• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Audyssey Room EQ Review

Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
62
Likes
39
Location
VA
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
Do you share your mains/amp/sub between your Stereo & HT setup. If so, how do you deal with the HT bypass issue of going back and forth between the SHD and an HT receiver?
 

aarons915

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
275
Likes
404
Location
Cincinnati, OH
I recently bought a Denon X3500h and tried out XT32 myself, I think it does a pretty good job and is much faster than what I could do with PEQ but I still think I prefer the PEQ. I have a large dip around 120 Hz due to SBIR and I suspected Audyssey would try to boost it and it did, that wouldn't be a huge deal but I use LS50s and their distortion peaks around 100Hz so it's not an area that I want to add even more through a 7db boost. The other weird thing I noticed was the signal seems to be jagged with XT32 on compared to off. I even measured my Emotiva UMC 200 that was still plugged in and it is smooth with and without the PEQ enabled. I honestly can't say I notice an audible difference with Audyssey on but it is odd. Edited to add that the Audyssey is cutoff at 300Hz, so above that point I would expect flat and smooth like the UMC 200. Here is the Pre-out measurement to show what I mean:

PreOuts.jpg
 
Last edited:

phoenixdogfan

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
441
Likes
349
I bought this to solve my microphone attachment issues. A few EURs

View attachment 59696

View attachment 59697

And yes, the USB cable was previously damaged when the stack of books/boxes/whatever I used before collapsed. I have others, it's just there for illustration purposes :):)
I use those as well and I have a $20 microphone tripod I use with my Dirac Live calibrations.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
37
Likes
38
What are those vertical silver boxes on the both side of the cabinet? I've seen those in other pictures but I don't know what they do.
 

Robbo99999

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
433
Likes
247
Location
UK
What are those vertical silver boxes on the both side of the cabinet? I've seen those in other pictures but I don't know what they do.
I'm gonna take a real punt and say UPS units. I really don't know, but it's a hunch...I like to guess!

EDIT: and I was wrong, darn it!
 
Last edited:
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
26,687
Likes
62,290
Location
Seattle Area
Thread Starter #109
@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?
Again, I don't know why this is either or. If your amp runs out of power and distorts, then it will sound horrid. If it does not run out of power, then EQ trumps any distortion differences between them.

But let's remember that better amp performance usually (noise and distortion) doesn't cost money. It just requires better engineering.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
26,687
Likes
62,290
Location
Seattle Area
Thread Starter #110

Fitzcaraldo215

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2016
Messages
1,432
Likes
557
I used Audyssey from 2007-2016, and I was really quite happy with that, same room, same Mch speakers. My last experiences with it were with XT/32 and AudysseyPro, with its calibrated microphone. However, there was a cleaner and purer sound with an Exasound Mch DAC and Dirac in the PC vs. my Integra 80.2 HT with Audyssey processor.

It was not bad with with HT Mch prepro via USB or HDMI, but the sound was plainly second rate vs. Exasound Mch DAC, files delivered by JRiver in the PC, and Dirac Live at 196k in the PC. They have beguiled me ever since. When recently I moved, I threw out the Integra prepro, because it was of second rate performance and it was obsolescent in prepro terms, not to mention resale value, which don’t last a a fortnight.
 

rvsixer

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
173
Likes
93
Location
Aus Texas
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
342
Likes
173
Thank you for taking the time to review Audyssey XT32 with the app. There are so many devices that are sold with it included, this is a very important review. Many of the devices are also very reasonably priced if you pick up an older model that is compatible with the app. I think it would be helpful to locate and list the oldest models the app is compatible with. On the Denon side I believe it is the X3300 for the 3xxx series.
This conclusion matched my experience. Audyssey XT32 works very well. Prior to the app, you were just stuck with 2 very bad target curves. The app fixes these issues.
The one thing the review doesn’t cover is how good Audyssey’s Subeq ht is with dual subs. This is the one area that Audyssey is better than Dirac (at least until their bass management gets released). To properly eq 2 subs with a Dirac system you really need to use a minidsp.
As others have mentioned, having a great SINAD is meaningless if there is no room eq, or if it is poorly implemented. Having used XT32 with the app, Dirac, and ARC, they all have worked well for me and I think the gap between them is smaller and often overstated.
@amirm is it possible to see what Dirac does to your system once it gets put back together (or if you have a previous measurement you have done from the past)?
That is why I choose ARC over Dirac. Bass integration is the most critical feature of EQ.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
342
Likes
173
Imo Harman's session wasn't being fair to Audyssey as Dr. Toole and Olive are the psychoacoustics experts who know full well that most people do not prefer flat in room bass curve. Even with that much older XT version (assumed, but not XT32 for sure), most users would have like it better if they simply add a few dB to their subwoofers (not the same, I know, but would still be better to their ears). To me, I actually prefer the target curve to be flat by default, then I can use the app to do what Amir did, but to a sharper, or more gentle rise towards the low end. Dirac Live allows that too obviously. Anthem ARC apparently default to a slope, but likely user adjustable as well.
ARC is adjustable
 

