The astounding new AS-EQ1 SubEQ goes on sale!

[markus76]

Ed Mullen wrote:

The AS-EQ1 has 2X the filter resolution of the consumer version of MultEQ XT

Hello Ed,

I'm not sure if this was asked before but was is the exact filter resolution of the AS-EQ1?

Best, Markus

[Ed Mullen]

Kal Rubinson wrote:

So, that means it has the same filter resolution as the SEQ but adds facilities to handle multiple subs. No?

Kal

Correct - the AS-EQ1 is based on the Pro box technology and hardware.

[MartinTong]

Do you feel so beautiful ?


Sub A - PC13-Ultra
Sub B - M&K MX350 MKII

[Kal Rubinson]

Ed Mullen wrote:

Correct - the AS-EQ1 is based on the Pro box technology and hardware.

Yes. I recognize the LEDs.

Kal

[Rookie100fun]

MartinTong wrote:

Do you feel so beautiful ?

[Lordoftherings]

Kal Rubinson wrote:

Where do you come up with 32 frequencies?

Kal

Oups! Kal you are right. I screw up, I took the number 32 from the the 32 possible position measurements from the Audyssey Pro calibration system.

Very sorry about that.

But I do believe that Audyssey MultEQ XT uses something like 512 FIR filters (the Denon AVR-5805 does).
But this is across the full range.
Will be interesting to know how many are use only for the subwoofer(s), or let say below 100hz or so, and down to 5hz.

Maybe Chris will be able to provide some help into this.

Bob

[Kal Rubinson]

Lordoftherings wrote:

Maybe Chris will be able to provide some help into this.

Bob

He never has.........so far.

Kal

[Lordoftherings]

Ed Mullen wrote:

The AS-EQ1 has 2X the filter resolution of the consumer version of MultEQ XT, and also has more processing power and can handle dual subs independently.

The consumer version of MultEQ XT can be perfectly adequate for certain applications, so we've been telling prospective AS-EQ1 buyers to independently verify the existing FR if possible, and then we'll determine if it's a wise investment to upgrade to the AS-EQ1. The worse the FR, the bigger the benefit from upgrading to the AS-EQ1, and if you have non-colocated duals, it's game over.

And of course there are the legacy AVRs out there with no auto-EQ, and also auto-EQ AVRs which don't EQ the subwoofer at all (like the Pio MCACC). In those cases, the AS-EQ1 is also a big benefit.

Well thank you very much sir for this brief & enlightening explanation.

Does the Denon AVP-A1HDCI has the capability to EQ his 3 sub outputs?

Also, do you have more filters apply to the sub region when using the Audyssey Pro EQ version?

And on your last point about legacy AVRs, cool, but why not just get a total new receiver with all the latest features and Audyssey MultEQ XT for the same price of the AS-EQ1?

For another point, do you know a bit about the new Audyssey DSX? Does it uses IIR filters in conjunction with FIR filters?

Bob

[Lordoftherings]

Kal Rubinson wrote:

He never has.........so far.

Kal

Yep, I thought of that.

So, basically the SEQ is the same as the Pro version of Audyssey? With the same numbers of FIR filters?
And the AS-EQ1 is the version of these, but only for the subwoofer(s)?

About the DSX version? From what I read so far, in addition of using FIR filters, it uses also IIR (Infinite Impulse Response) filters?

Seems that ARC from Anthem is spelling over on Audyssey?

Bob

[Kal Rubinson]

Lordoftherings wrote:

Yep, I thought of that.

So, basically the SEQ is the same as the Pro version of Audyssey? With the same numbers of FIR filters?

No. Apples vs. orangeade. The SEQ is a hardware EQ. The Pro software must be used with it but can also be used with many MultiEQ XT products as well.

And the AS-EQ1 is the version of these, but only for the subwoofer(s)?

Similar, as Ed says but the AS-EQ1 can EQ multiple subs independently and has added facilities for that.

Seems that ARC from Anthem is spelling over on Audyssey?

I noticed the "spellover," too.

Kal

[Lordoftherings]

Thanks Kal.

Bob

[Lordoftherings]

Mmm... If only that TacT TCS mkIII was less money...

Perhaps it will spellover on less costly versions.
Same as the AS-EQ1 SubEQ.

Bob

[aNomad]

Lordoftherings wrote:

But I do believe that Audyssey MultEQ XT uses something like 512 FIR filters (the Denon AVR-5805 does).
But this is across the full range.

I have read and read Audyssey's lit, and I have yet to figure out how many filters they have, what kind they are, and what they do. Either I'm blinded by science, or they aren't telling. They mention "points", but I don't know what that means, only what it implies. Where did you get that info Bob? I'd love to read up on it. I have a hard time believing they have 512 filters per channel.

