Is Auto Room EQ and Setup in AV Receivers Useful?
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 12. 2014
- Audioholics GoFundMe: bit.ly/GOFUNDAUDIOHOLICS
www.audioholics.com - Is Auto Room EQ and Setup in AV Receivers Useful? Gene and Hugo discuss if the auto room EQ & setup in AV receivers is useful. Gene also covers what are the limitations of autocorrection and how to overcome these issues.
Be sure to also check out this article on the subject:
www.audioholics.com/room-acous...
Be sure to sign up to our FREE Newsletter: www.audioholics.com/newsletter....
FOLLOW AUDIOHOLICS ON :
-------------------------
FACEBOOK
/ audioholics
GOOGLE PLUS
plus.google.com/+AudioholicsL...
TWITTER
/ audioholicslive Become a Patron of our CZcams channel for cool features unavailable to regular subscribers: / audioholics - Zábava
Man y'all have really come a long way from when y'all first started this CZcams channel. Keep up the good work guys, I now look forward on hearing you guys on a weekly basis.
I have to agree with Gene on this. I've used the YPAO on my Yamaha Aventage receivers and they make the EQ curve look like waves in a sea. This is with known good speakers with flat response curves. I also heard the buzz in the center channel on men's voices because of the over-zealous YPAO setting. Now I just leave it in manual and tune it by ear the way I like it.
The best thing I ever did was buy an Anti-Mode subwoofer equalizer. That thing did exactly as Gene said by taking the peaks down a bit and seemed to have also tightened the bass up to be more musical.
Great video guys! I'm looking forward to learning about the more specific auto eq systems, even though I probably won't use them!
This caught my eye because I have gone back and forth with the mcaac in my older pioneer receiver. I learned how to use my Beringer feedback pro as a peq years ago for my sub and stand by that method firmly. I built a 2nd sub later for even better response. The main speakers on the other hand have NEVER sounded better to me after being eq'd. Over the past year I finally just turned off the mcaac and let them go flat eq. They are energy Veritas and they don't have anything special about them when I let the receiver eq them. Once I turn it off it has way more detail and clarity. They sound so flat when the eq is on. I'm glad I watched this because you would think that since the sub sounds 10x better eq'd, the loudspeakers should too. Now I have a reason why my ears tell me otherwise.
Also, I used to lo e the extra bass as well lol. Now I just want everything as the original source intended. :)
My Anti-Mode 8033 Cinema controlling my PSA XV15 is all the room EQ I need!
Phenomenal video. Thank you!!
Like most half-decent receivers on the market today, mine too comes with both auto and manual room EQ and setup. I knew from the start to not take the auto measurement results as gospel, not because some of the figures were far off, but because I still noticed a difference between the result that YPAO on my AV receiver or Audyssey on my car audio system churned out, and the fine tuning I made by hand afterwards.
That said, when measuring up the distances properly, and then using the auto EQ to give the unit a rough idea of the lay of the land, the fine tuning has yielded me better results than just entering the data by hand. without using the auto EQ first. I guess it's a matter of knowing how to use the tools properly. :)
I agree. The same settings without Audyssey being run first don't have the same outcome as with Audyssey being run first.
I have used a few auto eq from manufacturers but my favorite by far is by Anthem called ARC. Please include them on your next video post of auto eqs. Keep up the great work!
Mike E heard great things about ARC and will be checking it out in the near future.
I love this channel!
Please review the denon avr-s900w. I just bought it and it sounds so amazing. I was wondering your opinion of it.
Thx. Did you see our AVR-X5200W review?
czcams.com/video/5mi-0Ixlis8/video.html
Hi guys and what you thinks about using a spl meter you thinks is better?
From your experience what is the best room correction technology outof thease.... ARC, Audyssey and Dirac.??
Thanks !
Quiet happy with my OPPO 205 feeding into the analog bel canto pre amp going to Classe multi channel amp going to Totem element metals front, Earths surround and wood center.
