Yes and repeat at 8 times for better SNR.
-
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
Hi OCA,
The Dr. Toole curve has too little bass for watching movies and is below the anechoic curve of my Dali Zensor speakers. You can see in the comments that quite a few people are increasing the bass gain. To the best of my knowledge, the reference curve cannot be universal for all speakers. How to create your own curve with a phase?
The Dr. Toole curve has too little bass for watching movies and is below the anechoic curve of my Dali Zensor speakers. You can see in the comments that quite a few people are increasing the bass gain. To the best of my knowledge, the reference curve cannot be universal for all speakers. How to create your own curve with a phase?
You can upload any target curve to REW during A1 optimization and it will replace Toole curve. A1 creates the minimum phase version of the curve on the go. Calculated crossover frequencies might deviate though but you can adjust them manually anyway.
elboogz
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2024
- Messages
- 4
- Likes
- 1
Hi OCA,
Would be grateful for some help please, as I’m still learning.
So, I've used MSO along with the MiniDSP to get my dual subs working as one, and followed the steps laid out in OCA’s video to run the A1 script. After uploading the optimised results into Audyssey, my Center channel came in pretty low at -8.5db, so I bumped this up a few db and the results now sound amazing.
However, when looking at REW, I did notice that the applied Dr Toole Target Curve seemed quite low at 70.5db, and in fact the target volumes across all speakers are low. Is this correct?
I’m thinking that the filters applied when I originally ran MSO some time ago, may have impacted the overall target volume levels for my speakers when running A1. Would this be the case, and what could I do to increase these levels to 75db?
The target level in the EQ tab of REW is set to 76.5db.
Would appreciate any help.
Many thanks
Would be grateful for some help please, as I’m still learning.
So, I've used MSO along with the MiniDSP to get my dual subs working as one, and followed the steps laid out in OCA’s video to run the A1 script. After uploading the optimised results into Audyssey, my Center channel came in pretty low at -8.5db, so I bumped this up a few db and the results now sound amazing.
However, when looking at REW, I did notice that the applied Dr Toole Target Curve seemed quite low at 70.5db, and in fact the target volumes across all speakers are low. Is this correct?
I’m thinking that the filters applied when I originally ran MSO some time ago, may have impacted the overall target volume levels for my speakers when running A1. Would this be the case, and what could I do to increase these levels to 75db?
The target level in the EQ tab of REW is set to 76.5db.
Would appreciate any help.
Many thanks
Attachments
Audyssey sweeps are supposed to be 75dB at the speaker outputs but that will be effected by speaker efficiency, distance to mic, mic capsule, many factors. No one gets 75dB but 70dB is a bit lower than usual but the target level is not important, you need to turn on the volume a bit more to hear the same loudness level and that's all. If center channel needs extra volume, it could be some dips causing that. Try a different crossover level maybe.
I'd leave all sorts of extra processing off for the cleanest sound production but I guess best tested audibly for your own preference.
phn
Member
I did some further acoustics reshuffling at my room, moved the bass traps around, etc. Having now done A1 a couple of times, it is such a breeze now.
Measure x8 at LP, send the ady file to PC, have the A1 script and REW do their magic, send back as Preset1, enjoy. Cound not be easier, with such good end result.
What an open soundstage as a result. I now had an UMIK-1 borrowed so was able to do some measurements after, they support objectively what I subjectively heard. I have a problematic room, concrete everywhere, having been able to tame the mid and highrange nulls for most part helps a great deal of course.
One caveat though: I do listen at low volumes often times, I have a microsub, so I did end up bringing the sub (and center) levels back up a tad. I ended up engaging DynEQ at RLO -10dB as well. But when listening with higher volumes, I often then switch DynEQ off again, as no Fletcher Munson loudness curve is then required.
For MultEQ-X, having now REW with UMIK-1 to measure the results was quite an eye opening too. At some stage, I will take the time to address the speaker per speaker curves with results from REW session. MultEQ-X provides such delicate tools for this.
But for anyone still on a fence with this, or as which approach to take, the USD 20 MultEQ app together with Audyssey One are such an amazing bang for the buck, this really does the trick. If you don't want to spend time with room alignment tool, the A1 approach should take you "there" unless you really want to dig into your room mode specifics.
Measure x8 at LP, send the ady file to PC, have the A1 script and REW do their magic, send back as Preset1, enjoy. Cound not be easier, with such good end result.
What an open soundstage as a result. I now had an UMIK-1 borrowed so was able to do some measurements after, they support objectively what I subjectively heard. I have a problematic room, concrete everywhere, having been able to tame the mid and highrange nulls for most part helps a great deal of course.
