Trinnov Altitude 16 Review (AV Processor)

[Golfx]

What a fantastic analysis and comparison.


Thank you very much indeed @apgood, a very useful and informative comparison. One of the things you mentioned about Trinnov that I appreciate is the fact that it is more software oriented which does help in terms of upgradeability. Apart from the Optimizer and remapping features, I suppose fidelity is a match.

What’s the difference between decoding and processing when it comes to channels?

Can you restate that question? Not sure I understand your intent? Thanks

 

[apgood]

What a fantastic analysis and comparison.


Thank you very much indeed @apgood, a very useful and informative comparison. One of the things you mentioned about Trinnov that I appreciate is the fact that it is more software oriented which does help in terms of upgradeability. Apart from the Optimizer and remapping features, I suppose fidelity is a match.

What’s the difference between decoding and processing when it comes to channels?

Decoding of channels means the Dobly, DTS or Auro decoder to decode the respective audio formats when soundtrack uses a particular format to the supported speakers in your particular speaker layout.

Processing is a general term for doing extra things like adding delay, using StormAudio's StormXT to send ambient sounds to speakers not supported in the Atmos or Auro formats when one of these formats is played, areaying of side surround speakers etc.

 

[Sam Ash]

Decoding of channels means the Dobly, DTS or Auro decoder to decode the respective audio formats when soundtrack uses a particular format to the supported speakers in your particular speaker layout.

Processing is a general term for doing extra things like adding delay, using StormAudio's StormXT to send ambient sounds to speakers not supported in the Atmos or Auro formats when one of these formats is played, areaying of side surround speakers etc.

That makes a lot of sense. You mention the arraying of side surround speakers, is this possible directly in both processors in terms of setting the delays and levels?

• Trinnov allows 16 channels digital out AES/EBU vs StormAudio allows 32 channels digital out (if buy the AES/EDU digital out module) or 32 digital AoIP channels in/out (if you but the AoIP module) - probably non-issue for most but for me it was important as I have a QSC Core that does my active crossovers etc and is what my Power Amps are connected to. Also saves me running a lot of long balanced cables between the 2 as my QSC Core and Power Amp are in another room from to keep the noise & heat down.

I need to read up a little more on AES/EBU and EDU. I'm sure this makes sense for powered speakers in which case one can run a CAT-6 cable for every channel between the processor and powered speakers instead of running XLR cables. However, is it necessary to do the same when connecting the processor to a multi-channel power amp or can that be done via a single ethernet CAT-6 cable that can transmit data for up to 24+10 or 30.x channels? - that would be awesome. I presume powered or non-powered subs can be connected in a similar manner.

Is it necessary to have a high-speed network switch in the mix for such a configuration? I take note of the fact that such topologies also allow some level of daisy-chaining but a star connection topology is preferred for optimal bandwidth. The migration to an IP based system is attractive provided the systems are smart and auto-configuring; otherwise it adds another layer of complexity in terms of network engineering.

 

[apgood]

That makes a lot of sense. You mention the arraying of side surround speakers, is this possible directly in both processors in terms of setting the delays and levels?



I need to read up a little more on AES/EBU and EDU. I'm sure this makes sense for powered speakers in which case one can run a CAT-6 cable for every channel between the processor and powered speakers instead of running XLR cables. However, is it necessary to do the same when connecting the processor to a multi-channel power amp or can that be done via a single ethernet CAT-6 cable that can transmit data for up to 24+10 or 30.x channels? - that would be awesome. I presume powered or non-powered subs can be connected in a similar manner.

Is it necessary to have a high-speed network switch in the mix for such a configuration? I take note of the fact that such topologies also allow some level of daisy-chaining but a star connection topology is preferred for optimal bandwidth. The migration to an IP based system is attractive provided the systems are smart and auto-configuring; otherwise it adds another layer of complexity in terms of network engineering.

Yes, I haven't played with it myself, but it will be things like delay levels and so on. Think the Storm does some of it automatically when you indicate they are arrayed but not too sure to be honest. For Trinnov not sure how automated it is but all the tools to do is are there for sure and more.

Sorry EDU is a typo. Should be EBU. Both use the same. just that the Trinnov maxes at 16 and the Storm at 32. Other difference are the cable types. Trinnov use 25 pin harnesses (bit like a parallel printer cable connector ) while Strom use standard rj45 ethernet cables for the audio digital output. Both are perfectly fine. Ethernet cables are just easier and cheaper to come by.