Bel canto has no bass and treble. Sounds great to me and whoever that hears it. I’m good.
I have a Rotel receiver so I had to do all my settings the old fashioned way....Manually!...and it was fun! What you said about EQing of the subs is so true. I have Infinity speakers and my subs were EQ'd using their RABOS (room adaptive bass optimizing system) system and what a difference that EQing did for my bass response in my listening room! After adjustments, the bass became smooth, rolling and beautify linear. You mentioned "Transition frequency" a few times. What is that?? The sub crossover freq??
Hi Dan, the Transition frequency is the frequency in which the loudspeaker becomes the dominant factor in what we hear in the room. While the room will affect how it measures even above the transition frequency, its still the dominant factor responsible for what we hear. At bass frequencies, speaker placement is critical for what we hear while frequencies above that are dominated by the properties of the loudspeaker more than the position in the room.
You guys are awesome and very helpful to improve the sound quality out of our avr. Can u plz guide me if I am not running Audyssey on my Denon x4400h will I miss something as there are few options only available when u run Audyssey but I did not liked the sound after doing Audyssey so I reset my avr and now the question is that what is recommended that run Audyssey and put it off to keep the extra options in hand or do not run Audyssey and set it keeping faith on your ears ??
It need not be either/or. Run Audessey, then make manual adjustments. And as the LFE channel ceiling is 120, set the subwoofer for 120, and try to crossover the other speakers without too much overlap.
SO FRIGGIN TRU ..my New Theater YAPO got it So wrong it did exactly as you said with Boosts and Levels PLUS distance of Speakers IE. My front height is 15ft it measured it at 25 feet.LOL so Obv it was way off and I Sound proofed the room as you know Big time. :) Great Video Boss. Sorry Ive been MIA Business is Killing me lol.
Is there anymore info on this? Im looking for a how-to on room EQ with the different Auto EQ programs out there. I currently use MCAA from Pioneer. Also would a better mic help? Mainly looking for more direction on what to use and what to ignore in my Auto EQ. But If you are going to go deeper into this later then, I'll just sit back and wait for the video or forum post. Thanks!
EQ is especially useful on speaker distances/delay, and good on speaker levels. Crossovers are a place to 'experiment" with the manual settings, beginning with setting the subwoofer crossover to 120, and the other speakers near that with not too much overlap.
I have an elderly system, the main components being a Sumo Athena, Sumo Polaris, and TDL Studio 3 speakers.
I recently set the system up anew in what I'm calling my "home cinema" room and whilst I'm not finding problems with the room eq I am having major problems with the variable nature of online music.
There seems to be a lot of modern stuff out there where the top and bottom ranges have been boosted excessively.
Most older albums come out with a well balanced sound but some of the new ones get my speakers booming the bass out most unpleasantly and the top end cutting through you like knife.
Has anyone else found this?
The only solution I can think of is EQ software where I can save different profiles and switch between them as required.
Anyone any other ideas?
Use compression.
I just got an onkyo and used the mic to auto calibrate. I was off with my ear height. Can I plug the mic in and redo it or do I have to do something else?
@Mark Nicholls I'd love to do that but I don't know the ins and outs of measuring them etc etc
I have a Denon AVR-X5200W. I have it calibrated with Audyssey. Is there any way to remove the EQ just above the transition frequency and keep the lower EQ? I am hesitant to use the Graphic (manual) EQ because it has much less specificity and much fewer control points.
Unfortunately no. Audyssey doesn't allow this which is too bad b/c Anthem ARC does. We keep pushing for this so fingers crossed......
AudioholicsLIVE That's a bummer. Thanks for the response.
thanks, thats some good info. it would be good if you webt more into detail about that with real examples
Can you guys do a video tour of your listening room please
Sure thing. Thanks for the suggestion.
AudioholicsLIVE thanks. Love the channel.