John Galt

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
82
Likes
68
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/


I did not use the cardboard. I just commented on it. The admonishment about hand holding the mic is wrong. THe major correction in EQ is at low frequencies where wavelengths are massive compared to the size of your arm. As such, it is not "seen." In addition, being in the measurements is better because it reflects the true usage pattern of the room (as opposed to be empty with just the mic stand).

The main benefit of the microphone stand is repeatability if you can mark all the positions. Otherwise, you can't repeat them anyway. Again, I encourage you to look at the objective results I showed on how the right corrections were made.

Certainly this is NO proof that using a stand makes an improvement:
View attachment 59745

There is no way you can remember such things from run to runs that take minutes.

There is another issue. When I was playing with the app after calibration, I made a change and was amazed at the improvement in detail and imaging. Then I realized I had not yet uploaded the change so nothing was different! This is especially true of people who like to believe something is good. This is why you want to confirm what the system is doing.

Anyway there is no rookie mistake or otherwise. I have calibrated rooms countless times by hand and with every Room EQ system out there. I understand the underlying science and what the system needs to do. It is not a mistake that I quickly arrived at the right target curve and positive results.
I respect you immensely Amir, but would you consider a REW measurement ‘clean’ if I simply held the calibrated mic in my hand with associated body reflections?
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
342
Likes
173
XT32 vs Dirac - I got a trial PC license for Dirac and compared to XT32. Dirac let's you choose what seating positions you want to measure for and I used the single listening position for music. I immediately noticed improved imaging over XT32 and was about to pull the the trigger on a MiniDSP SHD (still might). However, it occurred to me the Audyssey App encourages you to take measurements around a couch to optimize (more like compromise) for movies. I re-ran XT32 taking 6 measurements pulled into to the main listening position (12" apart from one another) and the difference in center stage imaging was amazing, in line with Dirac. Makes sense really, you can only optimize for one position but the overall room mode improvements makes the movie watching great for everyone. I used to limit XT32 to 300Hz but now I much prefer to run it FLAT for the full range.
ARC recommends multiple measurements at least 2 feet apart
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
342
Likes
173
I suggest getting Umik-1 calibrated usb microphone. HF is important so show proper in room response and investigate impulse responses. By the way room correction /convolution is as far as I understand based on a reverse filter obtained by the impulse response. So a calibrated mic all the way to 24k is a good thing a think.
ARC comes with calibrated mic and a real stand. I will not use a McDonald's happy meal paper stand.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
342
Likes
173
Amir

Thanks for the write up. I think you may get different (maybe even better) results if you read up on Audyssey a bit and re-do the calibration. You seem to have made some typical ‘rookie’ mistakes regarding microphone placement, etc.

This is a great place to start: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-r...6770-official-audyssey-thread-part-ii.html#d1

Two things jumped out at me immediately:

1. Use a microphone stand and throw the cardboard out. Never handhold the mic. I simply tape my calibration mic to a boom mic stand since my fittings are also not compatible.

2. Your measurements should all be within 24 inches of the first (most important) measurement. The Audyssey App setup wizard clearly makes this point, but I’m not sure about the receiver wizard. Since I bought the app I’ve not used the receiver wizard because I don’t even like standing in the same room when the calibration is taking place.

More here: https://audyssey.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/202387323-Audyssey-101

I’ve run Audyssey calibrations many times starting with my old 2312CI, and most recently with my X-3500H. I’ve read every single piece of information that I can regarding Audyssey setup, pros/cons, etc. My initial microphone placement methods were very far from ideal (about 8 years ago on the 2312). My experience for both receivers, and various sets of speakers, is that Audyssey SIGNIFICANTLY improves the sound quality for my setup...but I highly recommend reading up on the basics first.

From the AVS FAQ link above:
  • 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.

View attachment 59766
These instructions are similar to ARC
 
Top Bottom