benefit since those speakers already have incredible dispersion (but it would be interesting to see/hear if there is a difference - although probably cost prohibited for most, in my case it was pretty affordable). 

So, if you can, just try it!!! You'll be pleasantly surprised IMO.


----------



## Sonnie

Thanks for the update on the DSX Ray... that sounds like it may be a hit for a lot of home theaters. I was watching Robin Hood last night and thinking about the wides, but as mentioned by both of us already, the ML's are already throwing out such a large (wide) sound stage now that it would probably be negligible in my room. I could even see it potentially making things worse. It won't matter though, it would be too expensive for to trial something like this. Maybe one day when I got some free money lying around I can afford to give it a shot.


----------



## Moonfly

JohnJSmith said:


> I was a bit surprised because I assumed Audyssey's time shifting could make the same magnitude of adjustment as the phase knob and do a better job of it. I assumed I'd see no difference at all in running the configuration with different phase knob settings. These experiments show that's not really the case, though. Too bad there aren't some Audyssey engineers hanging around here to explain the science.
> 
> Getting a bit off topic, how do you go about manually adjusting your subs? I've just been doing trial and error. I leave one sub alone and take multiple measurements at different phase settings on the other one. Ideally I'd get a measurement for every permutation of both subs' knobs, but that would take more patience than I have.
> 
> It seems like there should be a way to optimize each sub individually, but there wouldn't be a way to predict how they'd interact with each other. Is there a way to look at the whole frequency range in the RTA so I could move the knobs and watch the results on the screen? I've done that with individual frequencies to try and mitigate nulls, but that doesn't help for the rest of the band.


The one thing you need to remember is that Audyssey only has so much processing power, only so much filter resolution and only so many filters with which to work. The more you can do to make its job easier the better it can focus its efforts on overall correction. Ive always found I get better results from Audyssey if I help it out first.

When I talk about manual setup, I am talking about getting the best response from your sub you can before you touch Audyssey. Normally you would set phase to 0, but if altering this can improve your response, then my preference has been to do just that. If your sub is at the rear, this can be a bigger help too. The important things are to get the sub in the best spot you possibly can. If you have more available positions, take the time to try them all and find which is best. Then experimental with the phase, which can be time consuming if you have a variable phase knob. Finally, if you have a built in PEQ, dont be afraid to use it, and target it at your biggest problem. 

If you have a couple subs, then it becomes a lot more difficult, especially so if they are non co-located. The best way forward is to find your best spots, then see which of the 2 works best with your speakers before you do anything. Set that one up first, get its phase working well with the speakers and PEQ working well to help with room issues etc. Then do the second sub, integrating it with the first as best you can. Also ensure both subs are gain matched at the listening position, or Audyssey will read one over the other, which will lead to inferior results.

Once you have done all that, then run Audyssey and the results should be as good as they possibly can be, assuming of course you run it correctly. I have always worked this way after a great deal of testing and experimentation, and its always stood me in good stead. I never get bad results from Audyssey, and I often wonder about comments to the contrary.


----------



## JohnJSmith

Thanks, Moonfly. That helps. So I need to look for position first before messing with anything else. Is there a chance I might get the best response by putting the two subs right next to each other? Or stacking them maybe?

Here's another XT32 question: when I run the setup, I get a phase warning for the front L/R and the rear surround L/R. Is Audyssey telling me it thinks the speakers are out of phase with each other? Or in phase with each other but out of phase with the rest of the speakers? The wiring is correct so I assume it's a room effect, and I wonder what (if anything) I should do about it.


----------



## Moonfly

If you have a few available positions for your subs, you should do a quick measure of each sub in the spots available. Dont use the PEQ's etc, just measure the raw response with Audyssey off ans see which is naturally the best. This way you give your self the best start you can. No point starting with a worse position and fixing it with eq only to end up with an inferior end result anyway. Once you got the best spot, then work from there.

Again, if you have 2 subs it gets much harder. You then need to find the best 2 spots and work from there. As you say, you may be as well simply stacking them, but if you have an glaring issues, then the chances are spreading your subs out will help a lot. You need to position your 2 subs, measure them individually and overlay the responses. Your looking for where one response might have a dip, the other has a peak in the same place, so where one sub has a null the other will fill it in, which will result in an overall smoother response before manual adjustments or eq, again helping to get to the very best end result. If you stack and get a fairly smooth response, or at least one with no glaring dips, then be happy to stack them etc.

So to sum up, find the best spot(s), then use all available manual options to improve the response, then complete with auto eq to mop up and remaining issues. This will result in the best response from your subwoofers in your system.

A phase warning is usually telling you there is a problem with the wiring. This could be incorrect poles on the speaker connections, so triple check them, its quite easy to accidentally mix them. Ensure all positives on the amp go to all the positives on the speakers, front and rear. It can also be caused by a poor connection. Make sure all cables well terminated, and if you have any jumper bars on your speaker terminals, ensure they are seated properly. If you bi-amp or bi-wire, ensure they are all correct as well. Those are the majority of the culprits, so hopefully that will fix the phase error report problem.


----------



## eugovector

And with phase and audyssey, remember that you should next re-adjust the subwoofer distance as this, in my understanding, is how audyssey compensated for phase/electronic delay. Now, if you get a distance that is actually shorter than the real distance, this is likely an indicator that you are getting sound transmission through your floor to the mike, rather than through the air. You'll want to isolate the mic stand/tripod that your using from the floor or other surface.


----------



## Sonnie

Moonfly said:


> You need to position your 2 subs, measure them individually and overlay the responses.


No reason to do this... just measure them both together and save time. If the spot works, it works, no reason to waste time measuring two subs and overlaying and trying to figure out if they if they are opposite enough when one measurement will tell if they work together. :T


----------



## Moonfly

I simply like to see how the 2 subs responses work together. Sure you can get away without that step, but I prefer not to so I can see which sub is doing what. If you had one sub with a very bad response and one with pretty good, its entirely possible only one sub would be doing most of the work and this would be the dominant force in the overall response chart, but you wouldnt know it because you cant see the individual plots.

For example, in a theoretical scenario, if you had one sub that was fairly flat throughout its range, with some minimal peaks, but the other had a couple really bad nulls, then you may as well stack your subs for the max spl output and system headroom. If you dont measure the individual responses, which takes a matter of a minute, you simply wouldnt know. It might depend how you are, but I can be pretty obsessive about things like this, which can and do play on my mind. Doing the individual responses and overlay puts my mind completely at rest if nothing else. FWIW, I have seen combinations that would compare with the above scenario.


----------



## Sonnie

Moonfly said:


> I simply like to see how the 2 subs responses work together. Sure you can get away without that step, but I prefer not to so I can see which sub is doing what.


If you want to do this for your own pleasure, you can... but it really ain't that beneficial and is a waste of time.




Moonfly said:


> If you had one sub with a very bad response and one with pretty good, its entirely possible only one sub would be doing most of the work and this would be the dominant force in the overall response chart, but you wouldnt know it because you cant see the individual plots.


This is highly unlikely and will not be an issue when you level match the subs and equalize them together.




Moonfly said:


> For example, in a theoretical scenario, if you had one sub that was fairly flat throughout its range, with some minimal peaks, but the other had a couple really bad nulls, then you may as well stack your subs for the max spl output and system headroom. If you dont measure the individual responses, which takes a matter of a minute, you simply wouldnt know.


I am not sure how you even begin to qualify this statement. The sub itself should be flat within its designed limits, if it ain't, get a new sub. 

If you are referring to having a sub in one part of the room with a few minimal peaks and another sub in another part of the room with bad nulls, you will not know the combined response until you measure the combined response of those two subs in their respective locations. The ONLY way to know if stacked subs will sound better than spreading them out, is to measured the stacked subs together and compare that response to the combined responses you obtain from the combined measurements when they are spread out, not by measuring them individually.


----------



## cavchameleon

Sonnie said:


> Thanks for the update on the DSX Ray... that sounds like it may be a hit for a lot of home theaters. I was watching Robin Hood last night and thinking about the wides, but as mentioned by both of us already, the ML's are already throwing out such a large (wide) sound stage now that it would probably be negligible in my room. I could even see it potentially making things worse. It won't matter though, it would be too expensive for to trial something like this. Maybe one day when I got some free money lying around I can afford to give it a shot.


I've been enjoying it so far - pretty incredible (I think it would be for most direct radiating speakers). As for your ML, I would be very curious how it would work with them, but as you mention, it may be detrimental to the sound - creating some weird echo effects since your speakers already have incredible sound stage ability. Did you already get your AVR? Curious what you think about it with XT32.


----------



## cavchameleon

JohnJSmith said:


> Thanks, Moonfly. That helps. So I need to look for position first before messing with anything else. Is there a chance I might get the best response by putting the two subs right next to each other? Or stacking them maybe?
> 
> Here's another XT32 question: when I run the setup, I get a phase warning for the front L/R and the rear surround L/R. Is Audyssey telling me it thinks the speakers are out of phase with each other? Or in phase with each other but out of phase with the rest of the speakers? The wiring is correct so I assume it's a room effect, and I wonder what (if anything) I should do about it.


