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 123

post #3661 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by mxcrash View Post

The GET command not actually a command that is used to control the AMP it is the initial method icontrolAV uses to query the amp, infact it is the same method your browser uses to request a page.
I de-constructed the android apk but couldn't find where it made the decision as to what type of AMP it was talking to,
Unfortunately I dont know anyone with a SC55 so cant sniff the packets,

ok, i think you meant to write establish a telnet session to port 80, not 8080

i'll try it again this evening

ok, tried it again, but Sorry the description.xml does not appear to exist

i tried to download a upnp spy program but got so frustrated with spam that I gave up

if you have a link to one that is easy to download and free I'll give it a go

i have a switch so the ethernet packet sniffers don't work

DP
Edited by purdyd - 12/13/12 at 9:41am
post #3662 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

I really hope to see Pioneer come out with sub EQ in next year's model but not 100% sure it's going to happen. If it does, that'd be wonderful news to Pioneer fans. But even if we do, by the end of '13 or early '14, at least one MDA (3D multidimensional audio) format will start to show up. So that's another gear swap to get the latest & most promising surround technology to come along in a long time. receivers are becoming an annual upgrade event tongue.gif
hope all is well with you. see ya later smile.gif

Coming to this late---I've largely moved on from even lurking on Pioneer threads since I've been focusing on video lately.

I'm not holding my breath about Sub EQ being added to MCACC due to the Japanese engineer philosophy you mentioned a while back, but MDA perked my interest.

Find someone that's adding Dolby Atmos or a consumer implementation of Trinnov on a non-buggy AVR that's in the price range of a SC-68 or a 4520 +/- 20% and you have my interest, even if it's for the SC-88 or -98.

Good thing I kept my Denon 4311 box in that case.......and my AS-EQ1 for that matter.

As for remote control, that's why God invented the Harmony LOL...

(of course, I'd be happier if it were Denon that introduced an Audyssey Pro compatibile version of MDA, but if Pioneer somehow did it first....I'd at least look)
Edited by sdrucker - 12/14/12 at 10:26am
post #3663 of 3982
Thanks so much for trying to help me out purdyd.

Agreed switches don't help debugging this sort of thing.

Searching thru the code it actually tries 3 different port numbers for xml info
1. port 80 /BasicDevice.xml
2. port 8080 /description.xml
3. port 38400 /description.xml

Looking at the phone I saw port 8102 mentioned, but thought this this was just another web port it tried, but I was wrong.

Firing up a sniffer and telling the phone to try and connect to that I can see the application tries to hit port 8080 first. It tries to the GET /description.xml. If I supply it one it then connects to the IP control port 8102, an then seems to send the undocumented IP command ?RGC (Hex code 3f5247430D) maybe it is this command that returns the device model.

Btw, I'm not after answers straight away, please only look at it if you have a bit of free time.
Edited by mxcrash - 12/14/12 at 11:02pm
post #3664 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by mxcrash View Post

Thanks so much for trying to help me out purdyd.
Agreed switches don't help debugging this sort of thing.
Searching thru the code it actually tries 3 different port numbers for xml info
1. port 80 /BasicDevice.xml
2. port 8080 /description.xml
3. port 38400 /description.xml
Looking at the phone I saw port 8102 mentioned, but thought this this was just another web port it tried, but I was wrong.
Firing up a sniffer and telling the phone to try and connect to that I can see the application tries to hit port 8080 first. It tries to the GET /description.xml. If I supply it one it then connects to the IP control port 8102, an then seems to send the undocumented IP command ?RGC (Hex code 3f5247430D) maybe it is this command that returns the device model.
Btw, I'm not after answers straight away, please only look at it if you have a bit of free time.

Maybe I can help too smile.gif
I have a VSX-922(European model which is not in the US) at my parents house which uses the latest iControlAV2012 version.
And I am running Debian on my laptop.

