Will you come and set up my system for me? Kidding of course. I was just wondering how good those techs are that work for Best Buys Magnolia. Anybody?
-
Feeling lucky? Check out the AK 24th Anniversary Giveaway thread and join in the fun!
What are your thoughts on Audyssey?
- Thread starter privateeye
- Start date
Bill Ferris
Lunatic Member
Don`t know about any of BB`s Magnolia tech folks having any skills concerning manual voicing (equalizer tuning) of a audio system ?
I`m totally self taught in audio electronics and sound systems knowledge, starting with HS rock bands in 1970 setting up and operating their small simple PA setups, and what little I knew then, was usually greater than the band members, and it helped that I had already taught myself how to solder as a child in the early to mid sixties, so I could repair their cables, which got me my first introduction to and pay.
Sorry no more service house calls, since retiring from public audio repair service/setup operations in the summer of 2002.
jayvis
Addicted Member
I'm not sure if there's anything that can really correct hearing deficiencies. Hearing aids are just that, an aid for a detected deficiency. They don't actually fix the underlying problem either. Even with perfect hearing, no reproduced recording sounds the same as a live performance, and never will because they're all engineered fabrications. Page 3 of the April 2024 edition of Stereophile has an interesting take from Jim Austin "On assessing sonic illusions".
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
Uh, that would be a big fat no.
You're still missing my point. What do you do about live concerts?
If your hearing is bad enough to need help from an equalizer at home, why does this not apply to a live concert or the rest of life?
IMO +95% of users claiming they need an equalizer to compensate for their individual hearing are just lying to themselves and trying to get others to agree with them.
I don't care how anyone sets up their own system. I just wish that instead of claiming their hearing is "different" they would admit their use of an equalizer and constant tweaking of their system has nothing to do with higher-fi. It's about making things sound the way they want.
IME those who use live orchestral music as their reference are the most likely to agree with what auto equalization sets for their system.
PS: As for the poster who said he uses auto equalization for TV/movies but not for music, that makes no sense at all.
I'm in complete agreement with you. I'm just saying that a system with flat in room response is far more likely to deliver what the musicians and engineer intended. That you or anyone else may not like a flatter sound doesn't change that.
I know that I have a tendency to want generous bass. However, using measurements to adjust in-room response has made everything I listen to sound better than using my ears to adjust same.
Gigantic
A big, big love
Uh, that would be a big fat no.
You're still missing my point. What do you do about live concerts?
If your hearing is bad enough to need help from an equalizer at home, why does this not apply to a live concert or the rest of life?
IMO +95% of users claiming they need an equalizer to compensate for their individual hearing are just lying to themselves and trying to get others to agree with them.
I don't care how anyone sets up their own system. I just wish that instead of claiming their hearing is "different" they would admit their use of an equalizer and constant tweaking of their system has nothing to do with higher-fi. It's about making things sound the way they want.
IME those who use live orchestral music as their reference are the most likely to agree with what auto equalization sets for their system.
PS: As for the poster who said he uses auto equalization for TV/movies but not for music, that makes no sense at all.
I'm in complete agreement with you. I'm just saying that a system with flat in room response is far more likely to deliver what the musicians and engineer intended. That you or anyone else may not like a flatter sound doesn't change that.
I know that I have a tendency to want generous bass. However, using measurements to adjust in-room response has made everything I listen to sound better than using my ears to adjust same.
In the past, I abused a graphic eq with a more or less smiley face setting to boost the bass and treble and scoop the mids. I’ll admit that I liked it, but my gear was not much to talk about, generally entry level receiver, slightly better speakers and basic sources. I was using Eq to make up for the inadequacies of my system. However, as I have built an increasingly better system, I’ve found that I appreciate it better with a measured and calibrated, flat room response. Applying the eq curve that I used to enjoy, makes it sound boomy and harsh; although because my hearing rolls off just under 10kHz, there is no amount of adjustment that can compensate for it, so I trust the measurements and my spouse for guidance.
jayvis
Addicted Member
And you're still using the same ears to come to that conclusion. The measurements just happened to be a tool that helped you determine that. It works for some, but not for others. Just like anything in audio, your experience is valid but not generalized.
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
Yes, I'm using my ears to make a judgement call. Not once in the 30+ years of adjusting for flatter in room response using measurements have I regretted doing so. However, my judgment is based on what I hear at live concerts of unamplified orchestral music and the Wannamaker Organ.And you're still using the same ears to come to that conclusion. The measurements just happened to be a tool that helped you determine that. It works for some, but not for others. Just like anything in audio, your experience is valid but not generalized.
