|
|
Post by brian6751 on Sept 22, 2011 18:29:28 GMT -5
The guys at Aperion Audio don't use any auto correction stuff. They do it all manually. Just saying.
And I have not heard any processor better with a direct signal.
|
|
|
|
Post by brian6751 on Sept 22, 2011 18:51:15 GMT -5
Actually, now that I think about it, why is it that everyone agrees how great the UMC sounds in direct mode but then puts all this energy into hating what it does to the sound with EmoQ. If direct sounds so great, why would you want EmoQ or any EQ program for that matter, messing with it?
Roadrunner is sooo right. We as consumers have come to expect a processor to run some auto setup and sound fantastic. We buy all these nice speakers and then alter their sound.
I just wish I understood how the different bands of EQ effect the sound soni could manually adjust it better. Then I wouldn't use EmoQ at all.
This message brought to you by Founders Reds Rye PA
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2011 23:43:09 GMT -5
I just wish I understood how the different bands of EQ effect the sound soni could manually adjust it better. Then I wouldn't use EmoQ at all. It is really not that difficult. We all used to do it manually if we wanted reasonably flat response in our room. I used the para/EQ in my Sony ES pre-pro section. I also used a $115 model 351, 31 band 1/3 octave mono graphic manual EQ made by ART and many other brands to lower the one or two room mode/ standing wave peaks in the sub woofer range. It worked very well and was sold at one time by SVS to their sub customers before the Velodyne SMS-1 and other sophisticated EQ's came out including the REW/computer systems. It is a matter of understanding the frequency range of the Sub from about 80-100Hz and down to 20Hz or below at least every 1/3 octave and better yet every 1/6 to 1/12 octave. You need to know how to measure that range and identify and eliminate any bothersome peaks that make the bass boomy and indistinct. This can be as simple as using an RS meter with a test CD with frequency test tones like the Stereophile test CD #3 or more focused methods mentioned above including some subs with their own built-in parametric EQ's like in the new Emo X-Ref12 and X-Ref10 subs. It takes some Google searching and plenty of reading, but is very effective and actually fun when you get the hang of it. Letting some auto program do it for you that many times can turn out to be less than reliable regardless of what the experts over at AVS forum say, is for the Bose type crowd, IMO. Usually you can also move the sub(s) to get better response. Moving the L&R and center is not very practical, except for small distances left or right and out from the wall or corner. One can start with the RS analog meter (now closeout at $15 and a test CD about $15, used, see track #17: ".....[17] Bass Decade 1/3-octave warble tones at -20dBFS 2:47....." This will, on the $30 cheap, usually detect if you have any broad peaks. The more sophisticated computer systems are much more precise. Measuring the distance from you to the speakers your 1st grader can do and setting the speakers up as small or large (also referred to as full range ... not recommended by the Nut if you have a quality sub(s)) is pretty fundamental if you simply read some on bass management at Audioholics, etc or God forbid the owner's manual. ;D forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?htech&983682086&openflup&1&4 |
|
|
|
Post by nirvana1911 on Sept 22, 2011 23:53:14 GMT -5
Why has my thread been hijacked and thread crapped?
Not happy I have 22 replies, and of that, not many that address my concern.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2011 0:13:00 GMT -5
Why has my thread been hijacked and thread crapped? Not happy I have 22 replies, and of that, not many that address my concern. Well, I just went back and read all 22 posts in this thread and it appears to me that most of them are in the "ball-park" that they respond to your comments in general about the UMC-1 and its auto setup and EQ functions. Did I in my post or others get too far off the subject? Can you explain more specifically how the subject was hijacked and/or crapped? Your original post: I set up my UMC-1 and it sounds good, and thought I'd improve it further by running Emo-Q and tweaking it from there. At the end of the calibration, my movies sound worse than when it came out of the box, so I changed everything back to flat. The speaker distance, phasing and level seems to be ok. It's just with the equalizer settings messed up the sound, it's increased and decreased certain frequency bands that make it sound thinned out and "tinny". Can anyone help out in regards to this? Thanks. |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Sept 23, 2011 0:15:28 GMT -5
Why has my thread been hijacked and thread crapped? Not happy I have 22 replies, and of that, not many that address my concern. Calibrate your system manually, and don't use Emo-Q.  |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Sept 23, 2011 6:00:26 GMT -5
It is interesting to note, although not regularly publicized, many of the speaker companies who have endeavored to produce as neutral a sound as is possible in their models, aren't too thrilled with the use of these eq systems since, in their mind, it changes the very nature of what they are attempting to do with the sound emanating out of their speakers. Room acoustics have more of an effect on what you hear out of your speakers than anything else. So I find it hard to believe that speaker companies would be against something that would atttempt to address this. |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Sept 23, 2011 6:12:43 GMT -5
Letting some auto program do it for you that many times can turn out to be less than reliable regardless of what the experts over at AVS forum say, is for the Bose type crowd, IMO. No..its not for the Bose crowd...its for people who want to enjoy their system, not spend hours tweaking some EQ sliders while analyzing an SPL meter. Its for people who are not afraid of new technology and are willing to learn how to implement it proplerly. Audysessy, especially the newer versions, works for most who take the time to set it up correctly and use all available mic positions. If your a control freak and are the type to go back 6 months later and boost the 10Khz slider .5dB because that string instrument seems to have lost its "3D soundstge and attack" then Audysessy would not be for you. |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Sept 23, 2011 6:13:17 GMT -5
It is interesting to note, although not regularly publicized, many of the speaker companies who have endeavored to produce as neutral a sound as is possible in their models, aren't too thrilled with the use of these eq systems since, in their mind, it changes the very nature of what they are attempting to do with the sound emanating out of their speakers. Room acoustics have more of an effect on what you hear out of your speakers than anything else. So I find it hard to believe that speaker companies would be against something that would atttempt to address this. Ancient audiophile proverb: "Better to treat the room acoustics first, then EQ afterwards if you have too." I dare say that if most people got their speakers ruler flat in frequency response, they would not like the sound. That's why we tweak. That's how we have fun... |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Sept 23, 2011 6:17:59 GMT -5
Ancient audiophile proverb: "Better to treat the room acoustics first, then EQ afterwards if you have too." Can't argue with that.... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2011 6:34:47 GMT -5
Ancient audiophile proverb: "Better to treat the room acoustics first, then EQ afterwards if you have too." Can't argue with that.... +1 And parametric equalizers are far better than graphic ones. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2011 7:25:01 GMT -5
Only sissies and pantywaists use Audyssey! Real men use RS meters, test CD's and graphic equalizers, the old fashioned way!
