Audyssey's Next Generation of Room Correction (MultEQ-X)

[chych7]

Not sure I understand how this describes a difference between MultiEQ loaded in the AVR, and using the MultiEQ app instead.

There isn't a difference, it's the same. Although MultEQ-X by default puts in the 0.87 distance correction factor for pre-2022 Denon/Marantz AVRs, which would come out as a sonic improvement (of course you can manually put this in without MultEQ-X).

But MultEQ-X lets you increase the headroom for correction, and disable auto levelling, which makes it a lot easier to set a subwoofer target curve (that Audyssey will actually follow).

 

[dlaloum]

I've found that this is all I need to get what I want.

1. Delete both Theater HF rolloff and Midrange compensation.
2. Add a Tilt and apply a -0.8dB -0.9dB/octave slope (equivalent to a harman 3dB/decade slope), though you can play with this to find your preference.
3. Check "Disable Auto-Leveling" on the subwoofers.

Another cool thing is that If you want to leave the Theater HF Rolloff, just make sure it's set for the reference Type and Set the Tilt type to flat. Then you can switch between both targets on the AVR quickly.

EDIT: Oh yeah, also make sure you take 8 measurement points no further than 6" from the center of your main listening position. I usually cross everything over at 80Hz, and up the subwoofer by a few dB on my HEOS input. You can trim input specific speaker trims by pressing the options? button to the top right of the arrows and going to channel levels or similar.

So this is not about XT32, but all about the target slope you have set - you have changed the "voicing" of your room...

Have you also changed the MRC setting?

 

[depechefan]

I'd recommend viewing these 2 videos. There is some good information especially about the extra headroom and disabling auto-leveling

 

[fieldcar]

So this is not about XT32, but all about the target slope you have set - you have changed the "voicing" of your room...

Have you also changed the MRC setting?

Right. It's the "house curve" as many people label it. My feelings are that multEQ's default targets are flawed. I would assume you mean voice intelligibility during movies? I don't quite know what voicing is. My goal is for my home theater to sound like my nearfield studio monitor setup with minimal room interaction and near perfect FR. This is what most studios use to make the music and movies we are listening to, so why would I deviate? If these audyssey EQ tweaks of MRC and non-tilted Flat+HF rolloff were part of a speakers natural in-room estimated FR, then it would be an objectively poor speaker with a headless panther.

I haven't really changed anything with the overall tonality or "voicing" of my speakers in my room. My JBL 590's measure raw, in-room, very similar to the -3dB/decade Harman in room target if you ignore the room modes on the raw measurements.

As far as MRC(aka BBC dip), I deleted it. I'm puzzled why it's enabled by default. From what I gather, the BBC dip was created for ancient speakers with poor off-axis FR/directivity using a first order butterworth crossovers with a 2.0KHz +3dB hump (basically not using a proper linkwitz Riley crossover). Any modern and objectively well regarded speaker is worse off using MRC. What about 3-ways or my compression driver having a low crossover point of ~1.2KHz?

Sean Olive:
"Many poorly designed 2-way loudspeakers already have dips in the sound power response in the cross-over range 1-3 kHz where the directivity of the woofer is too high compared to the directivity of the tweeter at those frequencies. As a result, this produces a notch in the sound power response of the loudspeaker, usually followed by a peak. Depending on the bandwidth and depth of the notch, it is the peak that is often heard as sounding objectionable (harshness, hardness or excessive brightness)."

In the end, I'm open to new ideas if you've got some compelling information to go against what I've found. Please, share.

Right now, I'm really interested in playing with my subwoofer placement to flatten the peaks and nulls before any room correction just by moving them in the room. So far, it hasn't been easy (monolith THX 13=heavy as hell), and the REW room simulator has limitations, but it's a good starting point. I'm really really excited for the next generation of room correction (spatial room correction?) using every speaker to deaden reflections or something to that effect.

 

[dlaloum]

Right. It's the "house curve" as many people label it. My feelings are that multEQ's default targets are flawed. I would assume you mean voice intelligibility during movies? I don't quite know what voicing is. My goal is for my home theater to sound like my nearfield studio monitor setup with minimal room interaction and near perfect FR. This is what most studios use to make the music and movies we are listening to, so why would I deviate? If these audyssey EQ tweaks of MRC and non-tilted Flat+HF rolloff were part of a speakers natural in-room estimated FR, then it would be an objectively poor speaker with a headless panther.

