Difference between Audyssey Multeq VS Multeq XT Vs Multeq XT32

[GalZohar]

How much you will notice is hard to say, but basically XT hardly does any useful EQ for the speakers. It does some limited useful EQ to the subwoofer but it's still lacking compared to XT32. I have audible peaks at 20hz and 27hz that my XT can't really fix because it doesn't have the horsepower, and supposedly XT32 should be able to deal with them (I expect them to not be too narrow for XT32, but I don't have an XT32 receiver to test). Peaks at the speaker bass, as shown here, are also not EQed at all on my system. Only the overall bass level is leveled according to the target curve. Only the mid-bass gets some extremely minimal EQ, and the high frequencies get some not useful EQ that is best left disabled.

If you don't really care about having an EQ system that actually EQs peaks in your bass response, then XT will be good enough... Again, you'll almost definitely benefit from XT32, but nobody can predict how significant of a difference it'll be for you.

 

[jeffw_00]

Thanks Galz - though it's funny - I really noticed the difference, in a positive way, when I ran Audyssey 2EQ on my existing system - better than what I could have done manually. And XT is 2 generations removed. So I would think XT would be better - or at least as noticeable (in a positive way). My fear is that reading some of the comments here that the XT may be WORSE than what I have now (I.e., Audyssey screwed up their 3rd gen). If not, and it's really just a low bass thing, I'm happy with my Sunfire's response now so if that's the only issue I might try to go with XT.....
Thanks!
/j

 

[GalZohar]

There wasn't a graph posted for 2EQ, but supposedly it's even worse than XT. Basically in terms of value for money XT32 is great unless of a very very tight budget. As in, don't get speakers with ****** frequency response that won't integrate with your subwoofer, or a subwoofer that doesn't get down to 20Hz with high enough SPL, just to afford XT32, but once you have those, I estimate XT32 is the next most cost effective upgrade.

 

[jeffw_00]

Thanks - no plans to change the speakers - love my Sunfire Need to update only my receiver (Recently it's been taking > 30 sec on power on to make an HDMI connection - not a good sign).

Have you ever used the Audyssey App to fine-tune?

 

[GalZohar]

Yes, the app is necessary if you want to disable the poor high frequency corrections of XT (and with XT32 it would let you either disable high frequency correction or tweak the curve to give them a chance to do anything useful), and also has some other somewhat useful features, like keeping multiple calibrations stored and making other modifications to the target curves.

 

[jeffw_00]

So here's what I don't get - I read this (and a couple of other threads) that suggest that the XT hi-freq is too aggressive and so well, broken - i get how one gets that from looking at the graphs, but if it was really broken, (i.e., turning it on made things worse) wouldn't they fix it? I just wonder if Audyssey has a counter-argument...

 

[GalZohar]

Audyssey was not changed in a very long time. It's not really going through any development other than the multeq X app which honestly seems like mostly a maximum profit for minimum effort kind of thing, taking advantage of exposing features that were already there to the user with much better interface. I can understand XT can't handle bass as FIR filters need high processing power to deal with bass, but I don't have an explanation for why the high frequencies are handled poorly by XT. For me there was a slight audible difference with limited frequency range with XT compared to full range. If found out about this when I tested XT on vs off and noticed some voices in some videos were sounding better without Audyssey... But as my speakers at the time were near the wall and had high room gain, while my subwoofer has 20-40Hz much stronger than 50-80Hz, bass sounded more balanced with Audyssey on. Limiting the correction range gave me the best of both worlds. Now that my speakers are further from the wall, XT hardly makes any difference for them (as the bass issues are too high resolution for it to handle, and I block it from correcting high frequencies), so it just EQs the sub imbalance between 20-40hz vs 50-80hz (still leaving my major 20hz and 27hz peaks uncorrected, it actually only slightly reduces them along with deepening the 25hz null that is between them, again probably due to lack of resolution), and of course it still sets distances and levels (had to manually adjust sub distance for much better integration with right speaker), and lets me use Dynamic EQ.

