• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily 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)

Fidji

Active Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
170
Likes
338
Location
Firenze, I
View attachment 243648View attachment 243649Just for fun, here are before and after photos of the basement rehab. More equipment is coming, other than the elliptical.

is your elliptical 10x better than this one for 150eur? Can you point to measurable benefits of spending X th Eur on expensive elliptical? Will you burn 10xmore calories with the same effort? ;-) Please do not use any "subjective" arguments - e.g. "better build", "more options" etc.


You get my point, I hope.

Re: Trinnov and others - everything is "use case" - I am having 22 channels. What else can I purchase? If I had 5.1, I would not bother.
 
Last edited:

Billy Budapest

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Messages
1,430
Likes
2,090
is your elliptical 10x better than this one for 150eur? Can you point to measurable benefits of spending X th Eur on expensive elliptical? Will you burn 10xmore calories with the same effort? ;-) Please do not use any "subjective" arguments - e.g. "better build", "more options" etc.


You get my point, I hope.

Re: Trinnov and others - everything is "use case" - I am having 22 channels. What else can I purchase? If I had 5.1, I would not bother.
Regarding the elliptical, I think I got it around 10 years ago on sale at Amazon. It was around 50% off. Truthfully, the price is what motivated my purchase, not features or brand name. But it works great!
 

Billy Budapest

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Messages
1,430
Likes
2,090
On my 75” XBR 940E at 15 ft viewing distance, when I watch the cartoon version of “The Grinch” on Vudu 4K streaming, the animated characters look subtly textured. On the UHD Blu-Ray, you can see that all of the characters are made of “fuzz.” Kaleidascape gets you disc level quality streaming. The real tragedy is that they were part of UltraViolet but not Movies Anywhere.

What is very impressive is that the Grinch is a 2K master that is upsampled. It’s primarily bitrate and HDR color that is responsible for the picture quality.

I can clearly see the value of Kaleidascape if you had a dedicated HT with viewing scale that benefits from higher detail.

With the Black Friday discounts, I highly recommend the 4K UHD Blu-Ray just to see the difference yourself!
That whole Ultraviolet thing was a disaster.

I do have a 4k UHD player—the Sony x1000es—but it has a shortcoming: no Dolby Vision support.

My AppleTV 4k supports Dolby Vision. Its performance is good. I prefer UHD discs, but most of my viewing on the AppleTV is confined to first-run TV series (currently watching The Watcher on Netflix, finishing up Westworld series 4, The White Lotus on HBO Max, and eagerly awaiting the new season of Dead to Me premiering tomorrow night. About to re-watch For All Mankind on AppleTV+ and maybe Breaking Bad).
 

Billy Budapest

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Messages
1,430
Likes
2,090
Regarding the elliptical, I think I got it around 10 years ago on sale at Amazon. It was around 50% off. Truthfully, the price is what motivated my purchase, not features or brand name. But it works great!
I just looked at the elliptical you linked and looking at its build quality, I do not think it would last the 10 years my Diamondback elliptical has. If I would have bought a commercial model or even a consumer brand more costly than the Diamondback, the build would probably be even sturdier but overkill for home use.
 

Billy Budapest

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Messages
1,430
Likes
2,090
How big of a room do you have to have for 36 speakers!!

I will be happy with 9.4.6!
My living room, although a decent size, is adequately served by 7.1.2. If I rearrange my room a bit and go to a larger screen than 65”, I could see adding front wides. But that’s about it.
 

Madhuski

Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
70
Likes
55
I just looked at the elliptical you linked and looking at its build quality, I do not think it would last the 10 years my Diamondback elliptical has. If I would have bought a commercial model or even a consumer brand more costly than the Diamondback, the build would probably be even sturdier but overkill for home use.

During the height of the pandemic, we cancelled our gym memberships and bought a precor AMT. One of the best purchases we've made. Converting our spare bedroom into a workout room is next on our list, but unclear if/when that will ever get done

IMG_0423.jpg
 

Andysu

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
Messages
1,412
Likes
689
2 rows/6 seater 65 sqm [is part of an old barn], 3.3 meter thigh, 5 meters wide scope screen.
9.x.x with 2 additional screen speakers and 2 surrounds,
4 BIG subs on LFE duty and 8 for Bass management
8 Height + Center Height and Top

