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 127

post #3781 of 5340
For those of you who have tried the multi-point calibration, did you like the results or did you find that it took too much away from your prime spot? Also, please explain how your 3 measuring points were laid out such as across a couch with the first measurement in the prime spot and others to the sides of that spot or what?

Thanks.
post #3782 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by spookywillow View Post

So your saying that when I listen to http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5b_fikmGLFY#! or a 30hz test tone that I am just imagining that I cannot hear the low bass when I set my sub to either on or plus and that I can hear it when I set the sub to off?
I just listened to it, with sub=Plus, fronts=Large. I heard lots of low bass from my sub.
post #3783 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeclough24 View Post

right now i have the fronts to large and sub to plus 80hz xo and love it but it is a tad bit boomy. Any suggestions?
Boom is predictable with these settings, since mid bass is coming from both sub and fronts. Suggestions: (1) [standard] change fronts from Large to Small, (2) [off-beat] turn the crossover knob on the subs down until the boom goes away.
post #3784 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

I just listened to it, with sub=Plus, fronts=Large. I heard lots of low bass from my sub.

Yes I know that lol, So do I. What I dont hear is bass from my fronts when they are set to large and I use a surround mode
post #3785 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by spookywillow View Post

Yes I know that lol, So do I. What I dont hear is bass from my fronts when they are set to large and I use a surround mode
There is bass going to my fronts, which I know because I hear it from the sub I have connected to the front speaker outputs. This is with fronts set Large and sub set Plus, crossover at 80Hz, and using Neo:X. I don't know how audible bass from the fronts is, while playing that video, since I wasn't listening for that, but the bass must be being sent to the fronts, because that's the only way it can get to the sub I hear it coming from. My fronts are rated down to 37Hz at 3db down, and the sub in question is rated down to 17Hz at 9db down -- its crossover is at 40Hz.
post #3786 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

@horseflesh: I tend to agree with derrickdj1 implied: what you are hearing is likely interaction among the sub and mains -- and room. Most likely you need to adjust the sub's position for optimal bass at the LP in your room. Measurement makes that much easier...

Gotcha, I will play with the sub position. I will also have to make a chart so I can keep straight my listening impressions of the one million combinations of settings!

Spookywillow -- I thought you did not have to re-run MCACC after changing speaker settings? (Large/Small Sub Yes/No/Plus) If so that would sure change things...
post #3787 of 5340
Yes you do, if you set your fronts from large to small they are no longer producing frequencies below your cut-off so it needs MCACC running again.

Even if you add/remove/move furniture you are supposed to re-run MCACC.
post #3788 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

I reviewed the EQ graphs after All Channel Adjust and was surprised to find very little correction for my speakers. About the only one who got any real attention was the center. It reduced the low end (such as when set to Small) by a fair degree. Everything else was minor at best and I'm pretty sure I couldn't pick the native versus EQ sound out via a A/B test.

One of my towers is pretty close to a corner, so I expect that one to be given more aggressive EQ treatment, however the other one is about as ideally placed as it gets, so go figure.

One interesting thing I discovered is that if I do the calibration with the diaphram(top) of the mic pointed forward, I get significantly less boosting of the high frequencies in MCACC as a result. I've seen this brought up a couple times in the past, and the poster is usually met with "it's an omnidirectional mic, so it doesn't matter." NOTHING could be further from the truth, and for folks to say that is reckless. I've tracked drums hundreds of times with several different omni mics...positioning still matters with regard to frequency. Not as much as cardioid family mics, but it still matters.

Now, after the fact, I usually adjust the eq by ear. MCACC to me, really is just a tool to cut out some room resonances with their standing frequency filter or whatever they call that parametric EQ. Again drawing from my tracking and mixing experience, I know that most EQ's sound much better dipping frequencies than they do boosting them, especially ones built to the price point of an all in one receiver wonderbox. In fact, the only EQ I've worked with which sounded great while boosting was a Manley Massive Passive, which is zen...and about 5 grand. So, I dip the most (3db) at 16k which makes the tweeters in my Bowers 683's a bit softer and less fatiguing, and most other corrections I make are less than 2db. If MCACC were left to its own devices I'd have an 8db boost here, a 6db cut there....yikes.
post #3789 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrummingdude View Post

One of my towers is pretty close to a corner, so I expect that one to be given more aggressive EQ treatment, however the other one is about as ideally placed as it gets, so go figure.

One interesting thing I discovered is that if I do the calibration with the diaphram(top) of the mic pointed forward, I get significantly less boosting of the high frequencies in MCACC as a result. I've seen this brought up a couple times in the past, and the poster is usually met with "it's an omnidirectional mic, so it doesn't matter." NOTHING could be further from the truth, and for folks to say that is reckless. I've tracked drums hundreds of times with several different omni mics...positioning still matters with regard to frequency. Not as much as cardioid family mics, but it still matters.

Now, after the fact, I usually adjust the eq by ear. MCACC to me, really is just a tool to cut out some room resonances with their standing frequency filter or whatever they call that parametric EQ. Again drawing from my tracking and mixing experience, I know that most EQ's sound much better dipping frequencies than they do boosting them, especially ones built to the price point of an all in one receiver wonderbox. In fact, the only EQ I've worked with which sounded great while boosting was a Manley Massive Passive, which is zen...and about 5 grand. So, I dip the most (3db) at 16k which makes the tweeters in my Bowers 683's a bit softer and less fatiguing, and most other corrections I make are less than 2db. If MCACC were left to its own devices I'd have an 8db boost here, a 6db cut there....yikes.

it's nice to have the knowledge such as yourself, knowing what to adjust manually eq on top of the MCACC auto eq.

i understand the frequency response range, but most of us don't have the in depth knowledge of a mixer, sound designer enough to manually adjust each frequency individually. MCACC auto calibration does a fine job making all my speakers blend together. only thing that drives my OCD crazy is every MCACC calibration i run, i can tell subtle differences in tone consistencies and it drives me crazy. in an ideal world, i would like it to be consistently the same across the frequency spectrum every other time i run the calibration. but everytime i run the calibration i can notice subtle variations of 0.5~2 db across the spectrum. mad.gif
post #3790 of 5340
I also discovered that having the mic on a tripod and either pointing it slightly forward, or backward, yielded different results. Pointing slightly forward did produce a less bright result with more mid range boost. Pointing slightly backwards produced a much more harsh, thin sound with the EQ all over the place. I simply ran MCACC several times while examining the results until I got the mic positioned correctly. My room is an acoustical nightmare so All Channel Adjust ended up being the most pleasing calibration.
post #3791 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by howzz1854 View Post

it's nice to have the knowledge such as yourself, knowing what to adjust manually eq on top of the MCACC auto eq.

i understand the frequency response range, but most of us don't have the in depth knowledge of a mixer, sound designer enough to manually adjust each frequency individually. MCACC auto calibration does a fine job making all my speakers blend together. only thing that drives my OCD crazy is every MCACC calibration i run, i can tell subtle differences in tone consistencies and it drives me crazy. in an ideal world, i would like it to be consistently the same across the frequency spectrum every other time i run the calibration. but everytime i run the calibration i can notice subtle variations of 0.5~2 db across the spectrum. mad.gif

Frequencies really aren't as hard to identify as most folks think. Even without music production experience, a quick web search can yield some pretty useful info on cross identifying certain instruments and sounds to their frequency range. Voices, for instance, can be affected all the way down to about 100hz. Most people when confronted with boomy or muddy vocals will start cutting out stuff between 250-500hz, which does work, but you should also try lower than that to see what it does. That's the main reason I run my center channel thinner in the mid-bass regions than I do my mains...voices are much more intelligible that way, and the mains can remain full and powerful for music and effects.
post #3792 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurolicious View Post

