The astounding new AS-EQ1 SubEQ goes on sale!

**Kal Rubinson** · **06-19-09, 06:37 PM**

Quote:

blekenbleu wrote:

FWIW, I just stopped hesitating. In my experience, products with good stories are rarely all bad.

One question for which I have not already read an answer is:
given options of combined or separate LFE,
for which is an AS-EQ1 likely to yield better results?

..for mismatched subs near front left and right corners?
(I find subs behind too startling.)

Ah, another question:
does the box ship with a printed manual, or should I just go ahead and print the pdf?

Mine came with only the mic, disc and cables and I had to print the manual. OTOH, mine was a very early sample.

Kal

**Doug McBride** · **06-20-09, 11:18 AM**

The manual is provided on the CD as a PDF. The same file can be downloaded from the AS-EQ1 page on the SVS web site.

http://www.svsound.com/manuals/aseq_...1_1_lowres.pdf

Doug

**blekenbleu** · **06-20-09, 02:41 PM**

Quote:

Doug McBride wrote:

The manual is provided on the CD as a PDF. The same file can be downloaded from the AS-EQ1 page on the SVS web site.

http://www.svsound.com/manuals/aseq_...1_1_lowres.pdf

Doug

Thanks, I got it. Taking a hint from "lowres" in the name, I printed it 2-up.
Some lettering e.g. in FiG. 21 on page 31 becomes illegible,
but for practical purposes 2-up is altogether serviceable.

Images of the provided microphone are not very detailed;
it appears similar to e.g. the Marantz AMC1 Audyssey Microphone
and consequently difference in appearance from Denon's plump puck for my AVR.
I guess it is a nominally full-range microphone, rather than one specifically designed
for bass calibration. Like Denon's plump puck, its acoustic port appears
intended to point vertically, which presumably reduces its high frequency sensitivity
compared with other mics using electret cartridges (e.g. Radio Shack's SPL meters)
which typically recommend something nearer 45 than 90 degree orientation from horizontal.

Has anyone calibrated their Audyssey microphone
for evaluating results e.g. with REW and one less variable?

**blekenbleu** · **06-20-09, 04:59 PM**

Quote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I'm not aware of any auto-EQ product (integrated or stand-alone) which evaluates the combined interactive/modal response of some/all of the speakers and the subwoofer.
...
The real issue is how the speaker and subwoofer interact below the selected crossover frequency. Depending on the design and F3 of the loudspeaker, its roll-off slope below the selected crossover frequency is anything but consistent and predictable. And this will cause FR and phase anomalies with the subwoofer.

It is fairly easy to use a signal generator, oscilloscope and amplified microphone
to identify an octave for crossover in which both speaker and sub
develop most nearly linear Lissajous figures relative to a sinusoidal signal.
It should not be very difficult for digital audio controllers to semi-automate this,
but I suppose that would be more appropriately discussed in Equalization | Calibration fora.

**jbjb** · **06-21-09, 01:59 AM**

Quote:

BigPines wrote:

The answer is Yes and Yes! The Audyssey MultEQ AVRs are wonderful units. They EQ all the speakers including the sub. So why would you want a separate sub EQ like the AS-EQ1? Well, for starters, the AS-EQ1 can handle dual subs (even dual discrete subs). This is a major advantage if you are running more than one sub which many of us are. Another reason is there are only so many "bands" (processing power) available in the AVR and the sub only gets allocated a portion of what is available. The AS-EQ1 has MUCH more resolution and processing power to dedicate to only the sub channel enabling it to do a MUCH better job on the sub. The thinking is get a dedicated sub EQ and let your AVR use all of it's processing power to EQ the other speakers.

This is simplified but I hope it helps.

Mike

Like you I have the Onkyo 876 and was just thinking about the question: since the 876 already has MultEQ XT would it be superfluous adding the AS-EQ1?

Your post above is informative but in my setup I only have 1 sub. So the dual sub capability of the AS-EQ1 is not relevant to me. While the AS-EQ1 might be better due to more resolution and processing power as you say, how much better is it?

Does anyone have a FR graph for a sub just with MultEQ XT applied vs AS-EQ1? That would be quite informative.