If you can tell me, maybe in a PM?, how you decoded the .apk file of the android app I would love to see that smile.gif
post #3665 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by mxcrash View Post

Thanks so much for trying to help me out purdyd.
Agreed switches don't help debugging this sort of thing.
Searching thru the code it actually tries 3 different port numbers for xml info
1. port 80 /BasicDevice.xml
2. port 8080 /description.xml
3. port 38400 /description.xml
Looking at the phone I saw port 8102 mentioned, but thought this this was just another web port it tried, but I was wrong.
Firing up a sniffer and telling the phone to try and connect to that I can see the application tries to hit port 8080 first. It tries to the GET /description.xml. If I supply it one it then connects to the IP control port 8102, an then seems to send the undocumented IP command ?RGC (Hex code 3f5247430D) maybe it is this command that returns the device model.
Btw, I'm not after answers straight away, please only look at it if you have a bit of free time.

8102 is the ip command port, you can issue the same commands via port 23, the default telnet port

I can not connect to 8080, or 38400

You can have port 23 open while you connect with icontrolav and see the commands echoed and indeed, the ?rgc command I sent first from icontrolav

However, in trying icontrolav2012, it doesn't even get to that step, it is determining as part of the upnp process that the sc55 is not supported

So really we would need to sniff the packets during the icontrolav startup

If I get a wild hair i will drag a dumb hub out from work

Personally if I was going to expend any energy on this it would be to write a complete remote control app

It is interesting that ?rgc is not in the official commands list document, wonder what else is not there?
post #3666 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post

You can have port 23 open while you connect with icontrolav and see the commands echoed and indeed, the ?rgc command I sent first from icontrolav
However, in trying icontrolav2012, it doesn't even get to that step, it is determining as part of the upnp process that the sc55 is not supported

As my wifi and ethernet are on different subnets the UDP broadcast /UPNP discovery process would never work, so all testing was done using the manual directed method
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post

Personally if I was going to expend any energy on this it would be to write a complete remote control app
It is interesting that ?rgc is not in the official commands list document, wonder what else is not there?

If all fails I will go back to a self written web page app, but it in order to make it snappy I would need to learn AJAX and while my web pages function they are never very pleasing to the eye.

I have since found two instances where people have pasted the result of ?RGC, one response from a VSX-32/33 is RGC1100011001 and another SC-35 RGC111001002
Edited by mxcrash - 12/19/12 at 12:08am
post #3667 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by mxcrash View Post

As my wifi and ethernet are on different subnets the UDP broadcast /UPNP discovery process would never work, so all testing was done using the manual directed method
If all fails I will go back to a self written web page app, but it in order to make it snappy I would need to learn AJAX and while my web pages function they are never very pleasing to the eye.
I have since found two instances where people have pasted the result of ?RGC, one response from a VSX-32/33 is RGC1100011001 and another SC-35 RGC111001002

RGD<000> SC-55/UXJCB.

The point was the ?rgc command is probably not used to identify the model number for the app since the app doesn't even issue the command if you have an unsupported receiver

There is also a ?rgd command which returns

RGD<000> SC-55/UXJCB. This is not exact as the second field has <> around it but won't display in this forum properly with it

If you want android, I would write the app in java

In order for the icontrol app to work, upnp must be routed between your networks as it does make use of that protocol to find the receiver and properly identify it
Edited by purdyd - 12/19/12 at 6:12am
post #3668 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post

The point was the ?rgc command is probably not used to identify the model number for the app since the app doesn't even issue the command if you have an unsupported receiver
There is also a ?rgd command which returns
RGD<000> SC-55/UXJCB. This is not exact as the second field has <> around it but won't display in this forum properly with it

Ok I was playing with AV2, switching over to iControlAV2012 , I can see were ?RGD is issued first, I configured the script to reply with
Code:
RGD<000> <SC-55/UXJCB>
and iControlAV immediately replied with the ?RGC so I sent RGC111001002 but iControlAV didnt send anything else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post

In order for the icontrol app to work, upnp must be routed between your networks as it does make use of that protocol to find the receiver and properly identify it

Interesting, I've configured an IGMP proxy service on my firewall between the wifi interface and lan. It works for discovering a media server from the phone but I dont see iControlAV sending a M-SEARCH out on the wire so maybe my RGC answer format is wrong.
Edited by mxcrash - 12/23/12 at 3:50am
post #3669 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by mxcrash View Post

Ok I was playing with AV2, switching over to iControlAV2012 , I can see were ?RGD is issued first, I configured the script to reply with
Code:
RGD<000> <SC-55/UXJCB>
and iControlAV immediately replied with the ?RGC so I sent RGC111001002 but iControlAV didnt send anything else.
Interesting, I've configured an IGMP proxy service on my firewall between the wifi interface and lan. It works for discovering a media server from the phone but I dont see iControlAV sending a M-SEARCH out on the wire so maybe my RGC answer format is wrong.