I also discovered that having the mic on a tripod and either pointing it slightly forward, or backward, yielded different results. Pointing slightly forward did produce a less bright result with more mid range boost. Pointing slightly backwards produced a much more harsh, thin sound with the EQ all over the place. I simply ran MCACC several times while examining the results until I got the mic positioned correctly. My room is an acoustical nightmare so All Channel Adjust ended up being the most pleasing calibration.

this is a very good tip. this could explain the 0.5~2db variances i've been experiencing. i've only started mounting the mic onto a tripod lately, before i was just putting it on top of my head. but even with tripod, i was noticing those slight variances. especially one time the result came out to be bass light, while another time came out muddy. Tho the last few times i ran MCACC, i made absolutely sure that the mic was leveled.

good tip.
post #3793 of 5340
With the mic on a tripod in my room MCACC runs are extremely repeatable.

Being able to hear 0.5 dB variations in FR is impressive.
post #3794 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

I just listened to it, with sub=Plus, fronts=Large. I heard lots of low bass from my sub.

I listened to the video in stereo mode xo at 100 Hz with the Large and the small setting. There is more bass with the small setting compared to Large. My RF 7's are rate to 32 or 34 Hz connected to a 250 watts/channel amp. The subs are the clear winner. If you can't hear the subs, then there is something wrong with the setup. The bass is more powerful with the subs using bass management and the speakers set to small! Bass management affords more headroom for the system. With the speakers set to small, the wattage of the amp never exceeded 1 watt, which mean it was all subs for the most part hitting 110-115 db.
post #3795 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

With the mic on a tripod in my room MCACC runs are extremely repeatable.

Being able to hear 0.5 dB variations in FR is impressive.

i've got cat ears biggrin.gif
post #3796 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurolicious View Post

I simply ran MCACC several times while examining the results until I got the mic positioned correctly.
That's interesting. So, what did the correct position turn out to be? Straight up?
post #3797 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

That's interesting. So, what did the correct position turn out to be? Straight up?

Straight Up is the correct & recommended position! for proper calibration.

no other position will give you an accurate measurement for all speakers of distances, channel levels, reverb compensation, & EQ.

if you want the sound to arrive at your ears at the same time with proper delays, levels and freq response, don't tilt it.

there was someone a few months ago who actually held the mic next to his nose with his head blocking the sound from the surrounds/rears and complained that the Pioneer sounded like crap rolleyes.gif I had to explain that the sound was bouncing off his face right into the mic throwing off the freq measurements plus completely blocking some of the sound. it was amazing to me that someone could lack that much common sense. this was a true post.

follow the recommendation of using a tripod or mic stand, put the tripod so that the mic is aimed directly up to the ceiling, horizontal to the floor, leveled, and not actually IN the seat where your butt sits, nothing in the way of clear line-of-sight to all speakers. this is the only way to get a proper calibration.

with all the information available in this forum, repeated thousands of times over a decade in all model threads, for all receiver brands, it's interesting that this issue still comes up and people will try all kinds of goofy ideas, ignoring common sense, don't bother to read the manual, then wonder why they have poor sound, or worse, trash the company, then ask for help in this forum rolleyes.gif

Pioneer even has a diagram with the mic on a tripod & tips in their manuals wink.gif
Edited by ss9001 - 4/4/13 at 5:05am
post #3798 of 5340
Subscribing to a great thread.
post #3799 of 5340
BTW -

GregLee, I wasn't picking on you or your question, in case you thought I was smile.gif
but I wanted to answer you & others in as clear a way as I could redface.gif

my rant doesn't apply to you of course smile.gif

I realize there are newcomers coming onstream all the time & info gets missed. so the advice has to get out over & over again. unfortunately, my frustration is with folks who aren't using their head or complain when they didn't use their head tongue.gif

when I got my 1st Pioneer Elite in 2002-3, the vsx-49txi, there were no good tips in the manual but it just made common sense to me to point a domed, circular directional mic directly up to the ceiling & not tilted.