[Lordoftherings]

aNomad wrote:

I have read and read Audyssey's lit, and I have yet to figure out how many filters they have, what kind they are, and what they do. Either I'm blinded by science, or they aren't telling. They mention "points", but I don't know what that means, only what it implies. Where did you get that info Bob? I'd love to read up on it. I have a hard time believing they have 512 filters per channel.

Hi,

Thank you for your interest and disbelief.

The 512 FIR filters from the Denon AVR-5805 are mentioned in the review of the 5805 at "Ultimate AV Mag" from January 2006 by Thomas J. Norton: -> http://www.ultimateavmag.com/avreceivers/106denon
Just go to page 3 under the banner "2006: A Space Audyssey".
Here: http://www.ultimateavmag.com/avrecei...on/index2.html

Chris, the main man at Audyssey will not mention how many filters there are in the different version of Aydyssey (2EQ, MultEQ, MultEQ XT, SEQ, DSX and PRO software version).

I can assure you one thing though for sure, is that Denon and others too with Audyssey, are using more and very sophisticated filters compared to the very basic room EQ of other manufacturers (YPAO, MCACC, SARS & MRAC).

The Audyssey Automatic Room EQ uses FIR (Finite Impulse Response) filters.
Now with DSX, they are using a combination of FIR and IIR (Infinite Impulse Response) filters.

Anthem with their own Room Correction (ARC) is also using IIR filters.

To find more about Audyssey and their algorithms for their system, just go to their web site.
You will find there what kind of filters they are, what they do (frequency & time domain), and more.
But no numbers, as to how many filters total from their various models. But way more than any other system, except the ones by high end companies with digital automatic room correction EQ (Anthem ARC1, TacT TCS mkIII and Sig Tech Timefield 2000 and up, to name a few).

These are quite complex systems, where the engineers work for many years to perfect, so it is normal that they keep some secrets about it. I would too.

But if you do some serious searching, you will find some amazing discoveries about the extreme complexity involve in some of them. The one that really blow me is from TacT TCS mkIII and also from Sig Tech Timefield 2000.

Google "CARROUSO" (Creating, Assessing and Rendering in Real time Of high quality aUdio-viSual envirOnments in mpeg-4 content). Just for the fun of it.
Another one is "TRINNOV".
There are more, one of them (I forgot the name) in Los Angeles, is using 384 discrete channel speakers and 8 discrete subwoofers!
And there are some also from Germany, Finland and other European countries.

When you really start to get into this, there is no Exit, no Limit.

I will go as far as to do my own prediction: in the future, we will see programs that analyse and measure your OWN room with all the furnitures and different materials, exact size to the mm precision, and then from that program your room will be automatically EQ to perfection. We are getting closer by the year, or even months. It will be just like your own computer with software taken from your own room, similar to Audyssey Pro software version, but you will not have to hire a pro, you will downloaded yourself all the requirements from your own measurements, and pick from various EQ target curves with ultra precision.

And do believe about using FIR filters with up to 512 taps, it's no bull. This is from the Audyssey MultEQ XT in the AVR-5805.
I bet that there are even much more with the PRO software version, where the bass is 8 times more EQ.
As few as 32 taps are used in less sophisticated versions of MultEQ (2EQ).
The Audyssey Pro software version can take up to 32 microphone positions' measurements.

And the "points" as you mentioned is more accurately referred as "taps". Taps are the various frequency
points across the entire audible frequency range. Many of those taps are concentrated in the bass range, where they are said to provide good resolution down to now 10hz or even lower (5hz).
Some Digital EQ correct bass down to a very low 0.6 Hertz (or perhaps lower), and with a distance accuracy to 6 millimeters (maybe even smaller by now)!

TacT digital room-correction system can perform Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) room-response measurements with greater accuracy and less noise than any dedicated instrument extant (from the review
of the Tact Audio RCS 2.2, Digital Room-Correction System, in the "Audio" The equipment authority magazine, by Anthony H. Cordesman, in the January 2000 issue).

I hope this help on putting you in the right path to the world of Digital Automatic EQ Room Correction.

Regards,

Bob

P.S. Remember the Denon AVR-3805 from 2004 with it's Automatic setup/Room EQ?
That is a Parametric EQ with 8 bands from a maximum of 60 different frequency points across the entire audible range from 20hz to 20khz. How do I know? I made about over 100 or so measurements, and I counted them. So, 10 octaves, 60 points = 1/6 octave parametric EQ with the Frequency, the Gain and the Q.

[JohnM]

Lordoftherings wrote:

I will go as far as to do my own prediction: in the future, we will see programs that analyse and measure your OWN room with all the furnitures and different materials, exact size to the mm precision, and then from that program your room will be automatically EQ to perfection. We are getting closer by the year, or even months. It will be just like your own computer with software taken from your own room, similar to Audyssey Pro software version, but you will not have to hire a pro, you will downloaded yourself all the requirements from your own measurements, and pick from various EQ target curves with ultra precision.