Hey, does anyone ever heard or even owned the Sony Dav TZ-140 300 watt hometheater system ? is it good ?
Very helpful guys. Still have room acoustic issues, until I fix this issue I don't think I can correct my lack of bass (Boominess)..
Set the subwoofer crossover to 120, and your speakers at about 90-100/110, and listen for a while.
You guys never talk about pioneer i have a 2010 pioneer avr 7.1 I have 5.1 connected i've never been able to perfect the mcacc. Any tips?
I have been trying to get an answer to this question. Hope you can help. How important is that i use the OEM mic when doing these caliberations? I have a few mics but i rencently purchased aused integra which did not include a mic. Will i miss much with one of my pioneer or onkyo mics?
I suspect the mics are all the same, but if you search on Amazon (as example), you'll find some for sale identified as working with specific receivers.
Its very important. Mics are tuned to the specific AVR.
Can you make videos on this where you go more into detail about what you said I run my set up mike & I don’t know if I’m getting the best out of what it could be
yes working on them.
"Subwoofer 101" gives much detail on Audessey settings, including manual changes.
Can you make a video on how to setup AV receiver SC-91. No matter what I do, I cannot hear dialogue. I play videos from PS4. Also, best setting for Full Auto MCACC and the EQ types mentioned in the pioneer system.
If you can adjust speaker levels, then increase the level of your center channel speaker.
For someone with an entry level system (
The way to find out is to TRY it. IF your receiver has it.
What is the amp your using
I still use "bass, treble" I'm sorry, but the recording is not going to sound like the original. plus, the recording maintains its "tonal characteristics" that the engineers gave it, you just give it a little "help". I don't care how much tone changes you do , it's not going to change the "main sound" of the recording!
The source is the source is the source. You can add "color," or you can eliminate adding anything to what is already the source.
Hi guys thanks for all your help i am fan of the show. I have the receiver onkyo tx-nr646 and the dobly atmos enabled speakers SKS-HT594. I used the calibration but it sound very flat. When i turn off the EQ correction it sound amazing is like day and night. I am doing something wrong? Do i miss something in the steps of calibration?
Carlos Gutierrez I would like to hear the answer to this as well I have the same system
ThePanamanianMike i just turn it off lol it sound much better
I use auto setup for my yamaha YPAO, but what is Auto Room EQ, i dont see that as a option on my yamaha ?
It's the same thing.
If Audyssey sets all levels to 77db, do you keep them there or lower it to 75db? Also if audyssey sets crossovers to 150hz or 200hz, do you lower it to 80hz or leave it there?
It's all relative to where you want the reference level to be on the master volume control. Yes in most cases you should adjust the crossover settings, usually to 80hz or higher for inceiling speakers.
@@Audioholics thank you. I generally do not lower crossovers set by audyssey but do increase them to 80hz, if they are set low.
How can you bang on room eq when there is nothing else better for the typical consumer that doesn't know or have the means of measuring the transition point in a room?
Room EQ usually makes things worse NOT better than just a regular manual setup and NO EQ at all! This is based on scientific fact, not just opinion. This is why we usually recommend using EQ below the room transition frequency (300Hz) and NOT auto-EQing above that.
That said, auto-setup can be useful for setting levels and delays but usually messes up crossover frequencies. Again manual intervention is needed.
see: www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation
Ironically this video doesn't have great audio. Great content though.
Great stuff guys. Especially the topic of avoiding EQ boosts. DSP boosts can be much worse than analogue circuits. Very helpful video, thanks.
So it's better to tune a stereo manually!?
What about anthems ARC?
Hugo and I have no experience with ARC though one of our writer's uses it and loves it. I am intrigued by the fact it limits correction to 5kHz and it seems like a very flexible system per our interview.
See:www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/anthem-arc-room-eq-interview
Is Audyssey XT-32 really better than XT?
