Official Pioneer SC-68/67 Thread - Page 5

^^
well, channel trims or no, are u enjoying it, trying out different features?

I know you've posted on audyssey but why do you think it didn't work as well for you? how does the SC-68 stack up vs the 4311 besides audyssey? bottom line - why did you come back to Pioneer?

do you have a Pioneer player to use to check out PQLS? I'm interested in how others perceive it over HDMI on different types of audio formats. I can only use it for CD's since I have the original version in the BDP-09 player. I wonder how much (if any) difference people hear on SACD & BD.

I think there was several who asked about THX Ultra 2 mode on the SC-68. Today I rigged up a temp setup with the SC-68 & a DVD player to confirm this issue once & for all.

While the SC-68 has THX Cinema, Surround EX, Games, Music modes, there is no Ultra 2. OK - is this a big deal anymore?

Personally, I don't think so. The main use for Ultra 2 was to derive 7.1 rear channels from 5.1 sources. Happy to say that is no longer needed anymore, even with DTS-Master Audio. The 68 can add std PLIIx/z or Neo X modes to create rear channels from 5.1 DTS-MA tracks, whereas some of the older models apparently didn't have the DSP power to do that. So using Ultra 2 was needed to matrix them - unless you had a player that didn't duplicate the sides into the rears, like the Oppo's.

If someone likes the effect of THX modes, all you have to do is add THX on top of PLIIx/Neo X or you can just use select THX Cinema or other THX modes. THX Cinema still has all the normal THX technologies.

IMHO, the "loss" of Ultra 2 processing is no biggie. It isn't needed anymore, people are looking at > 7.1 anyway, plus the licensing cost to put it in means Pioneer would have to raise the selling price. And not many AVR companies even bother to include any THX processing now, only Onkyo. In the Denon 4311 thread, you don't find too many owners missing THX

I don't think Denon, NAD, Yamaha, McIntosh, Rotel, even Anthem bothers with including THX. The cost is high & the benefits are dwindling as newer forms of matrix surround processing are added. Pioneer & Onkyo are in the minority.

Pioneer 1) still has THX processing & 2) still believes in THX certification. And the SC-68 is Ultra 2 Plus certified.

us mature farts have to stick together - I'm early 60's so not that far behind.

"last hurrah" - gosh, let's hope not!!
Edited by ss9001 - 8/24/12 at 5:42pm

^^
Thanks, Smack
I admit I'm not a Mac person, so I defer to your knowledge of built-in drivers. Other than dappling in Linux, I've been windows-centric since the win 3.1 days.

I do like ipods & iphones, tho Next yr I'd like to add an ipad to my apple collection.

^^
troubleshooting - been there at least you know it's not the Pioneer.
please keep us posted - maybe others can benefit when you figure it out.

congrats!

yup

as long as you have 9 spkrs connected, just adding D PLIIz or Neo X will get you the extra channels. altho I don't have ht speakers yet, I see no reason why it would be any different than PLIIx & rears.

and you use the Speaker selector (same button as selecting A/B, etc) accessed by the front panel or remote, to select which surrounds to use, depending on which speaker setup you initially selected. For 9 ch (normal) you can select FH, FW, or a combination of FH/FW that will change ht's to widths depending on audio content Have no idea what algorithm it uses to decide which one to use at any particular time, but that could be an interesting effect or a goofy one all the possible choices are described on pg. 78 in the manual.

You're right
I wasn't thinking of the virtual options. Checking the manual again, you can have virtual ht, virtual wide & virtual depth - and you're correct, all are in the Audio Parameters menu.

So even more options exist to derive the extra channels. It does say that you can only use virtual h/w if there are surround speakers & FH/FW in the setup menu is set to No. It also states that you can't use them if there are signals containing actual h/w information....so not sure if that means you don't use PLIIz & Neo X or not. It doesn't say implicitly, but it implies it, because there are certainly no sources with h/w.

Once I get this hooked back up again, hopefully in a week, I'd like to try this out, because I won't have real ht speakers for several months. That's phase 2 I'll let you know.
Edited by ss9001 - 8/31/12 at 2:36am

in a word, sound quality is great! not sure what to say here...it's certainly not bad

To my ears, sound quality is just as good as the former $7K flagship SC-09 & subjectively a tad smoother, less edgy than the 09's Ice amps but that could be in the MCACC EQ tuning. It also compared favorably vs. a hi-powered class A/B amp I normally use for my fronts, even loud close to 0 dB. My speakers are planars, typically sound best with lots of power, and are both low efficiency & 4 ohms. The SC-68 drove all at reference without issues. I couldn't hear any obvious signs of strain or clipping.

The last Home Theater Mag test report on the SC-57 (same amp) showed a better distortion vs power curve than the formerly used Ice amps & backs up Pioneer's claims when they changed from them. And Walkamo @ Pioneer told me that they upped the power a bit in the SC-68 over the 57. It'll be interesting to see a review & tests, hopefully soon.

