-
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!
Audyssey Manual Calibration “OCA’s REW + Audyssey Awesomeness”
- Thread starter Rednaxela
- Start date
quick question, if the multieq app shows my speakers as full range "large", do i change it to "small" before feeding it to a1 evo? Also, should i lower my sub volume to get it to fit in the green section before running audyssey or leave my subs at my desired level?
I think A1 evo handles everything. Apparently it also frequently sets subs to main+LFE to some people's dismay.
The A1 script will also tell you if something is wrong with your sub level. There was an issue with mine and I had to re-run Audysseeyy using a different version of the app (known android error for a certain config)
Oh. Which version of the app are you running? How do you get it?
I thought it was weird bc it's setting my speakers to full range and it's never done that before.
Last edited:
Ok, this will be a big long post. I am hoping to tidy up the process and results and then I might post it as a thread to itself but I am looking for feedback and whatnot.
Anyways, I just upgraded my receiver from one that had a very old version of Audyssey to one that has the superior Audyssey MultEQ XT32 + the phone app capabilities (I have a Denon AVR X4400H).
I am keen to try out some new EQ options and was very excited to hear and try OCAs new script. So I am comparing direct with no EQ, to Audyssey MultiEQ XT32, to OCA (A1EvoMaestroMJ)
My setup:
I run a 7.2.2 configuration yet with a phantom center (so I guess 6.2.2)
My L&R speakers are HTM 12 v2 which were measured here:
My surrounds are Energy bookshelf speakers and get the job done.
My subs are 18” in a Marty Cube box with a Behringer 3000DSP powering them and doing some delays and EQ already.
Measurement Process:
I measured with the Audyssey mic in 8 positions (1 = MLP, 2 = to the left, 3 = to the right, 4 = infront of MLP, 5 = wide and high to the left, 6 = wide and high to the right, 7 = back left, 8 = back right) then let Audyssey MultiEQ do its work and then and also made OCA filters and then I measured with a UMIK1 in the exact same 8 positions (likely within a few inches) to get my measurement results comparing Audyssey and OCA. When this was done I turned off all the EQ and did a measurement of my system with no EQ as a baseline comparison.
I then took the 8 measurements for each speaker and cross correlate aligned them and then did RMS + phase average (its been a while since playing with REW, so let me know if there is a better way to average the measurements) which gives the final average measurement of each speaker. I did that for each EQ (none, MultiEQ, OCA).
So 8 measurements (now averaged) x 8 speakers x 3 EQ options and got these results!
Results:
Direct = No EQ = Always RED
Multi EQ = Always GREEN
A1EvoMJ = OCA = Always BLUE
FRONT LEFT:
FRONT RIGHT
CENTER = L+R (phantom center)
SUBS
SURROUND RIGHT
SURROUND BACK RIGHT
SURROUND BACK LEFT
SURROUND LEFT
Here is the raw data if you want to look at yourself.
File that has all the RMS averages which is posted above:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/19PQBTJX6iJXfVJ0pgZjh-naMq_h0cNXy/view?usp=sharing
Folder with all the raw data and OCA script results: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1IlA-QEQ8vH2diQq8epn5u1DsJZVygnvc?usp=sharing
If this is of interest, I also compared what the Audyssey microphone measured for my system (which are the measurements that the MultiEQ and OCA scrip used) vs what the UMIK1 measured and the results can be seen at:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Uv5rKoBKq8uRbgvcK9SAWzBB_LV-5ALk/view?usp=sharing
Ok so now some thoughts and questions:
Crossovers and distances: For my direct (no EQ) results I now realize the MultiEQ would have set the crossover and the distances for the subs as I ran that first and thus I kept its distances. I do wonder if those distances to not result in the best sub integration as I have previously measured my system and showed better results:
My previous measurements had the FL and FR speakers at 9ft and subs at 15ft.
Audyssey set the distances for the FL and FR speakers at 9.5ft and subs at 16ft and 20.4 ft.
