hmm similar price range to denon x1200. many on avsforum were saying room eq of MCACC/pioneer is better than audyssey/denon
any idea which is a more reliable avr & less prone to failure?
Quoting this link from an other thread...
Here is an interesting link to read Audyssey Multi EQ XT32 Vs YPAO Vs MCACC -
Google Translate
Results towards the end of the review from the above link ....
Rating system calibration with automatic correction of priority:
1. Audyssey MultiEQ XT 32 for most flat frequency response graph for all channels, including subwoofer
2. YPAO RSC for the good work RSC complex filter on correcting problems in NP
3. MCACC for clear presentation of information about the changes made
4. YPAO for work at all frequencies
5. Audyssey 2EQ for correcting the frequency response of heterogeneous speaker HF
Rating calibration systems with manual priority correction:
1. YPAO (all) for flexible parametric EQ on each channel
2. MCACC 9-band graphic equalizer and 3-band EQ standing waves
3. Audyssey (all) for a graphic equalizer, equalizer including subwoofer (sale Onkyo)
Overall Rating calibration systems:
1. Audyssey MultiEQ XT 32 and YPAO RSC. Uniquely difficult to choose a leader, that is. To. A system perfectly corrects frequency response over the entire range, and the second, though less straightens response, but has the ability to further edit the result obtained using a parametric equalizer to your personal preference.
2. MCACC. A good range of options is limited only by the means used for editing.
3. YPAO. Auto-tuning is only slightly rules AFC channels, which requires a mandatory change settings parametric equalizer to produce an acceptable result.
4. Audyssey 2EQ. The absence of changes below 1 kHz does not allow to adjust the effect of the room.