For AES/EBU digital out on the storm it has RJ45 ethernet output jacks. There are 4 of them 8 channels per jack 1-8, 9-16, 17-24 & 25-32. If at the other end you also have ethernet jacks as well it's pretty simple. I have the 4 ethernet cables going to my Q-Sys Core which then has their proprietary cables to the power amps. Haven't really looked what options there are directly to power amps with their own DACS built-in, but DACS build into Power Amps are unlikely to be better than what is in the Storm or Trinnov. For the ethernet cables don't think you need cat6 but shielded cables are probably recommended.

 

[Sam Ash]

Yes, I haven't played with it myself, but it will be things like delay levels and so on. Think the Storm does some of it automatically when you indicate they are arrayed but not too sure to be honest. For Trinnov not sure how automated it is but all the tools to do is are there for sure and more.

Sorry EDU is a typo. Should be EBU. Both use the same. just that the Trinnov maxes at 16 and the Storm at 32. Other difference are the cable types. Trinnov use 25 pin harnesses (bit like a parallel printer cable connector ) while Strom use standard rj45 ethernet cables for the audio digital output. Both are perfectly fine. Ethernet cables are just easier and cheaper to come by.

For AES/EBU digital out on the storm it has RJ45 ethernet output jacks. There are 4 of them 8 channels per jack 1-8, 9-16, 17-24 & 25-32. If at the other end you also have ethernet jacks as well it's pretty simple. I have the 4 ethernet cables going to my Q-Sys Core which then has their proprietary cables to the power amps. Haven't really looked what options there are directly to power amps with their own DACS built-in, but DACS build into Power Amps are unlikely to be better than what is in the Storm or Trinnov. For the ethernet cables don't think you need cat6 but shielded cables are probably recommended.

It's nice that Storm does RJ45, much easier to work with I suppose.For the 24-pin harnesses on the Trinnov, does one need a breakout box that has RJ45 connectors? How would it connect to a third-party power amp that is AES/EBU compatible? or do most AES/EBU power amps have both the 24-pin and RJ45 interfaces?

I meant power amps without DACs for use with the DACs that are already present in the Trinnov or Storm.

I love the idea of a single cable between the processor and the power amp for use with passive drivers. Alternatively, running ethernet cables from the processor to active drivers via RJ45 interfaces would be very convenient. The only caveat with active drivers is that they need mains power so additional planning required to that effect.

 

[apgood]

It's nice that Storm does RJ45, much easier to work with I suppose.For the 24-pin harnesses on the Trinnov, does one need a breakout box that has RJ45 connectors? How would it connect to a third-party power amp that is AES/EBU compatible? or do most AES/EBU power amps have both the 24-pin and RJ45 interfaces?

I meant power amps without DACs for use with the DACs that are already present in the Trinnov or Storm.

I love the idea of a single cable between the processor and the power amp for use with passive drivers. Alternatively, running ethernet cables from the processor to active drivers via RJ45 interfaces would be very convenient. The only caveat with active drivers is that they need mains power so additional planning required to that effect.

What connectors are at the other end of the 24pin( Slight correction it's a DB25 connector i.e. 25 pin) harness depends what connectors are needed at the other end (AES XLR).

If you use the Trinnov Power amp then to connect the processor to 32 channels of amplification you only need 4 cables too. As the analogue outs on the processor and the analogue ins on the power amp both have the DB25 connector. Much better than a whole bunch of xlr cables.

Yeah if you can reduce the number of cables it always makes life easier.

 

[Sam Ash]

What connectors are at the other end of the 24pin( Slight correction it's a DB25 connector i.e. 25 pin) harness depends what connectors are needed at the other end (AES XLR).

If you use the Trinnov Power amp then to connect the processor to 32 channels of amplification you only need 4 cables too. As the analogue outs on the processor and the analogue ins on the power amp both have the DB25 connector. Much better than a whole bunch of xlr cables.

Yeah if you can reduce the number of cables it always makes life easier.

Thanks for the clarification, I love that approach and flexibility. I guess both Trinnov and Storm are quite innovative in that respect.

 

[Fidji]

So long awaited DAC upgrade is officially announced.
ESS based DAC board, costing 2.500 eur for Altitude 32 16 channel.

+ significant price hike, of course, and some Altitude 32 8 and 16 channel version not available in 2022.

 

[Impossible]

Any details what ess chip etc?

