# Audssey setup vs. REW



## D Wulf (Feb 15, 2008)

Hello,

My receiver does a setup via audssey (sp) how will this compare to the rew setup I am thinking of purchasing the spl meter and other items needed, but if this setup program that the receiver does is ok
I can save some cash.

Thanks for comments

David


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*

Audssey usually does a fairly good job but REW and an SPL meter will really tune your system properly and will help dramatically with the adjustment of your sub as the receivers mic is usually not very accurate in the lower octaves.


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



tonyvdb said:


> Audssey usually does a fairly good job but REW and an SPL meter will really tune your system properly and will help dramatically with the adjustment of your sub as the receivers mic is usually not very accurate in the lower octaves.


I do not think it is a problem as these mics are fairly well calibrated in the better receivers and, certainly, no worse than that in an RS SLM. The real issue, however, is that REW will not tune your system at all unless you have some device to implement the filters it generates. The OP needs to realize this.

Kal


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*

I currently have a sub with PEQ and use Audyssey calibration. I tried running Audyssey first and then followed it up with REW. I noticed that turning off Audyssey produces a flatter response than turning it on. I am suspecting that Audyssey curves were never meant to be flat.

My question is does it make more sense to do REW first and use PEQ to correct peaks or dips and then run Audyssey after so it sees a flatter room response to work with?


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



ddemeterio5 said:


> I currently have a sub with PEQ and use Audyssey calibration. I tried running Audyssey first and then followed it up with REW. I noticed that turning off Audyssey produces a flatter response than turning it on. I am suspecting that Audyssey curves were never meant to be flat.


Not in my experience, and that includes measuring the results with REW. Remember, you need to average multiple mic position measurements with REW in order to approximate what Audyssey measures.



> My question is does it make more sense to do REW first and use PEQ to correct peaks or dips and then run Audyssey after so it sees a flatter room response to work with?


Why not? Generally, Audyssey recommends that it be the last correction and, if you don't like it, you can easily turn it off.


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



Kal Rubinson said:


> Not in my experience, and that includes measuring the results with REW. Remember, you need to average multiple mic position measurements with REW in order to approximate what Audyssey measures.
> 
> How do you average multiple mic position measurements in REW?


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



ddemeterio5 said:


> Kal Rubinson said:
> 
> 
> > Not in my experience, and that includes measuring the results with REW. Remember, you need to average multiple mic position measurements with REW in order to approximate what Audyssey measures.
> ...


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



Kal Rubinson said:


> ddemeterio5 said:
> 
> 
> > I cannot recall and my REW stuff is in the other house. However, it has been described here. Mebbe try the REW thread?
> ...


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> How do you average multiple mic position measurements in REW?


Take up to 8 positional readings and average them on the AVERAGE tab....



> How do u measure this distance?


From the sub to the listening position.



> Does Audyssey have problems with PEQ? Should I just switch off PEQ and let Audyssey do everything?


Some say yes, some say no.

I would suggest AutoEQ with equalizers off, and then clean up anything with the equalizer.

brucek


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



ddemeterio5 said:


> Kal Rubinson said:
> 
> 
> > Kal,
> ...


----------



## thewire (Jun 28, 2007)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



tonyvdb said:


> Audssey usually does a fairly good job but REW and an SPL meter will really tune your system properly and will help dramatically with the adjustment of your sub as the receivers mic is usually not very accurate in the lower octaves.


Was it ever discovered why a receivers mic usually isn't accurate for the lower frequencies?


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

brucek said:


> Take up to 8 positional readings and average them on the AVERAGE tab....
> 
> 
> From the sub to the listening position.
> ...


So if the sub is to my right, should I measure diagonally from the sub to my seating position?
The PEQ is in the subwoofer and it can only be turned on or off. Are you saying I should turn it off?
I'm getting the impression that Audyssey prefers to work alone. Because of this I can only use REW to measure the results of Audyssey or position speakers, subwoofers, and room treatments before running Audyssey again.


