SubEQ HT vs MultEQ XT32

Is there a difference between these two features and if so what are they? I see some AVR's offer both of them so I am trying to sort out if you have XT32 why you would need SubEQ HT.

 

Example, the Integra 70.3 doesn't list SubEQ HT as a feature but the Integra 70.2 does.  Is one going to be different in regards to how it treats multiple subs?

Thanks

Bill

Have more questions? Submit a request

56 Comments

  • 0
    Avatar
    EJ Navarro

    Hey Chris,
    If you look at the back panels of the 1010,3010 and 5010 they label the sub outs SW1 and SW2 which would lead one to believe that all would have SubEQ HT. This is a pure guess on my part but if you look at the back panel of 818 which doesn't have SubEQ HT it labels the two subouts as just subwoofer.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    As far as I know these are simply internally connected to play the same signal so no individual control is possible on the 1010 and 3010.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Randy Parker

    I bought Integra's DTR 80.3 to get SubEq for my two subwoofers.  Each subwoofer contains two 18" Fi woofers in an infinite baffle design mounted in the basement with openings cut out in the rear corners of the listening room behind the front left and right main speakers.   I expect the SubEq will ensure proper subwoofer delay/phase integration with the main speakers as well as with each other.  Correct?  However, I am just as interested in the equalization capabilities of SubEq.  The whole reason for going to such extreme subwoofers is to obtain (and I get) amazing output below 20 Hz.  What are the SubEq equalization capabilities below 20 Hz? I have plenty of amplifier power to handle boost at these frequencies.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Hi Randy,

    Yes, the SubEQ HT function in the 80.3 will measure each sub individually first to determine any level and distance (phase) differences between them.  It will apply these corrections and then measure them together as "one" sub to apply the room correction filter.

    It is MultEQ that is in charge of creating the filters and it will look all the way down to 10 Hz.  If it finds usable response down there then it will apply correction down to 10 Hz.  

  • 0
    Avatar
    Jay Kopp

     "Hi Jay, this is already available from Audyssey. However no AVR maker has yet allowed control of 4 independent subs."

    July 10, 2012 07:23 am

    Hi Chris,  It would be nice if you guys can offer a stand alone SubEq box with 4 or more sub outs.   I think Harman has a product like that.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Hi Jay, thanks for the input. It's something that we will discuss internally.

  • 0
    Avatar
    EJ Navarro

    Hi Chris,

    I was able to download a copy of the 3010/5010 owner manual via Onkyo's HK website.  On page 17 it reads

    "To find the best position for your subwoofer, while playing

    a movie or some music with good bass, experiment by

    placing your subwoofer at various positions within the

    room, and choose the one that provides the most satisfying

    results.

    You can connect the powered subwoofers with SW1 PRE

    OUT and SW2 PRE OUT respectively.

    The level and distance can be set individually for each

    output. If you’re using only one subwoofer, connect it to

    SW1 PRE OUT.

    The same as what is found on the manual of the 3009/5009 which features SubEQ HT.  Based on this I'm certain despite your information that the 3010 does feature SubEQ HT and I suspect the 1010 will also feature it as well based on how Onkyo labeled the subouts.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Hi EJ,

    Yes! Breaking News: Onkyo 1010, 3010 and 5010 will indeed have SubEQ HT.  I'm sorry we didn't have this info earlier, but we are not always the first to know.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Markus

    Hi Chris,

    I'm wondering why Sub EQ HT (i.e. aligning delay and level) is needed. Does aligning delay and level always lead to a starting situation that is better suited for equalization? What's Audyssey's priority here? Flat response, low seat-to-seat differences, equalizability (low non-minimum phase behavior within the listening area), etc.?

    Thanks

    Markus

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Hi Markus,

    Yes, that is what we found in our experiments.  Aligning delays and levels first and then pinging the subs together consistently produced a smoother response.  The objectives of the equalization strategy are a combination of all the factors you list using a (proprietary) weighting.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Markus

    Thanks Chris.

    Is the data of your experiments available to the public? Or at least is there a more detailed description of what was tested (different rooms, room properties, number of subs, placement, etc.)

