Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

Dynamic Eq or Manual Eq

2K views 7 replies 4 participants last post by  jaddie 
#1 ·
I have been messing around with my receiver and speakers for quite time some now, but I still have one question. Is it worth setting the equalizer in the receiver manually over using audyssey dynamic eq? The equalizer is the one setting I haven't messed with yet, partially because I don't know how it works. The main reason I want to know this is because I play a lot of POV and third person video games, and it's bad to use dynamic eq on those kinds of games because the perspective constantly changes. I am wondering if setting up the equalizer properly would be able to remedy this problem and allow me to stop having to turn dynamic eq on and off whenever I play games.
 
#2 ·
The manual EQ replaces AudysseyEQ, not DynamicEQ. DynamicEQ is compensation for low level listening.
Manual EQ is limited in its resolution and control compared with AudysseyEQ.
DynamicEQ can be defeated while leaving AudysseyEQ in effect.
 
#4 ·
Some will say manual EQ is better, but the reality is that to beat what's possible with Audyssey takes not only the right EQ hardware, but a degree of skill and understanding that is way above the ability of most people. Even then, Audyssey's analysis method beats what can be done manually, and the resulting filters do things that very few conventional EQ devices can. If you had enough time, patience, hardware/money (same thing), you could get the system sounding as good. But who as all that?
 
#8 ·
Remember when manual EQ was 1/3 octave? Like attempting micro-surgury with a backhoe. No EQ built into an AVR is any better, usually much worse. External EQ can have decent flexibility, but you still have the issue of measurement. People sometimes think that just because they can run an FFT and see fractional-octave resolution. But even if you can resolve a 1/24th of an octave, single point measurements are meaningless, so you need multiple point measurements. How to do you combine them? If you do a spacial/temporal average of an RTA, or just average multiple swept-sine shots, you throw out detail, basically reduce measurement resolution, but you don't have much choice. Audyssey's fuzzy clustering algorithm takes care of combining multiple points and ignoring wild single point specific data, while preserving similar data common to all points. Basically the combining process increases resolution, not decrease.

Let's not forget that its Fast!
 
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