Well maybe you are right if you got it to send ?rgc then it might be all ip commands

My sc55 response to ?rgc is

RGC111111112111111000000000000000

Hope that helps
post #3670 of 3982
Purdy, I really do appreciate you taking the time to provide answers, hope you have a merry Xmas. Looking thru the code I am struggling to find where it processes the answers to the setup queries hence the many questions

Success biggrin.gif using the android version, (apple to be debugged further). I fired the app up from cold and saw it sent out power status requests, I faked them and the app now fires up and I can see my zone power and volume requests.

Damn thing doesnt work anymore after I restarted the app:mad:

Any chance you could provide the output to
?RGF
?RGH
?RGI

and what should be the DVD input
?RGB04
Edited by mxcrash - 12/24/12 at 12:48am
post #3671 of 3982
...
Edited by Slackjaw747 - 2/2/13 at 4:43pm
post #3672 of 3982
It looks like this receiver had a good run. Must be why Best Buy had one on clearance for $550. Needless to say I grabbed it and am listening to my new, beautiful sounding AVR right now. I had bought a Sony DN1030 & exchanged it. It's like trading in a motor scooter for a helicopter.
post #3673 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

It looks like this receiver had a good run. Must be why Best Buy had one on clearance for $550. Needless to say I grabbed it and am listening to my new, beautiful sounding AVR right now. I had bought a Sony DN1030 & exchanged it. It's like trading in a motor scooter for a helicopter.

Smoking deal!
post #3674 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by mxcrash View Post

Purdy, I really do appreciate you taking the time to provide answers, hope you have a merry Xmas. Looking thru the code I am struggling to find where it processes the answers to the setup queries hence the many questions
Success biggrin.gif using the android version, (apple to be debugged further). I fired the app up from cold and saw it sent out power status requests, I faked them and the app now fires up and I can see my zone power and volume requests.
Damn thing doesnt work anymore after I restarted the app:mad:
Any chance you could provide the output to
?RGF
?RGH
?RGI
and what should be the DVD input
?RGB04

Sorry been off the grid, will get that to you.
post #3675 of 3982
I bought an SC-55 last year not long after they came out and I've been extremely happy with it. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the latest models, but not sure I need those right now (e.g. 4K). Last night I was at a Best Buy/Magnolia and noticed how hot the new units were running (an SC-65). My unit doesn't run hot at all, and in fact I had thought that was one of the benefits of a Class D amp. When I mentioned this to the guy at Maggies, he said that Pioneer has been cutting corners and that folks are not happy about that. He said that is probably why the new units are running so hot.

What do you all think?

