Room correction, it's a waste IMO. (1 Viewer)

[Mike Up]

I have audyssey XT on my Denon AVR-2312. I've had the receiver 11 years and I've tried using Audyssey several times and every time it comes back sounding like crap, very harsh sounding and bright and fatiguing. I've gone back to manual setup as I found channels levels wrong, crossovers way up near max, distances wrong, and EQs all over the place. This is likely why it has always sounded like crap. I could do the test several times and each time brings back different settings on everything. I even did resets thinking this could help and nothing helped. Even made sure curtains were closed to limit reflections.

I found out I wasn't the only one. A relative with a Marantz SR5005 also had the same issues as me and turned it off and manually set it up. I've also read on the forums of numerous others having the same issues. Makes me wonder why people still continue to use these Room correction schemes when they only harm the sound. Then I get a laugh when someone does a review on equipment as speakers or the receiver itself, and use room correction to judge the sound. They aren't judging the sound of the equipment they're reviewing, they're judging the sound of the Room Correction ON the equipment they're reviewing.

I know some like these room corrections. However I wonder if they just like the sound even if it's inaccurate.

I know with my Audyssey XT off, I get excellent sound from system in stereo with the subwoofer. I have used some headphones reviewed by rtings.com with a frequency response and my speaker system sounds very close or slightly better than my headphones. Now headphone's sound is pure and uncolored by room acoustics so if there is a similar sound on a relatively flat sounding headphones, I would say having the Audyssey off is the most accurate. Having it on wasn't a small difference in sound but a huge difference as scratching on a chalk board! Like I said, harsh, bright, and fatiguing.

I guess I'm confused why people still even use room correction and why receiver makers even implement it. It seems like wasted money on poor sound to me.

Now if you use a dedicated system with quality mics, computer software, and treatments to get your room sounding it's best, I can believe that. I just have a hard time believing that a cheap, plastic microphone and an inexpensive sound feature (comparative to expensive hardware features and Dolby/DTS licensing) on a relatively inexpensive receiver can actually be any good. I found it's not, but others believe it is.

What gives??

 

[garyrc]

What gives??

"What gives: may be:

• I'm not saying you do this, but never use "quality mics," or any mics other than the Audyssey mics with Audyssey. The characteristics of Audyssey's mics are "known" to the Audyssey system and the median curve of those Audyssey mics is compensated for in the Audyssey circuitry in your AVR or pre-pro.
• All mics must point straight up at the ceiling, perpendicular to the floor (probably as sighted from two directions, about 90 degrees apart). There is some agreement that the mics should be at ear height. All 8 mic positions need to be used, for best results.
• If your room is of more or less average liveness for a listening room, use Audyssey Reference, with its narrow 2 dB dip at 1.5K to 3K (returning to flat by 3K) and long, slow roll-off, starting at about 6.5K, 2 dB down at 10K, 5 dB down at 16K, and 6 dB down at 20K. I find, for a few really great recordings, Audyssey Flat can be better. If your room is very, very dead, Audyssey Flat may be better.
• It is normal for almost all subwoofers to measure as farther away than they are physically. This is because the sub's circuitry imposes a delay, and most distance measuring devices use delay to estimate distance. Do not defeat or readjust this -- it's the relative delay, both from room position and circuitry you want to measure, so that sound from all speakers, including the subwoofers, arrives at your ears at the same time. Also, most Audyssey users turn up their subs by 3 to12 dB (see the sources I will cite for the reasons).
• Some like DEQ, some don't. I'd rather turn up the bass tone control (which will only become available with DEQ off) as well as turning up the sub. Since I play at approx 5dB to 7dB below reference level, I don't need compensation due to the losses the equal-loudness contours describe.
• There are two experts who have written great works on how to deal with Audyssey. Since your AVR is circa 2011, you might find a quicker way in through this:
  "Audyssey FAQ Linked Here" but the definitive system set up work, of War and Peace length, but aided by a "Cliff Notes" section at the beginning, which I wholeheartedly recommend is Mike's: Guide to Subwoofer Calibration and Bass Preferences. He started it to address Audyssey, then expanded it to cover many other related topics.
• I love what Audyssey does to my sound! Switching back and forth between Audyssey ON and OFF, Audyssey sounds more transparent, slightly more detailed, and more like the orchestra rehearsing I used to eat my lunch in front of, symphony concerts I have attended, the several orchestras I played in, and the best of the 70mm 6 channel movies I have seen and heard in roadshow releases. Of course different recordings in different halls sound different, but through Audyssey almost all sound plausible. My favorite music is classical, romanticist, modern orchestral, jazz, folk, and a few disks (including SACDs, DVD-As, and Blu-rays) of rock and film scores.

 

[Mike Up]

Yep, I even bought a tripod for the mic and followed setup to a T. Everytime, it sounded god awful!

Glad it worked for you. BTW, it had all my speaker distances off as well as crossovers almost maxed out. Eq was all over the place.

Here's the catch, everytime I ran it again, it came up with different results but always sounded BAD.

