Hello people,
I really appreciate the time taken to make and then post these graphs. I'd like to get a dialog going and I wish to say right now that I am not intending to be a pain. My understanding is Audyssey claims to flatten the response in the time domain to reduce ringing caused by other EQ's yet I have not yet seen a graph anywhere from a consumer, reviewer or the manufacturer that shows ringing to be reduced anywhere.
I looked at the much appreciated graphs from Sonnie and Jerm357 and noticed that the results were not as good as the OP think. Sonnie showed he did obtained good FR results in the main/sub integration and undoubtedly it would be heard as an improvement, but he also strangely suffered in the 2.5K and 6K-10K area after the implementation. Jerm357 posted graphs show a poor response in the 100-300Hz which could also be easily perceived as a improvement cutting those not so articulate frequencies. To me though it took a not so troubled area and trashed it. He also suffers in a failed 6K and up but I'm thinking he accidentally had the THX re-EQ feature on.
Perhaps this is because of the receivers processing power is still very limited but Jerm357 has the XT version as do I which claims to have just that. Perhaps Audyssey as the manufacturers claim, really needs to be performed on a PC then have the calculations transfered to get optimal results. Yet again, I have not seen any graphs which show this to do what the manufacturer claims it can do. Anyway, since these overhangs cannot be removed by a parametric either,why give up a personalized FR in the low octaves when it isn't doing such a good job at the higher octaves?
After seeing these posted graphs I immediately Googled for more and this is something that came up.
http://www.realtraps.com/art_audyssey.htm
I understand Kal has the Onkyo Prepro with the MultEQ XT capable of the Pro incorporation which he was going to obtain and review. What I do not know is what version was being used by his friend Ethan.
Ethan wrote:
"Recently several products have appeared claiming to do even more than EQ by using sophisticated DSP (Digital Signal Processing). They claim not only to flatten the frequency response, but also to reduce modal ringing and early reflections, and to do so successfully over the full range of audio frequencies for multiple seats in a room"
"Unfortunately, the popular audio press gushes uncritically over products like these, printing press releases as fact and never actually testing the validity of manufacturer claims. The appeal of a small electronic device that claims to replace large and visually imposing acoustic panels is undeniable. But wishful thinking does not make it so!"
"Even the vendors themselves offer no real proof that their products work as claimed. I emailed Audyssey on October 29, 2006, regarding the technical descriptions and graphs shown in THIS series of pages on their web site. I asked if they had any data to support their claims of reducing ringing, and I also asked for clarification about how the tests on their site had been performed. For example, how large the room is and how far the measuring microphone was from the walls. At the time of this writing, 3-1/2 months later, I have yet to receive a reply from Audyssey. "
"Audyssey claims to flatten the response and reduce ringing over an area large enough to encompass multiple seats, so I measured at three adjacent locations on Kal's couch. It turns out this was not necessary because the MultEQ was unable to reduce ringing even at the same place it was calibrated for. As you can see in Figure 1 at left, the main improvement is a 6 dB reduction of the lowest response peak around 35 Hz.
The graphs in Figures 1 and 2 show not only the raw low frequency response, but also the individual decay times for each peak frequency. This type of graph is called a waterfall plot, and the "mountains" come forward over time to display the decay times at each frequency. You can read a more complete explanation of waterfall plots and the ETF software I used..."
Now since there is no proof that Audyessy improves the decay times/ringing in the low end as they claim, why throw away the Behringers personalization capabilities for our subs? I had/have taken mine out of the equation BTW and I myself have noticed improvements but also immediately acknowledged sacrifices in the low end articulation and slam which the BFD could re incorporate. I am not so sold on the Audyssey implementation in our systems