But still tempted with smth like this -

View attachment 237931

Now in my 32sqm - 9.5.6, that will become 9.5.7 [adding Center Height], 4 subs on LFE/Bass Management Duty, 1 dedicated to C.
Screenshot 2022-11-17 09.18.05.png



the below centre . now this has been my point i think for over 11 years . i mentioned about in post some 11 years ago .
agent mulder taking a piss . i did sort simple test of agent mulder peeing on my floor with HF centre horn laying on floor . amazing . agent mulder was actually sounding like peeing on my floor . below centre . normally , what is normal ? commonly LCR or L Lc C Rc R are middle height behind the screen and mostly sounded like again mulder was peeing into his mouth . the sound of peeing was arced upwards made no sense unless agent mulder was aiming upwards against the wall in the alley way .

picture taken 2011 with centre HF laying on the floor so only wet frequency peeing sound will be heard as if peeing on the floor . hence i look downwards and that was basic test that actual worked . listening is what i do . deep listening . i know what to look for . listen for . feel for .
201924_10150207982730149_7891225_o (2).jpg


2014 got dts laserdisc of x-files so some more listening . this time agent mulder is listening to , matrix below surround demoing in my THX cinema .
the matrix below surround works so well , an idea that came to mind in 1998 . it be better if it was discrete , but how many home cinemas actually running matrix below surround ? i see with dts x pro , it doesn't support discrete below surround so it would only be waste of my listening time and i would still have to do , special re-plugging wiring for matrix below surround .
1956839_10152281325505149_690160113_o (1).jpg


there was bees , corn crops .

while , agent scully looks upwards listening ? i didn't have atmos then i i did my own cocktail overhead and below surround which basics are so simply to connect and listen to what works and what doesn't work since it is matrix .
1898341_10152281326945149_823614771_o (1).jpg


where you stand is what you see and hear . where you crouch down on the floor is what you see and hear . where you are standing on stepladder is what you see and hear . if up in hot air balloon is what you see and hear , which is total opposite of what you see hear at ground level .
 

Jonas_h

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
22
Likes
12
View attachment 243920


the below centre . now this has been my point i think for over 11 years . i mentioned about in post some 11 years ago .
Why do you mention a 'Below center' and referencing these diagrams? To my knowledge and various documentation, there is no speaker close to the floor.

Example of source: http://m.egreatmediaplayer.com/info/dts-x-pro-sound-technology-released-44402380.html

And a comment about your talk about 'surrounds on the floor': Remember that there need to be line of sight to all speakers - that will never happen with an idea like that.
 

Billy Budapest

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Messages
1,430
Likes
2,090
View attachment 243920


the below centre . now this has been my point i think for over 11 years . i mentioned about in post some 11 years ago .
agent mulder taking a piss . i did sort simple test of agent mulder peeing on my floor with HF centre horn laying on floor . amazing . agent mulder was actually sounding like peeing on my floor . below centre . normally , what is normal ? commonly LCR or L Lc C Rc R are middle height behind the screen and mostly sounded like again mulder was peeing into his mouth . the sound of peeing was arced upwards made no sense unless agent mulder was aiming upwards against the wall in the alley way .

picture taken 2011 with centre HF laying on the floor so only wet frequency peeing sound will be heard as if peeing on the floor . hence i look downwards and that was basic test that actual worked . listening is what i do . deep listening . i know what to look for . listen for . feel for .
View attachment 243926

2014 got dts laserdisc of x-files so some more listening . this time agent mulder is listening to , matrix below surround demoing in my THX cinema .
the matrix below surround works so well , an idea that came to mind in 1998 . it be better if it was discrete , but how many home cinemas actually running matrix below surround ? i see with dts x pro , it doesn't support discrete below surround so it would only be waste of my listening time and i would still have to do , special re-plugging wiring for matrix below surround .
View attachment 243927

there was bees , corn crops .

while , agent scully looks upwards listening ? i didn't have atmos then i i did my own cocktail overhead and below surround which basics are so simply to connect and listen to what works and what doesn't work since it is matrix .
View attachment 243928

where you stand is what you see and hear . where you crouch down on the floor is what you see and hear . where you are standing on stepladder is what you see and hear . if up in hot air balloon is what you see and hear , which is total opposite of what you see hear at ground level .
Mulder peeing in your mouth? No comment. Or did you mean his own mouth? Still no comment. LOL!
 