Yes, at the least because it provides more manual options. As example, in XT one can adjust the overall crossover. In XT 32, one can adjust the crossovers on pairs of speakers, and the subwoofer, separately.
@3:18 my favorite part was the biblical sauwce
Lou Ferrigno
What about house curves? A flat in room response is not always desirable and in fact doesn't sound flat to a lot of people, myself included. Harmon international and a few other company's have done tests that reflect that. Also a dynamic eq is needed to compensate for the Fletcher Munson cruve.
Thejoyofdriving1 hi, I really liked what audessy has done with my Denon X6300H and two Svs sb200 subs, I did some manual tweaking after the fact but I still needed the audessy. The measurements were dead on.
@@lusly258 In my experience Audyssey gets distances dead on, and in most instances speaker levels. Speaker size usually -- but the Denon automatically sets the front "Large," even when it shouldn't; and manual adjustment of crossovers is usually required. Except that it always gets the subwoofer correct: 120.
Lou Ferrigno seems like he doesn't know much about AV stuff. He's got some big muscles, though!
If Lou says to use it then you use it!
I memba
Another problem with these Auto EQ... is the (Cheap microphones) that use.
@Gordon Shumway I doubt they do that for every single microphone
Retitle this video to “Lou Ferrigno laughs at his Boss’s Jokes”. Hehe
I wonder what kind of headphones this guy uses at the gym though.
Bluetooth as you NEVER want wires dangling when lifting....dangerous!
What do you think about the powerbeats 3s?
Some prefer the hysterical perspective.
No YAPO etc r not effective when there is room with furniture etc. Its give perfect result of speaker distance and wrong wire connection. In case of other it is not giving satisfied result.
That guy in the red probably lifts heavy amps all day.
Not a bad video but it includes some discussion that defies logic and shows a lack of engineering sense. Especially the discussion of taking the difference between the "anechoic data" of a speaker and it's in-room performance to know what to correct. What are you trying to say? Correct only the anechoic data anomalies? Correct only the room problems? Senseless. The problems that room eq addresses can be in either the speaker or the room, or even in the preamp/amp. it does not matter which. What's important is the overall audible effects from the signal leaving the DVD player or tuner and the ears. How, other than a chirp and a mic at the listening position (up to 32 samples), are you going to do this.
+Harrison Clark room correction above bass frequencies is a nebulous goal. That is the point. The Room EQ systems cannot differentiate between room or speaker resonances so in most cases you cause more harm than good by trying to do fullrange auto correction.
+Audioholics I didn't question the above-bass frequencies issue but as one who is well into the years when the ears & brain do not extract information from noise very well (e.g., voices from other sounds in a movie sound track), I do have a thought on that. My room eq system helps significantly in this respect. This experience suggests that voice frequencies (which extend up to about 2400 Hz as I recall) are helped by room eq (at least by the system I'm using).
On the issue of needing to address speaker anomalies and room issues separately, I don't see the connection with correction above bass frequencies. I don't care what is causing the problem, if room eq can help, I'll use it. I've been using room eq for more than 10 years and at one time was a frequent contributor to AVS Science forums on the topic and I don't recall anyone experiencing degradation at higher frequencies through experience or testing. EDIT: I reread. I think you are saying that higher frequencies are degraded by room eq and that testing speakers and rooms separately can help by showing that higher frequencies should not be eq'd. But, we should not have to measure speakers and rooms separately to show that. Regardless of the source of the problem, if eq is degrading sound quality at higher frequencies, this should be showing up in the literature or in published tests. I'm probably behind in my reading if that's the case. And if it is the case, my experience is the anomaly, mine and that of other elder folks that I've discussed this with. END EDIT.