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> should I measure diagonally from the sub to my seating position?


Yes, how else would it be done?



> Are you saying I should turn it off?


Yes.



> Because of this I can only use REW to measure the results of Audyssey or position speakers, subwoofers, and room treatments before running Audyssey again.


Can you explain what this means?

brucek


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

brucek said:


> Yes, how else would it be done?
> 
> 
> Yes.
> ...


Previously, I thought I could run REW and adjust my sub PEQ for flatter room response and then let Audyssey finish the job. However this approach may confuse the Audyssey setup since the PEQ will introduce some phase/delay in the system and that's why I was getting an erroneous subwoofer distance calculation. Now I'm just going to use REW for positioning speakers, subwoofers, and room treatments. Also, I could use REW to measure the room response after running Audyssey. With Audyssey, I could setup up to 8 different mic positions for it to work with. On the same token, I could do the same thing in REW and take the average room response and see which combination of mic positions in Audyssey does a better job in my listening position.


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> Previously, I thought I could run REW and adjust my sub PEQ for flatter room response and then let Audyssey finish the job


And why can't you simply do the opposite?

Run the AutoEQ, and then run REW to clean up the sub... It's the method many members here use.

brucek


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

brucek said:


> And why can't you simply do the opposite?
> 
> Run the AutoEQ, and then run REW to clean up the sub... It's the method many members here use.
> 
> brucek


If I adjust the subwoofer PEQ after running Audyssey, there is a chance that I might alter the phase/delay settings done by Audyssey. If there's a cheap alternative to Neptune EQ then I will abandon Audyssey completely.:T


----------



## Kal Rubinson (Aug 3, 2006)

ddemeterio5 said:


> If I adjust the subwoofer PEQ after running Audyssey, there is a chance that I might alter the phase/delay settings done by Audyssey. If there's a cheap alternative to Neptune EQ then I will abandon Audyssey completely.:T


Can you explain why you cannot simply run and use Audyssey by itself? 

Kal


----------



## brucek (Apr 11, 2006)

> If I adjust the subwoofer PEQ after running Audyssey, there is a chance that I might alter the phase/delay settings done by Audyssey.


If that's the case, then that is what should happen, since REW measures that as a new superior situation at the listening position.

Why would you doubt that REW could not correct something that it measures, (whether the situation it's correcting comes from a bad room, or an imperfect Audyssey result)? If the Audyssey result is actually perfect, then REW will say so.



> Can you explain why you cannot simply run and use Audyssey by itself?


My anecdotal evidence shows that Audyssey is sometimes less than perfect in the low bass regions in removing modal resonances, although I understand that it is getting better.

brucek


----------



## ddemeterio5 (Apr 16, 2007)

Kal Rubinson said:


> Can you explain why you cannot simply run and use Audyssey by itself?
> 
> Kal


I'm now more convinced that Audyssey is the way to go. It's just the tweaker in me I guess trying to make things better if I could. Even if I only use Audyssey, I can still use REW to determine which mic positions in the Audyssey setup produces better results in my seating position.


----------



## hjones4841 (Jan 21, 2009)

*Re: Audssey setup V.S. REW*



tonyvdb said:


> Audssey usually does a fairly good job but REW and an SPL meter will really tune your system properly and will help dramatically with the adjustment of your sub as the receivers mic is usually not very accurate in the lower octaves.


I have a Denon 5805 with the first version of Audyssey (no dynamic EQ). I used to be a fan of it and left it on all the time, but after treating the room with traps I much prefer for it to be off. It introduces a broad peak in the freq. response in the 60Hz range. See attached plots - the smooth FR one is with Audyssey off and with FR correction via a BFD. Measurements are with a ECM8000 after using the Denon mic for Audyssey setup. For this plot, I had Audyssey average only the 3 seats in the HT.


As always tho, YMMV.


----------

