The filter resolution depends on the processor in the AVR. It is where the filters have to run ultimately and so they will be XT or XT32 depending on which AVR you have.

Why do you use an automated room correction system like Audyssey instead of manual parametric EQ?

A: Actually, we use both.

The SC-1 incorporates active crossovers, parametric EQ that is transparent to the installer, and Audyssey MultEQ XT which must be calibrated using MultEQ Pro software on a PC. (We train our dealers to do the calibration; it is not something the owner has to worry about.)

A few points:

MultEQ Pro has vastly more resolution than any parametric EQ. You would need something like 500 bands of parametric EQ per channel to achieve similar results, assuming you had the time, skill, and instrumentation.
MultEQ Pro optimizes in both the amplitude and the time domains.
MultEQ Pro does have a finite number of target curves, whereas manual EQ can shoot for any given target. It is important to note that our target curves are different than the standard Audyssey curves (since they represent the final "voicing" of our speakers in the room).
It is highly likely that one of our curves will be pretty close to what an experienced installer would try to do. Curve editing (part of the MultEQ Pro software) will likely get the installer the rest of the way (±3 dB from whichever target curve is selected).

There are multiple levels of implementation of MultEQ XT. If you only have experience only with the lowest level, receiver-based implementation, you don't know what you're missing. It is like comparing tone controls to true parametric EQ, saying that they do basically the same thing. They are drastically different in capability.

We find that parametric EQ is excellent for "roughing in" a system; MultEQ's additional resolution works best for the final tuning.

That's not to say that our way is the only way. Far from it. But if you want to get outstanding results quickly, easily, and consistently, it will be hard do better than the SC-1.

Q: Why did you select Audyssey MultEq XT as your room correction technology?

A: Our previous approach to room correction (bi-amping and lots of parametric EQ) delivered great results, but it was extremely time-consuming, and it required a tremendous amount of experience on the part of the person doing the calibration. The hard part is not operating the equipment; the hard part is analyzing the room's many problems and prioritizing them, and coming up with a strategy for tackling them. In fact, one of the most important lessons is learning which problems you ought not to try to fix. (In some cases, the "solution" is worse than the original problem.)

Audyssey's MultEQ XT encapsulates this most-difficult part of the process in software, in effect capturing decades of experience in a program that is installed on a laptop. In the case of the SC-1, we also use the same powerful DSP engine used in the $5000 Audyssey Professional Sound Equalizer to maximize the resolution of the resulting correction filters. The combination is amazingly powerful and effective.

The subjective result is comparable to the calibrations our own people achieved under our old system (in some ways, even better). But these results can be achieved by our dealers (after they go through our mandatory training program), in about an hour. Contrast that with us having to send our own people all over the world, and a calibration process that usually required several days.

Hmm.... Some good info to get me thinking here. Thanks!

Maybe we'll have to revisit this topic once we know more about how the 976 will roll.

IMHO, one of the great disadvantages of a PEQ is that once it is tuned to the masters ears it may sound odd to others. For instance, my 60 year old ears are less sensitive to the 4K-6K band so I may actually boost those frequencies to a point where it sounds weird to my wife who, as all wives do, has catlike hearing. The room corrections which use a microphone to set the processors DSP are at least trying to make the system neutral so that it sound natural to most people. I think that for the most part, higher end equipment tends to shy away from manually adjusted PEQ to discourage users from making their equipment sound different than intended.