AFAIK, it wasn't written down as gospel anywhere at that time by Pioneer but my thinking was the same as experienced Pioneer owners in this forum. as years pass, EVERY receiver brand, with Audyssey, YPAO & other systems, say exactly the same thing. why someone still thinks tilting it is going to give them an accurate measurement is a mystery to me.

tilting would mean whichever direction the mic is pointed at would make it more sensitive to the sounds from that direction and result in inaccurate measurements from all directions. I hope that makes sense.

the poster who you replied to confirms this with his own statements...that it made a difference in the levels & EQ which way he tilted it. so, logically, you wouldn't want to tilt it. pointing the domed part to the ceiling means it will behave as an omni-directional mic and receive sounds equally from all directions...exactly what you want!

I know it'll get asked again, repeatedly, maybe later today even in some thread tongue.gif

but at least, for now, today, in this thread wink.gif the correct way is on record smile.gif
Edited by ss9001 - 4/4/13 at 6:03am
post #3800 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

That's interesting. So, what did the correct position turn out to be? Straight up?

Tilting the mic just slightly forward.
post #3801 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

Straight Up is the correct & recommended position! for proper calibration.

no other position will give you an accurate measurement for all speakers of distances, channel levels, reverb compensation, & EQ.

if you want the sound to arrive at your ears at the same time with proper delays, levels and freq response, don't tilt it.

there was someone a few months ago who actually held the mic next to his nose with his head blocking the sound from the surrounds/rears and complained that the Pioneer sounded like crap rolleyes.gif I had to explain that the sound was bouncing off his face right into the mic throwing off the freq measurements plus completely blocking some of the sound. it was amazing to me that someone could lack that much common sense. this was a true post.

follow the recommendation of using a tripod or mic stand, put the tripod so that the mic is aimed directly up to the ceiling, horizontal to the floor, leveled, and not actually IN the seat where your butt sits, nothing in the way of clear line-of-sight to all speakers. this is the only way to get a proper calibration.

with all the information available in this forum, repeated thousands of times over a decade in all model threads, for all receiver brands, it's interesting that this issue still comes up and people will try all kinds of goofy ideas, ignoring common sense, don't bother to read the manual, then wonder why they have poor sound, or worse, trash the company, then ask for help in this forum rolleyes.gif

Pioneer even has a diagram with the mic on a tripod & tips in their manuals wink.gif

I don't recall saying that tilting the mic slightly forward yielded an accurate measurement nor did I imply it would. I simply offered an observation. You're welcome to disagree with it.
Edited by Kurolicious - 4/4/13 at 8:59am
post #3802 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurolicious View Post

I don't recall saying that tilting the mic slightly forward yielded an accurate measurement nor did I imply it would. I simply offered an observation. You're welcome to disagree with it.

you misunderstand. your observation does confirm that it makes a difference. and I wholeheartedly agree with your observation.

that is not the same as to which is the proper orientation. and that was my point. the proper orientation for an accurate measurement is horizontal aimed at the ceiling.

your observation confirms my point, that you actually got different results. you didn't claim yours was "accurate" so you posted nothing I disagreed with.

my reply was to address the question asked by GregLee as to which position was to quote him - "correct" - and straight up is the correct position for best accuracy. that has nothing to do with your observations or post.

what you did was an experiment just like I did the day before to check spooky's observations.

you can chill smile.gif
Edited by ss9001 - 4/4/13 at 9:03am
post #3803 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurolicious View Post

I don't recall saying that tilting the mic slightly forward yielded an accurate measurement nor did I imply it would. I simply offered an observation. You're welcome to disagree with it.

+1

"Correct" or not (which is a term I threw out the window with regards to audio years ago), in my front 3 channel calibration, having the mic tilted slightly forward yielded a sound that was more germane to the voicing of my speakers.

