AVS Forum banner
6K views 32 replies 13 participants last post by  jdsmoothie 
#1 ·
Looking to replace my old Denon receiver with something new and was sure on the Denon AVR-1912 until I saw the Pioneer VSX-1121-k for the same price. Looks like it's an extra 20w per channel with Pioneer. Both have all the features I need, however Denon does offer a 2 yr warranty vs 1 year. My Speakers are B&W 683 if it makes a difference.
 
#27 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by MechanicalMan /forum/post/21568301


I'm shopping for a new AVR, and I was initially drawn to Denon because of the Audyssey buzz here. Then I saw comments about how MultEQ can't be adjusted or disabled for only certain speakers (subs), and comments like this have completely reversed my position. Now I'm leaning heavily to Yamaha, and my second choice is Pioneer -- because why would I want room EQ that screws up my sub (I'm already using a BFD with good results) and cannot be altered? I've seen plenty of comments about how MultEQ is superior to MCACC and YPAO (good job with subs. If they do a lousy job with subs and cannot be disabled while using MultEQ on the other speakers, then why would I want MultEQ? Now I'm thinking that MultEQ is more of a negative than a positive, and I'd rather take my chances with YPAO or MCACC.

hey, we're all different but I wouldn't make a decision based on a few graphs. The best think to do is try them out. I think that the 49000+ posts in the Audyssey thread speaks for itself and the majority of them are positive. I'm not knocking down the other room correction software, YPAO in the higher end Yamaha model has lots of fans.
 
#28 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnson636 /forum/post/21568450


Really? You believe audessey vs mcacc is comparable to HD vs SD. I believe everyone here would be able to undoubtedly tell the difference from an HD signal and a SD signal without having the two signals displayed side by side. Can you do the same with audessey and mcacc?

to my ears, yes. For me, the difference was in the details, especially for the surrounds and surround backs (when listening to 7.1 channel material). My room is not acoustically treated right now so maybe that's where I found Audyssey to do a better job than MCACC. That don't mean it will do the same for you. All the receiver suggested by the OP are good receivers and since they're all virtually equal, features is what makes us choose one or the other, I happen to prefer Audyssey. Don't forget that that's all Audyssey does, room correction software.


I'm not going to comment on the HD vs SD as we're audio, not video.
 
#29 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by MechanicalMan /forum/post/21568301


I'm shopping for a new AVR, and I was initially drawn to Denon because of the Audyssey buzz here. Then I saw comments about how MultEQ can't be adjusted or disabled for only certain speakers (subs), and comments like this have completely reversed my position.

The quote you posted referred ONLY to the Denon XX09 models (2309CI in that quote) with MultEQ which were determined to be found defective and was subsequently fixed with a firmware update. Audyssey does not screw up the sub filtering.
 
#30 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie /forum/post/21569181


The quote you posted referred ONLY to the Denon XX09 models (2309CI in that quote) with MultEQ which were determined to be found defective and was subsequently fixed with a firmware update. Audyssey does not screw up the sub filtering.

Thank you for setting me straight. Before I spend several hundred dollars on a new AVR, could you point me to a comparison that demonstrates the superiority of MultEQ to BFD equalization?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top