Pioneer VSX-1019....pphhhhhhhhh!

[Lordoftherings]

No problemo.

Anyone have a link to where the 1019 has problems with the PS3? I just picked mineup this weekend but if it doesn't work well with a PS3 then I might have to look for another option.

Hi,

Nothing to be worry about. It was a problem of wrong settings from the PS3, that's all. A guy unplugged the HDMI cable from his PS3, and plugged it into his receiver, his video settings then changed.

If all settings are properly adjusted from the PS3, there is no problem whatsoever. Just set the Video Out from the PS3 video menu, to HDMI.

* If you want The "Official Pioneer VSX-1019AH-K Owner's Thread", here it is:
@ http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1149686

*** If you want to jump directly to the heart of the matter, just go to post #505, from page 17. Just read a couple pages from there.

~ Sorry for the misuderstanding, it always start with incomplete false rumors, based on wrong settings. Nothing surprising from a Sony PS3 machine, as it is one of the most complicated one, with it's multitude of audio and video adjustments, to properly set up.

That is another reason that the PS3 ain't for me. And many other people too, that cannot deal with it's complex settings.
But for the people that can, it's an excellent turbo machine.
And it will work just fine with the Pioneer VSX-1019AH-K A/V Receiver.

--> PS3 User's Guide: All Audio/Video Settings. The PS3 Bible.
@ http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps3/current/settings/index_display.html

Cheers,
Bob

 

[TLS Guy]

These new Pioneers actually look pretty good to me. The amp sections may not be the best. But they are in line with there competition. But when a majority of people will be crossing speakers over at 80hz its not that big of a deal when the sub is doing most of the work.

The key selling features for me are the very user friendly MCACC system with adjustable standing wave mode for the subwoofer. No other system on the market that I know of offers this kind of control.

The adjustable X-Curve mode is a really nice feature as well. Since all studio screening rooms and theaters are actually EQ'd using the X-curve. This can really help with getting a proper tonal balance. Most receivers that are offer this feature are not adjustable and the roll off changes depending on the room size.

As pointed out many times before, the sub is not doing most of the work! The energy of musical program rapidly tapers off below 80 Hz. By far the most radiated sound energy is from 80 Hz to 1500 Hz.

This myth of the sub doing all the work is continually stated on these forums. It is a totally false concept, and leads to poor planning of systems.

 

[Lordoftherings]

As pointed out many times before, the sub is not doing most of the work! The energy of musical program rapidly tapers off below 80 Hz. By far the most radiated sound energy is from 80 Hz to 1500 Hz.

This myth of the sub doing all the work is continually stated on these forums. It is a totally false concept, and leads to poor planning of systems.

I absolutely agree with this above quote.

* I also believe that we are at a changing time for the better in these forums too.

Thanks TLS Guy for saying what many don't know, or are afraid to say.

Bob

 

[Seth=L]

As pointed out many times before, the sub is not doing most of the work! The energy of musical program rapidly tapers off below 80 Hz. By far the most radiated sound energy is from 80 Hz to 1500 Hz.

This myth of the sub doing all the work is continually stated on these forums. It is a totally false concept, and leads to poor planning of systems.

Subwoofers deal with something extremely important, transient low end frequencies that require more power than normal. There's a reason why subwoofer amplifiers tend to have a large power supply and high dynamic headroom, because that's what they need to get the job done.

 

[TLS Guy]

Subwoofers deal with something extremely important, transient low end frequencies that require more power than normal. There's a reason why subwoofer amplifiers tend to have a large power supply and high dynamic headroom, because that's what they need to get the job done.

The reason for the power is that sub woofers are generally of low sensitivity and very inefficient. Usually the sub driver is 9 to 10 db less sensitive than the rest of the speakers. It is not unusual for the disparity to be as much as 12 db.

Therefore for the same spl. three to four times the amp power is required for the same spl. I think this is where the myth comes from that there is so much bass energy.

My big TL lines are about 3db more sensitive than the other speakers, so I have about 50 watts per channel less on the bottom end. The bass amps don't break a sweat and run cool, and yet the bass is powerful enough to threaten the integrity of the room.

On the metering screen of my system, there is a spectrum meter, and the low bass energy seldom rises to the level of the upper bass and mid range. It practically never exceeds it.

 

[Seth=L]

The reason for the power is that sub woofers are generally of low sensitivity and very inefficient. Usually the sub driver is 9 to 10 db less sensitive than the rest of the speakers. It is not unusual for the disparity to be as much as 12 db.

