# Audyssey Pro kit and/or REW?!? What to buy?



## etc6849 (Jan 4, 2009)

Hey guys, it's been a long time since I was on here as I had an apartment before. I've since moved and just bought a second sub and I'm very interested in getting the flattest LF response possible.

My setup: 
AVR: Onkyo TX-NR905
5.1 speakers (all Klipsch):
mains: RF-83, center: RC-64, sides: RS-62, sub 1: RT-12d, sub 2: RT-12d

I just added a second RT-12d and it seemed to help things. The subs are self powered (BASH 800 watt) and Klipsch included an eight filter parametric equalizer that can be adjuster via the Klipsch Sub-commander software or with the auto room eq funciton on the sub.

My receiver also has Audyssey MultEQ XT. I don't have separate amps, but I do bi-amp the main speakers using the Onkyo 905.

I'm contemplating buying the Audyssey pro kit, but how well will it work with RoomEQ and do I really need them both? 

Where is the cheapest place to order the Audyssey pro kit (feel free to PM me)?

Can I update the Audyssey kit later if I update my AVR, by just purchasing new software/license?

What parametric equalizer would you buy for Room EQ and how do you guys handle two subs with it? Right now, I just use a wye adapter as my receiver only has one sub output. I was looking at the DEQ2496 or DCX2496, but I'm open to other suggestions...

Is there a way to use the calibrated Audyssey mic/preamp with the REW software? I already have the ECM8000 mic.


----------



## etc6849 (Jan 4, 2009)

So, even though my receiver is says multEQ on the front, it appears I cannot use the Audyssey pro kit with it?!?


----------



## AustinJerry (Apr 2, 2010)

Just because the AVR has MultEq XT, it doesn't mean it is "Installer Ready", which is the Audyssey term for supporting the Pro Kit. Very few Onkyos are installer ready.

The Pro kit costs $550, plus $150 for the AVR license. If you upgrade from one Installer-ready AVR to another, you can continue using the kit. It just requires a new $150 license.

I have both the Pro kit, and an REW kit. I have been using both for years. As far as which is the better investment to improve sound quality, there is no question--a measurement system. With the latest beta release of REW, you can now have a simplified kit consisting of a USB mic and an HDMI cable, so the entry price for REW is reasonable.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

etc6849 said:


> What parametric equalizer would you buy for Room EQ and how do you guys handle two subs with it? Right now, I just use a wye adapter as my receiver only has one sub output. I was looking at the DEQ2496 or DCX2496, but I'm open to other suggestions...


Just get the basic BFD. The others don’t offer anything additional for subs to justify their extra expense. You typically want to adjust both subs with a single set of filters, so you can “y” after the EQ (although before is fine, too).

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## etc6849 (Jan 4, 2009)

Thanks guys.

So the UMIK-1 USB mic is worth getting? The ECM8000 I have is not calibrated.


----------



## AustinJerry (Apr 2, 2010)

etc6849 said:


> Is there a way to use the calibrated Audyssey mic/preamp with the REW software? I already have the ECM8000 mic.


You can use the mic, but since it has no calibration file to use with REW, the validity of the measurements would be suspect.


----------



## AustinJerry (Apr 2, 2010)

etc6849 said:


> Thanks guys.
> 
> So the UMIK-1 USB mic is worth getting? The ECM8000 I have is not calibrated.


I purchased the UMM-6 from Cross-Spectrum Labs. I like it because it comes with custom calibration files. The 90-degree calibration file is perfect for REW measurements, with the mic pointed towards the ceiling. Not sure what calibration files come with the UMIK-1.


----------



## snowmanick (Oct 16, 2007)

I'd offer a slightly different EQ recommendation, and suggest the MiniDSP in a box. Easy to use, works well with REW, it is a similar price to the BFD, and is in a much better looking box. My wife (and I admit, I) really disliked the looks of the BFD and its sharp corners.

Overall, both will probably get you were you want, but the MiniDSP seems to offer a few more features and exact less of a WAF toll.

Just my $.02.


----------



## Sieglander (May 6, 2011)

I second this. I'm using a miniDSP 2x4 to eq my subs and a OpenDRC for the front speaker. And this is what I get:


----------



## Dwight Angus (Dec 17, 2007)

Sieglander said:


> I second this. I'm using a miniDSP 2x4 to eq my subs and a OpenDRC for the front speaker. And this is what I get:


Good looking graph. Is the minidsp in a box easy to use and is it compatible with Audyssey xt32. I guess I would set up the minidsp first and then run audyssey setup after. I am waiting for delivery for Umik-1 to take room measurements and then will start to focus on flattening out room response. I have a 7.2 home theater and Onkyo 5508 preamp. What configuration should I look at to setup the Minidsp in a box?


----------



## Sieglander (May 6, 2011)

The miniDSP in a Box is not an automated system. To take it to max. performance you have to be familiar with REW and room measurement. In your case, you should first take some measurements of the actual situation and see what multEQ XT32 can do . Maybe there is no need for further EQing after Audyssey.
In general, you first have to setup any additional EQ device and finally run Audyssey.
Without knowing the actual room response it's nearly impossible to advise you on what to do. So I think we're all looking forward to your measurements.


