# Mcacc/audyssey/denon/pioneer



## venkataraman manu

Hi,
fellow Shacksters,
Greetings! Been a while away from this 
forum. During this period I completed my HT and hope to post fotos as 
soon as I know how to upload hd fotos!

Here is my query to you out there: I am 
planning to upgrade my Denon 4311 to Pio sc lx86 and my worry is, will 
advance mcacc measure up to the Audyssey xt32? Been a huge fan of 
Audyssey and Chris:bigsmile: I have used multeq, xt and currently xt32.
I hear that mcacc doesnt eq below 63hz but of what real disadvantage( if 
any ) would that be for the music or movies bass? 
Also does Audyssey eq the reverberations time in a room? Mine is sound 
controlled with absorbers and diffusers as well 
too and I like the Audyssey contoured sound here verymuch.Would a 
changeover to mcacc be as good or better?
Mcacc also controls the standing waves. What about Audyssey on this 
s.wave area?
Thanks folks for your response in advance:wave:


----------



## Todd Anderson

Howdy,

I think that the SC-LX86-K is the same as the Elite SC-68? European version vs US Version.

The Elite SC-68 was just awarded the best receiver of the year by Home Theater Magazine (here is the review).

You are correct, MCACC doesn't correct below 63Hz. I'm a Pioneer Elite owner, myself... the MCACC system is a little tricky to master, but if you stick with it, you can get great results. I will add... I used the REW software and a Behringer Feedback Destroyer to equalize my subs. For me, and my room, I needed it.

You say your room is treated... perhaps you need to use REW and take some measurements in your room (for your subs, of course) with your Audyssey EQ turned off. That would be the only way to know what kind of room response you are getting at your seating positions...

I will say this: Really like my Pioneer Elite. Based on the rave reviews given to the Elite SC-68, I'm sure you'd be happy with it.


----------



## J&D

The Denon 4311 is an excellent receiver. What do you think you are missing with your current setup? My guess is there would be a marginal improvement at best and as was stated you will most likely need to EQ your subs with an outboard solution if you move to the Pio.


----------



## Prof.

MCACC gives you a lot more manual EQ and reverb/time delay adjustments than Audyssey, but as Todd mentioned, it takes a lot of perseverance to get it tuned just right..but the end result is very satisfying..


----------



## Dale Rasco

I love using MCACC as it is much more flexible than Audyssey as long as you have the tools to take the proper measurements, etc.


----------



## Jungle Jack

Hello,
While I am a big Pioneer Elite fan and honestly miss my VSX-49txi, switching from the 4311 is somewhat of a sideways move. I would keep the AVR and purchase an outboard power amplifier. Indeed MCACC has some advantages over Audyssey, but incorporating EQ to the LFE Channel is far more involved than with MultEQ. Especially as your 4311 has SubEQ HT which offers almost the same features as the $800 SVS AV-EQ1 that was co-designed by SVS and Audyssey.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Todd Anderson

Jack - Not to nit-pick... actually just curious, why the recommend for an outboard amp? His current amp is already pushing 140W per channel. Added power from an outboard amp doesn't necessarily = better sound, or does it?


----------



## venkataraman manu

Thanks Todd!
Can you tell how this" below 63 hrz lack of equalisation "would affect the sub sound output /quality while I listen to music? Or movies with plenty of LFE ? Mine is 9.2 with Jamo C60 series speakers. Sunfire Signature true sub and Deftech Supercube 2. I have absorber panels of glass wool 2*4ft in first reflection areas of LCR speakers. Heavy curtains too in place, with Auralex qfusers for diffusers. I followed their room treatment guidelines for my room and carpeted floor for the floor reflections. 
Am happy with the result though I don't know how to go about REW wizard. Audyssey did a great job too in my HT room.since you have the top Pio ;-), will MCACC be as good if not better!? Any good tutorial for novice?
Thanks 
Manu


----------



## venkataraman manu

Thanks JJ
But the 4311 has no sub eq. Only xt32. Subsequent ships with 4520s! Regarding the sideways move I thought Pio sc lx 86 is up above it. It delivers 190 w power at 6ohms( my speakers are) compared to 140w by my D4311. Also the certified quality of sound!More DSP choice. I hear it does better job on the stereo mode than Denon?
Thanks again
Manu


----------



## venkataraman manu

Also JJ what if I don't eq the sub and leave it with what MCACC does? What do u think would happen to sub output? The MCACC works on standing waves too. Don't know if Audyssey addresses that
Bye for now
Manu


----------



## venkataraman manu

Thanks D but what tools than a tripod?