Thanks,
David
post #3676 of 3982
I was wondering if you guys could help me and answer a quick question about the sc-55 and how it will work with 4 ohm speakers. I have a chance to buy a sc-55 for a great deal and they say they are for only down to 6 ohn but the sc-61 and all other new models now claim to be good for 4ohm. Did the newer ones make some change to the amps as their the same class amp but they say they are better for 4 ohm or are they pretty much the same as the sc-55 and are marketing this. The sc-6X state everywhere that they are made for 4 ohm speakers now and the sc-55 do not. Do you think the sc-55 would drive martinlogan motions better. I actually have 6 towers. 2 motion 12s as fronts and the 4 motion 10 towers as surrounds and rears. The 10s are small towers but still 6 towers and A martinlogan motion 8 is a 4 ohm speaker as well and all being 4 ohm and the room being 22x22 with high cathedral ceilings. I have a newer Denon AVR-2112ci that worked ok until added the set of 12's up front and moved my old fronts my other set of 10s out to the rears and now the denon does not have enough punch. what do you guys think? l just don't want to buy less of a receiver sc-61 or 3 vs the sc-55 and pay more for less just because pioneer just decided to start saying they now all good for 4 ohm if the sc-55 has same or better amps. Maybe there has been a change and the sc-6x now are better and made of 4 ohm as pioneer is saying all over the place but if not i will just buy the sc-55. you guys are the only ones that i have a chance at getting an answer so thanks
post #3677 of 3982
It is readily apparent what Pioneer has done. They have taken the plunge and changed the impedance spec on Elite receivers from 6 ohms to 4 ohms. No surprise there, the online community has been pushing for the switch for some time. Unofficially, people have been running 4 ohm loads on Elite receivers without issues. The other thing Pioneer did is put a cheaper, less powerful amp in the SC-65 than the SC-55. You can clearly see - on their site - the SC-67 specs are identical to the SC-55 specs. That's why the SC-65 lost the Ministry of Sound certification - not the same amp anymore. But the amp in the SC-67 and the SC-55 have identical specs and the two AVRs have the exact same 'estimated power consumption'.

Most telling is the actual weight of the units:

SC-65 = 33.29 lbs - 330 watts
SC-55 = 38.36 lbs - 370 watts
SC-67 = 38.36 lbs - 370 watts
SC-57 = 39.02 lbs - 370 watts

That's incredible precision, down to 1/100 of a pound. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the SC-55 was re-branded as the SC-67 and that internally, nothing has changed in terms of amplification. The SC-55 on clearance is an absolute steal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fsmithjack View Post

I was wondering if you guys could help me and answer a quick question about the sc-55 and how it will work with 4 ohm speakers. I have a chance to buy a sc-55 for a great deal and they say they are for only down to 6 ohn but the sc-61 and all other new models now claim to be good for 4ohm. Did the newer ones make some change to the amps as their the same class amp but they say they are better for 4 ohm or are they pretty much the same as the sc-55 and are marketing this. The sc-6X state everywhere that they are made for 4 ohm speakers now and the sc-55 do not. Do you think the sc-55 would drive martinlogan motions better. I actually have 6 towers. 2 motion 12s as fronts and the 4 motion 10 towers as surrounds and rears. The 10s are small towers but still 6 towers and A martinlogan motion 8 is a 4 ohm speaker as well and all being 4 ohm and the room being 22x22 with high cathedral ceilings. I have a newer Denon AVR-2112ci that worked ok until added the set of 12's up front and moved my old fronts my other set of 10s out to the rears and now the denon does not have enough punch. what do you guys think? l just don't want to buy less of a receiver sc-61 or 3 vs the sc-55 and pay more for less just because pioneer just decided to start saying they now all good for 4 ohm if the sc-55 has same or better amps. Maybe there has been a change and the sc-6x now are better and made of 4 ohm as pioneer is saying all over the place but if not i will just buy the sc-55. you guys are the only ones that i have a chance at getting an answer so thanks

Edited by imagic - 1/1/13 at 7:50pm
post #3678 of 3982
Awesome info, imagic. I think this answers my question as well. Thanks for posting.
post #3679 of 3982
I have been running my 4ohm speakers with my SC-57 since new, works flawlessly. I think the Sc-55 and Sc-57 have the same amps.
post #3680 of 3982
Hello everyone, I'm new to this forum and that's because I just bought an SC/55 last Friday. I was really excited to get home and put the system to use. After going through the set up process and getting everything all dialed in I'm very disappointed.

This system is replacing is a Yamaha HTR 5740. That system was bought as a kit home theater with all the speakers. I'm not replacing the speakers and I'm wondering if that could be part of my problem. I've assumed that the sound would be better after putting this new receiver in even with the same speakers. The truth of the matter is the old system sounded a lot better. this one sounds tinny and echoey and I just can't get a really good surround sound out of it

I've read a lot of good things about this product and so I'm hoping that its something I have set up wrong.

I don't want to return this receiver because I enjoy the options that it Has to offer but I need to figure out the sound problem or it's going to have to go back.

