or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › "OFFICIAL" Pioneer MCACC thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"OFFICIAL" Pioneer MCACC thread - Page 54

post #1591 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

^^^

yes... it doesn't care about the "physical distance"... it only cares about "what the microphone hears" and does channel delay accordingly...

Thank you.
post #1592 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew4msu View Post

Possibly, but couldn't you put your receiver in the same room temporarily (while you ran MCACC)?

While this may be an option, it's not very practical. The wires to the speakers and sub are run through the walls, so I'd need to temporarily run wires from the receiver to the speakers. This doesn't lend itself to easily rerunning the setup for changes (new furniture, different speakers, etc), tweaks etc.

Can someone throw on an extension on their microphone and see how it affects the MCACC findings?

Also, how long is the actual wire? The cable on my HKs mic is pretty long..about 19 feet.
post #1593 of 5325
I'm having an issue with my Pioneer 1120K MCACC saying my Center and Right Speaker are reverse phase. The speakers are all identical Gallo Adiva Ti's (satellites) with a Martin Logan Dynamo 500 Sub.

I did the following to try and narrow down the problem. I swapped the center the left speakers, still reports Center and Right being reverse phase. This should rule out a speaker problem as the center speaker is now working fine in the left speaker position. Next, I installed an old cambridge speaker in the center position and MCACC said that the speaker is wired correctly. This should rule out a cable problem. So now I'm really confused. The receiver could just be wrong. My speakers seem to sound fine to me despite it complaining about it being reverse phase. If it was reverse phase shouldn't my speakers sound much weaker than another one?
post #1594 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by fox1541 View Post

Can someone throw on an extension on their microphone and see how it affects the MCACC findings?

you can use an extension on the microphone cable... no issues there, many people have on many different models...

just don't try to extend it 1000 feet...
post #1595 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjdflag View Post

Can anyone help me understand BGC setting in THX Audio Setting?
I was tweaking some settings last nightand decided to mess around with it.
I never bother to change this setting before because the description on screen says to turn it on when bass is too loud, and I always liked to keep it that way.
But, when I turned it on just to see what it does, wow, the fronts became more clear and bass from sub integrated with speakers so much better.
It made me realize that I used to have a boomy and localized bass for all this time.
I am happy to find out about this, but I would appriciate if someone enlighten me how it made so much difference. Thanks

pio VSX 9040 txh
fronts DT mythos 5
center DT procenter 1000
rear DT promonitor 1000
sub SVS pc12 plus bash amp at rear corner
room 20 by 20 with cathedral ceiling

bgc = boundary gain compensation...

what does it do? it applies a filter in the low frequencies to try and alleviate the affects of your room/sub placement...

keep in mind that with low frequencies, your room (at least for home users) primarily determines what your hear.... bgc attempts to flatten the response in that region... it can be rather helpful for users, especially those that don't have a lot of placement flexibility with the sub...

a quick way for you to "see" (well, "hear") the effect that your room has on low frequencies is to play something bass heavy, and then walk around your room... you'll notice that you hear a much different response in various spots in your room...

google "room modes" for more info on "what is really happening with bass frequencies in my room?"... and feel free to post back questions...
post #1596 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

bgc = boundary gain compensation...

what does it do? it applies a filter in the low frequencies to try and alleviate the affects of your room/sub placement...

keep in mind that with low frequencies, your room (at least for home users) primarily determines what your hear.... bgc attempts to flatten the response in that region... it can be rather helpful for users, especially those that don't have a lot of placement flexibility with the sub...

a quick way for you to "see" (well, "hear") the effect that your room has on low frequencies is to play something bass heavy, and then walk around your room... you'll notice that you hear a much different response in various spots in your room...

google "room modes" for more info on "what is really happening with bass frequencies in my room?"... and feel free to post back questions...

Does this function reside in the older Pioneer's MCACC under a different name?
post #1597 of 5325
^^^

i don't recall... sorry...

if it is, it would be in the "thx audio setting" part of setup...
post #1598 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxGeek View Post

I'm having an issue with my Pioneer 1120K MCACC saying my Center and Right Speaker are reverse phase. The speakers are all identical Gallo Adiva Ti's (satellites) with a Martin Logan Dynamo 500 Sub.

[...snip...]

So now I'm really confused. The receiver could just be wrong. My speakers seem to sound fine to me despite it complaining about it being reverse phase. If it was reverse phase shouldn't my speakers sound much weaker than another one?

See two of my recent posts, then feel free to ask questions after reading those:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post19567329

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...5#post19573495

Hope it helps!

Dan.
post #1599 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

bgc = boundary gain compensation...

what does it do? it applies a filter in the low frequencies to try and alleviate the affects of your room/sub placement...

keep in mind that with low frequencies, your room (at least for home users) primarily determines what your hear.... bgc attempts to flatten the response in that region... it can be rather helpful for users, especially those that don't have a lot of placement flexibility with the sub...

a quick way for you to "see" (well, "hear") the effect that your room has on low frequencies is to play something bass heavy, and then walk around your room... you'll notice that you hear a much different response in various spots in your room...

google "room modes" for more info on "what is really happening with bass frequencies in my room?"... and feel free to post back questions...


Thanks for your reply.
Interesting to find out that BGC only alters LFE, because in my ears, it made a huge difference to the rest of the speakers as well.
They became louder and more clear with BGC on.
If it only affects LFE, my sub must have been interfering with speaker frequencies then.
And, if I understood you correctly, is turning the BGC off the best way if sub is placed optimally?
post #1600 of 5325
Merry Christmas Everyone!
post #1601 of 5325
Hi - First time poster

I am running a Pioneer VSX-1020-K AMP (Australian) with Jamo 608 Speakers and a Jamo 650 Sub - 5.1 set up.

I have run the MCACC several times. My problem like other people have come across is with the Sub dB settings.

When I do the MCACC test the sub dB setting is around +10.5!!! I know it should be around 0 to +3 (or there abouts).

Even with the Sub set up this high the Sub is not giving me the punch I would expect ie the bone rattling thump!!

I have ajusted the gain (volume) up and down on the back of the Sub but with minimum or no result.

The sub is sitting to the left behind the listener and is on a carpeted floor.

Fronts are Bi-Amped and set to small. Sub is connect via LFE.

Here is my current settings after the last test.

On Sub -

Cut Off 150Hz
Phase 0
Boundary Gain Comp - set to about 11 o'clock (have set it at full but with minimum result)

After MCACC test -

L -1.5
C -1.0
R -1.5
SR +0.5
SL 0.0
SW +10.5

I am not running a SPL meter and have noticed that if I move the MCACC mic an inch either forward/back/side to side - that can tell me certain speakers are out of phase - eventhough I know they are not!! It also tells me the sub is about 2 meters in distance away when it probably is about 1 meter.

So I am wondering - is there a setting I am missing. Is it just the acoustics of my room. Could the Sub and/or the MCACC mic be stuffed?

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
post #1602 of 5325
I would try moving your sub. I would also suggest doing the sub crawl to see if you can locate a better spot for it. It sounds to me like you might be located in a subwoofer null.

Do you get better bass if you move around the room?

Is the sub new to you? If not, did it work fine before?
post #1603 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by jw00dy View Post

I would try moving your sub. I would also suggest doing the sub crawl to see if you can locate a better spot for it. It sounds to me like you might be located in a subwoofer null.

Do you get better bass if you move around the room?

Is the sub new to you? If not, did it work fine before?

Hi.

First Sub - well first HT system for that matter

Yeah, will try the crawl - unfortunately limited for sub space/areas in the room. All the rest of the speaker settings appear to be OK. Have tested it with DVE and THX and watched a couple of Blurays and TV and it sounds good. Just the sub is lacking.

Might invest in a cheapish SPL meter.
post #1604 of 5325
OK - I think my volume (gain) control on my Sub my be stuffed??

So I moved the Sub to the front of the room facing the listening position.

Setting the phase to 0, crossover to 150, gain to about 10-11 o'clock.

Ran MCACC again - it said volume on Sub is to low. Turned the volume up to max - again Sub is to low. Moved the Sub forward - still Sub is to low.

Got my iPod out and connected it to the Sub - sound is coming out of the Sub but I don't appear to have any volume control using the volume (gain) knob on the back of the Sub. There is no difference on minimum to maximum and being a volume control I would expect some difference.

Am I right to assume this?

(Sorry I know this probably should be in the Sub forum now).
post #1605 of 5325
Certainly sounds like the sub might be broken -- I would ask the Jamo guys on the forums though to see if they can provide more information.
post #1606 of 5325
So Im a long time audyssey multEQ user who recently got a vsx-1020-k, now that I'm experienced with both a few thoughts on them.

The included mic seems pretty shabby in both cases, but the audyssey one screws tightly into my tripod whereas the pioneer one doesnt.

As far as the actual setup process goes they are as different as can be. Audyssey's is very simple compared to MCACC, and that's a good thing and a bad thing. Its definitely trying to make the process as unintrusive as possible. It's simplicity certainly makes it easier to figure out than the rather confusing menu mess of mcacc. The test tones are very simple and at a very low volume, whereas with mcacc it's LOUD, drawn out and comprehensive. But once you understand the setup routine of MCACC, it's the hands down winner. It tells you what it's measuring, and then shows you the result, in a staggering amount of detail, and you actually have a few options. And you can always tweak the result to your taste. The test tones are confidence inspiring, whereas the audyssey tones seem like they can't possibly be enough to test what needs to be tested, especially at such a low volume, particularly the sub...but we'll get to that in a bit. Audyssey is simply too much of a black box that expects you to just accept it's improving the sound without actually showing you how or what it does, nor does it offer any sort of flexibility.

But audyssey does have some technical advantages - for one, it actually eqs the sub. And the sub arguably is the most important component to EQ, and mcacc doesn't even bother at all. Despite all that I like about mcacc, this is a pretty huge flaw.

Audyssey with it's 6 position setup also seems to just be technically superior - you can do a sorta 3 position standing wave setup with mcacc, but audyssey seems to do a better overall job for tuning a wider area. In my experience with audyssey, the most positions you measure the less overall EQ is applied, which makes some sense if EQing one band is good at one seat but makes a problem worse at another. Even though I have a small seating area, I don't feel like measuring from a single position really is enough to capture the room characteristics - after all, we hear with two ears.

The main thing to judge by is of course, how does it sound? Hard to say which is technically more accurate, but mcacc makes a more drastic change to the sound, whereas audyssey can often be quite subtle, especially multi position. But mcacc really sells it to me by showing me what it just did, and allowing me to change or tune it. Despite it's deficiencies, this alone makes mcacc the hands down winner.

With audyssey I'd often go through the time consuming 6 measurements, only to not be happy with the results. The only option was to do it again and hope for better.

With mcacc, I can get the results, and have it show me the exact improvements it made. Then I can measure again, and save to a different memory slot, compare the two, and pick my favorite - can't do that with audyssey. I can copy my favorite over to another slot, and boost certain frequencies for different content, and just switch as I please...can't do that either.

Even though it seems technically lacking in some ways, mcacc's configurability makes it just night and day better. If it can eventually do sub eq and multi position, then there's really no comparison.
post #1607 of 5325
Interesting comments, thanks! I have been contemplating a pre/pro with Audyssey XT32, but part of my issue is the extra $500+ to be able to tweak the settings. And, I am one of those that wishes Pioneer would add sub filters, though the consensus in this thread is to get a dedicated sub EQ like the Behringer or Antimode. So far, I was able to get my system flat enough by tweaking MCACC and the sub's controls (it includes a single-band EQ that I used for a 30 Hz bump, them MCACC handled the rest well). While I tweaked the upper end a hair, in my room the only thing I really (significantly) changed were the three PEQs (forget what Pioneer calls them -- standing wave filters or something like that) in MCACC.

