# Sticky  Data Supporting a Single Setup Mic Position for Audyssey or Dirac Live



## AudiocRaver

*NOTE: Not for Dirac Live after all...

The initial measurements taken when this report was first posted seemed to support the use of a single mic measurement position for getting good results with Audyssey and with Dirac Live. More recent measurements and experiences have shown that this is not the case for most situations. With Dirac Live, it is always better to use multiple mic positions and is very easy because precision placement and careful physical measurements are not necessary. See this review for more details.

With Audyssey, a single microphone position calibration can be effective with low-backed chairs or sofas, but more recent measurements have shown that with high-backed furniture that is not the case. However, there is an approach with high-backed furniture which requires minimal effort and no precise physical spacing of the measurements. This is covered in Part 2 of this report.

Part 1 is left intact for the background info it contains. See Part 2 for the main takeaway info and conclusions.*



*Part 1*

There has been some recent discussion about the use of a single mic position for the setup process for Audyssey or Dirac Live, or any Digital Room Correction (DRC) product. The reasoning for the single mic position is that, if properly chosen, it gives the DRC technology the best information possible for determining the filtering to apply through the auto-correction process, thereby giving the best sound possible where it matters most - at the listener's ears. The tradeoff is improved soundstage and imaging (SS&I) but with restricted sweet spot.

This recent HTS article explains in detail the main reasons justifying the single-point setup mic technique. The data below supports that article, particularly in how it relates to the Listening Position (LP) having a high seat back, by showing:

There is a lot of variation in frequency response (FR) depending on closeness of the ear to the seat back. Therefore a single setup mic position will give best DRC results when located at the same distance from the seat back as the ear would normally be located.
There is very little variation along the ear-to-ear line, even that close to the seat back.
The following graphs show the effect of chair back reflections when making measurements close to a high-backed chair. They have the vertical scale (dB) zoomed in more than we usually recommend for readability.

The first shows the effect of putting a blanket over the back of the chair to reduce reflections. In this case, the blanket was an inexpensive plush throw folded into quarters and draped over the back of the chair so that it extended down to below shoulder level. The first graph shows the difference between with and without the blanket with a mic 6 inches away from the chair back at Listening Position Center (LPC), the center of the listener's ear-to-ear line. Minimal smoothing was used to show the comb effect filtering at higher frequencies without the blanket in place. The dip at 1 kHz is the main mid-frequency effect of the reflection from the chair back, and it is only changed a little by the blanket because the wavelength is over 1 foot at those frequencies. (The 600 Hz dip is from the seat and would not exist with the listener in place.) At higher frequencies we see a lot of comb filtering effect from the reflection, which has a negative effect on image clarity. Adding the blanket improves that quite a bit, although not completely eliminating it. The difference is clearly audible.
 


Here is a third-octave-smoothed view of the same curves, and one can still see a significant difference between with and without the blanket.
 

This plot shows the change in mid-frequency response for distances of (from bottom to top) 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 inches out from the chair back. I normally assume the 6 inch spacing. From ear line to back of head is 4 inches, and I usually sit with my head forward from the chair back a couple of inches while listening. I can hear the difference between that position and leaning my head all the way back, plus it is just more comfortable for me to have my head forward a little, more erect, most of the time. Even ignoring the more dramatic 4-inch curve, from 6 inches out to 12 inches there is significant change in mid frequency response.
 

Here is another view of the same data, with both left and right speaker curves shown, offset for easier readability. 
 

As to the "We have two ears" argument which is sometimes used against the single mic point setup method, the plots below show the difference between LPC, left ear, and right ear positions for left speaker and for right speaker. The FR difference is very small whether the mic is at to left ear, right ear, or LPC position. The LPC mic location represents the ears very accurately.
 

The final plot shows, for each speaker, the average of the three "ear-line" curves versus the LPC curve. There is almost zero benefit in averaging the three curves vs just using the LPC curve to represent the ears.




*Part 2*

Except where noted, the following discussion is for Audyssey calibration. The tests below were done with Audyssey XT and should apply to all versions of Audyssey.

The measurement that made it clear that the single mic position calibration was not a good idea is in the first diagram below. The upper red trace shows the frequency response (FR) with the microphone 6 inches away from the chair back, and the cancellation dip we thought we wanted to have Audyssey compensate for. The measurement in green shows what happens when one sits down with the mic placed at the ear in the seated position. This is the measurement that changes it all. 