Also, I've always had a bit of an allergy to poor sound quality at higher frequencies. When I got my Klipsch RF-7's I nearly took an axe to them before figuring out that my CD/DVD player DACs were lousy. A new better CD/DVD player solved the problem. A few years later room EQ didn't change that and in fact improved things further -- though maybe it was the Room EQ's house curve that rolled off the high end some that was helping. And, since then, aging ears might have be contributing as well. I'd guess that when one is losing higher frequency hearing, there is more than just missing frequencies. I.e., maybe there's some corruption of the highs as well. Or maybe it's just not hearing a complete set of the high frequencies. These last points may muddy the water a bit, but in the end room eq is helping me deal with old age.
+Harrison Clark Your statements don't agree with the science of acoustics. A microphone is a poor approximation of our ears. I highly recommend reading this AES paper presented by Dr. Floyd Toole to get a better understanding why: www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17839
Room EQ certainly does alter the sound and if you prefer the after result than more power to you. Just realize, that it's unlikely the after calibration is more accurate and in many cases will be far worse at all but a narrow sweet spot.
I wouldn't blame your DAC on the brightness. Klipsch speakers are inherently bright and your room can be factoring in as well if you have a lot of hard surfaces and little absorption.
+Audioholics I read the paper and I see where you are coming from. But, I respectfully question your conclusions. Yes, anechoic data would (Toole's opinion) lead to better loudspeaker design, but he does not so strongly suggest room eq at higher frequencies is useless. He discusses the issue of poor off-axis performance rendering room eq ineffective or possible degrading the sound. But his best example is from a speaker that I doubt gets paired with modern room eq equipment very often. Do you think that many of us are putting $$ and time into room eq using speakers with off-axis characteristics that are bad enough to trick room eq systems into large scale corrections that should not be made?
My statements may agree with the science of acoustics (or psychoacoustics) if my room issues dwarf any bad off-axis stuff from my loudspeakers. I think Toole would agree with this. He might say that my room eq is dinking with sub 50ms reflections when it should not, but he did not get into room eq technologies and mentions only parametric eq, nothing about what can and is being done with FIR based systems.
As for using anechoic data to improve the room eq process, I wonder if that's overkill or even practicable. Better and cheaper to weed out the poor performing loudspeakers. I doubt if good off-axis performance is all that costly. Toole mentions loudspeaker design improvement as the key benefit of anechoic data. I suppose it should come from an independent source! To use anechoic data in routine room eq work would require a database of that data and some kind of synthesis of how it's bouncing around each specific room. I'm not holding my breath on that. Do you think it's practicable?
Toole is also concerned with microphones not knowing which direction a sound is coming from. I'm not sure how knowing that would be factored into the room eq filter development algorithms. He's right that our ears perceive the sound differently than the Omni directional mic, but is that really a deal killer on room eq above bass modes? Toole expressed concern but didn't quantify it or express much concern.
I was hoping Toole would get into room eq as we know it. His discussion of it was mostly in terms of bass and treble control and correcting low-end room modes. He didn't make the case that it doesn't work above the room modes with decent loudspeakers. Did he?
+Harrison Clark There was a ringing in my ears that was not just my tinnitus, so, yes, my name was being mentioned :-) I can add some clarification to this discussion. In spite of my recent 30-page, peer-reviewed (i.e. not just my opinion) paper, and a 550 page book, and numerous references to work by myself and others, this debate goes on. The substantial piece of missing information is about loudspeakers - the sound source - which human listeners are very good at separating from the room. If we had comprehensive anechoic data, we probably would not be attracted to purchasing many of the loudspeakers in the marketplace. You said: "He discusses the issue of poor off-axis performance rendering room eq ineffective or possible degrading the sound. But his best example is from a speaker that I doubt gets paired with modern room eq equipment very often." The regrettable performance of my example loudspeaker from 30 years ago exists today in some highly advertised and expensive (e.g. $20K/pr) products. In fact I read only a couple of days ago, of a well-known reviewer using such a loudspeaker (one of his "references") in the evaluation of room EQ products. The industry has not completely understood the basic principles of loudspeaker design, although such examples are diminishing in number, which is good for us all.