**Kal Rubinson** · **06-21-09, 10:46 AM**

Quote:

jbjb wrote:

Does anyone have a FR graph for a sub just with MultEQ XT applied vs AS-EQ1? That would be quite informative.

It would be quite specific, perhaps too much so to be useful. Remember, these are not fixed filters but the results of many variables.
1. Speakers
2. Room setup
3. Mic #/placement variation from test to test
4. Calculations done in AVR vs. PC
5. Hardware
6. Skill/repeatability of user.

**blekenbleu** · **06-21-09, 12:39 PM**

Quote:

jbjb wrote:

Like you I have the Onkyo 876 and was just thinking about the question: since the 876 already has MultEQ XT would it be superfluous adding the AS-EQ1?

Have you seen append #403?

A mix of appends here from users, kibitzers and manufacturers reps
makes interesting reading, but inefficient subsequent referencing.
An extraction of append numbers original testimonies follows;
apologies in advance for omissions:

SVS:
1, 14, 19, 26, 28, 30 (MCACC), 47 (vs XT, DEQ), 72, 73, 90 (measurements)
93 (recommend dual combined mode), 108 (better grade mic), 109 (with Pro), 111,
113 (short vs long cal), 122 (-30 dBFS test tone), 140, 146 (THX), 149 (set small),
153 (phase shift at crossover), 175 (also 326, 328 LFE vs sub channel level),
192 (temp vs permanent transfer fn), 199 (2x XT taps), 202 (SEQ technology), 335 (DVE, Avia),
359 (hail mary level matching), 362 (73db RS SPL ~ 75-76dB actual) 376 (FAQ),
385 (Vista sucks), 412 (0 LFE attenuation), 477 (manual only as PDF)
465 (MultEQ XT Audyssey mic correction curve only applies at high frequencies; completely flat in the subwoofer range.)

users:
71 (SVS 3808CI, dual Ultra/2), 97 (one day),
132 (also 302..329, 346 Audiolab 8000AP, single SVS),
159 (RS SPL boosts bass), 172, 173 (AVP-A1HD, XLR-RCA),
203 (PC13-Ultra + M&K), 238 (AVP-A1HD), 247 (Tag av32r), 259 (also 275, 367 Yamaha RX-V 2700),
260 (also 290 Pioneer SC-07, PC 13 Ultra), 292 (also 349 six subs: LMS, Rythmiks, Maelstrom),
298 (also 300, 307, 309, 312, 333, 373 Integra DTC-9.8 and single SVS PB2+dual 12 woofers)
332 (Lexicon MC12 V5eq, Legacy Audio FOCUS as mains and (2) PC Ultra/2 co-located)
356 (also 365 Denon + 4 subs), 369 (also 374 stereo subs),
380 (also 383 Yamaha, Paradigm Monitor speakers)
384 (Vista, Cary tube stereo preamp, Avantgarde Trio Omega speakers with Avantgarde large Basshorn)
391 (also 401 Denon AVR-4308CI, SVS PB12/Plus2 Sub), 478 (manual OK printed 2-up)
394 (also 408, no valid opinion after 2 hour compare to SMS-1: Integra SSP, dual Danley TH-SPUD subs)
403 (Onkyo 885, Velodyne HGS18MkII)

REW:
230 (warped FIR), 237 (URLs) 334(phase)

**eugovector** · **06-21-09, 04:17 PM**

Anyone have insight as to how the SVS unit differs from Audyssey's own branded unit?

http://www.audyssey.com/hometheater/subeq.html

**blekenbleu** · **06-21-09, 06:46 PM**

Quote:

eugovector wrote:

Anyone have insight as to how the SVS unit differs from Audyssey's own branded unit?

In appends #108-9, Ed Mullen indicated that Audyssey's directly accepts the Pro microphone,
so it probably differs analogously to how an Denon CI AVR differs from one with XT which does not support
Pro calibration.

**Sonnie** · **06-21-09, 07:24 PM**

I don't believe the Audyssey unit comes with a mic... it is s custom install unit and therefore you would need the install kit in addition to the unit to install it, which only custom installers are supposed to have access to. It also has a dual zone feature.