John,

Looks like there are already answers on this, just want to add to them. Cris from Audssey noted that, if you do get a phase warning, double check that all connections are correct (as mentioned already) and if they are, just move on to the measurements. There have been a very few cases though where they found some speakers wired wrong internally (done during manufacturing where the leads were just put on the wrong terminal at the speaker), but that was rare. If you feel up to it, you can check this, but for the most part you can ignore the warning if your connections are correct.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Here's another update on this AVR, now with the DSX portion. I finally tried out adding wides, which are the same speakers as used for my rears (all from the same line of speakers so the timber matches). I tried scenes from many movies and switched back and forth, playing each scene over with wides in and out (it's just a button push - there is a dedicated button for this on the remote). All I have to say is WOW!!! You have got to try this! It really does add a lot to the front sound stage (at least in my setup). You feel totally enveloped in the sound -a much better addition than rears! Now for music with surround (SACD's and DVD Audio discs with surround recorded) it really depended on the music. Sometimes is sounded better and sometimes is distracted (loss in pinpoint imaging - like a slight echo). I did not notice this with movies, the experience was always enhanced with the wides. I'm sold on it. My room is small and it works great. I'm sure with a larger room it may even be more pronounced. I have not tried the heights and probably won't as I don't think I can accommodate them.
> 
> If you have large planar speakers (like ML or Maggies) I'm not sure how this technology would work. Rooms such as Sonnies with large ML may not benefit since those speakers already have incredible dispersion (but it would be interesting to see/hear if there is a difference - although probably cost prohibited for most, in my case it was pretty affordable).
> 
> So, if you can, just try it!!! You'll be pleasantly surprised IMO.


You have now got me thinking I need to try out the wides my-self. I have heard that it really is a nice addition and your comments have put me over the top in the need to try it.

I will report back once I can set-it up, probably won't be until this weekend though.

Thanks for the info.


----------



## cavchameleon

Mike,

You have got to try it! Just make sure the speakers used for the Wides match the Fronts as close as possible in timber (from the same line of speakers you are using). It's recommended that they be the same exact speakers, but that would be hard for most to do. In my case, my Fronts are NHT Fours (towers). I tried the Threes (equivalent to the top portion of the Fours for the most part) and the Zeros (smaller brother of the Threes) and the difference was pretty much nil (since they are XO'd to the subs) so I kept the Zeros for the Wides and put the Threes back on surround duty (which I like better there for surround music from SACD's and DVD Audio discs). 

Go to Audyssey's web site on the topic:
http://www.audyssey.com/technology/dsx.html

I played around with the locations a bit and you do need to get it close to get the best effect. The wides should be at about 60deg from the center (Fronts at 45deg). I found that if you are within + of the mark, it sounded the same (at least in my room). 

If you already have the speakers and some wire, then it won't hurt to try it out. I think you'll be surprised with the results. I did some re-arranging of the room to experiment and then had to do some permanent re-arranging as I was hooked right away after playing scenes from several movies, comparing DSX activated and not activated. Don't forget to re-run Audyssey after fully setting it up and re-correcting the XO points (the AVR always gets them too low - or non at all with my speakers except for the smallest ones). 

Have fun with it and report back, curious to hear what you think.


----------



## eugovector

Sorry, nitpicking-warning:

Timbre: 
–noun
1.
Acoustics, Phonetics. the characteristic quality of a sound, independent of pitch and loudness, from which its source or manner of production can be inferred. Timbre depends on the relative strengths of the components of different frequencies, which are determined by resonance.
2.
Music. the characteristic quality of sound produced by a particular instrument or voice; tone color.


----------



## cavchameleon

Marshall,

Thanks for the clarification. Just wanted to note that the speakers should be as close in sound to each other so that they blend well. It's pretty critical for the wides (as I'm sure for the heights if also going that route) since they will output pretty close to the same signal that their matching fronts will (WL same as FL).


----------



## eugovector

cavchameleon said:


> Marshall,
> 
> Thanks for the clarification. Just wanted to note that the speakers should be as close in sound to each other so that they blend well. It's pretty critical for the wides (as I'm sure for the heights if also going that route) since they will output pretty close to the same signal that their matching fronts will (WL same as FL).


Critical for anything in front of you. God has given us ears that are more sensitive to sound in front of us, rather than to the side or behind. Now, if we were cats or birds, that would be different.


----------



## cavchameleon

^^^ Agreed!


----------



## cavchameleon

Update. I had to work on placement for the wides due to WAF - the wides were 'in the walk way entering the room' which became unacceptable. So, instead of the recommended placements of R/L 30 Deg from center and Wides 60 Deg from center, I had to work with acceptable WAF placement. The results are still pretty good, not quite as large a front sound stage, but still incredible results IMO. The angles I ended up with were: R/L 28 Deg from center and Wides at 48 Deg from center. In order to get the them all the same and to know my angle values, I'm using a laser light level on a tripod which has a rotating platform marked with the angles (had this for some years - has always worked great for speaker placement and other thinks like getting pictures mounted exactly right, construction, etc.). The main thing is to have the front baffles perpendicular to the main LP and have all the speakers pretty close to the same distance (although the software will account for this anyway). Then, of course, re-run Audyssey. Then...Enjoy.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Update. I had to work on placement for the wides due to WAF - the wides were 'in the walk way entering the room' which became unacceptable. So, instead of the recommended placements of R/L 30 Deg from center and Wides 60 Deg from center, I had to work with acceptable WAF placement. The results are still pretty good, not quite as large a front sound stage, but still incredible results IMO. The angles I ended up with were: R/L 28 Deg from center and Wides at 48 Deg from center. In order to get the them all the same and to know my angle values, I'm using a laser light level on a tripod which has a rotating platform marked with the angles (had this for some years - has always worked great for speaker placement and other thinks like getting pictures mounted exactly right, construction, etc.). The main thing is to have the front baffles perpendicular to the main LP and have all the speakers pretty close to the same distance (although the software will account for this anyway). Then, of course, re-run Audyssey. Then...Enjoy.


That laser light level on a tripod sounds pretty slick, do you have the name of it so I could look and see if I can pick one up?

Thanks for the tips on the DSX wide speakers Ray. I do have some speakers to try out but there floor standers so if I like it then I will need to look for some bookshelves to match my mains. The floor standers for wides will probably be a no no but I want to experiment and see if it worth looking into.


----------



## sub_crazy

A quick update on my XT vs XT32 via the Denon 4311.

I finally added a second sub that I have been working on for awhile (build thread to come in the sealed DIY section when I get more free time) I wasn't too happy with the dual sub calibration of XT32 and re-ran it a few times. I finally just set-it up as a single sub with both subs as close in distance as I could possibly get from the LP so the phase would be the same. I tried it this way and got the same results so I added in my SMS-1 again and made some corrections and the sound was better. I still have more experimenting to do and will put my Onkyo 886P back in to see what normal XT does for the subs when I get the time.

I have changed out my sub set-up so it could be something else contributing to this but in the past I XT did such a great job on my subs that no further tweaking was necessary. I guess I was just surprised that XT32 didn't at least match what XT did for me but for now I would have to think I made an error somewhere. Once i swap out the Denon for the Onkyo I can rule out one possibility.


----------



## eugovector

sub_crazy said:


> I finally added a second sub that I have been working on for awhile...


A couple things to keep in mind. Using non-matching subs in a dual setup can be difficult. Also, you should work with a single sub first to find the best position in your room. REW comes in very handy for this. Then, add the second sub and move it around until you get the response dialed in as best you can. Then, as a last step, run and EQ such as Audyssey.

I don't know if this will help you or not, but hopefully it will.


----------



## mohmony

Ordered a TX-NR3008 today; Very excited to see what MultiEQ32/SubEq (Have dual Epik Sentinels) to my room correction.


----------



## Sonnie

Welcome to HTS mohmony... and yeah... bring it on. I would to see the results myself.


----------



## sub_crazy

eugovector said:


> A couple things to keep in mind. Using non-matching subs in a dual setup can be difficult. Also, you should work with a single sub first to find the best position in your room. REW comes in very handy for this. Then, add the second sub and move it around until you get the response dialed in as best you can. Then, as a last step, run and EQ such as Audyssey.
> 
> I don't know if this will help you or not, but hopefully it will.


Thanks for the tips Marshall,

The subs are exactly the same, I actually built a matched set but was using one of the subs in an older enclosure until the sealed pair was done.

I have done experimenting with placement and will do some more but so far this has been the best 2 locations. I even tried placing the sub in the listening position and moving my SMS-1 mic around the room at sub level to see which spots have the flattest response. Of course some of the best places have to be in spots the subs can't go but that is life for most.