I haven't really changed anything with the overall tonality or "voicing" of my speakers in my room. My JBL 590's measure raw, in-room, very similar to the -3dB/decade Harman in room target if you ignore the room modes on the raw measurements.

As far as MRC(aka BBC dip), I deleted it. I'm puzzled why it's enabled by default. From what I gather, the BBC dip was created for ancient speakers with poor off-axis FR/directivity using a first order butterworth crossovers with a 2.0KHz +3dB hump (basically not using a proper linkwitz Riley crossover). Any modern and objectively well regarded speaker is worse off using MRC. What about 3-ways or my compression driver having a low crossover point of ~1.2KHz?



In the end, I'm open to new ideas if you've got some compelling information to go against what I've found. Please, share.

Right now, I'm really interested in playing with my subwoofer placement to flatten the peaks and nulls before any room correction just by moving them in the room. So far, it hasn't been easy (monolith THX 13=heavy as hell), and the REW room simulator has limitations, but it's a good starting point. I'm really really excited for the next generation of room correction (spatial room correction?) using every speaker to deaden reflections or something to that effect.

View attachment 291300

What I mean by "voicing" is the process whereby one subjectively alters the "sound" or "voice" of a setup - at its most basic, it is the trebble and bass knobs on vintage gear.... nowadays we prefer to mess with the much more complex "target curves" - but it really amounts to the same thing.

I asked about the MRC - because by default it is turned on, which is (IMO) a major flaw, and I believe one of the biggest single gains in sound quality from an Audyssey setup, is simple to turn MRC off (!!).
(and yes - why they still have it on by default is completely beyond me.... incomprehensible)

I also believe that standard target curve approaches are ultimately flawed, as aiming for a proper flat FR should be the goal from the direct sound from the speakers - as long as reflections are more than circa 5ms ( off the top of my head... would need to look that up!) delayed from the direct signal - our minds will sort it out - but in room terms, those reflections are not seperated out.... that makes the target curve a very blunt tool!.

I would like to see the measurement and room EQ tools show both the direct sound contribution (via time gated measurements) as well as the overall "room curve" which incorporates both direct and reflected sound... and most of the EQ applied should be focused on correcting the direct sound contribution ....

If wishes were fishes...

 

[chych7]

As far as MRC(aka BBC dip), I deleted it. I'm puzzled why it's enabled by default. From what I gather, the BBC dip was created for ancient speakers with poor off-axis FR/directivity using a first order butterworth crossovers with a 2.0KHz +3dB hump (basically not using a proper linkwitz Riley crossover). Any modern and objectively well regarded speaker is worse off using MRC. What about 3-ways or my compression driver having a low crossover point of ~1.2KHz?

There are lots of modern speakers that have dips in sound power and directivity errors around the crossover. Wouldn't these benefit from some kind of MRC? Examples:

Klipsch RP-500M (~1.8 kHz):

Measurements for speaker Klipsch RP-500M

www.spinorama.org

KEF Q650 (~1 kHz):

Measurements for speaker KEF Q650C

www.spinorama.org

Revel W553 (~2.2 kHz):

Measurements for speaker Revel W553L

www.spinorama.org

But the default 2 kHz -3 dB makes no sense, since speakers can vary quite a bit from that point.

 

[dlaloum]

There are lots of modern speakers that have dips in sound power and directivity errors around the crossover. Wouldn't these benefit from some kind of MRC? Examples:

Klipsch RP-500M (~1.8 kHz):

Measurements for speaker Klipsch RP-500M

www.spinorama.org

KEF Q650 (~1 kHz):

Measurements for speaker KEF Q650C

www.spinorama.org

Revel W553 (~2.2 kHz):

Measurements for speaker Revel W553L

www.spinorama.org

But the default 2 kHz -3 dB makes no sense, since speakers can vary quite a bit from that point.

If the EQ system is doing the right thing, it should pick these up and correct for them - the MRC still does not make sense

 

[chych7]

If the EQ system is doing the right thing, it should pick these up and correct for them - the MRC still does not make sense

AFAIK, EQ systems like Audyssey just try and fit the direct measured sound to a target curve, and ignore reflections. Hence the reasoning for an MRC, to avoid over EQing regions of poor directivity, which can worsen reflections and overall tonality. Maybe other EQ systems can do better than that (i.e. Trinnov with its multiple mic array), but I don't think Audyssey can.