Andysu

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
Messages
1,412
Likes
689
Mulder peeing in your mouth? No comment. Or did you mean his own mouth? Still no comment. LOL!
think about it ? Dolby labs and mixers well if Dolby labs going to make an atmos where mixers are still got their hands tied behind their backs at mixing for the encode/decode then actors will still be foley artist-ing with shoes in stuck in the actors mouths . the sound happens at the wrong sounding locations to what i hear/listen to in real life .
need at minimum at least 15 speakers behind the screen for the artificial/fabricated mixes today . five upper L Lc C Rc R / five middle L Lc C Rc R / five below screen L Lc C Rc R . this way sound can be panned diagonally around in sort of like circle well sort of get the idea ? and up and down and have sounds located in fixed positions to what is happening , visually bon screen . of course home would have to use smaller speakers unless the room is very large to accommodate the same cinema PA speakers ?

in this day and age . i'm fed up listeningto the same common speaker channel layout be it cinemas or home . real life sound isn't the same . its always different .
 

mf22433

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2020
Messages
1
Likes
0
FWIW Trinnov told me that the new DAC and ADC components in the Altitude (16 and 32) are the Sabre ES9080Q (DAC) and the ES9840 (ADC).
New Altitude are equipped with these components.
 

Fidji

Active Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
170
Likes
338
Location
Firenze, I

“Traditionally, low frequency reproduction is handled through a modal analysis where resonances are identified in the frequency domain. Through our extensive research and unique expertise in 3D acoustic fields, we propose something different. Our disruptive approach seeks to fully understand and control the behavior of the room in all its dimensions (time, frequency and the 3 dimensions of space) so that resonances are removed almost entirely and without artifacts.“

I am really curious, will be at ISE. Presentation will be done with Double Bass Array setup.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,180
Likes
14,788
Location
Oxfordshire

“Traditionally, low frequency reproduction is handled through a modal analysis where resonances are identified in the frequency domain. Through our extensive research and unique expertise in 3D acoustic fields, we propose something different. Our disruptive approach seeks to fully understand and control the behavior of the room in all its dimensions (time, frequency and the 3 dimensions of space) so that resonances are removed almost entirely and without artifacts.“

I am really curious, will be at ISE. Presentation will be done with Double Bass Array setup.
This is very interesting.

Resonances vary in amplitude depending on how long they are excited and damping. In a room the peaks vary strongly depending upon where in the room the excitation is, ie speaker location, and how big the various peaks actually are for the listener depends on where in the room the listener is located and how long the note is played - an organ tone and bass drum will be unlikely to generate the same amplitude peaks.

This means the test signal sweep speed used in the analysis will effect the amplitude of the measured peaks. I assume the test signals are designed to be similar to musical signals, which generally decay, but has always meant the "correction" of peaks of the 3 main room modes and their harmonics can only be "correct" at one listener location for one type of musical signal (ie how similar to the test signal sweep), so better than nowt in a very reactive room but a long way from a solved problem.

IMHO of course.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
1,840
Likes
2,253

“Traditionally, low frequency reproduction is handled through a modal analysis where resonances are identified in the frequency domain. Through our extensive research and unique expertise in 3D acoustic fields, we propose something different. Our disruptive approach seeks to fully understand and control the behavior of the room in all its dimensions (time, frequency and the 3 dimensions of space) so that resonances are removed almost entirely and without artifacts.“

I am really curious, will be at ISE. Presentation will be done with Double Bass Array setup.
Sounds like both Dirac with ART and Trinnov have been working on interesting things for quite some time. It will be interesting once both are up and working to see the results and how they translate in practice.
 

Music707

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2022
Messages
69
Likes
66

“Traditionally, low frequency reproduction is handled through a modal analysis where resonances are identified in the frequency domain. Through our extensive research and unique expertise in 3D acoustic fields, we propose something different. Our disruptive approach seeks to fully understand and control the behavior of the room in all its dimensions (time, frequency and the 3 dimensions of space) so that resonances are removed almost entirely and without artifacts.“

I am really curious, will be at ISE. Presentation will be done with Double Bass Array setup.

Thank you for sharing this. It should come as no surprise that Trinnov won't have Dirac surpass them (at least in some regard). For many practical purposes, however, the big question seems to be how much you can get without some sort of technical overkill. Maybe I am not the only one who will definitely not install 16 subs in the living room. :)
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
5,929
Likes
5,346
Resonances vary in amplitude depending on how long they are excited and damping. In a room the peaks vary strongly depending upon where in the room the excitation is, ie speaker location, and how big the various peaks actually are for the listener depends on where in the room the listener is located and how long the note is played - an organ tone and bass drum will be unlikely to generate the same amplitude peaks.

