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 152

post #4531 of 5316
The MCACC calibration put my sub crossover at 150hz. Is this bad? Everywhere I've read said to stick around 80.
post #4532 of 5316
^^
depends on the bass response of your speakers. are they satellite type speakers? make & model? if small satellites, then they may be rated for only 120 hz or so. if that's the case, then 150 is appropriate. if they are normal bookshelf or tower speakers, capable of 80 hz or lower, then 80 is appropriate. if you are mixing and matching small satellites for surrounds with more full range fronts, then MCACC has to pick one crossover that's appropriate for the speakers with the least bass freq response.

if all your speakers have bass capability down to 80Hz or below, then you may have had something interfere with proper measuring. make sure you place the mic properly and near your listening position, preferably on a tripod or mic stand sitting in the main seat - listening position, with the mic pointed directly up to the ceiling, not tilted forward or back.
post #4533 of 5316
Since when does MCACC set the crossover? I still have an older SC-07 unit and I've never seen it set it after running MCACC.
post #4534 of 5316
I have Infinity tower Beta 50's for my L/R and Infinity OWS-1's for my sides and rears. Center Channel is Infinity C-351.

The beta 50's can get down to 35
OWS-1's down to 70
C-351 down to 80
post #4535 of 5316
^^
the best crossover for the combination of these speakers would be 80hz which you can set manually in the Manual Speaker setup menu.

don't know why you got 150. my SC-68 initially had set mine to 100 which I manually set to 80. that was before I added a bass panel from Magnepan to supplement the bass limited Maggie center. and my SC-09 and VSx-59txi and 49txi before it always set it to 80 hz. you may have a measurement anomaly from mic positioning, listener position or room bass response (sitting in bass dip or null from standing waves)

and yes, the receiver does automatically set the crossover when Auto MCACC is run. the default out of the box crossover for both the SC-68 and the SC-1222K is 80 Hz, and I know for a fact that my SC-68 set it at 100 when I ran Full Auto MCACC (all 3 presets). and yours was set to 150 Hz. plus, if you think about it, it has to, otherwise how would a "newbie" or just new owner get an decent initial calibration running Auto MCACC for the 1st time. the receiver wouldn't know if little lifestyle sats were connected or large full towers. it has to measure the bass capability, down to 63 hz, decide whether to set as Large or Small and then pick the best compromise crossover for all them. another point - how would a true newbie know which crossover to manually select when many don't really know enough about their speakers to pick one? wink.gif Pioneer, like all mfg's doing auto room EQ systems, has to account for people with next to no knowledge. so, there's empirical evidence combined with sensible approach to design saying the same thing >> it makes some measurements and decides in same way to set the crossover in Auto MCACC. but the owner is free to change it manually at any time - no different than what Denon, Marantz, Yamaha and Onkyo do wink.gif

when I added the Magnepan bass panet to my center speaker and reran Auto MCACC, it used 80, when without the bass panel, it compromised it to 100.
Edited by ss9001 - 11/3/13 at 6:23am
post #4536 of 5316
When I first bought my SC-07, I though that it was setting the crossover after running "Full Auto MCACC". After I moved from an apartment to a house, I had the chance to build two systems. My main system where we watch most movies and listen to some music is using a Cambridge Audio Minx system (link in Signature) that comprises of very small satellite speakers. I've gone to a nice size 7.1 capable system living room space in an apartment, to a house where I can barely fit a 5.2 system in because of size and layout. I can set the crossover point anywhere before I run MCACC and it always ends up staying where I set it which I find odd.
post #4537 of 5316
^^
understood...and maybe that's how the earlier models worked. all I can is the SC-68 has a default of 80Hz and it initially set the Xover to 100 before I changed it. unless it came from the factory that way, which is highly doubtful. it was a brand new one, sealed in box, nothing configured.
post #4538 of 5316
When I run auto mcacc its always set my xover at 100 and my fronts to large...Im running polk STi10's, CS10 center, and FXiA6's for rears. With dual Hsu 12 subs AND with my new Rythmik FV15HP. Dunno why. I just manually set it at 80 and fronts to small.
post #4539 of 5316
Plus, I may have miss it but I'm not seeing in the MCACC section of the Manual for my particular AVR that states running MCACC sets the Subwoofer crossover level automatically. Though, I do get your previous point regarding why it should. Perhaps, an excuse to purchase a new AVR? biggrin.gif
post #4540 of 5316
What does setting the sub to plus do?
post #4541 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

What does setting the sub to plus do?

