I find this funny because after setting up my 8000 and running the system through a pink noise and time alignment I realized just how screwed up this unit is compared to some of my pro processors like my DBX Driverack 260 that I use in commercial sound. 

What I find odd is the manual states that after pinking the system the EQ will return to Flat (which it did not it stayed on Powerful), it's also odd that the unit doesn't display the new curve into either Custom 1 or Custom 2 for you to see what the environment looks like post processing. 

The funniest thing however were the calibrations that were determined during the ping tests to do distance alignments, in my case (see image below) it calculated that my front speakers were 100+ inches and rears were 90+ inches from the microphone which was placed hanging down from the latch that holds my removable top in place, here's the kicker, this was in a Vette where the actual distance was no more than 30 inches in any direction! I guess I could divide the numbers by 3 and enter them manually but what's the point. So either Pioneer is using mm's or cm's and attaching a label of inch to the results or their algorithms are really screwed up! 

Bottom line I wanted to see how this would work, glad I did but in the end and quite honestly, I'll forgo the processing which amounts to nothing more than playing with crossover points and removing bottom end and do an alignment with the best tools I have at my disposal, my ears! TA and Pinking is a must for my commercial systems but at this level, it's more of a joke than anything. Nice try Pioneer. 

Thinking out loud here... Lots of glass in that Vette. Perhaps the Pioneer is picking up reflections, leading it to think that your speakers are farther away than they are? It may have to set up the speakers as if they were 100" away in order to get everything as in phase as possible. More importantly, how does the processed sound compared to unprocessed? I'm sure that your commercial sound applications take place in well-controlled environments compared to a car. Would covering your windows with absorptive material during the TA procedure help at all, or is "tricking" the Pioneer a useless exercise since you're testing an artificial environment that won't resemble your actual listening environment (no covered windows)?

Pioneer's Auto EQ and time alignment did the same thing in my Toyota RAV4. It said my sub was something like 155 inches away which, let's just say, it isn't. After a couple of passes I scrapped the Auto measurements and did time alignment on my own. Got much better results that way.

...it's more of a joke than anything. Nice try Pioneer. 

I arrived at the same conclusion years ago on the first Pioneer unit I purchased with AutoEQ (didn't have AutoTA back then, just manual).

Thinking out loud here... Lots of glass in that Vette. Perhaps the Pioneer is picking up reflections, leading it to think that your speakers are farther away than they are? It may have to set up the speakers as if they were 100" away in order to get everything as in phase as possible. More importantly, how does the processed sound compared to unprocessed? I'm sure that your commercial sound applications take place in well-controlled environments compared to a car. Would covering your windows with absorptive material during the TA procedure help at all, or is "tricking" the Pioneer a useless exercise since you're testing an artificial environment that won't resemble your actual listening environment (no covered windows)?

In all honesty the processed sound is thin, it's missing all the bottom end which the manual basically states, the setup will play with filters (pg 172). In the end it may deliver a sound that some might find awesome in fact I bet that installers could use this with their customers and say don't touch it ever, it's setup just for your car, but once you play a piece of music that you're intimate with (my personal testing favorite is Tower of Power What is Hip) and you'll find the deficiencies in their setup. 

As for controlled situations in commercial sound, nothing farther from the truth, we never get to pink a system with a couple of thousand people between the mixing desk and the cluster, it's more to get a rough idea and a starting point, you can sense how much bottom end is fading over distance and space and if the highs are in the shrill zone, adjustments are usually made on the fly but having a flat system to start with makes it so much easier. 

In all honesty the processed sound is thin, it's missing all the bottom end which the manual basically states, the setup will play with filters (pg 172). In the end it may deliver a sound that some might find awesome in fact I bet that installers could use this with their customers and say don't touch it ever, it's setup just for your car, but once you play a piece of music that you're intimate with (my personal testing favorite is Tower of Power What is Hip) and you'll find the deficiencies in their setup. 

 

As for controlled situations in commercial sound, nothing farther from the truth, we never get to pink a system with a couple of thousand people between the mixing desk and the cluster, it's more to get a rough idea and a starting point, you can sense how much bottom end is fading over distance and space and if the highs are in the shrill zone, adjustments are usually made on the fly but having a flat system to start with makes it so much easier. 

Got it. You do sound reinforcement for large live situations. I was imagining something along the lines of theater/auditorium/lecture hall type of stuff where things can be a little more predictable.

Got it. You do sound reinforcement for large live situations. I was imagining something along the lines of theater/auditorium/lecture hall type of stuff where things can be a little more predictable.

