Yes they are in-wall along with LCR. JBL SSW-3
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Trinnov Altitude 16 Review (AV Processor)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
6%Every one should have a spare.
Hello
Can someone post the Trinnov forecasts and REW measurements ?
It is to see what REW measures against Trinnov's target.
All this comes to the point, because I see a lot of targets from other companies
correction systems but they are not accompanied with measurements.
made with REW for example.
Written with translator
Greetings
Can someone post the Trinnov forecasts and REW measurements ?
It is to see what REW measures against Trinnov's target.
All this comes to the point, because I see a lot of targets from other companies
correction systems but they are not accompanied with measurements.
made with REW for example.
Written with translator
Greetings
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
I don’t know about room treatment growing in popularity, and I’m just using this as an example. When our host measures speakers in his room do you see any treatments anywhere? Unless I just don’t see them I don’t think they’re there, and I’m not criticizing because I want to learn as much as I can. That being said I’m not a beginner either and I have been at this for decades, room treatments matter in my opinion. I’m not debating if room equalization works, because it does, what I’m saying is people are forgetting about the room, and some of them are totally forgetting about the room.
Your experience with XT32 was exactly like mine… for two channel it was anemic. I tried to like it, but it was just funky sounding, even besides the bass I didn’t like it. For home theater I thought it did a pretty amazing job, so if I remember right it was a little light on the bass in my opinion.
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
Your last paragraph is definitely true in my opinion, ASR is already shaking things up for the better in my opinion. I stated this before, but a lot of these companies are resting on your laurels from 10 or 20 years ago or more. They got away from posting any in-depth specs, hardly anybody that reviews measures anything anymore.
Viva ASR!
It is a good thing, I was so tired of listening to subjective reviews, and then you buy something and it’s like… you can’t be serious.
I do not know if this will help. But posted below are my measurement graphs as measured per speaker by the trinnov’s sensitive microphone—before, after and the graphs of correction filters used
When it comes to multi-channel home theater processors, SINAD is the least important as long as it's no worse than average. The most difficult part is integrating 7.4.6 into a complete sound system that gives you what the Atmos mixing engineer intended. You buy the Trinnov (or Storm, Lyngdorf, etc.) to get as close to movie immersion as possible which means fully integrated bass with no dips/peaks. It is unimportant that your SINAD is average because the improvement from a high SINAD explosion with people screaming all around you is not noticeable - it's all about channel separation and the ability of the processor to adjust to your room and the speaker placements within that room - that's all software processing, and Auddyssey does NOT do that. Processing 18 channels so you can hear voices coming from the proper direction in their designated space. This has everything to do with the processor's unique software, whether it's Denon or Trinnov. People pay extra for Trinnov to ensure that the immersion is as close to the Atmos mix as possible. When determining the performance of a cinema processor, it's all about immersion from as many channels as you can afford - 16 channel speaker integration is a good start and very rare few companies are able to accomplish this feat because it is difficult, thus, expensive.
You do not (or should not) buy the Trinnov to listen to 2-channel music on a highly resolving stereo system, because it was not designed with that purpose in mind. For that, you would get the Benchmark full stack dac/preamp/amp and you'll get the highest SINAD end to end available today - truthfully, this is how Benchmark designed this stack - the highest possible signal from source to amp.
Additionally, having a Trinnov means you can have @Matthew J Poes log into your processor directly from accros the country via internet and do all the dirty work while you walk around the room with the microphone and he makes the adjustments in real time. People shopping cinema processors should not care about the SINAD as long as it's at least average - managing 3 subwoofers on the other hand? Your least expensive option is the Monolith HTP-1 as Denon and Marantz can't even manage two independent subwoofers.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
I understand what you’re saying, and I heard some of the same things when I bought my last pre-pro… the whole audio world said it doesn’t do 2-channel all that well… just mediocre was the consensus.
I hate to blow that theory up… but I just
pitted mine (both on a perfectly transfer XLR switcher) against one of the most transparent
2-channel preamps on the market, and there’s no difference between my nine-year-old pre-pro and that stellar reviewed 2-channel amp.
Are you telling me that this $17,000 preamp doesn’t do 2-channel as well as my $3600 9 year old preamp? I find impossible to believe.
I’m sure it’s room correction (for home theater) is stellar, and I would like to hear it in my room.
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
Prediction;
Within the next 3 years the DAC’s many of these prepros will start to measure like the better DAC’s on the market…. SINAD included.
Within the next 3 years the DAC’s many of these prepros will start to measure like the better DAC’s on the market…. SINAD included.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
I appreciate the discussion thank you
Well said!
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
Maybe time to try Atmos for me I’ve held off up to now.
I’ve held off up to now.Sounds like we’ve had very similar experiences with XT32.
Re: Popularity of room treatment
Compared to when I joined this hobby there are more acoustic treatment companies, and far far greater awareness about room treatment than ever before, with ever more informed listeners seeking guidance on treating their rooms. And that’s why I didn’t necessarily agree with your statement that “everybody’s getting away from treating their room”. ”Getting away from” implies a reversal of a previous trend or behavior, and I simply don’t see that happening on any mass scale… certainly not enough to justify the word “everybody”. Rather, I see a trend among the informed that is very much in the opposite direction of what you asserted, though with plenty of room for continued improvement. I do agree with your subsequent re-statement that ‘many people are forgetting about the room’ (but I don’t believe Amir is one of them).