**jbjb** · **06-21-09, 07:48 PM**

Quote:

Kal Rubinson wrote:

It would be quite specific, perhaps too much so to be useful. Remember, these are not fixed filters but the results of many variables.
1. Speakers
2. Room setup
3. Mic #/placement variation from test to test
4. Calculations done in AVR vs. PC
5. Hardware
6. Skill/repeatability of user.

Indeed it would be quite specific. I should have made it clear that I wanted specific examples, i.e. a user who has both an AVR with MultEQ XT who later added the AS-EQ1 and who did testing on his own setup with everything the same.

I did not mean to compare MultEQ against the AS-EQ1 across different setups from different users.

**jbjb** · **06-21-09, 08:03 PM**

Quote:

blekenbleu wrote:

Have you seen append #403?

A mix of appends here from users, kibitzers and manufacturers reps
makes interesting reading, but inefficient subsequent referencing.
An extraction of append numbers original testimonies follows;
apologies in advance for omissions:

SVS:
1, 14, 19, 26, 28, 30 (MCACC), 47 (vs XT, DEQ), 72, 73, 90 (measurements)
93 (recommend dual combined mode), 108 (better grade mic), 109 (with Pro), 111,
113 (short vs long cal), 122 (-30 dBFS test tone), 140, 146 (THX), 149 (set small),
153 (phase shift at crossover), 175 (also 326, 328 LFE vs sub channel level),
192 (temp vs permanent transfer fn), 199 (2x XT taps), 202 (SEQ technology), 335 (DVE, Avia),
359 (hail mary level matching), 362 (73db RS SPL ~ 75-76dB actual) 376 (FAQ),
385 (Vista sucks), 412 (0 LFE attenuation), 477 (manual only as PDF)
465 (MultEQ XT Audyssey mic correction curve only applies at high frequencies; completely flat in the subwoofer range.)

users:
71 (SVS 3808CI, dual Ultra/2), 97 (one day),
132 (also 302..329, 346 Audiolab 8000AP, single SVS),
159 (RS SPL boosts bass), 172, 173 (AVP-A1HD, XLR-RCA),
203 (PC13-Ultra + M&K), 238 (AVP-A1HD), 247 (Tag av32r), 259 (also 275, 367 Yamaha RX-V 2700),
260 (also 290 Pioneer SC-07, PC 13 Ultra), 292 (also 349 six subs: LMS, Rythmiks, Maelstrom),
298 (also 300, 307, 309, 312, 333, 373 Integra DTC-9.8 and single SVS PB2+dual 12 woofers)
332 (Lexicon MC12 V5eq, Legacy Audio FOCUS as mains and (2) PC Ultra/2 co-located)
356 (also 365 Denon + 4 subs), 369 (also 374 stereo subs),
380 (also 383 Yamaha, Paradigm Monitor speakers)
384 (Vista, Cary tube stereo preamp, Avantgarde Trio Omega speakers with Avantgarde large Basshorn)
391 (also 401 Denon AVR-4308CI, SVS PB12/Plus2 Sub), 478 (manual OK printed 2-up)
394 (also 408, no valid opinion after 2 hour compare to SMS-1: Integra SSP, dual Danley TH-SPUD subs)
403 (Onkyo 885, Velodyne HGS18MkII)

REW:
230 (warped FIR), 237 (URLs) 334(phase)

Thanks for compiling that list. Appreciate the effort.

I haven't read through all of them, but in the few I've read like #403, #394, #391, #384 I don't see any comparisons between MultEQ XT and AS-EQ1. They do talk about just the AS-EQ1 but not a comparison of the efficacy between the two.

Perhaps no one has done such a comparison yet and graphed it?

**Kal Rubinson** · **06-21-09, 08:53 PM**

Quote:

jbjb wrote:

Indeed it would be quite specific. I should have made it clear that I wanted specific examples, i.e. a user who has both an AVR with MultEQ XT who later added the AS-EQ1 and who did testing on his own setup with everything the same.

I did not mean to compare MultEQ against the AS-EQ1 across different setups from different users.

