• 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!

Is AVR room correction necessary in my case?

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
Do Integra AVRs have the distance bug that pre x800 Denon's have? i.e. need to multiply distances by 0.875 to compensate the incorrect assumption for speed of sound. The speaker distance should be pretty close to the physical distance, so it being 1.5 ft over makes me think it could have the distance bug.

The subwoofer measuring 30 ft is not surprising. This would most impact the bass quality in the crossover region. But then again, most AVRs don't do this perfectly anyway; really need a measurement mic to tweak the distance to get the best blending over the crossover.

As an experiment, you can change the speaker distances to some extremes to see if you can hear a distance impact. Like, set both speakers to 1 ft, and then set them both to 20 ft, then set one to 1 ft and the other to 20 ft, to see if you can hear a difference (look for imaging quality/how precise the phantom center image is).
The distance in ft calculation thing is so overstated. Its about timing overall relative to speakers/seat, not some specific conversion of speed of sound into feet.
 

chych7

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
276
Likes
422
The distance in ft calculation thing is so overstated. Its about timing overall relative to speakers/seat, not some specific conversion of speed of sound into feet.

Whatever calculation/measurement Denon receivers did, it got the incorrect distance/timing because it assumed 300 m/s for speed of sound (instead of 343 m/s). AVSforum link. This was measurable from REW impulse response that the timing was off, and reducing distance by 300/343 = 0.875 fixed the issue. If this was only a timing measurement, then speed of sound shouldn't matter, but it did for these receivers.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
Whatever calculation/measurement Denon receivers did, it got the incorrect distance/timing because it assumed 300 m/s for speed of sound (instead of 343 m/s). AVSforum link. This was measurable from REW impulse response that the timing was off, and reducing distance by 300/343 = 0.875 fixed the issue. If this was only a timing measurement, then speed of sound shouldn't matter, but it did for these receivers.
No, it got the timing right, it's merely the translation into "feet" that was off. A much overblown non-issue.
 

chych7

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
276
Likes
422
No, it got the timing right, it's merely the translation into "feet" that was off. A much overblown non-issue.

No, it didn't. REW impulse responses clearly showed the timing was off. See first post in the thread I linked. Seems to me that the AVR converts the timing signal to distance (with the wrong speed of sound number), then tries to align based on distance... instead of just doing it on time.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
No, it didn't. REW impulse responses clearly showed the timing was off. See first post in the thread I linked. Seems to me that the AVR converts the timing signal to distance (with the wrong speed of sound number), then tries to align based on distance... instead of just doing it on time.
I've seen the arguments before, still haven't seen anything important come out of it. What is a timing signal? All distance is is a translation of time....
 
OP
hnash53

hnash53

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
75
Likes
82
Do Integra AVRs have the distance bug that pre x800 Denon's have? i.e. need to multiply distances by 0.875 to compensate the incorrect assumption for speed of sound. The speaker distance should be pretty close to the physical distance, so it being 1.5 ft over makes me think it could have the distance bug.

The subwoofer measuring 30 ft is not surprising. This would most impact the bass quality in the crossover region. But then again, most AVRs don't do this perfectly anyway; really need a measurement mic to tweak the distance to get the best blending over the crossover.

As an experiment, you can change the speaker distances to some extremes to see if you can hear a distance impact. Like, set both speakers to 1 ft, and then set them both to 20 ft, then set one to 1 ft and the other to 20 ft, to see if you can hear a difference (look for imaging quality/how precise the phantom center image is).
I did play around with the distances and I did notice a bit of lateral movement of the phantom center.
Thanks for the replies... you all gave me a few more tools to customize my sounds to my liking.
 

chych7

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
276
Likes
422
I've seen the arguments before, still haven't seen anything important come out of it. What is a timing signal? All distance is is a translation of time....
Not really sure where the confusion is. Speakers are better time aligned after applying the 0.875 fix on Denon AVRs.
Example impulse response before correction
After multiplying distances by 0.875 correction
Why would you say this is not important? We can hear time misalignment; set one of your speakers distances to 0 and it will be obvious. This was important enough for Denon to fix it on their newer x800 receivers and Audyssey to fix it in MultEQ-X.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
Not really sure where the confusion is. Speakers are better time aligned after applying the 0.875 fix on Denon AVRs.
Example impulse response before correction
After multiplying distances by 0.875 correction
Why would you say this is not important? We can hear time misalignment; set one of your speakers distances to 0 and it will be obvious. This was important enough for Denon to fix it on their newer x800 receivers and Audyssey to fix it in MultEQ-X.
Better time aligned in relationship to what, though? The actual relationship changed or just the math changed to translate to feet?
 

