Automatic Calibration/Equalization Recievers (1 Viewer)

[Bill Polley]

I use Behringer Ultra Curve EQs. They have an auto calibration feature. I paid $179 for mine, but they have been replaced by a newer model that costs a bit more.

 

[David Judah]

Hey Bill,

I saw one at the local music store and it looked like it had alot of features. How well does the RTA work and the auto EQ?

DJ

 

[BruceD]

David,

I think that once you come down from the ivory tower of audio theory, you'll find they perform admirably for units in their price range in the real world, but of course, they're not going to compete with higher priced pre/pros and outboard digital EQ units--they weren't designed to.

No need to get snippy, I'm in no ivory tower.
I'm not talking about high-end units, I'm talking about what's available in these modestly priced units. Doesn't take any more processing power than is already available to do the bass, so that's not an excuse worth considering. By the way, even the audioholics review of the 2400 doesn't think much about the EQ in the Yamaha.

I think you're completely missing the point altogether, if these companies are going to offer EQ why not offer what everybody REALLY needs in the way of EQ, i.e. in the bass frequency range.

 

[David Judah]

No snippyness here, but I think as Gene noted in the AVS thread that you are being overly crtical of a $1000 receiver, and since I take it you haven't experienced one in practice, your theories are well-noted and reasonable(same things I said before I heard them), but are incomplete.

To be sure, they're not perfect and can be improved. They also might not have a positive effect with some speakers, rooms, and subjective preferences, but for a great many who don't have alot of extra money to throw at correcting in-room response, they work quite well.

DJ

 

[Chuck Kent]

David: I actually chuckled out loud on that one. As Bruce noted for himself, I'm about as far from an audio ivory tower as it can get. Just meat and potatoes here...

I agree that I am being critical (diplomatically I hope.) Am I overreacting for a $1,000 receiver? Yeah, I suppose I am a bit guilty. But I also feel that it's very important to point out that the current versions of the equalizers are not where they could (and should IMO) be.

Should my opinion change your or anyone else's positive impressions of the current models out there? Nope. All I ask is that if it's possible to offer a better way (and I feel that it is), then we should aspire to achieve it.

I'm no engineer (actually an office jockey.) But Bob Stuart from Meridian Audio is. Here is a link to Merdian's room correction system. It does a great job of explaining why bass correction is so important. http://www.meridian-audio.com/w_pape...ection_scr.pdf (I admit that this level of automated correction for a current model $1,000 receiver is way too much to ask for. But makers could throw us a bone and at least give us the manual bass eq frequencies adjustments so that we could have a serious go at it on our own.)

 

[David Judah]

I have read that Meridian paper before and it is very informative. Unfortunately, they don't tell us how it controls reverberation only that it is different from traditional methods, but I can understand why.

One thing that stood out and I hope will get more attention is this statement:

To begin with, it aims to arrive at a 'flat' response, and if this were actually achieved, the sound would be extremely boring, sucking all the life out of the room

I was talking about my experiences with a BFD in another thread and how I didn't like it as well when I equalized flat to 20 Hz. I had also read about the Gundrey Effect, which calls for not a flat resonse, but a 6-8 dB rise from 20-30 Hz slowly sloping down to 100 Hz. Professor Gundrey performed the tests in the 20's, and over 90% of his test subjects preferred that curve to a flat curve.

Some Pioneer's have something called Air Studios Sound Tuning which overlays the response of Air Studios in England(George Martin's Studio of Beatles fame)with DSP in conjunction with the EQ. They haven't been very forthcoming on how they achieve its effects, but I have toyed with the idea that it could be it, even more than the EQ that gives what alot perceive as an improved soundfield with these Pioneer receivers. I'm just guessing here and I could be wrong, but something is going on, because there is a definite change in many rooms with the MCACC engaged.

Anyways, I've had fun discussing this and I hope there are no hard feelings because that was not my intention. In the end, I agree with alot of what you and Bruce have said, and I also agree that it would be nice to have something similiar to Meridian's approach. We are probably not going to see it at the $1000 price point, but could see it in pre/pros down the line that are less expensive than the Meridians.

DJ

 

[Bill Polley]

David, I use my auto EQ feature one channel at a time, then I use the RTA to tweak until the graph is flat. I like it...at first the music seams a bit sterile, but after an hour or so of listening you realize how much more revealing everything is. Switching back after listening for a few hours really makes the unEQ'd sound seem colored.

For many it is a matter of taste. EQing a room really helps bring out the best sound in my opinion.