Trinnov Altitude 16 Review (AV Processor)

[GXAlan]

@multichannel_guy
Here's the idea of speaker remapping

Dirac, Audyssey, Anthem ARC, REW have no reliable way to distinguish between these scenarios:
Perfect ITU placement vs too close vs too far

The levels and distance are all the same...

Sony, Yamaha, and Trinnov are able to distinguish between these scenarios, but only Trinnov combines speaker position knowledge with advanced EQ/phase/room correction

Just as L+R creates a phantom center, the Trinnov can use the left *and* the center to place the "perceived" left speaker in the correct position

To do this, you need exceptional control of phase and frequency response so that the phantom center works.

Now imagine that the Trinnov knows the position of every speaker, its effect on the room for direct, first, and late reflections along with room nodes. It can fine tune everything and make it actually work.

There's a lot of "what about ______" but it really does work. The old Sherwood R972 had this feature and I loved in the plan 7.1 era. A little bit like Yamaha's CinemaDSP, there are a lot of questions whether it works or not -- but in practice, it really does.

Even if you have perfect Dolby Atmos speaker placement, it'll be wrong for DTS:X and Auro3D. So even in a very premium theater setup, Trinnov maximizes your performance for Atmos, Auro-3D, and DTS:X...

Of course, a lot of Atmos content is hard coded without dynamic objects and the HTP-1 wins with BassEQ when the source bass is filtered and you believe that the cinema reference contains more <30 Hz content.

 

[Dj7675]

@multichannel_guy
Here's the idea of speaker remapping

Dirac, Audyssey, Anthem ARC, REW have no reliable way to distinguish between these scenarios:
Perfect ITU placement vs too close vs too far
View attachment 360482View attachment 360483View attachment 360485

The levels and distance are all the same...

Sony, Yamaha, and Trinnov are able to distinguish between these scenarios, but only Trinnov combines speaker position knowledge with advanced EQ/phase/room correction

Just as L+R creates a phantom center, the Trinnov can use the left *and* the center to place the "perceived" left speaker in the correct position
View attachment 360486

To do this, you need exceptional control of phase and frequency response so that the phantom center works.

Now imagine that the Trinnov knows the position of every speaker, its effect on the room for direct, first, and late reflections along with room nodes. It can fine tune everything and make it actually work.

There's a lot of "what about ______" but it really does work. The old Sherwood R972 had this feature and I loved in the plan 7.1 era. A little bit like Yamaha's CinemaDSP, there are a lot of questions whether it works or not -- but in practice, it really does.

Even if you have perfect Dolby Atmos speaker placement, it'll be wrong for DTS:X and Auro3D. So even in a very premium theater setup, Trinnov maximizes your performance for Atmos, Auro-3D, and DTS:X...

Of course, a lot of Atmos content is hard coded without dynamic objects and the HTP-1 wins with BassEQ when the source bass is filtered and you believe that the cinema reference contains more <30 Hz content.

Stormaudio has remapping on their roadmap. I believe ART took priority as well as subwoofer support for zones.

 

[GXAlan]

Stormaudio has remapping on their roadmap. I believe ART took priority as well as subwoofer support for zones.

US8014532B2 - Method and system for processing a sound field representation - Google Patents

A method of processing a sound field representation which can be used to provide a representation which has been modified by at least spatial processing. The method includes: the establishment of an initial representation of the sound field and the establishment of a representation which has...

patents.google.com

This Trinnov patent expires in 2026, but there are other Trinnov patents that expired last year. Yamaha has a variant of mapping with Cinema DSP and Sony has a variant too, so there are different ways to reposition speakers.

2D remapping requires two microphones at fixed distances. 3D remapping requires four microphones at fixed distances. Think “triangulation” or more accurately: trilateration…

Yamaha had a fancy tripod with four positions for a mono mic, Sony uses stereo mics with a fancy tripod with two positions and Trinnov has a quad mic so you just need to measure once.

Anything done with a mono mic will require manual measurements to be input. Has StormAudio said anything about new mics?

 

[Dj7675]

US8014532B2 - Method and system for processing a sound field representation - Google Patents

A method of processing a sound field representation which can be used to provide a representation which has been modified by at least spatial processing. The method includes: the establishment of an initial representation of the sound field and the establishment of a representation which has...

patents.google.com

This Trinnov patent expires in 2026, but there are other Trinnov patents that expired last year. Yamaha has a variant of mapping with Cinema DSP and Sony has a variant too, so there are different ways to reposition speakers.

2D remapping requires two microphones at fixed distances. 3D remapping requires four microphones at fixed distances. Think “triangulation” or more accurately: trilateration…

Yamaha had a fancy tripod with four positions for a mono mic, Sony uses stereo mics with a fancy tripod with two positions and Trinnov has a quad mic so you just need to measure once.

Anything done with a mono mic will require manual measurements to be input. Has StormAudio said anything about new mics?

Yes, they will have a 3D mic to make it work. That was the other issue is that was taking longer that expected. I believe at one point they were looking at the one from MiniDSP but don’t believe that ended up being an option.

 

[Fidji]

@multichannel_guy
Here's the idea of speaker remapping

Dirac, Audyssey, Anthem ARC, REW have no reliable way to distinguish between these scenarios:
Perfect ITU placement vs too close vs too far
View attachment 360482View attachment 360483View attachment 360485

The levels and distance are all the same...

Sony, Yamaha, and Trinnov are able to distinguish between these scenarios, but only Trinnov combines speaker position knowledge with advanced EQ/phase/room correction

Just as L+R creates a phantom center, the Trinnov can use the left *and* the center to place the "perceived" left speaker in the correct position
View attachment 360486

To do this, you need exceptional control of phase and frequency response so that the phantom center works.

