Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

The best Audyssey test... single mic test

35K views 166 replies 17 participants last post by  Wayne A. Pflughaupt 
#1 ·
So far...

a single test... with me at the MLP... with the audyssey mic placed on top my head... (yes, like a stupid little horn coming out the top of my head)...

has produced the best results for me. I find the results to be perfect. It's when you add more than that single test I hate the results.

Of course... this is no sub. I did this for music since in direct mode the SVS Ultras are too much bass. 1/3 smoothing for ease of seeing the "curve" change.
 

Attachments

See less See more
1
#43 ·
If you only do one position do you have to just keep the mic in one position and then run the tones 8 times or can you save the results after just one test? Hope that isn't a stupid question but I have always just followed the prompts and just moved the mic for each test.
 
#51 ·
The last time I set mine up... We did 8 positions but i did it this way:
1. I placed the mic between the 1st row MLP, and the 2nd row MLP
2. I ran Audyssey with the mic as described for 8 positions, but we only varied the positions by 12".

We found that our bass was much more even then before, and we now have excellent sound in both rows (MLP positions). Prior to doing it this way the MLP in the first row lacked bass, but now we have bass, and both MLPs have almost exactly the same sound.
 
#57 ·
Well... maybe i need to learn how to test properly before I make threads like this.

I've only had 5 minutes of listening and I had to go pick up edge of tomorrow (yes just now watching this tonight)

a few sample songs on 8 mic testing and I'm pleased with the initial results BUT need to do some intensive critical listening.

I basically confined the testing to a 6" square. 1st spot was center of head then moved over 3" to test in the left ear position and then moved over 3" to the right of the 1st position to test the right ear and then moved forward 3" of that position and then moved 3" in front of the left ear position and then back to 1st potition and then 3" forward of that position and then back to the first position.

Very tightly clustered around the head. bass seems good.
 
#60 ·
I will shut it off and see how it sounds. :T
 
#59 ·
watched edge of tomorrow... awesome movie. The sound was awesome with the new calibration. I need to run some REW sweeps and see where it's at.

One thing is for certain... the bass seems to be much much better right out of the box. Audyssey had the front mains set to large, center to large, rear to small. the sub was set to -5.5 like normal, dialog was +2.5, crossover for rear was 40hz which first time it set it that low.

I manually set the front 3 to small and changed the crossover to 40hz and overall the movie experience was great...

although that intro scene produced some insane port noise on my sub... I think I need three more subs:scratch:

here was the test pattern I did based on the image below

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5
6. 1
7. 6
8. 1

I repeated the center spot 3 times as you can see. everything was bound to a small 6" square window. This means all around my head from my ears to my nose.

I will report back my impression but the pinpoint imaging seemed to improve over a single test.
 

Attachments

#62 ·
Great post, Wayne, and some interesting points. And so the pendulum swings . . . Sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should. I like your suggestion to the other Wayne (Audiocraver). I know he has used EQ via a plugin for foobar in the past so maybe he already has some ideas about it.
 
#63 ·
Regarding the idea of placing the measurement mic on top of the head, that's quite clever. I would have a couple of reservations about it. First, you'll want to ensure that the thing is still pointing straight to the ceiling, not significantly tilted one way or the other (especially forward or backward). The other is that the mic will be significantly above ear level, as already alluded to. Solution for that would be to slouch during the measurement.

The mic tip being above the head (especially combined with it being tilted to the rear of the room) could result in the mic picking up lower SPL at the higher frequencies, leading Audyssey or Dirac to boost that area and create a bright-sounding FR.
 
#64 ·
I've found that the easy way to tell if room correction has hurt your imaging by simply selecting pure direct mode. Listening to the difference between that and stereo if Audyessey made any bad changes to the eq on the left or right channel it will be evident right away.
Room acoustics and speaker placement are the biggest factors in getting a good front image I can't stress that enough.
 
#65 ·
listening now....

...for sure I'm sticking to my very tight 6" square 8 mic position with repeating center position 3 times setup.

imaging is amazing... pinpoint accuracy
 
#67 ·
I suppose that is a good reason my couch is lower in the back. the back of my couch is about even with the top of my shoulders so my entire head pops up above it. If I sit at the MLP then my head is on average 2' off the wall but I also put a computer chair in front of the couch for critical listening and that puts my head at 3.75' off the back wall which is exactly 25% of the length of the room, the back 25% which is suppose to be right on the ideal mark.
 