The explanation is fairly obvious in retrospect. The side of the human head is hard enough at those frequencies that it becomes a boundary, much like a wall in the room. We know that at a solid wall or any solid boundary there is no air movement, only pressure variation. So the amplitude we normally associate with air movement does not exist there and the FR is very flat. Noticed that in the green plot the FR is much flatter at mid frequencies.

At high frequencies, reflections from the head and structures of the ear now start to cause new disturbances. The blue plot is a second measurement taken while seated with the mic by the ear supposedly in the same position, but see how much HF variation there is between the green and blue plots. Measurement repeatability is very poor.

The lower orange plot shows the Moving Mic Method (MMM), using pink noise as the measurement signal. The measurement mic is moved slowly through the measurement area with the RTA in infinite averaging mode. This plot shows the average FR in the area around the head without equalization.

 


How about selecting a mic measurement point above the chair back? The measurement taken straight up from Listening Position Center (LPC), the center point between the ears of the listener when ideally positioned, is shown next. This measurement position is 1 foot away from the closest point on the chair back, and shows much flatter FR above the bass frequencies. It is not the answer, though, as we will see shortly.

 


Several Audyssey calibrations were executed to try out various combinations of measurement positions. *First,* the single LPC measurement position yielded the following MMM FR plot. As a reference, it involved three calibration steps all at LPC without moving the mic. FR and imaging were fairly good, but the soundstage was poor, very unnatural and disjointed. I found myself moving my head forward and back to try to get it to settle in and it never would.

 


As we continue, we will use a new term, the Center Plane. It is the plane that divides the left and right sides of the listener's head, stretching up and down and backward and forward through the room so that all points within it are equidistant from the main Left and Right speakers.

For the *second* calibration, giving us the next MMM plot, the first measurement position was straight above LPC, one foot away from the nearest point of the chair back. All of the other measurements were in the center plane, at least one foot away from the chair back, all at or above the ear position, all different distances from the chair back, and all within 1.5 feet of LPC. The resulting imaging and soundstage were good, but FR was hollow in the midbass and uneven through the midrange.

 


Realizing that it was important to include LPC as the first point in any calibration, even with its imperfections, the *third* calibration started at LPC and after that was similar to the second calibration, but the FR (no MMM was done) ended up very light in the bass frequencies, and still rough through the midrange. Imaging and soundstage again were quite good.

At this point it was clear that the strategy of focusing all the measurements positions in the center plane was good for imaging and soundstage, but finding the right combination of points to give good FR was not quite so simple.

The fourth and final calibration finally got the right combination of factors involved. All measurement positions were in the center plane, the first was at LPC. Now imagine a right triangle with the right angle at LPC, one side pointing straight up, and the other side straight forward through the bulb of the nose. The second measurement position was straight above LPC even with the top of the back of the chair. The final measurement was taken straight forward from LPC, 12 inches away. The line from the 2nd to the final measurement positions is the hypotenuse of the triangle, and the remaining measurement positions were all along that line, equally spaced.

 


The convenience of this method was that the small mic stand in use, sitting on the seat of the chair, was set up so that the 2nd through 8th positions simply involved sliding the telescoping boom of the stand without moving any other angles or settings. That made it very easy to finish the rest of the measurements without a tape measure or any precise physical measurements of microphone position. The MMM average FR result is shown in the final diagram, which is very flat and sounded very good. Soundstage and imaging (SS&I) were both very good and the FR was smooth and enjoyable. The high bass amount could easily have been tailored by changing subwoofer level and the small dip just above 100 Hz could probably have been alleviated with a subwoofer positioning or delay setting change.

 

*NOTE:* At this point the best SS&I performance of Dirac Live was compared to that of Audyssey XT. While the results with Audyssey XT were very good, the Dirac Live results were sharper and more precise. Audyssey XT32 _might_ have done a better job at this than Audyssey XT, although this can not be automatically assumed.


Some might argue that left and right data should be included in the measurements. There is no harm in doing that, however it complicates the process in that precise physical measurements are required for the symmetry of that measurement pattern, and one of the goals I was hoping to achieve was the elimination of that tedious necessity. I believe that has been achieved with the fourth pattern described above. And if one wishes to argue that the left and right data is important because of variations that need to be included, the counter argument is that if there are significant FR variations a few inches left and right of LPC, then there are serious problems at the listening position which only will be alleviated acoustically, and Audyssey or Dirac Live or any other room correction program will have no hope of making it any better. 