----------



## venkataraman manu

Thanks Prof but do you think that MCACC alone is sufficient. Some say you gotta eq sub separately. What say you?
Regards
Manu


----------



## venkataraman manu

Thanks J&D
BUT what if I leave it with only the MCACC calibration( with manual control overlay on xover, reverb time etc.) What would the audition be in your opinion? 
Thanks
Manu


----------



## Todd Anderson

venkataraman manu said:


> Thanks Todd!
> Can you tell how this" below 63 hrz lack of equalisation "would affect the sub sound output /quality while I listen to music? Or movies with plenty of LFE ?


No, I couldn't really predict since we have no room measurements to see what's happening in your room with low frequencies without any EQ. It could be that you have a nearly flat response without any EQ and therefore the lack of bass management in MCACC wouldn't matter. But, if you took measurements you might find that you have a ton of room gain - lots of peaks - and that you need quite a bit of EQ to flatten them out.

As I said, with my particular home theater, I needed EQ from 80Hz and below. MCACC doesn't handle this frequency range at all --- while it does technically EQ down to 50 or 60 Hz (I believe), once you set your speakers to "small" it turns off that 50-60 Hz range from it's program (in other words, when the speakers are set to "small" it won't EQ its lowest possible range). The only way to EQ your sub, when using MCACC is to spend about $100 on a parametric equalizer like the Berhinger Feedback Destroyer DSP1124P and download the REW software (which is free). All the information you need to learn how to use REW and the Feedback Destroyer are right here on the Home Theater Shack website. It takes time to learn how to use it... but, once you do, the results are fabulous. In fact, you will probably find that going that route is technically better than relying on Audyssey XT32 to equalize your sub (I say this based on things I've read on the net... someone else here may say otherwise).




venkataraman manu said:


> Audyssey did a great job too in my HT room.since you have the top Pio ;-), will MCACC be as good if not better!? Any good tutorial for novice?
> Thanks
> Manu


MCACC, as noted in some posts above, gives the enduser the ability to tweak the EQ process more than Audyssey... especially when it comes to selecting time delay for taking measurements. 

Beyond reading the manual for your receiver, this is an older link to a manual for using MCACC in conjunction with a PC (but it has some added discussion on the nuances of MCACC):

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/StaticFiles/Manuals/Home/VSX-21TXH_OperatingInstructions0528..pdf


Here's a link to a thread that I started (and actually only added to, myself :R)... but it has some conclusions to some issues I was having:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-theater-receivers-processors-amps/52567-i-need-pioneer-mcacc-help.html#post477916

And here is a link to a thread from a british AVS group. I didn't agree with all of their conclusions, but it helped me to read through this to understand the key variables/topics I should be paying attention to:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/av-amplifiers-receivers/986641-how-get-best-pioneer-mcacc.html


At the end of the day, there is no perfect EQ system. IMO, the very best thing you can do is make sure you have the appropriate trapping and diffusion treatments in your room. Bass, though, is really difficult to tame and that is why it is important to EQ your sub IF you are getting a really bad room response. You really should take the time to learn how to use REW. Take some sub measurements in your room using REW. See what kind of response you are getting. That will tell you how good or bad your room response is. Then, you'll have to decide what EQ route you are going to take: a parametric equalizer or something like Audyssey XT32.

Best,
Todd


----------



## Prof.

venkataraman manu said:


> Thanks Prof but do you think that MCACC  alone is sufficient. Some say you gotta eq sub separately. What say you?
> Regards
> Manu


Manu,

MCACC alone is not enough to have a fully calibrated system..
As others have mentioned, you don't get any calibration in the lower register and when speakers are set to small, there is no calibration below 125Hz..

You have two choices for calibrating bass frequencies..
Use REW with a Behringer Feedback Destroyer..OR use the Anti-Mode 8033 EQ device that automatically sets levels for frequencies ranging from 200Hz - 20Hz. It tunes those frequencies to your room characteristics to level off peaks and dips..
That's what I use!