In general it will muddy up the sound, lol.
post #4542 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

What does setting the sub to plus do?
Someone correct me if I'm explaining this wrong, but I believe it sends and lower frequencies to both the sub AND your front L and R. So, the crossover point is bypassed and your receiver sends the full spectrum of frequencies to front L/R, as well as to the sub. There are a million opinions in regards to this, but IMHO, this is bad for a number of reasons. One of which being that amplifying low frequencies, say below 50Hz, becomes harder for the receiver to do and thus puts a tremendous load on your receiver. Crossover at 80Hz for your fronts means you'll receiver won't have to break a sweat and allows your sub(s) do what they were intended to do.....reproduce those low, low frequencies. Hope this helps.
post #4543 of 5316
Thank you. Also, when MCACC sets the X.Over, it's setting it for LFE right? And not LPF?
post #4544 of 5316
I just purchased an SC-77 but am unhappy. I've been so please with the sonics of my SC-1222-K but the SC-77 is driving me crazy.

After running MCACC, it's terribly bright and forward with no meaty lower midrange like on the 1222. I've followed the steps posted here and on other forums although the SC-77's user interface is different. Just wondering if the 1222-K is a fluke and most MCACC calibrations are harsh and forward. I've experimented with the reverb timings, crossovers so I guess I'll return it.
post #4545 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by loop7 View Post

I just purchased an SC-77 but am unhappy. I've been so please with the sonics of my SC-1222-K but the SC-77 is driving me crazy.

After running MCACC, it's terribly bright and forward with no meaty lower midrange like on the 1222. I've followed the steps posted here and on other forums although the SC-77's user interface is different. Just wondering if the 1222-K is a fluke and most MCACC calibrations are harsh and forward. I've experimented with the reverb timings, crossovers so I guess I'll return it.

ditch the MCACC and set the eq's and levels yourself, channel by channel
post #4546 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Thank you. Also, when MCACC sets the X.Over, it's setting it for LFE right? And not LPF?

to address the question I bolded, whether it effects the LFE has been debated for a long time. I don't think we know 100% for sure although some people have results that they think show it does. I have a white paper by Pioneer that sort of implies that it doesn't.

but it is the LPF for all speakers.

and for the record, LFE is not the same thing as "bass". it is the dedicated .1 channel in 5.1/7.1 tracks. re-directed bass from speakers set to Small gets added to the LFE and that combined bass is what's sent to a subwoofer.
post #4547 of 5316
+1. It's the LPF. The LFE channel is something different as explained by Steve. Pioneer used to toss the LFE content above the LPF setting, a small loss in the real world. Most AVR's route the LFE content over the LPF setting to the L/R speakers (there's a diagram in a white paper someplace on the Dolby site). I thought I had read that had been changed but I do not know, do not have a newer Pio to measure it on anyway (nor time etc.)
post #4548 of 5316
Ok so maybe it's a good thing for it to be set at 150 then for them amp? Is there a way to set the crossover for the speakers then via MCACC?
post #4549 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Ok so maybe it's a good thing for it to be set at 150 then for them amp? Is there a way to set the crossover for the speakers then via MCACC?

just based on what you said your speaker's rated response was, I probably would disagree with setting them to 150 Hz; personally I'd set them to 80Hz, or at least no higher than 100 Hz, because your speakers are all capable of at least that. if you set it to 150 Hz, bass from the sub will become more localizable unless you have it center between the 2 fronts wink.gif you could experiment with 80, 100 & 150 to see which you prefer. and you don't have to re-run MCACC each time you change the crossover.

If you are concerned about missing something between 80 and 120Hz, don't be. as I said, it's unproven whether Pioneer tosses LFE above the crossover but even if it did, you won't miss much and I'd take non-localizable bass as the "lesser of 2 evils". plus, it's not a hard cutoff but a more gradual roll-off, 24 dB/octave. as the bass above the crossover gets rolled off in the sub, the main speakers will be starting to reproduce it. at least that's how I think about it smile.gif

if you intend to have the sub reproduce more of the bass by raising the crossover above 80 or 100, then I'd make sure you place it where your ears won't be saying - "hey, all the bass sounds likes it's coming from the left corner now" and setting it to 150 or 200 Hz is a sure way to get that effect. if you had satellites with limited bass capability, you'd have no alternative but you do.

one of the reasons THX recommended 80 Hz is because bass < 80 Hz is essentially non-localizable to our perception.

changing the crossover is covered in the manual, under Speaker Settings, but you'll find it not in the MCACC menu, but in the Manual Speaker Setup menu: Manual SP Setup >> Speaker etting. like I'm fond of saying - check your manual.
Edited by ss9001 - 11/4/13 at 12:20pm
post #4550 of 5316
"Are you sure that the 150 figure isn't for the LPF for the LFE channel? This needs to be set to at least 120Hz (some amps allow higher) because the LFE channel may contain sounds up to 120Hz. This is different to the crossover settings for the speakers which are the point where the lower notes get diverted to the subwoofer."