#71 ·
In my case room width.

Unfortunately/fortunately I have full freedom to do whatever I want with my room when it comes to the WAF factor... except:

1. Must have room for Christmas tree in corner every Christmas season.
2. Must be setup along the long walls (backward to a normal rectangular setup)

Considering this it throws everything off.

So far my room response is decent. I can't complain really. Just need to tame the wild echo/reverb/flutter that I have.... which is coming soon.
 
#73 ·
If I may add my little contribution here. I am neither an expert nor a sound engineer.
But I made a lot of experiments in a little room with YPAO.

My chairs must be at 18 inches from the back wall and I can not have more than one sub if I want to avoid divorce procedure (32 years later it would be stupid !)

Recently, I used an Excel room mode calculator. IF I understand well the theory, I discovered that at my main listening position (MLP) I had (by chance !) width and height mode null of 2nd, 3rd or 4th orders for 75hz or 147hz. More, my sub (it is between the center and the right front main speaker) was right on a width mode null of the 2nd order i.e. 98 hz (147hz is the 3rd order of 98hz) making that 98hz FR not existing because was not excited by the sub.
The automatic EQ of the receiver used a lot of filters only to attempt to get rid of this approx 150hz null. For ex. 3 filters at 150hz for the right channel, 2 filters at 300hz for the center.
A pattern of 8 tight mic spacing positions helped but I never get good results (dialogue in a tunnel like effect).
Now, I cheat a little bit...with the mic position not in love with my wife !!.
Always keep a tight mic pattern and the first measurement at MLP. But positons 2 and 3 for ears (3 inches left and right from the MLP) are moved 3 inches forward between the nulls of the 3rd and 4th order of width mode. I moved the sub backward of 3 inches to be sure that it is in between the 2nd and 3rd axial width modes (between to make sure that 98hz and 147hz order exist) .
For the height of the mic I moved it 1 inch upward my ear height to be sure to put it in between the mode of first and 4th order (75hz and 150hz).
Also, for the last 4 mic positions, I take care to never put it back on the same width and height planes that gives the mode null of any orders.
Then, YPAO uses filters for different frequencies instead of 3 filters at 150hz to add 5.5 dB with a large Q.
I gain in sound stage imagery and more in sound quality.
 
#74 ·
If I may add my little contribution here. I am neither an expert nor a sound engineer.
But I made a lot of experiments in a little room with YPAO.

My chairs must be at 18 inches from the back wall and I can not have more than one sub if I want to avoid divorce procedure (32 years later it would be stupid !)
There are a FEW things in life more important than good sound.

Recently, I used an Excel room mode calculator. IF I understand well the theory, I discovered that at my main listening position (MLP) I had (by chance !) width and height mode null of 2nd, 3rd or 4th orders for 75hz or 147hz. More, my sub (it is between the center and the right front main speaker) was right on a width mode null of the 2nd order i.e. 98 hz (147hz is the 3rd order of 98hz) making that 98hz FR not existing because was not excited by the sub.
The automatic EQ of the receiver used a lot of filters only to attempt to get rid of this approx 150hz null. For ex. 3 filters at 150hz for the right channel, 2 filters at 300hz for the center.
A pattern of 8 tight mic spacing positions helped but I never get good results (dialogue in a tunnel like effect).
Now, I cheat a little bit...with the mic position not in love with my wife !!.
Always keep a tight mic pattern and the first measurement at MLP. But positons 2 and 3 for ears (3 inches left and right from the MLP) are moved 3 inches forward between the nulls of the 3rd and 4th order of width mode. I moved the sub backward of 3 inches to be sure that it is in between the 2nd and 3rd axial width modes (between to make sure that 98hz and 147hz order exist) .
For the height of the mic I moved it 1 inch upward my ear height to be sure to put it in between the mode of first and 4th order (75hz and 150hz).
Also, for the last 4 mic positions, I take care to never put it back on the same width and height planes that gives the mode null of any orders.
Then, YPAO uses filters for different frequencies instead of 3 filters at 150hz to add 5.5 dB with a large Q.
I gain in sound stage imagery and more in sound quality.
Interesting, they seem like small moves to make a significant difference at the wavelengths involved with such low frequencies, 15 feet for 75 Hz, for example, but I guess if you are talking about avoiding actual null points, very small moves can make a significant difference around a null. And you cannot argue with results.

