Audyssey Room EQ Review

[amirm]

And now we have to ask ourselves if we prefer a two channel dac with a SINAD of 110 dB, or a multichannel dac (11 channels) with RoomEq but a SINAD of “only” 99db. Or even only 90db. (I know we would all say “a multichannel dac with a SINAD of 115db” but there isn’t one available...)

What’s more important? What’s audible and what’s not? Should we tone down the ranting against AVR’s

This is not an either or situation. I have a 120 dB SINAD DAC and room EQ (Dirac) together. For stereo listening, you can use different EQ solutions or do it manually as I have partially shown in my speaker reviews. All you need is a parametric EQ to make a few bass corrections and a good speaker.

For movies and multichannel, automatic systems are much faster and easier to use. And use of advanced audio decoders is mandatory so an AVR fits there.

 

[amirm]

@amirm could you please test the app with limited correction at 500Hz?

I won't have time, sorry. I have such a backlog of gear and people complaining about their reviews. I bought speakers 3 months ago that I have yet to review! These tests are very time consuming to do and very disruptive to my home setup.

In general, anyone with the app can experiment themselves anyway. I won't be adding much value by playing with different settings.

 

[amirm]

Let me be clear about something: NO audio system has good performance without EQ of bass frequencies. Period.

If you have tried an EQ system and it did not work well, then keep searching. The difference with proper bass correction is dramatic.

 

[kokishin]

Not at all. If I had made mistakes the objective and subjective results would have been poor which they were not.


It isn't unfortunately. I used to be an AVS member and posted extensively about the mistakes in that thread in the specific, and issues with Audyssey in general including many discussions with the OP of that FAQ. Fortunately, it seems that since then he has changed his views significantly about me , and which EQ system is best:

View attachment 59744

This is the article he is talking about: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/target-room-response-and-cinema-x-curve.10/

<snip>

If there is one thing Keith doesn't lack, it's chutzpah.

 

[Lbstyling]

This review is awsome.

 

[Dj7675]

DEQ is the main reason I'm not wholesale switching to Dirac. It's incredibly useful/practical to have a progressive application of the loudness curve and the ability to tailor the offset. I typically find an offset of -10 to be suited to most music but can quickly be adjust to -5 or 0 for bass light recordings or -15 for bass heavy. I find myself content listening at lower levels than before having DEQ.

DEQ is the main reason I'm not wholesale switching to Dirac. It's incredibly useful/practical to have a progressive application of the loudness curve and the ability to tailor the offset. I typically find an offset of -10 to be suited to most music but can quickly be adjust to -5 or 0 for bass light recordings or -15 for bass heavy. I find myself content listening at lower levels than before having DEQ.

Second DEQ as being useful for sure. Having reference level offset makes it pretty flexible. My only nitpicks would be:
-I wish there was an option to not have it boost high frequencies. If your speakers measure flat, I find it can be a little bright on the top end. For me having a downward tilting target curve makes the boost by DEQ not an issue
-DEQ also boosts the surround levels. This can make the surrounds a bit loud to me sometimes. I wish there was an option in DEQ to disable surround level boost. But all in all it works well. Many of the receivers with Dirac don't have loudness compensation (like the NAD T758 V3) but you can of course save different curve presets.

 

[John Galt]

??? I don't see such remark from Chris (I have read that FAQ countless times in arguments on AVS):
View attachment 59747

Spatial averaging is used to make sure the frequency response errors are minimum phase and are corrected for larger seating area. There is no other magic about them. To the extent a peak survives all those measurements in the aggregate, it can be corrected without making the sound worse for some listeners.

The only admonishment I remember was not being 24 inches or less from a wall, not with respect to mic positions.

Regardless, within my arm length, I followed the graphs in the app which was the same as what was in the receiver.

The picture doesn’t exactly match the instructions. Study the two links that I posted for more details.

I do a ‘bubble’ around my primary seating position with the first measurement pretty much in the center of where my head would be, directly between my ears. Second measurement a foot to the right, then a foot to the left, then forward right a bit, forward left a bit, right and higher of first position, left and a few inches higher of first position.

I know that the picture doesn’t reflect this advice. I’ll post exact quotes of I have time to dig through the copious information that’s out there. Could start here: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...6770-official-audyssey-thread-part-ii.html#d3

From the AVS FAQ:

• Use only the microphone included with your AVR. If you cannot find it, contact the manufacturer for a replacement.
• Attach your microphone to a mic stand (preferably) or tripod.
• Take the measurements at ear height and with the mic facing the ceiling.
• Start the measurements from the primary listening location and spread out from there.
• Approximate distance from the first measurement position is 2 feet in any direction.
• Focus on the central listening area and avoid extreme positions such as the back wall or too far beyond the left and right speakers.

