themrclean Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 I also do not have any kind of room auto eq with my receiver I just adjust the volume of all the speakers with a db meter from where we sit. Setting your system up that way will give you a much better final sound than any audyssey or room eq will do anyway. The average person can adjust sound better with their own ears. These are pretty much for amateurs that have now clue how to adjust anything and want to just push a button and let the receiver do the work for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted March 9, 2012 Author Moderators Share Posted March 9, 2012 Sooner or later you will need to change over to an hdmi avr or prepro.You can use what you have with analog out and your BR player should be outputting hd audio through analog if capable. That's kind of what I was thinking The point I want to make is all these radios sound different, to me and those I know.There are two schools of thought, one is they all sound the same pretty much pick features and price first.The other is(including me) they all sound different, most suck at music, I put sound first then everything else after. I don't have much experience listening to different receivers but i know they sound different. When I got the Yamaha I also listened to Denon and I did not like the sound it for music at all. And yes sound comes first and especialy music, but on pre-outs from the receiver. But like you said each different receiver is going to sound different even counting just the pre-amp sound from brand to brand. Unless you have owned many units this may not matter cause you don't know what you're missing.Once you know what you're missing................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted March 9, 2012 Author Moderators Share Posted March 9, 2012 Room eq is huge. DTS and true HD are awesome. Once you use audyssey multi eg XT 32 You'll be in love. I would like to try room eq just to hear what it does, and I had a feeling the DTS and HD would make a difference. Kind of like when regular DTS came out and sounded better many times compared to just 5.1 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted March 9, 2012 Author Moderators Share Posted March 9, 2012 Setting your system up that way will give you a much better final sound than any audyssey or room eq will do anyway. The average person can adjust sound better with their own ears. These are pretty much for amateurs that have now clue how to adjust anything and want to just push a button and let the receiver do the work for them I don't know I never had it. I would think it does more than volume adjust everything but i don't know what it really does ? But if i had it I would try it, the way I look at it is Whatever makes it sound better it an improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoman Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I also do not have any kind of room auto eq with my receiver I just adjust the volume of all the speakers with a db meter from where we sit. Setting your system up that way will give you a much better final sound than any audyssey or room eq will do anyway. The average person can adjust sound better with their own ears. These are pretty much for amateurs that have now clue how to adjust anything and want to just push a button and let the receiver do the work for them. Pretty condescending and ignorant statement if you ask me. Unless you have thousands of dollars of professional calibration equipment, no one can do what Audyssey does on their own, which is make the sound in your room more ACCURATE, more flat. Just about every serious sound professional in the industry uses EQ and room correction to varying degrees. Why? Because it works, and they understand that it is impossible to just "eyeball" it (ear-ball it?) and get flat frequency response. Just because you didn't like that sound that Audyssey produced in your room, doesn't mean that you should flippantly write it off as amateur fare. Quite frankly, Audyssey takes longer that using an SPL meter, and any one who knows how to use their own thermostat can use one of those... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted March 11, 2012 Author Moderators Share Posted March 11, 2012 Well after much thinking about this I think the best thing I can do is not get a newer HT receiver. [] I think I should separate the Ht and 2 CH, which will require a pre-amp or DAC for the 2 CH, and a few new connections to the sources. This way I can look at any HT receiver instead of only models that have what I need to run both systems. It's not going to happen quickly but I would think everything especially 2 CH will sound better, I really didn't like using the Yamaha as a preamp, it was definitely the weakest part of the 2 CH setup (i would guess). But it was convenient. Part of this whole thing is also making everything easier to turn on for my wife and daughter, if it's beyond the power button and volume control they don't want to learn, I tried. And it's not that complicated at all. Thanks for all the ideas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Do we all agree recorded music sounds much worse than it used to 40 YEARS ago? Wonder why with all the magic machinery? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themrclean Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I also do not have any kind of room auto eq with my receiver I just adjust the volume of all the speakers with a db meter from where we sit. Setting your system up that way will give you a much better final sound than any audyssey or room eq will do anyway. The average person can adjust sound better with their own ears. These are pretty much for amateurs that have now clue how to adjust anything and want to just push a button and let the receiver do the work for them. Pretty condescending and ignorant statement if you ask me. Unless you have thousands of dollars of professional calibration equipment, no one can do what Audyssey does on their own, which is make the sound in your room more ACCURATE, more flat. Just about every serious sound professional in the industry uses EQ and room correction to varying degrees. Why? Because it works, and they understand that it is impossible to just "eyeball" it (ear-ball it?) and get flat frequency response. Just because you didn't like that sound that Audyssey produced in your room, doesn't mean that you should flippantly write it off as amateur fare. Quite frankly, Audyssey takes longer that using an SPL meter, and any one who knows how to use their own thermostat can use one of those... Actually, almost every professional review on any receiver or processor with Audyssey or the like says to not even use it because it is innaccurate. It is geared towards those who still want a quality receiver, but do not know how to make correct adjustments. Just because you don't like or agree with a statement does not make it condescending or ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Sargent Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I know for a FACT that my ears do not work as good as they did 40 years ago. So, no way can I compare the quality of recorded music over that time. 15Khz is tops for me now. Almost don't need a tweeter.[] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I know for a FACT that my ears do not work as good as they did 40 years ago. So, no way can I compare the quality of recorded music over that time. 15Khz is tops for me now. Almost don't need a tweeter. So...if you can't hear over 15k you don't know if music was recorded bad or good 40 years ago, really??.....That statement makes no sense in the context of I listen to 40 year old recordings that still sound great, but most new ones with all the available electronic fixes suck.That is the comparison. You're saying if I put on Yes "Fragile" and some new compressed crap you can't hear the difference because your ears are not quite as good??? That is a real bummer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted March 12, 2012 Author Moderators Share Posted March 12, 2012 Do we all agree recorded music sounds much worse than it used to 40 YEARS ago? Wonder why with all the magic machinery? Because SOME of the people responsible for the production and making a playable disc couldn't find there @ss with both hands, OR they are just greedy and only care about $, make it louder they only listen with mp3 players anyway. Yes but to tell the Truth even with some older cd's the recording quality varies greatly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Sargent Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Not only do my ears hear it differently, my brain digests it different too. Illusional if that's not understood. So again, I honestly don't think anybody really can compare "recording quality" over a 40yr period. Some people think the 50s model cars were so much better than today too. [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hm.......I'm gonna try once more.If a 40 year old recording sounds great(do we agree there is a 40 year old recording that sounds great?) Now, we have many new recordings that don't sound great(can we agree many new recordings sound very poor quality?)It was stated earlier in this thread that the industry uses room correction blah blah to achieve a top notch quality of sound.Sooo....if it works so well why did the old sound better in many cases, I say because the room correction and other gadgets do no better than a good room with 40 year old gear and recordings,just my opnion but I don't think I'm alone, maybe....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted March 12, 2012 Author Moderators Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hm.......I'm gonna try once more.If a 40 year old recording sounds great(do we agree there is a 40 year old recording that sounds great?) Yes Now, we have many new recordings that don't sound great(can we agree many new recordings sound very poor quality?) Yes It was stated earlier in this thread that the industry uses room correction blah blah to achieve a top notch quality of sound.Sooo....if it works so well why did the old sound better in many cases, I say because the room correction and other gadgets do no better than a good room with 40 year old gear and recordings,just my opnion but I don't think I'm alone, maybe....... I never had anything with "room correction" but I think it's only on playback and the BIG problem is with bad recordings. Room correction or not a bad recording is going to not sound good. About this "room correction" stuff, I would be willing to try it but may not use it depends on how it sounds for HT? I have never read to see what it really does and is capable of changing, if it's just individual speaker volumes, I doubt I would use it. If it's more I would really like to know what it actually doing, I am old and don't just trust something because they claim it's hot #%@$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJCarney Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hm.......I'm gonna try once more.If a 40 year old recording sounds great(do we agree there is a 40 year old recording that sounds great?) Now, we have many new recordings that don't sound great(can we agree many new recordings sound very poor quality?)It was stated earlier in this thread that the industry uses room correction blah blah to achieve a top notch quality of sound.Sooo....if it works so well why did the old sound better in many cases, I say because the room correction and other gadgets do no better than a good room with 40 year old gear and recordings,just my opnion but I don't think I'm alone, maybe....... Are you talking about vinyl record vs modern CD's? What recording means are you referring to from 1972 and before? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 The master tapes are the source, so it's the real recording, the media can be CD or whatever.Room correction does have it's place, in modern home design for sure .That does not mean it can be better than a good room, only it can compensate for a room never designed for sound systems.Of course level matching and delay are required for proper presentation, all can be done manually.The only point is to rebutt the notion RC or gadgetry is always the best and that we have come so far.I have heard 5 digit room correction sets and very good rooms with only manual delay/level that sounded as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornfedksboy Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hm.......I'm gonna try once more.If a 40 year old recording sounds great(do we agree there is a 40 year old recording that sounds great?) Now, we have many new recordings that don't sound great(can we agree many new recordings sound very poor quality?)It was stated earlier in this thread that the industry uses room correction blah blah to achieve a top notch quality of sound.Sooo....if it works so well why did the old sound better in many cases, I say because the room correction and other gadgets do no better than a good room with 40 year old gear and recordings,just my opnion but I don't think I'm alone, maybe....... I'm going to suggest something here: If a recording I bought 40 years ago sounded bad, would I keep it around and listen to it regularly? Probably not. After 40 years, the chances that I have every CD/Tape/Record I ever bought laying around is very slim. Only the good ones survive and THAT is what I would compare every modern recording to. Basically, you are comparing the top 10% of 40 year old stuff to the full spectrum of modern recordings. In this scenerio It will appear that the old stuff is better though that might not be the case. Go to a flea market or garage sale and buy all the $1.00 records and see how they sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Sargent Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 OK, I follow what you're saying. I think Cornfedksboy makes a good point about us listening to the best of the 70s and comparing that to ALL of today's music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoman Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hm.......I'm gonna try once more.If a 40 year old recording sounds great(do we agree there is a 40 year old recording that sounds great?) Now, we have many new recordings that don't sound great(can we agree many new recordings sound very poor quality?)It was stated earlier in this thread that the industry uses room correction blah blah to achieve a top notch quality of sound.Sooo....if it works so well why did the old sound better in many cases, I say because the room correction and other gadgets do no better than a good room with 40 year old gear and recordings,just my opnion but I don't think I'm alone, maybe....... Because the quality of the initial recording is irrelevant to a discussion surrounding room correction. Application of room correction has nothing to do with how engineers mix their recordings. If it's a good recording, chances are room correction will make it sound even better, since you're evening out the room irregularities, and a terrible recording will probably sound worse, depending on what the room was emphasizing or hiding before. Audyssey and other room correction software is for "fixing" the room, not the recording. Obviously getting a proper room is the ideal scenario, but very few of us ever truly get that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoman Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I also do not have any kind of room auto eq with my receiver I just adjust the volume of all the speakers with a db meter from where we sit. Setting your system up that way will give you a much better final sound than any audyssey or room eq will do anyway. The average person can adjust sound better with their own ears. These are pretty much for amateurs that have now clue how to adjust anything and want to just push a button and let the receiver do the work for them. Pretty condescending and ignorant statement if you ask me. Unless you have thousands of dollars of professional calibration equipment, no one can do what Audyssey does on their own, which is make the sound in your room more ACCURATE, more flat. Just about every serious sound professional in the industry uses EQ and room correction to varying degrees. Why? Because it works, and they understand that it is impossible to just "eyeball" it (ear-ball it?) and get flat frequency response. Just because you didn't like that sound that Audyssey produced in your room, doesn't mean that you should flippantly write it off as amateur fare. Quite frankly, Audyssey takes longer that using an SPL meter, and any one who knows how to use their own thermostat can use one of those... Actually, almost every professional review on any receiver or processor with Audyssey or the like says to not even use it because it is innaccurate. It is geared towards those who still want a quality receiver, but do not know how to make correct adjustments. Just because you don't like or agree with a statement does not make it condescending or ignorant. Please remember that I'm not talking about the neutered down versions of room correction software found in $500 AVRs. I'm talking about the full proper suites like Audyssey XT/XT32/Pro. My opinion comes from ten years in the industry as an integrator building and calibrating rooms. For the record, most software is designed to correct multi channel systems, not two channel; there are way more variables to consider with multi-channel. I have NEVER heard a room with multiple subwoofers that didn't sound better after proper room calibration. You don't think that a comment like "these are pretty much for amateurs that have now (sp) clue how to adjust anything" is condescending? I've actually found your statement about reviewers to be contrary to my experience. Professional reviewers tend to like to assess all of the features of a piece of equipment, EQ included. Most are overwhelmingly positive about the job suites like XT/XT32 do, and if they aren't it's because they have big money calibration hardware/software to calibrate with instead. Is Audyssey prefectly accurate? No, I never said it was. Is it more accurate? Most of the time, yes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.