Yes, I have Room Correction + Bass Control. I don't have my 2nd sub yet as the misses isn't convinced this is 'necessary''.... So still work in progress in that department. One thing I noticed is both of my measurements (optimal/central and couch) I can use as 'sub'-choice in preset 2. In preset 1 I have the standard Audyssey for central. So I was able to sit down in the 'right spot' and do some A-B comparison. By far not enough but still able to say the 'stage' has become wider and clearer voices. To be fair though; my previous setup with Audyssey A1 EVO also sounded great.
She may be right, I have tried one and two subs in my HT system and found no clear advantage using two, but in my two channel bookshelf speakers system, I do get a little better looking curves with two subs.
The thing with this hobby is; normally you just don't do A-B comparison all the time. I belief what you are saying that optimal calibrated but worse distortion still can result in a much better listening experience as so much of the bandwidth is outside of our hearing capabilities. Then again, the 6800 for € 1.850 and full Dirac through Black Friday discount still makes is a great deal even though my day-2-day listening experience hasn't improved much. I'll be tweaking and tuning the next few weeks and provide some feedback on the, very subjective, results.
AB comparison amps are very difficult because for them to be valid, the tests have to be tightly controlled. My basis of believing people who claimed devices that measured equally well sounded different are not reliable/credible is 90% logic, briefly, the following:
- designers/engineers design gear based on target performance matching or exceeding their target specifications, not based on their ears/brains/listening tests.
- they would do measurements, such as ASR's, Stereophiles, Audiholics.coms, and often used the same/similar AP instruments, just different models/versions.
- some will do listening tests, presumably in the end using their prototypes I would assume, but they would be just listening for obvious issues, as in the end it has to be the test result that rule, otherwise we would have seen Marantz AVRs measured with very different results than Denon's, just an example.
Just take a look of the graph in post#25, can we imagine how someone could hear a difference between well designed amps/avrs when frequency response is supposedly the most impactful on perceived sound quality. Isn't it easy to see that a well run room correction avr-x1800H, Cinema 50 can do much better than a AV10, or A1H will no room correction in use? That's the same reason why I just smile when I see people on AVS forum raving about the night and day better sound quality of the AVM90 over the AVM70 and even the AV10. I am so amazed, that people there would ask for opinions and then once told by their resident "experts" assuming them the AVM90 sound so much better than whatever, they would post thing like, thanks for confirming, order placed...
I don't think too many ASR science minded members would decide on spending thousands more because some members told them the gear sounded much better than another gear that has comparable features and measured as good or better. This is a wonderfully amazing hobby, where logic often don't mean anything...
I don't remember the last time I listen to movies and even 2 channel music in pure direct mode...