The priorities for data collection by way of the mic setup pattern at the LP are:

front to back variations
up and down variations
left and right variations
Measurements and actual listening tests verify that using the center plane for all measurement positions gets the information necessary to give excellent FR and SS&I results at the same time. And since those measurements do not involve any left/right symmetry requirements, the tedium of careful physical spacing is unnecessary. What a relief!

Beyond that, the main requirements for getting good results are that:

the first measurement is at LPC, even though we know there are disturbances there and often no line-of-sight to surrounds, as there is important data needed at that position for the room correction program to get best performance from the front main speakers
the remaining measurement positions, all in the center plane, should be different distances from the chair back
all within one foot of LPC, if possible, although line-of-sight to surrounds is important for these measurements. With Audyssey, measurement points farther than 12 inches from LPC give compromised FR and softened, imprecise SS&I, so are only useful if smoothed FR across several seats is the goal.
The method described above, sliding the telescoping boom along the hypotenuse of the right triangle described, makes it very easy to accomplish this without any further physical measurements. 

*In conclusion,* with Audyssey, where the height of a chair or sofa back extends above shoulder level, multiple measurement positions are necessary when good FR and good SS&I performance are all desired. The single mic position calibration (3 calibration steps all at LPC) is appropriate where a low chair back is in use. With Dirac Live, multiple measurement points, with the first at LPC, are always recommended, as discussed elsewhere.


----------



## muzz

Thx for the info.
The last Aud cal I did was only a 3 point, center, and about 10" left and right, and it's the best sounding cal I've done yet.
I usually do MLP- and 2' l/r, with another set down the exact same way, but like 2' in front of MLP.
With that being said, the area of listening is very small, 1 Love seat, which I sit in the middle of, so I don't have to worry about other areas/multiple rows.


----------



## Talley

Thank you for the test data.

Overall I'm still playing with various setups. It's to go back to direct mode with the SVS Ultras because they are so bass heavy they sound good for rock lol... trying to find a happy medium.


----------



## AudiocRaver

I am afraid I must modify some of my statements above. After doing some measurements with the mic next to the ear while seated at the LP, it is now clear that the acoustical landscape there changes drastically when one is seated, more than I might have guessed. I will update the first post as soon as I am able. It is a complex subject.:dontknow:


----------



## AudiocRaver

*The FIRST POST has been updated with new recommendations.*

Also, in this latest work with mic calibration patterns, more listening comparison was done between the best SS&I performance of Dirac Live vs. Audyssey XT. While Audyssey did a very good job, the SS&I performance of Dirac Live was sharper and more precise. XT32 _might_ have done a better job, although this can not be automatically assumed. See FIRST POST for details.


----------



## Savjac

I told ya Wayne, the sound and image smear considerably when seated in a higher back chair, especially a well padded one. The results are similar to defocusing a camera to show a slightly blurred image that does not quite gel onto the film plane. Just moving from the back of the chair about 12" does help but does not ameliorate the problem fully. Using a low back chair that comes to rest just below the plane wherein the head meets the neck is a good place to start. 

Allowing the sound to develop in front, to the sides of and behind the head/ear interface will tend to smother that sonics wherein they seem to be the most important for being able to form a sonic image in ones head...if that makes sense. When we go to a live concert say at Orchestra Hall in Chicago, we do not sit in easy chairs and no self respecting composer would ever think of allowing that as so much of the music and sonic landscape would go un noticed. My opinion anyway.


----------



## RapalloAV

AudiocRaver said:


> *NOTE:The fourth and final calibration finally got the right combination of factors involved. All measurement positions were in the center plane, the first was at LPC. Now imagine a right triangle with the right angle at LPC, one side pointing straight up, and the other side straight forward through the bulb of the nose. The second measurement position was straight above LPC even with the top of the back of the chair. The final measurement was taken straight forward from LPC, 12 inches away. The line from the 2nd to the final measurement positions is the hypotenuse of the triangle, and the remaining measurement positions were all along that line, equally spaced.
> 
> The convenience of this method was that the small mic stand in use, sitting on the seat of the chair, was set up so that the 2nd through 8th positions simply involved sliding the telescoping boom of the stand without moving any other angles or settings. That made it very easy to finish the rest of the measurements without a tape measure or any precise physical measurements of microphone position. *


*

Is it possible to have a drawing of this (multi) single mic placement please as Im trying to understand it in the text?*


----------



## AudiocRaver

Savjac said:


> I told ya Wayne, the sound and image smear considerably when seated in a higher back chair, especially a well padded one. The results are similar to defocusing a camera to show a slightly blurred image that does not quite gel onto the film plane. Just moving from the back of the chair about 12" does help but does not ameliorate the problem fully. Using a low back chair that comes to rest just below the plane wherein the head meets the neck is a good place to start.
> 
> Allowing the sound to develop in front, to the sides of and behind the head/ear interface will tend to smother that sonics wherein they seem to be the most important for being able to form a sonic image in ones head...if that makes sense. When we go to a live concert say at Orchestra Hall in Chicago, we do not sit in easy chairs and no self respecting composer would ever think of allowing that as so much of the music and sonic landscape would go un noticed. My opinion anyway.


