Not enough bass even after house curve with Audyssey app

[ricky101]

@sammy

Thanks for the suggestions. Historically, I only focussed on subwoofer equalization, so that’s where I started. Was previously also reluctant to do process the higher frequencies for fear of loss of clarity, but am prepared to try now if modern equipment & room correction can retain or improve the clarity of vocals.

I too was in the “purist” camp until recently when I did more research on acoustics and the influence of room. The science is rather straight forward once you grasp the fundamentals but the challenges to correct is not.

From my learnings, the highs are easier to address using room treatment and typically you can bypass the software. The more challenging part is usually the mid and lower registers.

@sammy

no where as bad as my old Yamaha where I always listened to music (off an external DAC) exclusively in Pure Direct mode.

I had the Yammy before the Anthem and I basically bypass YPAO. I manually tune using the parametric EQ and never reach any point of satisfaction.

@sammy

Perhaps what the director intended is not what we like!

My thoughts are as follows:
Looking at the reproduction chain;
Source >> Processor >> Amplification >> Speaker >> Room >> Ears
Every component plays a part and has it’s weaknesses and we cannot assume they are the same for everyone or in every instance.

Source - we need to try as many different permutation as possible. One song or movie may sound good given a configuration, but often I find it messed up another song/movie if it is not “neutral” aka flat.

Processor - this one a bit difficult to experiment as it’s a luxury to be able to try before you buy. I would recommend one that has many options/parameters to play around. This gives flexibility and a higher possibility to adapt to a wider spectrum of use cases.

I will skip amplification - it is quite straight forward I feel.
Speaker are design and voiced in anechoic chamber.
Music and movies are mastered in well treated studios.
So it does makes a lot of sense to have a suitably treated room if one wishes to experience as close as what the artist or director intended.

Ear - often we assume everyone has the same level of aural sensitivity. As we age we lose the ability to hear higher octave and some lower octave. So when we bump up the highs and lows, I feel this is likely where we compensate for our physical deficiencies. Also it is a matter of taste esp when it comes to base.

My approach now is - fix what I can with respect to the room.
Use REW to see where potential issues are (ie bumps and dips).
Use ARC to get a ref flat response.
Finally apply own curve to suit my taste.

The above process/principle should work for everyone, the final results though will never be the same as every room/person are different.

[desray]

@ricky101

From my experience with Anthem, it always complained that the sub level is too high and insist on asking me to lower it. The fortunate thing is that there is an option to ‘ignore’ and proceed anyway. I suspected why in my situation it is reporting this as there is a huge bump at one frequency which I am attributing in causing the software to insist on lowering the volume.

Your understanding is correct.

[desray]

@sammy

Its useful to me to hear that you also find ARC suggesting lower subwoofer levels. Perhaps what the director intended is not what we like!

Yes, the proverbial reference vs preference argument. Unlike video calibration which you already have a lot of experience from Calman. For sound, it is very very very subjective.

[sammy]

@ricky101

I too was in the “purist” camp until recently when I did more research on acoustics and the influence of room. The science is rather straight forward once you grasp the fundamentals but the challenges to correct is not.

From my learnings, the highs are easier to address using room treatment and typically you can bypass the software. The more challenging part is usually the mid and lower registers.

At this point are you addressing the higher frequencies (say above 500Hz) using DSP or room treatment or both? If both, how much does DSP improve over room treatment and which areas have subjective improvement i.e. what kind of music does it help? Sultry female singers, Jazz, Techno etc.

I’m at this point where Audyssey is pretty good equalizing 20-20Khz for 2 channel music off an external DAC, but there is a slight loss in crispness, especially in percussion instruments like cymbals, vs Pure Direct. I can live with that because drums and brass instruments like trumpets and saxophones sound rounder. My upgrade path is to Dirac for USD350 so I’m wondering if it will return the crispness of Pure Direct, while retaining everything else.

My thoughts are as follows:
Looking at the reproduction chain;
Source >> Processor >> Amplification >> Speaker >> Room >> Ears
Every component plays a part and has it’s weaknesses and we cannot assume they are the same for everyone or in every instance.

There is an additional overriding factor, which is cost. Room treatment can be expensive. One can also go crazy on costs over Amplification and Speakers. For me, I’m trying to get the best bang for the buck. So the question to my mind is whether DSP can improve everything e.g., can DSP make $500 speakers sound like $2,000 speakers? Can I avoid $3,000 of renovations to improve the room with DSP? Dirac ART is supposed to treat the room as if you did it manually. In a living room, I’d rather add more invisible wall and ceiling subwoofers and use Dirac ART, rather than clutter everything with absorption panels and bass traps. The current version of Audyssey XT32 with the app is so much more effective and easy to use than anything I’ve used before so I’m really looking towards developments in DSP.