Now, would it be the best idea if I were calibrating surround speakers with the same test? Likely not, but to tell someone else he is flat out wrong is a bit absolute. After all, I don't recall Pioneer visiting my room with my speakers, dog, ceiling fan and glass of tea on my coffee table while designing their "one size fits all" approach to audio calibration...which is conveniently built to a price point anyone can afford. I've tracked and mixed using omni mics worth 100 times more than that cheapo one pioneer provides and even those have frequency characteristics which need to be addressed before they hit the 2 buss, preferably before any compression at all. To be regarding the mic which comes included with a very feature laden $1000 AVR as a precision instrument is foolish. Get your baselines and then tune by ear.
post #3804 of 5340
Right, Finally got to do some testing and I'm still losing bass from my FRONTS when using any surround mode when the sub is set to YES or PLUS. They sound just perfect and as they should when set to NO in any surround mode and stereo.

Tested this with MCACC, EQ and Standing wave control truned OFF and my sub powered off so I can guarantee the sound change in my FRONT speakers using the DPII music setting in all tests for continuity - No back speakers as I'm running the back channel as Bi-Amped (did test all other surround modes but outcome was the same)

Crossover frequency does not affect the sound so it's not that.


Setting the sub to YES should only output bass redirected to it from speakers set to SMALL according to the crossover setting when playing a stereo source and will only output the LFE channel when playing a source that includes an LFE channel. Correct?
So setting ALL my speakers to LARGE and the sub to YES should have no effect on the lower frequencies at all compared to setting the sub to NO when playing a stereo source as there are no small speakers for the sub to get involved. Correct?

Problem is, the distinct lack of bass is still there. Changing the Sub from NO to ON should have no effect at all on the sound as the amp does not have to redirect bass from any of the speakers as they are all set to large but it does and it sounds like I have set my speakers to SMALL.

If the presets could save speaker settings then I couldn't care less whats happening but as it stands I have to manually change it every evening when I turn the sub off to get decent sound. If I didn't just move to a new house with a copper next door who got the previous tenants evicted for noise pollution then once again it wouldn't be a problem as our last neighbours didn't mind the awesome rumbling coming from my front room biggrin.gif

So for some reason, when using a surround sound mode My receiver is stealing the lower frequencies from the front speakers when sub is set to ON or OFF and redirecting them to the sub or discarding them (Haven't tested which as I'm not disconnecting my fronts.)
Edit: I would err on the side of it being redirected as the surround modes have to create a subwoofer channel from the stereo source. Manual states I should get full range at the fronts regardless as long as they are set to large but that is not the case.
Edited by spookywillow - 4/4/13 at 10:01am
post #3805 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrummingdude View Post

Get your baselines and then tune by ear.

I do agree with this one thing you said wink.gif

I am saying that for optimum results start the baseline with the mic in an orientation where it neither increases or decreases the level & freq response from all speakers. that way you get a balanced measurement. and that would be held flat so that's its omnidirectional.

then run MCACC and if you'd like, you can tune by ear individual settings & EQ adjustments to taste. but at least your baseline isn't biased forward or backwards rolleyes.gif

starting with a baseline taken in a less-than-ideal manner seems pretty flawed to me even with a non-precision microphone. it's designed like a hockey puck for a reason.

if you choose to use it in a way that is counter-intuitive to its design, that's your choice but that doesn't mean it's the correct or best way.

let me enlighten you with some facts not personal preferences.

1. Audyssey mics are also designed to be pointed up.

quoting directly from Audyssey's General FAQ on how to do their measurements (Denon, Marantz, NAD, Onkyo use Audyssey):

'-Use only the microphone included with your AVR. If you cannot find it, contact the manufacturer for a replacement.
-Attach your microphone to a tripod.
-Take the measurements at ear height and with the mic facing the ceiling.
-Start the measurements from the primary listening location and spread out from there. Approximate distance from the first measurement position is 2 feet in any direction.
-Focus on the central listening area and avoid extreme positions such as the back wall or too far beyond the left and right speakers."

