Originally Posted by bladerunner6
No version of MCACC can EQ a sub unless something has changed since I shopped for an AVR. The 1913 has MultEQ which does EQ a sub and the Onkyo has MultEQXT 32 (which is the top of the line Audyssey, not the low end) which adds even more capabilities.
It is true Advanced MCACC does only EQ down to 63hz. I do not know exactly how low Audyssey MultiEQ goes down to. Regardless, MultiEQ did not make a significant difference on my sub. Maybe it does for others, it did not for me. MultiEQ did help a lot with the speakers though.
With that said, I would take the 1522k without MCACC over the Denon 1913 with Audyssey. It simply sounds better (at least to me). The difference is very noticeable when listening to music with ambiance.
Plenty of people prefer Audyssey and its capabilities to MCACC. Your statements about Audyssey and MCACC are really not that defensible.
Sure some people say they perfer Audyseey. Other prefer MCACC.
I can tell you this though, the Advanced MCACC on the 1522k gives you SIGNIFICANTLY more options to manually adjust and eq your system. This is not debatable, it is fact.
With the MultiEQ Audyssey on the Denon 1913, you run it, and you get what you get, and thats that. If you do not like it, too bad, you cannot adjust it.
The the MCACC on the Pioneer 1522k, you run it, and it sets things for you, then it gives you the ability to manually tweak TONS of settings to your hearts content. I would much rather have this ability than not.
And just going by one person's comments is hardly scientific.
I agree, just going by my comments is not scientific. But at least I have compared the two, side by side, with the same speakers, in the same room, with the same music.
Your statements are merely speculative. You speak as if you KNOW audyssey is better. But you have not listened to the MCACC on the 1522k yourself. You clearly insinuate that MultiEQ is better than MCACC. I disagree. Sure, that is my opinion, but again I have actually listened to them. Others may disagree with me I suppose. But what is not opinion is that MCACC allows someone A LOT of ability to manually adjust their EQ settings. MultiEQ does not give you anything. It is opinion as to which auto-eqs better. It is fact that the MCACC on the 1522k gives someone more abilty to EQ better.
That person you quoted could very well be showing a bias just because he thinks the more expensive unit should be better. That is a common phenomenon
Sure, that is a possibility. But I can tell you this, I honestly did not expect to hear a difference. I thought all AVRs sounded basically the same and the only differences are the options (5.1 vs 7.2 vs 9.2, or pre-outs vs no pre-outs, or additional dolby/dts options, etc.). I plugged the Pioneer in right next to the denon, and it as noticeable right off the bat. This was not the sort of case where you have to switch back and forth a few times to figure out the minute differences. It was instantly noticeable and it surprised me.
With that said, I was seriously considering the Marantz 5007 before I got the 1522k. The Marantz is $599 refurbished, same price as the 1522k. So if you really want audyseey and pre-outs, you can get the 5007 instead of the 1522k. I would not do it. But if someone thinks Audyssey is so much better, and does not want the abilty to adjust things, then this is a good option. I have not heard it, who knows, the 5007 might have had a big difference in sound too. But I would not trade all the options and abilities the 1522k gives you. The Marantz does have Audyseey xt. Maybe that is better than MCACC, but I did not think MultiEQ was.
The only thing I do not like about the 1522k is it switches between sources slowly.
The reason why I felt the need to respond in this way is because you spoke so matter of fact, as if you KNOW that the audyseey on the 1913 is better. But the truth is, you do not know, you are only speculating.Edited by Goride - 4/18/13 at 1:05pm