Big news coming from Sound United in 2023!

[tjcinnamon]

Can you take a screenshot of this feature?

 

[Vacceo]

Jhaider has mentioned the license part and I think that is a fair point. Restrictions aside, it is cheaper than DLBC multisub. However, how does a DLBC multisub license work? Per AVR? Per user (and thus, on several devices)? By month?

 

[ElectricKoolAid]

Jhaider has mentioned the license part and I think that is a fair point. Restrictions aside, it is cheaper than DLBC multisub. However, how does a DLBC multisub license work? Per AVR? Per user (and thus, on several devices)? By month?

It is a one time payment and it is per AVR

 

[Jon AA]

You can’t have it both ways. My statement was clearly true as written by your above admission.

No, you need a math lesson. <100%≠0%. Your statement was 0%. That is false.

Unless the software keeps each channel together (I.e. the target curve for each channel encompasses the whole channel, not just a limited bandwidth of it with the rest of it stuck elsewhere.

The end result is the same after a level adjustment. Yes, it annoys me they set the levels based on a frequencies other than the crossover frequency. This has been known ever since the app came out and the various guides and tip sheets (many using my contributions) point out that if a bass boost is used for the sub, the level needs to be increased after calibration.

For a target curve using a 5 dB bass boost--the same curve (at least at low frequencies) for sub and main channels should be used--you need to increase the trim on the sub 5 dB afterward. Any high end user of the app has known this for years. Afterward, the end result is no different than doing the whole channel as you describe.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but MultEQ X doesn’t even allow you to shape the target curve directly. You have to use the dumbass abstraction of faux PEQ bands. Therefore, it’s actually a step backwards from the $20 iOS app, which admittedly does need a “copy curve” button.

Again, if you had actually ever used it, you'd know how laughable the "step backward" from the app is. You can make a target in REW in about 10 minutes. Here's a generic 5 dB target that uses 5 PEQs:

Once you have that done, you can import it and apply it to all the speakers you want to use it for in about 10 seconds. Changing the level of boost on the bottom end requires only adjusting the value of one of the PEQs.

For different reasons though. The utility of PEQ on HTP-1 (along with Storm, Datasat, etc) is to “precondition” prior to running room correction. One use case is in place of a separate DSP for assisted speakers.

I agree that's a fantastically useful feature. But it's a feature of the HTP-1--not Dirac. There are a lot of processors out there with Dirac that don't have it. You can get to the same end results with Audyssey (even on a machine with no PEQs), but it is more work.

Another use case is to take down a a big peak that’s throwing off level/volume calibration before EQ.

Not an issue with Audyssey. It sets the levels based upon the predicted response after correction.

Note that I’m writing about actual utility, not what excites people on the internet.

The snark isn't helping your case. The idea that adding PEQs after calibration has no actual utility is quite laughable. This capability of MQX even allow the user not to bother with making a target curve at all. People very comfortable with REW may prefer to do all their corrections in REW with their preferred mic and simply import them into MQX. Just a few short years ago, the idea of a generic EQ system that gives you an infinite number of PEQs on 16 channels for $200 would have been considered fantasy.

Does it?

Well, ask all those people with Auydssey or Dirac who do multiple calibrations and get different answers each time. There are plenty of comparisons in the various MMM and spatial average threads. In my experience, MMM is by far the most consistent and repeatable way to do it for anybody who doesn't have permanent mic fixtures all around his listening chair. MQX gets much closer to this than the 8 measurement of the app.

If you want to take 32 different measurements of 15 different speakers for one calibration good for you I guess.

Even I don't do all 32. You don't have to, but the capability to do so is a feature that can't be dismissed. I do about 28. The measuring procedure for MQX is much better than the app (you'd know that if you had tried it) so it's not bad at all. Especially when you refer to my earlier point--for most of your speakers you're only going to do that once. Make a change to a speaker and you can remeasure that speaker only. That goes really fast.

 

[peng]

No, you need a math lesson. <100%≠0%. Your statement was 0%. That is false.


The end result is the same after a level adjustment. Yes, it annoys me they set the levels based on a frequencies other than the crossover frequency. This has been known ever since the app came out and the various guides and tip sheets (many using my contributions) point out that if a bass boost is used for the sub, the level needs to be increased after calibration.