So bottom line is that XT has some value, but doesn't correct most of the things that XT32 is supposed to be correcting.

 

[jeffw_00]

thanks - food for thought

 

[jeffw_00]

Hey Galz - I just had a stupid thought - I -thought - that at the end of the day - the purpose of basic MultiEQ XT was just to set the static settings (levels, equalizer) reasonably well for each speaker - all this stuff about response matching (i.e., the graphs) - how can that be part of that - is that instead part of the Dynamic EQ - which could be separately disabled (while still letting Audyssey do the static setup?)

 

[GalZohar]

MultEQ (all versions) try to flatten your frequency response, but only XT32 is actually powerful enough to do it in a similar level to other higher-end EQ systems, while XT has very limited capability to achieve that. Part of it is just setting levels and distances (which almost any AVR does). The other part is applying filters to match a target curve (flat, reference, or custom-made "reference" curve from the 20$ android app or 200$ PC app), and can also be disabled by selecting "off" instead of reference/flat, which also disables the ability to use the other functions like Dynamic EQ.

Dynamic EQ is a rather separate functionality (although it relies on your system being properly calibrated, and can only be used with equalization active).

 

[jeffw_00]

ah - so the complex response in the high end comes from filters programmed by Audyssey that are in the receiver. These filters are over-and-above and more complicated than the parametric equalization accessible to the user (Manual EQ)
do I have that right? Thanks!

 

[GalZohar]

There isn't any proper manual EQ in Denon/Marantz receiver, just graphic EQ which is extremely basic and not very useful, which cannot be used when Audyssey is active. A more useful parametric (or other) equalization would require some kind of separate processor, which still might not do as well as Audyssey, depending on which processor it is and how you use it.

 

[jeffw_00]

So I had been looking for a rebuttal to the "XT isn't evolutionary, it's just bad" thesis. FWIW - I found it here

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/official-audyssey-thread-part-ii.2376770/page-518#post-61480958

 

[Ata]

My experience is that MultEQ XT in my DENON X2500H AVR is a definite improvement in multi-channel experience, and some improvement, but inferior to my manual DRC or DIRAC based effort, for stereo sound experience. Bass has improved nicely, both subjectively and in measurements. I have no experience with XT32, but based on technical specs and Amir's review, I would expect XT32 to be noticeably superior to XT.

 

[GalZohar]

XT should be possible (when used correctly, using the app) to not cause any harm to your results, but it will also make very little improvement compared to what XT32 can do. Room modes in the speakers are basically left completely alone, and only relatively wide peaks/dips are handled in the subwoofer region.

 

[Flageborg]

XT32 is the way to go today

2EQ was simple
XT was a bit better
XT32 do all you need and better !

 

[jeffw_00]

XT32 is the way to go today

2EQ was simple
XT was a bit better
XT32 do all you need and better !

For $500+ more I hope XT32 is better , but honestly, for my small 5.1 HT with bookshelf speakers, XT may be all I need (i'm really not a tweaker, I just want the system to do a reasonable job with initial setup/balance/etc). BTW - where do you rank Dirac Live? (which is a little cheaper than XT32 these days)

 

[Flageborg]

For $500+ more I hope XT32 is better , but honestly, for my small 5.1 HT with bookshelf speakers, XT may be all I need (i'm really not a tweaker, I just want the system to do a reasonable job with initial setup/balance/etc). BTW - where do you rank Dirac Live? (which is a little cheaper than XT32 these days)

A lot of earlier Denon Receivers needed firmware update to correct issues as time went by. Which model are you looking at today?
Both mine and other audiophiles experience is that Dirac does not handle phase corrections well. It sounds great in multichannel, but Stereo is far from correct....

 

[jeffw_00]

A lot of earlier Denon Receivers needed firmware update to correct issues as time went by. Which model are you looking at today?
Both mine and other audiophiles experience is that Dirac does not handle phase corrections well. It sounds great in multichannel, but Stereo is far from correct....

X1700H - thanks!

 

[Astrozombie]

It was probably just dynamic volume, but I enjoyed it when I used XT because the bass did seem fuller.