Taken from another thread. Just want to make sure i'm doing this right. appreciate the time taken as well sir.
post #4551 of 5316
Pioneer does not (or did not, I do not have a newer unit to play with) allow you to set the sub crossover and LFE points separately.

I would do what Steve says, set it at 80 Hz and forget about it.
post #4552 of 5316
^^
Thank you smile.gif

mijotter, Pioneer doesn't nor ever has had a separate, adjustable LPF for LFE, like Denon, Marantz, Onkyo. However it works, Pioneer's crossover is combined into one setting.

what we don't know is if it's done this way:

Sub = Sum of LPF ((Redirected Bass from Small Speakers)) + LFE Channel

or this way:

Sub = LPF ((Redirected Bass from Small Speakers + LFE Channel))

If it's the latter, then yes, it will effect the LFE, but there is no documentation how Pioneer actually implements it. Some in this thread claim to have measurements that suggest it's the latter. But I personally can't duplicate them; when I measure my subs response by itself with test tones, it goes out past 120 all the way to its own cut-off at 150Hz with Pioneer crossover set to 80 Hz. So I'm not going to guarantee you it's one way or the other. What has been posted by some online source years ago, in the early 2000's, that older, budget Pioneer models along with many others, did implement it the latter way which is not the preferred way. What no one knows for sure is if the more expensive Elite models, especially newer ones, do it the preferred and technically more correct former way.

It won't matter in the real world since the amount of info between 80 - 120 is not much. Pioneer defaults to THX recommendations of 80Hz so if their audio engineers thought it was a big deal, I would think they'd default to a higher freq. And based on my own personal conversations with the head of marketing at Pioneer US Home Audio, their audio engineers consider their sound quality very very important. What more can I say?

Up to you where you want to set it, as long as your main speakers can handle bass to the point where you set it.

in my own system, all my speakers are capable of 80 Hz, fronts much lower, and my own decision has always been to use 80 Hz and be done with it rather than agonize over some theoretical issue. In the days before bass management in receives, I once used a sub that got full range freq's and a high internal crossover. I personally hated the way it pulled all the bass to one side of the room - didn't sound natural at all.

so go with a high crossover & live with off center bass or place the sub right in front of your TV to make it sound centered...or use a crossover that will result in non-localizable bass.

your choice
Edited by ss9001 - 11/5/13 at 3:17am
post #4553 of 5316
Alright, I have been having trouble with getting ZERO bass from my KEF Q900, running them with an SC-67. I called in a professional installer and he couldn't find any problems with the speakers.

So now I am left with lifeless speakers with no low end. Any ideas how to get the best out of these speakers using the SC-67?

I'm all out of options.
post #4554 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by jer181 View Post

Alright, I have been having trouble with getting ZERO bass from my KEF Q900, running them with an SC-67. I called in a professional installer and he couldn't find any problems with the speakers.

So now I am left with lifeless speakers with no low end. Any ideas how to get the best out of these speakers using the SC-67?

I'm all out of options.

Set your receiver to 2ch pure direct mode and see what happens with no EQ or anything applied. If that doesn't help you, then it is most likely a problem with your room acoustics.
post #4555 of 5316
I came on here to add as well, that I just got done messing with MCACC for an afternoon and I cannot get it to sound good at all. It absolutely KILLS proper stereo imaging for me. 5.1 is better but still a bit bright and it's obviously setting the subwoofer far too low.

I've played around with the advanced EQ and etc., but it's just not cutting it. I'm running with no-eq now and am happy, I guess it was good for setting the speaker distance!
post #4556 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcdade View Post

Set your receiver to 2ch pure direct mode and see what happens with no EQ or anything applied. If that doesn't help you, then it is most likely a problem with your room acoustics.

I have and it doesn't improve the low end. I don't get it, I have read so many reviews and talked with so many people on forums who have these speakers and they say that they just pound!!! I don't hear that what so ever.

I guess its figuring how to treat that room now or get a good sub.
post #4557 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcdade View Post

I came on here to add as well, that I just got done messing with MCACC for an afternoon and I cannot get it to sound good at all. It absolutely KILLS proper stereo imaging for me. 5.1 is better but still a bit bright and it's obviously setting the subwoofer far too low.

I've played around with the advanced EQ and etc., but it's just not cutting it. I'm running with no-eq now and am happy, I guess it was good for setting the speaker distance!