I know I still have a bunch of experimenting to do, so much so that I am thinking of buying a lab coat so I look official :bigsmile:

Your tips are right on Marshall and definitely helpful :T


----------



## tcarcio

mohmony said:


> Ordered a TX-NR3008 today; Very excited to see what MultiEQ32/SubEq (Have dual Epik Sentinels) to my room correction.


Great, Let us know what you think of it.:T


----------



## cavchameleon

mohmony said:


> Ordered a TX-NR3008 today; Very excited to see what MultiEQ32/SubEq (Have dual Epik Sentinels) to my room correction.


Awesome! Give us your impressions!


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> Thanks for the tips Marshall,
> 
> The subs are exactly the same, I actually built a matched set but was using one of the subs in an older enclosure until the sealed pair was done.
> 
> I have done experimenting with placement and will do some more but so far this has been the best 2 locations. I even tried placing the sub in the listening position and moving my SMS-1 mic around the room at sub level to see which spots have the flattest response. Of course some of the best places have to be in spots the subs can't go but that is life for most.
> 
> I know I still have a bunch of experimenting to do, so much so that I am thinking of buying a lab coat so I look official :bigsmile:
> 
> Your tips are right on Marshall and definitely helpful :T


Looks like Marshall covered it. Yes, get everything as 'right' as possible before running Audyssey. Are you doing all 8 positions for your mic measurements BTW? It's important to have a good tight grouping in order for Audyssey to correct it well (and the main LP must be the 1st mic position as that is the one that will calculate for distance/phase/time domain corrections/sub coupling. All the other mic positions are freq corrections of the combined subs as one. Also confirm that when running Audyssey that you hear both subs being pinged for the first measurement (I actually increase the level of the subs amps initially so it forces the AVR into the 'level match the subs to ~75db' mode.


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> That laser light level on a tripod sounds pretty slick, do you have the name of it so I could look and see if I can pick one up?
> 
> Thanks for the tips on the DSX wide speakers Ray. I do have some speakers to try out but there floor standers so if I like it then I will need to look for some bookshelves to match my mains. The floor standers for wides will probably be a no no but I want to experiment and see if it worth looking into.


Mike,


There are many out there. Can't confirm which one i have right now, but will check when I get back home from work. It's a nice kit with a 'level' type laser that marks in both the horizontal and vertical plane separately or together (makes a cross if both on). This unit then can mount to a rotating tripod mount with degree markings. It also comes with a rotating laser (also for the tripod) that can basically make a 360 Deg line around the whole room so you know exactly where the same 'level' point is around the room. Its been a very handy device.


----------



## cavchameleon

^^^ Forgot to add in my above post, if you get one of these do not forget to also purchase eye protection made for lasers - most of them use a freq band that will blind you quickly, and make sure no one will be entering the room you are using this tool unless also wearing eye protection. There are some newer versions that are not as dangerous, but always be on the side of caution. Just and FYI...


----------



## eugovector

Just to be clear, the recommendation I made for matching subs is assuming a rectangular symmetrical room, based on my own experience, the idea that the coupling of two identically performing subs will be easier to predict across various volume levels, frequency ranges, etc.

These criteria may be irrelevant given a person's particular setup/room/equipment, and the topic of whether or not to match subs may warrant investigation in a separate thread. This, and much other advice in home theater (whether or not to absorb 1st reflections, whether different amps/cables make an audible difference, etc) is continually being studied, discussed, and up for debate and should not be taken as gospel without first applying some critical reasoning of your own. There's only one person who knows for sure the workings of the world, and I'm not him/her/them.

It is my opinion, based on my understanding of what I have read and personally experienced, and that may not be universal (or even correct for that matter). I will be happy to attempt to refute any evidence to the contrary, but will not discount it outright and may wholly fail in my pursuit to prove the contrary.

In the face of advice to the contrary, any advice I give should be considered my opinion only, not the official position of The Home Theater Shack. Disagreement leads to discovery, new knowledge is grown on past misconceptions, and if I have misconcept-ed, let me say I'm happy to do my part.


----------



## cavchameleon

^^^ Marshall, that's a disclaimer that all should use! Very well said.


----------



## Fastslappy

can I use that 2nd to the last paragraph in my signature ? ^^^


----------



## eugovector

Fastslappy said:


> can I use that 2nd to the last paragraph in my signature ? ^^^


I didn't invent misconception, and hold no trademark on it. Use away.


----------



## cavchameleon

But you say it so eloquently Marshall! I could use your quote (last two paragraphs) in many places/topics.


----------



## cavchameleon

Mike,

Here is the leveling system I purchased. You can probably do a search for it. I got it at Costco at the time for a very cheap price. It works very well and is very affordable compared to many (if you are in construction or the like though, it may be better to purchase a higher quality one).

http://www.csntools.com/asp/show_detail.asp?sku=AXN1013

Alton Multi-Beam and Rotary Laser Level Set - AT013230


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Looks like Marshall covered it. Yes, get everything as 'right' as possible before running Audyssey. Are you doing all 8 positions for your mic measurements BTW? It's important to have a good tight grouping in order for Audyssey to correct it well (and the main LP must be the 1st mic position as that is the one that will calculate for distance/phase/time domain corrections/sub coupling. All the other mic positions are freq corrections of the combined subs as one. Also confirm that when running Audyssey that you hear both subs being pinged for the first measurement (I actually increase the level of the subs amps initially so it forces the AVR into the 'level match the subs to ~75db' mode.


I think your the one who actually gave me the link to the Audyssey mic locations, I follow them to a T and use all 8 locations. Thanks for that. I have always had excellent results with Audyssey with my prior Onkyo and Integra pre-pro's but then again I didn't have the dual LMS subs then. I am going to try out my Onkyo 886P again to see what the difference is between normal XT and XT32. Hopefully I have a chance this weekend but definitely soon so I can put one of the other up for sale 

How do you get past the Audyssey sub screen that asks you to turn down your subs before measurements begin with that nifty spl meter on the screen? I almost have to turn my subs down half way so the spl meter from Audyssey goes from red to green.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Mike,
> 
> Here is the leveling system I purchased. You can probably do a search for it. I got it at Costco at the time for a very cheap price. It works very well and is very affordable compared to many (if you are in construction or the like though, it may be better to purchase a higher quality one).
> 
> http://www.csntools.com/asp/show_detail.asp?sku=AXN1013
> 
> Alton Multi-Beam and Rotary Laser Level Set - AT013230


Thanks Ray,

A quick look ad Amazon has it for $48, will look around more when I get back.

Thanks again:T


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> I think your the one who actually gave me the link to the Audyssey mic locations, I follow them to a T and use all 8 locations. Thanks for that. I have always had excellent results with Audyssey with my prior Onkyo and Integra pre-pro's but then again I didn't have the dual LMS subs then. I am going to try out my Onkyo 886P again to see what the difference is between normal XT and XT32. Hopefully I have a chance this weekend but definitely soon so I can put one of the other up for sale
> 
> How do you get past the Audyssey sub screen that asks you to turn down your subs before measurements begin with that nifty spl meter on the screen? I almost have to turn my subs down half way so the spl meter from Audyssey goes from red to green.


Mike,

You can't by-pass that section if you subs are running hot according to Audyssey as all the other speakers will be calibrated at that level. Simply get it in the green, run Audyssey, save the calibration. Then, go to the manual setup portion (you'll most likely have to set your crossovers up higher, the AVR sets all my speakers to 'full band' - yeah, right...), set your crossovers then go to the leveling step and re-set your levels for your subs (note that all your mains will be pretty close, but I found my subs to be -4db and just bring it up to the mains level. Remember to bring up the combined sub levels (both A and B together), not the individual subs. That way the blend will be kept in tact. It's the last part of the leveling section.

Keep us posted on your outcomes.


----------



## Sonnie

I experimented with the XT32 and Sub EQ HT nearly 4 hours Tuesday evening and probably the better of 8 hours yesterday. Ultimately, I had to break out the BFD to remove a pretty nasty bump around 40-50Hz. Funny I never remember that being there before this last few weeks of testing, but I highly doubt there are ghosts in the room altering the signal. I am pretty sure my natural response was pretty decent back when first built the room. I have been trying to dig up some older response graphs, but seem to have misplaced them (I thought I posted them here somewhere). I thought for a bit it may have been the UMC-1 doing something funny to the signal, but after swapping over to the 4311, it was still there. 

Audyssey improved the overall response pretty well, but it did not do much with the bass. I did find that using the Sub EQ HT was better than running both subs together. I am guessing it was phase related, since the only difference between Sub EQ HT and one sub is the fact that Sub EQ HT will measure distance and level between dual subs before combining them to measure response. 