Well done. "Yeah science!"
 
#75 ·
A couple of discussion points in this thread have gotten me thinking, and I took some measurements which have been posting in separate threads because there may be people interested who are not following this thread.

The first is concerning the Audyssey setup mic and its directionality, which is not what one would think of as an omnidirectional pattern. It has some funny frequency response patterns depending on which angle you are looking at it. It is posted for in this Audyssey Setup Mic Directionality Pattern thread.

The second area concerns the single mic point setup approach and its validity, especially relative to a high-backed chair. There are several measurement graphs and some discussion about that in this Data Supporting a Single Setup Mic Position for Audyssey or Dirac Live thread.
 
#77 ·
A couple of discussion points in this thread have gotten me thinking, and I took some measurements which have been posting in separate threads because there may be people interested who are not following this thread. The first is concerning the Audyssey setup mic and its directionality, which is not what one would think of as an omnidirectional pattern. It has some funny frequency response patterns depending on which angle you are looking at it. It is posted for in this Audyssey Setup Mic Directionality Pattern thread. The second area concerns the single mic point setup approach and its validity, especially relative to a high-backed chair. There are several measurement graphs and some discussion about that in this Data Supporting a Single Setup Mic Position for Audyssey or Dirac Live thread.
Excellent summary. Can we make this into a STICKY thread?

Sent from my iPad using HTShack
 
#78 ·
I know this thread has been quiet for awhile. The Data Supporting a Single Setup Mic Position for Audyssey or Dirac Live thread has been updated with new recommendations for Audyssey calibrations. Basically, the single mic position calibration is NOT recommended any more, by me anyway, for Dirac Live, or for Audyssey with a high-backed seat. Follow the link above for details.
 
#81 ·
I followed yesterday your suggestion to run 3 times the test tones at the MLCP instead of only 1 and 7 others elsewhere in a tight pattern around LP.
I confirm: I get a much detailed SS&I without so audible differences in FR. Also, I noticed that the 7 filters set by YPAO for fronts L\R channels are now near the same above 315hz. Maybe this explains that if I remember your recommandation to get the same eq filters for the mains speakers above 3-400hz.

Also it seems that all those tests mic patterns with Audyssey can be applied to YPAO. (BTW it will be great to see the results of a comparison between Audyssey and YPAO R.S.C. that tonyvdb plans to do one day)

Now, even my chair is not a high back one I will try soon 8 positions along the hypotenuse of the triangle and report.
One day I will get REW and graphs and proofs !@!!
 
#83 ·
Hello,
just for the fun of it (because it is fun !) I tried the triangle pattern even if my chair back is at shoulder level and with YPAO.
The 7 positions along the hypothenuse (from 12 inches above and 12 inches forward ) does not sound good.The YPAO filters were as bad as what I got with a large mic multi position pattern for 3 seats listening positions.

But I get my best results since a long time (SS&I and sound) with 3 calibrations at the MLCP, one measurement 6 inches straight above LPC, one measurement straight forward from LPC, 6 inches away of the MLCP and one in the middle of the hypothenuse of this little triangle for a total of 6 measurements.
 
#85 ·
Thank you VERY much for giving it a try with YPAO, and for posting your feedback.

This occurs to me: Without extensive testing, it is always difficult to tell how much of a given test experience is telling us about the technology - YPAO vs Audyssey, for instance - and the individual speaker / room / seating setup. BUT... I think you nailed the importance of finding the right balance between:
  • the highly focused approach of using only several repetitions at the LPC point
  • the approach of including more nearby points so the FR is less likely to be skewed by the one-point method
All the feedback I've gotten so far seems to support that the right triangle gives a good guide for where to get more measurement points, and the balance of LPC to non-LPC points and where thy are chosen from will vary due to individual factors. Along with that, the triangle size may need to be smaller, as in your case (I think 1 foot on the sides makes sense for maximum), and fewer non-LPC points are best widely spread out along the triangle hypotenuse. Hopefully additional test feedback from others will help confirm this.

