Audyssey's Next Generation of Room Correction (MultEQ-X)

[HarmonicTHD]

Forgive my ignorance, but I need advice before springing for Multeq-X. A couple years ago I downloaded REW and bought a UMIK-1. Hooked it up to my laptop (Dell Inspiron 1700), fired up REW and did some measurements, only to find that the in-room measurement fell off VERY rapidly below 50 Hz. I later tried it with my old desktop machine and it (correctly) goes down to 20 Hz and below. The laptop (HDMI out, USB in), is limiting the frequency response. If I need to buy a better laptop before I buy Audyssey Multeq-X, how can I tell if a prospective laptop will have full frequency response or not, or is there something I can do to the Dell laptop to make it behave?

I'm reasonably technical, but totally computer un-savvy. Thanks for any advice, including where to take my silly-ass question if not here.

In case of MultiEQX the actual frequency sweeps and measurements are not done by your laptop or PC (as in the case of REW) but by the AVR. The PC only triggers the measurements and downloads the results for the compilation of the respective filters/corrections.

 

[Jack B]

Thanks very much! So it wouldn't matter if I used the old desktop machine (that I am presently using with REW), or the damn Dell laptop, to use Multeq-X? That is a relief. Now, if anybody could advise me if I can "fix" the laptop, it would be icing on the cake (though probably off-topic here...apologies.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Thanks very much! So it wouldn't matter if I used the old desktop machine (that I am presently using with REW), or the damn Dell laptop, to use Multeq-X? That is a relief. Now, if anybody could advise me if I can "fix" the laptop, it would be icing on the cake (though probably off-topic here...apologies.

Correct, but check the software compatibility of your old PC as MultiEQX requires at least WIndows10 ( via MS App Store) to my knowledge (but pls double check). I haven’t used mine for a while once Setup was completed.

For REW see the respective threads here, where I am sure someone can help. The programmer of REW is also a forum member.

 

[phn]

It is my understanding that with REW, which is a Java based app, some users have experienced issues with having drivers working to run UMIK-1 properly. It is the app + UMIK that do the measurements. With MultEQ-X, it is the AVR that does the measuements with the supplied mic, then transfers the data to computer app for computations and parameters. MultEQ-X should thus be less dependent on your laptop setup.

Edit Oops already answered, the replies did not load for me first for some reason.

 

[Jack B]

Correct, but check the software compatibility of your old PC as MultiEQX requires at least WIndows10 ( via MS App Store) to my knowledge (but pls double check). I haven’t used mine for a while once Setup was completed.

For REW see the respective threads here, where I am sure someone can help. The programmer of REW is also a forum member.

Thanks!

 

[Jack B]

It is my understanding that with REW, which is a Java based app, some users have experienced issues with having drivers working to run UMIK-1 properly. It is the app + UMIK that do the measurements. With MultEQ-X, it is the AVR that does the measuements with the supplied mic, then transfers the data to computer app for computations and parameters. MultEQ-X should thus be less dependent on your laptop setup.

Edit Oops already answered, the replies did not load for me first for some reason.

Thank you.

 

[phn]

Pulled the trigger, will have the house for myself this Sunday. If you happen at our street, we're the house with lots of plop coming out of it! Do come in and say hi

 

[phn]

Oh but I am liking what I am seeing. And hearing. My listening space is a room next to our living room with double doors at the right side of the listening position. So far I have only ever measured it with a "movie setting", with those double doors closed, side curtains on, and screen down. For some reason I had not bothered to measure it with those double doors open ,right curtain open, and screen up. That is after all how I mostly listen to music, I don't need that immersion as with watching movies.

Acoustics are then very different, and thus perhaps not a suprise but the music setting measurements took me, well, by a surprise. Such improvement, too bad I did not have comparable previous measurements.

That said, the first things I did while playing around was removing the MRC as always, but now adding my own MRC filter with a 5kHz dip per how my Proacs have their crossover. Because I could. More beneficially, I then set Preset 1 with Audyssey Reference and Flat curves, but Preset 2 with Oliver/Toole and Harman curves for some A/B testing.