I would really appreciate any help that any of you could offer.

thanks in advance.
Edited by Izzy256 - 1/3/13 at 7:34am
post #3681 of 3982
Good Morning & Happy New Year.
Please tell me which are the differences between the SC LX 75 & SC LX 85 (SC 55 & SC 57 in USA) at the DAC.
Is it the same?
Someone told me that the LX 85 (SC 57) has different specs in DAC.
Thanks!
post #3682 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post

Sorry been off the grid, will get that to you.

post #3683 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Izzy256 View Post

Hello everyone, I'm new to this forum and that's because I just bought an SC/55 last Friday. I was really excited to get home and put the system to use. After going through the set up process and getting everything all dialed in I'm very disappointed.
This system is replacing is a Yamaha HTR 5740. That system was bought as a kit home theater with all the speakers. I'm not replacing the speakers and I'm wondering if that could be part of my problem. I've assumed that the sound would be better after putting this new receiver in even with the same speakers. The truth of the matter is the old system sounded a lot better. this one sounds tinny and echoey and I just can't get a really good surround sound out of it
I've read a lot of good things about this product and so I'm hoping that its something I have set up wrong.
I don't want to return this receiver because I enjoy the options that it Has to offer but I need to figure out the sound problem or it's going to have to go back.
I would really appreciate any help that any of you could offer.
thanks in advance.

Of course the first question would be did you run mcacc?

And if so, try turning it of.
post #3684 of 3982
^^
and the other thing of importance is HOW was the mic positioned when MCACC was run.

it HAS to be pointed directly to the ceiling, horizontal to the floor, and not tilted to the front or the back of the room. Someone posted they held it by hand at their nose and wondered why it didn't sound good rolleyes.gif

put the mic on a tripod, mic stand, or on the seat back as last resort, sit the tripod in the main listening seat, and the mic should be above the height of the seat back, not below it so the back blocks the sound. and leave the vicinity of the mic or get out of the room when the test tones are playing, control the receiver by aiming the remote at it and not be in the path of all the speaker tones.
post #3685 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

^^
and the other thing of importance is HOW was the mic positioned when MCACC was run.
it HAS to be pointed directly to the ceiling, horizontal to the floor, and not tilted to the front or the back of the room. Someone posted they held it by hand at their nose and wondered why it didn't sound good rolleyes.gif
put the mic on a tripod, mic stand, or on the seat back as last resort, sit the tripod in the main listening seat, and the mic should be above the height of the seat back, not below it so the back blocks the sound. and leave the vicinity of the mic or get out of the room when the test tones are playing, control the receiver by aiming the remote at it and not be in the path of all the speaker tones.

I disagree a bit: The mic should be at ear level. If that's below the seat back, so be it. That's the condition you'll be listening to the system in, presuming that one primarily listens from that point. Because if your couch is against the wall and you raise the mic above the seat back, the system will presumably be taking that wall reflection into account. But when you're seated on the couch, the seat back is absorbing high frequencies and there's unlikely to be any reflection, at least at ear level. (There'd still be reflection above your head).

I also disagree that someone should get out of the room. They should be sitting exactly where they would be when listening so the system can take into account the how your body absorbs sound signals. What I do agree with is that one shouldn't be walking around the room while the test tones are playing.

Having said that, let's not be unrealistic about what these auto adjustments are doing. For the most part, they're just adjusting the level slightly so that overall levels from each channel are the same at the listening position and they're adjusting frequency response across a few broad frequencies (which, as I've complained about many times before, should really be third-octave). In addition, they're probably doing some phase adjustment so that the signals reach you at the same time if the speakers are at different distances from listening position. However, if you're not sitting in one place while listening, these adjustments probably do more harm that good. Also, IMO, one should never take multiple position readings as all this will do is average out the results in a terrible compromise. I bet most people think that the system will somehow magically create a perfect listening environment at each listening position.