Adjusting for a flat(er) in room response is the only way to minimize the effects of room acoustics and speaker interaction with them. Whether you like it or not you're far more likely to get "closer" to the sound the artists and engineer intended by using measurements to flatten in room response.
What do you use as a reference? If it's not acoustic music, how do you know what it's supposed to sound like?
jayvis
Addicted Member
Even with perfect hearing and room correction, no reproduced recording will ever sound the same as a live performance because they're all engineered fabrications. Page 3 of the April 2024 edition of Stereophile has an interesting take from Jim Austin "On assessing sonic illusions". I encourage every audio fan to read it if they can. That doesn't mean that we can't or shouldn't do things to our systems that brings them closer to reproducing music to our individual and subjective tastes. But it will never accurately mimic or sound like a live performance to anyone.
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
No one especially me would say that reproduction of music is perfect. It most likely will never be. However, it's called Hi-Fi for a reason. That being, to reproduce with a high degree of fidelity. If high fidelity reproduction is not your aim that's fine with me. However, if it is, using measurements to adjust and set what you hear brings you closer to what the artist and engineer intended. IOW, that's what HiFi is intended to be.
The only way to get sound that's closer to what the musicians and engineer produced is to take the room/speaker interface out of the question. The only way to come close to that is to use measurements and settings that flatten the in-room response.
Anyone is certainly free to make their system sound the way they want. However, doing so doesn't usually have anything to do with HiFi or "Higher Fi".
I use measurements to adjust and set my in-room response. I also have a reference that has nothing to do with anything electronic.
I'm very familiar with Stereophile and The Absolute Sound having been a continuous subscriber to Stereophile since the early 1980's and TAS since the middle 1980's. I also subscribed to HiFi Review. I remember when they changed to HiFi Stereo Review and later to just Stereo Review. High Fidelity, Audio and The Audio Amateur were also on my list of subscriptions.
I ask again, what is your reference? If you don't have one that's OK. If you don't like what measurements tell you that's your business. The reality is, the more you reject what measurements say the lower your fidelity.
The only way to get sound that's closer to what the musicians and engineer produced is to take the room/speaker interface out of the question. The only way to come close to that is to use measurements and settings that flatten the in-room response.
Anyone is certainly free to make their system sound the way they want. However, doing so doesn't usually have anything to do with HiFi or "Higher Fi".
I use measurements to adjust and set my in-room response. I also have a reference that has nothing to do with anything electronic.
I'm very familiar with Stereophile and The Absolute Sound having been a continuous subscriber to Stereophile since the early 1980's and TAS since the middle 1980's. I also subscribed to HiFi Review. I remember when they changed to HiFi Stereo Review and later to just Stereo Review. High Fidelity, Audio and The Audio Amateur were also on my list of subscriptions.
I ask again, what is your reference? If you don't have one that's OK. If you don't like what measurements tell you that's your business. The reality is, the more you reject what measurements say the lower your fidelity.
privateeye
Active Member
I just wanted to write a quick interesting update to this post. I have a single MLP on my leather sofa, which has a relatively high back. My ear sits four or five inches below the top of the sofa back.
The internet consensus seems to be that in this situation, one should place a thick blanket or several towels over the back of the sofa in line with your main listening position prior to calibration in order to reduce reflections that may occur off of the sofa back. This is the practice I have always followed as I considered it proper procedure.
Last night, I decided to do some experimenting without using the thick blanket. I decided not to put anything over the sofa back. The results were vastly better, night and day different. When using the blanket, Audyssey would make drastic low-end and high-end adjustments, which is exactly what using a blanket is supposed to prevent. The low end would be completely cut off, and there would be a lot of strange adjustments on the high end; the end result was never good regardless of microphone placement.
Now, without the use of the blanket, the adjustments are much less severe. I'm actually getting a much flatter response and much better sound quality. This is another one of those examples where you realize that just because a lot of people are saying something, it can still be very wrong.
Hoping this might help someone else out in the future, try calibrating without using any dampening material on the back of your chair or sofa.
The internet consensus seems to be that in this situation, one should place a thick blanket or several towels over the back of the sofa in line with your main listening position prior to calibration in order to reduce reflections that may occur off of the sofa back. This is the practice I have always followed as I considered it proper procedure.
Last night, I decided to do some experimenting without using the thick blanket. I decided not to put anything over the sofa back. The results were vastly better, night and day different. When using the blanket, Audyssey would make drastic low-end and high-end adjustments, which is exactly what using a blanket is supposed to prevent. The low end would be completely cut off, and there would be a lot of strange adjustments on the high end; the end result was never good regardless of microphone placement.
