hodg100
Outstanding Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2005
- Messages
- 14,220
- Reaction score
- 4,522
- Points
- 6,489
For 4 grand, is Audyssey MultEQ XT32 really good enough? I would have presumed at this stage in 2018 top-of-the-range AV and pre-amps would start using Dirac EQ.
Confused.
13?
7 'flat' (LCR at the front, 2 surrounds and 2 rears) and 4 in the ceiling.
7 + 4 = 11.
13?
Are you planning on reviewing this, would be interesting to compare to say Arcam AV860 or the pre outs of a base receiver like the SR7012. Also from looking at data sheet it has 7.2.6 or perhaps 7.2.8 as shows 4 pairs of height channels.
Be interesting to see manual to see what combos available. 1st processor sub £10k I think with 6 height channels!
Kevin
Just for future reference, nothing in Europe is ever sold for the £/€ conversion rate. If that retails for 3.5k in the UK, it'll be closer to 4.5 to 4.7k here in France.
Word is, from those in the know (over on AVS), that XT32 combined with the Audyssey App, is comparable to Dirac. By limiting what gets ‘corrected’ and what gets left alone, and then working your own preferences into the mix (house curves) XT32 in later model processors/amps is a different beast to XT32 of old. TBH it’s a shame it’s kept the same name, as people assume it’s the same (OK, I know it is the same without the App, but still....)
Big difference is that XT32 still uses basic low-end processing chips built into the receiver to do all the calculations for the correction curves, whereas Dirac sends the data to their own server based high end "super-computers" to do the calculations. Since they can do many, many more calculations over similar (or longer) time, than basic local hardware, the correction curves should be much more accurate from Dirac. I'm no expert but would presume this to be the case.
I too am no expert, and the Dirac system is indeed powerful - but two things stick out (for me) - just how much processing power is actually needed? and I could never bring myself to rely on external servers to do this processing. Dirac goes bust, or stops supporting your version of software/firmware/whatever, and what are you left with? Personally, I'd want self contained processing, not reliant on someone/something else outside of my control.
There is, in theory, no reason why the App itself couldn't perform the necessary calculations and simply send what is required back to the processor. Indeed, in it's simplest form, this is what's happening - the processor is taking the measurements, passing them to the App, the App is then played with by the end user, and curves/limits applied. It may still not be as powerful as Dirac - but it seems, by the people that use it, it's more than adequate.
I'll find out if my optimism is misplaced in a couple of months!
Oh, and for those thinking that 48KHz sampling isn't as good as 96 or 192KHz - that myth has been debunked over on AVS - as anything above 48KHz is well above anything audible; but it seems it's good marketing by various vendors.
On the Datasat platforms, all the number crunching is simply done on a laptop, which platforms rely on Dirac themselves doing the number crunching? The Arcam iteration? Storm Audio also utilise Dirac eq, not sure how their version operates as far as the calculation side of things goes.
Irrespective of what is said on Avs, I’m highly dubious of the latest version of Xt32 getting anywhere near Dirac, Room Perfect or the custom Trinnov eq solution.
I can't tell you which system needs server connections - I was just responding to geogan's post, and he stated that Dirac used their servers to do the correction.
I'm almost, but not quite in agreement. As I'm sure Dirac, RP etc. are great correction systems - and indeed, are probably the best you can get. However, I do think that XT32, with the App, will get close - no, not exactly the same, but close enough for most of us.
Tests have already compared Dirac to XT32 and practically no difference between the two were discerned by ear - there are probably measurable differences, and indeed I find myself dubious that amateurs such as ourselves could actually produce meaningful results, as such a test would require stringent control parameters to be truly meaningful; so I wouldn't rely on such a test done by enthusiasts no matter how well meaning they were.
Nevertheless, the fact that such a test was attempted, and no discernable difference was heard I do find intriguing - after all, there is only so much correction that can be applied that is actually in the audible domain, anything else may give bragging rights, but if you can't hear it, what's the point?