----------



## etc6849 (Jan 4, 2009)

Thanks guys, the measurements are finally coming! I've ordered a UMIK this weekend, so with all hopes, I can post some stuff by next weekend.

As others stated in the thread, the Audyssey kit will not work with my receiver :sad: I'm disappointed as I would have bought a different receiver had I known, but oh well. 

I learned to check the Audyssey webpage before I buy another receiver! Who knew not all Audyssey MultEQ XT was the same?!?! Manufacturers should be required to more accurately describe the version of Audyssey you are getting. They are shooting themselves in the foot as I would have paid more for the Integra (ok, maybe not).

I've had the Onkyo for 4 years now, so at some point I'll upgrade in the near future. I've been wanting to try 9.2 or even 11.2, but I'm trying to figure out the amplifier situation first. If I can find two used 9 channel amps (Onkyo is preferred), that would give me a lot of flexibility in which preamp I buy.


----------



## shortysock (Oct 8, 2012)

Sieglander said:


> I second this. I'm using a miniDSP 2x4 to eq my subs and a OpenDRC for the front speaker. And this is what I get:


this is what i can get before digital room correction using the equalizer, so audyssey would need to fit in higher than here .. because they dont give much phase to adjust those large peaks & dips.. and i dont agree to multiple phase patches when a subsonic patch of negative square root (something like -3hz or -6hz) to quantify is much cleaner.
and if your speakers arent enough to go subsonic, then raising it back up to the positive square root should solve a lot of those modes from building up.
but some people will spin the room until some of the mode is lit up, because of going over.
but sometimes that pocket is exactly what you are moving with a joystick to get audio coming from some fancy art place (like the ceiling).

the cleanest room would be solid in & of itself.
one bump down would have lumps in the smooth.
another bump down is bigger lumps or grown bigger to holes.
then the holes get bigger and bigger.. and you start to see the soundwaves bouncing around in the room.

minidsp needs updates, stuck at 48khz and 24bit is enough to argue the next 3 years of usability .. but it is also the absolute lowest leaving behind the sample rates needed for movies.
since minidsp needs studio gear to run multiple PCM signals .. and it says the fir filter is locked at 48khz .. that rules out the hardware as an option for anybody wanting to simply sip on new socks and watch a movie with peace and restitution.
software lock? .. chip lock?

some say they dont boost any with the equalizer because nobody programmed a limit to prevent the amplifier from burping out chunks upon chunks of volts at whatever target frequency was recorded with the microphone.

smooth is 'i cant tell it sweeped that long or far' when you hear the measurement sweep.
all the phase difference is seperate from the timing of reflections.
and yes, you could grow or trim the hair of the time by adjusting the phase.
it is how you get the woofer to lay a SINGLE thump on the wall .. or lay down TEN (or more) soundwaves as a dribble of excess - WITH THE SAME test tone.

question is..
should the thing thump ONCE or TEN ?
well that is knowing the frequency and listening for the right number per second.
and hunting down the problem is only good if your phase slider really moves.
if the thing is a toy and it doesnt move the phase enough, then you never-ever found the master patch.
if you dont do it, then the only other choice or hope is to find an alternative to whichever overlay chosen to filter-block perfection.

..because equalizing with a large hump is making a patch into it with a comfortable fade (and out of it with an equal fade)
it's like the lump in the air keeps the whole room from smoothing and smearing together to become one solid piece.
and yes, listening to it with fine detail literally sounds torn.. thus the need for something like a helix to curve additional slices into it?
not necessarily true, because one large lump doesn't present itself with an echo like a large room.. but like an echo from a tiny room .. and that tiny blister needs tools to magnify the view for easier mental consumption.

its like a knob called 'atmosphere' and it could really make your ears pop like going downhill (or uphill).
it isnt the fancy timing that shakes the floor.. it is the next double step that could pop your ears or make your stomach feel 'toxic' if you are really ignorant sensitive.

we are talking 1/6th smoothing and a view of 5dB or less.
you got one peak and one dip that sounds as good as that chart shows it?
or did the chart say yes and the throat in the room say something less than 'cant tell if it moved long or short' smooth?
but i really dont think your decibel line is smooth enough to please that type of smooth.
says something about the data measured from the room, the accuracy of it (or the amount missing).
because if the line doesnt go perfectly flat.. the microphone didnt record it?
the software translated it and there was imperfections?
the speakers are junk, and if they were upgraded.. the line would get smoother?

here's my line..
it's 2 channel with zero subwoofers.



**edit**

and look..
there is some goof ball out there talking about 'jst chop off the peak and sell it' as one thing to sell.
another one saying 'jst chop off the peak and boost the dips with a 5-8dB limit'
another one saying 'do it right, even if i need a custom API registry for the NT operating system with dedicated electric worm blocks .. as if nobody ever seen a viable opportunity before printing the circuit'

there are some saying 'jst uber dip the problem and frequency adjust the rest of them all using amplitude adjustments only'
and another one saying 'dont touch any amplitude at all and use phase adjustments only'
and then other ones saying 'mix up amplitude and phase but mix up the amount of allowance for each'

it's like grabbing a coin in your pocket and wondering how dirty it is.


----------

