BFD vs. Audyssey MultEQ

[cra1g]

In addition to the IB goodies I've ordered (EP2500, BFD, and drivers), I've also ordered a new Denon AVR-3806, which has a built-in room EQ function.

I suspect that the best approach to getting everything working together would be to set up the BFD filters first, then let the Denon do its thing for all channels.

My thinking is that once I get things in the ballpark with test tones and an RS meter, the Denon will be better able to handle the fine-tuning.

Any reason why that won't work, or why another approach might be better? I have no idea what I'm doing, so I'm open to suggestions...

Thanks!

-Craig

[ThomasW]

I've never heard of this product so not much to say...

[brady]

cra1g

From what I've heard the room eq on the new Denon is very good. I see you ordered a bfd and you'll need it because it really won't EQ anything below 100 hz. You might think about doing it the other way around, denon EQ first and BFD tweaking after.

Read more here: forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6595

[norpus]

brady said:

cra1g

From what I've heard the room eq on the new Denon is very good. I see you ordered a bfd and you'll need it because it really won't EQ anything below 100 hz. You might think about doing it the other way around, denon EQ first and BFD tweaking after.

Read more here: forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6595

I agree. My brother has the 3806 and I set up the audussey across 6 listening positions, which it then averages.
Then do your sub 80Hz EQ with the BFD

[bumpyride]

cra1g said:

I suspect that the best approach to getting everything working together would be to set up the BFD filters first, then let the Denon do its thing for all channels.

I remember reading that the FIR filters used by Audyssey have resolution down to 5 Hz so they should be fine for room EQ over the BFD. I think you're right about using the BFD first, because audyssey isn't designed to extend the response of the subwoofer beyond its natural roll-off. I think it would be best to use BFD to get the extension you want out of the IB and then run the auto eq to tweak the rest of the room response. The multiple measurement and averaging system used by audyssey is pretty elaborate at appropriately doing what can be done with the room response.

[norpus]

My friend and I bought the big new Denon AVP-A1HD prepro start of March and are only just getting around to playing with the Audyssey.
usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/3922.asp
He runs many behringers with his subs, whilst I took mine out ayear or so ago due to hum loops in 2ch system attached to the HT

With the big Denon doing all HT and 2ch duties now (through XLR), and with the Audyssey Pro (pro kit yet to be bought), do you think I will need to reinsert the FBQ2496 or will the Audyssey likely do it all more seamlessly? (hoping)

[carvernut]

norpus said:

My friend and I bought the big new Denon AVP-A1HD prepro start of March and are only just getting around to playing with the Audyssey.
usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/3922.asp
He runs many behringers with his subs, whilst I took mine out due to hum loops in 2ch system attached to the HT

With the big Denon doing all HT and 2ch duties now (through XLR), and with the Audyssey Pro (pro kit yet to be bought), do you think I will need to reinsert the FBQ2496 or will the Audyssey likely do it all more seamlessly? (hoping)

please tell me you didn't pay 7 grand for that

[norpus]

Actually carvernut, I won't be revealing how little or much I paid for it, just know that I am quite happily satisfied it represents value for my situation.
If you look at what seperate gear I had previously, old krell 2ch preamp, Denon 3805 as prepro, DVDO VP30 video processor and hdmi switcher, behringer mixer/crossover, this AVP beast replaces all that and does a better job in each department (plus several others) for arguably less money than I paid for the other seperates. Plus it is so much easier to set up and way way fewer snakes at the back!

It is not better than the latest separates by any means, but as a full featured all-in-one package, it is quite excellent.

Back to my question, can the Audyssey pro install do (roughly) what a BFD can wrt smoothing IB bass peaks/troughs at the listening position from say 80 to 20Hz?
(The pro package I think costs another $500? - just not sure of its capability and I don't know anyone who owns or understands one fully)

[jagman]

Norpus,

I've read a lot of good things about Audyssey, but one negative I've continually read is that it has a tendency to vacuum the life out of the low frequencies. A lot of people use a BFD to boost the low end to offset what the Audyssey does. From what I can tell, the Audyssey system (especially the pro version) is stellar from 100 Hz and up. I thought long and hard about going with a receiver with Audyssey but ultimately decided to go with the Sherwood/Newcastle R-972 because it has the Trinnov Optimiser. Please come back and post your impressions of the Audyssey EQ. I have read that the PRO install is significantly better than the pared down DIY version. I'd pony up the dough and get it done right. It's a small price to pay given when you've already spent.

[norpus]

Thanks for the reply jagman

The latest advice from my friend is that the EU/Asia models may not have the pro option available - certainly denon seem to only be supporting the US models currently and one has to pay a $150 license fee to an authorised installer only. (bummer if one wants to do the calibrations regularly, unless you become an installer of course;) )

I'll post what we find as we learn
If I need to I still can put my old BFD into the mix if needed (as don't need the mixer/crossover anymore if not blending the IB into a dedicated 2ch as well like before)

[Nordo]

I've used BFD with Audyssey.

First I EQed my subs (2 subs, no IBs -yet ) using the BFD. I set a house curve in REW, raised the gain of the subs to match the low freq end of the curve, then used the BFD to bring the small peaks I had down to the curve. Never use BFD to lift your response, especially sharp troughs - these are natural room modes and you will lose any amp headroom you have trying to EQ them. Try and use as few filters as possibe.

Then run Audyssey. Use the maximum number of positions your version will allow (I used 8).

Then, using REW and the sub distance setting in your receiver (and your receiver set for stereo with sub), adjust the sub distance until you get the best/smoothest frequency response you can get from 20 to 400Hz i.e. in the Xover area.