 

[MZKM]

Second DEQ as being useful for sure. Having reference level offset makes it pretty flexible. My only nitpicks would be:
-I wish there was an option to not have it boost high frequencies. If your speakers measure flat, I find it can be a little bright on the top end. For me having a downward tilting target curve makes the boost by DEQ not an issue
-DEQ also boosts the surround levels. This can make the surrounds a bit loud to me sometimes. I wish there was an option in DEQ to disable surround level boost. But all in all it works well. Many of the receivers with Dirac don't have loudness compensation (like the NAD T758 V3) but you can of course save different curve presets.

I have a far fetched wish, that it was intelligent enough to auto-adjust the Reference Offset, as music/movies/tv are listened to at different volume levels on my AVR (some music I can be at -30dB and it’s still sufficiently loud). This could be done by analyzing the RMS vs peak levels. I mean, the AVRs have Dynamic Volume, which sorta analyzes the same thing and applies DRC, so it’s not impossible.

 

[MZKM]

The picture doesn’t exactly match the instructions. Study the two links that I posted for more details.

I do a ‘bubble’ around my primary seating position with the first measurement pretty much in the center of where my head would be, directly between my ears. Second measurement a foot to the right, then a foot to the left, then forward right a bit, forward left a bit, right and higher of first position, left and a few inches higher of first position.

View attachment 59757

Yep, so many people going from their couch to their recliners, getting every seat.

I do not believe the receivers themselves state this (at least my Denon 1713 doesn‘t).

 

[John Galt]

Yep, so many people going from their couch to their recliners, getting every seat.

I do not believe the receivers themselves state this (at least my Denon 1713 doesn‘t).

Yep, exactly how I thought I was supposed to do it 8 years ago with my 2312. Further reading explained that this was not optimal.

It‘s all discussed in detail in the links that I posted.

It is also CRITICAL to make sure that your receiver sets your front main speakers to ‘small’ regardless of their physical size if you’re using subs. Audyssey takes the measurements, but the receiver decides whether to set ‘small’ or ‘large’, often incorrectly. If the receiver sets the setting to ‘large’ then no sound will get passed to the subs, rendering them disabled. This is discussed in detail in many places. Companies like SVS get calls on this all the time. See note f7: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...6770-official-audyssey-thread-part-ii.html#f7

 

[Dimifoot]

This is not an either or situation. I have a 120 dB SINAD DAC and room EQ (Dirac) together. For stereo listening, you can use different EQ solutions or do it manually as I have partially shown in my speaker reviews. All you need is a parametric EQ to make a few bass corrections and a good speaker.

That’s true,

• if you use a computer as your only source,
• don’t ever listen to immersive music
• and don’t use (multiple) subs- @Floyd Toole wont be very happy

On the other hand, I think it would be very helpful if a line is drawn on the table with the DACs SINAD measurements:
What’s the limit of audibility in real life scenarios, with speakers, in rooms.

We all love engineering excellence, but I wonder if in the pursuit of this excellence we ignore what’s really important in music reproduction.

And as a result we have people here posting that all AVR’s sound mediocre because their SINAD is 90-100dBs.
And it’s the third decimal of THD+noise we are talking about.

What’s the point of bying a car that hits 500mph and drives rough, when you have the option of buying one with all the comforts that will make driving more pleasant (edit: and safe..), which can “only” go up to 200mph? Are you going to drive that fast anyway?

Let me be a touch heretical: is this a form of subjectivism-focusing so much on the SINAD measurements without explaining to the lay man what’s the threshold of audibility?

Isn’t it a more objective approach if the importance of (bass) RoomEq, target curve manipulation/tilting, and multiple sub management is noted in AVRs, and their absence in (most) 2 channel DACs?

I totally agree with your conclusion on the 2018 minidsp review, and the underlined statement summarizes why I think that the AVRs have been treated very harshly in this forum:

As it is, you would be compromising some performance to gain the benefits of its equalization. That technology if well implement, can make significant improvements to sound reproduction in your room so in balance you will come out way ahead.

 

[Robbo99999]

After seeing our host's 1/3 octave smoothing EQ results, I don't feel so bad about my results with REW.

Make that two!

 

[spacebar]

Let me be clear about something: NO audio system has good performance without EQ of bass frequencies. Period.

