or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" Pioneer Elite SC-55/SC-57 Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The "Official" Pioneer Elite SC-55/SC-57 Owners Thread - Page 120

post #3571 of 3982
After a quick search and review of this thread I think I know where people will land on this issue, but it does sound like a couple people may have tried this both ways so I am going to ask anyway...

Tonight the SC-57, B&W PM-1s (fronts), B&W CMC (centre), B&W M-1(rear surrounds) and B&W ASW610XP all arrive. I am wondering if anyone has made any conclusions about the value of bi-amping the fronts? From what I have read here the SC-57 is passively bi-amping so it is just sending full signal through two different amps (ie, it isn't splitting high and low frequencies and using different amps for each) which may not have much value. I can certainly give it a shot both ways but I wanted to see if anyone had tried it both way and had strong thoughts about it.

Any feedback will be appreciated...
post #3572 of 3982
It works as you say. I would not waste my time and wire. Opinions vary.
post #3573 of 3982
Dont quote me but in the manual when talking about bi-amping, it says just that... Page 18 "Bi-amping is when you connect the high frequency driver and low frequency driver of your speakers to different amplifiers for better crossover performance". I'm assuming that internally that means the Amp is driving low frequncy only to the low frequency driver, and high frequency only to the high frequency driver?! I have B & W CM9's at the front and found there was a small difference (whether real or not smile.gif to the sound, but the biggest difference was going up to good quality thick speaker wire...
post #3574 of 3982
I have no idea what they mean by that. There are not independent crossovers in the AVR, so it is sending the same signal to the upper and lower terminals of your speakers. The crossover in the speaker sees the same signal as if there were a single amp. The loading on the amps differ, and there are other technical things going on, but I find it hard to believe there would be audible differences.

Single amp --> speaker => single amp handles highs and lows for the entire speaker

Passive bi-amp --> speaker => both amps have the same output signal, with one amp driving only the LF driver(s) and the other driving only the HF driver(s). Note the net power delivered is the same, you've just split the frequency bands. The power drawn from the wall is higher since the amps are not 100% efficient, and there will be a slight noise increase but that is inaudible in any practical sense. The HF amp will not "see" the LF load and vice-versa, potentially reducing the modulation of the amplifiers' outputs by the speaker, the usual rationale for claimed benefits. Unless you have a very high output impedance (poor amp) and/or very difficult speaker load any difference is very probably going to be inaudible.

I have simulated the passive bi-amp condition with typical amplifiers and speakers and find it hard to imagine a real-world system benefit for any but the most extreme cases. However, people will debate this, like many facets of this hobby, until and well beyond the cows come home. If nothing else, the "I can hear better than you and/or my system is better than yours" argument seems to work well. smile.gif

FWIWFM, YMMV, IMO, etc. - Don
post #3575 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I have no idea what they mean by that. There are not independent crossovers in the AVR, so it is sending the same signal to the upper and lower terminals of your speakers. The crossover in the speaker sees the same signal as if there were a single amp. The loading on the amps differ, and there are other technical things going on, but I find it hard to believe there would be audible differences.
Single amp --> speaker => single amp handles highs and lows for the entire speaker
Passive bi-amp --> speaker => both amps have the same output signal, with one amp driving only the LF driver(s) and the other driving only the HF driver(s).

Don is correct, there is no independent acting crossovers in the AVR. If you think about it, how could there be? How would Pioneer know the characteristics of each driver in thousands of possible speakers being connected? Common sense & logic has to prevail, folks.

Biamping via active crossover box where YOU or the designer selects xover points between woofer, mid and tweeter and even that is an art and the good analog ones, like Marchand, Bryston, Pass Labs can cost upwards $1000-3000 or more. Of course, one can always get a $300 Behringer and experiment to their heart's content BUT this is in the digital domain, taking the preamp outs, doing a A-to-D convert then an D-to-A convert before being output to amps.

There's no way Pioneer is doing or ever has done this in ANY of their receiver models.

So, the best you will get is passive bi-amping which has no real performance advantage. One amp for low drivers, one for highs but the speaker's own internal crossover is still used, so what's the difference, besides using up un-used amps. The power increase or added headroom from adding the extra amp is minimal.