And I while I appreciate it isn't possible for everybody, I actually think the room itself will have a far greater impact on how everything sounds - so fixing the room, rather than relying on electronic wizardry would, in most cases, yield better, and more cost effective results. At the moment, I'm not using any room correction trickery, and to my ears, the room sounds great - not perfect, certainly, it hasn't yet got that big cinema sound - but then I'm only utilising a single 10" sub, and 2nd hand smaller MK speakers, as I haven't built my replacements yet.
As I said earlier - time will tell whether my optimism is misplaced!
Ooops! You're right - I thought Dirac was Dirac - I wasn't aware of different flavours....and actually, having gone back over that article, the authors did further testing later, and preferred Dirac (actually Dirac Live from a miniDSP - (I'm sure that the site being sponsored by miniDSP didn't sway them at all - in all fairness, they did declare it)).
I know that Dirac is held in higher regard than XT32 - but there's not a lot I can do about it - the Marantz and Denon units don't have it, so in many ways the point is moot; I'm certainly not going to head down the Datasat or Trinnov route (much as I may enjoy them), my wife would kill me! I'm probably going to keep quiet about how much the Marantz is going to cost!
I think I'll be pretty happy with the Marantz - I don't hear many owners of the 8801, or 8802s complaining about sound quality, and the 8805 is supposed to offer some benefits over those, as well as the extra channels. And I'm coming from an Onkyo 818 - so expect it's a move in the right direction, even if it doesn't reach the giddy heights of Datasat, Trinnov or Lyngthingy.
At the price point - and I think the price is important here - there is simply nothing else that offers 13 channels of processing with 15 available outputs. The next step up in channels would be the Datasat, at around 3 times the price!
A few years ago we were all pretty happy with no room correction available at all - the differences between Dirac, RP, and XT32 do seem like a first world problem.
You only get 11 channel discreet Atmos processing on the Rs20i, so in that regard the Marantz is currently on top.
Anyway, I hope the marantz brings you much joy when you get around to picking it up
Oh! Really? I thought the Datasat could do 16 channels - or is this capability an add-on? Anyway, I can't justify it, so again moot. Maybe if I have any pension left when I retire I could treat myself!
...and amplification for all these channels isn't free either! My wife has just discovered me 'doing a deal' for yet another power-amp! Which is going to double the price, as she's said she's off to the jewellers next week to keep up with my spending!
.........
Be interesting to see manual to see what combos available. 1st processor sub £10k I think with 6 height channels!.........
In my opinion Audyssey is pretty crap. I turned it off on my Denon AVP A1 and tuned the system by ear and some tape measuringFor 4 grand, is Audyssey MultEQ XT32 really good enough? I would have presumed at this stage in 2018 top-of-the-range AV and pre-amps would start using Dirac EQ.
In my opinion Audyssey is pretty crap. I turned it off on my Denon AVP A1 and tuned the system by ear and some tape measuring
I tried XT and XT32. Neither came close to setting sound satisfactory. I’d read the reviews at the time and people were raving about them. So I was excited to try. What a let down. Unlistenable IMHO particularly for multi channel music which requires more accurate set up at least to my ears. I haven’t tried the app or DiracAudyssey is a company. I think you mean MultEQ is crap, which was Audyssey's first major foray into room correction and incorporated into the AVP A1. And in that regard you may well be right, particularly when comparing it to todays room correction systems.
There is a great article over on HTS on how to get the best out of MultEQ, which shows both its benefits and it's limitations. Getting the best from MultEQ.
A bit late for you - and if your experience has been sullied once, I can understand the reticence to accept that things have moved on over the last decade.
It seems that Dirac came up with solutions that have worked well from their first iteration, and so the love is for that system. Having queered their initial pitch, Audyssey seem to have a mountain to climb to gain peoples acceptance.
I haven't yet used either, preferring to treat my room instead - I can accept that Dirac is a good product, there seem to be no detractors; I have yet to experience the 'badness' of MultEQ in any form - but the XT32 with the App is getting good reviews from most users and is certainly miles away from the MultEQ of yesteryear.
On the Datasat platforms, all the number crunching is simply done on a laptop, which platforms rely on Dirac themselves doing the number crunching? The Arcam iteration? .
The Denon?At the price point - and I think the price is important here - there is simply nothing else that offers 13 channels of processing with 15 available outputs. The next step up in channels would be the Datasat, at around 3 times the price!