auto setup/eq on receivers

[masterxela]

Hi

I'm looking at upgrading from my old phillips receiver and
want to spend the least amount I can whilst retaining the highest audio
quality I can get. I don't really want any kind of video conversion,
internet jazz, ipod etc. I want the cheapest receiver with 7.1 and
either a solid auto setup, or a really nice built in eq that I can do
manually with a tone generator and db reader. Second option seems
cheaper to me. Oh, and enough umph to drive my reference 3 speakers
LOUD. Thanks

[oldbuckster]

Looking for NEW or pre-owned????????

[tommyboy]

I have the Pioneer 2016. It has a nice built in EQ, and does the MCACC auto cal. I think that the 1016 and the 2016 are pretty much the same model. The only difference, (from what I can tell) is that the 2016 puts out 150w p/c as opposed to 110 in the 1016. But, it does have the IPOD input, and all that other stuff. But at the same time, it is THX certified. The 1016 can be found at about 480 bucks.

[masterxela]

pre-owned is ok if i can see it/hear it first or its from a reliable

source, like people on here..... $480 is more than i was wanting to

spend, but thanks for the post

[Guest " "]

keep us posted on yor search.

[DrWho]

$480 is too much? What kind of budget are you looking at?

For what it's worth, I think you're wasting your time with the EQ features...there is something wrong with the configuration if you feel the need to EQ everything, not to mention the entire auto EQ concept is based on a flawed principal from the 80's that just doesn't want to die off. A receiver with a decent set of tone controls should be more than enough. I would recommend experimenting with speaker placement and listening position before running an auto EQ. That's not to say that they never improve the sound, but you should realize far better improvements by investing in a receiver that's not offering these crazy bells and whistles.

Nevertheless, you're going to be hardpressed to find a "good" 7.1 receiver for under $400.

Best of luck on your search.

[masterxela]

came across dakmart.com, seems like a decent enough place. What do you guys think of some of these and their asking price:

denon avr-1506 $232 http://dakmart.com/itemdetails/31034/173/

denon avr-1706 $319 http://dakmart.com/itemdetails/30628/173/

denon avr-1905 $352 http://dakmart.com/itemdetails/16459/173/

Thanks for your help

[masterxela]

Tell me I should buy this. Then I'll stop thinking about it.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Denon-AVR-1905-A-V-Receiver_W0QQitemZ260073493129QQihZ016QQcategoryZ39793QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[tommyboy]

It LOOKS like a good unit. But you won't know how it sounds til you get it hooked up. And it would be a pain to return it if you weren't happy w/ the sound. Always remember too, that your system is only as good as your weakest component.

[tommyboy]

So, if you have really good speakers, but a crappy receiver, or a good receiver, but crappy speakers, then that definitely limits the sound of your system.

[tommyboy]

For what it's worth, I think you're wasting your time with the EQ features...there is something wrong with the configuration if you feel the need to EQ everything, not to mention the entire auto EQ concept is based on a flawed principal from the 80's that just doesn't want to die off.

I agree here. The Pioneer I have runs the EQ setup when it does the auto cal. I couldn't see myself sitting there, going through every freq trying to set them to get the"best" sound. You may be wasting your time with the whole EQ thing.

[bruschi54]

I disagree. For those of using using set-ups in less than ideal rooms, the EQ functions can perform wonders. I don't understand the comment relating to this being an 80's concept. I currently use an HK 435. The EQ/EZ-set sets delays, crossover, and has a parametric eq that also adjusts for the subwoofer.

If you have a dedicated HT then the EQ may not be necessary. However, when so many people use a variety of speakers in less than ideal rooms, the really good EQ systems can work miracles...

[DrWho]

This article sums it up better than I could:
Equalizing
the room

[masterxela]

The reason I was interested in a nice eq is because I think it would

help. I'm in a dorm room. The standing waves are so bad that I can set

a test tone, walk across the room and easily hear every node.

Doing in room frequency response from my listening position with a db

meter shows me the nastiness of the situation on paper, and I don't

have the choice to move the speakers anywhere else or glue acoustic

stuff to the walls. Am I wrong that if I have a 10 db peak at say 60 hz

that with an eq I couldn't help that "problem spot"? My current

receiver is limited to large/small settings and a bass/treble knob, and

it just doesn't cut it. I guess my only other question is,

Am I wasting money trying in this room, and should I wait to buy a nice

reciever until I have a decent place for it.

Thanks (I'm also having second thoughts on the

idea of possibly half-a$$ing this entire thing and wanting all new

stuff again in 2 years, maybe I'll wait till funds allow for some

belle's......)

[DrWho]

Sadly Belles aren't being made any more...

As far as the in room frequency response - you could measure it, apply eq, and the measurement would show a reduction in the peak...but this is because the measurement isn't a time-based measurement (and the EQ isn't changing in time either). The fact that it's "better" still doesn't change the behavior of the time-based problem which is actually what you're hearing. To be honest, you're just not going to get good farfield sound out of a dorm room. Either move to an apartment or stick to nearfield listening. You can certainly make things sound better and even with a little EQ you can make things more bearable - but it's an artificial band-aid and not a complete solution.

Anyways, that's just one guy's opinion...I know plenty of people like the EQ thing - I'm more against it out of principal. The improvements just sound more like differences to me...

[WMcD]

I'm pretty much in agreement that you can't really equalize a room to take care of all the anomalies created by standing waves.

OTOH, several friends have used equalizers (the slide pot type) to equalize speakers, in those cases, Speakerlab SK near copies of Klipschorns. The bass below 60 hz and treble above 7000 hz was poor. So there can be some benifits if you are realistic and don't go overboard.

It is nice to read about your experience with single tone tests. I've written about mine in the past. It is hard to convince people that the room has that much influence and how much it changes from spot to spot. And as others have shown, this makes it very difficult to say whether a room and speaker are good or bad. It changes from spot to spot.

Maybe you should run the same experiment in another room. I'm sure you'll find most of the effects are universal.

I'd like to suggest that your inclination is correct. It might not be worthwhile to invest in a budget receiver to address (perhaps unsuccessfully) a problem in a dorm room which you may not be inhabiting for too much longer. Every product cycle gets things more favorable regarding electronics, obviously. Too bad that is not true of Belle's.

OTOH, it may be beneficial to make up some absorbers from pink fiberglass insulating boards. A few 2 X 3 foot panels on the walls could have a big effect. I'm a fan of polycylinders but they are more difficult to build. In any event, these are portable and usable in your post-college abode. You'll be getting some experience in taming the real problem, which is universal.

Gil