AVS Forum banner

Pioneer MCACC vs Audyssey

11K views 5 replies 5 participants last post by  devanee 
#1 ·
I owned a Yamaha for many years and loved it...unfortunately it was only HDMI 1.3 so I needed to upgrade and bought an A1040. Hated it. Ended up buying a Pioneer Elite SC-85 but Im thinking about making the switch to an Audyssey platform probably Marantz Pre/Pro. Can anybody speak to their preference on Pioneer, MCACC vs any of the Audyssey receivers?
 
#2 ·
MCACC is more tweakable (without buying the Audyssey pro kit). Audyssey has many more filters (frequency bands) and so may provide flatter response. I am not sure sound-wise I have a preference. I do not have an XT32 system, however, and many say it is a significant improvement over XT. I like to tweak so my main AVR until recently was a Pioneer (replaced by a processor running Dirac Live). - Don
 
#3 ·
A significant percentage of AVS Forum users feel that the target curves Audyssey uses are too bright for their system. This feeling might be highly dependent on the room acoustics and the speaker dispersion though. For some systems a flattish response might be just right.

I agree that Audyssey is too bright for my system, at least now that I have a treated room with manual cal to optimize the system integration, and also feel that Audyssey has many other issues.

One is that their error limits are too loose. Another is that it does not EQ below the -3dB point of your subwoofer. A third is that its 'reference' or 'movie' target incorporates a 'midrange dip' to try to address crossover or cone breakup issues without any data on your particular speakers whether that really helps or not. Final issue is that Audyssey comes in several flavors, with anything less than MultEQ-XT32 doing poor or no EQ on subwoofer response and MultEQ-XT introducing lots of fine resolution high frequency EQ that could actually make the sound worse.

So when asking if you should be concerned about the difference in systems, probably the biggest thing to watch out for is how customizable the target EQ is. Users of Dirac have complained that even Audyssey Pro with its customizable house curve is still far inferior (poor user interface, cannot store multiple curves).

In my system I bought a UMIK-1 and learned to use REW. Then I optimized my dual subwoofer placement, ran a full auto cal with Audyssey MultEQ-XT32, and used the manual graphic to add Harman's preferred ~-4dB/decade straight-line sloped frequency response. Big improvement in sound.

The excursions off target are a little larger than I had with Audyssey but the manual graphic target is so much more listenable that I felt the net result was a big improvement. Plus the smoothness of the curve I ended up with is not much less controlled than Audyssey anyway.

If you are really concerned about your auto EQ solution I think you should go with a Dirac processor. You can customize the curve easily and store multiple curves for later recall, so I hear anyway. If not, maybe you can do similar manual cal, but be prepared for lots of work measuring and tweaking your subwoofer(s) because when you have the capability to measure it suddenly pays off to try out several placements.
 
#4 ·
I went from a Pioneer with MCACC to an Audyssey XT equipped Onkyo and I liked what Audyssey did better, particularly with the subs; I later went with an XT32 Denon and like that even more. MCACC had some nice features, though, wish there were more a marriage of the features. I wonder if the newer MCACC Pro is more on the level of XT32 since it supposedly does subs now, even two individual subs.
 
#6 ·
Question:

I have an old onkyo 605 (audyssey 2EQ) currently powering an elemental design a3-300 (12" driver) and a recently bought SVS PB-1000 (10" driver). Due to my room layout, the subs are not equidistant from each other. I am thinking of upgrading my AVR to either denon x4200, marantz 6010 or pioneer sc-95. Suggestions?
 
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