    I'm asking because in my own experiments using varying levels and delays (and locations) resulted in less non-minimum phase locations and lower spatial variance compared to a level and delay aligned setup. These findings are also more in line with other published studies like those by Todd Welti.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Hi Markus,

    The data is all on our measurement computer, but we have not published it yet.  Perhaps it would make a good AES paper one day... I am attaching one example from the data taken in one of our listening rooms.

    As you can see, the pink curve (SubEQ HT method) is smoother than the light blue curve (individual EQ for each sub).

  • 0
    Avatar
    Markus

    Thanks but I'm not sure what the data shows. Is it a single point or spatial average? What is "Mix Calb 2 Subs" and "2 individual Subs"?

    The frequency response looks already pretty smooth - is this a rather large room or is the data smoothed (or both)?

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Hi Markus, do you really think I would post any data that was single point! Ha!

    This is multipoint data that is spatially averaged in a mid-size listening room.  It is 1/6th octave smoothed.

    Mix Calb 2 Subs MEQ Off = two subs acoustically summed with no delay correction between them.    This is the "before"case for the pink curve

    2 individual Subs MEQ Off = two subs measured individually and then summed.  This is the "before"case for the light blue curve

    The point is that equalizing each sub separately and then summing them (light blue curve) is not as flat as summing them (with delay and level compensation) and then equalizing the sub (pink curve).

  • 0
    Avatar
    Markus

    Thanks for the explanation but then the data doesn't show a comparison between Sub EQ HT on and off at all? It shows "EQ each sub individually then measure the combined response" vs. "EQ all subs as one then measure the combined response"?

    If yes, it's different from what I was talking about: find optimal level and delay of each sub for lowest point-to-point variance and lowest number of non-minimum phase locations, then EQ all subs as one.

    Two additional comments:

    I believe 1/6 smoothed data is too coarse and doesn't correlate well with how we perceive low frequencies.

    Spatial averaged data can potentially hide a lot of important detail. I think it would be most helpful to show the single data points too.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    The pink curve is SubEQ HT On.

    I agree that 1/6 smoothed data is too coarse.  It just happened to be a graph that I could find.  The calculation is much finer than 1/6th octave.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Garrett Oostdyk

    I am designing a theater for a customer with existing power amps.  It seems that SubEQ HT and XT32 are only available on receivers.  Is that correct?  As we will use 2-3-or 4 subs we are looking for help in the lower frequencies.  We are looking at the Marantz AV7005.  We would do a Pro calibration.  Are the XT32 and SubEQ HT only part of a Pro calibration?  Thanks,  Garrett

  • 0
    Avatar
    Rfeemster

    So, someone with a stand-alone Sub EQ in their existing system with a MultEQ product could make a viable upgrade to xt32 with SubEQ HT with the Onkyo TX-NR818 (or similar xt32/non-SubEQ HT product), true?

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    @Randy: yes, the upgrade would give you the benefit of 32x higher resolution in the speaker filters and the same functionality as the separate SubEQ processor.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    @Garrett: XT32 and SubEQ HT are also available in preamps.  For example, Integra DHC-80.3 and Onkyo PR-SC5508.  Product catalog is available here.

  • 0
    Avatar
    mjf_uk

    With the 5010, if I have 2 identical Subwoofers that are symmetrically placed and an equal distance from the MLP, is it better to plug them both into SW1 or have one on SW1 and one on SW2 please?

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    It's better to plug them both to SW1 and treat them as "one" sub.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Markus

    I thought that they are treated "as one" anyway (after delay and level has been set by Sub EQ HT)?

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    Yes, that's correct if the AVR has SubEQ HT

  • 0
    Avatar
    Markus

    So why the recommendation to plug both subs into one single subwoofer out and not into SW1 and SW2?

  • 0
    Avatar
    Audyssey Labs

    If the AVR has SubEQ HT then you should connect to the Sub 1 and Sub 2.  If it doesn't, then you should connect to the subs via a y-cord (if only one sub out on the AVR) or to the two sub outs (that are internally y-corded).

    In the case of mjf, the subs are at equal distance and level so it will make no difference.  That's basically what SubEQ HT does first before pinging both subs as one.

Article is closed for comments.