I tried measuring 1 position vs 4 vs 8. When measuring 4 and 8, I measured the primary position twice to try to favor it a bit more. For the primary listening position and the two positions to either side, the response was nearly identical and the 4 measurements option ended up being the best measurement choice to obtain the best final response for the main listening position. All three front seats ended up with basically the same response, while the rear seats are a bit bass heavy, but no matter how I measured, they were bass heavy after correction was applied, so I stuck with optimizing the primary position since I spend more time in the room than anyone else. :bigsmile: 

I also did a lot of test measuring...

Front subs only (amps for rear subs off).
Rear subs only (amps for fronts subs off).
Varying the amp levels between front subs and rear subs before and after Audyssey (favoring front vs favoring rear).
Running Sub EQ HT, then combining front and rear.

Nothing seemed to work as well as just letting Sub EQ HT do its own thing the proper way. It got it as right as it could get it. 

I'll post up some more graphs when I get a chance to label them properly, but I did want to show you guys my final results with XT32, Dynamic EQ, Sub EQ HT and 5 filters in the BFD.










If the print is not too small... the response is from 5Hz to 200Hz with 1/3 smoothing applied. 

I used my IBF-Akustic mic with its provided cal file for all measurements.

One thing I would like to try is forcing the LCR and surrounds to crossover at 80Hz electronically prior to running Audyssey, so that it would not try to equalize those speakers full range (it sets my fronts and surrounds to Large). I do not know (maybe I should ask Audyssey), but it seems logical that Audyssey would use more resources on the sub equalization if it did not have to deal with equalizing below 80Hz on the other speakers.

I need to look for a 5 channel electronic crossover.


----------



## cavchameleon

Sonnie, welcome to XT32, pretty nice. WOW your subs go LOWWWWWW! That is amazing.

As far as Audyssey correcting your speakers to full, that is fine (all of mine except for the smallest pair is set to large by the AVR, the smallest one is set to 40Hz). In any case, it was brought up to Chris from Audyssey before and the allotted resources for the subs is separate from the mains IIRC, so you do not need to force a crossover on the mains, just set the crossovers to your desired setting (60/80/90Hz). Also remember that, even though you may set the crossover at 80Hz, it's not a brick wall and there is still some energy at 70/60/ and maybe even 50Hz, so it's good to have the correction below that point. 

For my speakers, since they are set to large, I set the crossover points ~30Hz above the manufactures' specifications for the speakers (i.e. Fronts are supposed to be -3db at 27Hz, I set it to 60Hz, Surrounds are supposed to be -3db at 45Hz and I set it to 80Hz: I round it up, then go 30Hz just to make sure I get the ~30Hz range for most crossovers). I do not know the exact crossover slopes for the AVR, but I'm using the assumption of 12db/Octave (hopefully it's higher - it would be nice to have steep 48db/oct slopes to increse the dynamic capabilities of the speakers).

Do you like the sound?


----------



## Sonnie

Oh yeah... the sound has been awesome thus far. I need to watch more movies and listen to a few of my favorite concerts, but I believe it is going to be fine. I am contemplating picking up a couple of the CraigSub SS 18.2's for the fronts... or perhaps I will just add them to the room :gulp: Of course that would basically be for better dynamics, but maybe also "naturally" smoothing out the response more without filtering. I really am not fond of all the filters... mainly because of how it can effect other positions in the room... and on boosting, how it taxes the driver more.

The only thing that concerns me about the equalization being done full range is perhaps Audyssey seeing enough of a signal at a particular frequency in the mains and therefore not adjusting for it in the subs... if that makes sense. I realize the sub has independent adjustments, but surely Audyssey considers the response of the rest of the system in helping determine what to do with the sub response. It is somewhat difficult for me to come up with the wording to explain and maybe give an example of what I mean. But... if Audyssey measures and equalizes the subwoofer totally independent of the entire rest of the system... and it does the same for the LCR and surrounds, then my concerns would shift a bit. I would then be concerned for situations with those who are running full range speakers. The interactions between the low frequencies of the mains and subs would not be considered, which would not be a particularly good thing.

*EDIT*: To add to that final statement of concern... would be situations such as yours, where you have the sub covering some of the same range of frequencies as your mains, when you use a 60Hz crossover. I could do the same for my Prodigy's... which are rated to 28Hz +/- 3db... but then how does Audyssey account for the interaction between the same portion of the sub response from 60Hz up vs that same portion of the mains from 60Hz to the point where the subs roll off.


----------



## Moonfly

Dont quote me here, but,

I seem to recall Audy has filters for the sub and speakers. It sets the filters to deal with the issues it reads, and integrates the speakers response with subs response etc, not independently. Where ever you set your crossover isnt an issue as Audyssey can account for that, but they do recommend 80 hz period (that much I am certain off). If you run speakers full range they are equalized for their entire range, if not then the bit not being used isnt an issue. Using a sub is better though as Audyssey typically has twice the resolution for the subwoofer channel, so bass equalization for the sub in the low frequencies should be superior to that of the speakers, even if in theory your speakers could match a sub for ability.

I will have to go back over this stuff and brush up on it, its a while and I cant be certain I correctly remember all the details now, but I seem to recall thats how it all works. I have new speakers on the way, and an IB going in in a couple months time, so I will need to get back upto speed anyway.


----------



## cavchameleon

Dan, that was correct with pre XT32. With XT32, all the freq have the same processing power. 

Sonnie, IIRC (may have to be confirmed with Chris), there are no real 'duplicates' for the sub and mains. AS Dan eluded to, if you change the crossover, Audyssey accounts for this: i.e. if you crossover the mains at 60 Hz, then the subs will take over the freq of the mains from 60Hz on down (and of course there is a 'blending' dependent on the crossover slope as I mentioned above).

Dan is correct that for the most part, Audyssey just recommends a 80Hz crossover point - makes it simple. The only thing one cannot do is lower the recommended point (i.e. if one has very small speakers and Audyssey recommends 100 Hz, you cannot lower that as no filters will be created below that point for that speaker). You can always raise the XO point though. In my room I tried different XO points with music and 60Hz sounded the best (this was for 2 channel music with the subs engages). The rest, well I use my method above. Some may seem high, but I figure the subs can do the heavy lifting and the dynamic range of the mains will increase.

Sonnie, just try different XO points, Audyssey will account for it and see what you like the best.

BTW, more subs ? You already have so much low energy in your room. Maybe you can set some at different heights like suggested in the Welti paper...


----------



## laser188139

Sonnie said:


> ... One thing I would like to try is forcing the LCR and surrounds to crossover at 80Hz electronically prior to running Audyssey, so that it would not try to equalize those speakers full range (it sets my fronts and surrounds to Large). I do not know (maybe I should ask Audyssey), but it seems logical that Audyssey would use more resources on the sub equalization if it did not have to deal with equalizing below 80Hz on the other speakers. ...


Congratulations on picking up a MultEQ XT 32 capable unit. 

With the greatly increased number of filter coefficients for the mains with XT 32, I don't think you need to worry too much about it wasting resources on a range you don't need. But this should be one of the advantages of Audyssey Pro, that it knows your choice of crossover before it calculates the filter and therefore calculates the coefficients only over the range you actually use. (Another advantage is that it has unlimited compute power in the PC to fine tune the result, before downloading the calculated filters to the AVR.)

This might have been more important with MultEQ XT. When I looked at the effect of Audyssey on the preout curves, I saw that its changes at the low end of the mains were very broad. My speculation is that it did not spend many resources there, that it spread them in some sense evenly over the full range, but maybe it just took lots of coefficients to change the frequency response at the low end, and restricting the range before calculating the filters would have helped. 

Bill


----------



## eugovector

Sonnie said:


> One thing I would like to try is forcing the LCR and surrounds to crossover at 80Hz electronically prior to running Audyssey, so that it would not try to equalize those speakers full range (it sets my fronts and surrounds to Large). I do not know (maybe I should ask Audyssey), but it seems logical that Audyssey would use more resources on the sub equalization if it did not have to deal with equalizing below 80Hz on the other speakers.


My understanding is that Audyssey has predetermined resources (number of filters), and doesn't considered the crossover settings when choosing a frequency range to correct. Rather, Audyssey will use the measure range to apply corrections.

Here's what Chris says about their sub correction from the Audyssey Tech Talk facebook group:



Chris Kyriakakis said:


> Audyssey subwoofer filters will correct up to the highest measured sub frequency the measurements find. Similarly for the low end of the range. They will correct down to the point where the sub starts rolling off.


I'm assuming the same is true of the main channels, but I could be wrong. I'll ask Chris.


----------



## Sonnie

cavchameleon said:


> Sonnie, IIRC (may have to be confirmed with Chris), there are no real 'duplicates' for the sub and mains. AS Dan eluded to, if you change the crossover, Audyssey accounts for this: i.e. if you crossover the mains at 60 Hz, then the subs will take over the freq of the mains from 60Hz on down (and of course there is a 'blending' dependent on the crossover slope as I mentioned above).


I can understand the subs taking over from the crossover point of 60Hz, but that would apply to the redirected bass. You would still have the subs and the mains both playing duplicate from 60-80Hz because the sub is still playing LFE above 60Hz.