OCA set the distances for the FL 9.25ft and FR 9.18ft and says this for subs “[WARNING!] SW1: 5.19 meters, keep this subwoofer's polarity 'as is'.” = 17ft
When I get back home in a week I can put in the old distances I had set and re-measure the L+R with my prior sub integration if desided
I also know that my room and speaker placement is perfectly symmetrical (which is fortunate). So the distances to the speakers should all be identical.
I think MultiEQ takes the first measurement as the MLP and bases distances set on that. But you can manually override it. So I think in my case it is worth changing them to symmetric as it is more likely that I did not place the first measurement directly in the MLP.
I hear that changing the delays on OCAs scrips is not advised. So I do not know if people would recommend it. Or should I just remeasure until the L&R come out the same.
Independent Sub Delays:
I also have previously worked hard to get my two subs integrated as one virtual sub and it results in me having Sub 1 (front) with 0 delay and Sub 2 (back) 12.44ms relative delay in my Behringer amp.
My old amp measurements had the FL and FR speakers set at 9ft and subs at 15ft.
Audyssey set the distances for the FL and FR speakers at 9.5ft and subs at 16ft and 20.4 ft.
So it thinks sub 1 should be at 16ft and sub 2 should be at 20.4ft (so 20.4-16 = 4.4ft = 3.9ms of relative delay added to sub 1 (right? As it is viewed as ‘closer’ so it adds delay to this sub). So it thinks that the subs are actually 8.54ms apart (12.44-3.9). I am 98% sure I did that right.
I also do not know how OCA treated the sub distances as all I can see is “[WARNING!] SW1: 5.19 meters, keep this subwoofer's polarity 'as is'.” But not sure if and how it treated the second sub.
Thus I do wonder if that is Ideal or if I should just go back to having a Y spitter and have full control of the relative sub delays with the Behringer (Should I just set the relative sub1&2 distances myself and then use a Y splitter and let these scripts set the distances of the virtual sub?
Does OCAs script do a good job with dual subs? As I cannot see the delays it has put on each of them just the one.
I am also curious why the low frequency is not smoother with OCA for the front L and R?
Full range EQ for just my L&R
The HTM 12 v2 has amazing directivity and thus would be prime candidates for full-range EQ (as opposed to most speakers where you just want to EQ lower frequencies) so I do want to EQ them. My surrounds are generic Energy speakers and probably should just have low end EQ.
In the Audyssey phone app you can set the EQ range and thus this would be easy for MultiEQ.
Is there a way to have the OCA script do a full range EQ for just my L+R speakers and then a lower cutoff for the surrounds? As I know that people online have modified the script for more full range optimization, but I think that is applying to all channels and not just the L+R correct?
Alternatively I have done gated measurements and Erins Audio Corner also did full Klipple measurements at so I could use those to generate the high frequency EQ data. Is where a way I can add manual EQ on top of whatever MultiEQ or OCAs scrip generates (as then I could use them for the low end, and then anechoic for the high end)?
Is there anything else?
OCAs script does seem amazing but I am just trying to figure out what are the parameters that it can adjust. Delays, crossovers, and then PEQ filters correct? There is no phase or other adjustments done correct?
I have not looked into manually making filters and uploading them to Audyssey but would be open to people pointing me in the right direction.
Is there anything else that anyone would recommend?
I (and now you) have full access to all my measurements, but I am away for the next week and so I cannot measure anything new until next week…. But I am hoping to have a game plan for what I am going to do when I get home (outside of listening to my system)
Thanks again @OCA for the amazing script! Happy to hear peoples thoughts!
Anyways, I just upgraded my receiver from one that had a very old version of Audyssey to one that has the superior Audyssey MultEQ XT32 + the phone app capabilities (I have a Denon AVR X4400H).