I'm really starting to think that the SC-67 is just not the way to go running these speakers. I'm going to go buy a good dedicated 2 channel power amp and see what the hell that does. Its way too much money to spend on this setup to not be 100% thrilled everything single time you turn the power on!
post #4558 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by jer181 View Post

I'm really starting to think that the SC-67 is just not the way to go running these speakers. I'm going to go buy a good dedicated 2 channel power amp and see what the hell that does. Its way too much money to spend on this setup to not be 100% thrilled everything single time you turn the power on!

You'll be wasting money, an SC-67 will drive those speakers just fine. Unless you are hearing clipping a dedicated and more powerful amp isn't going to make a bit of difference.

Check out this quote from the Stereophile Q900 review:
Quote:
All that cone area led me to expect a very full, rich balance—but that's not what I heard. My first impression of the Q900 was of a well-balanced sound that was, if anything, a bit lightweight. However, that reservation faded quickly, as I stopped comparing the KEFs to the Audyssey- and sub-assisted system they'd replaced.
post #4559 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcdade View Post

You'll be wasting money, an SC-67 will drive those speakers just fine. Unless you are hearing clipping a dedicated and more powerful amp isn't going to make a bit of difference.

Check out this quote from the Stereophile Q900 review:

Rather then spend my money on another amp, would you say it would be wiser to order a good sub so that I can have some nice deep bass and really hear when a drum solo is going on in the music....

If so, any suggestions that would pair well?
post #4560 of 5316
Quote:
Originally Posted by jer181 View Post

I have and it doesn't improve the low end. I don't get it, I have read so many reviews and talked with so many people on forums who have these speakers and they say that they just pound!!! I don't hear that what so ever.

I guess its figuring how to treat that room now or get a good sub.

if you used Pure Direct on some 2 ch source (no sub) then it's not your speakers and not the receiver calibration. we've said get a sub for "pounding" bass. your KEF Q900's are:

Frequency range (-6dB) 35Hz - 45kHz
Frequency response (±3dB) 40Hz - 28kHz

while it's very good bass response, this is not subwoofer territory by any stretch. look at the 40 Hz spec which is 3 dB down from the avg level. very respectable. so if you're not getting any appreciable bass, then you are probably sitting in a bass null where you expect to hear what most call "bass", the 60 Hz region. the only cure for that is move your seat.

have you done any of the things, I and some others suggested? walked around your room, move your head a ft or 2 forward or backwards while playing a test tone or strong bass line and see if it gets stronger?

and yes, you need a subwoofer to duplicate the bass you hear in a sound effects laden movie.

the only speakers I ever owned that had huge bass output were Acoustic Research towers I bought in the 80's, which had 2 - 12 in true woofers, 1 on each side. no passive radiators to enhance the bass, like your KEF's but real subwoofer sized woofers wink.gif those were truly capable of reaching to 20 hz region but in every other aspect, their sound sucked, the worst speakers I ever owned - no depth, no imaging, and harsh highs, they couldn't hold a candle to my 1st Magnepans @ $500 that had much less bass.

if you are truly interested in having big bass for home theater, a good sub is mandatory. not some wimpy 8" job, capable of 30 hz or so, you need to get something that gets to at least mid-20's and preferably 20Hz (or lower). they don't come cheap but there are excellent choices, Velodyne, Fathom are good choices for sealed cabinet, servo controlled designs and are in the high price end. SVS, HSU Research, Rhythmic are excellent choices that won't break the bank. personally, I'd take a good look at SVS. they have some very capable subs.

I don't know exactly why your setup is under-performing, I don't think anyone here can tell you why...we can offer ideas and that's it.

but the 1st thing I would do is >>> MOVE your head and/or MOVE the KEF's! Try moving them further away from the front wall. move 'em out 3-5 ft and listen again. people who place their speakers right against the front wall so they look nice with the TV may be compromising their performance. ANY speaker sounds better moved away from the front wall - they'll image better, have more soundstage depth and possibly have better bass response. if you have yours against the wall, try moving them out at least several feet, even if they're in front of the plane of the TV. you have nothing to lose and they might sound better.

and I have to ask, are you sure you have the bi-amp knob turned the right way so that you haven't disabled the woofer? wink.gif

and remember, because you have no sub, the Pioneer should have set them to Large and unless you have a center or surrounds, you don't set the crossover, it should be grayed out. the fronts should be getting a full-range signal. but Pure Direct defeats any bass mgmt anyway so that's the true test of what your fronts can do by themselves.
Edited by ss9001 - 11/6/13 at 3:22pm
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