Even with recorded material, pinked just provides a good baseline for adjustment.  Recording engineers just can't seem to get the mix dialed in to my taste consistently

Even with recorded material, pinked just provides a good baseline for adjustment.  Recording engineers just can't seem to get the mix dialed in to my taste consistently

You actually just brought up a very interesting point, recording engineers today are mixing in a fantasy world, everything is compressed beyond belief, vocals are artificial and so highly auto-tuned because the industry keeps signing people that in reality have no vocal talent. Even with great singers they are still using the tools in the software pallet to fix things that don't need fixing, I blame Cher and Do you Believe for this, that was one of the first examples of auto-tuning that I can remember. BTW, the music itself is so over-compressed that to me it's not music anymore, but you have no choice but to listen to it. 

Want to listen to something that will make your speakers work the way they were designed to, play a copy of Dire Straights Sultans of Swing, to me one of the best examples of perfect production, everything in the mix is dialed in, nothing rides higher than anything else, it's pure, if you can get it in FLAC even better since even an MP3 at 320kb has already lost 90% of the original. 

The issue that I have with the pinking on the 8000 is it keeps the curve hidden in the DSP somewhere, it would be much nicer if it would save it to Custom1 or Custom 2 so that you can see it then adjust accordingly, in the end I'm totally happy with my new HU trust me but the issue I have is that Pioneer could do just a little bit better for their flagship unit. I sent a message to them regarding this, likely nothing will happen but it's nice to get them a message that it could be just a little better with only a little minor tweak. 

In closing and to illustrate my point, 2 screen caps of the waveform for 2 songs, Dire Straights Sultans which I reference above and Neon Trees Sleeping with a Friend, the latter shows what modern music has turned into, a compressed, squashed, lack of headroom and presence piece of garbage influenced highly by a music industry that has gotten in the habit of delivering garbage to fans who pay good money without ever realizing what they could be listening to. I love turning kids onto older music on CD and even vinyl that has quality sound and not the digital drek that is being hatched up today.   

I totally agree. It looks like I'm preaching to the choir here, but dynamics are what music is all about! Compressed recordings of today sound awful, especially when you A/B them with a good recording. Unfortunately, most people think "louder is better". Sure, louder gets noticed more easily, which probably equates to more sales, but the overcompressed sound is downright fatiguing to me. This stuff should be regulated (isn't that happnening now?). 

We're on the same page.

I've attached a couple screen cap's to demonstrate... from my general use computer; not from my HTPC/DAW.  Had to convert to wave format because WaveEditor is the only waveform-displaying app on this computer.  Original files are Apple Lossless (.m4a) because I need them to play on my iPod Classic, which is more universal for my portable uses.

The first cap' is Sultans of Swing.  I included because it depicts the dynamic range better than your capture (and somewhat to verify I have it ).  It is a good example of instrument and vocal, both quality and mix.  In terms of dynamic range, it is a bit compressed, but at least the engineer didn't chop off the peaks.

The second cap' is of The Eagles "All She Wants To Do Is Dance" from Farewell Tour I: Live From Melbourne DVD... which I downmixed from 5.1 to stereo for portable listening.  It too is a good example of instrument and vocal, both quality and mix.  The noticeable difference in the waveform shape and amplitude is representative of the better dynamic range. 

With both songs played on the same system, the Eagles song will seem to be substantially less loud (without automated compensation, such as ReplayGain).  That is the main reason why many recording engineers currently over-compress... simply to make their recordings seem louder than the other artists.  With compensation, all songs will seem to be the same loudness... but the non-overly-compressed songs will have way more dynamic range.  At substantial volume, a kick drum hit will make your heart skip a beat.  Without dynamic range (overly compressed) it'll just seem like someone let the air out of a bag .

Anyway, back to the Pioneer AutoEQ...

I think one of the reasons they do not load the AutoEQ curve to Custom 1 or 2 is because the process is supposed to flatten your system.  So from an EQ standpoint, audio with a flat EQ should be presented audibly to your ears as flat (equalization as recorded).  Also, being Custom EQs are adjustments from any of the presets, they would have to be separated somehow.  As it is can be an advantage if your system requires substantial EQ'ing to get it flat... you still have an additional +/- 12dB of EQ available.  If AutoEQ was transferred to Custom 1 or 2, you would not.  However, as it is, that'd mean the processor either has two-stages +/-12dB adjustment, or one-stage of +/-24dB. with +/- 12dB hidden.  But I agree the AutoEQ should be displayable in some fashion.  It would help tweaking crossover, bi-, and tri-amp input level settings.

Then there's the unknowns.  Professional say EQ bands when flattening a system should never exceed +/-3dB compared to the adjacent bands.  Does the AutoEQ algorithm employ that recommendation or not?  Then there's the aspect of crossover tuning.  Just exactly what does the algorithm do in this respect?

There's no point in even discussing auto time alignment with as bad as it performs!!!

So I just did an auto-EQ in my minivan - front speakers were both determined to be 137 inches away with rears being roughly right (about 10 inches too much)

So I just took out a tape measure and changed the numbers. But honestly it is a bit embarassing to mess up that badly. Now I need to go find an SPL meter since I can't trust the auto-EQ at all.