Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Advanced MCACC

What is this feature on pioneer AV receivers?

It's the Pioneer version of Audyssey, Trinnov etc... In short it's the automated calibration procedure of the receiver. I have the Pioneer SC-05 with MCACC. I like what it does (especially standing wave correction) but I prefer to defeat the EQ settings it comes up with. That's just my preference, there is no right or wrong to it. Overall I personally like MCACC - though I will readily admit I have not experienced Audyssey or any of the others available on differing receiver brands.

That was exactly what I was gonna ask. Which one is better, Audissey or the MCACC. LOL

That is a can of worms with no one correct answer! I won't speak for anyone but you will find a wide variety of opinions about the different methods out there and even if people like to use them or not. I'm sure those with more experience and wisdom than I will be along to help fill in the gaps. There really is a wealth of knowledge about this subject among all of the forum members here. Let me know if you have any specific MCACC questions and I'll try and help. There's a few of us with Pio receivers.

Cheers,

How do you like your Pio receiver? Would you get a Onkyo or Denon if you had a choice?

I love my Pioneer Elite receiver. Personally, I wouldn't get one unless it was one of the Elite models. I have the cheapest of the Elites. When I bought it, it was $700 and I got it for $630 with 10% off. The last I checked, on-line, it was MSRP $800, but perhaps it's gone back down since then. I'm only driving 8 ohm speakers, but, so far, I haven't heard anything negative about the Elites not being able to drive the 4 ohm loads. It has plenty of power to drive what I currently have.

MCCACC is simple to use and seup with a single microphone position. You also can save up to 6 seperate settings with the one I have. The cheaper ones have less.

If I ever buy another one, I might get a Denon just so I can experience the difference. I think the Denon may be superior to the Onkyo, but I don't have anything to back that up really, so I really don't know. Just that I've heard a lot of good things about Denon.

Personally, after functionality, I would probably base my decision on weight, because I think that with added weight comes superior power supply, which to me equates to better sound.

One thing I realized is that the onkyos have more video outputs then the Denons. I like the back panel of the onkyos better, but it seems to me people believe the Denons are better.

It probably depends on which Denon AVR... The more expensive ones look good. I'm not so sure about the cheaper ones.

I like my Pio for my particular situation. There are pros and cons of course. My biggest issue with the Pio is that it only has one system wide crossover setting. OTOH the class D amps on the Pio Elites create an amazing amount of power so give you more headroom for the $ than other receivers (at least back when I was shopping). I could have individual cross overs with the same ICE amps I would be 100% happy. There are a couple of threads where the Pioneer receivers were discussed. I'll link to them later when I have time to dig (I'm at work now).

I don't think I'd like having global crossovers. My 8 year old H/K has independent crossovers. You'd think other manufacturers would get on the bandwagon already.

Are you sure about the "one system side crossover setting"? I had though that there was one per each of the 6 MCACC saved settings.

Oh, I imagine there's 1 per MCACC saved setting, but if I read that right, it's still only 1 crossover for all channels.

Per channel? For some reason, I can't reason out what a channel is?

Fronts, center, surrounds, etc.

"Oh, I am so embarrassed..." lol.

Correct, the Pioneer does not have a separate cross-over per channel.

My old Pio Elite had individual crossovers, I'm shocked that yours does not. I have a Denon now, but was very happy with the Elite before.

My Pio 45TX has MCACC and it seems to work out fine. I never bothered to pull out an SPL meter.

I just got a Denon 3310 and did the Audyssey set up. Sounded fine, but oddly, I had to up the sub from 9 o'clock to almost 1 o'clock just to get the calibration working. Not sure why the sub is so low on Denon.

And now...the Denon is in the shop getting the HDMI repaired.

Probably have to get one of the more expensive Pioneer Elites to get the individual cross-overs per channel.

Nope, at least the current model year (2010) does not offer channel independent cross over settings. It's not something they advertise one way or another, you kind of need to figure that one out for yourself. In fact I just verified that the SC-09 flagship model has one system wide crossover setting for any speakers set to 'small'.

That's phenomenal that a flagship model would have the restriction....

"Phenomenal" wouldn't exactly have been my choice of word I have to agree that all Elites at the very least should have it.

Agreed - they absolutely should. That is my one beef with these receivers that I will warn anybody about. Also there is no upconversion through HDMI inputs. Outside of those 2 issues the Elite's are awesome amps - you just need to be aware of their design choices/limitations and decide if that affects you or not. Now I'm starting to retype previous threads - I'm going to link in a minute!

OK - found the previous post that should let you find all the information. Hope that helps.

Wow, I gotta remeber that, didn't know about the upconversion either. Thanks for the headsup.

Pioneer knows you can't maintain phase coherence when combining multiple channels with different cross-over points into one output. One of the features of the Advanced MCACC is phase alignment of the LCR with the sub (the newest models have multi-channel phase alignment to include the surrounds). They couldn't do that if there were different cross-over points for each channel.

I've been meaning to write to Audioholics to ask them to use their fancy HDMI test tone thingy to measure the sub-woofer output of a bass sweep through multiple channels with different cross-overs. I'm sure it'll be interesting, and start many fires on AVS.

I think it fits.

For all the features that can be offered for sound quality, what is likely to effect the end result more than not being able to change the individual crossover frequencies? My fronts are set to 40hZ, my VP150 to 100hZ and my QS8s to 120hZ. Having to set them all to, say, 80hZ would affect the sound quality quite a bit.

While it wouldn't be a dealbreaker in a low-priced receiver, I think they missed the ball by not including it in their flagship product.

Oh, and Pioneer's newest top of the line non-Elite, the 1120, and the Elites which will follow will upscale the HDMI inputs.

Anyone ever play the Myst games?

I liked them, played them all, but only played a few other games that would compare. (Siberia, Mysterious Island, King's Quest, The Longest Journey) There may be more that I'm not aware of. I've started some bad and boring ones, but didn't play them for long.

I believe Onkyo offers models with pre outs at a much lower price point than Denon.

So do I! But I think I like the Denons more expensive models better.

Thanks for the explanation Chris. I didn't realise this design 'omission' was actually for technical reasons. Helps make me feel better about it! Either way, my Axioms still sound awesome - I use an 80Hz crossover.

I will add: What Pioneer is doing is technically correct, but may not technically be needed.

The only time the issues of different crossover points causing different phase shifts between channels becomes a problem, is when those channels have the same signal being sent to them. It probably isn't often in real world material that the mains have the same content as the surrounds. Maybe a little more frequently (especially when using Prologic II Music) that the mains and the center end up playing the same thing.

It's one of those things that's easy to provoke with a test tone, but no one does it in real life. Kind of like the "all channels driven with broadband noise", no one actually listens to anything like that.

That is a very good point.