Define performance, please.
-
Welcome to ASR. 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
Bulldogger
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2018
- Messages
- 85
- Likes
- 40
SINAD. Does Trinnov excel in ANY objective measurement?
Does the Trinnov have tone controls?
Yes:
Parametric equaliser filter quantity.
Active crossover matrix size.
Sampling capacity of the acoustic environment.
Number of different saved setups
HDMI data transfer rate (HDMI version).
All above are measured in tests.
It has parametric equaliser which is superset of a tone control.
Is it really a tone control if you can't easily adjust it on the fly?
You can
Do you know what a parametric EQ is?
If you mean by easy as whether the unit has separate Treble and Bass controls, no it doesn’t. No quality unit would be seen with those on their front panel.
I would consider a tone control to be something like a broad bass/treble control that can quickly be accessed and changed on the fly until it "sounds right" some content that needs it. Below, for example is a screenshot from the Stormaudio remote (these settings are also accessable from the control4 app for those that want it on a regular remote.. I was curious as to the frequency range for the bass/treble/brightness and they were kind enough to send me that info as well. I'm sure some people may have no need for them, but when needed they are quick and very useful. YMMV
----
Hi Darin,
Bass/Treble are low shelf and high shelf filters at 400Hz and 4000Hz respectively. The Tilt EQ uses a center frequency of 1kHz and then boosts one of the regions above or below 1kHz while doing the opposite with the other range.
The Surround Enhancer was so far adjusting only the side surround. A new firmware 4.3r1 that will be released this week will change this: it will now affect all surround and ceiling speakers.
Regards.
The Support Team
For those who care Trinnov can maintain full resolution and sampling rate when processing all its various codecs and applying correction, whereas the vast majority of AVR/AVP units down-sample to 48 kS/s as soon as you engage room correction. It also tends to offer more decoders sooner than other processors (e.g. IMAX).
The number and length of the filters, along with the user's ability to program them, is greater in the Trinnov than any AVR and most if not all AVPs (all I know, but that is not "all"). And of course the ability to manage crossovers and target curves is greater than most other processors (Dirac Live comes closest IME).
Higher channel count than most AVR/AVPs is good for some of us -- I am using 15 of the 24 channels in my SDP-75.
There could be lots of reasons the Denon room was preferred, including speaker choice and setup, room interactions (SBIR, modes, etc.), different frequency response curves in the processors that favored user preference more on Denon than on Trinnov, etc.
For me, once performance reaches good enough such that distortion and noise is inaudible, then it is all about features and flexibility. I don't think any AVP/AVR tops the best stand-alone DACs' noise and distortion performance, for instance, but I question my ability to hear the difference going from say 100 dB to 120 dB SINAD vs. hearing the result of the Optimizer and fine-tuning the filters that leads to better sound compared to my previous Emotiva, Denon, Pioneer, Sony, and Yamaha AVRs. That said those AVR/AVPs spanned years so I certainly have not done 1:1 comparisons, though I have measurements for some showing how much better the Trinnov did.
At this point I expect the argument to fork into either (a) "but the measurements still suck compared to XYZ" and/or (b) "that just means your ears/speakers/system/whatever are not good enough to hear the difference".
Onwards - Don
The number and length of the filters, along with the user's ability to program them, is greater in the Trinnov than any AVR and most if not all AVPs (all I know, but that is not "all"). And of course the ability to manage crossovers and target curves is greater than most other processors (Dirac Live comes closest IME).
Higher channel count than most AVR/AVPs is good for some of us -- I am using 15 of the 24 channels in my SDP-75.
There could be lots of reasons the Denon room was preferred, including speaker choice and setup, room interactions (SBIR, modes, etc.), different frequency response curves in the processors that favored user preference more on Denon than on Trinnov, etc.
For me, once performance reaches good enough such that distortion and noise is inaudible, then it is all about features and flexibility. I don't think any AVP/AVR tops the best stand-alone DACs' noise and distortion performance, for instance, but I question my ability to hear the difference going from say 100 dB to 120 dB SINAD vs. hearing the result of the Optimizer and fine-tuning the filters that leads to better sound compared to my previous Emotiva, Denon, Pioneer, Sony, and Yamaha AVRs. That said those AVR/AVPs spanned years so I certainly have not done 1:1 comparisons, though I have measurements for some showing how much better the Trinnov did.
At this point I expect the argument to fork into either (a) "but the measurements still suck compared to XYZ" and/or (b) "that just means your ears/speakers/system/whatever are not good enough to hear the difference".
Onwards - Don
Good to know. I learned something new today. When I was shopping for a new processor I didn't see the setting anywhere.
May I ask you to elaborate this please?
Thanks for posting this on how tone controls could be achieved on the Trinnov. I am guessing a user could get used to that, but the simple broad tone control (bass/treble/brightness) is a much simpler solution when actually in use (at least for me I should say). Thanks for posting the screenshot.
Yes. In a PEQ you set a type, center frequency, gain, and Q/bandwidth for each filter. A tone control is less precise but more easily adjustable control used to compensate for differences in source material on the fly.
Keeping the config page open on your phone or something and reserving a couple bands for bass and treble controls would achieve the same result, but be much less convenient.
Well the front panel, sure. It's probably in a rack or cabinet. The remote should have them though...
Yes, I actually know that they've gone out of style and fewer devices have them than in the past, but that doesn't make them any less useful.
Bulldogger
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2018
- Messages
- 85
- Likes
- 40
24/192 in processor seems like hype. Trinnov current dacs just do 18bits. Why even tout 24/192? Does not seem like that is a real advantage over any of the others when you look at how they measure. Just 24/48 is "drowned" in the noise of Trinnov's dacs.
Possibly because most manufacturers understood the term Hi-Fi to mean high fidelity and altering the signal is against that concept.
Uh, "design of experiments" is the subject of many books, and I'd probably need at least an hour and a whiteboard.
Did you have something specific in mind?Off-topic w.r.t. Trinnov, comparisons have always been very difficult to achieve, and seemingly harder (for me anyway) recently since so much buying is done online, so few local stores carry what I want to compare, it is difficult to impossible to bring things home to compare (I suppose the Internet exchange route is possible but still a hassle and potentially pricey given shipping costs), and (in at least one case of a major dealer) even getting the salesman to move speakers (let alone other gear) onto the same room for a more credible comparison is "too much work unless you are going to buy today". I dislike high-pressure sales tactics.
Some examples that may or not be relevant:
- If the speakers are different in the two rooms, the sound is different;
- If the listener prefers a particular response, like boosted bass or boosted (or rolled-off) highs, not only the speaker but the room's treatment, speaker placement, and so forth can affect the bass (maybe the lone sub was in a corner and provided more bass, whereas two subs provided a flatter response?);
- The target curve between (among) processors may differ, increasing or decreasing the level of certain frequencies, again playing into (or not) the listener's preference;
- The decoding could be different, e.g. one could be set to "direct" or "stereo" whilst another used a derived response like Atmos, Neo, etc.;
- The volume could have been different, louder in one room than the other, affecting the perceived bass and treble response;
- Source material could have been different;
- Other component differences could be in evidence (once a salesman had a friend comparing two pairs of high-end B&W speakers, one driven by a tube amp, the other by SS, a flaw I was able to get them to correct);
- Room size, treatment, and what is in the room all affect the sound at the listening position; an example from ages ago is when a room had a coffee table in front of the listening chair and the sound changed when it was removed;
- Sometimes things about the room somewhat unrelated to the sound do matter, like a brighter vs. darker room, bigger vs. smaller, and so forth that can alter the listener's "feelings" or connection to the sound (some like a dark room, some bright, some prefer a smaller, more intimate room and others like it bigger, etc.);
- Subtle (or not so subtle) cues from the salesperson can influence the decision, such as "this sounds almost as good for 1/10th the price", or "I really like this system and it's on sale", "the Trinnov is very powerful but harder to use"...
To me, if the customer said "I prefer the Denon", then the obvious follow-up would be to ask what sounded better to identify why the difference, and work with the customer's preferences to show how the Trinnov could equal or better the Denon's performance. The Trinnov is pricey and somewhat complicated, so it's possible the salesman didn't feel it was worth the effort if the sale was not immediate, or perhaps he did not know how to adjust the Trinnov. I have also numerous times found the preferred sound was not always the most accurate (apologies to Dr. Toole), though in the long run most folk I know ultimately preferred a more neutral system (and some did not -- plenty of room for preference). In the short run, figuring out what the customer liked to hear, and adjusting the components to suit that preference, would seem to be the obvious albeit more time-consuming approach to sales.
FWIWFM - Don
What is your gripe with Trinnov. Why don’t you come clean?