Of course I have never even thought about how Audyssey handles duplicate ranges above the typical crossover points of mains from 80Hz to 120Hz vs. the LFE that also is playing up to 120Hz.




cavchameleon said:


> BTW, more subs ? You already have so much low energy in your room. Maybe you can set some at different heights like suggested in the Welti paper...


That is a thought to consider. I am a bass head no doubt. :sarcastic: 



laser188139 said:


> Congratulations on picking up a MultEQ XT 32 capable unit.
> 
> With the greatly increased number of filter coefficients for the mains with XT 32, I don't think you need to worry too much about it wasting resources on a range you don't need. But this should be one of the advantages of Audyssey Pro, that it knows your choice of crossover before it calculates the filter and therefore calculates the coefficients only over the range you actually use. (Another advantage is that it has unlimited compute power in the PC to fine tune the result, before downloading the calculated filters to the AVR.)
> 
> This might have been more important with MultEQ XT. When I looked at the effect of Audyssey on the preout curves, I saw that its changes at the low end of the mains were very broad. My speculation is that it did not spend many resources there, that it spread them in some sense evenly over the full range, but maybe it just took lots of coefficients to change the frequency response at the low end, and restricting the range before calculating the filters would have helped.
> 
> Bill


Audyssey Pro... is this different than XT 32? 





eugovector said:


> My understanding is that Audyssey has predetermined resources (number of filters), and doesn't considered the crossover settings when choosing a frequency range to correct. Rather, Audyssey will use the measure range to apply corrections.
> 
> Here's what Chris says about their sub correction from the Audyssey Tech Talk facebook group:
> 
> _Audyssey subwoofer filters will correct up to the highest measured sub frequency the measurements find. Similarly for the low end of the range. They will correct down to the point where the sub starts rolling off._
> 
> I'm assuming the same is true of the main channels, but I could be wrong. I'll ask Chris.


That makes sense.


----------



## eugovector

On recommended crossover point, Chris has been pretty adamant in his recommendation to set all speakers to small: http://www.audyssey.com/blog/2009/05/small-vs-large/

On sub/mains crossover point, one of many similar posts on the subject when using Audyssey:


Chris K said:


> I would recommend moving the crossover for all speakers up to 80 Hz after the calibration is finished. This will send more content to the subwoofer where the MultEQ filters have 8x more resolution.


Of course, this recommendation applies only to MultEQ XT and below as XT32 now has the same resolution in both sats and subs. If using MultEQ XT32, it would be best to let you ears or microphone+REW determine your crossover point, IMO.

On LFE crossover point:



Chris said:


> To add to the confusion, manufacturers offer an LFE lowpass (LPF) filter setting. They should not! During authoring of the content, the LFE track is limited to 120 Hz. So, any other setting for the LFE lowpass filter is incorrect! It should always be 120 Hz and, in fact, should not be adjustable by the user.


In theory, the mixers shouldn't be putting anything in the LFE into other channels as well. Maybe Sir Terrance can weigh in on accepted philosophies in the industry re: LFE vs. Main Channels.


----------



## eugovector

Response from Chris K:

*Marshall Guthrie:* Sorry to dig up an old comment. Does the same hold true for the main channels? In other words, if you have tower speakers with a measured response down to 40hz, will Audyssey attempt to correct down to 40hz regardless of the subwoofer crossover? I'm assuming so based on your previous response, but just wanted to clarify.

*Chris Kyriakakis:* Yes, your understanding is correct. However, if you push the xover point higher afterwards you will have more content sent to the sub where the MultEQ and MultEQ XT filters are 8x higher resolution. Not an issue for XT32 because the sub and satellites have the same very high resolution.


----------



## laser188139

Sonnie said:


> ... Audyssey Pro... is this different than XT 32? ...


As you point out, the sub's filter needs to extend up to the full LFE limit, irrespective of the crossover frequencies for the satellites. 

Yes, Audyssey Pro is a product for installers, but many individuals buy their own copy to allow them to tweak and redo the calibration as often as they like. It comes with an individually calibrated microphone, is licensed to the individual unit being calibrated, runs on a PC and downloads the calculated filters into the receiver. You can read more about it here and here. It's available only on the high end receivers, but I expect this includes all the MultEQ XT 32 capable models.

Bill


----------



## Kal Rubinson

Sonnie said:


> The only thing that concerns me about the equalization being done full range is perhaps Audyssey seeing enough of a signal at a particular frequency in the mains and therefore not adjusting for it in the subs... if that makes sense. I realize the sub has independent adjustments, but surely Audyssey considers the response of the rest of the system in helping determine what to do with the sub response.


It does not.



> It is somewhat difficult for me to come up with the wording to explain and maybe give an example of what I mean. But... if Audyssey measures and equalizes the subwoofer totally independent of the entire rest of the system... and it does the same for the LCR and surrounds, then my concerns would shift a bit.


It does.



> I would then be concerned for situations with those who are running full range speakers. The interactions between the low frequencies of the mains and subs would not be considered, which would not be a particularly good thing.


How? If a speaker is set full-range, none of that channel's bass goes to the sub.



> *EDIT*: To add to that final statement of concern... would be situations such as yours, where you have the sub covering some of the same range of frequencies as your mains, when you use a 60Hz crossover. I could do the same for my Prodigy's... which are rated to 28Hz +/- 3db... but then how does Audyssey account for the interaction between the same portion of the sub response from 60Hz up vs that same portion of the mains from 60Hz to the point where the subs roll off.


Why do you presume there is any interaction if they are producing different signals?


----------



## Sonnie

Kal Rubinson said:


> How? If a speaker is set full-range, none of that channel's bass goes to the sub.
> 
> Why do you presume there is any interaction if they are producing different signals?


No presumptions here. I am basing the information on tests... where low frequencies recorded via the subs were also recorded via the full range speakers after the sub channel was disconnected. 

When the same low frequencies are sent via the LFE channel and to the mains, you now have low frequencies competing with each other... and two of those channels of low frequencies most likely not in the most optimal locations (where the mains are located). 

I suspect this is one reason Audyssey is so adamant about using the 80Hz crossover point and redirecting the bass to the sub, so that all of the low frequencies are equalized together, which is the most logical and reasonable way to equalize bass.

If it were a case where low frequencies are never duplicated between the sub and mains, it would not be an issue.


----------



## eugovector

Sonnie, can you describe the "recording"? Do you mean recorded via REW while doing a sweep?

You don't mean the point at where the cross over slopes and, let's say with an 80hz crossover point, both sub and mains are playing 70hz, albeit at lower levels, do you?

The LFE, being a dedicated channel that is never sent anywhere but the sub, should be, in my understanding, used by mixers to send only low-frequency content. That content shouldn't be duplicated in any of the other channels by the mixer, once again, in my understanding. In other words, if you set your sub to "none" in your AVR, you will never hear anything recorded in the LFE channel of the movie soundtrack.


----------



## Sonnie

Spectrum Labs software recordings showing the same frequencies... each channel recorded independently of the other.

The LFE is basically just to enhance bass that may already be sent to the mains. As I understand it, it is not necessarily always taken away from the mains. In some cases it is, in some it is not. Apparently the producers and mixers do not have a set method of how the bass is necessarily distributed.

If you have your crossover point at 80Hz, then the low frequencies being sent to the mains are then redirected and sent to the subwoofer, and then mixed with the LFE. In some instances it may be mixing the same frequencies, which would not really be an issue.


----------



## tcarcio

Any of you guy's hear rumblings about receivers having the wrong mics for Audyssey? On another forum it looks like Chris from Audyssey is doing a mic exchange. I sent him a PM but he hasn't answered . Anyone know anything about it?


----------



## eugovector

I know there was an isolated incident where someone bought a floor model, and they gave him the wrong mic, but Chris offered to send him the correct one. Otherwise, I seem to recall him saying there were only two kinds of mics: the old puck style and the new tower style.


----------



## recruit

Will either of the 2 styles of mic work with all Onkyo AVR's Marshall or do you have to have the correct one for each of two variations?


----------



## eugovector

Once again, this is based on info from a thread that I'm not looking at, only recalling the info from memory...

The mics are not interchangeable, you need to correct mic. However, the pucks are no longer used in newer receivers.


----------



## recruit

Ok thanks Marshall.


----------



## tcarcio

Well the thread over at AVS they are talking about the ACM1 and the ACM1-H and they both are the tower style mics. Hopefully he gets back to me soon and I will pass on anything I find out. Funny though he said that the ACM1 was phased out if you go to the Marantz website even their new recievers still list it as the mic being used. Kind of confusing.........:scratch:


----------



## laser188139

Apparently, besides the simple puck and tower difference, there have been two different versions of the tower mic for Onkyo, the ACM1 and the ACM1H. According to Chris, Audyssey started providing Onkyo with the ACM1H mics in 2007, but there may have been some confusion at Onkyo, and they seem to have shipped older ACM1 mics with some receivers that have the calibration curve for the ACM1H. It doesn't help that the labels on the boxes are different, but once the mic is out of its box there is no way to distinguish them visually. Chris seems to be still trying to chase down the sequence of events at Onkyo. 