The physical region over which an EQ system can correct for the physical characteristics of a room is frequency dependent, the higher the frequency the smaller the region that can be successfully corrected. The region in which correction operates succesfully can be expanded by using multiple speakers distributed around the listening area to generate the correction signals but there are no such systems outside research facilities. Malcolm Hawksford summarised that nicely in a paper in 1991 Hawksford paper, although many years have passed the laws of physics have remained stubbornly unchanged.

Lordoftherings wrote:

And the "points" as you mentioned is more accurately referred as "taps". Taps are the various frequency
points across the entire audible frequency range. Many of those taps are concentrated in the bass range, where they are said to provide good resolution down to now 10hz or even lower (5hz).

The taps of an FIR filter are simply the values of each sample of the filter's impulse response, they are separated in time by the sample rate at which the filter operates. The low frequency resolution is determined by the total duration of the filter's impulse response = number of taps divided by the sample rate.

Lordoftherings wrote:

TacT digital room-correction system can perform Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) room-response measurements with greater accuracy and less noise than any dedicated instrument extant.

Nonsense.

[Lordoftherings]

JohnM wrote:

The physical region over which an EQ system can correct for the physical characteristics of a room is frequency dependent, the higher the frequency the smaller the region that can be successfully corrected. The region in which correction operates succesfully can be expanded by using multiple speakers distributed around the listening area to generate the correction signals but there are no such systems outside research facilities. Malcolm Hawksford summarised that nicely in a paper in 1991 Hawksford paper, although many years have passed the laws of physics have remained stubbornly unchanged.

The taps of an FIR filter are simply the values of each sample of the filter's impulse response, they are separated in time by the sample rate at which the filter operates. The low frequency resolution is determined by the total duration of the filter's impulse response = number of taps divided by the sample rate.

Nonsense.

Thank you John for the nice explanation.

Yes, I know that EQ works best at lower frequencies, where let say, below 250hz, is the most valuable.
And it is interesting to note that more speakers contribute to a more succesful and accurate room EQ.
I forgot the name of that research theater in Los Angeles, where they are using a few thousand of speakers (all discrete channels) in addition to 8 subwoofers. I will do a bit of search and come back with more.
Thanks for the link that you provided.

For me, TAPS = Time Arrival Per Sample. Thanks for your precision.

As for TacT (with FFT), that was back in the year 2000. I should have make clear of that, sorry.
I did add this information now on my previous post, with the exact provenance.

Best regards,

Bob

[goonstopher]

Ed Mullen wrote:

The AS-EQ1 has 2X the filter resolution of the consumer version of MultEQ XT, and also has more processing power and can handle dual subs independently.

The consumer version of MultEQ XT can be perfectly adequate for certain applications, so we've been telling prospective AS-EQ1 buyers to independently verify the existing FR if possible, and then we'll determine if it's a wise investment to upgrade to the AS-EQ1. The worse the FR, the bigger the benefit from upgrading to the AS-EQ1, and if you have non-colocated duals, it's game over.

And of course there are the legacy AVRs out there with no auto-EQ, and also auto-EQ AVRs which don't EQ the subwoofer at all (like the Pio MCACC). In those cases, the AS-EQ1 is also a big benefit.

Ed can you explain this part? Does it mean this would be a good or bad situation for the AS-EQ1?

[Lordoftherings]

All right, I did some more research.

First I have to correct a previous mistake when I mentioned "using close to 3,000 speakers", it should have read "384 discrete speakers plus 8 discrete subwoofers".
Sorry for that mistake. I corrected my prior post.

Now, the name of that research is called IOSONO, and it does use 384 discrete speakers (channels), plus 8 discrete subwoofers.
It is situated in one commercial setup in a Mann Theater in Los Angeles.

For more info, click here: http://www.iosono-sound.com/

This information came from Marc Fishman, re-recording mixer for the last 13 years as in the film sound business.

According to Chris from Audyssey; "MultEQ XT performs correction using 4,000 points of control to shape the response in the subwoofer channel".
And with the SubEQ from the Pro software version 3.0, the number of points increases to 8,000 (this is the capability of the DSP chip, not necessary the actual number applied).

Audyssey is expanding quite fast. Here's some links:

The Audyssey Setup Guide:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...5#post14456895

Audyssey facts: http://www.audyssey.com/faq/index.html#largesmall
(Just scroll to the top, for several questions and fact's answers.)