I recall seeing it discussed here as well in that Toole and Harman curves in a way are "old fashioned" in that for instance with Audyssey we get the Dynamic EQ to compensate for psychoacoustics, so why have a curve that adds bass with that? Well because it does sound "better"? I listen and watch movies with varying volume, so for me DEQ has always been a godsent once I understood, sort of, how it works. Now, with Toole and Harman curves, I also realised that when keeping DEQ yet around I need to adjust the reference level offset properly, to -10db in my case. With that tweak, and after listening to various familiar tunes, I am at least for now sticking with the Toole curve. Harman was too hot for me, but for movie preset I will give it another go. We do love our bass in the movies.

For me, very much worth the cost so far. I love how I am able to have four target curves now with two each per preset for easy A/B testing with multiple options.. Very easy to tweak with filters to try out different things as well.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Oh but I am liking what I am seeing. And hearing. My listening space is a room next to our living room with double doors at the right side of the listening position. So far I have only ever measured it with a "movie setting", with those double doors closed, side curtains on, and screen down. For some reason I had not bothered to measure it with those double doors open ,right curtain open, and screen up. That is after all how I mostly listen to music, I don't need that immersion as with watching movies.

Acoustics are then very different, and thus perhaps not a suprise but the music setting measurements took me, well, by a surprise. Such improvement, too bad I did not have comparable previous measurements.

That said, the first things I did while playing around was removing the MRC as always, but now adding my own MRC filter with a 5kHz dip per how my Proacs have their crossover. Because I could. More beneficially, I then set Preset 1 with Audyssey Reference and Flat curves, but Preset 2 with Oliver/Toole and Harman curves for some A/B testing.

I recall seeing it discussed here as well in that Toole and Harman curves in a way are "old fashioned" in that for instance with Audyssey we get the Dynamic EQ to compensate for psychoacoustics, so why have a curve that adds bass with that? Well because it does sound "better"? I listen and watch movies with varying volume, so for me DEQ has always been a godsent once I understood, sort of, how it works. Now, with Toole and Harman curves, I also realised that when keeping DEQ yet around I need to adjust the reference level offset properly, to -10db in my case. With that tweak, and after listening to various familiar tunes, I am at least for now sticking with the Toole curve. Harman was too hot for me, but for movie preset I will give it another go. We do love our bass in the movies.

For me, very much worth the cost so far. I love how I am able to have four target curves now with two each per preset for easy A/B testing with multiple options.. Very easy to tweak with filters to try out different things as well.

View attachment 327716

Good. Great start.

For Toole your target curve seems too flat from 2kHz on up. Remember an anechoically flat speaker results in a 0.5 to 1dB/octave roll off in a room (depending on room and listener position).

I would look at the non EQed measurements and see how much they roll off and then add the appropriate tilt to your target curve. Or alternatively dont EQ at all past Schroeder which is about 200 to 300 Hz give or take.

Just because your speaker has its crossover at 5kHz. Have you verified that it actually needs that MRC correction by looking at some quasi anechoic measurements of them? Many modern speakers don’t have that flaw (BBC dip) any more and therefore don’t need MRC correction. It is odd that Dennon still keeps it as a default.

 

[phn]

^ Thanks for the tips. I will continue tweaking what is to be my "house curve" for sure. The Proac MRC was for laughs and as a practice run. I very muich doubt it is needed, I have used Audyssey without MRC all along.

 

[phn]

^^ So, trying out your tip for a slight roll-off from 2kHz up, I tried out a 1st order high shelf filter for Ref only, deselected the Harman curve altogther, and ticked Toole for both Ref and Flat. So Ref with the added roll-off at the high end. I have to say I like it better now.

While I realise I have entered the realm of psychoacoustics well and truly, I mean, that is what Toole was about in the first place right. Even with Dynamic EQ in play. Interesting.