Bill


----------



## eugovector

Hmm...well, for what it's worth, my Onkyo 706 cam with the ACM1. Let us know what you read/hear.


----------



## tcarcio

laser188139 said:


> Apparently, besides the simple puck and tower difference, there have been two different versions of the tower mic for Onkyo, the ACM1 and the ACM1H. According to Chris, Audyssey started providing Onkyo with the ACM1H mics in 2007, but there may have been some confusion at Onkyo, and they seem to have shipped older ACM1 mics with some receivers that have the calibration curve for the ACM1H. It doesn't help that the labels on the boxes are different, but once the mic is out of its box there is no way to distinguish them visually. Chris seems to be still trying to chase down the sequence of events at Onkyo.
> 
> Bill


OH so it is just an Onkyo thing and doesn't effect others like Marantz? I will post the question at Ask Audyssey also.


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Here's another update on this AVR, now with the DSX portion. I finally tried out adding wides, which are the same speakers as used for my rears (all from the same line of speakers so the timber matches). I tried scenes from many movies and switched back and forth, playing each scene over with wides in and out (it's just a button push - there is a dedicated button for this on the remote). All I have to say is WOW!!! You have got to try this! It really does add a lot to the front sound stage (at least in my setup). You feel totally enveloped in the sound -a much better addition than rears! Now for music with surround (SACD's and DVD Audio discs with surround recorded) it really depended on the music. Sometimes is sounded better and sometimes is distracted (loss in pinpoint imaging - like a slight echo). I did not notice this with movies, the experience was always enhanced with the wides. I'm sold on it. My room is small and it works great. I'm sure with a larger room it may even be more pronounced. I have not tried the heights and probably won't as I don't think I can accommodate them.
> 
> If you have large planar speakers (like ML or Maggies) I'm not sure how this technology would work. Rooms such as Sonnies with large ML may not benefit since those speakers already have incredible dispersion (but it would be interesting to see/hear if there is a difference - although probably cost prohibited for most, in my case it was pretty affordable).
> 
> So, if you can, just try it!!! You'll be pleasantly surprised IMO.


Hey Ray,

I am set-up for the wides now but I have some work to do outside the house:crying: I will give the DSX wides a try later on tonight when I get home. I did try some music really quick but like you said it is probably a movie best mode as the music sounded too diffused.

I'll post an update.


----------



## laser188139

tcarcio said:


> OH so it is just an Onkyo thing and doesn't effect others like Marantz? ...


This afternoon Chris has posted an update. Here is part of his message:


> At the time of the switch, Onkyo also decided to start using the Audyssey mic. Before that they were using their own mic, but after evaluation of the Audyssey mic they understood that it offered better performance.
> 
> After checking the certification records, we have found that ALL Onkyo and Integra products have been certified with the ACM-1H mic. They never used the ACM-1 mic.
> 
> So, if you have an Onkyo or Integra product with an Audyssey mic, it must be an ACM-1H. The remaining question under investigation is: For those with an ACM-1 mic box, is that a simple printing problem on the box or is this the wrong mic.


So this may all be a confusion over the labeling of the boxes, and not of the mics themselves. Audyssey is still investigating.


----------



## Sonnie

It offers "better performance"... ahhh... in other words... Audyssey has not been accurate for the several years we have allowed our customers to use the inferior mic.

I wonder if Herb at Cross-Spectrum Labs can test this mic I have with the 4311... and maybe we can ask Chris for the cal file they use to compare it with what Herb measures. It would be interesting to know just how accurate they are and how Audyssey corrects for it.


----------



## tcarcio

Well I got an answer from Chris and he said it only pertained to Onkyo products and not my Marantz. Still I would like to know if the -H mic is better then would I be better off getting one to replace my -1?


----------



## eugovector

I bet they start labeling the mics themselves and not just the boxes from here on out. 

Could you link to that thread so that those of us with non-h boxes can keep abreast? Thanks.


----------



## Fastslappy

here's the link 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19838003#post19838003
I have one coming to replace the mic I got with my bedroom systems A/V a Onkyo TX-SR707 
i used it on my Onkyo TX-NR807 in the man cave & got wild differences in the levels


----------



## Sir Terrence

eugovector said:


> Sonnie, can you describe the "recording"? Do you mean recorded via REW while doing a sweep?
> 
> You don't mean the point at where the cross over slopes and, let's say with an 80hz crossover point, both sub and mains are playing 70hz, albeit at lower levels, do you?
> 
> The LFE, being a dedicated channel that is never sent anywhere but the sub, should be, in my understanding, used by mixers to send only low-frequency content. That content shouldn't be duplicated in any of the other channels by the mixer, once again, in my understanding. In other words, if you set your sub to "none" in your AVR, you will never hear anything recorded in the LFE channel of the movie soundtrack.


The use of the LFE does not preclude using deep bass in other channels. We use the LFE to augment the bass in the other channels. It is use to give the mix an extra bit of "ummmph" without overloading the screen channels in the process. 

Example, your typical explosion. I could pack quite a bass wallop in the screen channels, but that could overload them, and decrease the audibility of other effects by masking them with a lot of bass. So I use the LFE channel to give the explosion more impact, without stressing or masking the other elements of the explosion in the screen channels. The LFE gives the system overall more headroom in the bass department, but is not designed as a conduit for all bass signals.

Sonnie has this one right.


----------



## eugovector

Thanks for the explanation, Sir Terrence. So, in the Home Theater environment where we use bandwidth limited fronts and redirect low bass frequencies from all channels to the subwoofer, this is why it's essential to have a sub that's got plenty of headroom and can not be easily overloaded.


----------



## Sir Terrence

eugovector said:


> Thanks for the explanation, Sir Terrence. So, in the Home Theater environment where we use bandwidth limited fronts and redirect low bass frequencies from all channels to the subwoofer, this is why it's essential to have a sub that's got plenty of headroom and can not be easily overloaded.


Bingo! :T

Each main channel's bass that is sent to the subwoofer adds 3db of electrical gain to that speaker. That equals up to 15db's, along with the 10db's of the LFE. The bass management circuitry cuts that gain from the mains in half to 7.5db's to prevent overload to the input circuitry, but that is still a total of 17.5db's of potential electrical signal(at full reference levels) that has been sent to the sub. That places a tremendous acoustical reproduction task on any subwoofer, and it has to do this with very low distortion, high output, and down to at least 20hz. This is why there are not a lot of subs that can truly pull this off, it is not an easy task. 

System headroom is a big deal for me. I have a personal requirement that all of my systems; mixing, multichannel music, and HT, have a 3db headroom output capability for each main speaker within its designated bandwidth for the mains, and 6db for the subwoofer. With this requirement I insure that distortion stays very low even during the highest sustained peaks from any soundtrack or multichannel audio mix. Like you I enjoy big speakers, but I have a couple of HT with very small powerful speakers as well.


----------



## sub_crazy

Sir Terrence,

I have to ask you about your "4 custom 15" servo H-PAS tuned subs" I see you have listed on your equipment list. I know this is off topic but I ran a search and haven't seen you talk about them any other place. A thread in the DIY sub section would be great.

Actually hearing about your speakers as well would be great!

Please tell us about your gear:hail:


----------



## viccmw

Based on Sir Terence explanation who is intimate with the production end; that of LFE and main channel bass which can be duplicated - does this validate Sonnie's observation for full range equalization ie Mains set as Large?

Audyssey XT32 sure has amazing technology if it handles duplicated bass in the LFE and mains...




Sonnie said:


> No presumptions here. I am basing the information on tests... where low frequencies recorded via the subs were also recorded via the full range speakers after the sub channel was disconnected.
> 
> When the same low frequencies are sent via the LFE channel and to the mains, you now have low frequencies competing with each other... and two of those channels of low frequencies most likely not in the most optimal locations (where the mains are located).
> 
> I suspect this is one reason Audyssey is so adamant about using the 80Hz crossover point and redirecting the bass to the sub, so that all of the low frequencies are equalized together, which is the most logical and reasonable way to equalize bass.
> 
> If it were a case where low frequencies are never duplicated between the sub and mains, it would not be an issue.


----------



## Sonnie

Good information Sir Terrence... thanks! :T



viccmw said:


> Based on Sir Terence explanation who is intimate with the production end; that of LFE and main channel bass which can be duplicated - does this validate Sonnie's observation for full range equalization ie Mains set as Large?
> 
> Audyssey XT32 sure has amazing technology if it handles duplicated bass in the LFE and mains...


