Using a decibel meter to double check all speaker levels.

[bluelightning]

I have a

probably setup with Audyssey

Au contraire, my experience with Auddyssey is quite the opposite. Their default reference curve tends to be too flat and dull.

 

[fredblue]

That is interesting. It makes one wonder why they include the 3dB boost as the “neutral” sound level. I never use Dynamic EQ, but the first time I played a quad with straight MultEQ I was aware of the SPL tsunami from the surrounds. I guess it’s even worse with Dynamic EQ engaged.

i don't know but i recall they came out with some blurb before on their own site/literature about why they did it with Dynamic EQ engaged (i think it was maybe something to do with how we perceive sounds emanating from behind/to the sides?) and that's why they boost the Rears but as to if that is done so generally without Dynamic EQ engaged i think they'd say that they don't?

fwiw i still believe the system does invasive, detrimental channel balance adjustments at a base level.

i've said it before and i'll say it again, that system is to me the devil's own work and having given it the benefit of the doubt on several AVRs that featured it, i would not recommend using it beyond gathering just basic distance and channel level info. even then i remain unconvinced.

 

[fredblue]

I have a

Au contraire, my experience with Auddyssey is quite the opposite. Their default reference curve tends to be too flat and dull.

well i guess something to factor in maybe is that we are all different and hear differently and have different AVRs, with different speakers, in different rooms

in that way one could say there's too many variables to suggest the system does just one thing or has just one or two effects on sound universally.

either way, i have disliked what Audyssey has done to the sound quality and the Surround soundfield of not 1, not 2, not 3 but 4 (!) of my AV Receivers over the years (3 Denon's and a Cambridge Audio) in different rooms, with different speakers and so in every occasion i have reset the AVR in question disengaging the system altogether and gone about carefully setting up manually with the aid of an SPL.

the only consistent throughout was Audyssey - oh and me! so i guess i just hate Audyssey! (basket) case closed!

 

[ar surround]

I have a

Au contraire, my experience with Auddyssey is quite the opposite. Their default reference curve tends to be too flat and dull.

I let Audyssey do its thing only below 500 Hz...essentially low frequency correction. If you have / get the $21 app, you can play with the frequency range at which the program operates.

 

[ar surround]

i don't know but i recall they came out with some blurb before on their own site/literature about why they did it with Dynamic EQ engaged (i think it was maybe something to do with how we perceive sounds emanating from behind/to the sides?) and that's why they boost the Rears but as to if that is done so generally without Dynamic EQ engaged i think they'd say that they don't?

fwiw i still believe the system does invasive, detrimental channel balance adjustments at a base level.

i've said it before and i'll say it again, that system is to me the devil's own work and having given it the benefit of the doubt on several AVRs that featured it, i would not recommend using it beyond gathering just basic distance and channel level info. even then i remain unconvinced.

I can understand the probability that human ears do not perceive sounds from the rear the same as those from the front. When making my own MC mixes from stereo sources, I alway need to boost the sounds mixed into the rears by 1.5 dB and more.

However, one would think that MC recordings are mixed with rear levels that compensate for this phenomenon. So one would ask why there would be a need for the additional 3 dB boost. (I know, I know, we have certainly heard our share of MC recordings with anemic rear channels.)

 

[par4ken]

I don't see the need to use a meter to balance speaker levels, that is best accomplished with your ears and can vary from one recording to the next. I'm talking balance controls as are present on vintage quad equipment. That being said if you are running a bi-amped (or tri-amped) system a meter would be a good way to check that the highs and lows are properly balanced. I would check that at the crossover frequency running the high and low frequency amplifiers each separately, adjusting both for equal levels at the crossover point.

 

[bluelightning]

I have a calibrated SPL measurement microphone, Galaxy CM-140 that I used previously with REW and my older Yamaha RX-A3000 receiver. Now, I am using a calibrated UMIK-1 USB microphone with REW, Ratbuddy, the Audyssey App for loading curves, Audyssey Mult XT or whatever variant of it my X4500 Denon receiver has. I have the SPL meter sitting right along with my remotes. I routinely check SPL levels when I am playing loud music or am curious what frequencies various sounds are.

