HK 635 Set Up Questions now that time has passed

[jesyjames]

Does any one conclusively know if when doing the ezset we should use -35db or -28db as the setting? I've gotten two different "conclusive" answers from the threads around here. Does it even matter? I went with the guy who said he contacted HK and they said -35 and they tried to make it real obvious on the screen.

Also, does anyone know why they recommend putting the mic at least 3 feet above ear level? I know many people report better results by holding at ear level. In my experience, the distance and levels settings are much more accurate at ear level, but there's this part in my brain the keeps thinking maybe there is some formula to why they want it 3 feet above. It does sound different, for sure. Not sure which is better or worse.

The "eq" seems to make a really nice difference, but at the same time because it's sound I know that if I move even inches it will change the sound experience. I wonder if that doesn't factor into their 3 feet overhead formula, maybe some sort of tonal averaging for the area.. ? Or maybe I'm overthinking it.

[ranster]

jesyjames,
The following works best for my 635 set-up:
1) Volume at -28 (-35 does not work consistently)
2) Mic at ear level (no difference for me when I raised it)
3) Mic fixed on a tripod (biggest difference for me, much improved results)
Hope this helps...
Randy

[lei@forum]

[QUOTE=jesyjames]Does any one conclusively know if when doing the ezset we should use -35db or -28db as the setting? I've gotten two different "conclusive" answers from the threads around here. Does it even matter? I went with the guy who said he contacted HK and they said -35 and they tried to make it real obvious on the screen.


Also, does anyone know why they recommend putting the mic at least 3 feet above ear level? I know many people report better results by holding at ear level. In my experience, the distance and levels settings are much more accurate at ear level, but there's this part in my brain the keeps thinking maybe there is some formula to why they want it 3 feet above. It does sound different, for sure. Not sure which is better or worse.

The "eq" seems to make a really nice difference, but at the same time because it's sound I know that if I move even inches it will change the sound experience. I wonder if that doesn't factor into their 3 feet overhead formula, maybe some sort of tonal averaging for the area.. ? Or maybe I'm overthinking it.[/QUOTE]


i tried both -28 and -35, once it works the results are the same (to my ears)
but -35 sometimes does not work (gives far field measurement error)

[jesyjames]

I struggle with that fixed tripod.. it's always at some strange angle and doesn't seem to quite rest where my head position would be.. I probably should try and do that again but it's always falling over and i can't get it close enough to the back of the couch.

So the feeling I'm getting so far is -35 or -28 or 3 feet doesn't really matter?

[ranster]

I think that you will have to try it yourself and compare the results. Each set-up maybe slightly different. In my case, the "tripod" was the key to the consistent results. And with the volume at -35 (as lei mentioned), you will get errors. So, in my case, both issues "really matter".