Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Loudspeakers Amplification | Digital Sources Analog Sources Featured | Accessories Music |
Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | Analog Sources Accessories Featured | Music Columns Retired Columns | Show Reports | Features Latest News Community | Resources Subscriptions |
I only have the rooms I have. Neither is perfect but each has benefited from some acoustic considerations and there's no easy way to remove them temporarily.
What I can say is the the majority of Audyssey demos have been in hotel rooms that are simply awful without it so I do assume it will make a bigger subjective improvement in a lousy space. OTOH, I make an equal assumption that acoustic treatments are a better investment ($$ and effort) since they make the room audibly better for conversation and tend to lower ambient noise levels, as well.
Kal
Besides the points Kal made, understand that "room acoustics" is a large subject that encompasses a wide range of frequencies. There's no way an electronic device can reduce outright echoes and room ambience, and these are generally perceived as the most damaging room acoustic problems. The most that systems like this can hope to achieve is EQ cut for modal peaks (those related to the room dimensions) to reduce the boomy quality many smaller rooms suffer from.
--Ethan
Kal,Ethan,thanks for replying.I am aware of the pros and cons of Audyssey.What i meant was,the readers of magazines should be able to read reviews of such systems in a less-than-perfect acoustic enviroment to enable them to know what to expect and what not to,after purchasing such system.
Kal is right.There is no substitute for acoustic treatments.
Hmm. Mebbe I can wiggle some speakers into the spare bathroom................
Kal
LOL Kal . But seriously now,you made me wonder how far the correction algorithms of such system would go in correcting a pair in such a bad acoustic space.
Well, there are two parts to what Audyssey does, imho. First and foremost, it attempts to correct the major room modes that are a consequence of room dimensions. Second, it attempts to correct the overall frequency response throughout the audio spectrum.
The first is usually below 200Hz, requires bulky acoustic treatment and is, imho, an issue in every domestic listening room. The second is a more variable problem and what makes a room seem subjectively bad at first hearing. The latter can be, and should be, fixed with acoustical treatment although a parametric EQ or Audyssey can be used. The former is where the Audyssey/MeridianRC/TAcT/etc. can make a bigger impact, especially if you are not using physical treatments.
Kal
Actually,in my case,it did quite the opposite.If you remember,in one of my previous post(2-3 months ago)i moved the whole system in a room which has bass problems.You can only hear good bass when you are standing.When i tried to fix the problem with my Denon,the reult was a hughely improved overall frequency response but the bass problem stayed,although i have to admit it is not as bad as before but the improvement was negligible.
Yes. The bass is the most problemmatic since it requires great bulk to do physically and great sophistication and care to do electronically. The major beef I have with Audyssey is its very convenience: I'd prefer to tweak it myself to get the bass where/how I want it. I can look at the room response with ETF or REW but only with a PEQ can I tweak it in real time.
Kal