Therefore for the same spl. three to four times the amp power is required for the same spl. I think this is where the myth comes from that there is so much bass energy.

My big TL lines are about 3db more sensitive than the other speakers, so I have about 50 watts per channel less on the bottom end. The bass amps don't break a sweat and run cool, and yet the bass is powerful enough to threaten the integrity of the room.

On the metering screen of my system, there is a spectrum meter, and the low bass energy seldom rises to the level of the upper bass and mid range. It practically never exceeds it.

Your speakers are of a rare breed. Not everyone, hardly anyone, has the room to dedicate to such gigantic arrays of speakers. In order for a smaller package to produce abundant tactile force it has to give something up, less efficiency, lower impedance, etc...

Which is why for most people without extraordinary usage that the subwoofer does what it does better and will take larger amounts of power when it comes to dynamics. You seem to have walked into a corner with your logic.

 

[TLS Guy]

Your speakers are of a rare breed. Not everyone, hardly anyone, has the room to dedicate to such gigantic arrays of speakers. In order for a smaller package to produce abundant tactile force it has to give something up, less efficiency, lower impedance, etc...

Which is why for most people without extraordinary usage that the subwoofer does what it does better and will take larger amounts of power when it comes to dynamics. You seem to have walked into a corner with your logic.

No I have not! The point I'm making is the energy radiated in a the last four octaves frequency region (20 to 80 Hz) is not what a lot of people on these forums think it is.

Now let us take a 30 Hz tone. Take a fairly typical subwoofer driver of 81 db 1 watt 1 meter sensitivity. The sensitivity of my lines is 93 db 1 watt one meter. Now to reproduce a 30 Hz tone at 93 db at 1 meter I need a watt of power, but the sub needs 4 watts. So I can reproduce the same spl with a hundred watts as the typical sub does with 400 watts. I have 400 watts available to this spectrum, so the sub would need an 1600 watt amp to be equivalent.

Lets look at it another way. Let us say we have a set of towers with a sensitivity of 90 db 1 watt one meter, and a sub with a sensitivity of 81 db 1 watt 1 meter. That is a very typical scenario. Now lets assume the system is well balanced and that at the crossover frequency set at 80 Hz, both the towers and the sub contribute half the sound energy radiated into the room at 80 Hz. This would be the optimal situation. The sub will need three times the power from its amp than the towers at 80 Hz, to achieve this goal. The sound output from towers and sub will be identical.

Now as to the spectrum meter. This meter shows the energy spectrum of the the signal versus frequency before amplification. It tells you at any instant at what frequencies the power demands are. Except for Hollywood effects that are artificially boosted 20db in the 0.1 LFE track, the energy demands below 80 Hz are very modest.

I have a suspicion that people think there is so much energy below 80 Hz because of the usually huge gap in sensitivity and by extension efficiency between subs and the other speakers.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Is 20hz to 80hz, the first two octaves of the audio frequency range?

* Most of the material on music recordings is concentrated around the midrange area,
say from about 100hz to 1khz, am I right?
Or 150hz to 1.5khz?
Or 250hz to 2.5khz?

*** Personally, I much prefer running my two front main loudspeakers fullrange,
which have a clean bass extension down to 30hz (0db), 25hz (-3db), and 24hz (-6db);
than running my two subs with them, with a x-over between.
They sound soooo muuuuch better by themselves on nice music recordings.

For me the subs are just a guilty pleasure to boost our egos for movies.

Hey! That's just me.

 

[TLS Guy]

Is 20hz to 80hz, the first two octaves of the audio frequency range?

* Most of the material on music recordings is concentrated around the midrange area,
say from about 100hz to 1khz, am I right?
Or 150hz to 1.5khz?
Or 250hz to 2.5khz?

*** Personally, I much prefer running my two front main loudspeakers fullrange,
which have a clean bass extension down to 30hz (0db), 25hz (-3db), and 24hz (-6db);
than running my two subs with them, with a x-over between.
They sound soooo muuuuch better by themselves on nice music recordings.

For me the subs are just a guilty pleasure to boost our egos for movies.

Hey! That's just me.

Yes most of the energy is in the 100Hz to 1.5kHz range

 

[Lordoftherings]

Yes most of the energy is in the 100Hz to 1.5kHz range

I thought so, which means that you and I agree, once more.