----------



## venkataraman manu

Hi Todd
Thanks again for your opinions and links. I had already read the avforums thread during my forays to learn about what is waiting for me in a couple of days. Found both threads a lot very useful, thanks HTS! I am happy with my room acoustics( only by my ears) with all the absorbers, diffusers ( back and ceiling in my 25/11/10 ( LBH In ft ) HT with carpet on entire floor. Recliners ( 5 all fabric and big ) Audyssey did a fantastic job too over the passive correction. Pio has a lot more to offer than my 4311 on paper. Lets see. Thanks for your views and encouragement as a user of the very same model! I had used 3 Onkyo receivers before Denon. Thought I would try the top Pio now
Best
Manu


----------



## Jungle Jack

27dnast said:


> Jack - Not to nit-pick... actually just curious, why the recommend for an outboard amp? His current amp is already pushing 140W per channel. Added power from an outboard amp doesn't necessarily = better sound, or does it?


Hello,
I just honestly see the Pioneer and really most other AVR's compared to the 4311 being somewhat a sideways move. By adding an amplifier, you will have a component that is practically technology proof and I do have concerns about the Denon's power supply as it weighs about the same if not less than pre Bain Capital 7 Channel $1200 Denon AVR's. In addition, by adding an amplifier, there will not be many if any concerns about speaker purchases.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## chashint

I am a Pioneer owner and fan, having said that I also think the Denon 4311 is a killer AVR and I don't really see any advantage to be gained by swapping it out with any other AVR.
When it comes to output power of 140 vs 190 watts there is not much real world difference there.

Please describe what is lacking with the Denon that you expect the Pioneer to resolve.

BTW if you just want to try out Pioneer just for the experience, I think that is a perfectly fine reason to do the swap.


----------



## venkataraman manu

chashint said:


> I am a Pioneer owner and fan, having said that I also think the Denon 4311 is a killer AVR and I don't really see any advantage to be gained by swapping it out with any other AVR.
> When it comes to output power of 140 vs 190 watts there is not much real world difference there.
> 
> Please describe what is lacking with the Denon that you expect the Pioneer to resolve.
> 
> BTW if you just want to try out Pioneer just for the experience, I think that is a perfectly fine reason to do the swap.


Thanks for your views Chashint!
That is my primary idea after trying out 3 Onks and now Denon 4311. I changed from my Onk 1007 to the present Denon to savor the xt32! No disappoinment with it except that the 8 seating adjustment is just a dud IMO. I feel that the DSP choices are more in Pio. No tone adjustment in the D which I feel is a let down. The audio as you say is still wonderful.
Best
Manu


----------



## venkataraman manu

Hi fellow Shacksters!

 Greetings again. This thread that I started was very informative esp for a prospective Pio buyer like me. Todd's contribution to clear confusion in MCACC use is one instance in particular besides the links he gave.
After all the information I feel that in conclusion 1. Both Audyssey Multeq xt32 /Advance MCACC have plus and minus in terms of ease of use and more flexibility ( or the lack of it ) 2. Once that is concluded so, it is now between the many facilities both in audio and video tweaking between Denon 4311 and Pio Lx 86 (Aside their signature sonics ) that require our consideration. I conclude that Pio is a better choice than Denon IMO
Best
Manu


----------



## Jungle Jack

venkataraman manu said:


> Hi fellow Shacksters!
> 
> Greetings again. This thread that I started was very informative esp for a prospective Pio buyer like me. Todd's contribution to clear confusion in MCACC use is one instance in particular besides the links he gave.
> After all the information I feel that in conclusion 1. Both Audyssey Multeq xt32 /Advance MCACC have plus and minus in terms of ease of use and more flexibility ( or the lack of it ) 2. Once that is concluded so, it is now between the many facilities both in audio and video tweaking between Denon 4311 and Pio Lx 86 (Aside their signature sonics ) that require our consideration. I conclude that Pio is a better choice than Denon IMO
> Best
> Manu


Manu,
Pioneer makes a great AVR and I could not possibly agree more about the pros and cons with the various RoomEQ's. I have owned a Pioneer VSX-49tx which was the first MCACC offering and then used MultEQ XT with the Onkyo TX-SR805, 875, and TX-NR3007. 