One caveat though: I do listen at low volumes often times, I have a microsub, so I did end up bringing the sub (and center) levels back up a tad. I ended up engaging DynEQ at RLO -10dB as well. But when listening with higher volumes, I often then switch DynEQ off again, as no Fletcher Munson loudness curve is then required.
For MultEQ-X, having now REW with UMIK-1 to measure the results was quite an eye opening too. At some stage, I will take the time to address the speaker per speaker curves with results from REW session. MultEQ-X provides such delicate tools for this.
But for anyone still on a fence with this, or as which approach to take, the USD 20 MultEQ app together with Audyssey One are such an amazing bang for the buck, this really does the trick. If you don't want to spend time with room alignment tool, the A1 approach should take you "there" unless you really want to dig into your room mode specifics.
Last edited:
@OCA : As for measuring: I tried both. Single point and around MLP with 20-30 cm distances. The single point asked for distance to my center, MLP did not. SP had to revise sub distance 3 times, around MLP did it in one. SP has much less bass and sounds overall less 'forward'.
So with me the around MLP seems to work better, although I optimize for 1 listening position. I used the Harman curve because that helped the bass.
5.2, small room (3,5x3,6m), A One 1.3x, Harman curve.
Any suggestions for making it even better?
So with me the around MLP seems to work better, although I optimize for 1 listening position. I used the Harman curve because that helped the bass.
5.2, small room (3,5x3,6m), A One 1.3x, Harman curve.
Any suggestions for making it even better?
Wait for A2!@OCA : As for measuring: I tried both. Single point and around MLP with 20-30 cm distances. The single point asked for distance to my center, MLP did not. SP had to revise sub distance 3 times, around MLP did it in one. SP has much less bass and sounds overall less 'forward'.
So with me the around MLP seems to work better, although I optimize for 1 listening position. I used the Harman curve because that helped the bass.
5.2, small room (3,5x3,6m), A One 1.3x, Harman curve.
Any suggestions for making it even better?
That sounds like Dynamic EQ and its uber surround boost.
Signal to Noise Ratio, more measures or with more samples in the frequency sweep improves SNR. This AFAIK noise floor mantains constant during the measure.
One thing I noted today running REW sweeps after A1 optimization is that step response maybe not optimal considering that I have that SW distance limit problem that I have to set Center distance by hand.
After setting my C distance by hand to A1 (1.77m) it inference SW distance to 3.52m which is about right but the step response shows the SW quite delayed so I maxed SW distance manually on Audyssey (7.61m) with a better step response BUT my SW is much near to 3.52m than 7.16m. What I'm doing wrong ?
Red line is the A1 response (3.52m SW distance) green line is manually edited to max (7.16m SW distance). Twetter and Mid is impossible to improve without active XO and breaking my speakers apart, SW being a different driver can; limited to Audessey limits. But my question is, are my Audyssey capture feeding A1 wrong ? (8 points 30cm apart) or there is something else here ?
REW sweeps:
drive.google.com
After setting my C distance by hand to A1 (1.77m) it inference SW distance to 3.52m which is about right but the step response shows the SW quite delayed so I maxed SW distance manually on Audyssey (7.61m) with a better step response BUT my SW is much near to 3.52m than 7.16m. What I'm doing wrong ?
Red line is the A1 response (3.52m SW distance) green line is manually edited to max (7.16m SW distance). Twetter and Mid is impossible to improve without active XO and breaking my speakers apart, SW being a different driver can; limited to Audessey limits. But my question is, are my Audyssey capture feeding A1 wrong ? (8 points 30cm apart) or there is something else here ?
REW sweeps:
SR_Comparision.mdat
drive.google.com
Comparing excess phase responses is the more robust way. A1 is doing a slightly better job:One thing I noted today running REW sweeps after A1 optimization is that step response maybe not optimal considering that I have that SW distance limit problem that I have to set Center distance by hand.
After setting my C distance by hand to A1 (1.77m) it inference SW distance to 3.52m which is about right but the step response shows the SW quite delayed so I maxed SW distance manually on Audyssey (7.61m) with a better step response BUT my SW is much near to 3.52m than 7.16m. What I'm doing wrong ?
View attachment 365689
Red line is the A1 response (3.52m SW distance) green line is manually edited to max (7.16m SW distance). Twetter and Mid is impossible to improve without active XO and breaking my speakers apart, SW being a different driver can; limited to Audessey limits. But my question is, are my Audyssey capture feeding A1 wrong ? (8 points 30cm apart) or there is something else here ?
REW sweeps:
SR_Comparision.mdat
@OCA forgot to mention both measure are with A1 the only diference is that I just manually adjusted SW distance for the second one.
Forgive my ignorance but it is not prefered to have the least amount of phase inversions in the LF area specially ?
Cannot stress enough how greateful I'm for your great work
Similar threads