Lastly, I’m interested in hearing what changes one applies (room treatment, room correction) and what effects that has on specific music subjectively. e.g. after putting in panels or DSP what improvements and in what music did one hear, especially in mid and high tones. Using a Real Time Analyzer like REW is useful in setting crossover points, taming peaks and troughs, and making sure the base frequency response is flat. I can clearly hear those improvements in bass and subwoofer output, especially with a house curve, but for the higher frequencies is more subtle, like as I described earlier, the rounder brass instruments and also negatively in less crisp percussion instruments.

[sammy]

@desray

@sammy

Its useful to me to hear that you also find ARC suggesting lower subwoofer levels. Perhaps what the director intended is not what we like!

Yes, the proverbial reference vs preference argument. Unlike video calibration which you already have a lot of experience from Calman. For sound, it is very very very subjective.

I’m starting to see that the most important thing is having a good curve editor to tailor the sound. This seems to work extremely well for bass through a house curve for subwoofer output. However, its less clear for the upper frequencies and I definitely hear some loss, eg crispness of cymbals, after adding Audyssey vs Pure Direct. Perhaps raising the house curve around the frequencies of cymbals would improve things? The other issue is whether the loss in detail is due to any DSP. Some Audiophiles will claim that analog all the way from vinyl to speakers is the only way.

When comparing to video work, I find getting a flat frequency response curve similar to calibrating for grey scale and color. However, that is not enough. For video, our display devices have limited dynamic range so we need good tone mapping to get satisfying images. For audio, we need to edit the house curve to get satisfying sound. That is the difference between dull but accurate sound and video vs satisfying.

[desray]

@sammy

When comparing to video work, I find getting a flat frequency response curve similar to calibrating for grey scale and color. However, that is not enough. For video, our display devices have limited dynamic range so we need good tone mapping to get satisfying images. For audio, we need to edit the house curve to get satisfying sound. That is the difference between dull but accurate sound and video vs satisfying.

Very astute observation and I totally agreed. Audio is subjective at 2 extreme ends. For audio, my take is we need to focus more on the 200hz to 20hz range as a result of the way human perceives sound output at lower freq range.

[ricky101]

@sammy

At this point are you addressing the higher frequencies (say above 500Hz) using DSP or room treatment or both? If both, how much does DSP improve over room treatment and which areas have subjective improvement i.e. what kind of music does it help? Sultry female singers, Jazz, Techno etc.

For me this is subjective. I would look at the response curve and decide accordingly.
Take the font channel as 1st example.

I set the correction up to 3kHz just to even out the slight depression btw 1-5kHz.
I prefer the natural roll-off of the speakers as personally I do not wish to push the tweeter if I can help it.

Next we look at the height speaker response.

There is significant dips all the way to 5kHz, thus I increase the max correction to this frequency.

I feel that if there’s no issue, best to avoid correction, whether I can or cannot hear the difference.

As for the improvements, my experience is that it is not in a specific frequency but overall perception. I would say increased clarity and transparency… with a balanced output, it is as if a veil is removed, ie there is no overpowering or over emphasis in specific area which then lends to a more “correct” presentation - just my 2cts.

As for room treatment vs DSP - they are not the same thing, though the goal/final outcome is. Room treatment does what DSP cannot and vice versa. Ultimately all the issues is due to the room (ie secondary and nth reflection smearing the original sound coming direct from the speakers). The nulls and bumps is also a result of node cancellation and summation due to reflected energies.

Now, if you do not deploy any room correction, the DSP have to deal with all the reflected energies. Often we do not look at the time domain and the decay - this I’m not sure how DSP can help as all the graphs we are looking at is a snapshot in time. Correcting for a flat response may not necessarily be sufficient as reverberations will smear the perceived output.

@sammy

There is an additional overriding factor, which is cost. Room treatment can be expensive. One can also go crazy on costs over Amplification and Speakers.

I feel the cost for room treatment if deployed objectively give more benefits than pumping $$ into audio equipments and accessories like amps, speakers, cables n etc. The only drawback is that equipments you can move to another room, treatments usually difficult as quality treatment may mean permanent fixtures.