This means the test signal sweep speed used in the analysis will effect the amplitude of the measured peaks. I assume the test signals are designed to be similar to musical signals, which generally decay, but has always meant the "correction" of peaks of the 3 main room modes and their harmonics can only be "correct" at one listener location for one type of musical signal (ie how similar to the test signal sweep), so better than nowt in a very reactive room but a long way from a solved problem.
This is why I rely on pink noise and RTA to analyse a room instead of sine sweeps or pulses. As rooms have a fixed RT you can change the level of the pink noise and see the room response at the "saturated" levels you will be listening. I am sure a specific signal that is designed to work with a custom measurement system will do a better job.

Looking forward to the update :)
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
6,882
Likes
7,081
Location
Brussels, Belgium
This means the test signal sweep speed used in the analysis will effect the amplitude of the measured peaks.

I don't think this is accurate. I get barely any difference in the amplitude response when it comes to absolute amplitude when I reduce or decrease the sweep speed. If I remember correctly the Klippel NFS uses incredibly short sweeps as well.

When i take a sweep in REW, REW takes a time window of 500ms from the moment the sweep is generated, all the sound pressure within that window is processed and eventually displayed in the amplitude response. This is why we have reflections added in to our measurements in any sweep. This is more than enough for any room mode to get excited to peak output.

@JohnPM can explain this in more detail. I probably didn't express this perfectly.
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
5,929
Likes
5,346
I don't think this is accurate. I get barely any difference in the amplitude response when it comes to absolute amplitude when I reduce or decrease the sweep speed. If I remember correctly the Klippel NFS uses incredibly short sweeps as well.

When i take a sweep in REW, REW takes a time window of 500ms from the moment the sweep is generated, all the sound pressure within that window is processed and eventually displayed in the amplitude response. This is why we have reflections added in to our measurements in any sweep. This is more than enough for any room mode to get excited to peak output.

@JohnPM can explain this in more detail. I probably didn't express this perfectly.
A common mistake (to my understanding that is) is to measure a room like you measure a sound emitter, like a speaker. They should not be measured the same way. The speaker measurement does not and should not include any reverberation. That is why pulses (as in REW) and or computational calculations (as in LFS) are used.

All enclosed spaces have different level of RT throughout the audio spectrum, and unless they are very big, they also have room modes, which are basically resonances. If you measure the sound level coming direct to you before the reverb of the room has time to fill in and increase the level at the frequencies where RT is high, your measurements will not be correct.

In short: gating allows you to avoid the room, which also means you are not measuring the room. The reflections added by NFS are just that reflections, not the reverberation, which are multiple reflections. Our ear/brain mechanism is effected by early reflections and hence NFS concentrates on that. Remember though, NFS is a specific device designed to measure a speaker FR as it it is in an anechoic environment and to simulate its response in a typical listening room. It is not an acoustic analyser designed to analyse a space.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
6,882
Likes
7,081
Location
Brussels, Belgium
A common mistake (to my understanding that is) is to measure a room like you measure a sound emitter, like a speaker. They should not be measured the same way. The speaker measurement does not and should not include any reverberation. That is why pulses (as in REW) and or computational calculations (as in LFS) are used.

All enclosed spaces have different level of RT throughout the audio spectrum, and unless they are very big, they also have room modes, which are basically resonances. If you measure the sound level coming direct to you before the reverb of the room has time to fill in and increase the level at the frequencies where RT is high, your measurements will not be correct.

In short: gating allows you to avoid the room, which also means you are not measuring the room. The reflections added by NFS are just that reflections, not the reverberation, which are multiple reflections. Our ear/brain mechanism is effected by early reflections and hence NFS concentrates on that. Remember though, NFS is a specific device designed to measure a speaker FR as it it is in an anechoic environment and to simulate its response in a typical listening room. It is not an acoustic analyser designed to analyse a space.

The inside of a speaker is basically a room, and that sound pressure can and does escape to the actual room the speaker is sitting in during listening in several ways. the NFS should care and does care about reverberation and decay times of sound emitters. So I don't personally see the point you're trying to make. For example here is a couple of decay graphs that Amir shares in his speakers review that show very room mood like behavior with certain dips on certain speakers.

1673611794549.png


1673611964433.png
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
5,929
Likes
5,346
The inside of a speaker is basically a room, and that sound pressure can and does escape to the actual room the speaker is sitting in during listening in several ways. the NFS should care and does care about reverberation and decay times of sound emitters. So I don't personally see the point you're trying to make.
I understand what you are saying but I am afraid either you or my teaching and experience in the field is wrong, hence we have to agree to disagree.
 
Top Bottom