Audyssey Manual Calibration “OCA’s REW + Audyssey Awesomeness”

[EasyC]

Where do I get that from?

Thanks

I've collected a few from elsewhere on ASR...

 

[antcollinet]

I've collected a few from elsewhere on ASR...

Thanks, I'll try that.



EDIT - that seems to have done the trick - at least for the first half hour or so of listening.

EDIT SOME MORE - OK I have been listening all evening. The sound is now uniformly wonderful. I have no idea what you, @OCA, are doing with all that tech, but you, my friend, are a steely eyed melody man.

 

[ludovic62310]

Good morning
I have a 4500h
during calibration via the multieq application, it asks me to reverse the wiring of the left, right and central headlamps
what I have done
after calibration, I put the cables back as before
is this annoying?
even if before calibration my cables were supposed to be well connected?
If Audyssey detected it, is there a reason?
my speakers are KEF IQ
regarding the subwoofer, I set it in the green zone, but after calibration it puts me at +3
should I increase in red? re-calibrate?

I used a Harman curve that I replaced in REW instead of Dr Toole and launched an A1 V1.3
it worked and it downloaded an ady file for me
can't wait to hear what it soun

https://we.tl/t-yI83W0QLFQ

 

[Chromatischism]

That happens more often for speakers that are very close to a wall. If you know you have them connected correctly, ignore the error.

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

This was my first solution idea. Unfortunately, the AVR will completely mute after the transfer of any ady file with "enTargetCurveType: 0"


PS And other values like 3,4,5,6.... all default to 1!

OCA,

have you tried, if it is possible to trick Audyssey into applying a target curve in Audyssey "flat"-mode, by replacing the pseudo perfect speaker measurement (Dirac-impulse) with the impulse response of an (inverted) EQ target respose curve?

If REW allows to export parametric EQ filters as impulse responses of the needed lenght and sampling frequency MultEQ is expecting as speaker measurements, it could be possible to make Audyssey apply all kind of target curves in the flat-mode:
1. Create the wanted EQ correction curve in REW with REWs parametric EQs.
2. Invert all EQ gains/cuts
3. Export all the EQing as one single filter as an impulse response (in the needed MultEQ length and sampling frequency).
4. Load it into ADY as pseudo speaker measurement.
That impulse response is the wished inverted EQ target curve and is injected into MultEQ instead of the perfect Dirac impulse.
Then Audyssey, instead of a perfect speaker response, sees that inverted filter as the measured speaker response, and should try to flatten it by applying an inverted filter to the inverted filter impulse response... - therefore resulting in the wanted target response curve created in REW.

That way Audyssey Flat-mode would correct torwards flat without HFR and, Audyssey Reference-mode would apply the HFR and probably even allow an additional MultEQ target response curve to be applied...

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

Did some initial tests and the part with REW involved, works as expected.
I attach a dirac impulse wav file, with 16384 samples (the length MultEQ seems to use in ADY files?). It's normalized to -50 dB which shows 75 dB SPL in REW.
This WAV can be imported into REW as impulse response and REW will display a perfect speaker response.

Then, with the REW EQ-module, any kind of EQing can be applied to this "measurement". Afterwards the calculated measurement with the applied EQ can be exported as text file.

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

No interest in a flat-mode user-curve plus reference curve with a 2nd user target curve on top of the "flat"-user-correction?

 

[OCA]

OCA,

have you tried, if it is possible to trick Audyssey into applying a target curve in Audyssey "flat"-mode, by replacing the pseudo perfect speaker measurement (Dirac-impulse) with the impulse response of an (inverted) EQ target respose curve?

If REW allows to export parametric EQ filters as impulse responses of the needed lenght and sampling frequency MultEQ is expecting as speaker measurements, it could be possible to make Audyssey apply all kind of target curves in the flat-mode:
1. Create the wanted EQ correction curve in REW with REWs parametric EQs.
2. Invert all EQ gains/cuts
3. Export all the EQing as one single filter as an impulse response (in the needed MultEQ length and sampling frequency).
4. Load it into ADY as pseudo speaker measurement.
That impulse response is the wished inverted EQ target curve and is injected into MultEQ instead of the perfect Dirac impulse.
Then Audyssey, instead of a perfect speaker response, sees that inverted filter as the measured speaker response, and should try to flatten it by applying an inverted filter to the inverted filter impulse response... - therefore resulting in the wanted target response curve created in REW.