 

[Fidji]

Any details what ess chip etc?

only says this [is new pricelist for EU] I am not IDK or smth like this. I will probably go for one major upgrade together with HDMI board in a year or two.

 

[Impossible]

I'll only do hdmi board if eARC allows volume control. Else the ess dac upgrade only.

 

[Spocko]

So long awaited DAC upgrade is officially announced.
ESS based DAC board, costing 2.500 eur for Altitude 32 16 channel.

+ significant price hike, of course, and some Altitude 32 8 and 16 channel version not available in 2022.

Just wondering how audible this THD improvement would be considering this is the only spec they mentioned as being "improved"

• "Altitude16/32 will be delivered with brand new ESS Sabre ADC and DAC boards, improving the THD performance. These new boards will be available as upgrade kits at a later stage, giving the opportunity to customers to upgrade in case they got a previous spec unit."

 

[Golfx]

Any improvement in SINAD over its current 100 will likely be swallowed by its ability for thorough and intricate room correction and clock matching up to 96khz on the Altitude 16 and 192Khz on the Altitude 32.

 

[hmt]

Just wondering how audible this THD improvement would be considering this is the only spec they mentioned as being "improved"

• "Altitude16/32 will be delivered with brand new ESS Sabre ADC and DAC boards, improving the THD performance. These new boards will be available as upgrade kits at a later stage, giving the opportunity to customers to upgrade in case they got a previous spec unit."

It will not be audible. Case closed.

 

[Fidji]

Just wondering how audible this THD improvement would be considering this is the only spec they mentioned as being "improved"

• "Altitude16/32 will be delivered with brand new ESS Sabre ADC and DAC boards, improving the THD performance. These new boards will be available as upgrade kits at a later stage, giving the opportunity to customers to upgrade in case they got a previous spec unit."

I think they were just tired of people here at ASR bitching about ONLY 100dB SINAD!!!!!! vs some Chinese cheapo DAC with SINAD 3672dB.
We will see measurements going to 108dB, so that the same people, who never heard it in action can be calmed down.

More important question though - are you able to hear any difference between 20CH ALtitude 32 vs Altitude 16? As only major difference seems to be ability to work with 192kHz rate for Alt32. I am curious,

I went for Alt16, left with Alt32, still no idea how the salesman made me do it. I think the punchline was - "there is NOTHING better" so I took it as fait price to pay for audioneurosis cure. BTW, price difference was not THAT dramatic, if you consider you get microphone for free.

 

[sarumbear]

More important question though - are you able to hear any difference between 20CH ALtitude 32 vs Altitude 16? As only major difference seems to be ability to work with 192kHz rate for Alt32. I am curious,

I went for Alt16, left with Alt32, still no idea how the salesman made me do it. I think the punchline was - "there is NOTHING better" so I took it as fait price to pay for audioneurosis cure. BTW, price difference was not THAT dramatic, if you consider you get microphone for free.

Same here. I think the difference is the internal number of processing channels. The new specs mentioned that, which I don’t recall seeing that.

 

[hmt]

More important question though - are you able to hear any difference between 20CH ALtitude 32 vs Altitude 16? As only major difference seems to be ability to work with 192kHz rate for Alt32. I am curious,

Dont thinks there is any audible difference. Even 44.1kHz would be enough.

 

[Fidji]

Dont thinks there is any audible difference. Even 44.1kHz would be enough.

yes, this seems to be general consensus also on avsforum. And normally I would not discuss audibility of Hires vs RedBook. Was just wondering, whether 192kHz sampling rate does not improve result of DRC [more "natural" sound or smth like this] as some FIR filters in mids/heights can be pretty unpleasant for the ear, if done too agressively.

So looking forward to hear from early adopters about new DAC board.

 

[hmt]

With 96KHz you need the double amount of taps for the same resolution of an FIR filter. That is not important with high or mid frequencies but for lower frequencies. Actually the trinnov is wasting some processing power for the higher sapling rate which could otherwise be used to correct phase issues in lower frequencies. For example the bandwith of an FIR filter would bei 50Hz and thus only really of use above 200Hz, the same FIR filter could have a bandwith of 25Hz and thus could be used above 100Hz when halving the sample rate.

 

[Descartes]

So long awaited DAC upgrade is officially announced.
ESS based DAC board, costing 2.500 eur for Altitude 32 16 channel.

+ significant price hike, of course, and some Altitude 32 8 and 16 channel version not available in 2022.

So overpriced for what it is but just like Louis Vitton!