chych7

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
276
Likes
422
Better time aligned in relationship to what, though? The actual relationship changed or just the math changed to translate to feet?
Better time alignment for a speaker with respect to the other speakers in the system. In REW you'd set one speaker as the acoustic timing reference (and peaks at t=0 in the charts), from which the other speakers are compared against. Goal is to have sound arriving from each speaker to the listener at the same time. Yes, the actual time alignment relationship changes when one multiplies the distances by 0.875, as the charts show. 1.5 ms time alignment error goes down to 0.5 ms. 1 ms error is roughly equivalent to sitting 1 foot off center, in a stereo system, which with reasonably trained ears, is audible.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
Better time alignment for a speaker with respect to the other speakers in the system. In REW you'd set one speaker as the acoustic timing reference (and peaks at t=0 in the charts), from which the other speakers are compared against. Goal is to have sound arriving from each speaker to the listener at the same time. Yes, the actual time alignment relationship changes when one multiplies the distances by 0.875, as the charts show. 1.5 ms time alignment error goes down to 0.5 ms. 1 ms error is roughly equivalent to sitting 1 foot off center, in a stereo system.
I'm not thinking your analogy is accurate then. I did recently update between older/newer Denon and the new Denon calibration difference did come out to pretty much only being the .875 translation into feet visually in terms of the "distance" readout....can't say it made any other difference myself. I did not run full setup measurements as am still making some changes and just too lazy.
 

chych7

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
276
Likes
422
I'm not thinking your analogy is accurate then. I did recently update between older/newer Denon and the new Denon calibration difference did come out to pretty much only being the .875 translation into feet visually in terms of the "distance" readout....can't say it made any other difference myself. I did not run full setup measurements as am still making some changes and just too lazy.
I can't really comment on the new Denon calibration and its accuracy of time alignment. Take some impulse response measurements and investigate its accuracy of time alignment. The thread and data above show that on old Denons, the distance setting matters and improves alignment when changing the distance. That comes from actual data, not subjective impressions. Or are you questioning those measurements? I don't really understand your argument.
 
OP
hnash53

hnash53

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
75
Likes
82
How do I turn off/cancel/delete any/all of the Audyssey setup?
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
I can't really comment on the new Denon calibration and its accuracy of time alignment. Take some impulse response measurements and investigate its accuracy of time alignment. The thread and data above show that on old Denons, the distance setting matters and improves alignment when changing the distance. That comes from actual data, not subjective impressions. Or are you questioning those measurements? I don't really understand your argument.
Seems the different setups could have an effect. Generally I do not go for the manual setup vs audyssey setup for most users, introduces more confusion than needed.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
I can't really comment on the new Denon calibration and its accuracy of time alignment. Take some impulse response measurements and investigate its accuracy of time alignment. The thread and data above show that on old Denons, the distance setting matters and improves alignment when changing the distance. That comes from actual data, not subjective impressions. Or are you questioning those measurements? I don't really understand your argument.
The more important part is it didn't change anything but the translation into "feet" which is not all that important generally.
 

chych7

Active Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
Messages
276
Likes
422
How do I turn off/cancel/delete any/all of the Audyssey setup?
You can use the "Direct" listening mode to disable any of the EQ. There may be another way to disable Audyssey EQ in the menus, not sure.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
You can use the "Direct" listening mode to disable any of the EQ. There may be another way to disable Audyssey EQ in the menus, not sure.
Yes, you can simply turn Audyssey off. Direct modes don't use it.
 
OP
hnash53

hnash53

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
75
Likes
82
The "Audyssey EQ" is still on my receiver's screen. I can't find how to turn it off. I know I could go to Direct... but wish I could still clear out Audyssey.
I've set the speaker distances to my liking and the sound is ok.
 
OP
hnash53

hnash53

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
75
Likes
82
Perhaps you could try reading the manual.
Yes, I have read it.
But I did get it figured out.
Thanks for all of the replies and suggestions... as always, I learn a lot when I ask a question here.
 
Top Bottom