In this situation (Mains set as Large), there is no redirection of the bass and Audyssey attempts to equalize the low frequencies independently in each individual speaker. They are no longer combined for measurement nor correction, which has to make it more difficult to equalize since it does not take into account the interaction of those low frequencies. As you state, they could have some sophisticated way of calculating the end result... and I agree, it would be amazing technology.

Audyssey does not attempt to do this for two subwoofers when using Sub EQ HT, which sets the level, distance and phase of each sub with independent signals... then next it sends a combined signal to both subs to measure the summed output for equalization. This method takes into account the interaction of the subs and equalizes the summed bass. It would be more difficult to do this for the mains + LFE... however my receiver has a setting to send LFE to the LFE + Mains. IIRC, Audyssey says not to use the LFE + Mains setting... and instead recommends the exact opposite... use a crossover and redirect the LF of the mains to the sub(s).


----------



## cavchameleon

Sir Terrence - I also thank you for the info, lots of good info. 

Sonnie, yes, Audyssey does not recommend Mains + LFE due to the fact that it may actually be more detrimental to the low freqs. Too many interactions taking place. Plus, if one has a lot of headroom in the subs as Sir Terrence suggests, it should never be necessary to want Mains + LFE: your mains will have greater headroom that way. You most likely have far above the necessary headroom in your HT, as many here do (lots of bass heads here...), so that should not be an issue for your room.


----------



## Sir Terrence

cavchameleon said:


> Sir Terrence - I also thank you for the info, lots of good info.
> 
> Sonnie, yes, Audyssey does not recommend Mains + LFE due to the fact that it may actually be more detrimental to the low freqs. Too many interactions taking place. Plus, if one has a lot of headroom in the subs as Sir Terrence suggests, it should never be necessary to want Mains + LFE: your mains will have greater headroom that way. You most likely have far above the necessary headroom in your HT, as many here do (lots of bass heads here...), so that should not be an issue for your room.


As great as Audyssey is, it does have some limitations in terms of working with non sub/sat setups. To get it to work with my setup in my signature took a lot of extra work that does not normally need to happen with normal set up. 

The problem with moving all of the bass below 80hz from my mains to my subs, is that it changes the sound of the mains drastically. These speakers were voiced for a flat 30hz to 50khz frequency response, with a very gentle roll off of 12db per octave below 30hz. With all of the bass below 80hz removed, the speaker sounds top heavy, and a lot less robust. They just don't sound good under those conditions. 

Lets add on four subs, three full range mains up front, and a baffle wall to the equation, things that are not always common in every day setup. 

If there was some way than can apply this great technology over more variable types of setups(without all of the associated complex added steps), they would have the perfect setup algorithm.


----------



## steve1616

Ray,

How do I know if I have the necessary headroom from my sub? I don't think mine has quite enough umph in it. It will shake plaster right off of my walls, but I just can't seem to collapse my ceilings yet. :R

I keep getting thoughts of putting together an LMS 18 Ultra sub that will make mine look silly, but then I listen to my PB13/ultra, and it doesn't get much better than that.


----------



## cavchameleon

Sir Terrence said:


> As great as Audyssey is, it does have some limitations in terms of working with non sub/sat setups. To get it to work with my setup in my signature took a lot of extra work that does not normally need to happen with normal set up.
> 
> The problem with moving all of the bass below 80hz from my mains to my subs, is that it changes the sound of the mains drastically. These speakers were voiced for a flat 30hz to 50khz frequency response, with a very gentle roll off of 12db per octave below 30hz. With all of the bass below 80hz removed, the speaker sounds top heavy, and a lot less robust. They just don't sound good under those conditions.
> 
> Lets add on four subs, three full range mains up front, and a baffle wall to the equation, things that are not always common in every day setup.
> 
> If there was some way than can apply this great technology over more variable types of setups(without all of the associated complex added steps), they would have the perfect setup algorithm.


I agree that Audyssey is not just plug and play (may work for a majority, but not for specialized setups). Yours would fall under the 'very specialized setups' which many on this and other forums would fall under (the 'majority' of users don't use these forums though, I have lots of friends and family with decent above the norm setups that do not go on forums, they just enjoy what they have and 'never know' what they are missing, which is OK, they are happy with it). For us here, we are looking for that 'bliss' and always striving for it, which requires a lot more knowledge, experimentation, and constant tweaking (and usually having a lot of fun doing it). You have an incredible setup - would be really cool to see it in person.


----------



## cavchameleon

steve1616 said:


> Ray,
> 
> How do I know if I have the necessary headroom from my sub? I don't think mine has quite enough umph in it. It will shake plaster right off of my walls, but I just can't seem to collapse my ceilings yet. :R
> 
> I keep getting thoughts of putting together an LMS 18 Ultra sub that will make mine look silly, but then I listen to my PB13/ultra, and it doesn't get much better than that.


Ha, that funny :bigsmile:! Yep, it's always nice to have more...I have to keep mine limited at the moment just due to space. We're hoping to move into a bigger place in a year or so, at that time I'll be wanting more also. But, as you suggest, what we have is already very enjoyable already. Enjoy your system!!!


----------



## cavchameleon

Anyone here try Wides yet? I'd like to hear your impressions.


----------



## Sonnie

cavchameleon said:


> For us here, we are looking for that 'bliss' and always striving for it, which requires a lot more knowledge, experimentation, and constant tweaking (and usually having a lot of fun doing it).


In other words... we are addicted!


----------



## Sir Terrence

> One thing I am starting to notice is that I am too interested in specs that should theoretically be way better, but in reality are not what I am wanting. For example, last night my family and I watched two movies. One was a blu ray and the other was just a DVD. I played both of them on my playstation 3. Even my wife commented that she thought the blu ray was suppose to be better quality, but it just wasn't in the case of the 2 movies we watched. The blu ray version of the movie "salt" seems to be a poor quality recording, while the movie "despicable me" seems to be a good quality dvd. I did many comparisons last night, and for the most part I could tell that the blu ray was a lot better in quality when I was 3 feet away from my 46" tv. The problem is that my recliner and sofa are 10 feet and 13 feet away from the tv, and I wasn't able to pick one from the other consistently at all. My wife was also getting tired of switching back and forth.


Not to pull this off topic, but I think you are comparing apples to oranges here. Salt was filmed in Super35, a film based shooting format. Despicable Me is a digital animation creation that is not based on film, but created in a computer. These two cannot be compared, their origins are completely different. 

There is no way under the sun that Salt can be assessed as "poor quality". It is an excellent looking film from a visual stand point, with very few to no visual artifacts. 

Animation on DVD has a huge benefit that film on DVD does not. It is called ton's of redundant information. When you have a lot of redundant information in a frame, the encoder can throw away tons of repetitive data, and still retain an excellent image. 

You sit WAY too far from you set to make any meaningful comparison. From the distance you set away from a 46" set, you could barely tell 480p from 1080p. You have to move much closer to your set to get the benefit of 1080p resolution.


----------



## Sonnie

The original post is definitely off topic... it belongs in the Salt review if anything.

Apparently the thread was derailed at one time and we missed it.


----------



## cavchameleon

Sonnie said:


> In other words... we are addicted!


:bigsmile::coocoo:
Agreed...


----------



## sub_crazy

cavchameleon said:


> Anyone here try Wides yet? I'd like to hear your impressions.


I tried out the wides this past weekend.

My room is not that wide at 15 feet so my wides were the minimum recommended distance from the mains, 2 feet. I am guessing that if I had a wider room the effect would be more pronounced.

While I did notice a difference in that the front sound stage panned to the side surrounds more seamlessly it was not enough to commit to making it a permanent install. I really did _not_ like the effect with music or when watching DirecTv, when a program went from dolby digital to stereo during commercials it sounded very echoey. Pretty much any 2 channel content sounded like I was in a cave, dolby digital and Blu-ray's sounded better than plain 5.1.

I am guessing that the effect for you is a sound stage that envelops more fully? 

I did convince a friend of mine to try it in his place and he is now ordering dedicated wides. He had the same conclusion that the wides closed the gap between the front and surrounds and it was a more enveloping experience. 

It definitely gets a :T from me but not enough of a :boxer: in my room to commit.


----------



## cavchameleon

sub_crazy said:


> I tried out the wides this past weekend.
> 
> My room is not that wide at 15 feet so my wides were the minimum recommended distance from the mains, 2 feet. I am guessing that if I had a wider room the effect would be more pronounced.
> 
> While I did notice a difference in that the front sound stage panned to the side surrounds more seamlessly it was not enough to commit to making it a permanent install. I really did _not_ like the effect with music or when watching DirecTv, when a program went from dolby digital to stereo during commercials it sounded very echoey. Pretty much any 2 channel content sounded like I was in a cave, dolby digital and Blu-ray's sounded better than plain 5.1.
> 
> I am guessing that the effect for you is a sound stage that envelops more fully?
> 
> I did convince a friend of mine to try it in his place and he is now ordering dedicated wides. He had the same conclusion that the wides closed the gap between the front and surrounds and it was a more enveloping experience.
> 
> It definitely gets a :T from me but not enough of a :boxer: in my room to commit.