View attachment 230430

For a target curve using a 5 dB bass boost--the same curve (at least at low frequencies) for sub and main channels should be used--you need to increase the trim on the sub 5 dB afterward. Any high end user of the app has known this for years. Afterward, the end result is no different than doing the whole channel as you describe.

Hello Jon, I am sure you know according to Audyssey MultEQ X (I don't have it but have watched the video a couple times) doesn't technically do PEQ but it would use the information from the "PEQ" imported and then implement the FIR filters. The effects may be very similar, or better than the real PEQ that is IIR type, or may be practically a moot point. I thought I should mention it, so you can correct me if I misunderstood something..

 

[Jon AA]

Yes, that's correct. I thought it everybody knew that so I didn't specifically mention it.

 

[Daniel0]

For a target curve using a 5 dB bass boost--the same curve (at least at low frequencies) for sub and main channels should be used--you need to increase the trim on the sub 5 dB afterward. Any high end user of the app has known this for years.

Can you explain this part?
I don't understand the pictures either.

 

[mhardy6647]

Midrange Compensation is not the BBC dip nor is it a debacle - it's still recommended for many speakers that have a dip in that range to prevent the EQ from boosting it when there's a directivity mismatch. The fact that Dirac pays no attention to this makes it flawed.

The BBC dip... not to be confused with the Bunny Dip.

 

[Sancus]

Some major TLDR; going on here but I will say Audyssey still has nothing competitive with DLBC, apps or not. It just doesn't.

The PC app allowing PEQ entry would theoretically allow you to use MSO at least, but IIRC there is a hardware limitation that prevents different PEQs from applying to different subs. I am hopeful the new models won't have these limitations, even if they don't include DLBC, 4 sub channels with independent PEQs would still make a good solution.

I'm honestly not sure which is better between MSO and DLBC, as to my knowledge an in-depth comparison has never been done, but in theory at least DLBC's ability to independently optimize every speaker's crossover does put it ahead. It's not really practical to do that with MSO/REW unless you want to run every channel you have through miniDSPs, which is a cable mess and not exactly cheap either.

But in any case just MSO with no miniDSPs in the middle would be plenty good enough for >90% of setups I think.

 

[TheAVInsider]

News of the day
Three new models are up now

https://www.wi-fi.org/ja/product-finder-results?sort_by=certified&sort_order=desc&companies=558

 

[Sal1950]

But in any case just MSO with no miniDSPs in the middle would be plenty good enough for >90% of setups I think.

Agreed. But I wonder at what point it all becomes too complicated for Joe Sixpack to wrap his head around?
IMO I think we may need to go back to the drawing board and put together something a bit more point and shoot.
We here as enthusiasts get all caught up in the smallest of details that may not make a bit of audible difference
for the Best Buy customer?

 

[Sal1950]

The BBC dip... not to be confused with the Bunny Dip.

Oh my, she's much too chubby/heavy to be a Playboy Bunny
UK standards must be slippin. LOL

News of the day
Three new models are up now

https://www.wi-fi.org/ja/product-finder-results?sort_by=certified&sort_order=desc&companies=558

Damn, If only I had known I could have waited a few weeks and got a significant "end of model year" discount on the 4700H model I just purchased.

 

[TheAVInsider]

Oh my, she's much too chubby/heavy to be a Playboy Bunny
UK standards must be slippin. LOL

Damn, If only I had known I could have waited a few weeks and got a significant "end of model year" discount on the 4700H model I just purchased.

Yeah. No.
Sal,
I doubt anyone is finding discounts, let alone substantial stock quantity in the coming weeks, months, etc.
I'm sorry you didn't get the message sooner. The one I sent out almost 2 weeks ago now.
Congratulations on your recent purchase. I'll be looking forward to your reports.
Best wishes.

 

[Miker 1102]

Yeah. No.

Doubt anyone is finding discounts, let alone substantial stock quantity in the coming weeks, months, etc.
I'm sorry you didn't get the message sooner. The one I sent out almost 2 weeks ago now.
Congratulations on your recent purchase. I'll be looking forward to your reports.
Best wishes.

Seems like we're going to see a big price increase in the Denon product line. I have found Audessy to be manageable for room correction after doing a lot of learning. I think Denon is a well made mid level consumer avr and worth the money. I tried some of the new Pioneer/Onkyo products and the Dirac sounds a bit clearer in my room but the Pioneer avrs are very cheaply made and I returned them. For an average user I feel like investing in a Denon product that allows you to upgrade to Dirac is probably worthwhile but not a bargain anymore. The Denon amp I am running is 4400 and it seems very cheap to me now. I hope it lasts. I think my next upgrade is going to be my analog capacity.