I know a lot of people who never heard it, pay big bucks to go up in the Denon line to either get XT or XT32. I thought XT sucked.

So I went with the AVR-S960H with normal audyssey since I plan on never using. That and some custom installation/zone 2 features was all that separated the S960H from the much more expensive X2700h. I have the AVR-2311 now in my media room but the S960H is doing my main living room duty with it's 4K compatible HDMI inputs.

I just read and read so many posts and comments on people having the same results as me so it just makes me wonder why even bother. Maybe it's room dependent as yours worked out for you, but doing everything right, multiple times, it did not work out for me. Then again isn't this suppose to correct for poor sounding rooms?!!

Thanks for the reply. It's nice knowing that some like it. It does bother me that Denon pushes it in the auto setup. They should give it as an option to the manual setup instead.

 

[Al.Anderson]

I use room correction as a starting point and then tweak; and for that purpose I really like it. (I've mostly used Yamaha's version.)
That said, I can't tell if it's the room correction (distance, level, big/small, crossovers) that you don't like, or the used of the receiver's DSPs based off of the room correction. As far as DSP setting go, I like them for some recordings and very much don't like them for others.

 

[Clinton McClure]

I use Audyssey and have no issues with it. I have to change all of my speakers from large to small and bump my sub +12dB but I’m pleased with everything else it does.

 

[Mike Up]

I use Audyssey and have no issues with it. I have to change all of my speakers from large to small and bump my sub +12dB but I’m pleased with everything else it does.

That's what I'm talking about, it characterized your speakers incorrectly as well as your subwoofer level. I'm glad you're liking the sound quality of it though. The inaccuracies are what I also seen and what made me turn it off beside the sound quality I found less than tolerant.

It's a personal taste, just as DSP sound modes. I didn't care for the sound quality. I didn't trust that it was helping more than harming the sound quality, being it had so many inaccuracies.

The sound quality of the Room Correction was severely different from the quality of the sound without the room correction.

That being said, my headphones that have a documented frequency response measurement by rtings.com, sound very close in quality and tonality to my speakers in stereo mode compared to what Audyssey had done to the sound. While my headphones are heavy in the bass, I can match their sound quality just by turning my subwoofer up a few decibels.

I guess Audyssey works for some and some it doesn't. Maybe it just can't play well with my square room.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I guess Audyssey works for some and some it doesn't. Maybe it just can't play well with my square room.

I never bothered w/ Audyssey (on my previous lower end Yamaha AVR used strictly as prepro for a handful years since around the HD format war), but besides the occasional complaints I've seen, I do wonder if it also just yields worse results for your combo of Klipsch(?) speakers and nearly square room (and whatever other possible quirks). I could certainly imagine the Klipsch horn drivers being a potential issue for some such auto-calibrated results, particularly since you mentioned harshness of sound. Just purely guessing/speculation on my part though...

Generally, I strongly prefer the more purist/minimalist/manual approach and prefer not to rely on such auto-calibration tech messing w/ EQ, etc (that I can control nearly enough)... unless I actually hear/feel the need myself (and can't figure out better manual or semi-manual ways to resolve whatever issues).

_Man_

 

[Mike Up]

I never bothered w/ Audyssey (on my previous lower end Yamaha AVR used strictly as prepro for a handful years since around the HD format war), but besides the occasional complaints I've seen, I do wonder if it also just yields worse results for your combo of Klipsch(?) speakers and nearly square room (and whatever other possible quirks). I could certainly imagine the Klipsch horn drivers being a potential issue for some such auto-calibrated results, particularly since you mentioned harshness of sound. Just purely guessing/speculation on my part though...

Generally, I strongly prefer the more purist/minimalist/manual approach and prefer not to rely on such auto-calibration tech messing w/ EQ, etc (that I can control nearly enough)... unless I actually hear/feel the need myself (and can't figure out better manual or semi-manual ways to resolve whatever issues).

_Man_

I have had infinity and Polk speakers used with that Audyssey system. Im not a fan of Klipsch speakers.

I do like their subwoofers though.

 

[Josh Dial]

I assure you Anthem's ARC Genesis room correction a) works, and, b) improves the sound in almost all cases (excepting out user error).

I know you were commenting on a smaller subsection of room correction (hence your comment, "I just have a hard time believing that a cheap, plastic microphone and an inexpensive sound feature (comparative to expensive hardware features and Dolby/DTS licensing) on a relatively inexpensive receiver can actually be any good"), but I wanted to note for the conversation that some room correction does work, and works well.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I assure you Anthem's ARC Genesis room correction a) works, and, b) improves the sound in almost all cases (excepting out user error).

I have an Anthem AVM-60... though I still haven't gotten around to trying its much lauded room correction so far (due in large part to various logistics/obstacles since I acquired it a couple years ago). I never bothered w/ the inferior stuff on my previous AVRs/prepros (as I indicated above) since I was plenty satisfied w/ my setup back then and strongly prefer the more purist/minimalist/manual approach, but I will probably give Anthem's a try at some point once I have my situation more settled, etc, perhaps over this holiday season...

_Man_