That way Audyssey Flat-mode would correct torwards flat without HFR and, Audyssey Reference-mode would apply the HFR and probably even allow an additional MultEQ target response curve to be applied...

Audyssey Flat is hardcoded to bypass app customTargetCurvePoints so all filters will be deactivated. There's an anti high frequency roll off added to each filter in A1 that attempts to reverse the odd effects of reference curve.

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

Audyssey Flat is hardcoded to bypass app customTargetCurvePoints so all filters will be deactivated. There's an anti high frequency roll off added to each filter in A1 that attempts to reverse the odd effects of reference curve.

I know. Therefore my idea to use speaker measurement as an inverse target curve to make Audyssey create the wanted target curve, when it corrects torwards "flat".

 

[ludovic62310]

hello, instead of the Dr toole curve, if I want to put the Harman curve, is this possible?
just replace the EQ file in REW and run the 1.3 A1 script for example?

 

[antcollinet]

hello, instead of the Dr toole curve, if I want to put the Harman curve, is this possible?
just replace the EQ file in REW and run the 1.3 A1 script for example?

Yes, that works. Just add whatever target curve you want in REW instead of adding the supplied toole curve.

 

[ludovic62310]

THANKS

what is the ideal “target” curve for home cinema
Toole? harman? rtings? ....

 

[antcollinet]

THANKS

what is the ideal “target” curve for home cinema
Toole? harman? rtings? ....

I'm using Harman. But it is pretty much going to be down to personal preference.

It doesn't take long to run the script, so you can try a few.

 

[Chromatischism]

I would say the ideal target is a variable slope. From 100 Hz to 20000 Hz the in-room SPL should drop by about 3-6 dB. Below ~100 Hz the slope steepens to about another +3-6 dB by 20 Hz.

 

[ludovic62310]

I'm using Harman. But it is pretty much going to be down to personal preference.

It doesn't take long to run the script, so you can try a few.

did you increase the level of the subwoofer with harman?

 

[antcollinet]

did you increase the level of the subwoofer with harman?

No, used it as it came.

 

[Mike Lima]

Yes and repeat at 8 times for better SNR.

This comment from OCA needs more attention that it is getting!

 

[EasyC]

This comment from OCA needs more attention that it is getting!

I’ve had strange results with not moving the microphone. 10-20cm apart works better in my experience. I do use 8 positions.

 

[Mike Lima]

I’ve had strange results with not moving the microphone. 10-20cm apart works better in my experience. I do use 8 positions.

I would be interested to know what your results were with 1 position, 8 times. Personally, i found my bass was about 2hz lower when i did multiple positions10-2cm apart. I wish OCA would expound on this.

 

[OCA]

In an HT set up, if all speakers are fairly symmetrically positioned in a fairly rectangular shaped room with a central MLP at an acoustically valid position (ie not by the rear wall or at a room corner) then moving the mic around the MLP would always somewhat improve the calibration in a greater region. But when there are reflections higher than the direct sound itself in the measured responses (more common than you would think in calibration files I am sent!), cross correlation alignment of multiple mic positions (which is the only valid method to truly average out multiple responses) fails to correctly create the actual speaker response at the MLP resulting in inaccurate correction filters. In such cases, keeping the mic at a certain location (or closely around it) helps. On the other hand, even when everything is ideal, repeated measurements/measurement volume/length all improve SNR due to noise during measurements, hardware glitches, etc. I take 5-6 measurements at the dead centre mic position for each speaker in my stereo set up and average them after eliminating odd ones out (there usually will be 1 or 2 at the same mic position even with an Earthworks mic).

The new script (soon to be finished) eliminates Audyssey measurements that don't correlate properly with the rest of the measurements of that same speaker.

For best results with an Audyssey mic, I would strongly recommend using a mic stand (cheapest ones for about $20 would still work great) and keeping it at the central position and only rotating its arm for different mic positions keeping all at ear height and fairly close to each other. Spending time on the accuracy of the mic's upward position if you want a meaningful HF response, absolute silence during measurements and temporarily turning subs to always on during calibration rather than auto-on which might introduce extra delays as well as any extra processing on the sub itself like PEQ, LPF, etc. Speakers should all be directly facing the MLP. There's nothing that can ruin a speaker's sound more than boosting its high frequencies only because the low SPL at HF is in fact caused by wrong toe-in angle.

Also, you should not reasonably expect descent sound for all seats in a multiple row home theatre set up with just one pair of surround or height speakers.