My experience here - I treated my room for $4k (DIY).
Results - my 10k focals in-wall sound every bit as good as my MBLs 101e Mk2 costing 85k
So I sold the the MBLs.

[sammy]

@ricky101

As for the improvements, my experience is that it is not in a specific frequency but overall perception. I would say increased clarity and transparency… with a balanced output, it is as if a veil is removed, ie there is no overpowering or over emphasis in specific area which then lends to a more “correct” presentation - just my 2cts.

As for room treatment vs DSP - they are not the same thing, though the goal/final outcome is. Room treatment does what DSP cannot and vice versa. Ultimately all the issues is due to the room (ie secondary and nth reflection smearing the original sound coming direct from the speakers). The nulls and bumps is also a result of node cancellation and summation due to reflected energies.

Now, if you do not deploy any room correction, the DSP have to deal with all the reflected energies. Often we do not look at the time domain and the decay - this I’m not sure how DSP can help as all the graphs we are looking at is a snapshot in time. Correcting for a flat response may not necessarily be sufficient as reverberations will smear the perceived output.

That makes a lot of sense in doing more correction for the more problematic speakers individually. Might try this weekend. It seems you do find molesting good speakers with DSP to be detrimental. Also, its impractical to mount some speakers that you would use for front speakers on the ceiling for timbre matching because of size or cost, yet Dolby says to use the same full range speakers if possible. One assumes that DSP will narrow the sound differences between speakers when they are very different in size or design and this will result in more matched immersive sound.

As for room correction with DSP systems like Dirac and ARC, I know very little of how it works, only that these guys with PhDs seem to be working on it and the room sounds better. Early room correction like YPAO improved this a bit, but having transitioned from a 20 yr old Yamaha AVR to a new Denon, the technology has made a night and day improvement. So these PhD boffins have been doing good stuff in their labs. You have probably seen the Dirac ART video posted by Desray. This goes beyond room correction to room treatment and I hope that this may allow me not to have to treat my room too much. I find this to be something like the noise cancelling headphones, which now have such good performance.

[sammy]

@ricky101

I feel the cost for room treatment if deployed objectively give more benefits than pumping $$ into audio equipments and accessories like amps, speakers, cables n etc. The only drawback is that equipments you can move to another room, treatments usually difficult as quality treatment may mean permanent fixtures.

My experience here - I treated my room for $4k (DIY).
Results - my 10k focals in-wall sound every bit as good as my MBLs 101e Mk2 costing 85k
So I sold the the MBLs.

I see what you mean. Room treatment can be considered cheap, if speakers cost as much as a COE! I’m not there yet and do still have to save for a new COE in a few years. I’m still struggling over whether to pay USD350 Dirac Live now or wait until November for the 30% Black Friday sale. Perhaps you have pushed me over the edge

[Whitesox]

Maybe you should try, set :

Front : Large
Center: Large
Subwoofer mode: LFE + Main
LPF for LFE: 120hz or you can try lower it to 100Hz

Hopefully you should get boost for the bass.

[Foodie]

@Whitesox

Maybe you should try, set :
Front : Large
Center: Large
Subwoofer mode: LFE + Main

Hopefully you should get boost for the bass.

Sorry ah,
1. Can u share more in detail how does it exactly boost the bass, POSITIVELY in a typical calibrated HT setup? And the benefits. Keen to know/learn.

It may sound like a perceived “bass boost”, but from what I know, it will also result in other things in the bass realm.

**2. It will be good to advise on the negative aspects too so as to have a balanced view? **

3. Have you tried measuring the room response (after room EQ calibration) for freq below the xover point after you do these steps to see the outcome? Any REW graphs (b4 and after) comparison would be enlightening.

For most HT setups, I feel that’s a detrimental idea, unless your gear and your calibration know-how can support it.

4. Perhaps you have successfully calibrated with such an approach and the measurements verify it. Keen to know/ learn if there is, and see the graphs.

[desray]

@whitesox, your reply is directed to which post in this thread? Is there post from member that need more bass? I can’t seem to find it. Did I miss anything?

[Whitesox]

Hi Foodie,
Actually I have calibrated my room (ran Audyssey 8 position), REW and fine tune.
All these things, I did to minimize the dips and get a response curve as flat line as possible. I don’t use apps.

My previous setting was
L/C/R: Small
Subwoofer mode: LFE
LPF for LFE: 120hz

Then I tried to play around and compare.

I discovered :
L/C/R changed to Large, LFE+Main
Used demo movie : Hulk, Leave by Night and Terminator Genisys
Wow… it sounds more dynamic and bass become more punch.
That’s why I would like to share with you.