Moving forward from the 3007, I got a XT32/SubEQ HT equipped TX-NR3008 and today picked up a Denon AVR-4520CI which also has XT32/SubEQ. If it were not for me having 9 channels of outboard amplification, I would have given serious thought to tracking down an B&O ICEPowered SC-35 or 37 and if not that a D3 powered Elite. I greatly enjoyed MCACC in the 49txi and I am sure it has gotten much better.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## chashint

You guys go through AVRs like I go through a bag of chips.
In 1979 I bought a two channel Sansui G7500 and had that until ~2002 when I replaced it with a JVC 5.1 channel receiver, which was replaced in ~2010 with a Pioneer VSX23.
I will probably have this until technology changes and I need something new to interface with it.


----------



## venkataraman manu

27dnast said:


> No, I couldn't really predict since we have no room measurements to see what's happening in your room with low frequencies without any EQ. It could be that you have a nearly flat response without any EQ and therefore the lack of bass management in MCACC wouldn't matter. But, if you took measurements you might find that you have a ton of room gain - lots of peaks - and that you need quite a bit of EQ to flatten them out.
> 
> As I said, with my particular home theater, I needed EQ from 80Hz and below. MCACC doesn't handle this frequency range at all --- while it does technically EQ down to 50 or 60 Hz (I believe), once you set your speakers to "small" it turns off that 50-60 Hz range from it's program (in other words, when the speakers are set to "small" it won't EQ its lowest possible range). The only way to EQ your sub, when using MCACC is to spend about $100 on a parametric equalizer like the Berhinger Feedback Destroyer DSP1124P and download the REW software (which is free). All the information you need to learn how to use REW and the Feedback Destroyer are right here on the Home Theater Shack website. It takes time to learn how to use it... but, once you do, the results are fabulous. In fact, you will probably find that going that route is technically better than relying on Audyssey XT32 to equalize your sub (I say this based on things I've read on the net... someone else here may say otherwise).
> 
> MCACC, as noted in some posts above, gives the enduser the ability to tweak the EQ process more than Audyssey... especially when it comes to selecting time delay for taking measurements.
> 
> Beyond reading the manual for your receiver, this is an older link to a manual for using MCACC in conjunction with a PC (but it has some added discussion on the nuances of MCACC):
> 
> http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/StaticFiles/Manuals/Home/VSX-21TXH_OperatingInstructions0528..pdf
> 
> Here's a link to a thread that I started (and actually only added to, myself :R)... but it has some conclusions to some issues I was having:
> 
> http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-theater-receivers-processors-amps/52567-i-need-pioneer-mcacc-help.html#post477916
> 
> And here is a link to a thread from a british AVS group. I didn't agree with all of their conclusions, but it helped me to read through this to understand the key variables/topics I should be paying attention to:
> 
> http://www.avforums.com/forums/av-amplifiers-receivers/986641-how-get-best-pioneer-mcacc.html
> 
> At the end of the day, there is no perfect EQ system. IMO, the very best thing you can do is make sure you have the appropriate trapping and diffusion treatments in your room. Bass, though, is really difficult to tame and that is why it is important to EQ your sub IF you are getting a really bad room response. You really should take the time to learn how to use REW. Take some sub measurements in your room using REW. See what kind of response you are getting. That will tell you how good or bad your room response is. Then, you'll have to decide what EQ route you are going to take: a parametric equalizer or something like Audyssey XT32.
> 
> Best,
> Todd


Hi Todd,
Greeting! 
Got my Pio lx 86 and been tweaking it. Got a lot out of MCACC ( thank you) and more. It is a cool room healer and once I got the basic calibration done i became familiar with it. It requires audiophile ownership to get the best out of it IMO. High flexibility. When I did the manual eq ( sub menu of adv MCACC) fine level and fine distance adjustment I was amazed with the change in soundscape! No such thing is possible with Audessey. Nor can you calibrated for different seats and memory allot it!
Can you tell me how to do precision distance adjustment ? Have you done it? Does one have to move the speakers physically? Gotta be impractical to deal with my SVS M series speakers! The instruction seem to hint the physical shift, albeit a few Cms distance. 
Best
Manu


----------



## chashint

Thanks for coming back to the thread with your follow up.
The precision adjustment for distance does not mean you move your speakers (unless you actually want to physically adjust their location to match each other).