Re: Amir as an example of people forgetting the room
I don’t believe anyone could rightly reference Amir as an example of a listener ‘forgetting about the room’… far from it; his entire approach to speaker testing and selection is to search for and use speakers that perform well “in-room”; he’s also a proponent of various multi-sub optimization strategies to optimize in-room bass response. All of which is the ‘opposite’ of forgetting about the room.
I honestly don’t know what Amir’s room(s) look like or how many he has. But on that point, I also don’t believe he uses automated room correction when testing speakers; I know he’ll apply EQ based on the klippel response, and maybe touch up a room mode here or there… but I don’t believe he’s using automated room correction. So Amir’s approach to testing speakers simply doesn’t support an assertion that—to summarize my interpretation of your posts in full context—people are using room EQ to get away from room treatment (apologies if that wasn’t the net conclusion you intended).
Further, he may very well use room correction during pleasure listening, and he may well have some type room treatments in one or more of his rooms… I have no idea.
Incidentally, Amir has also said, I believe (or was it Toole?), that pinpoint imaging and soundstage aren’t high priorities for him (apologies if I’m mis-recalling something here), so his approach to acoustic treatment may also not be relevant to the population of listeners seeking such attributes and using room correction.
Anyway, I’m done side railing… back to the topic of the Trinnov!
I don't want a separate two-channel system in my media room, too much hassle and not room for all the pieces, so Trinnov (SDP-75) it is. No, it does not have the SINAD and such that the best stand-alone DACs do, but the performance is enough to provide inaudible levels of noise and distortion for me (and likely most if not all of us). Plus I am a proponent of room correction for all sources as the problems of my room do not go away for two-channel listening, so appreciate the power of their processing ability, and Trinnov does not downsample to do processing unlike other AVR/AVP units. Finally, the speakers are going to represent by far the largest source of distortion in most if not all systems, no matter how "resolving" they may be. Of course, you can always argue my speakers are not "resolving" enough, but they are good enough for me.
You're conflating your limited use case and subjective impressions with other people's use case requiring a higher level of performance from their 2-channel gear - it is under these more challenging circumstances (professional studio, audiophile man cave, etc.) where your 9 year old pre-pro will fall short, ie, very quiet noise floor, highly sensitive speakers, perfectly treated room. So if you compared any AVR to something like the $2,500 Benchmark LA4, then certainly the LA4 is hands down "the superior" 2-channel preamp in this room because you would more likely hear noise from the high sensitivity speaker in a quiet room.
Am I telling you that the $17,000 preamp can't do stereo better than a $3,600 9 year old preamp? No, I'm not saying that at all. This $17,000 preamp would blow away your 9 year old preamp if you needed multi-sub bass management combined with an active cross-over for active amplification of your 3-driver speakers, because that's what it was designed to do. However, it will do no better than your 9 year old pre-amp if you're playing through $60 speakers with 5-watt amplifiers from a highly compressed MP3 you downloaded off of Napster back in 2000.
Equipment must always match your use case, so just because your use case doesn't require the additional features/performance of the more expensive gear does not render that gear pointlessly expensive to other people, just to you.
Obviously, I may have incorrectly assumed your use case to underscore my points, and your 9 year old pre-amp can match the Trinnov on all counts, which is pretty cool. But many of us are not that fortunate, and must pay handsomely for the features we need.
When inquiring why somebody bought a specific piece of gear, then sharing your experience with that gear (good or bad), it's also important to understand their specific needs as it may be very different from yours. For example, when asked why I would pay for the Trinnov 4-channel preamp, part of the reason is this very cool remote:
D
Deleted member 43441
Guest
Are you trying to convince me or yourself?
I understand why people buy it, I just said that it should measure better for $17,000.
I am letting it go now, and I’m sure it sounds wonderful, but I’m not dropping that kind of money or even $5000… until they measure better.
Now can you allow me to have my own opinion?
Thanks I appreciate that and have a great night.
It's not about silencing your opinion at all, but for the benfit of others reading this thread who are curious as to what the $17K prepro can offer if not SINAD, and then receiving a balanced opinion from me. I thought I was politely sharing my opinion, hoping to shed light from a differing point of view. The intent of my response is less about you and more about having a balanced discussion on this thread.
For my use, I’m far more concerned with effectively dealing with room/speaker issues than absolute SINAD; especially since room and speaker issues tend to be orders of magnitude larger than any potentially audible differences between the Trinnov and the highest performing DAC ever measured on ASR… And I find the DAC differences immaterial for my use, while also finding the Trinnov Room Optimizer to be the most compelling option on the market for dealing with room and speaker issues. So in the pursuit of real world enjoyment (which is what I’m after), I choose the Trinnov (well… JBL SDP-75) over the best two-channel only DAC. Further, I can add the worlds best DAC(s) to the Trinnov via the digital outputs if I’m ever so inclined.
Of course, I would prefer it was already a world class DAC for the price of entry, but we just aren’t there yet.
Of course, I would prefer it was already a world class DAC for the price of entry, but we just aren’t there yet.
Last edited:
This.
There’s no point complaining that a 17000$ prepro should have higher SINAD because “it’s important for 2 channel reproduction”
If it’s really that important for someone, then he can pay 17200$, and connect a Toppind Dac at the digital out, for the L-R channels and enjoy SOTA Dac+SOTA processing.
If you can afford 17000, then you can definitely afford 17200.
Similar threads