But to each his own...
post #3576 of 3982
My sc55 when playing movies in dts master hd cause my speakers to make a popping noise.. All other soundtracks play fine. Only in dts. Any ideas
Edited by Ron32 - 11/20/12 at 6:46pm
post #3577 of 3982
Re. active crossovers: I am using a dbx 223S, also around $300 but analog, to crossover from my Magnepans to my subs. Steve listed a range of other crossovers; another inexpensive option is a miniDSP, though that also adds an A/D and D/A conversion. I do miss my old ARC tube crossover (long gone, alas).
post #3578 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron32 View Post

My sc55 when playing movies in dts master hd cause my speakers to make a popping noise.. All other soundtracks play fine. Only in dts. Any ideas

which movies?
post #3579 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I have no idea what they mean by that. There are not independent crossovers in the AVR, so it is sending the same signal to the upper and lower terminals of your speakers. The crossover in the speaker sees the same signal as if there were a single amp. The loading on the amps differ, and there are other technical things going on, but I find it hard to believe there would be audible differences.
Single amp --> speaker => single amp handles highs and lows for the entire speaker
Passive bi-amp --> speaker => both amps have the same output signal, with one amp driving only the LF driver(s) and the other driving only the HF driver(s). Note the net power delivered is the same, you've just split the frequency bands. The power drawn from the wall is higher since the amps are not 100% efficient, and there will be a slight noise increase but that is inaudible in any practical sense. The HF amp will not "see" the LF load and vice-versa, potentially reducing the modulation of the amplifiers' outputs by the speaker, the usual rationale for claimed benefits. Unless you have a very high output impedance (poor amp) and/or very difficult speaker load any difference is very probably going to be inaudible.
I have simulated the passive bi-amp condition with typical amplifiers and speakers and find it hard to imagine a real-world system benefit for any but the most extreme cases. However, people will debate this, like many facets of this hobby, until and well beyond the cows come home. If nothing else, the "I can hear better than you and/or my system is better than yours" argument seems to work well. smile.gif
FWIWFM, YMMV, IMO, etc. - Don

Don, just trying to make sure I understand things here...

It sounds like there is a theoretical benefit to the passive bi-amping in that if the LF load causes the amp to roll off then because you are using two amps the HF amp doesn't roll off so in dynamic use you might carry some "better" HFs or LFs when with just a simgle amp an extra requirement on one of those frequencies might impact the other. Hard to quantify/qualify/test/prove that this sounds better.

So what are the drawbacks? Time, effort, number of amps required, wire required, extra noise due to extra amps. Anything else? Basically I am thinking I already have the amps, I already have the wire and the work isn't really anything extra other than a few extra bannana plug prep....So unless there are some negatives to doing it I might as well take the potential upside because I have already paid for all the reasons to skip it....
post #3580 of 3982
Not quite... Two (main) things:

1. With passive bi-amping, the voltage out of both amp channels is the same (for all practical purposes), but the LF input is high-impedance to HF signals and vice-versa. So, each amp delivers power (voltage * current, current = voltage / impedance) only in the frequency band used by the respective input (high or low). The reduced current demand can improve the performance of the amp. In the real world I doubt you could tell without sophisticated measuring equipment, especially at typical power levels. It is of theoretical but no practical benefit in virtually all cases. Which means all audiophiles feel they must be one of those extreme cases wherein it actually matters...

2. The other potential benefit arises because speakers are effectively motors in reverse. Move a speaker, and a corresponding voltage and current is generated. If the amp does not perfectly control the speaker, then this "kickback" can modulate (and thus distort) the amplifier's output. Bi-amping isolates the HF and LF load from their respective amplifiers, which does not solve the kickback problem but means LF kickback does not impact the HF amp and vice-versa. So, a second-order reduction in HF/LF "crosstalk" is possible, although the first-order modulation by the speaker into each amp is still present. Again much more likely to be a theoretical than practical benefit. Again meaning every audiophile feels he can hear the difference no matter what measurements might say…

A drawback you did not state is more power supply utilization, and unfortunately the power supply is one of the weak links in most AVRs. You are using power in the extra amplifier and that means less total power supply capacity. You may find more benefit in doubling the wire to reduce loss to the speaker and using just one amp. However, many people claim to hear differences despite the lack of scientific evidence, as is true with many things audio, so have fun!
post #3581 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

which movies?
Any movie that the soundtrack is dts master hd. I have o change both blu ray player to PCM
post #3582 of 3982
Don, thanks for the lesson. I wired it up bi-amped figuring there was little downside, but maybe the power supply might rear its ugly head...I will keep an eye out for it.