----------



## venkataraman manu

chashint said:


> Thanks for coming back to the thread with your follow up.
> The precision adjustment for distance does not mean you move your speakers (unless you actually want to physically adjust their location to match each other).


Chashint
Thanks but I do feel that we need to move the speakers physically with the microphone In seating spot. The reading on the monitor changes when you move the speaker but not otherwise. This tweaking is impossible with speakers like height ones which are held to the front wall above the front ones! Nor the SB speakers which are also fixed to the wall. No precision adj is possible IMO. I suppose one must shop with fine distance adj only in most practical scenerio. And in a 9.2 system it is very impractical unless there are other ideas to get round this! Fine distance adj and fine level adj work wonders. 
MCACC is cool with multi seat calibration and memory. Audyssey never works as well in seats other than sweet spots. In spite of their claim otherwise. Got years of experience with different avatars of Audyssey. Never was able to get the sound equal to to the sweet spot! 
Manu


----------



## chashint

The sweet spot earned that designation for many reasons and no amount of EQ will ever be able to make the sound field equal across all listening positions. It's just not possible to do that. What optimizes one location takes something away from another location.


----------



## chashint

My system is in my living room, it is what it is, the gear has to go where it's currently located. As a result I cannot let myself get too worried achieving a perfect EQ. It would just drive me crazy if I were to ever measure this room and "know" the acoustical problems it has.


----------



## hyghwayman

chashint said:


> My system is in my living room, it is what it is, the gear has to go where it's currently located. As a result I cannot let myself get too worried achieving a perfect EQ. It would just drive me crazy if I were to ever measure this room and "know" the acoustical problems it has.


I'm right there with you brother


----------



## venkataraman manu

hyghwayman said:


> I'm right there with you brother http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=10923


Greetings Folks!
We'll after starting this thread I spent one year with my Pio SC LX 86. Worked on the various MCACC settings. I must admit that after all the effort and any number of calibrations and listening IMO AUDYSSEY room eq is the better of the two. I gave off the Pio and got myself Marantz 6007 and boy! Did I enjoy the soundscape with Audyssey doing a stunning re-entry to my HT. Although the Marantz 6007 is less powered and with less of all the bells and whistles vis a vis Pio 86( and at half the price!) it's warm sound signature was a revelation to me. The sound bubble that Audyssey creates in the primary listening position is perfect. Audyssey is the WINNER! IMO. Now planning to get the top-end Marantz 7008. I like their sonic signature best coupled with Audyssey. After experiencing ONKYO(503, 709, 1007) Denon 4311, Pio lx 86, over 8 years of listening I feel that the Marantz is truly AUDIOPHILE grade. Sounds like I have arrived at last-sonically?

Manu


----------



## chashint

Well hello again.
Very nice to get a one year follow up.
Nothing wrong with liking any manufacturer over the others at all.
I still have the Pioneer VSX-23 with no plans to switch it out.
Maybe in 5 or 10 years ;-)


----------



## venkataraman manu

chashint said:


> You guys go through AVRs like I go through a bag of chips.
> In 1979 I bought a two channel Sansui G7500 and had that until ~2002 when I replaced it with a JVC 5.1 channel receiver, which was replaced in ~2010 with a Pioneer VSX23.
> I will probably have this until technology changes and I need something new to interface with it.


hi, Chashint!
Thanks. I know that you enjoy long associations with your gears! Good for you.I try what I can afford out there as a sort of sonic tour! And sometimes I land on good things like the Marantz. It has a fabulous signature sound that is big and clean.Conversation is clear and the scaling of sound is big.Also the accuracy of panning the sound in a movie is more precise IMO than any of the avrs that I had access to.Audyssey is awesome and provides the soundscape that is so refreshing after my stint with the MCACC. Worth a try:T

Cheers
Manu


----------



## chashint

That is a very nice way to look at it.
My brother might tell you it's because my wallet squeaks when I try to open it and it actually weeps if a dollar is pried out of it.


----------



## venkataraman manu

chashint said:


> That is a very nice way to look at it. My brother might tell you it's because my wallet squeaks when I try to open it and it actually weeps if a dollar is pried out of it.


Sure! I know how it feels except in my case frequently? but seriously I am sure you have used avrs with Audyssey and MCACC. What's you experience?