So true, Jack. The techniques above are "best can do" with high-backed chair, at least the best I can come up with, and are pretty good, but a low back is better, no doubt about it.

What we need is a chair with a shoulder-high back and a narrow extension with a small cupped headrest, like on some dentist chairs, so you can lean back totally relaxed and the head does not roll to either side, yet it is all behind the head, not sticking out at all behind the ears, not causing sonic disruptions. And it needs to be easily removable for when we are taking measurements and setting up.


----------



## RapalloAV

AudiocRaver said:


> So true, Jack. The techniques above are "best can do" with high-backed chair, at least the best I can come up with, and are pretty good, but a low back is better, no doubt about it.
> 
> What we need is a chair with a shoulder-high back and a narrow extension with a small cupped headrest, like on some dentist chairs, so you can lean back totally relaxed and the head does not roll to either side, yet it is all behind the head, not sticking out at all behind the ears, not causing sonic disruptions. And it needs to be easily removable for when we are taking measurements and setting up.


Wow that would be something great for those that care about their sound, the right HT seats!
Sadly most dedicated rooms would have high backed seats, so all are missing something in their sound.:rolleyesno:


----------



## AudiocRaver

RapalloAV said:


> Is it possible to have a drawing of this (multi) single mic placement please as Im trying to understand it in the text?


A diagram has been added.


----------



## Savjac

AudiocRaver said:


> The techniques above are "best can do" with high-backed chair, at least the best I can come up with, and are pretty good, but a low back is better, no doubt about it.
> 
> What we need is a chair with a shoulder-high back and a narrow extension with a small cupped headrest, like on some dentist chairs, so you can lean back totally relaxed and the head does not roll to either side, yet it is all behind the head, not sticking out at all behind the ears, not causing sonic disruptions. And it needs to be easily removable for when we are taking measurements and setting up.


You did a brilliant job here Wayne of quantifying the issue at hand. I had never thought of going through these projections scientifically, maybe that is why few believe it is real. Thank You for taking on this endeavor. I do need to learn the power of the REW, it seems a complex program when starting out. 

Oh and the chain that works best is a barber chair


----------



## AudiocRaver

Savjac said:


> You did a brilliant job here Wayne of quantifying the issue at hand. I had never thought of going through these projections scientifically, maybe that is why few believe it is real. Thank You for taking on this endeavor. I do need to learn the power of the REW, it seems a complex program when starting out.
> 
> Oh and the chain that works best is a barber chair


Thanks, Jack. REW is not without its learning curve, but the rewards are great!


----------



## Dwight Angus

Hope to try this today & measure xt32 in the LPC. One question. I am tall & my ears are near the top of the high back chair about 2 inches below the top of the chair back. For the 2nd measurement where do I place the mic ie 2 inches above ear postion or a higher postion?


----------



## AudiocRaver

Dwight Angus said:


> Hope to try this today & measure xt32 in the LPC. One question. I am tall & my ears are near the top of the high back chair about 2 inches below the top of the chair back. For the 2nd measurement where do I place the mic ie 2 inches above ear postion or a higher postion?


Sorry, I thought I had answered this.

I would go higher, but no more than 12 inches above LPC. And keep all measurements above the LPC level. I tried taking some measurements lower than that, and there is more and more variation as you go down.

Your height is in your favor. The LPC measurement is critical, but the higher it is (the taller you are) the more it rises above the messiness around chair surfaces. Going higher is better, it captures and includes info around the head area, but more than 12" away it is no longer representative of the LP area as far as SS&I with Audyssey is concerned.


