I am following this forum from long time but have never written here. So this is my first post. I recently replaced my Arcam AVR390 with Denon X3600 for obvious reasons. I was never satisfied with the Arcam for the two years i owned it. I made a lot of measurements trying to fix the problems i was hearing and never completely achieved what i was looking for ( measuring with REW and calibrating with Dirac). Testing the denon for 1 week and made only 2 measurements with audyssey and 2-3 different curves and i can honestly say after watching the movies i always watch as reference that it is completely insane difference. The denon is soo much better to the point that am hating arcam for loosing 2 years of my life not listening to my theatre the way it is supposed to sound. I can post numerous REW files with the arcam compared to what I now have with denon and audyssey for evidence if required even seat to seat consistency is almost perfect. As a reference i have 3 subs pre-calibrated with miniDSP and separate amps ( Audiolab 8200m and 8200p) for the main layer of speakers + 4 channel NAD for atmos ceiling. I was about to purchase Arcam AV40 but i am glad i didn’t. I do not miss XLR outs. I am even wondering whether to sell the AVR390 and disappointing someone else.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Arcam AVR10 Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
[Someone asked if room correction is audible]
Check Sean Olive/Harman's "The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products"
Keynote slides
This is from 2009; don't know if there's anything more current.
Check Sean Olive/Harman's "The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products"
Keynote slides
This is from 2009; don't know if there's anything more current.
First of all, congrats to your success! My guess is that regardless of the ASR measurements, few people would make such brave move from a highly regarded/hyped up boutique class AVR to a utility class Denon.
Now, about Audyssey, I don't know how you made the adjustments but I would like to share my recent experience using the Editor App and Ratbuddyssey. As you probably know and would agree, using just the App to draw/shape the target curve is not easy, that is, if you want to end up with a REW graph that shows less than 4 dB peak-peak variations between 20 and 110 Hz. I tried many times and got tired of it. Amir seemed to have done a pretty good job reshaping the curve in his review, I wonder how he did it. In my set up, Audyssey has been able to get the reference curve to within about 9.5 dB peak to peak with no smoothing and about 7.8 dB with 1/12th smoothing, that's +/- 3.9 dB. I think that's good enough based on my threshold of audibility but does not look good on paper.
So I thought I would try doing it with Ratbuddyssey that allows me to enter the adjustments point by point manually, instead of reshaping the target curve by hand or touch pen. The steps I took are as follow:
1. Use REW to plot the FR between 15 to 200 Hz (or 20-110 as a first step, that is, just get the subwoofer curve fixed first), no smoothing.
2. By looking at the curve, set my target SPL, I picked one that would result in most of the adjustments needed for correction to the target end up being cuts, not boosts. In my case I couldn't avoid a few boosts due to room modes.
3. Set up a spreadsheet to calculate the required adjustments at each of the selected frequency points, I would use 25 points minimum between 20-110 Hz but it depends on how the reference curve look.
4. Enter the calculated adjustments, by typing in the numbers on the Ratbuddysssey's data table for correction to the target SPL for each selected frequency point. No drawing/shaping required!
5. Load the new Ady file to the Denon.
I tried this method several times and was able to get within around 4 dB peak to peak no smoothly and under 3 dB peak to peak at 1/12th smoothing.
After that, a few more trial and error tweaking would get me in within 2.3 to 2.8 dB peak to peak between 20-110 Hz, without even touching the FL/FR curves. I actually was able to get within less than 2 dB peak to peak, that is +/- 1 dB 1/12th smoothing a few times.
That tells me Audyssey is not capable of getting the FR tight enough for me to look at (not to sound as I couldn't tell a difference anyway) but that's must be due to the mic accuracy and the way I set the 8 mic positions, and/or Audyssey's data collection algorithm does not have enough resolution for what I need. Using REW to measure the actual results and use the results to force Audyssey to create a new set of filters for the new non flat (in fact a very busy looking target curve with lots of peaks and dips) is able to fool Audyssey to correct to it, thereby ended up with a flat curve.
The amazing thing is that after the curve is flattened, probably because Audyssey is till in charge of creating the filters, the listening bubble is very well preserved. I could move the mic about 12 inches to the left, right above and below the main mic position, and the resulting average curve is still very closed to the targeted 2.3 to 2.8 dB peak to peak variations.
Based on my new flat curve, I can now tweak it some more to get the 15-80 Hz to tip up towards the low end, that shouldn't be too difficult.