Based on a review or 2, Sony ES doesn't seem to be in the same league with the other brands anymore. Maybe at one time but not many reviews place them as a top choice anymore. Check Home Theater Mag & other sites. IIRC, weaker all channel power & room correction EQ is probably not going to be as advanced or in same league. But you should do your own due diligence & listening comparisons. What appeals to you may not appeal to me I freely admit, this is my own personal opinion but for a top model receiver, I would consider Pioneer, Denon, Marantz, Onkyo, Yammie long before I'd look at the Sony

IMO, choices come down to

-Pioneer class D amps vs conventional class A/B amps - is that a factor to you?
-Pioneer MCACC vs Audyssey (Marantz has MultiXT not the best Multi32XT) vs Yamaha YPAO. How important is it to have built-in sub EQ? even with non-audyssey AVR's, you can add ext sub EQ with a Velodyne SMS-1, used SVS EQ1, or an anti-mode. none will break the bank. MCACC has some unique features, like phase control, and the ability to manually tweak calibrations, if that's important to you.
-Specific feature differences
-Connectivity, including need for legacy. IF you intend to use the Oppo 95's analog multichannel outputs, I know the new Onkyo 5010 doesn't have them. And none anymore can apply room EQ to the analog multichannel's. But if you're using HDMI anyway, then it doesn't matter.

Does this help? or too much information
Edited by ss9001 - 8/31/12 at 4:04am

If you haven't already, you may want to check all the Pioneer Ice amp & new design threads From the SC-09, SC-07, SC-27, SC-37 to the SC-57, there are a lot of owners. Pioneer won an award from CEDIA & Secrets of Home Theater & High Fidelity when the SC-09 was introduced. It may seem like a leap of faith - listen for yourself at a local dealer or BB Magnolia & compare with a Denon 4311 which has a huge following here

And yes, Audyssey is v good, no question, but Pioneer MCACC also has its supporters. Personally, I almost went Denon but discovered what MCACC, phase control & standing wave filters could do to integrate a complicated center speaker combination I recently went to - coupling a Magnepan center with a Magnepan dipolar woofer panel & have it sound good with the mains & subs.

Whatever you decide, you're the one who has to be happy with it But if you're considering Marantz, you owe yourself a comparison with this new Pioneer - IMO

The Ice & this new design of class D amps really do have the capability to maintain their rated power all channels driven. Also, you may want to check out the Wyred4Sound, D-Sonic Ice based amp threads. And hi-end amp companies Bel Canto, Nuforce, Jeff Rowland, and others all use class D amp Ice or other designs. Class D is not the red-headed stepchild it used to be & gaining more interest & support.

If a subjectivist like reviewer Michael Fremer, who "worships at the altar" of vinyl & class A amps, was surprised about the sound quality of Pioneer class D amps, that has to say "something" His review of the SC-57 @ Home Theater Mag was very complimentary - it's on their website.

I freely admit I'm a fan, hopefully not a fanboy I've tried to be as objective as possible while still being an enthusiast. Posters in the SC & player threads know I don't hold back when I have a criticism of Pioneer You'll find some if you check my posting history I've taken some straight to Pioneer US's head of marketing - Walkamo here on the forum who I have talked with, met @ CEDIA & emailed. So I'm not all flowery praise, like some here who review products

at least you're tire-kickin'
Edited by ss9001 - 9/1/12 at 4:01am

another susano owner! yes!
are you considering replacing the 09 or adding to it? I added to it

power - I don't know yet how the new 68 amps compare vs the 09. Walkamo @ Pioneer had told me that there's a bigger power supply in the 68 vs the 57 so the 68 gets a larger power rating & that Home Theater Mag may be reviewing one "soon". Don't know how soon is soon but I'm very interested in a bench test to see

the 57's power output rating was ~ same as the 09 with all 10 of the 09's amps in use but with all ch driven the 09 could still pump out more power. The 09's Ice power supply was 1400 watts & if you only used 7 channels, it could produce 7 x 200 watts. So, the increased power rating of the 68 vs the 09 may or may not be a wash. We'll have to wait for a review & test results to compare.

I do know that for these new amps, Pioneer finally has officially approved them for 4 ohm use & they do have lower total distortion in the middle part of the power curve due to the new design & simpler circuitry but will that be audible?

I can say that the new amp design seems to have a nice class A/B sound to my ears (whatever that is ) & that with all my 4 ohm magnepan speakers connected, even at very hi volumes, its sound seemed very smooth & par with a hi-powered, hi current design 2 ch amp I use (600@4ohms) that's saying something. If I had to put a subjective label on what it sounded like vs the Ice amps (ccotenj - you can ignore this ), I'd say a little less "edgy". How's that for "audio-fool" lingo? To my ears, the Ice amps seemed a little brighter or edgier when really pushed hard, more so than the class A/B amp. This could be differences in MCACC tuning, the lower distortion, the higher sampling frequency in the amp design itself, or just my imagination which is most likely the case Here I am, going Michael Fremer on everyone

Amp efficiency isn't relevant to SPL tho. 100 watts from class D is the same as 100 watts from class A/B. A watt is a watt, and the SPL is determined not by the efficiency of the amp but the efficiency of the speaker - how many dB's/ watt it produces.

What amp efficiency does effect is the power draw from the wall outlet needed to produce that watt of output. Typical class A/B amps are ~50% eff, while class D can be 80-90%. So it takes almost 2 x as much current for the A/B amp to produce that watt than the class D amp. That's the electricity savings part.

IF it weren't for several very unique features the SC-09 has that are very important to me, I could replace it with the 68 and not look back. That's why I am coming up with convoluted way to use both in my setup For a normal sane person I think the 68 can pretty well replace the 09, especially if you don't use ILink/PQLS or care about adding DSP to the analog multichannel inputs.

You will give up the pretty display but you'll have full-blown OSD instead, even over HDMI, including full setup menus, including changing audio/video parameters, something I really missed not being able to do with the 09. AND you'll get the i-control apps...easy to control it with it. All the connectivity, streaming & control options, have come a long way in 4 years. I was a bit surprised
Edited by ss9001 - 9/7/12 at 9:09am