You can try and play around.
Let me know how do you feel? and what do you think?

[Whitesox]

Hi Desray,
My post is directed to Foodie because of his 1st post ‘… Do any of you guys find the bass too soft after Audyssey’

[sammy]

@Whitesox

Maybe you should try, set :

Front : Large
Center: Large
Subwoofer mode: LFE + Main
LPF for LFE: 120hz or you can try lower it to 100Hz

Hopefully you should get boost for the bass.

Whitesox, bass is door rattling now with me just raising the subwoofer gain manually. My fronts and center still set to small for movies

For 2 channel music in Pure Direct, I’m using LFE + Main. Otherwise no subwoofer output at all.

[Whitesox]

You must give a try bro… change to Large and LFE+Main (for HT, movie)

[desray]

@Whitesox

My previous setting was
L/C/R: Small
Subwoofer mode: LFE
LPF for LFE: 120hz

Then I tried to play around and compare.

I discovered :
L/C/R changed to Large, LFE+Main
Used demo movie : Hulk, Leave by Night and Terminator Genisys
Wow… it sounds more dynamic and bass become more punch.
That’s why I would like to share with you.

Have to be careful and know what one is doing. This is not an easy feat to pull as “double bass” if not done right, can create more problem than it solve. Getting the crossover right for the LCR is crucial but if you know how to tame it, I believe it will reap benefits. Can share the Freq response to let us see the improvement on the bass? Would love to see it

[sammy]

@Whitesox

Hi Foodie,
Actually I have calibrated my room (ran Audyssey 8 position), REW and fine tune.
All these things, I did to minimize the dips and get a response curve as flat line as possible. I don’t use apps.

Then I tried to play around and compare.

I discovered :
L/C/R changed to Large, LFE+Main
Used demo movie : Hulk, Leave by Night and Terminator Genisys
Wow… it sounds more dynamic and bass become more punch.
That’s why I would like to share with you.

You can try and play around.
Let me know how do you feel? and what do you think?

@Whitesox, as far as I know (and I’m quite new to this), Audyssey Reference Mode tries to put in a house curve that makes movie bass satisfying. When everything is flattened by Audyssey and REW tweaking, bass sounds very weak. So Reference Mode sounded better than Flat Mode, but for me, it was not enough. The Audyssey app allowed me to at 10dB from 20-30Hz and that improved things, but I still have to increase my subwoofer gain from 10% to 20%.

I found the app very useful to tune Audyssey, but if you already have it sounding the way to want it, better don’t touch it otherwise can waste many hours…

[Foodie]

@Whitesox

Hi Foodie,
Actually I have calibrated my room (ran Audyssey 8 position), REW and fine tune.

I discovered :
L/C/R changed to Large, LFE+Main
Used demo movie : Hulk, Leave by Night and Terminator Genisys
Wow… it sounds more dynamic and bass become more punch.
That’s why I would like to share with you.

Thx @whitesox. Sorry u didnt answer my qns at all lei. And u said u are replying to my post. Could u look into my post and reply to those qns one by one pls? To help u I have numbered the questions in my post.

Sounding more dynamic thru such a tweak does not mean your bass is good. Its not difficult to make bass sound more punchy.

Besides hearing your replies to my qns, I am also particularly keen to see your bass rew graphs after u do that (speakers = large; lfe + main) for the bass region below 120hz. Before and after (ie. speakers small vs speaker large & lfe+main), w room audyssey enabled. And learn what’s the enhancement. Appreciate it if u can post it up here for learning purposes. The forum allow easy photo attachment

For HT, measurements are impt and will show bass room response performance very clearly.

[desray]

@sammy

…as far as I know (and I’m quite new to this), Audyssey Reference Mode tries to put in a house curve that makes movie bass satisfying. When everything is flattened by Audyssey and REW tweaking, bass sounds very weak. So Reference Mode sounded better than Flat Mode, but for me, it was not enough. The Audyssey app allowed me to at 10dB from 20-30Hz and that improved things, but I still have to increase my subwoofer gain from 10% to 20%.

I found the app very useful to tune Audyssey…

Yes, the Audyssey Dynamic EQ (DEQ) is the answer to a “house curve” even though it does come with some “side effects” to the upper freq and the surround levels. The Audyssey app is an essential tool for user to focus solely on the most important freq range sans the “side effects” from DEQ. So what you need to do is to disable DEQ and play with the freq range between 200Hz and 20hz.