I suppose this will get me branded as an Audysseyphobe! (At least I can spell it correctly) ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Sept 23, 2011 9:34:57 GMT -5
Only sissies and pantywaists use Audyssey! Real men use RS meters, test CD's and graphic equalizers, the old fashioned way! I suppose this will get me branded as an Audysseyphobe! (At least I can spell it correctly) ;D ;D ;D +1! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by moovtune on Sept 23, 2011 10:53:50 GMT -5
I think the trick to Audyssey is to keep running it over and over until it finally gets it right... to your liking. It took me about 6 or 7 attempts until Audyssey and I were on the same page. ( The downside is if I make a change, like a new couch I'm considering, then I may have to "train" it all over again 6 or 7 times). EmoQ is probably the same way.
|
|
|
|
Post by laserman35 on Sept 23, 2011 11:46:28 GMT -5
I was a part time installer of car audio for years. We used a USB RTA meter. Flat frequency was the objective. I was told it should always be flat across the frequency spectrum. That is how the recording was intended to be listened to.
There are cheap USB setup mics online and some some free software out there if you Google it.
In a car it can be frustrating to get things flat, Glass reflection and things that was not meant to be shaken add unwanted noise and response.
|
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Sept 23, 2011 14:36:48 GMT -5
I think the trick to Audyssey is to keep running it over and over until it finally gets it right... to your liking. It took me about 6 or 7 attempts until Audyssey and I were on the same page. ( The downside is if I make a change, like a new couch I'm considering, then I may have to "train" it all over again 6 or 7 times). EmoQ is probably the same way. Touche amigo! |
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs 
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Sept 23, 2011 16:41:39 GMT -5
The beauty of Emo-Q is that it is not a 'correction' tool. It does not correct anything. It is a sort of elementary diagnostic tool. It tells you what is going on with the signal from each speaker as it interacts with the room. Then, it allows you to make changes to the frequency "to your subjective judgment & taste" Unfortunately, the tool that you have to make the corrections is very limited (an 11 band graphic EQ for each channel). That is just as basic as you can get. Hopefully, the XMC-1 uses a 3 band PEQ, or at least at 16 band GEQ. One mistake that I personally believe that Emo made, was to believe that buyers of the UMC-1 would be representative of this forum at the time it was conceived. Who would have appreciable audio knowledge to at least be able to set up the component and use the features properly. There is nothing difficult about the UMC-1. But, some folks who are graduating from the 'mother's milk' of Receiver automations, are having difficulty adapting to the taste of 'fine wine' in the separates and manual set-up arenas and are getting frustrated. This is an acquired taste that requires you to sip rather than to gulp. Take time to learn. "Do not ditress yourselves with imaginings"  |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Sept 23, 2011 16:49:55 GMT -5
Do you guys think that a separate digital Parametric EQ like from Rane, or Soundcraftsmen, or AudioSource, with included bands that are in the lowest frequencies of the audio spectrum (the Subwoofer region), are better than the internal ones implemented inside the Yamaha receivers, or other digital Graphic EQs from other pre/pros and receivers?
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Sept 24, 2011 6:53:58 GMT -5
Do you guys think that a separate digital Parametric EQ like from Rane, or Soundcraftsmen, or AudioSource, with included bands that are in the lowest frequencies of the audio spectrum (the Subwoofer region), are better than the internal ones implemented inside the Yamaha receivers, or other digital Graphic EQs from other pre/pros and receivers? This guy believes that the standalone equalizers mentioned are better than the EQs in the component. The rub is convenience. I use a DOD model R-231 GEQ which allows 9 bands of adjustments +/-12dB in the sub region of 20Hz -125Hz with my 2.1 rig. It works wonders with the Velodyne SPL-12R. |
|
|
|
Post by SticknStones on Sept 24, 2011 8:38:50 GMT -5
Why has my thread been hijacked and thread crapped? Not happy I have 22 replies, and of that, not many that address my concern. Okay, it is one of two things 1) It is time for you to have a pint 2) You have had too many pint's and time for bed ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