----------



## chashint

My brother's Denon AVR uses Audyssey and mine uses MCAAC.
He really likes the dynamic EQ and I use the front align calibration.
The two calibration systems are just different and I think they both work fine.
I would not trade my Pioneer for my brother's Denon and he would not swap me either.
We visit each other all the time and I think we both enjoy listening to each other's system.
The Audyssey is definitely the most popular, maybe because it is better and maybe because it is just more widely deployed.


----------



## tonyvdb

Here are my findings comparing MCACC and Audyssey XT

MCACC Pro's
1. Graphical view of system response

MCACC Con's
1. It doesn't EQ the sub
2. Its only a 9 band EQ
3. One x-over point for all speakers, so your weakest link sets everything
4. Only reads one position meaning other spots in the room may not sound very good.

Audyssey XT Pro's
1. More measured points for a better response in room
2. EQ's the sub
3. Most XT AVR's are pro capable for more customization

Audyssey XT Con's
1. You cant see what its doing (unless you get the Pro kit)


----------



## chashint

I got the AVR long before I got the sub and the sub EQ (lack of) was something I was concerned about.

I chose a pretty good ported sub so I would at least start with something flat when measured in an anechoic environment.
There were only two options for location with one being far and away the preferred location.
The sub is squeezed between a large chest of drawers and the left speaker pushed close to the back wall.
Perhaps I am very lucky since I violated every rule of sub placement but in my structurally complicated room it works fine. (It should be noted I do not stress over 3-4dB variation measured with a SPL meter).

Pioneer has the equivalent to the pro (MCACC version dependent).
Pioneer measures multiple positions (again version dependent).

The merits of global crossover verses individual crossover is not clear cut either.
Just like my Pioneer my brother's Denon identified all speakers as large when all but the front mains should have been identified as small.
After listening for a while (several weeks) and trying various crossovers the Denon ended up being set to 80hz for all speakers.
It is just a singular example YMMV but there is nothing inherently wrong with using a global crossover nor do I see anything inherently wrong with separate crossovers.

MCACC (again depending on the version) reads multiple positions during the calibration.

As far as making the whole room sound good, that is more of a room and speaker positioning issue than a calibration issue.
The primary listening position is called primary for a reason.
Processing cannot make all locations be the sweet spot and the more you would try to do that the more the sweet spot will suffer.

All MCACC versions offers many more user customizations without needing to use "pro" than the equivalent Audyssey versions.
In the MCACC any parameter can be tweaked without the system turning off the calibration.

Since I own the Pioneer VSX-23 I obviously know more about it than I know about my brother's Denon, I learned enough about that to help him and get it setup.

As I said previously the two systems are different.
They both seem to work well.
They come in different flavors depending on price point.

I have no issue with personal preferences, making a list of pro/con without fully understanding how each functions and why may not be the best way to approach it.


----------



## tonyvdb

chashint said:


> As far as making the whole room sound good, that is more of a room and speaker positioning issue than a calibration issue.
> The primary listening position is called primary for a reason.
> Processing cannot make all locations be the sweet spot and the more you would try to do that the more the sweet spot will suffer.


The issue with that is your ears are not in one position, moving or turning your head even a few inches can make a very big difference. Many people find measuring 6 positions all within a foot of each other gives much better results.


----------



## chashint

tonyvdb said:


> The issue with that is your ears are not in one position, moving or turning your head even a few inches can make a very big difference.


While I have read that many times I have not personally experienced it. 
From one location in the room to another yes, I have experienced noticeable differences. But not from moving my head a few inches.

None the less, MCACC does have multiple mic positions (version dependant) to compensate for that variation so it's a moot point. 

The particular room calibration included in an AVR is obviously very important to many people.
It's not to me.

Maybe someday I will have the night and day difference experience from something other than speakers, until then I will remain skeptical that Audyssey vs MCACC vs YAPO makes significant differences.
Do I think the calibration routines will sound different ... yes, but different is different not necessarily better or worse.


----------



## tonyvdb

You need to hear what Trinnov will do, it will change your tune on that. I also think that Audyssey XT and XT32 are much more than the YAPO or MCACC offerings give you. Lower versions of Audyssey I agree there is no gain.


----------



## venkataraman manu

tonyvdb said:


> You need to hear what Trinnov will do, it will change your tune on that. I also think that Audyssey XT and XT32 are much more than the YAPO or MCACC offerings give you. Lower versions of Audyssey I agree there is no gain.


