When NOT to use room EQ


Distinguished Member
Just wondering who are using their systems without any room eq?

I'm in the slightly fortunate position than my room is being purpose built, a perfect rectangle. I'm also fully sound proofing it and will have acoustic panels on at least the LCR reflection points as well as corner bass traps.

In theory, should I need to use Audyssey? I will have a 7.2.4 system with a denon x7200 receiver, but I do also have an anti mode that I can use.

Obviously I can and will try both with and without audyssey, but interested to hear people's thoughts on this.


Distinguished Member
Even with room treatments Audyssey can work well (very well in some cases) as EQ can be the cherry on the top as it were. I have room treatments in the form of broadband absorbers, monster bass trap as well as some diffusion and find that Audyssey improves the overall imaging and focus of the soundstage. I also have an Anti-Mode so whilst I could live without Audyssey I prefer it on as it gives me that bit extra. I did also experiment with Audyssey Dynamic EQ for a few months but now have that switched off.

As you've said, you ideally need to try it on and off in your room to see which you prefer.


Well-known Member
I am using my Arcam SR250 2+1 AV receiver without Dirac. Three reasons really:

1. I tend to listen to music from three different seating positions at the moment and the SR 250 can only retain one Dirac Eq setting.

2. I am planning to re-jig the room in the not too distant future, and plan to use only two seating positions so the main one for serious listening will have Eq and for the other, I will switch it out.

3. I am currently happy with the system as it is anyway, wherever I sit, so if it ain't broke...


Distinguished Member
Has this thread been instigated as a Roku magnet?

You've lost me on this one? I take it Roku is a member who has such opinions on these things?

Derek S-H

Distinguished Member
You're a lucky person to be able to construct a perfect room sonically!

I think room correction is just that: correcting imbalances in less than perfect rooms, which is what most of us have. At least you'll have the option to compare like with like by switching Audyssey on or off.

I like having room EQ and my room definitely needs it! If yours doesn't, then don't use it, but it is just another option, not necessarily a given.


Standard Member
If I might add my grain of salt. I have a little room (40 m/cube). During years, I had room EQ on. Since last 12 months I finally made thing in proper order. 1- speaker placement; 2-room treatment, 3- sub (only one) integration with time delay and distance tweaks. Nothing done at the top of the scientific knowledge but a set of compromises for all. The result: PEQ is still usefull there but so much less problematic when it does not work!


Well-known Member
I think you’ll still benefit from eq. Whilst I understand the golden rectangle formats, I don’t completely subscribe to them. The frequency range is infinite, there will be a wavelength that causes a node in your room (to some extent).

My room is a rectangle, purpose built room, extensive sound isolation and acoustic treatment, non flat surfaces, broadband absorbed (in the stage), bass traps and still I had a spike at 200hz that had to be tamed with Dirac. It also had a bad bass null on the outside seats of the rear row before I added the corner base traps.

Just my opinion though! At the end of the day, your ears, go with how you like it.


Distinguished Member
Wow this is an old thread that has just been resurrected. I’m using Dirac now and my system has never sounded better.


Active Member
This topic will always be interesting :)

The latest video from AVForums

Sony Bravia XR A80J OLED TV Review
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom