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 112

post #3331 of 5331
Uh, what?
post #3332 of 5331
You're going to have to agree to disagree ccotenj, because I don't need to re-read your post. I already know what it says and no matter how one reads it it's full of assumptions and innuendos regarding what I said on the subject. I know how these things work and have no problem understanding how the sub frequencies are handled, manually or via calibration.

@derrick,
You make yet another comment that misinterprets my meaning on "blending". You all make it sound like I mean shaking up all the frequencies and putting them in a virtual blender. I'm talking about getting seamless sound between the sub and sats via each getting the frequencies they can handle best. In short you're taking the word blend here too literally. Think of it as meaning the sub blending well into the overall sound vs literally into the sat frequencies. Geez, does this really need explaining, or are some of you just too hung up on using only the words you're familiar with?

As for speaker size, it has as much to do with how the receiver's calibration and interpretation of them as their physical size and the frequencies they produce. There's no one size fits all setting for every brand, and much has to do with personal preference and again, the programming of the receiver. For instance, my friend's VSX-822 auto calibrates his front speakers to Large. His fronts are rated at 48Hz, the sub is crossed at 100Hz.

On some systems that would cause noticeable muddiness in the bass where the sub and front sat frequencies overlap, but somehow his manages to sound clean and tight on the sub and fronts, with no muddiness. Like I said, no set rules of thumb on this stuff. Best to make corrections on auto calibrations only if you hear noticeable problems.
post #3333 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi Def Fan View Post

For instance, my friend's VSX-822 auto calibrates his front speakers to Large. His fronts are rated at 48Hz, the sub is crossed at 100Hz.

I thought that MCACC always set the speakers to large by default and one had to manually go and change them to small. So you can't trust what MCACC tells you regarding speaker size. I'm pretty sure it doesn't actually determine this for you. Am I wrong on this one?

It's why the whole large vs. small naming convention is rather silly. They should just say engage or disengage bass management for a better meaning of what it really is. I think people get hung up on if their speakers are large vs. small but don't understand what is going on behind the scenes with how the receiver manages bass frequencies. Has nothing to do with whether your speakers are large or small. It's do you want bass to go to your sub for all low frequencies (small) or only the .1 channel (large)?
post #3334 of 5331
@hi def fan... ok... someday you'll learn... obviously not from me though...

@miller... while it may "seem" to default to large, it really doesn't... if it defaulted to small, with the option to change it buried WAY deep in the menus, life would be much easier...
post #3335 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerrh View Post

I thought that MCACC always set the speakers to large by default

no

if it senses they can reproduce the low bass tones, yes, it will set them to Large, but this is NOT a default. That would mean if you had some little sats as fronts, maybe capable to 150 hz, it would automatically set them as Large, and it doesn't do that. in my case, the fronts can reproduce bass as low as ~34 hz so it sets them as Large. I just go in & change to Small (for movies)...no big deal.
post #3336 of 5331
I have the new SC LX86 (Elite 68 in the us) and strangely enough i cannot set the crossover frequency on the rear surround speakers to be different to the rest of the crossover setting of all the speakers, that is if i change the crossover frequency, all the speakers will be setup to 100Hz for example. Am i doing something wrong or? Cannot find any user menu to do so, and BTW my onkyo pr sc 5508 processor can do this on every channel separately. I really like the power and sound quality of this amp but i cannot understand how to setup my front THX speakers to 80hz and not having the rear speakers also to 80hz. I need separate crossover settings because my rears will only handle 120hz. please help me out. thanks.
post #3337 of 5331
^^^

no, you are not doing anything wrong... the xover is global, you cannot have different settings... only one...

this is true of all pioneer avr's...
post #3338 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerrh View Post

I thought that MCACC always set the speakers to large by default and one had to manually go and change them to small. So you can't trust what MCACC tells you regarding speaker size. I'm pretty sure it doesn't actually determine this for you. Am I wrong on this one?
It's why the whole large vs. small naming convention is rather silly. They should just say engage or disengage bass management for a better meaning of what it really is. I think people get hung up on if their speakers are large vs. small but don't understand what is going on behind the scenes with how the receiver manages bass frequencies. Has nothing to do with whether your speakers are large or small. It's do you want bass to go to your sub for all low frequencies (small) or only the .1 channel (large)?

It's the difference between discrete sub frequencies, or allowing the fronts to play full range, and yes, MCACC did set my friend's VSX-822's fronts to large. It DOES sound good though. His fronts are not compromised in how low they can play, their low frequencies are plenty tight, as are that of the subs, and the bass doesn't sound muddled.

What I find odd is that ccotenj and others here seem to be Pioneer brand loyal, yet they're implying MCACC's calibration on these lower models is fundamentally flawed. I suppose they ASSume ALL Pioneers sound the same after auto calibration too, yet I'M the one that needs to "learn"? LOL

The net is full of elitist, brand fanboy snobs that think they know it all, some things never change. rolleyes.gif
post #3339 of 5331
@ Hi Def Fan--
I guess I sure don't get where you are coming from. If you were to follow posts by ccotenj (Chris), you would know he is a FORMER Pioneer owner with vast experience with a wide variety of very high quality gear. He has a lot of experience with MCACC and has contributed and shared valuable information to us all. He sure does not present his posts in a "fan boy" way and gives balanced feedback.

Was just reading a post of yours talking about the quality of receivers and matching them to your $350-400 speaker system - price including sub as you said. Makes me question your posts as that price gets you in to an entry level sub but without any of the rest of a surround system.
post #3340 of 5331
edit: removed due to deletion of post i was responding to... smile.gif

edit: thanks peter... smile.gif
post #3341 of 5331
yeah, I deleted mine, too redface.gif
decided his post wasn't worth the bother smile.gif
post #3342 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post

Was just reading a post of yours talking about the quality of receivers and matching them to your $350-400 speaker system - price including sub as you said. Makes me question your posts as that price gets you in to an entry level sub but without any of the rest of a surround system.

wise words - puts it all in perspective wink.gif
post #3343 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post

@ Hi Def Fan--
I guess I sure don't get where you are coming from. If you were to follow posts by ccotenj (Chris), you would know he is a FORMER Pioneer owner with vast experience with a wide variety of very high quality gear. He has a lot of experience with MCACC and has contributed and shared valuable information to us all. He sure does not present his posts in a "fan boy" way and gives balanced feedback.
Was just reading a post of yours talking about the quality of receivers and matching them to your $350-400 speaker system - price including sub as you said. Makes me question your posts as that price gets you in to an entry level sub but without any of the rest of a surround system.

So someone having previously owned other brands makes them up on how latest models compare? As well, all one need do to verify what you can get decent HT speakers plus sub for at a mere $350 regular price (got mine for $250 total via a sale on the 5-pack and net price match on the sub) is check Fry's in store pricing on a brand called Jamo that is not only pretty well known and reviewed, it's owned and backed by Klipsch via a 5 yr warranty.

Even more absurd is your questioning the pricing I mentioned for my speakers when others here on other threads are talking about RX-A1010s going for $650 or less when such pricing isn't even readily prevalent via Google searches without anyone yet answering why that is. Makes me question if the vendor is even an authorized dealer. This is the kind of talk that leads one to assume those speaking it are brand biased and/or not as in the loop as they make it sound.

It's not unlike those that think they are all knowing politically, including one arrogant SOB I had the displeasure of speaking to today that was harping the never ending "Bush invented WMD talk to excuse the Iraq invasion", yet he, a political science major, wasn't even aware of what Hussein did to the Marsh Arabs. Like talking to a wall really. Being opinionated doesn't necessarily make one intelligent.
Edited by Hi Def Fan - 9/13/12 at 6:56pm
post #3344 of 5331
For what it's worth, I have found Chris's posts to be very informative and full of useful information over the time I have been visiting these forums. I'll vouch for him for how much he's helped me personally. The more I have learned I would say everything he says is true. I feel like this line of postings recently is really adding nothing to this discussion. The man really does know what he's talking about. Please don't take it personally. Go research what he's talking about, and come to your own decisions. I think in the end you'll see he is being impartial and sticking to truths and not opinions.
post #3345 of 5331
MCACC dose asses the speakers frequency and sets the value Large or Small based on that and the speakers role in the HT setup. When xo is being considered, MCACC also considers standing wave issues in the room and may set a higher xo than expected based on the speakers frequency response. For example, my Klipsch RC 64, 200/800 watts speaker with with a frequency response 62 Hz-21 kHz is set to Small by MCACC and the RS 35 with a response of 81 Hz to 20 kHz is set to Large. Even with my setup of large, capable Klipsch speakers, MCACC set the xo at 100. Surely my RF 7's have decent bass, the S wave showed problems around 125 and 201 Hz which is where the filters are. MCACC takes a lot into account and to take full advantage of it, enable bass management. MCACC is a better room correction and system integration program than many people give Pioneer credit for. The filters work similar to subwoofer eq just from a different angle. I always hear how MCACC does not EQ the sub, there is very little info in music and movies under 40 Hz other than rumble for creating earthquakes. the second octave of 40-80 and the third 80-160 is where the harmonic's and energy come from even for frequencies in music produce below 40 hz like the pipe organ. IMO MCACC is the best overall correction system in avr's today, good thing this post is only in the Pioneer thread, lol.
post #3346 of 5331
Is there any EQ level for a specific band which is so much that you would tame it? For example, if MCACC boost the 500 band by 6.5 db, or reduces the 16000 band by 6.5 db, would you bring either of them a little closer to zero? And if you do, would you trim the others proportionally? So if you changed a 6.5 db boost to 3.5, then would you trim the one next to it from 3 to 2 to keep the eq curve roughly the same?

I think my latest EQ actually sounds pretty good but it is startling to see dramatic changes in this band or that band. Particularly with pretty expensive speakers that are well reviewed and regarded as "pretty flat". I mean if I buy speakers that are +- 1.5 db from 38-20,000 .... then it is weird to see MCACC adjust any band by 6.5 db.

Anyway.. are there any solid guidelines for tinkering with the automatic EQ settings if they are extreme?
post #3347 of 5331
^^^

once they get in a room, the anechoically flat measurement no longer holds... room acoustics then take over...

as far as "guidelines"... adjust to taste... smile.gif
post #3348 of 5331
well I'm asking because my "taste" has been to "front align" and it has been sort of mocked (in generally a good-natured helpful kind of way).

did you trim any of your automatic settings, just on the general principle that a certain amount of boost or attenuation seemed like "too much"?

it is impossible to adjust to taste when I must pause the material, go to the guide, and hear a test tone while I try to tweak the EQ. my machine won't let me adjust the EQ sliders while listening to music. So it is guesswork to toggle over to MCACC, add 1.5 db to the 16000 band, toggle back, play something, and evaluate whether the 1.5db was too much, not enough, or the wrong band to tweak alltogether.
post #3349 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

MCACC does assess the speakers' frequency and sets the value Large or Small based on that and the speakers' role in the HT setup. When xo is being considered, MCACC also considers standing wave issues in the room and may set a higher xo than expected based on the speakers' frequency response.

So if the front speakers are set to "Large" and the crossover is at "100," doesn't that mean that the fronts aren't getting anything under 100Hz anyway?

post #3350 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastButNotLeast View Post

So if the front speakers are set to "Large" and the crossover is at "100," doesn't that mean that the fronts aren't getting anything under 100Hz anyway?

Nope. When you set your speakers to "Small" that's when the crossover is used. If they are set to "Large" your AVR thinks your front speakers can play all frequencies.

Small = Anything below crossover is sent to sub(s). Anything above crossover is sent to mains.
Large = All sent to mains, subs not used unless there is a .1 channel.
Plus = Same as large, but also signals below crossover also sent to sub(s). So you can get duplicate bass from your subs and your mains and is not recommended by most.
post #3351 of 5331
I went and purchased a set of dipole speakers from Jamo just like the fronts, but obviously surround speakers, and now i have a complete 5.1 D600 set. yesterday i hooked up everything to the Pioneer 86 and on certain movies i can hear the same distortion i was hearing when i had the previous speakers which did not handle 80Hz. Now as ccotenj told me, on the Pio i cannot set the crossover individually and yesterday i tried the crossover at 100hz globally and the distortion went away. Is this supposed to happen when i am using THX Ultra 2 speakers all round?

Mind you, the distortion is only on certain movie passages like for example the opening of Ghost protocol after the opening titles when there is the big explosion, that is the time i do hear it and on certain other small passeges but it is really annoying and i changed my rears to eliminate this but nothing until now. Anyone had this problem maybe i can tweak MCACC to get around this?
post #3352 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by dozer95667 View Post

well I'm asking because my "taste" has been to "front align" and it has been sort of mocked (in generally a good-natured helpful kind of way).

did you trim any of your automatic settings, just on the general principle that a certain amount of boost or attenuation seemed like "too much"?

it is impossible to adjust to taste when I must pause the material, go to the guide, and hear a test tone while I try to tweak the EQ. my machine won't let me adjust the EQ sliders while listening to music. So it is guesswork to toggle over to MCACC, add 1.5 db to the 16000 band, toggle back, play something, and evaluate whether the 1.5db was too much, not enough, or the wrong band to tweak alltogether.

well, at least it was good natured... smile.gif

yea, i hear you... braving the wrath of a certain poster, pio does not make it easy to "tweak" because of that limitation... people have complained (rightfully so) about that for a long time...

when i used mcacc, no, i did not, as given my room setup, it pretty much left stuff that it could adjust in the radiant zone alone...

i'd only reallybe concerned about "too much boost as a general principal" if it was trying to do it in the modal zone... primarily because it may be trying to boost a null, which would simply be feeding power into a black hole...

in my current setup (xt32 using audyssey pro), again, i don't really have to deal with it once the radiant zone is hit, since i get a pretty flat response there due to setup...

have you got any measuring equipment? i've learned that while autocal (regardless of flavor) is a huge boon to users, the phrase "trust but verify" is definitely true...

your post highlights one of the big issues with sighted evaluations... smile.gif
post #3353 of 5331
@joe...

not surprising, looking at the speaker specs... you are likely hitting power compression problems on those scenes, causing the distortion... simply because a speaker will measure flat anechoically to a certain frequency doesn't tell you what will happen if you try and make it play "loud"...

a good rule of thumb is that you should cross your speakers at least a half octave above their -3db point... for the jamos, the -3db point would appear to be 80hz (if i looked up the right speaker), so 120hz as a xover point sounds about the right spot to start... since i don't believe there's a 120hz xover (someone please correct me if i'm wrong), 100hz is likely an "ok" compromise, vs. 150hz (although you might want to at least try 150)...
post #3354 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

@joe...
not surprising, looking at the speaker specs... you are likely hitting power compression problems on those scenes, causing the distortion... simply because a speaker will measure flat anechoically to a certain frequency doesn't tell you what will happen if you try and make it play "loud"...
a good rule of thumb is that you should cross your speakers at least a half octave above their -3db point... for the jamos, the -3db point would appear to be 80hz (if i looked up the right speaker), so 120hz as a xover point sounds about the right spot to start... since i don't believe there's a 120hz xover (someone please correct me if i'm wrong), 100hz is likely an "ok" compromise, vs. 150hz (although you might want to at least try 150)...
I am a bit surprised as my set is the Jamo D 600 THX Ultra 2 which was praised by many reviewers so i guess these are up to the job. this is the spec sheet i downloaded from the internet right now.

Specifications...............................................................................................................................................................................................D 600 SUR
System..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Way closed dipole
Woofer (mm / in)..................................................................................................................................................................................................1 x 165 / 6½
Midrange (mm / in)...................................................................................................................................................................................................2 x 76 / 3
Tweeter (mm / in).............................................................................................................................................................................................2 x 25 / 1 DTT
Power (W, long / short term)................................................................................................................................................................................ 150 / 200
Sensitivity (dB/2,8V/1m)......................................................................................................................................................................................................87
Frequency Range (Hz).........................................................................................................................................................................................80 - 20.000
Cross-over Frequency (Hz).................................................................................................................................................................................250 / 2.500
Impedance (Ohm).................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Weight (Kg / lb)............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 / 19.8
Dimension HxWxD (mm / in)................................................................................................................................... 255 x 454 x 170 / 10 x 17.8 x 6.7
Finish..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................Stone Grey
post #3355 of 5331
Chris is right, the speakers are being overloaded by the LF content, causing the audible distortion you hear. The largest signals are typically the lowest frequencies, and of course explosions and the like have plenty of LF content. Making it go away by raising the crossover point confirms it.
post #3356 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerrh View Post


Nope. When you set your speakers to "Small" that's when the crossover is used. If they are set to "Large" your AVR thinks your front speakers can play all frequencies.
Small = Anything below crossover is sent to sub(s). Anything above crossover is sent to mains.
Large = All sent to mains, subs not used unless there is a .1 channel.
Plus = Same as large, but also signals below crossover also sent to sub(s). So you can get duplicate bass from your subs and your mains and is not recommended by most.

Great. Thanks for the clarification.

Michael

post #3357 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Chris is right, the speakers are being overloaded by the LF content, causing the audible distortion you hear. The largest signals are typically the lowest frequencies, and of course explosions and the like have plenty of LF content. Making it go away by raising the crossover point confirms it.

yupper... it was nice of him to provide us all the evidence we needed to make that conclusion... smile.gif

@joe... the jamo's are fine speakers for what they are, and best i can tell, have earned their good reviews... you are simply asking them to do something they cannot do... realistically, there's only so much a 6 inch "woofer" (probably better described as a "mid") in that size box can do...

also keep in mind that xover's are slopes, not brick walls...
post #3358 of 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

yupper... it was nice of him to provide us all the evidence we needed to make that conclusion... smile.gif
@joe... the jamo's are fine speakers for what they are, and best i can tell, have earned their good reviews... you are simply asking them to do something they cannot do... realistically, there's only so much a 6 inch "woofer" (probably better described as a "mid") in that size box can do...
also keep in mind that xover's are slopes, not brick walls...
You are right size is limited for the driver but this eve I am trying and playing around with the eq settings and now seems much better. What is strange is that the fronts lcr still have the same driver but cofiguration is different and there is no clipping with the fronts.

Can it be that after MCACC the crossover still is at 80hz but some frequencies are being boosted over what the speakers can handle? Have you tried any THX ultra 2 speakers that cannot handle 80hz cutoff frequency? Thanks
post #3359 of 5331
^^^

the fronts have 2 of those drivers in them...

if you "messed around with the eq" and cut the lower frequencies, yes that may make your issue "go away", however, you are then creating another issue...

what you are "hearing" is what would logically be expected, given the specs... you found the "correct" solution earlier, which is to cross them higher...
post #3360 of 5331
+1.

I had a Mirage system (OMD-5 LR, OMD-whatever center, Omnisat v2 surrounds/rears, Mirage 10" sub) and found the initial crossover setting was too low and the OMD's were overloading. The AVR will boost the lows to flatten the response, and that can lead to overdriving the little mid-woofers. Exactly as you describe. Had the same thing happen with Denon, Sony, and Pionner AVRs, BTW. Had to set the crossover to 100 Hz or higher. Personally, I do not like the higher crossover, and my solution was to get my old Magnepan's set up again, and add a pair of nice subs to go with them.


YMMV - Don
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