BTW, my Pio mic does screw tightly into my tripod... Perhaps a bad bushing on yours? I have in the past used shims on the mount when the bolt would not go in far enough to secure the xxx (camera, lens, mic, whatever) but my Pioneer mic does fine.
post #1608 of 5325
I have used them both and ended up with the SC-37. I like the fact that MCACC does not mess with the sub(s) and that gives the user a wide range of flexiblility for EQ'ng. I have 4 Empires and use the Anti Mode. I tried the SMS-1 and Audyssey Sub EQ and prefer the Anti Mode for 4 sub(s).
post #1609 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

So Im a long time audyssey multEQ user who recently got a vsx-1020-k, now that I'm experienced with both a few thoughts on them.

The included mic seems pretty shabby in both cases, but the audyssey one screws tightly into my tripod whereas the pioneer one doesnt.

As far as the actual setup process goes they are as different as can be. Audyssey's is very simple compared to MCACC, and that's a good thing and a bad thing. Its definitely trying to make the process as unintrusive as possible. It's simplicity certainly makes it easier to figure out than the rather confusing menu mess of mcacc. The test tones are very simple and at a very low volume, whereas with mcacc it's LOUD, drawn out and comprehensive. But once you understand the setup routine of MCACC, it's the hands down winner. It tells you what it's measuring, and then shows you the result, in a staggering amount of detail, and you actually have a few options. And you can always tweak the result to your taste. The test tones are confidence inspiring, whereas the audyssey tones seem like they can't possibly be enough to test what needs to be tested, especially at such a low volume, particularly the sub...but we'll get to that in a bit. Audyssey is simply too much of a black box that expects you to just accept items improving the sound without actually showing you how or what it does, nor does it offer any sort of flexibility.

But audyssey does have some technical advantages - for one, it actually eqs the sub. And the sub arguably is the most important component to EQ, and mcacc doesn't even bother at all. Despite all that I like about mcacc, this is a pretty huge flaw.

Audyssey with it's 6 position setup also seems to just be technically superior - you can do a sorta 3 position standing wave setup with mcacc, but audyssey seems to do a better overall job for tuning a wider area. In my experience with audyssey, the most positions you measure the less overall EQ is applied, which makes some sense if EQing one band is good at one seat but makes a problem worse at another. Even though I have a small seating area, I don't feel like measuring from a single position really is enough to capture the room characteristics - after all, we hear with two ears.

The main thing to judge by is of course, how does it sound? Hard to say which is technically more accurate, but mcacc makes a more drastic change to the sound, whereas audyssey can often be quite subtle, especially multi position. But mcacc really sells it to me by showing me what it just did, and allowing me to change or tune it. Despite it's deficiencies, this alone makes mcacc the hands down winner.

With audyssey I'd often go through the time consuming 6 measurements, only to not be happy with the results. The only option was to do it again and hope for better.

With mcacc, I can get the results, and have it show me the exact improvements it made. Then I can measure again, and save to a different memory slot, compare the two, and pick my favorite - can't do that with audyssey. I can copy my favorite over to another slot, and boost certain frequencies for different content, and just switch as I please...can't do that either.

Even though it seems technically lacking in some ways, mcacc's configurability makes it just night and day better. If it can eventually do sub eq and multi position, then there's really no comparison.

If you can swing the cash, an anti mode 8033 is a great compliment to pio's mcacc
post #1610 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

I have used them both and ended up with the SC-37. I like the fact that MCACC does not mess with the sub(s) and that gives the user a wide range of flexiblility for EQ'ng. I have 4 Empires and use the Anti Mode. I tried the SMS-1 and Audyssey Sub EQ and prefer the Anti Mode for 4 sub(s).

If so, how big is your room? Did you co-locate them and/or have one on each wall?
post #1611 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by jw00dy View Post
Certainly sounds like the sub might be broken -- I would ask the Jamo guys on the forums though to see if they can provide more information.
OK - I feel like a bit of a Goose now

I'll put my hand up and say I stuffed up

But in my defence the Subs manual (which I re-read when I got home just to make sure I wasn't loosing the plot!) doesn't mention anywhere about a master control volume knob.

So rang up the Service Department this morning - told them what was going on - they said it sounded faulty and to bring it in. So off I go - thinking "I bet I get there and the Sub starts working!!"

Anyway the Service people hook the Sub up and yeap it starts working - well they knew where the master volume knob was!

I'm sure if I showed the Sub to people and asked them to find the master volume knob they wouldn't be able to find it either.