I am keen to try out some new EQ options and was very excited to hear and try OCAs new script. So I am comparing direct with no EQ, to Audyssey MultiEQ XT32, to OCA (A1EvoMaestroMJ)
My setup:
I run a 7.2.2 configuration yet with a phantom center (so I guess 6.2.2)
My L&R speakers are HTM 12 v2 which were measured here:
My surrounds are Energy bookshelf speakers and get the job done.
My subs are 18” in a Marty Cube box with a Behringer 3000DSP powering them and doing some delays and EQ already.
Measurement Process:
I measured with the Audyssey mic in 8 positions (1 = MLP, 2 = to the left, 3 = to the right, 4 = infront of MLP, 5 = wide and high to the left, 6 = wide and high to the right, 7 = back left, 8 = back right) then let Audyssey MultiEQ do its work and then and also made OCA filters and then I measured with a UMIK1 in the exact same 8 positions (likely within a few inches) to get my measurement results comparing Audyssey and OCA. When this was done I turned off all the EQ and did a measurement of my system with no EQ as a baseline comparison.
I then took the 8 measurements for each speaker and cross correlate aligned them and then did RMS + phase average (its been a while since playing with REW, so let me know if there is a better way to average the measurements) which gives the final average measurement of each speaker. I did that for each EQ (none, MultiEQ, OCA).
So 8 measurements (now averaged) x 8 speakers x 3 EQ options and got these results!
Results:
Direct = No EQ = Always RED
Multi EQ = Always GREEN
A1EvoMJ = OCA = Always BLUE
FRONT LEFT:
FRONT RIGHT
CENTER = L+R (phantom center)
SUBS
SURROUND RIGHT
SURROUND BACK RIGHT
SURROUND BACK LEFT
SURROUND LEFT
Here is the raw data if you want to look at yourself.
File that has all the RMS averages which is posted above:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/19PQBTJX6iJXfVJ0pgZjh-naMq_h0cNXy/view?usp=sharing
Folder with all the raw data and OCA script results: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1IlA-QEQ8vH2diQq8epn5u1DsJZVygnvc?usp=sharing
If this is of interest, I also compared what the Audyssey microphone measured for my system (which are the measurements that the MultiEQ and OCA scrip used) vs what the UMIK1 measured and the results can be seen at:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Uv5rKoBKq8uRbgvcK9SAWzBB_LV-5ALk/view?usp=sharing
Ok so now some thoughts and questions:
Crossovers and distances: For my direct (no EQ) results I now realize the MultiEQ would have set the crossover and the distances for the subs as I ran that first and thus I kept its distances. I do wonder if those distances to not result in the best sub integration as I have previously measured my system and showed better results:
My previous measurements had the FL and FR speakers at 9ft and subs at 15ft.
Audyssey set the distances for the FL and FR speakers at 9.5ft and subs at 16ft and 20.4 ft.
OCA set the distances for the FL 9.25ft and FR 9.18ft and says this for subs “[WARNING!] SW1: 5.19 meters, keep this subwoofer's polarity 'as is'.” = 17ft
When I get back home in a week I can put in the old distances I had set and re-measure the L+R with my prior sub integration if desided
I also know that my room and speaker placement is perfectly symmetrical (which is fortunate). So the distances to the speakers should all be identical.
I think MultiEQ takes the first measurement as the MLP and bases distances set on that. But you can manually override it. So I think in my case it is worth changing them to symmetric as it is more likely that I did not place the first measurement directly in the MLP.
I hear that changing the delays on OCAs scrips is not advised. So I do not know if people would recommend it. Or should I just remeasure until the L&R come out the same.
Independent Sub Delays:
I also have previously worked hard to get my two subs integrated as one virtual sub and it results in me having Sub 1 (front) with 0 delay and Sub 2 (back) 12.44ms relative delay in my Behringer amp.
My old amp measurements had the FL and FR speakers set at 9ft and subs at 15ft.
Audyssey set the distances for the FL and FR speakers at 9.5ft and subs at 16ft and 20.4 ft.