I don't know if there are 3rd party software like Ratbuddssey for Dirac Live, that allows manual adjustments on selected frequency points but I did use the trial version that works like the Audyssey Editor App, that is, I had to change the target curve by manually shaping the curve, not manually entering/typing in the adjustments.
I did try and search for new studies and found none. That 2009 study, imo is too old and too much has changed so it is not really relevant any more.
First of all, congrats to your success! My guess is that regardless of the ASR measurements, few people would make such brave move from a highly regarded/hyped up boutique class AVR to a utility class Denon.
Now, about Audyssey, I don't know how you made the adjustments but I would like to share my recent experience using the Editor App and Ratbuddyssey. As you probably know and would agree, using just the App to draw/shape the target curve is not easy, that is, if you want to end up with a REW graph that shows less than 4 dB peak-peak variations between 20 and 110 Hz. I tried many times and got tired of it. Amir seemed to have done a pretty good job reshaping the curve in his review, I wonder how he did it. In my set up, Audyssey has been able to get the reference curve to within about 9.5 dB peak to peak with no smoothing and about 7.8 dB with 1/12th smoothing, that's +/- 3.9 dB. I think that's good enough based on my threshold of audibility but does not look good on paper.
So I thought I would try doing it with Ratbuddyssey that allows me to enter the adjustments point by point manually, instead of reshaping the target curve by hand or touch pen. The steps I took are as follow:
1. Use REW to plot the FR between 15 to 200 Hz (or 20-110 as a first step, that is, just get the subwoofer curve fixed first), no smoothing.
2. By looking at the curve, set my target SPL, I picked one that would result in most of the adjustments needed for correction to the target end up being cuts, not boosts. In my case I couldn't avoid a few boosts due to room modes.
3. Set up a spreadsheet to calculate the required adjustments at each of the selected frequency points, I would use 25 points minimum between 20-110 Hz but it depends on how the reference curve look.
4. Enter the calculated adjustments, by typing in the numbers on the Ratbuddysssey's data table for correction to the target SPL for each selected frequency point. No drawing/shaping required!
5. Load the new Ady file to the Denon..
Actually I’ve never heard of Ratbuddssey but will give it a try. I think you are too clinical
I am about 8-10 peak to peak but i have non dedicated theater room with some open space and nasty room modes at 33 and about 100 and 200 Hz. I have my subs dialed with miniDSP to the point of about 5db peak to peak flat at 18-120 Hz no smoothing. With the Arcam and the terrible 6db/oct sub crossover there was no way of getting anything good nor dirac was able to get me some near good results. I use Audyssey only to 500Hz with +5 db slope from 20Hz to 200Hz and I am happy with the actual result and with the actual sound not only with the measurements both for movies and music. I am not even considering external DAC for stereo any more.Very interesting. Thanks for the comments!. I'm guessing the AVR-x4500H should measure very similar as well. But nice with a little more power. My only concern is running 4 ohm speakers potentially. Do you think this will be an issue ?
Last edited:
The rDAC was designed by a different set of engineers than the AVRs. The rDAC was claimed to have THD+N: 0.003%, the irDAC II THD + Noise: 0.0007%. The irDAC II seems to be still available despite being OOP.
Actually I’ve never heard of Ratbuddssey but will give it a try. I think you are too clinical
Of course, I was clear about doing it for the look, and that I couldn't tell a difference between doing it and not doing it.
I have room modes at 50 Hz and 70 Hz. The one at 70 is quite solvable by Audyssey, but the 50 Hz one is tough. If it wasn't that one, I could get a curve with peak to peak under 2 dB easily, really amazing..Oh, about the minidsp HD, I put it back in the box. It doesn't really add anything for me except the extra interconnections.
The only Arcam product I am still using is the rHead and it is OK. I previously had Denon X4200 and I am sure it was not bad but with Audyssey and no app unable to tweak the courtains, curve and eliminate the 1-2 kHz dip, I just had it for several months. I am sure I am not missing Dirac with the Audyssey app and the accuracy of the standard mic and not being able to upgrade it is not a concern. As I have 2 identical subs which are combined only by reversing the polarity + 1 different I might try Audyssey sub EQ by splitting the signal for the 2 identical to see the result compared to miniDSP. I have the miniDSP balanced.
That is a question that involves too many variables to afford a "yes or no" answer. Stuff like how far you listen from the speakers, where are the low points in your speakers impedance and at what phase angle?
I'd suggest you start a new thread to address that. However, to give you a short answer, the 3600 and 4500 have pre-outs so you can always add external amplifiers for some or all of the channels if it doesn't!