 

[dlaloum]

AFAIK, EQ systems like Audyssey just try and fit the direct measured sound to a target curve, and ignore reflections. Hence the reasoning for an MRC, to avoid over EQing regions of poor directivity, which can worsen reflections and overall tonality. Maybe other EQ systems can do better than that (i.e. Trinnov with its multiple mic array), but I don't think Audyssey can.

Yes - one of the weaknesses with most EQ systems, is that they do not differentiate between direct and reflected sound - and the EQ should only be applying to the direct sound....

Which of course means that "target curves" for such systems (most of them!) - are a completely flawed objective.

It would be nice to get a setup where the software can seperate out the direct from reflected sound, and the user then gets the choice of where and on what to apply the target curve.

Trinnov must have the ability to differentiate in that way.... and in theory so should Dirac-ART. (based on what those systems are doing...)

But no one is providing a Multeq-X or Dirac like interface where you can apply a target curve to direct rather than overall room response.

Come on guys - it cannot be that hard!!

 

[Newman]

Yes - one of the weaknesses with most EQ systems, is that they do not differentiate between direct and reflected sound - and the EQ should only be applying to the direct sound....

And in that spirit, if one-inch-tweeter systems with no waveguide are prone to a directivity mismatch in the 2 kHz bracket, causing an ‘audible wobble’ in the reflected sound, then one can understand putting a little dip in the target through that problem area, to de-emphasise it. Bearing in mind that, like you say, the dip is set for summed sound including those reflections with their natural dip.

 

[Acerun]

I've found that this is all I need to get what I want.

1. Delete both Theater HF rolloff and Midrange compensation.
2. Add a Tilt and apply a -0.8dB -0.9dB/octave slope (equivalent to a harman 3dB/decade slope), though you can play with this to find your preference.
3. Check "Disable Auto-Leveling" on the subwoofers.

Another cool thing is that If you want to leave the Theater HF Rolloff, just make sure it's set for the reference Type and Set the Tilt type to flat. Then you can switch between both targets on the AVR quickly.

EDIT: Oh yeah, also make sure you take 8 measurement points no further than 6" from the center of your main listening position. I usually cross everything over at 80Hz, and up the subwoofer by a few dB on my HEOS input. You can trim input specific speaker trims by pressing the options? button to the top right of the arrows and going to channel levels or similar.

You don't take the 8 measurements in the positions recommended visually on XT32?

 

[Acerun]

I'd recommend viewing these 2 videos. There is some good information especially about the extra headroom and disabling auto-leveling

Really helpful. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Acerun]

You don't take the 8 measurements in the positions recommended visually on XT32?

This is a legitimate question

 

[chych7]

You don't take the 8 measurements in the positions recommended visually on XT32?

First position is the MLP center. Other points (and MultEQ-X allows for up to 32 points) can be anywhere you want included in the calibration. The tighter the points are for calibration, the more focused it will be for that listening position. You can have decent response for multiple seats or great response for one seat, it's a tradeoff to make. The visual representation is very generic and not a rule, I'd pick a microphone setup pattern that makes sense for your goals for your system.

 

[Reverend Slim]

First position is the MLP center. Other points (and MultEQ-X allows for up to 32 points) can be anywhere you want included in the calibration. The tighter the points are for calibration, the more focused it will be for that listening position. You can have decent response for multiple seats or great response for one seat, it's a tradeoff to make. The visual representation is very generic and not a rule, I'd pick a microphone setup pattern that makes sense for your goals for your system.

I would add to this: I do my first three positions at center of MLP, where my left ear is and where my right ear is... and then on the last step of MultEQ-X, I select all three of those positions for the Trim source so that it averages based on those three measurements. Gives me more consistent channel trim results almost every time when checking post-cal with a meter.

 

[Acerun]

I just bought an ACM1-X microphone. Should it have VOID stickers on it?

 

[chych7]

I just bought an ACM1-X microphone. Should it have VOID stickers on it?

Umm definitely not. Something’s amiss here.

 

[Sal1950]

I just bought an ACM1-X microphone. Should it have VOID stickers on it?

Where did you buy it from?

 

[Acerun]

Where did you buy it from?

Amazon, but the seller is listed as Audessey Labratories.

 

[Sal1950]

Amazon, but the seller is listed as Audessey Labratories.

Humm, I guess I'd try and contact someone at Audessey Labs.
That sticker just doesn't seem right on what should be a new, perfect product.
(I think, have you closely re-read the original ad material?)