As is made clear in the recent JAES paper, in my book, and elsewhere, comprehensive anechoic data on a loudspeaker can permit good estimates of measured performance in a room. The same data can also predict listener ratings in double-blind evaluations (Chapter 20 in my book) - and I think very well explained in the CZcams recording of my McGill University lecture: :Sound Reproduction: Art and Science/Opinions and Facts", which you will find interesting for other reasons. The loudspeakers that receive the highest ratings in double-blind listening tests, in different rooms, all exhibit the "best looking" anechoic data set. The room adds enormous colorations at low frequencies. However, above about 200-300 Hz, two ears and a brain are very, very good at separating the effects of room reflections from the loudspeaker itself - as I say, this is what happens in live unamplified musical performances. See section 11.3.1 in my book.
You said: "he did not get into room eq technologies and mentions only parametric eq, nothing about what can and is being done with FIR based systems." Actually I did, in the second paragragraph of section 2.4 in the recent paper. If you wish to read the two references, and there are others, you will find that acoustical interference problems cannot be eliminated by any form of DSP EQ. Add to this that humans don't always think of them as problems - see Chapters 5 thru 11 in my book. In fact a recent paper noted that the much discussed floor bounce turned out to be preferred by listeners in controlled tests of various ways of treating it. It seems that generations of evolving humans have come to accept, indeed to expect, the acoustical presence of a "floor". Basically, the most objectionable sound quality problems are associated with phenomena that are correctable by minimum-phase filters (parametric) but these problems cannot all be found in room curves - hence the need for anechoic data.
The McGill lecture explains the need for bass and treble controls - recordings and movie sound tracks are not at all consistent. The notion that recordings are flawless is, of course, naive, but it is widespread. It is, after all, the premise of subjective reviewing, where measurements are abhorrent. The recent JAES paper gives additional perspective. So, whatever "room EQ" target you start with, it cannot sound equally good for all recordings.
That said, EQ at low frequencies is hard to avoid, and is almost always beneficial. See Chapter 13 in my book.
These guys probably know their stuff, but their videos are not in-depth explanations.I mean that they should have tutorials on how to get the best out of our AV receivers. Plain and simple. This is useless.
What would you like to see? WE have many videos on how to set up AV receivers, especially bass management to maximize system performance.
First of all, I think my first comment came up wrong. Sorry about that.
I'm a electrical tech so I understand your "language" pretty good; what I want to see is a list of tools to get bass management right because I would love to do it myself. I already have a Radio shack sound pressure meter and a laptop to use REW. I have two subs and I have the feeling that I can improve the low frequency in my system. Can you do a tutorial on that?
Another question is what would be the correct level (Db) of the pink noise from my receiver ( RX A-3070) when I am using a pressure meter for each speaker from the listening position? Also, in the case of this Yamaha unit, I have a lot of problems accessing this particular manual adjustment after I do the room eq with the supplied microphone.
Man, I have so many questions! I really love your videos. Don't pay attention to the first comment. I learned with you guys the 80Hz / small speakers procedure and my system sounds a lot better, but I know it's lacking.
In a nutshell: REW and levels when doing the readings manually. I believe is around 75db but I'm not sure. Thank you so much for your videos. I laughed a lot as well with your stories about in laws putting all the speakers at front :-)
Ps: I forgot! My system is comprised of: RX A-3070 .5.2.4 Pioneer Andrew Jones being the main speakers. According to your videos, Yamaha crippled its voltage output in favor of these other features (DTS:X and Atmos, network.. etc) Do you think I would benefit from an external amp like the Outlaw 5000 to have a better performance for just music? My front speakers are Pioneer SP-FS52. Do you know how much current this Aventage outputs? I don't want to spend in a amp if the receiver has all the juice I need.
I will be doing detailed videos on setting up Anthem ARC and Audyssey in the coming months. Stay tuned...