I have to agree with you on several counts. The spacing does make a difference. I too was not able to use the specified angles, but used the ones I specified earlier. The front speakers do make and arc though, all of them being the same distance from the main LP and it did make a difference then on a flat plane. 

I have to agree that it does wonders for BluRay discs with the new un-compressed audio formats and all movies with Dolby Digital or DTS surround. But with music or any two channel formats, I revert to 5.1 (it's only a button push, so very simple) - and lots of music is still reverted to 2.1 for myself - just sounds more natural as that is how it was mastered in the studio. I left the final configuration with the wides in my system for 1 week before I decided is was worth keeping as I do like the increased envelopment with movies, as does my family and friends. None of them ever sit down for critical music listening sessions except for me (and sometimes my 4 year old son - he really loves it and will actually sit down for an hour session) and it's easy for me to just switch it to the format I want, then switch it back after the session is over.

At least you can say you tried it. I would love to have a larger room, as I'm sure you would also (something to strive for in the future...).


----------



## iskandam

I wish I had the room to accommodate this set up. I have a weird asymmetrical room with a big opening leading to another room just behind the right front speaker


----------



## cavchameleon

iskandam said:


> I wish I had the room to accommodate this set up. I have a weird asymmetrical room with a big opening leading to another room just behind the right front speaker


Yeah, that's too bad. You would have that one speaker (right wide) that would be in the walk way. You may be able to go with the heights - but would have to see if it really adds any benefit.


----------



## håkan

Hello
Audyssey must have a serious defect.
If you set the speakers to the large subunit and the LFE + Main
then the crossover in and where it cuts even sub base so down to the 40Hz to cut the base down at 40Hz.
So you can not put the base at 80Hz and 40Hz on the front it does not work
on XT and XT32.
Anybody have any ideas about what is wrong, otherwise it goes to the receiver back to the shop


----------



## eugovector

håkan said:


> Hello
> Audyssey must have a serious defect.
> If you set the speakers to the large subunit and the LFE + Main
> then the crossover in and where it cuts even sub base so down to the 40Hz to cut the base down at 40Hz.
> So you can not put the base at 80Hz and 40Hz on the front it does not work
> on XT and XT32.
> Anybody have any ideas about what is wrong, otherwise it goes to the receiver back to the shop


I'm afraid something is getting lost in translation here. Could you please list the settings you are using? Try to be as plain as possible, for instance:

Front: small, 80hz
Center: small, 80hz
LFE: 120hz


----------



## håkan

eugovector said:


> I'm afraid something is getting lost in translation here. Could you please list the settings you are using? Try to be as plain as possible, for instance:
> 
> Front: small, 80hz
> Center: small, 80hz
> LFE: 120hz


Front fullrange 20-20000hz

Lfe +main set to 250hz 
The problem is a cant not use the fullrange and subwoofer at the same time and the problem is audyssey xt.

I use google translate


----------



## eugovector

If you're referring to having the fronts and subwoofer playing overlapping frequencies, I believe the setting is commonly called "Double Bass" and leaving it off is generally recommended by Audyssey.


----------



## cavchameleon

^^^ That's correct. Audyssey does not ever recommend using 'Full Band', that is an option left by the equipment manufacture. After running Audyssey, re-set all speakers to "small" regardless of the size of your mains. If your mains are truly large, set the XO to the lowest point, usually 40HZ.


----------



## håkan

cavchameleon said:


> ^^^ That's correct. Audyssey does not ever recommend using 'Full Band', that is an option left by the equipment manufacture. After running Audyssey, re-set all speakers to "small" regardless of the size of your mains. If your mains are truly large, set the XO to the lowest point, usually 40HZ.


If i set front to 40hz and the sub cut att 40hz to.


----------



## cavchameleon

håkan said:


> If i set front to 40hz and the sub cut att 40hz to.


You can set each pair of speakers to a specific crossover. EX: Fronts at 40 (or 60, or 80), Center at appropriate XO, Surrounds, etc. Everything under the XO set for each speaker will be sent to the sub, including all of the LFE material (LFE is not the same as LPF, it is a separate track just for the sub: the LPF below the XO's of each speaker are combined with the LFE and sent to the sub, you won't be loosing any material).

Hope this makes sense.
Ray


----------



## RollsRoyce

håkan said:


> If i set front to 40hz and the sub cut att 40hz to.


If by "sub cut", you mean the crossover knob on the sub itself, then you should set that knob to "defeat" or as high as it will go. This will get the sub's own crossover up out of the way of the crossover in the receiver. You don't want to set the sub's crossover to the same frequency as (or close to) that in the receiver, as this will sum their effects with bad consequences for the sound.


----------



## håkan

RollsRoyce said:


> If by "sub cut", you mean the crossover knob on the sub itself, then you should set that knob to "defeat" or as high as it will go. This will get the sub's own crossover up out of the way of the crossover in the receiver. You don't want to set the sub's crossover to the same frequency as (or close to) that in the receiver, as this will sum their effects with bad consequences for the sound.


will try to make myself understood

it is a marantz AV7005

If you set the speakers at large so they must be capable of displaying 20-20000Hz
but if you set bass to LFE + Main and then goes down to the crossover, you have no longer large when the filter goes in and then you have only choice option in the 40Hz and up.
But then split the subwoofer at 40Hz as well so the frequency overlap
And this in two channels
I have pictures if it is easier to understand a bad google translation.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

håkan said:


> will try to make myself understood
> 
> it is a marantz AV7005
> 
> If you set the speakers at large so they must be capable of displaying 20-20000Hz
> but if you set bass to LFE + Main and then goes down to the crossover, you have no longer large when the filter goes in and then you have only choice option in the 40Hz and up.


But they are still playing full-range and all this option is doing is defining the frequency below which *both *the sub and the main speakers will be working together.


----------



## håkan

Kal Rubinson said:


> But they are still playing full-range and all this option is doing is defining the frequency below which *both *the sub and the main speakers will be working together.


should i be able to run full range with sub in 2ch and get it is used the filter so it is not full-range.


----------



## Kal Rubinson

håkan said:


> should i be able to run full range with sub in 2ch and get it is used the filter so it is not full-range.


I am afraid I do not understand the wording of your question.

Do you mean? "Should I be able to run full range on the main speakers with the sub in 2 channel and use the filter so the main speaker is not full range." Clearly, no. You cannot be full range on the main speakers and *not *be full range at the same time.

Do you mean? "Should I be able to run full range on the main speakers with the sub in 2 channel and use the filter so the sub is not full range." Yes. That is LFE+Main.


----------



## håkan

Kal Rubinson said:


> I am afraid I do not understand the wording of your question.
> 
> Do you mean? "Should I be able to run full range on the main speakers with the sub in 2 channel and use the filter so the sub is not full range." Yes. That is LFE+Main.


This is right but it not work if i use the main in fullrange and the sub in LFE+Main and sub in lowpass 80hz.


----------



## sub_crazy

Du måste ställa alla dina högtalare till små med en crossover på 80Hz. Även om du har fullregisterhögtalare det kommer att fungera bättre att bara låta din subwoofer hantera basen nedan 80Hz när du tittar på filmer. Jag använde Google translate för denna, låt mig veta om det fungerade bra.

_You need to set all your speakers to small with a crossover at 80hz. Even if you have full range speakers it will work better to just let your subwoofer handle the bass below 80hz when watching movies. I used Google translate for this, let me know if it worked well._


----------



## håkan

sub_crazy said:


> Du måste ställa alla dina högtalare till små med en crossover på 80Hz. Även om du har fullregisterhögtalare det kommer att fungera bättre att bara låta din subwoofer hantera basen nedan 80Hz när du tittar på filmer. Jag använde Google translate för denna, låt mig veta om det fungerade bra.
> 
> _You need to set all your speakers to small with a crossover at 80hz. Even if you have full range speakers it will work better to just let your subwoofer handle the bass below 80hz when watching movies. I used Google translate for this, let me know if it worked well._


Yes it work to translate from English to Swedish but not from Swedish to English


If I intend to do so here instead, so the subwoofer does not work with 80Hz crossover.
And they put the front to 40Hz so puts even crossover for woofer 40Hz though it is at 80Hz.


----------



## Ragnwald

Kal Rubinson said:


> But they are still playing full-range and all this option is doing is defining the frequency below which *both *the sub and the main speakers will be working together.


I think Håkan want to use an external DSP just for the subspeakers. Then he want, if possible bypass the receivers subwoofers LP-filter, or set it as high as possible, not to interfere with DSP-setting, and at the same time have a low crossover for the fronts, to match the DSP setting.
So there´s a point for the possibility to make settings separately for sub and front.

I wonder how many LP-filters in series to subwoofer, there is in most peoples systems, out there?:heehee:


----------