 

[bluelightning]

I let Audyssey do its thing only below 500 Hz...essentially low frequency correction. If you have / get the $21 app, you can play with the frequency range at which the program operates.

I agree. Initially when I let Audyssey do its thing, I was so underwhelmed. It was probably the most lifeless and sterile sound I had heard in a long time. Measuring the frequency response made me understand why. That sent me down the rabbit hole of the app & Ratbuddy so that I could fix the response and create my own reference curve. I also learned that most folks limit the corrections to 500-700 Hz range and is what I do as well for my LCR along with specific corrections based on what UMIK-1 and REW tell me.

 

[bluelightning]

That is interesting. It makes one wonder why they include the 3dB boost as the “neutral” sound level. I never use Dynamic EQ, but the first time I played a quad with straight MultEQ I was aware of the SPL tsunami from the surrounds. I guess it’s even worse with Dynamic EQ engaged.

Here is what Dynamic EQ did when I experimented with it quite a while ago. This is for the front Left speaker. Seems to affect frequencies below 300Hz and above 8KHz. I didn't realize it changed the gain for the surround speakers.

 

[MidiMagic]

Now ask yourself: Are you using it right?

There are several different weighting standards for sound pressure level (SPL).

A weighting (dBA) is intended for SPL readings in the range of 0 dBspl to 55 dBspl.
B weighting (dBB) is intended for SPL readings in the range of 55 dBspl to 85 dBspl.
C weighting (dBC) is intended for SPL readings in the range of 85 dBspl to 120 dBspl
Z weighting (dBZ) is intended for SPL readings in the range of 0 dBspl to 120 dBspl.

The A weighting is used to measure audibility of sounds entering someone's property.
The B and C weightings are used to measure audible annoyance levels of sounds.
The C weighting is used to determine if hearing damage can happen.
The Z weighting also looks for damage-causing infrasonic and ultrasonic sounds.
A special meter is needed for dBZ.

You actually need the B weighting for measuring 75 dBspl.

The Radio Shack does not have the B weighting. You can get a very good approximation of dBB by taking an A weighted reading and a C weighteed reading and finding the average of the two readings.

Also note that the mic is approximately omnidirectional, but does have a lower reading when the meter itself shadows the sound.

My city's "creative" councilmen passed a law that limits noise so much that birds chirping, dogs barking, and the noise of auto and bicycle tires are illegal. They came up with a number without knowing what it means.

Our stupid city also strongly requested that electronics stores not sell SPL meters so the one they have will be the city standard.

 

[The56Kid]

Absolutely agree with you and my procedure is very similar to yours. I use a good 'ol RS analog SPL meter on a tripod at the sweet spot. My Anthem AVM 30 pre-pro is too old for auto set up but new enough it has built in white noise generators that allow for adjusting the levels.

I start by adjusting left front to 75dB and then cycle through the menu for the other speakers to match too. Altho the speakers are carefully measured & set up to be equidistant from the sweet spot epicenter the right side speakers are closer to the wall then the left side. And behind the front speakers is wrap around floor to ceiling convoluted polyurethane for reflection absorption:

View attachment 89954
So this arrangement would never sound balanced if I just set all the balance controls at neutral. Tuning it up this way gives me a known value to return too & easy peasy to adjust balance on the fly using the Anthem remote. I set up the subwoofer using the built in rumble tone & the result is always a subwoof that never interferes with the music, or movies, but thunder when real bass is there.

On a device like the Surround Master V2 I have it has individual level pots on each ch I just make a QS encoded file of the main speaker positions & use that set the SM output levels.

And like you I recheck maybe once a year to see if anythings changed. I guess I just like messing with this stuff.