On a different note, when using MCACC is there only one seating position measured? I have a Denon unit and the Audessy set up measures multiple seats....Not htat it is better or worse or anything I just want to know what to expect. Looking at the manual makes me think MCACC is a single seat deal.
post #3583 of 3982
NP.

I have an SC-27 and am pretty sure it only does one seating position, though you can move the mic and save different settings. I thought the newer models might allow you to do an average but am not sure, sorry...

My room is heavily treated so about the only thing that changes from one end of the couch to the other is the respective distance and level trims, no significant change to EQ.
post #3584 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtm73 View Post

Don, thanks for the lesson. I wired it up bi-amped figuring there was little downside, but maybe the power supply might rear its ugly head...I will keep an eye out for it.
On a different note, when using MCACC is there only one seating position measured? I have a Denon unit and the Audessy set up measures multiple seats....Not htat it is better or worse or anything I just want to know what to expect. Looking at the manual makes me think MCACC is a single seat deal.

Although you measure only one spot at a time you can have multiple different measurements

See pare 75 of the manual
post #3585 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Not quite... Two (main) things:
1. With passive bi-amping, the voltage out of both amp channels is the same (for all practical purposes), but the LF input is high-impedance to HF signals and vice-versa. So, each amp delivers power (voltage * current, current = voltage / impedance) only in the frequency band used by the respective input (high or low). The reduced current demand can improve the performance of the amp. In the real world I doubt you could tell without sophisticated measuring equipment, especially at typical power levels. It is of theoretical but no practical benefit in virtually all cases. Which means all audiophiles feel they must be one of those extreme cases wherein it actually matters...
2. The other potential benefit arises because speakers are effectively motors in reverse. Move a speaker, and a corresponding voltage and current is generated. If the amp does not perfectly control the speaker, then this "kickback" can modulate (and thus distort) the amplifier's output. Bi-amping isolates the HF and LF load from their respective amplifiers, which does not solve the kickback problem but means LF kickback does not impact the HF amp and vice-versa. So, a second-order reduction in HF/LF "crosstalk" is possible, although the first-order modulation by the speaker into each amp is still present. Again much more likely to be a theoretical than practical benefit. Again meaning every audiophile feels he can hear the difference no matter what measurements might say…
A drawback you did not state is more power supply utilization, and unfortunately the power supply is one of the weak links in most AVRs. You are using power in the extra amplifier and that means less total power supply capacity. You may find more benefit in doubling the wire to reduce loss to the speaker and using just one amp. However, many people claim to hear differences despite the lack of scientific evidence, as is true with many things audio, so have fun!

I can also think of another treason, heat, two FETs will distribute out the heat more
post #3586 of 3982
I am not sure if you are citing that as a pro or con? Two amplifiers running means more net heat, but distributed over a larger area. I lumped thermal in with extra power, did not state explicitly, sorry.
post #3587 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I am not sure if you are citing that as a pro or con? Two amplifiers running means more net heat, but distributed over a larger area. I lumped thermal in with extra power, did not state explicitly, sorry.

It is a pro

The limitation with these small FETs is getting rid of the heat from the package

I am not so sure two amps are less efficient either
post #3588 of 3982
Hi, I have been an avid avsf reader. Have been on Energy/Jamo speakers and HK AVR254 forums so far. I am more of an HT Enthusiast rather than an Audiophile..
My current setup is 2xRC30 + 2xRC10 + Mirage Prestige 8" Sub + HK AVR254. Happy with speakers, but just an upgrade-itch for receiver.

Looking for help on new receiver choice ***Yamaha A1010/A2010 vs Pioneer Elite SC-55 vs Marantz SR5600***. Recently setup Pioneer elite (no D3 amp) VSX-60, and liking it so far. But I surely want to check out other options before I purchase/keep one of those.

I do not have installed but have spare speakers to use as heights/wides. I know Pioneer Elite can add virtual height/wide sounds in a 5.1 setup. Do Yamaha A1010/A2010 have that feature?