Here is a quote from Audyssey on how and why their technology is more efficient

Time and Frequency Correction:

"The time domain is where many of the problems are. Parametric and graphic equalizers can only correct for the frequency response and do so in a very coarse manner because they have limited resolution (bands).
Further, whether they have fixed or adjustable bands doesn't matter because bands cause phase problems that most people hear as "ringing" or "smearing." That's why, after thirty-plus years of trying this method, most people don't like the results. And they turn it off".
This fundamental difference between how AUDYSSEY and MCACC works is where the end results remain. Audible! And Audyssey is better IMO after endless tweaking with both.


----------



## venkataraman manu

venkataraman manu said:


> Here is a quote from Audyssey on how and why their technology is more efficient Time and Frequency Correction: "The time domain is where many of the problems are. Parametric and graphic equalizers can only correct for the frequency response and do so in a very coarse manner because they have limited resolution (bands). Further, whether they have fixed or adjustable bands doesn't matter because bands cause phase problems that most people hear as "ringing" or "smearing." That's why, after thirty-plus years of trying this method, most people don't like the results. And they turn it off". This fundamental difference between how AUDYSSEY and MCACC works is where the end results remain. Audible! And Audyssey is better IMO after endless tweaking with both.


 

tonyvdb wrote:
You need to hear what Trinnov will do, it will change your tune on that. I also think that Audyssey XT and XT32 are much more than the YAPO or MCACC offerings give you. Lower versions of Audyssey I agree there is no gain.
What is Trinnov?


----------



## tonyvdb

venkataraman manu said:


> tonyvdb wrote:
> You need to hear what Trinnov will do, it will change your tune on that. I also think that Audyssey XT and XT32 are much more than the YAPO or MCACC offerings give you. Lower versions of Audyssey I agree there is no gain.
> What is Trinnov?


Trinnov was released in only one receiver ever (Sherwood/Newcastle R972), it is normally a stand alone room correction unit that measures a room in three dimensions that costs around $7000. And the results are amazing. It uses a 4 mic capsule.


----------



## venkataraman manu

tonyvdb said:


> Trinnov was released in only one receiver ever (Sherwood/Newcastle R972), it is normally a stand alone room correction unit that measures a room in three dimensions that costs around $7000. And the results are amazing. It uses a 4 mic capsule.


I am off to buy a lottery ticket?


----------



## tonyvdb

If you can still find one the Sherwood can be found for around $500 I have one and it's great but has a few querkey issues.


----------



## chashint

If you read through the dedicated 972 thread I think "a few quirky issues" is a huge understatement but each to their own opinion.
http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...sherwood-newcastle-r-972-official-thread.html


----------



## tonyvdb

It's not as bad as it sounds, once you get it dialled in the only reoccurring issue that happens about twice a month is the audio shuts off after changing an input. All you have to do is switch to another input and back again. The sound quality you get after running Trinnov outweighs the issues by a long shot.


----------



## venkataraman manu

tonyvdb said:


> It's not as bad as it sounds, once you get it dialled in the only reoccurring issue that happens about twice a month is the audio shuts off after changing an input. All you have to do is switch to another input and back again. The sound quality you get after running Trinnov outweighs the issues by a long shot.


We'll good luck to you!


----------



## BeeMan458

I spent a year playing with a Marantz SR5007 and Anti-Mode 8033S II and got fair results. When I went to better subwoofers, I found that the 8033S II rolled off at 20Hz and I wasn't happy with the amplifier section of the SR5007 as it wasn't able to keep up with the action sequences. You could hear the life get sucked out of the speakers as they fell further and further behind the output of the three subwoofers; two of which were stacked.

The solution, I pulled the CC out, threw a boatload of borrowed cash at the problem, ordered a Denon AVR4520CI, a Denon DBT-3313UDCI blu-ray player and two Rythmik FV15HPs and now that the subs have had a chance to get broken in/dialed in, we don't need to anything other than turn the system on and listen to outstanding movie based sound tracks.

........ 

As you can see, we have a bare room, no room treatment and based on the graph as evidence, the bass sound graph is to die for.

We have no outboard amplifiers and no clutter. Just an old man, his TV, 5.2 speaker system, AVR/blu-ray player in which to create the magic with. The point is to encourage the OP with the idea of buying for the sake of simplicity.