All is good now - have run my setup tests again - just watched the start of Transformers and am now getting the bass punch I would expect

At least I don't have to wait 10 days for the repair - just a bit of hurt pride
post #1612 of 5325
LOL, hey, we've all been there and done that, so no worries there. I'm just glad you've got some good sound now.
post #1613 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Force View Post
OK - I feel like a bit of a Goose now

I'll put my hand up and say I stuffed up

But in my defence the Subs manual (which I re-read when I got home just to make sure I wasn't loosing the plot!) doesn't mention anywhere about a master control volume knob.

So rang up the Service Department this morning - told them what was going on - they said it sounded faulty and to bring it in. So off I go - thinking "I bet I get there and the Sub starts working!!"

Anyway the Service people hook the Sub up and yeap it starts working - well they knew where the master volume knob was!

I'm sure if I showed the Sub to people and asked them to find the master volume knob they wouldn't be able to find it either.

All is good now - have run my setup tests again - just watched the start of Transformers and am now getting the bass punch I would expect

At least I don't have to wait 10 days for the repair - just a bit of hurt pride
Glad you got it figured out. Impressed with your admission
post #1614 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by moparfan View Post
If so, how big is your room? Did you co-locate them and/or have one on each wall?
My room is over 6000+ cu ft. Two in the front under the TV, and two in the back nearfield behind the seat. Both sets are co-located.
post #1615 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

[...snip...]

Audyssey's is very simple compared to MCACC, and that's a good thing and a bad thing. Its definitely trying to make the process as unintrusive as possible. It's simplicity certainly makes it easier to figure out than the rather confusing menu mess of mcacc.

[...snip...]

Even though it seems technically lacking in some ways, mcacc's configurability makes it just night and day better. If it can eventually do sub eq and multi position, then there's really no comparison.

I don't know if it's because of the menu mess described above (which I agree...), or if it's only available on the Elite (I don't believe so), but on the SC-07 and SC-27 at least (and 05/25), the MCACC does have a mode where it can do multi-position (3 locations). You need to select the "EQ Pro & S-Wave" option. This is used only for the standing wave adjustment though.

Dan.
post #1616 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by info_dan View Post


I don't know if it's because of the menu mess described above (which I agree...), or if it's only available on the Elite (I don't believe so), but on the SC-07 and SC-27 at least (and 05/25), the MCACC does have a mode where it can do multi-position (3 locations). You need to select the "EQ Pro & S-Wave" option. This is used only for the standing wave adjustment though.

Dan.

I mentioned that, you just snipped it out.

Still, it's not the same as the full blown measurements, although unlike audyssey, there's nothing stopping you from doing the measurements yourself and averaging them out manually.
post #1617 of 5325
Got a question....I never really noticed it until I read yesterday that a person was having sound issues because they had not knowing set up THX audio on their older Pioneer receiver and it messed up their sound and mid bass... In MCACC, under speaker settings I notice on the Crossover settings if I choose 80hz I see under my choice: (THX: ALL SMALL). If I choose any other crossover other than 80hz that dialog goes away.
I know I haven't set the 92 to use the THX mode so is this just a informative thing to let the user know that 80hz croosover is standard for THX or is something screwy on my end?
post #1618 of 5325
^^^

informational only... nothing you did...
post #1619 of 5325
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

^^^

informational only... nothing you did...

Cool beans!
post #1620 of 5325
Apparently Pioneer USA thinks it's ok to break all its links on its site. I can't even get a PDF copy of my user manual for a receiver they consider to be in production right now!

I found the download for the MCACC software on the EU site though : ht tp://ww w .pioneer.eu/uk/support/software/VSX-1020-K/index.html#download_204

Software : h t t p : // w w w .pioneer.eu/files/support/MCACC/PioneerAdvancedMCACC_e_ver_2_3.exe

PDF : h t t p ://w w w.pioneer.eu/files/support/MCACC/ARB7450A.En.01_35.pdf


We'll see how long these links last. Fix the above links since the forum software thinks i'm a spammer.

-m
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › "OFFICIAL" Pioneer MCACC thread