Cool setup Sonik! Do you adjust ‘speaker-distance-to-listening-spot’ in your AVR as you transition between the centrally located folding chair and the rear located couch?

 

[Sal1950]

that's how Audyssey MultEQ is designed to work, the Rears get boosted +3dB as part of the process

Where did you source that information?

 

[Sal1950]

but as to if that is done so generally without Dynamic EQ engaged i think they'd say that they don't?

They don't, it only gets boosted with DEQ
I been measuring Audyssey's results for many years.

i've said it before and i'll say it again, that system is to me the devil's own work

BAH HUMBUG LOL
There's been many versions of Audyssey over the years, with each update getting a bit better and more sophisticated. The latest builds are excellent pieces of DRC software. Then it becomes the responsible of the
user to handle it in the correct manner.

 

[Sal1950]

Our stupid city also strongly requested that electronics stores not sell SPL meters so the one they have will be the city standard.

Do they realize that there are many app's for smart phone to make them SPL meters? LOL

 

[fredblue]

They don't, it only gets boosted with DEQ
I been measuring Audyssey's results for many years.


BAH HUMBUG LOL
There's been many versions of Audyssey over the years, with each update getting a bit better and more sophisticated. The latest builds are excellent pieces of DRC software. Then it becomes the responsible of the
user to handle it in the correct manner.

the latest iteration i have (2022 model Denon AVR-X2700H) seemingly worked no different from the previous version of Audyssey i used (it boosted the Rears, bloated the Bass and rolled off the Treble) so i did the only responsible correct thing i could and shut it off altogether

 

[fredblue]

Where did you source that information?

it's info that's been out there for many years, including from Audyssey's own website and there have been discussions about it ad nauseam over the years at AVS, AVF, etc.

tbh it's been a while since i researched the topic in earnest, having first encountered the phenomenon back around 2009, when i noticed Balances skewed to the Rear on the 5.1 mix of Clapton's 461 Ocean Boulevard SACD and then went searching for info.

even back then there was quite lengthy discourse about the subject online and since there was no way to defeat the Rear channel boost without losing any advantages of the system i had no alternative but to ditch it.

unfortunately in the intervening years it's been Audyssey Groundhog Day with each new Receiver (3 more) i've subsequently acquired that featured Audyssey similarly having no way to stop the Rear channel level increase without losing any benefits of the system

 

[MTB Vince]

FYI: The ubiquitous Radio Shack SPL meter, both the original analog meter version and the later LED version, becomes progressively less accurate at low frequencies. Smartphone SPL apps don't tend to be the last word in accuracy either as their microphone sensitivity rolls off at lower SPLs. So a better quality "prosumer" SPL meter is a good idea for simple verification measurements of your AVR channel levels and peak listening levels. It is also useful when determining your listening room's ambient floor. Several years ago, I replaced my last Radio Shack meter with the moderately priced, much more accurate Reed seen below.

For the more detailed frequency response measurement work used when determining overall loudspeaker/room response, decay times, etc I use Room EQ Wizard and a Cross Spectrum Labs calibrated version of the Dayton mic below>

 

[barfle]

Do they realize that there are many app's for smart phone to make them SPL meters? LOL

You beat me to it. When we were looking for a house, one of my wife’s concerns was freeway noise. My SPL meter was packed away in a storage locker, so I downloaded an app called “decibel x.” It worked fine for that task.

I recall a story by Mark Waldrep (Dr. AIX) where he attended a cable demo. He had a SPL app on his phone and measured the volume changes during the demo. The vendor wasn’t happy with him.

 

[MidiMagic]

Do they realize that there are many app's for smart phone to make them SPL meters? LOL

How flat are the mics in cell phones?

 

[ar surround]

In the final analysis, TRUST YOUR EARS. Even if our ears aren't what they used to be, 99% of the time we are the only ones listening to the system, so fine tune it to what is most pleasing to us.

(Now, if one is mixing a recording for public release than that is a completely different story.)