2. Yamaha's YPAO mics are designed to be pointed up.

directly from the Yamaha manual for their old $4K flagship model, the RX-Z11:

"Place the optimizer microphone at your normal listening position on a flat level surface with the omni-directional microphone heading upward."

3. Onkyo says the same thing for the mic they use (Audyssey) and

from the Onkyo 5010 manual:

"Position the microphone at ear height of a seated listener with the microphone tip pointed directly at the ceiling using a tripod. Do not hold the microphone in your hand during measurements as this will produce inaccurate results."

4. Anthem says the same thing for their ARC mic.

From pg 28 of the Anthem manual for their MRX receivers with their own proprietary room EQ system:

"Microphone positioning:
During measurement the microphone must point straight up."

that's 5 out of 5 companies, with different EQ systems, all recommending the same thing.

but what do the engineers at 5 out of 5 companies know? eek.gif I guess they're all being "a bit absolute" tongue.gif

This thread is supposed to be about "science", objectively how best to use MCACC for best overall performance not someone's personal audio voodoo.

If you want to do it your way, there's no law against it...the Pioneer police aren't going to knock on your door. but don't pretend it's the best way because it's not.

am I wasting my time in this thread trying to explain things in an objective manner?

seems that way...some of you want to do things against common sense!
Edited by ss9001 - 4/4/13 at 11:46am
post #3806 of 5340
^^^ no you're not. i find your post helpful.

i knew it was supposed to be pointed upward, i just didn't know it would affect the resulting sound in such a large increment just by slight variation of tilt. i never took it seriously and always has it on top of my head pointing upward, until i started putting it on the tripod and noticed slight sound variations produced.
post #3807 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrummingdude View Post

Frequencies really aren't as hard to identify as most folks think. Even without music production experience, a quick web search can yield some pretty useful info on cross identifying certain instruments and sounds to their frequency range. Voices, for instance, can be affected all the way down to about 100hz. Most people when confronted with boomy or muddy vocals will start cutting out stuff between 250-500hz, which does work, but you should also try lower than that to see what it does. That's the main reason I run my center channel thinner in the mid-bass regions than I do my mains...voices are much more intelligible that way, and the mains can remain full and powerful for music and effects.

Now that is news I can use, thanks!
post #3808 of 5340
i have a VSX-822-K. It seems that this model does not allow to
modify whatever MCACC calibrates. There is no way to manipulate
the resulting configuration.

I would like to add more bass to the MCACC setting. The resulting
configuration lacks of low frecuencies.

Any help ? I would appreciate very much any ideas.
post #3809 of 5340
turn up the gain on those frequencies
post #3810 of 5340
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

I do agree with this one thing you said wink.gif

I am saying that for optimum results start the baseline with the mic in an orientation where it neither increases or decreases the level & freq response from all speakers. that way you get a balanced measurement. and that would be held flat so that's its omnidirectional.

then run MCACC and if you'd like, you can tune by ear individual settings & EQ adjustments to taste. but at least your baseline isn't biased forward or backwards rolleyes.gif

starting with a baseline taken in a less-than-ideal manner seems pretty flawed to me even with a non-precision microphone. it's designed like a hockey puck for a reason.

if you choose to use it in a way that is counter-intuitive to its design, that's your choice but that doesn't mean it's the correct or best way.

let me enlighten you with some facts not personal preferences.

1. Audyssey mics are also designed to be pointed up.

quoting directly from Audyssey's General FAQ on how to do their measurements (Denon, Marantz, NAD, Onkyo use Audyssey):

'-Use only the microphone included with your AVR. If you cannot find it, contact the manufacturer for a replacement.
-Attach your microphone to a tripod.
-Take the measurements at ear height and with the mic facing the ceiling.
-Start the measurements from the primary listening location and spread out from there. Approximate distance from the first measurement position is 2 feet in any direction.
-Focus on the central listening area and avoid extreme positions such as the back wall or too far beyond the left and right speakers."