...and yes, I know that is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. I should not have taken the bait on the "$350 per channel value" post and gone off-topic. Sorry guys!
That is a question that involves too many variables to afford a "yes or no" answer. Stuff like how far you listen from the speakers, where are the low points in your speakers impedance and at what phase angle?
I'd suggest you start a new thread to address that. However, to give you a short answer, the 3600 and 4500 have pre-outs so you can always add external amplifiers for some or all of the channels if it doesn't!
...and yes, I know that is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. I should not have taken the bait on the "$350 per channel value" post and gone off-topic. Sorry guys!
Yes, agree its a mostly impossible question to answer correctly. Unless the answer is 'You must use 8 ohm speakers'
. External amps, can work. But box count start's to go up again .. but yes, it's an option.Objectivist01
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2020
- Messages
- 317
- Likes
- 118
Hence my interest! JA did review it: https://www.stereophile.com/content/arcam-irdac-ii-da-processor-measurements
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2018
- Messages
- 388
- Likes
- 601
I hope that Amir or others will follow with extensive measurements but, while waiting... here some from Norway:
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=it&sl=no&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Favforu m.no%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fdirac-live-bass-control.549527%2F&prev=search
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=it&sl=no&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Favforu m.no%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fdirac-live-bass-control.549527%2F&prev=search
Last edited:
Have you guys provided any form of measurements or examples of what customers can expect with the bass control before spending hard cash on it? Not providing information and relying on forum users to give measurements seems like an odd choice.
The information I would want customers to get is not really the frequency response itself because that's not where the hokus pokus lies. I'm gonna guess the magic is in the individual phase-manipulation, which makes sense, but I'm curious whether or not there's any fiddling with individual boosts and cuts in the bass range between drivers/subs/speakers to make it sum better?
The information we customers need is really about what goes on with our drivers and how Dirac affects the capacity and, if it does, how it ensures that the drivers are not being overdriven and decides to go suicidal on us when the spl goes up?
I think people who still have the X4200 (it should last more than 5 years if well vented or has a fan on top) may be better off with the L/R bypass setting, unless their room really benefits from that BBC dip.
I used to be concerned about that too but If I remember right, there seem to be enough evidence (don't remember exactly what/where I read so can't post links, yet..) out there to show phase is not an issue with the use of REQs such as the popular ones such as Dirac (best of both FIR/IIR) and Audyssey (FIR), but not sure about the IRR based ones such as YPAO, that seem like more prone to phase issues.
In terms of "over driven", I think that is hard to avoid if the user starts making manual adjustments. It seems reasonable that at least they tell you (thanks to Audioholics.com) the maximum cuts and boost they may/would apply.
Below are information from the Audioholics.com interviews with the 3 Dr. (Ph.Ds): The interviews were done in around 2014 so there may have been changes.
Dirac: ..............................not more than 10 dB boost
Audyssey: .......................+9 dB maximum boost and -20 dB maximum cut.
Anthem ARC:................. "Boost at any one frequency is up to 6 dB to avoid overloading the amp and speaker This cannot be adjusted by the user.............Cut is any amount needed".
If you boost a particular frequency, say 40 hz, by 8-10 dB in one speaker to fill a dip, you essentially reduce the headroom of the driver by the same amount. I can't imagine that they would let any algorithm based on several sources do that, but rather change the phase of one of the sources or even reduce the spl of one of the conflicting sources by the necessary amount to achieve a good trade-off between main LP and other LPs.
Whatever one does with dsp to fix one point, there will always be another point in space where you make stuff worse. But I think people deserve to know whether or not they risk damaging speakers or subs by using bass management due to aggressive boosting or if I need to take some kind of precaution to prevent that from happening. Without information people can only guess and hope for the best.
Whatever one does with dsp to fix one point, there will always be another point in space where you make stuff worse. But I think people deserve to know whether or not they risk damaging speakers or subs by using bass management due to aggressive boosting or if I need to take some kind of precaution to prevent that from happening. Without information people can only guess and hope for the best.
As you know, in the DSP there is no value greater than 0 DBFS, so all "boosts" are provided by attenuation.
All DSP bass-management is provided by attenuation to maintain channel balance. Though, I suppose it could be done by applying gain in the analog stage.
Some think it is unfair to compare AVR/AVP's to desktop DACs because they perform these function but not really when considering that DSP REQ, PEQ, and bass-management require headroom.
- Rich
Similar threads