If you have tried an EQ system and it did not work well, then keep searching. The difference with proper bass correction is dramatic.

@amirm I don’t know if its the best example, but by reading the Lyngdorf TDAI-3400 review it didn’t go well. But if I recall correctly, after you did room perfect calibration it was alright. My question is if you had to choose between a very good amp without EQ vs a unit with lower measurements (score) with EQ, would the EQ amp be a better choice?
I’m just curious about how much one is willing to sacrifice for EQ. Not you in particular but in general. And if you have a better example please share

Thanks.

 

[Lbstyling]

That’s true,

• if you use a computer as your only source,
• don’t ever listen to immersive music
• and don’t use (multiple) subs- @Floyd Toole wont be very happy

On the other hand, I think it would be very helpful if a line is drawn on the table with the DACs SINAD measurements:
What’s the limit of audibility in real life scenarios, with speakers, in rooms.

We all love engineering excellence, but I wonder if in the pursuit of this excellence we ignore what’s really important in music reproduction.

And as a result we have people here posting that all AVR’s sound mediocre because their SINAD is 90-100dBs.
And it’s the third decimal of THD+noise we are talking about.

What’s the point of bying a car that hits 500mph and drives rough, when you have the option of buying one with all the comforts that will make driving more pleasant (edit: and safe..), which can “only” go up to 200mph? Are you going to drive that fast anyway?

Let me be a touch heretical: is this a form of subjectivism-focusing so much on the SINAD measurements without explaining to the lay man what’s the threshold of audibility?

Isn’t it a more objective approach if the importance of (bass) RoomEq, target curve manipulation/tilting, and multiple sub management is noted in AVRs, and their absence in (most) 2 channel DACs?

I totally agree with your conclusion on the 2018 minidsp review, and the underlined statement summarizes why I think that the AVRs have been treated very harshly in this forum:

1) As I understand it toole's research ascribes somthing like 70% of user blind preference is explained by the things listed. The other 30% does matter, and it would stand to reason may become more clearly audiable once the 70% items listed are dealt with.

2) in products with EQ, you significantly increase the distortion levels and noise floor by boosting SPL in a given band. My horn speakers for example have some 30+ dB of attenuation at 7-10khz. Audiable 'hiss' sets a lower dynamic range which is very common in AV amps. This is much worse with high efficiency speakers, and you should probably be using reasonably high efficiency speakers due to power compression limitations for higher spl for maximum fidelity especially in longer listening sessions.
A 70db SINAD AVR at 99db can be well within audiabilty at low volumes with EQ.

 

[capt.s]

Let me be clear about something: NO audio system has good performance without EQ of bass frequencies. Period.

If you have tried an EQ system and it did not work well, then keep searching. The difference with proper bass correction is dramatic.

@amirm I'm not sure if you have a minDSP Studio in the pipeline but it would be very interesting to see what it's SINAD is and then when coupled to a known great desktop DAC what the combined SINAD is as system. That way you have Dirac and your choice of many good DACs such a one you may already own. Just a thought.

 

[Robbo99999]

That’s true,

• if you use a computer as your only source,
• don’t ever listen to immersive music
• and don’t use (multiple) subs- @Floyd Toole wont be very happy

On the other hand, I think it would be very helpful if a line is drawn on the table with the DACs SINAD measurements:
What’s the limit of audibility in real life scenarios, with speakers, in rooms.

We all love engineering excellence, but I wonder if in the pursuit of this excellence we ignore what’s really important in music reproduction.

And as a result we have people here posting that all AVR’s sound mediocre because their SINAD is 90-100dBs.
And it’s the third decimal of THD+noise we are talking about.

What’s the point of bying a car that hits 500mph and drives rough, when you have the option of buying one with all the comforts that will make driving more pleasant (edit: and safe..), which can “only” go up to 200mph? Are you going to drive that fast anyway?

Let me be a touch heretical: is this a form of subjectivism-focusing so much on the SINAD measurements without explaining to the lay man what’s the threshold of audibility?

Isn’t it a more objective approach if the importance of (bass) RoomEq, target curve manipulation/tilting, and multiple sub management is noted in AVRs, and their absence in (most) 2 channel DACs?