 

[dlaloum]

Seems like we're going to see a big price increase in the Denon product line. I have found Audessy to be manageable for room correction after doing a lot of learning. I think Denon is a well made mid level consumer avr and worth the money. I tried some of the new Pioneer/Onkyo products and the Dirac sounds a bit clearer in my room but the Pioneer avrs are very cheaply made and I returned them. For an average user I feel like investing in a Denon product that allows you to upgrade to Dirac is probably worthwhile but not a bargain anymore. The Denon amp I am running is 4400 and it seems very cheap to me now. I hope it lasts. I think my next upgrade is going to be my analog capacity.

The last couple of Onkyo / Integra AVR's I owned (prior to the current one), were flagship models... they were very well built, and had heaps of power (and even current) - sadly, their HDMI and DSP circuits tended to overheat and die prematurely.

I currently have the much more basic, mid market Integra DRX 3.4 - this looks decent, is lightweight, and has mass market construction quality... no complaints, but it is not the same as the flagship models.

Onkyo/Integra/Pioneer have yet to release the flagship models, the RZ70/RZ90, LX705/905, etc... Typically the market positioning of Onkyo's models has been a touch below Denon (and price has matched that placement) - similarly the Flagships were a notch below the Denon Flagship models - but traditionally performance has been on a par, and build quality has been good.

The SU and Onkyo stables were both on my short list - I chose the Integra, because it meets my needs (channels, pre-outs, RoomEQ) and was circa 30% cheaper than the nearest House of SU equivalent (X3700).

The market maneuvering will be interesting.

If SU raise their prices 20 to 30% - and Onkyo stays were they currently are, Onkyo/Integra/Pioneer may well capture a sizeable market segment.

 

[TheAVInsider]

Seems like we're going to see a big price increase in the Denon product line. I have found Audessy to be manageable for room correction after doing a lot of learning. I think Denon is a well made mid level consumer avr and worth the money. I tried some of the new Pioneer/Onkyo products and the Dirac sounds a bit clearer in my room but the Pioneer avrs are very cheaply made and I returned them. For an average user I feel like investing in a Denon product that allows you to upgrade to Dirac is probably worthwhile but not a bargain anymore. The Denon amp I am running is 4400 and it seems very cheap to me now. I hope it lasts. I think my next upgrade is going to be my analog capacity.

Nah
Denon increases will be noticed most by those accustomed to waiting to buy at closeout prices. They have a bit of catching up to do. Except them to remain very competitive in the Mid-FI range. Marantz, well there's another story, but I'm done trying to tell it.

 

[Newman]

Agreed. But I wonder at what point it all becomes too complicated for Joe Sixpack to wrap his head around?
IMO I think we may need to go back to the drawing board and put together something a bit more point and shoot.

The best possible advice for Joe Sixpack, if his main and surround speakers have good on and off axis frequency response, is to restrict his RC app to the bass frequencies, run it on auto, and adjust overall bass level to taste. Because every single one of the general AVR RC products will only make good speakers sound worse outside the bass, when used full range. This is coming from Toole, so don’t doubt it, especially not based on the plethora of sighted listening reports drowning the room correction discussion…even your own.

As for that Amir report you quoted, if he was running Full Range Auto (and had good mains and surround speakers, which I fully expect), my only logical conclusion (other than Toole is wrong because sighted listening reports are not wrong, LOL) is that the improvement in bass was so profound that it made all frequencies sound better, to a greater degree than the actual degradation that was occurring in the mids and highs. Well, there is one other logical explanation of course: it was a sighted listening report, QED.

cheers

 

[Newman]

Marantz, well there's another story, but I'm done trying to tell it.

Well, you are not done telling it on ASR, because your extensive 19 post history here makes no mention of Marantz at all, never mind a story.

 

[Newman]

Thanks for nothing. Bye

 

[Daniel0]

How good is the software of the recent Onkyo/Pioneer devices? The devices which weren't released in Europe.
I doubt it is a huge step better than Denon/Marantz. Sound United has a advantage in software functionality, support and is so good in terms of bugs thats nearly impossible to catch for the smaller competitors that were nearly gone.