----------



## Lumen

AudiocRaver said:


> With Dirac Live, it is always better to use multiple mic positions and is very easy because precision placement and careful physical measurements are not necessary.
> .
> .
> _Except where noted, the following discussion is for Audyssey calibration._
> .
> .
> the *third* calibration started at LPC and after that was similar to the second calibration, but the FR (no MMM was done) ended up very light in the bass frequencies, and still rough through the midrange. Imaging and soundstage again were quite good.
> .
> .
> The fourth and final calibration finally got the right combination of factors involved.
> 
> 
> 
> The convenience of this method was that the small mic stand in use, sitting on the seat of the chair, was set up so that the 2nd through 8th positions simply involved sliding the telescoping boom of the stand without moving any other angles or settings. That made it very easy to finish the rest of the measurements without a tape measure or any precise physical measurements of microphone position. The MMM average FR result is shown in the final diagram, which is very flat and sounded very good. Soundstage and imaging (SS&I) were both very good and the FR was smooth and enjoyable. The high bass amount could easily have been tailored by changing subwoofer level and the small dip just above 100 Hz could probably have been alleviated with a subwoofer positioning or delay setting change.
> .
> .
> Beyond that, the main requirements for getting good results are that:
> 
> the first measurement is at LPC, even though we know there are disturbances there and often no line-of-sight to surrounds, as there is important data needed at that position for the room correction program to get best performance from the front main speakers
> the remaining measurement positions, all in the center plane, should be different distances from the chair back
> all within one foot of LPC, if possible, although line-of-sight to surrounds is important for these measurements. With Audyssey, measurement points farther than 12 inches from LPC give compromised FR and softened, imprecise SS&I, so are only useful if smoothed FR across several seats is the goal.
> The method described above, sliding the telescoping boom along the hypotenuse of the right triangle described, makes it very easy to accomplish this without any further physical measurements.


Like yourself and others, my Dirac results have sometimes yielded mediocre to objectionable sound quality. The two biggest disappointments have been in the anemic bass and distorted mid-range arenas. In my experience, these "shortcomings" are alleviated somewhat by tighter mic spacing for the random positions. I've had better luck and satisfaction keeping the mic positions away from lower positions near armrests or seat cushions. I do allow some of the random mic locations to get quite close to the seat back, as that is where my ears rest during performances. Those calibrations deliver improved balance between overall FR and bass content while maintaining SS&I (as you already said). And bass can always be tweaked using AVR tone controls or by bumping up the house curve. 

I'm currently auditioning subs so can't introduce another variable at this time, but definitely plan on exploring your triangle technique. On a similar note, I've already begun to experiment with above-the-seat-back mic positions as described in Post #44 by _kbarnes70_ of your Audyssey vs Dirac thread. It yielded wonderful results for surround effects, but Dirac still (but not always) introduces midrange distortion and robs the bottom end. I believe with some more experimentation and practice, I'll be able to properly dial it all in, with many thanks to your keen insights.


----------



## Talley

Savjac said:


> I told ya Wayne, the sound and image smear considerably when seated in a higher back chair, especially a well padded one. The results are similar to defocusing a camera to show a slightly blurred image that does not quite gel onto the film plane. Just moving from the back of the chair about 12" does help but does not ameliorate the problem fully. Using a low back chair that comes to rest just below the plane wherein the head meets the neck is a good place to start.
> 
> Allowing the sound to develop in front, to the sides of and behind the head/ear interface will tend to smother that sonics wherein they seem to be the most important for being able to form a sonic image in ones head...if that makes sense. When we go to a live concert say at Orchestra Hall in Chicago, we do not sit in easy chairs and no self respecting composer would ever think of allowing that as so much of the music and sonic landscape would go un noticed. My opinion anyway.


My uncle would agree. He had a 3 seat couch that he use to use for his listening and has since moved to a regular ol' computer chair that is a midback type. The top of that computer chair goes to his shoulder blades so his entire tops of his shoulders and his head stick up into the room.

Obviously there is a compromise to comfort and perfect setup for listening and then when it applies to movies more often comfort takes the main priority.


----------



## flteng

Thanks for conducting these trials and posting the info! I had previously tried the suggested 101 pattern in the Audyssey thread and felt my results were improved over the standard Audyssey pattern. Later I tried the original single mic position setup and felt it was better still. 

Now with a bit of spare time this week I gave the triangle method a go on both my Denon AVR2809 (Audyssey XT) and B&W system and my Yamaha RX-V1900 (YPAO) and JBL System. In both these rooms I have high back lounges where the main listening position is. I used folded blankets on the seat backs and paid careful attention to the microphone positioning, initially running single point measurements fine tuning mic position until equal spacing from the front left and right speakers and getting the resultant sub trim level to be at 0dB. Then I ran the 8 point measurement with 3 at MLP (6 inches from the seat back) and then the 1 foot above, and the remainder on the hypotenuse with the last at 1 foot forward of the original position as suggested. The result- great! It is the best sounding Audyssey result I have achieved. 