I totally agree with your conclusion on the 2018 minidsp review, and the underlined statement summarizes why I think that the AVRs have been treated very harshly in this forum:

In my limited experience I've found Room EQ to make an absolutely night & day massive difference to sound quality, pursuit of SINAD DAC numbers pales in comparison to this. As is often said on this site, I see/understand the importance of a good speaker as the most important starting point, and I think Room EQ is second most important (almost equal in importance, although "sows ear/silk purse" of course), and to me it really puts into perspective the pursuit of SINAD numbers for instance. (I'll include speaker location and room treatment under the same banner as "Room EQ" here)

So it's great to see a recent article from Amir on Room EQ, it's a very important/influential subject in my eyes.

 

[QMuse]

2) in products with EQ, you significantly increase the distortion levels and noise floor by boosting SPL in a given band. My horn speakers for example have some 30+ dB of attenuation at 7-10khz.
A 70db SINAD AVR at 99db can be well within audiabilty at low volumes with EQ.

EQ never boosts dips more than 6-8dB. If your speaker needs 30dB boost you solve it with buying a better speaker, not with EQ.

 

[Dj7675]

It is interesting that

That’s true,

• if you use a computer as your only source,
• don’t ever listen to immersive music
• and don’t use (multiple) subs- @Floyd Toole wont be very happy

On the other hand, I think it would be very helpful if a line is drawn on the table with the DACs SINAD measurements:
What’s the limit of audibility in real life scenarios, with speakers, in rooms.

We all love engineering excellence, but I wonder if in the pursuit of this excellence we ignore what’s really important in music reproduction.

And as a result we have people here posting that all AVR’s sound mediocre because their SINAD is 90-100dBs.
And it’s the third decimal of THD+noise we are talking about.

What’s the point of bying a car that hits 500mph and drives rough, when you have the option of buying one with all the comforts that will make driving more pleasant (edit: and safe..), which can “only” go up to 200mph? Are you going to drive that fast anyway?

Let me be a touch heretical: is this a form of subjectivism-focusing so much on the SINAD measurements without explaining to the lay man what’s the threshold of audibility?

Isn’t it a more objective approach if the importance of (bass) RoomEq, target curve manipulation/tilting, and multiple sub management is noted in AVRs, and their absence in (most) 2 channel DACs?

I totally agree with your conclusion on the 2018 minidsp review, and the underlined statement summarizes why I think that the AVRs have been treated very harshly in this forum:

A few thoughts:
-I want it all... Something that measures well enough to guarantee in the ball park of cd quality (Sinad of 96 or better for my HT), properly eq's multiple subs, eq that has user configurable target curve
-Having effective EQ should not excuse a company from designing and manufacturing something that measures bad (SINAD of 60/70)
-Is there really an excuse having receivers measure with a SINAD in the 60s these days after seeing what the Denon X3600H does?
-I want as little noise and distortion from the DAC and Amp I can get AND get effective EQ.
-This site is littered with discussions on audability and it is very interesting. One such thread is HERE. What I find interesting is that there seems to be a number of 116 SINAD where it is not possible to detect issues. Anything under that it could be possible but isn't necessarily. Basically the closer to that number you get the more you can be certain noise/distortion isn't an issue. This does not mean that something lower can't sound good. In my living room I listen to a Denon x3500h with a pair of Revel M106's and it sounds great. It has a SINAD of 95/96 when used at under 1.5V where I use it.
-I guess the point is audibility is a topic discussed here quite a bit as well as a host of other topics. However without measurements from sites like this, we would have no idea what levels of noise and distortion are in products. In the end, take advantage of all of Amir's work and decide for yourself what matters to you... how much noise and distortion is ok for you in your system. There are many here that are of the opinion that say for example a SINAD of 85 is good enough. If that is your opinion, that is obviously OK. Others may feel from their experience and research they want to shoot for something better... and that is ok too.
- @amirm , would it be possible to include a sentence or two, or a link to your thoughts or research on audibility? It would be helpful for people not familiar with the prior discussion on audibility here to refer to and read. In your speaker reviews you have a nice summary for example of your speaker measurement system. Something like this for audibility might get more readers pointed to the discussion/research on audibility which would be beneficial to those reading reviews.

 

[Worth Davis]

great review, I too get good results with XT32 and a custom curve. I use the Minidsp SHD for everything but HT so its kinda a dead topic in my room

 

[Sancus]

Isn’t it a more objective approach if the importance of (bass) RoomEq, target curve manipulation/tilting, and multiple sub management is noted in AVRs, and their absence in (most) 2 channel DACs?

I agree with you, and personally I think that stereo products like MiniDSP SHD that combine excellent SINAD, subwoofer outputs and room correction should be recommended well above 2-channel-output-only products with a tiny bit more SINAD. They are practically superior in every way.