----------



## venkataraman manu

BeeMan458 said:


> I spent a year playing with a Marantz SR5007 and Anti-Mode 8033S II and got fair results. When I went to better subwoofers, I found that the 8033S II rolled off at 20Hz and I wasn't happy with the amplifier section of the SR5007 as it wasn't able to keep up with the action sequences. You could hear the life get sucked out of the speakers as they fell further and further behind the output of the three subwoofers; two of which were stacked. The solution, I pulled the CC our, threw a boatload of borrowed cash at the problem, ordered a Denon AVR4520CI, a Denon DBT-3313UDCI blu-ray player and two Rythmik FV15HPs and now that it's all broken and dialed in, I don't absolutely nothing other than turn the system on and listen to outstanding movie based sound tracks. http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=14678....http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=14628....http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=14630 As you can see, we have a bare room, no room treatment and based on the graph as evidence, the sound is to die for. We have no outboard amplifiers and no clutter. Just an old man, his TV, 5.2 speaker system, AVR/blu-ray player in which to create the magic with. The point is to encourage the OP with the idea of buying for the sake of simplicity.


Hi!
I have Marantz 6007 with two subs and anti mode 8033 S II. Mine is 7.2 system with SVS M SERIES speakers. Sunfire True sub plus Deftech Supercube II. Audyssey plus Marantz sound is really very musical, different from the Pio LX 86 
that I replaced. Never was happy with MCACC. And my HT has passive sound treatment as well. The Marantz is the most musical of all the aves that I have tried!
You have a nice system I see. You will enjoy Marantz 7008. More power. Audiophile grade. 
Cheers?


----------



## BeeMan458

venkataraman manu said:


> You have a nice system I see. You will enjoy Marantz 7008. More power. Audiophile grade.


Thanks!

I'm a bit confused, are you looking to purchase a Marantz SR7008 as opposed to a Denon AVR4520CI?


----------



## venkataraman manu

BeeMan458 said:


> Thanks! I'm a bit confused, are you looking to purchase a Marantz SR7008 as opposed to a Denon AVR4520CI?


Yes I do. I should be getting it anytime. I now have SR 6007. I have experienced Denon 4311 for more than a year. It was good. But once I heard Marantz's signature sound, I was hooked. Sound is fuller and focus and placement spot on! 
Rich with Audyssey sound bubble that is unbeatable. I read in a thread that the component s used in Marantz are better quality as opposed to Denon. Sounds better IMO.


----------



## BeeMan458

venkataraman manu said:


> Yes I do. I should be getting it anytime. I now have SR 6007.


I'll look forward to your first impression/comments once you have it setup and dialed in.

We just recently acquired the 4520CI. Not comparing it to the SR7008. I'm very happy with it's output. I don't use any of the fancy whistles and bells. All I was in it for was the amplifier section, XT32 w/SubEQ HT for our two subs and the free/included universal blu-ray player (the deal is no longer available), a matching Denon DBT-3313UDCI.

It was a sort of legal/factory rep provided, Godfather deal, I couldn't refuse. Fortunately, my wife was cooperative regarding this out of cycle purchase.

How soon before you take delivery?


----------



## venkataraman manu

BeeMan458 said:


> I'll look forward to your first impression/comments once you have it setup and dialed in. We just recently acquired the 4520CI. Not comparing it to the SR7008. I'm very happy with it's output. I don't use any of the fancy whistles and bells. All I was in it for was the amplifier section, XT32 w/SubEQ HT for our two subs and the free/included universal blu-ray player (the deal is no longer available), a matching Denon DBT-3313UDCI. It was a sort of legal/factory rep provided, Godfather deal, I couldn't refuse. Fortunately, my wife was cooperative regarding this out of cycle purchase. How soon before you take delivery?









How soon before you take delivery?[/ In a few days. Hey that's my HT!









The seating arrangement


----------



## BeeMan458

Sweet.

Lots of treatments and plenty of seating.

Congratulations.


----------



## venkataraman manu

BeeMan458 said:


> Sweet. Lots of treatments and plenty of seating. Congratulations.


Thanks! The passive treatment is complimented by awesome Audyssey. Sadly cannot say the same about MCACC,IMO.


----------

