A/V Auto-EQ's and Ascends

[Gov]

Howdy,

I have been busy enjoying my new Ascends lately and have realized that I may actually like the sound of them without my Pioneer 1014 EQ engaged. How many Ascend owners use the EQ on their receivers vs. how many do not? I am pretty sure most prefer it off. I also have better results with my SPL meter and the S&V HTT disc vs. MCACC with the Ascends. Looking forward to your comments.

Thanx

[curtis]

I have heard MCACC with Ascends on two occasions, and didn't like it either time....it seemed to sound artificial to me.

[Asliang]

Are the Ascends internally-EQed or is the FR the complex sum of the natural drive unit roll-offs?

[curtis]

Are the Ascends internally-EQed or is the FR the complex sum of the natural drive unit roll-offs?

The speaker's crossover does that work for the most part.

[swank121]

Interesting. I prefer the sound with the auto-eq on my H/K AVR 635. I do have an unusual shaped room with vaulted ceilings and a triangular opening into the kitchen (stairs in the middle).

[Gov]

My room is also open to a kitchen and my speaker arrangement is good, but not the best. Unfortunately I do not have much of a choice due to the how it is layed out. Anyway, I have played with the EQ with several different sources on (i.e Music Choice, CD, DVD) For DVD material I could NOT tell the difference at all. With Music Choice via Comcast I noticed a bit. With CD I could tell quite a bit. The best way I can describe the sound with the EQ on is a bit muffled sounding. It seems like everything blends together to much for my liking. With my old JBL Northridges the EQ sounded considerably better on than off. But, the Ascends are another story.

[curtis]

Interesting. I prefer the sound with the auto-eq on my H/K AVR 635. I do have an unusual shaped room with vaulted ceilings and a triangular opening into the kitchen (stairs in the middle).

Auto EQ on the HK's works differently, and I have not experienced it yet.

MCACC tries to flatten the response. The HK system tries to remove the differences the room creates. On the HK's, you take a nearfield measurement, which removes room induced FR changes, then it takes a measurement at the listening position. After these are done, it tries to match the listening position measurement with the nearfield measurement.

The thought is you bought the speakers because of how they sound, and it tries to preserve that sound rather than change it to be a flat FR.

[Gov]

Auto EQ on the HK's works differently, and I have not experienced it yet.

MCACC tries to flatten the response. The HK system tries to remove the differences the room creates. On the HK's, you take a nearfield measurement, which removes room induced FR changes, then it takes a measurement at the listening position. After these are done, it tries to match the listening position measurement with the nearfield measurement.

The thought is you bought the speakers because of how they sound, and it tries to preserve that sound rather than change it to be a flat FR.

I believe that is the goal of MCACC as well? Atleast thats I how I understand it.

[curtis]

Unless MCACC takes a nearfield measurement of the speakers, it can't know how they are suppose to sound and remove room effects.

[BGHD]

Use MCACC on my Pio 74 w/ Ascends. Without MCACC/EQ, everything's just louder and more fatiguing to my ears, so I tend to prefer it 'on'.