Now, without the use of the blanket, the adjustments are much less severe. I'm actually getting a much flatter response and much better sound quality. This is another one of those examples where you realize that just because a lot of people are saying something, it can still be very wrong.
Hoping this might help someone else out in the future, try calibrating without using any dampening material on the back of your chair or sofa.
JoeESP9
ESL's & tubes since 83
Ideally you want to start with a room that has at least some acoustic treatments. Many would be surprised how much difference a couple of bass traps and absorbers at the first reflection points can make. Beware of too much absorption. You don't want to turn your room into an anechoic chamber.
A mix of reflective diffusive and absorption devices generally produces the best results. I suggest doing this before the equalizing takes place. IME, having good room acoustics means that the equalization will not be as severe.
Some of the newer auto equalization setups support multiple measurement points. However, IME optimizing the sound for one specific position generally yields better results.
From the REW website:
REW allows multiple sweeps to be averaged, although best results are generally obtained by using single, longer sweeps rather than multiple, shorter sweeps. Multiple sweeps are offered when not using a Timing reference or when using a loopback as a timing reference.
The Yamaha HTR in my bedroom has YPAO. Using it to automatically adjust for room/speaker response results in both music and movies/TV sounding very agreeable to my ears.
For my main rig, I compared the results from my HT processor and REW. For my front speakers they were so close I turned off EMoQ (from Emotiva UMC-200) for the front left and right speakers.
When playing two channel music only my left and right front speakers are used. For surround/HT the amplifiers for surround and CC speakers are turned on and my preamp is set to bypass mode. The audio is then controlled by the HT processor.
FWIW: All my two channel sources are connected to my stereo preamp. All surround/HT sources are connected to my pre/pro.
A mix of reflective diffusive and absorption devices generally produces the best results. I suggest doing this before the equalizing takes place. IME, having good room acoustics means that the equalization will not be as severe.
Some of the newer auto equalization setups support multiple measurement points. However, IME optimizing the sound for one specific position generally yields better results.
From the REW website:
REW allows multiple sweeps to be averaged, although best results are generally obtained by using single, longer sweeps rather than multiple, shorter sweeps. Multiple sweeps are offered when not using a Timing reference or when using a loopback as a timing reference.
The Yamaha HTR in my bedroom has YPAO. Using it to automatically adjust for room/speaker response results in both music and movies/TV sounding very agreeable to my ears.
For my main rig, I compared the results from my HT processor and REW. For my front speakers they were so close I turned off EMoQ (from Emotiva UMC-200) for the front left and right speakers.
When playing two channel music only my left and right front speakers are used. For surround/HT the amplifiers for surround and CC speakers are turned on and my preamp is set to bypass mode. The audio is then controlled by the HT processor.
FWIW: All my two channel sources are connected to my stereo preamp. All surround/HT sources are connected to my pre/pro.
Bill Ferris
Lunatic Member
When I ran my Audyssey correction, it was for the couches center position measurement mike placement @ my ear height (hey, I was paying the bills !), and with the Mc. XRT-30 line array`s large amount of tweeters and midrange drivers, the whole couch`s ~8 ft. seating width was really the sweet spot, as experienced many times with two friends, and myself shuffling between L/R/C positions while listening to some HQ BR Pure Audio Discs tracks to see if there was much of a discernable SQ difference between them, and it turned out to be quite minimal and acceptable due to the wide sound field because of the arrays.
uofmtiger
Addicted Member
For me, it made a big difference for the better. My room is challenging with vaulted ceiling and other issues, so maybe the worse the room, the better the improvement? I did use the MultEQ app to make some recommended tweaks after the fact and they seemed to help. I think I got those tweaks from Audioholics, but it’s been a while, so I am not sure if I followed them exactly or watched a few more videos on the app first.
privateeye
Active Member
I used method number two from this post-
Data Supporting a Single Setup Mic Position for Audyssey...
www.hometheatershack.com
This method gave me the best results I've ever achieved with Audyssey. I've run MultiEQ, XT, and XT32 probably 150 times in total over the years, trying different methods and microphone positions, and have never been completely happy with the results. As a matter of fact, I've always thought that disabling Audyssey sounded better.
However, using the above method has given me what I would call perfect results, and for the first time, I am completely happy with my Audyssey calibration. I'm actually shocked by how good it sounds, even with music. He put a lot of work into developing this method, which is specifically meant to be used when your ear is below the seat back at MLP.
I highly recommend that anyone with such a seating arrangement try it.