And the sound must be distorted until it reaches listener's earsThe signal must be pure until it reaches speaker binding post.
Thank you for taking the time to review Audyssey XT32 with the app. There are so many devices that are sold with it included, this is a very important review. Many of the devices are also very reasonably priced if you pick up an older model that is compatible with the app. I think it would be helpful to locate and list the oldest models the app is compatible with. On the Denon side I believe it is the X3300 for the 3xxx series.Conclusions
I came into this review expecting Audyssey to not perform. That was my experience and that of formal blind testing of it years back. The out of box results of this "XT32" version was better than I remembered. Still, using the App is mandatory to properly incorporate a target curve with more bass and removal of "BBC dip." Once there, I had no issues with its performance and I think it comes very close to advanced solutions like Dirac and Anthem ARC.
My guess is that it doesn't appeal to the beliefs of the 2 channel audiophile community. Just having that feature included would tarnish the purity of the signal. Even worse, it would have to include bass management and subwoofer outputs.
Speaker size isn't a problem with them. Large enough to sit on. Music and tv doesn't trouble them but loud hissing noises are not appreciated.I've heard of those weak enough to actually accept and put up with WAF.... but not CAF lol.
I couldn't find anything with a quick google search about Onkyo Audyssey app support. You probably will need to call them to ask or take a $20 gamble.Am I correct in assuming the app does not work with an aging Onkyo PR-SC5509. It is Audyssey XT32 but I presume predates the app?
Amir, the loss of HF response in REW is likely because you were running the sweep through L+R and the mic wasn't perfectly centered. If it not centered perfectly (1/2" makes a difference) you get some HF cancellation) If you were able to muster up a tripod and try again (holding by hand isn't ideal as you note) run a sweep with just L or R to begin with so you get an idea of when to HF roll off should be in your room and then you can play with mic position running L+R until you get the curve to match. It's interesting to then plot L then R then L+R. It's amazing how the room affects the frequency response of the left and right at the listening position in anything but a perfectly symmetrical room.I have overlaid the target curve on top of the before and after measurement. We see that it has generally followed that curve. The big dip at the end is probably due to my measurement mic running without calibration.
Amir, the loss of HF response in REW is likely because you were running the sweep through L+R and the mic wasn't perfectly centered. If it not centered perfectly (1/2" makes a difference) you get some HF cancellation) If you were able to muster up a tripod and try again (holding by hand isn't ideal as you note) run a sweep with just L or R to begin with so you get an idea of when to HF roll off should be in your room and then you can play with mic position running L+R until you get the curve to match. It's interesting to then plot L then R then L+R. It's amazing how the room affects the frequency response of the left and right at the listening position in anything but a perfectly symmetrical room.
Agreed, you could use pink noise too. Also agreed that HF info is not that important when tackling room correction but it's a bit disconcerting to see the dip and it's an indication the mic isn't centered between the mains.Why even bother with sweeps when MMM with pink noise does the trick much quicker?
Btw, HF stuff is anyhow not really important in this evaluation as only mild tone balance correction was done there and for sure those Ultima's produced them superbly.
Sure, the more time you put to it the better it gets.
But the point here is that you managed to get very good results with your first try. Now, truth is that you have more skills than average user but this still indicates this is a very usefull product with which even an unexperienced user should be able to achieve results by carefully following the instructions. And, as you pointed out, that wil hugely improve SQ of a system.
Also, even if the filter amounts were the same, XT32 is better than all the others because it now allocates more filters into the bass region, allowing for more correction where it’s needed.I found this useful webpage which has surprisingly good information on Audyssey:
https://audyssey.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/202387323-Audyssey-101
Regarding the different versions:
MultEQ XT32: Our newest and most accurate room correction solution with more than ten thousand individual control points allowing finer details of the room’s problems to be captured and corrected. The ultra high resolution filters are applied to all channels including the subwoofers, with the most obvious benefit being heard in the low frequency range where correction is needed the most.
MultEQ XT: Our advanced resolution room correction solution with high resolution equalization filters for satellites and subwoofers. Most products with MultEQ XT are installer-ready and can be calibrated by an Audyssey Registered Installer to provide even higher performance for even the most demanding large or odd-shaped rooms.
MultEQ: Our standard resolution room correction solution that uses mid-level resolution filters for satellites and subwoofers.
2EQ: Our basic resolution room correction solution that uses basic resolution filters for the satellites, but does not apply a filter to the subwoofers.
View attachment 59703
From what I can see it is very much worthwhile to get the best MultEQ version you can as this has a huge impact on sound quality - I don't think the DACs and Amps in these Denon units are very different. When I was looking for an inexpensive AVR I ended up with the the x1500h precisely due to the MultEQ XT, which was much better than than competing correction systems.
It's worth noting that the AVR Amir reviewed uses MultEQ XT32 which is the best one Denon offers. Below that they offer 2 units with MultEQ XT, and below that they offer a zillion units with MultEQ.
Anyway to decide how the room corrected speakers you have would fair on the Harman scale?Seems to me it would boost the score significantly.
Is your mic cal loaded properly in REW? The HF roll-off seems excessive. More than 15dB down at 10k relative to 1kHz...
Yes , when a time align my speakers with my DSP preamp the effect is quite obvious on imaging, presence and focus. Of course accurate placement and a steady head position can do the same . The ability to turn on off alignment in 0.2sec makes the comparison easy.Yes, one of the unsung features of Room EQ is the matching of levels and delays which improves imaging (as does reduction of room modes).
Thanks. Corrected.
I suggest getting Umik-1 calibrated usb microphone. HF is important so show proper in room response and investigate impulse responses. By the way room correction /convolution is as far as I understand based on a reverse filter obtained by the impulse response. So a calibrated mic all the way to 24k is a good thing a think.Agreed, you could use pink noise too. Also agreed that HF info is not that important when tackling room correction but it's a bit disconcerting to see the dip and it's an indication the mic isn't centered between the mains.