I love HK sound vs Denon that I tried a couple of times (running full Audyssey MultEQ XT as well). I like ligtly-processed sound (specially for music), compared to heavily processed/tweaked sound.

Quesitons below..

1- Which of these three choices would give sound comparable to HK sound? Marantz SR5006? Most folks vouch for Audyssey MultEQ XT, so how does YPAO compare with that? How important is YPAO RSC (of A2010) compared with normal YPAO (of A1010)..

2- I am aware Yamaha Aventage series does not have Dolbt ProLogic IIz or Neo:X for heights/wides.. Instead H/W speakers can be introduced with DSP mode on. So any views on H/W usage with Dolby iiz vs Yamaha DSP modes?

3- Any inputs on which ones people prefer - Pioneer Elite series (specifically SC-55) vs A1010/A2010?

4- I would like to have Wides more than Heights (form simulated effects I have seen on Elite VSX-60). Which of Pioneer/Yamaha would give me better heights/wides effects?

5- Or is there a view that folks liking Harman Kardon sound may not be happy with other receivers? Not upgrading is a better option, as only new features I am looking for are heights/wides (i.e. ProLogic iiz or Neo:X), internet-connectivity and YPAO/Audyssey... ???

p.s.: I have also posted same questions on Yamaha Aventage A1010 owners thread, so I get inputs from both sides..
post #3589 of 3982
I have an SC-55. I know that when the receiver is off, the hdmi data is still passed from input to hdmi output to tv. I have both rook and blu ray player connected to the receiver and I have the hdmi out connected to tv. When the receiver is on and I turn on the blu ray player, the receiver will automatically switch the hdmi input to blu ray and start showing the blu ray video. When I turn off both receiver and blu ray player, I don't get Roku signal passed through the hdmi out. Is there a setting I am missing somewhere to make this work?

Thanks in advance.
post #3590 of 3982
Just hooking my new SC-55 up this weekend and I am NOT able to get the HDMI pass through to work either when the receiver is off. I adjusted the settings in the menu as described on page 53 of the manual. I must be missing something. I am trying to pass through the directv via HDMI into the receiver and out to the TV without having the receiver on. TV is a Pioneer Kuro hooked up via HDMI from the receiver.

Also, not getting any audio to play on my TV.

Any ideas where to start?

Thanks!
Edited by DASHREDDER - 12/4/12 at 8:39pm
post #3591 of 3982
Ok.

So, apparently the SC-55/57 will NOT pass HDMI through from a Directv satellite box without the receiver being turned on. The Directv boxes do not have HDMI control, which is needed to pass the signal through. The receiver must be ON to watch TV if the satellite is first connected to the receiver via HDMI. The 6xx series receivers will pass the HDMI signal through from a Directv box even without the HDMI control function.

PS3, etc will work on the SC-55/57.
post #3592 of 3982
Good Morning from Greece.
My name is Cris and 3 months ago i purchased a Pioneer SC-LX75 Receiver (Almost SC-55 Equal Model)
I have mentioned this in that thread before.That amp replaced my Old SONY STR DB 840 QS which was that:

http://www.google.gr/imgres?q=sony+str+db+840+qs&hl=el&sa=X&tbo=d&biw=1024&bih=653&tbm=isch&tbnid=-79Fkjpn30VaDM:&imgrefurl=http://archiwumallegro.pl/sony_strdb840_qs_amplituner_ddigital_dts_pilot-726243611.html&docid=_GhrfFfY-g07wM&imgurl=http://www.santur.webd.pl/img/allegro/27.08.09/sonykino.jpg&w=1024&h=768&ei=OHe4UMyTDI7UsgaYpoDgAw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=4&vpy=250&dur=535&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=131&ty=93&sig=105295403970355557788&page=3&tbnh=143&tbnw=186&start=32&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:48,s:0,i:230

I am quite pleased from that amp but i have some questions - advices for you.
Please help me because i like that amp very much and i want to get a 100% satisfaction because the 1300 Euros that i payed are big amount of money nowadays.
My set up to help you is the following:

TV:PIONEER *KURO* PDP 428XD
BLUE RAY PLAYER:PIONEER BDP-51FD
HD DVD RECORDER:PIONEER DVR LX 60
MEDIA PLAYER:PopCorn Hour A300
AV AMPLIFIER:Pioneer SC-LX75
CD PLAYER:SONY CDP-XB 930 QS
CD-RECORDER:PIONEER PDR-509
GAME CONSOLE: PS2
FRONT SPEAKERS:B&W 603 S3
CENTER SPEAKER:LCR 60 S3
SURROUND SPEAKERS:ROISTER STATUS
SUBWOOFER:MONITOR AUDIO RS W12
TURNABLE:TECHNICS SL 1200 MK2 With GRADO PRESTIGE SILVER Head
HDMI CABLES:VAN DEN HUL , AUDIOQUEST
SPEAKER CABLES:QED Anniversary XT
SCART CABLE:IXOS
SAT/MPEG4 DVB-T COMBO Receiver:DREAMBOX DM 7020HD
ZONE 2 (GARDEN) SPEAKERS:POLK AUDIO AW-12

Note please that all the comparisons between the Sony & the Pioneer are with the same speakers , same room e.t.c

So let's start:

1.After opening the box and installing it i connected the Amp with my new Cables Silver Anniversary XT via the Bi-Amp Method for the Fronts because they told me it is a better way than the single one.
At first i have to say that the 9*140 watts per channel are not so real (in my opinion),the Sony was more powerfull.I have to turn the volume to -10 db to have the level i had with the Sony at half volume 12 o'clock. How do you explain that?
2.I ran the MCAAC calibration and the sound i took it was not good (for that price amp).The Sony was FOR THE MOMENT still better.Please note that in sony i had not adjusted anything (as it was out of the box 11 years back).
The Stereo experience suffered there.The Sony was better there.
BUT! In movie sound the Pionner IS PERFECT!!!!! Much better that the Sony.I think that has also to do with the fact that amp decodes all the new Stuff like Dolby True HD,DTS HD Master Audio e.t.c that the Sony DIDN'T.
But still in audio NOT EXCITED!!
3.After that stage i called 2 experts that are ISF-HAA certified custom installers.They came 3 days ago and the were in my home for 2,5 hours.They heard the sound by playing the Moulin Rouge Blu Ray and the told me that this was not right.They told me that in stereo the more problem there is and in movies a smaller problem they have to face.
After that they ran an Mcaac measurement using amp's mic and they did not take good results.So they started taking measuremnts with the Manual MCAAC using their own BIG Professional Mic.They set the left front speaker at 85db as reference at +3db.After that the set all the rest according to the reference speaker (Front Left).
By finishing adjusting the levels , they continued by setting the EQ for each speaker.
They also set the distances by measuring the space between myself and the speakers manual by using a meter.
I must not forget to tell you that my speakers even they are big were set to Small and the XOVER (Sub) at 80HZ.Please note here that i advised them to set LPF at my Sub in Out Position (i mean the frequency here won't be affected by the sub and the Job will be done by the Amp. Am i right here?)
When everything was finished the sound was more powerfull , i think that is why we set the levels +3 or even +4 db in order to have the 85DB reference when setting the volume at 0db on the Amp.Is that Right? Do you agree?
As a result now , the sound was muchhhhh better in the movies (50% more satisfaction) , in the audio small difference (10% more satisfaction).
The dialogues from Moulin Rouge now APPEARED.I heard things that i have never heard before.Sometimes the dialogues are too Loud but according to these experts the Center Channel is the most useful speaker of the set.Is that right for you?
Ass for the setting about the Sub , i mentioned earlier that i turned off the frequency cut at the Sub and now the job is done by the AV's ability.Another technician that had come earlier for the TV he turned that on also.So in that case 2 frequency controllers were working??? That is wrong don't you agree?
Anyway that is right now and i enjoy the sub.
4.During the manual procedure set up by the experts i mentioned above , all the settings i saved them to MCAAC memory 1.
That setting has the adjustment about the phase control or full band phase control?
Must i ran an mcaac again?
If i do it the settings that were made by the men above will be lost.Right? What should i do?
The setting above was perfect for movies as i told you before but for music still is not satisfying.
The SONY was still better in music even after the calibration of the Pioneer.
Sometimes i thing it has to do with the setting of big/small speakers for the front because in Sony were declared as Large.
Can i make another MCAAC setting in another momory but in that having the fronts as Large without affecting the first memory?
I don't want to lose or destroy the setting that was made before.I paid 150 euros for their visit.
I am totally mixed.I think sometimes that these amps aren't for music , or better they are 80% for movies & 20% for music even this is Air Studios Certified.
The problem with the Audio is that the music is not alive , for example it is someting like a curtain is front of the speakers and in movies is taken away.
The problem is a bit solved when i turn on the Sound Retriever function but i think it's not right.This is there for mp3 or other compressed files that some of the original information is lost during the compression.Right?
Sometimes i think this is a cables problem but these cables play for movies and sound great.
Please help me because here in Greece except for the few people there are not dedicated professionals for these things and NOONE knows well the abilities of the SC-LX75 Receiver that i own.
Last thing is that as i was watchig the Amplifier from close is that i saw a small build problem that in the right side is not perfectly assembled but this not important , just to mention.Here are 2 photos , one with build problem on the right of the amp & one of the left side which is peffectly fitted:




Sorry for the big post but i wanted to inform you as good as i can.
Thank you & I am waiting your answers!
Cris
Greece
post #3593 of 3982
^^
BG

In my opinion, you have way too much information and asking too much in a single post for anyone to provide meaningful and succinct feedback. Can you break it down to simple questions? I saw your original thread and do have Pioneer experience like many others here but honestly, your post makes my head swim & I'd bet I'm not alone. I simply don't have the time to figure out what you're really asking. Sorry

simplify your post & questions and some may be able to give you some help. I'm not sure what you're seeking or what problems you have. maybe somebody with more time than me can help you based on your post, but I certainly can't. I can try if you make it easier to read & get to the point.
post #3594 of 3982
^^^

yes, it is rather difficult to parse, isn't it? i'll take a shot at a few...

1) cable type doesn't matter. bi-amping is worthless. no it's not "better". -10db on the volume scale isn't "overly loud", nor is it anywhere near "all the way turned up". the volume display is logarithmic, and really only means something when you are calibrated.

2) review the mcacc measuring techniques. in almost all cases, the issue is between the keyboard and the chair.

3) simply turning up the volume would have accomplished the same thing.

4) you shouldn't be using "large" as a speaker setting.

there's likely more, but that's as much as i could pick out without working too hard.
Edited by ccotenj - 12/6/12 at 10:29am
post #3595 of 3982
^^
you're a better man than me wink.gif

I don't have the time today to "parse" it rolleyes.gif and this is a cut/paste duplicate of his other thread which no one answered. maybe he'll get the hint next time. even my long-winded replies have paragraphs tongue.gifwink.gif
post #3596 of 3982
I know it is here in this 1000 pages of info, but does the sc-55 pass an hdmi signal out to zone 2? I see it will pass both audio and video, but I dont see what it goes up to.... 1080p, or component or hdmi.

Thanks
post #3597 of 3982
^^^

nope... no hdmi to zones...
post #3598 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoopsrgreat View Post

I know it is here in this 1000 pages of info, but does the sc-55 pass an hdmi signal out to zone 2? I see it will pass both audio and video, but I dont see what it goes up to.... 1080p, or component or hdmi.
Thanks

an HDMI output to a separate zone is not a feature in the SC-55/57 models. But it is in the new SC-68. The SC-68 is the 1st to have a 2nd zone HDMI output, and it also can have a different source than the main zone. The Denon 4520 also has this new feature.
post #3599 of 3982
^^^

yup...

but it should be noted that the "hdmi to a zone" (in both implementations) is truly that, "hdmi to zone 4"... it's not a "zone" in the way people commonly think of zones... you still can't process a hdmi input and send it to a zone...

it's a hdmi matrix switch... zone 4 (or whatever pio numbers theirs) still requires a hdmi sink...

btw, the one of the 4520 works well... wink.gif
post #3600 of 3982
So what WILL the 55 output to zone 2 or 4 or whatever it is?
What I want is say watch BD in one room, and watch DTV in another. The sc-67 can do that.. yes? The 55 can also do that??? Yes, it just doesnt use an HDMI out to the second zone, it uses component? am I off?

The sc-67/68 can send both the audio and video out from an inputted source on your receiver to a 2nd zone using HDMI OUT, but does the 55 do the same thing, only it can not do it using HDMI.. you would need component plus whatever for your audio?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" Pioneer Elite SC-55/SC-57 Owners Thread