I had to "move" my sub a lot to align it with my mains. This showed me that Audyssey could EQ most of my system, but didn't integrate my sub with my mains.

[norpus]

You will find with IB your mains will integrate so easily -thats been my experience
I just bought a pair of Rogers LS3/5a for an office system - reason I knew they were good is that when we had a bookshelf gtg, we married them all with my front IB - absolutely seamlessly all 5 pairs. The IB is much easier than box subs to integrate IME

If you have seen the dimunitive Rogers, you'd wonder if it could ever integrate with an 18" sub.... but it did, beautifully

[Nordo]

norpus said:

You will find with IB your mains will integrate so easily -thats been my experience
I just bought a pair of Rogers LS3/5a for an office system - reason I knew they were good is that when we had a bookshelf gtg, we married them all with my front IB - absolutely seamlessly all 5 pairs. The IB is much easier than box subs to integrate IME

If you have seen the dimunitive Rogers, you'd wonder if it could ever integrate with an 18" sub.... but it did, beautifully

Thanks
Sounds like another good reason to go IB

[norpus]

nordo said:

I've used BFD with Audyssey.

First I EQed my subs (2 subs, no IBs -yet ) using the BFD. I set a house curve in REW, raised the gain of the subs to match the low freq end of the curve, then used the BFD to bring the small peaks I had down to the curve. Never use BFD to lift your response, especially sharp troughs - these are natural room modes and you will lose any amp headroom you have trying to EQ them. Try and use as few filters as possibe.

Then run Audyssey. Use the maximum number of positions your version will allow (I used 8).

Then, using REW and the sub distance setting in your receiver (and your receiver set for stereo with sub), adjust the sub distance until you get the best/smoothest frequency response you can get from 20 to 400Hz i.e. in the Xover area.

I had to "move" my sub a lot to align it with my mains. This showed me that Audyssey could EQ most of my system, but didn't integrate my sub with my mains.

Thanks nordo
I'll be trying that the BFD back in at some stage, now that I have mainly XLR connections

[jagman]

Norpus... PM sent!

[mtbdudex]

AVSforum has a 6 page thread on this exact subject that I "missed" until last week.
www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1088596

I'm still running my FBQ2496 and Audyssey, but maybe over Easter weekend I'll try running just Audyssey as a "tweaker" hobby thing and compare with some REW plots.

[jonfo]

I used to have a BFD, but removed it from the system when I upgraded the active crossovers in my system to a DBX DriveRack 4800.

I do perform a few minor EQ’s with the DriveRack on the sub channel.

But by and large, I let the Audyssey MultEQ Pro in my Denon AVP-A1HDci preamp do the bulk of the work.

I find that the Audyssey works very well. But then, I had a good foundation with a treated room + some correction in the DBX (which had to be in-circuit anyway).

I believe that a lot of the variability people see with Audyssey has a lot to do with users measuring abilities (or more correctly, experience). Audyssey is very tricky to get right, but once you do, man, it really works.
The other challenge is the receiver implementation of Audyssey, their not all created equal, and some might not have enough filter-tap allocations left to handle the bass with as many taps as might be required. Higher-end devices that support Pro calibrations generally have much more capacity, and if you use the Pro kit (which I do), then you can do even more precise corrections, as the Pro software (on the PC) runs a much more complex analysis and filter construction algorithm.

Another benefit of Pro: You can design your own target curves

Bottom line, I’m extremely satisfied with Audyssey and would not want to be without it.

Here is a before and after Audyssey measurement taken in my theater. Cyan is the sub with DBX corrections, but no Audyssey, Purple is with Audyssey.

[mtbdudex]

Jonfo;
Wow, that's a sweet response you've got with the Audyssey Pro.
And really appreciate your feedback and experience.

I've looked into it, my dealer will sell me the pro kit for $700 (ok to talk price here I hope....), I'm holding off with that, other things in the HT/basement first.

But, like you said the ability to set your desired freq curve and see Audyssey deliver it has gotta be sweet.

Was the curve you posted the same as what you "set" in the Pro software, or did it deviate?

How about the "audyssey acoustic bubble", the Pro lets you take up to 32 measurement points, how many do did you take?

Did you also take REW plots in those other positions to see how the "acoustic bubble" measured?
I'm curious.

My Denon 4308CI has the Pro capable built in, I believe they call it Audyssey MultEQ XT, up to 8 measurement points with just the AV itself.

This may be a 2010 purchase for me, depends on where this economy is going later this fall.

[jonfo]

Mike, the thing you should be most impressed by is the relatively fast decay without Audyssey

That’s the product of LOTS of room treatments. Highly recommended.

As for whether it follows the set curve, yes it does, but as with all things in life, it is not quite as ‘perfect’ in the real world. The room influence is pretty hard to erase, even a well treated room like mine.

For instance, here is a link to a recent Audyssey ‘certification’ produced by my pro kit. The ‘after’ plots are laughably flat when compared to the same speaker measured by ETF (and yes, even averaging three or so positions) its way off what they purport the ‘after’ to be.

But bottom line, it works a heck of lot better than other options. Even the wonderful $5K DBX 4800 is no match for what Audyssey can do. Especially in the mids and highs.

As for how many measurements, I used 12 positions on my last run. As 10 to 12 is all it takes to really nail my room.

The REW measurements were single position. I thought about taking three and averaging, but got lazy

[norpus]

Nice work there jonfo

May I ask about the tail off at the high frequencies - it is (now) so regular it must be intentional?