REALLY, SERIOUSLY?! 

I have heard of it. But I can’t test it. I no longer have any Audyssey devices and use of that software voids the warranty on the device. As someone who needs to maintain a relationship with these companies I can’t get into reviewing gray market apps that void warranties.

@@PoesAcoustics ah gotcha, I’ve never thought of it from that perspective. All I can say is it’s a great tool and it really makes me want to skew towards denon/marantz for my future purchases. I did have a question about this particular video, Audyssey does time align based on sound arrival. But crossovers are usually pretty bad, which would mean it’s not phase and impulse aligned. How can it be that something is time aligned but the impulse doesn’t line up?

Thanks for the comment. It’s not just about giving it away for free. It’s concern over how much will need to be explained and understood to ensure it’s used correctly.

⁠@@PoesAcousticsI’d definitely be interested in learning more about your wavelet method in exchange for fair compensation as well

Yes a number of studies have found very low levels as audible. ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9450008 This study found that group delay equalization was audible down to .56 ms. When you shift specific frequencies (as is the case with the time alignment of drivers) the net effect is recall more group delay. boson.physics.sc.edu/~kunchur/papers/audibility-of-time-misalignment-of-acoustic-signals---kunchur.pdf This study was down to 6 microseconds. That is .006ms. However the validity of this study has been disputed by some peer reviews. None the less the study seems solid and I know the author and have talked with him many times. One counter claim is that all of this is audible over headphones with contrived signals. Not so audible with actual musical signals over speakers in rooms. The thresholds go way up for in room studies. In any case, my specific focus was on multiple ms of delay in the bass. Something shown to be readily audible numerous times.

But, as Dr Floyd E Toole points out. Regardless of how well your listening environment is acoustically treated, there will always be multiple room reflections which will mask any time or phase anomalies. If what you’ve done with your system in your listening space works for you, then that’s what matters most. But in my moderately proportioned lounge, filled with the ‘stuff of life’ which house my minimalist and purest 2 channel system, it is not of concern to me. Enjoy the music.

@@PoesAcoustics All my research is based on firsthand experience from which I extrapolate my own knowledge. I do my own testing and research. I’m glad that the study you cited listed 6 microsecond with regard to the ability of humans to detect. I found the exact evidence in my firsthand research. The resolving power of my DSP is .01 milliseconds and to me, I did not find that accurate enough to come into complete and perfect focus. I publicly asked the manufacturer of my DSP for a higher resolving power of at least one more decimal place ( even if it were just .005 ) which would have taken it to the 5 micro second accuracy range. My system features a Nearfield listening position , and the room was purpose built and treated and tuned specifically for two channel stereo playback. All crosstalk is eliminated and room reflections are mitigated to achieve the perfect range of reverberation decay time, so it’s just on the lively side of being too dead sounding. The system is so transparent that it literally allows the listener to hear deeper into the recording and extracts the recording space’s reverberation characteristics. It basically reveals the mixing and mastering choices as well as the recording engineers choices with regard to microphone choices, styles, cabling choices, microphone type/ brand/ pop filter differences as well as microphone positions relative to instrument locations. I would venture to say it’s one of the most revealing two channel systems ever created. The holographic imaging is truly three dimensional. Sound stage is gigantic and stretches well beyond the driver locations and the sound is completely audibly disconnected from the physical locations of the drivers. System was tuned with the aide of a tuning expert who flew I from Florida and 5 microphone array that allows for all drivers to be in phase at the listening position. Then it was fine tuned by ear. The BAACH system with ORC (optimal room compensation ) in a typical listening environment can also provide a close percentage of the level of what was achieved with the dedicated listening environment in which most typical issues like crosstalk cancellation, room nodes, and peaks have been addressed.

It’s really hard to say what’s going on here. I have zero experience with that sub. The R3s have great bass for a small bookshelf (shockingly good) but it shouldn’t be able to outdo a 12” subwoofer. But the subwoofer could be setup wrong. It could be in a bad position and have a terrible response. It could be broken. It could be connected wrong. I just don’t have enough information to know why. I would guess that a pair of modern 12’s would be a sizable upgrade. If you wanted to stick to Kef, their subs aren’t bad for their size. Better engineering than a lot of the competition, just not a ton of output per dollar (though it’s not just about SPL).

@@PoesAcoustics yeah it’s about 8’ at 11o clock from mlp, the second sub could only go ~10’ at 2.5 o clock. There are moments where I hoot and holler about the bass, I might muster up the courage to do some real deal REW, but I wanted your guidance first.

@@ThePolyesterPimp REW would help a lot. I think you raise an issue that I should discuss at some point. The bass response can often look unbelievably bad for one subwoofer in the wrong location.

@@PoesAcoustics Alright if you make a video I think the more interesting question would be, “Oh no! The bass response in my small room seems to be better off when using my speakers in full range mode rather than integrating a subwoofer! Is this okay?” I’ll use REW in the near future for some concrete evidence, but I think a lot of hobbyists and diyers (I’m also guilty of this) get caught up in the minutia of thinking they can get an uncompromising experience in a very compromised room. Cheers, and thank you and your wife for these videos.

Well the difference between them isn’t just bass. The R7T had better vertical control over a wider bandwidth. The beam forming is extended a good octave or more. So no it can’t sound as good. But it can still sound very good.

I understand your desire and get it a lot. The lack of visuals is a time resource issue.

High end of the price range

I suppose that everyone may have their own definition, but the conclusion I have come to is that 'high end' components those that are designed and manufactured with audio performance as the highest priority. 'Mass market' equipment often sounds perfectly fine, but has been subjected to other marketing limitations that may compromise some of its performance and physical parameters - materials quality, flashy features of questionable value, etc. In my mind, the 'high end' includes features, design, parts quality, etc that will be appreciated most by hobbyists or knowledgable users. These components also often employ higher quality parts and upgraded casework - that does not necessarily contribute to audio performance, but produces the image of a 'luxury' product. The limited production nature of some of the components in this category also tends to eliminate economies of scale found in higher volume manufacturing. Every hobby/interest has it's own 'high end' - golf clubs, cameras, fishing gear, knives, bourbon... Many will gladly spend amounts I'd never consider in THEIR OWN areas of interest. Do you wear a Timex, or a Rolex? Drive a Ford, or a Lamborghini? Take photos with a smart phone, or a Hasselblad? They all do the job, but the experience is very different.

@@joeburke9061 I put it down to 2 things. Perception. If my uncle has an Amstrad system he purchased for €199 back in the late 70s and my brother has an all in 1 Bose system he bought for €1200 3 years ago, then I guess my uncle would perceive my brother’s system as high end. My speakers were described on the manufacturers website as “mid-range flagships”. Every review of them I’ve read or watched describe them as high end, with Stereophile describing them as “high end made easy”, whatever that means. Secondly, maybe it’s sometimes a label applied to validate or excuse the component’s bloated price. I would describe my set up as high performance, high quality, high value but ‘high end’? Who’s qualified to make that call. Oh, I don’t drive, wear a watch, carry a knife or camera, play golf or go fishing. I have invested as much money in my hi-fi as many family men would invest in a premium family car!

@@geickmei 👍

Well and we can always point to studies on this. From a relatively recent study on group delay (which is what I was actually adjusting in my discussion). “The smallest mean threshold for the negative group delay was -0.56 ms and 0.64 ms for the positive group delay, obtained with a pink impulse.” That is very tiny.