So it thinks sub 1 should be at 16ft and sub 2 should be at 20.4ft (so 20.4-16 = 4.4ft = 3.9ms of relative delay added to sub 1 (right? As it is viewed as ‘closer’ so it adds delay to this sub). So it thinks that the subs are actually 8.54ms apart (12.44-3.9). I am 98% sure I did that right.
I also do not know how OCA treated the sub distances as all I can see is “[WARNING!] SW1: 5.19 meters, keep this subwoofer's polarity 'as is'.” But not sure if and how it treated the second sub.
Thus I do wonder if that is Ideal or if I should just go back to having a Y spitter and have full control of the relative sub delays with the Behringer (Should I just set the relative sub1&2 distances myself and then use a Y splitter and let these scripts set the distances of the virtual sub?
Does OCAs script do a good job with dual subs? As I cannot see the delays it has put on each of them just the one.
I am also curious why the low frequency is not smoother with OCA for the front L and R?
Full range EQ for just my L&R
The HTM 12 v2 has amazing directivity and thus would be prime candidates for full-range EQ (as opposed to most speakers where you just want to EQ lower frequencies) so I do want to EQ them. My surrounds are generic Energy speakers and probably should just have low end EQ.
In the Audyssey phone app you can set the EQ range and thus this would be easy for MultiEQ.
Is there a way to have the OCA script do a full range EQ for just my L+R speakers and then a lower cutoff for the surrounds? As I know that people online have modified the script for more full range optimization, but I think that is applying to all channels and not just the L+R correct?
Alternatively I have done gated measurements and Erins Audio Corner also did full Klipple measurements at so I could use those to generate the high frequency EQ data. Is where a way I can add manual EQ on top of whatever MultiEQ or OCAs scrip generates (as then I could use them for the low end, and then anechoic for the high end)?
Is there anything else?
OCAs script does seem amazing but I am just trying to figure out what are the parameters that it can adjust. Delays, crossovers, and then PEQ filters correct? There is no phase or other adjustments done correct?
I have not looked into manually making filters and uploading them to Audyssey but would be open to people pointing me in the right direction.
Is there anything else that anyone would recommend?
I (and now you) have full access to all my measurements, but I am away for the next week and so I cannot measure anything new until next week…. But I am hoping to have a game plan for what I am going to do when I get home (outside of listening to my system)
Thanks again @OCA for the amazing script! Happy to hear peoples thoughts!
You can use ConvertDirectional2Standard script with a X4400 if you want Evo to align your subs between each other. By default, Evo will use Audyssey's relative delay and volume levels between 2 subs.
Thanks! I'll look into it.
Ok, so I will use the ConvertStandard2Directional script for optimizing the relative delay between Sub1 and Sub2. Just to be clear, I take the 3 measurements (Sub 1 in output 1, Sub 1 in output 1, Sub 2 in output 1) then run the ConvertStandard2Directional script to get the delays for sub 1 and 2 and then I manually put those delays in my receiver and then I re-measure the whole system but now with the new sub delays and then keep sub1 in output1 and sub2 in output2 and then Evo do its thing with those delays.
Also, would you recommend that I get rid of all the EQ that my Behringer applies to the subs and just let Evo handle it? Or having a layer of EQ to get it close before Evo is of benefit? Or is it all negligible?
Also any comment on if there is a way to have full range EQ for just the front channels? Or is there a way to add EQ ontop of what the Evo script does?
Looking forward to re-measuring when I get home!
Last edited:
PHD
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2023
- Messages
- 262
- Likes
- 344
After upgrading to X4800H and taking measurements with directional bass and letting EVO do the rest, I no longer felt that I needed my MiniDSP and MSO to calibrate my two subs. You could try and do full-range EQ with EVO using this tool:
Release 0.9.12-Beta3 · pulento/A1Evo_Electrified
Option to enable/disable HF EQing. HF EQ changed to a windowed response based on each speaker distance Minor fix on dip removal efficiency log for each speaker at the final report
github.com
It's like an app/wizard for EBO with additional configurations. You can run EVO as is up to 250Hz and then the app will take a second run from 250Hz to 20kHz with EQ/boost. Better try the default up to 250Hz first. You may like it enough as is...
