🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 03:56:23 -0800 (PST), Mario <marmagi@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I am looking for receivers that have the Audissey Dynamic EQ feature,
>Denon AVR-1709 has it, do you know any other A/V amplifiers that have
>it?

Denon, Onkyo, Integra have it but the best info is at the Audyssey
website.

>DO the other brand of A/V amplifiers have similar feature? what is it
>called?

Dolby Volume

>Its a feature that at low level volume: ( in order not to disturb
>neighbours )
>
>http://www.audyssey.com/technology/dynamicEQ.html
>
>Have any of you used this feature? its good?

I've heard it but I don't use it.

Kal

>
> Have any of you used this feature? its good?
>

They have another feature called MultEq which supposedly corrects for room 
acoustics. My studies* to date have led me to believe that there is no 
decent electronic solution to the problem of room acoustics that has been 
discovered, and that any product which claims to be that solution is bogus. 
I'd hesitate to put much faith in a feature designed by the same company 
that touts MultEq.

*Frequency response varies based on location in the room. If you use EQ to 
flatten frequency response at one point in a room, you make it worse in most 
other points, and you can also add phase distortion to the signal due to the 
EQ filters. 

On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 12:10:56 -0500, "David Grant"
<REMOVE_MEjmd_2003@msn.com> wrote:

>They have another feature called MultEq which supposedly corrects for room 
>acoustics. My studies* to date have led me to believe that there is no 
>decent electronic solution to the problem of room acoustics that has been 
>discovered, and that any product which claims to be that solution is bogus. 
>I'd hesitate to put much faith in a feature designed by the same company 
>that touts MultEq.
>
>*Frequency response varies based on location in the room. If you use EQ to 
>flatten frequency response at one point in a room, you make it worse in most 
>other points, and you can also add phase distortion to the signal due to the 
>EQ filters. 

Spoken by someone unfamiliar with Audyssey MultEQ, as it is not simply
an amplitude/frequency EQ.  They acknowledge the points in your last
paragraph but have solutions.  (Yes, I know, no solutions, other than
correct acoustical design and treatment, are perfect.)

Kal

Kalman Rubinson  <kr4@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 12:10:56 -0500, "David Grant"
><REMOVE_MEjmd_2003@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>They have another feature called MultEq which supposedly corrects for room 
>>acoustics. My studies* to date have led me to believe that there is no 
>>decent electronic solution to the problem of room acoustics that has been 
>>discovered, and that any product which claims to be that solution is bogus. 
>>I'd hesitate to put much faith in a feature designed by the same company 
>>that touts MultEq.
>>
>>*Frequency response varies based on location in the room. If you use EQ to 
>>flatten frequency response at one point in a room, you make it worse in most 
>>other points, and you can also add phase distortion to the signal due to the 
>>EQ filters. 
>
>Spoken by someone unfamiliar with Audyssey MultEQ, as it is not simply
>an amplitude/frequency EQ.  They acknowledge the points in your last
>paragraph but have solutions.  (Yes, I know, no solutions, other than
>correct acoustical design and treatment, are perfect.)

The problem is that everybody and his brother claims to have solutions...
last year's AES show had a dozen or so companies with magic room equalization
devices, from JBL, Genelec, and Equator down to Coneq and IK Multimedia,
and the only thing they all had in common is that they all sounded bad.

It's possible to fudge some low end problems in small rooms a little bit
with EQ, and it's possible to fudge speaker problems that cause frequency
response problems that are position-independant, but beyond that the physics
just don't work.

I don't ask for a system to be perfect, but in the case of most of the 
systems I have seen they sounded substantially worse with the magic box
turned on.  The exceptions were systems like the JBL which worked only
below around 200 Hz and made only mild correction.
--scott
-- 
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"David Grant" <REMOVE_MEjmd_2003@msn.com> wrote in message
news:14adnb0k4K8JO6PUnZ2dnUVZ_orinZ2d@giganews.com

> They have another feature called MultEq which supposedly
> corrects for room acoustics. My studies* to date have led
> me to believe that there is no decent electronic solution
> to the problem of room acoustics that has been
> discovered, and that any product which claims to be that
> solution is bogus. I'd hesitate to put much faith in a
> feature designed by the same company that touts MultEq.

The problem of what speakers sound like in a room has several aspects, some 
of which can be addressed with electronic equalization, and some of which 
cannot. The big, big issue that can't be addressed very well by electronic 
means relates to slap echoes and standing waves. Those are best addressed by 
room design and/or room treatments.

> *Frequency response varies based on location in the room.

True, but there are also overall trends.

For example, if you put a bookshelf speaker in a corner, there will be a 
build up in the bass region due to the corner's effects on the speaker. The 
room will tend to be bass-heavy all over.

If a speaker is designed for a very large room, it will be bass-heavy in a 
small room.

If a speaker is designed for reverberant rooms, it might have a dip or a 
peak in a crossover region in a dead room, or vice-versa.

Some speakers can be a little light on the bass end, but take well to 
electronic equalization.

A speaker may be voiced for use in a very dead room, and then be overly 
bright everywhere in a live room.

> If you use EQ to flatten frequency response at one point
> in a room, you make it worse in most other points,

Please see former comments about overall trends.

> and you can also add phase distortion to the signal due to
> the EQ filters.

Pretty much a "fear of the dark" issue. Phase response in most of the room 
is soup. Its so bad it can hardly be hurt.

On 9 Dec 2008 17:09:15 -0500, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>The problem is that everybody and his brother claims to have solutions...
>last year's AES show had a dozen or so companies with magic room equalization
>devices, from JBL, Genelec, and Equator down to Coneq and IK Multimedia,
>and the only thing they all had in common is that they all sounded bad.

I cannot dispute that since I have not used, listened to or measured
those systems.  I did get a nice technical run-through of the JBL
system but not a demo.

>It's possible to fudge some low end problems in small rooms a little bit
>with EQ, and it's possible to fudge speaker problems that cause frequency
>response problems that are position-independant, but beyond that the physics
>just don't work.

Again.  No argument.  Filtering for room modes at low frequencies can
be quite effective especially since physical acoustical treatments for
those frequencies are bulky and generally eschewed by the domestic
user.  Simple electroniv magnitude EQ at higher frequencies can be
done but is more easily accomplished physically.  

>I don't ask for a system to be perfect, but in the case of most of the 
>systems I have seen they sounded substantially worse with the magic box
>turned on.  The exceptions were systems like the JBL which worked only
>below around 200 Hz and made only mild correction.

I have a similar experience with the Meridian system but several
Audyssey implementations have been very effective and more than
acceptable for domestic use.

Kal
 

In alt.home-theater.misc Mario <marmagi@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,

> I am looking for receivers that have the Audissey Dynamic EQ feature,
> Denon AVR-1709 has it, do you know any other A/V amplifiers that have
> it?


Did you look on the Audyssey website?  


http://www.audyssey.com/products/index.html



-- 
-S 
I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can 
seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit 
the falsity of conclusions which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have 
woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their life --  Leo Tolstoy