2. Yamaha's YPAO mics are designed to be pointed up.

directly from the Yamaha manual for their old $4K flagship model, the RX-Z11:

"Place the optimizer microphone at your normal listening position on a flat level surface with the omni-directional microphone heading upward."

3. Onkyo says the same thing for the mic they use (Audyssey) and

from the Onkyo 5010 manual:

"Position the microphone at ear height of a seated listener with the microphone tip pointed directly at the ceiling using a tripod. Do not hold the microphone in your hand during measurements as this will produce inaccurate results."

4. Anthem says the same thing for their ARC mic.

From pg 28 of the Anthem manual for their MRX receivers with their own proprietary room EQ system:

"Microphone positioning:
During measurement the microphone must point straight up."

that's 5 out of 5 companies, with different EQ systems, all recommending the same thing.

but what do the engineers at 5 out of 5 companies know? eek.gif I guess they're all being "a bit absolute" tongue.gif

This thread is supposed to be about "science", objectively how best to use MCACC for best overall performance not someone's personal audio voodoo.

If you want to do it your way, there's no law against it...the Pioneer police aren't going to knock on your door. but don't pretend it's the best way because it's not.

am I wasting my time in this thread trying to explain things in an objective manner?

seems that way...some of you want to do things against common sense!

Ok, I dont have a whole lot of time, but enough to give you a quick and dirty about high frequency directionality with regard to omni microphones.

Microphones all have a diaphragm which is mounted in a surround commonly called a capsule. The capsule is then either mounted in a chassis pointed in a certain direction (like a cardiod or hyper-cardiod), or is baffled to create a wider dispersion pattern. Omni's typically use the latter design and are often spherical. Martin Schneider has written a pretty good paper on the validity of different materials used in omni capsules if you're interested in searching it out.

On to my point. ALL microphones are VERY directional as the frequency rises, period. If you read my previous posts, you'll notice that I was referring to my measurement of my front soundstage only, since I measure my rear with a different approach.

Here is a link to an interactive frequency plot of the Neumann M-150. It is an omnidirectional, large diaphragm tube microphone, retails at around $7000, and is regarded as being one of the finest available. At first blush as you look at the chart, it appears that the plot is very balanced (it's quite lovely actually), but if you click on the bottom of the graph you'll notice that as the frequency rises, by 16k you are measuring almost nothing into the back. You still need to point it at your primary source. The "Omniness" of the mic is more used as a tool to incorporate room reflections (often in very nice, expensive studios with diffusers all over the place) in to your track.

http://www.neumann.com/zoom.php?zoomimg=./assets/diagrams/m150_diagrams.htm&zoomlabel=Diagram&w=878&h=295

Now we're on to brass tacks. The reason Pioneer and all those other manufacturers you listed decided to use a (cheap) omni mic with a static measuring position is three fold. Cost, user friendliness, and enviornmental unpredictability. You see, the engineers over at Pioneer WANT to measure reflections coming off of the ceiling so they can offset those reflections by dipping frequencies. However, as my link just demonstrated, a high frequency beamed directly at the SIDE of an omni mic will be much attenuated VS one beamed right at the front of the diaphragm...which will coincidentally be more accurate.

For this reason, as myself and others have observed, MCACC has an unnatrural boosting of high frequencies as a result of a measurement taken by aiming the mic straight up. Its great that all those manufacturers recommend positioning it like that, but dont fool yourself into thinking the reason is anything other than the reluctance those manufacturers to include a cardiod mic with the instruction to aim it towards each speaker at different times in the test, and the reluctance of said engineers to develoip and include such features in the $1000 wonderbox AVR. Untill that day, they have staked their bets that the lay public can grasp easier the concept of pointing a VERY cheaply made test mic up and hitting the go button. I have yet to see any real specs on the cheaply made mic in question, but the physics are pretty sound on this one.
Edited by adrummingdude - 4/4/13 at 2:38pm
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