Thanks again for your feedback.
 
#96 ·
In all your years experience, Wayne, have you ever had someone ask if SS&I applied to multichannel? I think you once wrote that a system which has its L/R mains properly dialed-in will be outstanding for multichannel as well. My reason for bringing this up is I'm not sure whether to use music, movies, or both to evaluate the results of each Dirac trial. Naturally I have my favorite demo material, but if I have a staple of YOURS then test results may be more valuable to you?

Oh, almost forgot...
My XMC-1 hardware runs Dirac LE Full, which is firmware optimized to run on Emotiva hardware. The "Full" designation signifies it accommodates custom house curves, windowed processing, and more. Dirac LE Full differs slightly in its feature set and capabilities than Dirac Live, but that should be of no consequence in testing--except maybe for the Dirac LE Full's lack of speaker distance adjustments (cannot accommodate delay/phase adjustment).
 
#99 ·
When I first experienced Audyssey in my Denon receiver few years ago, I thought it was great. However repeated listening left me more and more dissatisfied with the sound quality especially its hard top end.

After endless attempts with various mike positions, I simply turned off the EQ.

About 2 years ago I moved and was able to set up a proper 7.2 theatre and graduated to a Yamaha CX5000. Straight away I found YPAO much better both in its application and results. However before long, following the usual setup instructions around the seating area, resulted in a sound which was not as good as it could be and did not reach the potential of the rest of my setup.

Then I read about good results just from one position mike position and when I tried this there was a quantum leap in quality.

After some time with this set up, I again researched and read about multi mike set ups closely around the MLP. I tried this, 8 positions in about a radius of a foot around the MLP and again there was a marked improvement.

Now after reading this thread I discovered both Talley’s and FargateOne’s methods.

I have now tried both which give me similar results with a much better depth to the front soundstage, a nice open top end with good transparency and a well integrated bass.

Am still trying them with my usual test discs (I listen to a lot of music as well as movies), to see which works the best for my room.

So thank you all for taking the time to investigate and then to share your results with everyone.

A non technical person such as me greatly appreciates your efforts.
 
#102 ·
Hello,
I ran some new tests with the triangle patern and I confirm that with a low back chair and YPAO 6 measures (3 at the MLCP and 3 along the hypothenuse) gives the best SS&I.
I must say that this forum is very helpfull.
I must add my thanks to you guies and your forum. I followed Audiocraver's two channels guide for a deep soundstage. Even with many compromises (see my system) the SS&I improve a lot. For instance, I put the FR on the right spot from the side wall (not possible for the FL) , Imoved the speakers forward of6 inches, I increased the distance between it by only 5 inches ( average B/A ratio= 1,09) and...I can believe it. The orchestra in a movie is clearly detailed for the first time since 2005 ! It is at the center ! and the dialogues are eay to ear!.
Now, I would like to know which thread to post my graphs to get help to understand what is a smooth tranistion at the crossover point?.
Th
 
#104 ·
Hello,
I ran some new tests with the triangle patern and I confirm that with a low back chair and YPAO 6 measures (3 at the MLCP and 3 along the hypothenuse) gives the best SS&I.
I must say that this forum is very helpfull.
I must add my thanks to you guies and your forum. I followed Audiocraver's two channels guide for a deep soundstage. Even with many compromises (see my system) the SS&I improve a lot. For instance, I put the FR on the right spot from the side wall (not possible for the FL) , Imoved the speakers forward of6 inches, I increased the distance between it by only 5 inches ( average B/A ratio= 1,09) and...I can believe it. The orchestra in a movie is clearly detailed for the first time since 2005 ! It is at the center ! and the dialogues are eay to ear!.
It is very rewarding to hear you are getting improved results. Thanks for the feedback.

Now, I would like to know which thread to post my graphs to get help to understand what is a smooth tranistion at the crossover point?.
Th
I assume you mean the subwoofer to mains crossover point. Try the System Setup and Connection forum, in the Home Theater - Audio / Video section (this section). There is a lot of subwoofer setup discussion going on there these days.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top