Understood but it is still a problem unless the tester undertakes this intentionally. For example, I have used the AS-EQ1 with my MultEQ XT-equipped Integra DTC-9.8 but the calibrations were done months apart and I have no doubt that the mic positions were different. Had I wanted to make a direct comparison, even in this very specific case, I would have had to do both calibrations on the same day with marked, repeatable mic positions but I didn't. I could post the results for you to compare as long as you don't try to draw any generalization from them.

EDIT: I cannot post them until my review is published. September Stereophile.

Kal

**jbjb** · **06-21-09, 09:59 PM**

Quote:

Kal Rubinson wrote:

Understood but it is still a problem unless the tester undertakes this intentionally. For example, I have used the AS-EQ1 with my MultEQ XT-equipped Integra DTC-9.8 but the calibrations were done months apart and I have no doubt that the mic positions were different. Had I wanted to make a direct comparison, even in this very specific case, I would have had to do both calibrations on the same day with marked, repeatable mic positions but I didn't. I could post the results for you to compare as long as you don't try to draw any generalization from them.

EDIT: I cannot post them until my review is published. September Stereophile.

Kal

Hi Kal, yes I'd appreciate having your results and I won't draw generalizations from them. You have a review of the AS-EQ1 coming out in September?

**blekenbleu** · **06-21-09, 11:00 PM**

Quote:

jbjb wrote:

Thanks for compiling that list. Appreciate the effort.

No problemo; it was something I did for myself before purchasing.

Quote:

I don't see any comparisons between MultEQ XT and AS-EQ1. They do talk about just the AS-EQ1 but not a comparison of the efficacy between the two.

Not sure what you are looking for, but did not let that stop me.
There are other AVRs in my list which have MultEQ. It appears that SubEQ owners,
MultEQ XT or other, are typically satisfied once they get levels balanced.

If you are interested in graphs,
there are REW plots for MultEQ in the REW thread/forum, which
generally confirm my own experience that MultEQ XT is more effective for cleaning
up mid-range than bass (although the key improvement for me was in imaging).

#373 has before and after REW plots.
#180 also shows before and after, although it looks to me an exercise in attempting
to compensate electronically for standing wave nulls.
A more extensive set of before/after REW plots for AS-EQ1 is here:
http://www.hometheatershack.com/foru...rew-great.html

I found these REW plots of Audyssey Dynamic EQ interesting
http://www.hometheatershack.com/foru...surements.html

Some folks (myself included) conclude that flattest response curves produced using BFD with REW
are not the best-sounding.

**jbjb** · **06-21-09, 11:31 PM**

Quote:

blekenbleu wrote:

#373 has before and after REW plots.
#180 also shows before and after, although it looks to me an exercise in attempting
to compensate electronically for standing wave nulls.
A more extensive set of before/after REW plots for AS-EQ1 is here:
http://www.hometheatershack.com/foru...rew-great.html

I found these REW plots of Audyssey Dynamic EQ interesting
http://www.hometheatershack.com/foru...surements.html

#373 is the type of plot I'm looking for. Thanks for the heads up on that.

Quote:

Some folks (myself included) conclude that flattest response curves produced using BFD with REW are not the best-sounding.

That seems counter-intuitive right? Isn't the goal supposed to be the flattest curve possible? Boy I have so much to learn on this...

**cavchameleon** · **06-22-09, 09:13 AM**

Quote:

Kal Rubinson wrote:

Understood but it is still a problem unless the tester undertakes this intentionally. For example, I have used the AS-EQ1 with my MultEQ XT-equipped Integra DTC-9.8 but the calibrations were done months apart and I have no doubt that the mic positions were different. Had I wanted to make a direct comparison, even in this very specific case, I would have had to do both calibrations on the same day with marked, repeatable mic positions but I didn't. I could post the results for you to compare as long as you don't try to draw any generalization from them.

EDIT: I cannot post them until my review is published. September Stereophile.

Kal

Awesome Kal! I've been waiting for your review on this product!!! I always look forward to your opinions and experience with equipment. Also, thanks for being part of the forum.