Trying out, learning. But man if this did not take Audyssey to a completely another level.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

^^ So, trying out your tip for a slight roll-off from 2kHz up, I tried out a 1st order high shelf filter for Ref only, deselected the Harman curve altogther, and ticked Toole for both Ref and Flat. So Ref with the added roll-off at the high end. I have to say I like it better now.

While I realise I have entered the realm of psychoacoustics well and truly, I mean, that is what Toole was about in the first place right. Even with Dynamic EQ in play. Interesting.

Trying out, learning. But man if this did not take Audyssey to a completely another level.

Look here from the Toole/Olive publication (generally called Harman preference curve for speakers):

The roll off (starts at around 1kHz) is caused by physics, simply put, an anechoically flat speaker interacting with room (size, reflectiveness, speaker and listener positioning). As you can see average listener preference differs quite a bit especially in the bass region, so dont be afraid to experiement.

I approximate my personal preference curve by superimposing a general tilt (in my case 0.8db/Octave at 1kHz) with two BiQuad filters to approximate the "bass" bump) - I currently use the "green" one named Reference with up to ca. 4dB bass boost. Like this:

Again, this is not universally applicable. It is my preference in my room and with my system, but of course try it and adjust to your preference.

 

[phn]

Ah, tilt, not high shelf. Thank you.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Ah, tilt, not high shelf. Thank you.

I am sure there are several ways to achieve the same result (approximation of Harman curve) in MultiEQX. Toole himself however, mostly talks about tilt when he describes "desirable" basic tone controls and gives an approximate range of this tilt (see his book or publications), so I used tilt.

 

[randomer]

Curious, what does MultiEQ-X provide on top of the App and Ratbuddesey? Debating whether to go for MultiEQ-X or DL for my Denon 3800. Thanks!

 

[Acerun]

Does it matter where the volume "dial" is set when doing your initial measurements for MQX? I don't see anything about it in the user guide.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Does it matter where the volume "dial" is set when doing your initial measurements for MQX? I don't see anything about it in the user guide.

Doesn’t matter. Audyssey controlled by MQX sets it automatically.

 

[Acerun]

Doesn’t matter. Audyssey controlled by MQX sets it automatically.

Thank you

 

[SCG]

It's not available for my computer (Mac) and I can't seem to buy it from the Microsoft store using my emulated Win 11 install

I was going to install VMware Fusion on my Mac (with mac silicon) and then run Win 11, but after reading the info below from Audyssey and your post looks like it's a complete no go.

"Newer Mac computers are based on the Apple Mx processors, which is an ARM-based processor. Running MultEQ-X in Windows ARM natively on the Mac Mx is not supported. Mac computers can also run Windows 11 ARM in emulation, such as with VMWare Parallels/Fusion. This configuration is NOT supported because Windows 11 ARM would require x64 virtualization to run MultEQ-X, but multiple layers of emulation are not possible."

Going from 'Design Target Curves' to 'Filter Settings' pages (where the bulk of the initial iterative back & forth work takes place) is about 10 secs per screen on my older PC laptop but almost instantaneous on my desktop, so using my new Mac would be so much quicker; OR if Audyssey would let you to design your house-curves/filters on the measured results pages like Dirac does.

 

[middlemarch]

I don't understand that, because I run various x86 binaries in my Parallels Win 11 installation (I even paid Microsoft for a full Win 11 license). For example, MSO runs fine, so does Ratbuddesy, as well as a couple of 32 bit x86 games. But when I go to the Microsoft store it won't even allow me to download Multeq-x. Are MSO and the others all 32 bit apps? I'm not that familiar with the Windows world. I do have an older Intel I7 based Macbook Pro that can run Bootcamp. Maybe I should try that, but I only have a legal copy of Windows 8.1. Would that work with Multeq?

In the meantime I've gotten better with finger drawing curves using the $20 Ipad app. Not sure I'd gain a whole lot for the extra $200.