After upgrading to X4800H and taking measurements with directional bass and letting EVO do the rest, I no longer felt that I needed my MiniDSP and MSO to calibrate my two subs. You could try and do full-range EQ with EVO using this tool:
Release 0.9.12-Beta3 · pulento/A1Evo_Electrified
Option to enable/disable HF EQing. HF EQ changed to a windowed response based on each speaker distance Minor fix on dip removal efficiency log for each speaker at the final report
It's like an app/wizard for EBO with additional configurations. You can run EVO as is up to 250Hz and then the app will take a second run from 250Hz to 20kHz with EQ/boost. Better try the default up to 250Hz first. You may like it enough as is...
Please note. If somebody downloaded the Beta3 yesterday. Please re-download it. Had to fix some last minute bugs
If you go with Full Range EQ be cautious with boosts especially if you opt for High Shelf. 6db Max and 3dB overall is a good start.
PHD
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2023
- Messages
- 262
- Likes
- 344
Please note. If somebody downloaded the Beta3 yesterday. Please re-download it. Had to fix some last minute bugs
If you go with Full Range EQ be cautious with boosts especially if you opt for High Shelf. 6db Max and 3dB overall is a good start.
Can you please explain the difference between max and overall? How could the overall be lower than per filter max? I thought max is for each PEQ filter and overall is the absolute max arising from the sum of all PEQ filters, meaning it can only be greater than each PEQ'q max boost...
What did I miss here?
I thought the same way. But it seems the idea is not to overboost when you have two adjacent filters that sum themselves due to overlapping.
Actually maxBoost on REW can go up to 18dB and overallBoost to 12dB
Anyway this recomendations aren't writen in stone. I recommed to see the averaged measured after optimization over Var smoothing (Co, FLo, etc) to see the natural/original response of each speakers. And also everyone tastes, remmeber that HF eq is supposed to change tonal balance since it will not be any good for in room speaker response.
But I'm also learning here so I'm always open to suggestions.
Also please read the README, there are some importan points about installation and security warning on MacOS specially.
I am getting a Java Script error. When I click through it it does not allow me to upload my original .ady file. Help.Please note. If somebody downloaded the Beta3 yesterday. Please re-download it. Had to fix some last minute bugs
If you go with Full Range EQ be cautious with boosts especially if you opt for High Shelf. 6db Max and 3dB overall is a good start.
A1EE tries to autostart REW assumming it is in that PATH, you can give it OK then Start REW and its API server.
Most people solve this just reinstalling REW.
In next release I'll catch that exception to inform the user. It seems REW allow to install on the user HOME directory instead of the usual C:\Program Files\REW path.
Finally got my second sub. Finally got a Minidsp 2x4 HD. Finally got the house to myself for a day to redo the setup time aligning subs with MSO through the minidsp and then running Audyssey again for use with the A1 script.
Opened the box and dropped and broke my Umik. Had to redo all the cabling to connect the subs back to the AVR and am now just sadly running Audyssey without getting to have fun with the bass fine tuning first.
Off to the Internet I go to spend another $100 on another mic and wait to get the house free again.
Opened the box and dropped and broke my Umik. Had to redo all the cabling to connect the subs back to the AVR and am now just sadly running Audyssey without getting to have fun with the bass fine tuning first.
Off to the Internet I go to spend another $100 on another mic and wait to get the house free again.
The home directory will be used by the installer if the user does not have or does not provide admin privileges for the installation.
Thanks a lot @JohnPM I’ll add that to search path on next release. BTW the API beta download thread is the only place to post bug reports ? I’ve one pending to report I’m out os country so not with my development machine nearby but wanted to know since it seems there is no GitHub/Sourceforge/Something page for REW.
For the beta builds, yes.
PHD
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2023
- Messages
- 262
- Likes
- 344
Similar threads