Ray

**eugovector** · **06-22-09, 10:09 AM**

Quote:

blekenbleu wrote:

In appends #108-9, Ed Mullen indicated that Audyssey's directly accepts the Pro microphone,
so it probably differs analogously to how an Denon CI AVR differs from one with XT which does not support
Pro calibration.

Well, if that's the main difference, it will be interesting to see what the Audyssey unit is priced at.

**Sonnie** · **06-22-09, 10:25 AM**

Quote:

Kal Rubinson wrote:

EDIT: I cannot post them until my review is published. September Stereophile.

Kal

Ah... com'on... we can make it one of Zero Tolerance Forum Rules to not let anyone at Stereophile know about it.

**Sonnie** · **06-22-09, 10:39 AM**

Quote:

eugovector wrote:

Well, if that's the main difference, it will be interesting to see what the Audyssey unit is priced at.

$800 MSRP

The Installer Kit MSRP is $550 and includes the following:

Quote:

Install kit used to calibrate the AUDYSSEY Sound Equalizer, Sound EQ Balanced,
Sub EQ, or Integrated AVR technologies from Denon, Integra, and NAD. Kit
includes: MultEQ Pro CD, Calibrated Microphone, Microphone Stand and Cables,
Calibrated Preamplifier, XLR-to-RCA Adapter, USB Cables, Carrying Bag

**cavchameleon** · **06-22-09, 11:01 AM**

Quote:

Sonnie wrote:

$800 MSRP

The Installer Kit MSRP is $550 and includes the following:

Sonnie,

I do not think the installer kit is available to just anyone (only to installers and specific individuals that do not have an installer within a decent distance to residence - and when one is purchased for this reason, it only has the unlock code for the particular piece of equipment the customer is buying it for). There is a charge for every unlock code for every piece of equipment per serial number.

Ray

**BigPines** · **06-22-09, 11:10 AM**

Quote:

jbjb wrote:

Like you I have the Onkyo 876 and was just thinking about the question: since the 876 already has MultEQ XT would it be superfluous adding the AS-EQ1?

Your post above is informative but in my setup I only have 1 sub. So the dual sub capability of the AS-EQ1 is not relevant to me. While the AS-EQ1 might be better due to more resolution and processing power as you say, how much better is it?

Does anyone have a FR graph for a sub just with MultEQ XT applied vs AS-EQ1? That would be quite informative.

Good questions. If it were me, I would probably get the AS-EQ1 anyway because I know it would be better. However, given the fact that you only have one sub and the cost of the AS-EQ1 is a bit prohibitive, you may get the biggest bang for your buck somewhere else.

I have a solution for you...add another sub and the AS-EQ1! Problem solved.

Seriously, if you want to find out how much value the unit adds, just get one. There is a 45 day money back guarantee if you don't feel the investment is worth the benefit.

Mike

**drdoan** · **06-22-09, 12:02 PM**

Because the Audyssey in your receiver must handle all frequencies, it will not have nearly as many to EQ the bass, tho it will have some. The Bass Audyssey focuses all of its processing power on the bass, hence a significant about of correction in the bass region. That, in turn, allows the receiver's Audyssey to concentrate on the upper frequencies. Mine is on order. Have fun, Dennis

**Sonnie** · **06-22-09, 12:28 PM**

Quote:

cavchameleon wrote:

Sonnie,

I do not think the installer kit is available to just anyone (only to installers and specific individuals that do not have an installer within a decent distance to residence - and when one is purchased for this reason, it only has the unlock code for the particular piece of equipment the customer is buying it for). There is a charge for every unlock code for every piece of equipment per serial number.

Ray

This is correct... and I should have noted that this is for custom installers only. You generally won't see this unit or the installer kit available to the retail public. The SVS version is basically the retail public version.

**cavchameleon** · **06-22-09, 01:08 PM**

Quote:

Sonnie wrote:

This is correct... and I should have noted that this is for custom installers only. You generally won't see this unit or the installer kit available to the retail public. The SVS version is basically the retail public version.

I assumed that was so and considering most of the population here on the forums, the SVS unit is better suited. Most here constantly tweak, change out equipment, move equipment, etc. and with the SVS unit, one can re-measure as often as needed. I know that I want that option

!

Ray

Advertisement