Audyssey DSX (Dynamic Surround Expansion): http://www.audyssey.com/index.html

For Velodyne sub with digital EQ in conjunction with Audyssey room EQ (for additional information purpose): http://www.velodyne.com/newsletter/v...article_4.html

And for Harman Kardon on positioning multi subs:
http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/multsubs.pdf

For more on TacT (TacT uses FIR filters): www.tactlabs.com

For a very good DAC for listening measurement (this DAC compares to the EMM Labs DDC2 SE, which retails for $13,500 USA), called the Logitech Transporter:
http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_transporter.html

I also found the name of another digital room EQ, based on Europe, but not as good as the TacT system, it is called LYNGDORF.

Now, we have Audyssey 2EQ, Audyssey MultEQ, Audyssey MultEQ XT, MultEQ XT PRO software version 3.0, Audyssey DSX, SEQ (Sound EQ), AS-EQ SubEQ, and another one Audyssey version for HTIB version, which I forgot the name, fey! That's quite a few!

That's about it for now. I hope these links will provide some additional informations in the complexities and sophistications of Audyssey Digital Room Correction and Calibration.

And from what I read so far, the Audyssey PRO version is the way to go. So I really hope that it will eventually be available on products that are more affordable to more people, and with easy access to the Audyssey PRO kit.
* Because, I do fimly believe on multiple choice of target curves, curtailed for you own room sound.

Bob

[Lordoftherings]

goonstopher wrote:

Ed can you explain this part? Does it mean this would be a good or bad situation for the AS-EQ1?

If I may, I think that what he meant is if you have two (or even more) subwoofers that are at a separate distance from the listening position, there is no other method than the AS-EQ1 to properly EQ your two subs. Because of the level and delay (without mentioning the phase) between the two are dissimilar.

But I believe that you can EQ multiple subs from Audyssey Pro version 3.0 software program.

Bob

[Kal Rubinson]

Lordoftherings wrote:

If I may, I think that what he meant is if you have two (or even more) subwoofers that are at a separate distance from the listening position, there is no other method than the AS-EQ1 to properly EQ your two subs. Because of the level and delay (without mentioning the phase) between the two are dissimilar.

But I believe that you can EQ multiple subs from Audyssey Pro version 3.0 software program.

Bob

The program cannot do it if the hardware does not support it. Again, the Pro software is only software.

Kal

[Lordoftherings]

Kal Rubinson wrote:

The program cannot do it if the hardware does not support it. Again, the Pro software is only software.

Kal

Kal, I thought that on this one we were talking about the AS-EQ1 SubEQ, which can properly EQ two subs.

Anyway, that's what I was referring to.

Bob

P.S. By the way, take care of the boys at AVS., some of them are in desperate need of...

[Kal Rubinson]

Lordoftherings wrote:

Kal, I thought that on this one we were talking about the AS-EQ1 SubEQ, which can properly EQ two subs.

Anyway, that's what I was referring to.

And I was referring to your statement: "But I believe that you can EQ multiple subs from Audyssey Pro version 3.0 software program."

Kal

[Lordoftherings]

Kal Rubinson wrote:

And I was referring to your statement: "But I believe that you can EQ multiple subs from Audyssey Pro version 3.0 software program."

Kal

Of course you can, the Denon AVP-A1HDCI has three subwoofer outputs and they are all individually EQ correctable.

So, what that means is that the AVP-A1HDCI has the right hardware to enable that from the Audyssey Pro version 3.0 software.

And same for the AS-EQ1, which can EQ up to two subs individually, right?

Bob

[Kal Rubinson]

Lordoftherings wrote:

Of course you can, the Denon AVP-A1HDCI has three subwoofer outputs and they are all individually EQ correctable.

So, what that means is that the AVP-A1HDCI has the right hardware to enable that from the Audyssey Pro version 3.0 software.

And same for the AS-EQ1, which can EQ up to two subs individually, right?

Bob

Mebbe you need some sleep. The Denon does have multiple sub outputs and, afaik, can EQ them separately with its built-in Audyssey MultEQ XT. One can also use the Pro software with it.

The AVS can EQ two separate subs and, afaik, cannot use the Pro software. The software that comes with it has some of the features of the Pro software.

Now, again, the ability to handle and EQ two subs separately is inherent in the hardware. It is not endowed by the use of Pro.

Kal

[Lordoftherings]

Kal Rubinson wrote:

Mebbe you need some sleep. The Denon does have multiple sub outputs and, afaik, can EQ them separately with its built-in Audyssey MultEQ XT. One can also use the Pro software with it.

The AVS can EQ two separate subs and, afaik, cannot use the Pro software. The software that comes with it has some of the features of the Pro software.

Now, again, the ability to handle and EQ two subs separately is inherent in the hardware. It is not endowed by the use of Pro.

Kal

Lol, I just woke up. Plenty of sleep.

100% agree with each word from your post.

Was there something awkward in my previous phrasing?

Bob

P.S. By the way, is "afaik" stands for: And For Additional Information K... (Kal)?