The Denon system is used for watching TV and some movies as well as music and radio. So far for general TV watching I am happy with the sound using generally Pro Logic II, Audyssey and Dynamic EQ. For music I typically use a 2.1 configuration and prefer Audyssey Bypass L&R with Dynamic EQ for the sub. The difference between Audyssey on and Bypass is the smallest I have achieved and subtle however I prefer the sound of the two main speakers without the Audyssey corrections for music.

I have yet to try much listening on the Yamaha system but with a couple of quick samples I thought the result was also the best I have achieved.

This website has now sparked my interest in REW so as soon as I get a microphone and some time I'll start learning some more and tweak my systems further to try and get the most out of them I can.

Thanks again!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Glad to hear you are getting good results. Appreciate the feedback.


----------



## needspeed52

Hello Guys,
I came across this two page thread by accident looking for some mic positions for Audy XT 32 with SUB EQ. I was just wondering if this method is still valid today as it was written a while ago and if anyone might have some suggestions for me I'd be all ears. Wayne you need to clean some of your PMs out as you can't receive any more PMs until you do, it's all filled up.

Thanks guys, I look forward to your replies from this old thread about using the right angle and mic movements forming the hypotenuse of the angle. :T


----------



## primetimeguy

I've been a long time Audyssey user and seems like I am constantly tweaking things. Finally gave this mic placement a try and sure glad I did. I love it it so far, at least until the tweak bug catches me again! Thanks for all the great info. 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## Totemtimer

First off i need to say that I am from Lincoln NE and lived there for 20 years. Ive read a lot of your posts on audyssey set up and have a few questions. Today I am setting up my 5.1 system. I have used your CLP placement that uses the right triangle for my single LP and it worked very well. But, now my girlfriend lives with me and I'd like to do a multiple LP set up. I will being using a high seat back 3 seat sofa. 
1) Should just have her sit in the middle seat when she wants to enjoy the system or will me using the entire sofa for LPs give me similar results?
2) Which mic placement pattern should I use and how should I use it? 
FYI, My sofa is a little over 9 feet away from the main and center speakers. 
Any suggestions and tips for me setting this up would be very appreciated. 
Thanks man
Logan
PS Go Big Red


----------



## NBPk402

When I tuned my old theater with Dirac...I made a jig to hold the Mic at multiple heights so my Mic was always in the same position. This allowed me to get repeatable runs, and I knew that if the results were different it was not because of Mic placement.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk


----------



## Remedy1978

Referring to the original post on locations for Audyssey calibration, when you mention all measurements are relative to the MLP, do you return to that location and then move the mic forward, up, left, right, etc. or do you start in the MLP and continue to move from there. Meaning I do not go back to location 1 and move the set number of inches?


----------



## thumprchgo

This is a really good article! Tons of work was done, it's obvious. 

Whether I view this on a desktop, tablet. or phone, I can't see any of the graphics attached. They show up as broken image icons. The text often refers to these not-visible images. Are they retrievable in some other repository of images?


----------



## muad'dib

Can someone please post or email me the diagram for mic positions.. Seems I can't view them on this forum...

Thanks


----------



## muad'dib

thumprchgo said:


> This is a really good article! Tons of work was done, it's obvious.
> 
> 
> 
> Whether I view this on a desktop, tablet. or phone, I can't see any of the graphics attached. They show up as broken image icons. The text often refers to these not-visible images. Are they retrievable in some other repository of images?


Think I found the image on google search.


----------



## willis7469

muad'dib said:


> Think I found the image on google search.












yep


----------



## muad'dib

willis7469 said:


> yep


Thanks..

Cant wait to find time and try this method...
If it works awesome, I'll be very happy to finally achieve perfection...


----------



## willis7469

muad'dib said:


> Thanks..
> 
> Cant wait to find time and try this method...
> If it works awesome, I'll be very happy to finally achieve perfection...




I can’t say it’s super successful for multiple seats but for my use case it’s excellent. I’m the one who cares...and built it so..I win!!! Lol

I think you’ll like it.


----------



## muad'dib

Tried this procedure at a customers house.. Using his anthem avm60 and ARC Genesis..

End result from customer.......

AWESOME...

He and I love the end result....

Thanks again..


----------