As for the person who is disappointed with the sound, I suspect that his kit speakers might be at fault, but I too have been disappointed with the sound of my SC55 (as I've also complained about before). It's fine for BD and Dolby Digital from the TV, but for CD music listening, analog radio, LPs, Pandora, etc., my old stereo Apt-Holman preamp and Crown power amp gave a much more pleasing, refined, tight, crisp, full, dry, more impactful sound, in spite of the fact that the Crown was only 37.5 watts per channel and the Apt-Holman was known for not having a lot of "personality". Even if I put the Pioneer in "Direct" mode, it still doesn't come close. And obviously, the old system had no room adjustment modes whatsoever. I'm an ex-recording engineer, but I still haven't quite figured out why the SC55 doesn't sound as good for traditional listening as that 30+ year old system. If I ever hear a reasonably priced better sounding system, the SC55 will be gone. But I don't expect to see the manufacturers come out with anything new except cosmetic changes and maybe some content additions in 2013.
post #3686 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

It is readily apparent what Pioneer has done. They have taken the plunge and changed the impedance spec on Elite receivers from 6 ohms to 4 ohms. No surprise there, the online community has been pushing for the switch for some time. Unofficially, people have been running 4 ohm loads on Elite receivers without issues. The other thing Pioneer did is put a cheaper, less powerful amp in the SC-65 than the SC-55. You can clearly see - on their site - the SC-67 specs are identical to the SC-55 specs. That's why the SC-65 lost the Ministry of Sound certification - not the same amp anymore. But the amp in the SC-67 and the SC-55 have identical specs and the two AVRs have the exact same 'estimated power consumption'.
Most telling is the actual weight of the units:
SC-65 = 33.29 lbs - 330 watts
SC-55 = 38.36 lbs - 370 watts
SC-67 = 38.36 lbs - 370 watts
SC-57 = 39.02 lbs - 370 watts
That's incredible precision, down to 1/100 of a pound. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the SC-55 was re-branded as the SC-67 and that internally, nothing has changed in terms of amplification. The SC-55 on clearance is an absolute steal.

it certainly would not be surprising if the SC-67 has the same amp section as the SC-55. There are some differences so I doubt it is simply rebadged. Still, the SC-55 on clearance is as you say, an absolute steal.
post #3687 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

It's fine for BD and Dolby Digital from the TV, but for CD music listening, analog radio, LPs, Pandora, etc., my old stereo Apt-Holman preamp and Crown power amp gave a much more pleasing, refined, tight, crisp, full, dry, more impactful sound, in spite of the fact that the Crown was only 37.5 watts per channel and the Apt-Holman was known for not having a lot of "personality". .

When I hear description about sound coming out of a stereo that would be more at home in a wine review, I can't help but smile.gif.

Given the low distortion on modern receivers, the multitude of listening modes, and room correction/tweaking, it seems to me that one should be able to achieve just about anything they want.

Now if you are arguing that some systems may have provided some distortion that made things more pleasing to your ear, that is probably correct.

And of course distortion is a big part of music. Just mess around with an electric guitar, amps, and pedals or any musical instrument for that matter.

On the other hand, life is too short and money too dear to be messing around trying to make a receiver sound good to you. Especially given all the great options out there.
post #3688 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post

Of course the first question would be did you run mcacc?
And if so, try turning it of.

I did run mcacc and have tried it off. Is their a EQ setting that you can apply to all the speakers at one time. The equalizer settings that the system comes up with seem really strange to me there are sporadic all over the map.
post #3689 of 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by purdyd View Post


Thanks, tis a busy time when family take precedence over electronics in our house hold also.
post #3690 of 3982
If all your speakers are the same, find a good EQ curve and program those parameters into each speaker. Takes a couple minutes but really it's no big deal. If your speakers are different sizes you might want to use REW as well to profile each pair and come up with an EQ curve that looks good. Once the speakers are EQd in this manner, I used a sound meter to level-match to within 1/2db and a tape measure to set speaker distances.

OK I admit it, I always do it this way regardless of the brand of the receiver. I'm totally pleased with the results - there's nothing the receiver could do with auto MCACC that would be more accurate than a proper manual calibration.

Do not sweat the SQ of the receiver, it's as good as any high-end unit out there with plenty of power and extra low THD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Izzy256 View Post

I did run mcacc and have tried it off. Is their a EQ setting that you can apply to all the speakers at one time. The equalizer settings that the system comes up with seem really strange to me there are sporadic all over the map.
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