Now imagine that the Trinnov knows the position of every speaker, its effect on the room for direct, first, and late reflections along with room nodes. It can fine tune everything and make it actually work.

There's a lot of "what about ______" but it really does work. The old Sherwood R972 had this feature and I loved in the plan 7.1 era. A little bit like Yamaha's CinemaDSP, there are a lot of questions whether it works or not -- but in practice, it really does.

Even if you have perfect Dolby Atmos speaker placement, it'll be wrong for DTS:X and Auro3D. So even in a very premium theater setup, Trinnov maximizes your performance for Atmos, Auro-3D, and DTS:X...

Of course, a lot of Atmos content is hard coded without dynamic objects and the HTP-1 wins with BassEQ when the source bass is filtered and you believe that the cinema reference contains more <30 Hz content.

It still pays off to make every effort to place at least L-C-R properly.

I have assymetrical room, and my LRS/Left Top Rear are 15 dg Off at 135dG.

After couple of months I stopped using remapping. On the other hand, it still makes sense to have posititioning info available.
BTW - I have DTS/Auro optimised layout [9.8.7] and it works great for Auromatic, which is my go-to upmixer for 5.1/7/1 DTS HD content. Atmos also works very well, without any issues, as I have height speakers pointed at MLP

Still have 4 Ch free in 9.8.7 so I will either add 2 subs to pimp up Waveforming and add another 2 Height speakers [above wide fronts to make it 9.10.9]

 

[GXAlan]

Yes, they will have a 3D mic to make it work. That was the other issue is that was taking longer that expected. I believe at one point they were looking at the one from MiniDSP but don’t believe that ended up being an option.

The Sony and Yamaha mics are widely spaced, which may be necessary at 48 kHz sampling rate.

Speed of sound is 343 m/s and Trinnov have said 1 cm precision. So that is 34300 cm/s. In order to detect the difference in impulse time of 1/34300s, you need high res right?

The Sony/Yamaha mics are probably 7cm spacing. Smarter people can figure out what sort of position accuracy resolution that gives you. There’s also a question when it’s “good enough”. The ambisonic mics are good for binaural type experiences but not *quantitative data*.

I am all in on speaker remapping. It’s the single reason I got the Sherwood R972 years ago and why I wanted to go to Trinnov from HTP-1.

That said, Storm Audio had no problem with your Klipsch speakers and Storm Audio has a working AES67 solution. Competition is good for consumers!

It still pays off to make every effort to place at least L-C-R properly.

+ 1000. This is a short interview which

Brand Focus: Arnaud Laborie of Trinnov Audio

Arnaud Laborie is president and general manager of France-based audio manufacturer Trinnov Audio, a

www.hiddenwires.co.uk

At Trinnov, we anticipated this problem 10 years ago with our remapping technology that allows to retain the original 3D sound image — meaning the accurate position of each virtual source within the 3D soundscape — when played over an arbitrary speaker positions. This technology was originally proposed to offer flexible speaker positions and facilitate the adoption of multichannel audio in living rooms. Today this technology has been adapted to solve the 3D format interoperability: each 3D format can be mapped to the actual speaker layout.

However, even with 3D remapping some speaker layouts are more capable than others to reproduce accurate 3D images over a wide listening area. This is why Trinnov established as early as mid-2014 loudspeaker layout recommendations that achieve the best compatibility between the various formats considering the theoretical position of each speaker along with additional considerations such as the actual view angle, the sound-to-picture coherence, the head clearance and architectural constraints

 

[peng]

The Sony and Yamaha mics are widely spaced, which may be necessary at 48 kHz sampling rate.

Speed of sound is 343 m/s and Trinnov have said 1 cm precision. So that is 34300 cm/s. In order to detect the difference in impulse time of 1/34300s, you need high res right?

The Sony/Yamaha mics are probably 7cm spacing. Smarter people can figure out what sort of position accuracy resolution that gives you. There’s also a question when it’s “good enough”. The ambisonic mics are good for binaural type experiences but not *quantitative data*.

I am all in on speaker remapping. It’s the single reason I got the Sherwood R972 years ago and why I wanted to go to Trinnov from HTP-1.

That said, Storm Audio had no problem with your Klipsch speakers and Storm Audio has a working AES67 solution. Competition is good for consumers!




+ 1000. This is a short interview which

Brand Focus: Arnaud Laborie of Trinnov Audio

Arnaud Laborie is president and general manager of France-based audio manufacturer Trinnov Audio, a

www.hiddenwires.co.uk

At Trinnov, we anticipated this problem 10 years ago with our remapping technology that allows to retain the original 3D sound image — meaning the accurate position of each virtual source within the 3D soundscape — when played over an arbitrary speaker positions. This technology was originally proposed to offer flexible speaker positions and facilitate the adoption of multichannel audio in living rooms. Today this technology has been adapted to solve the 3D format interoperability: each 3D format can be mapped to the actual speaker layout.

However, even with 3D remapping some speaker layouts are more capable than others to reproduce accurate 3D images over a wide listening area. This is why Trinnov established as early as mid-2014 loudspeaker layout recommendations that achieve the best compatibility between the various formats considering the theoretical position of each speaker along with additional considerations such as the actual view angle, the sound-to-picture coherence, the head clearance and architectural constraints

All these are interesting to read, but in reality, like SINAD of 90 dB vs 110 dB full bandwidth, DF need to be >1000 under any conditions etc., the differences that are easily measurable between Trinnov, DL, Audyssey, if used and tweaked for the best measurable performance, is unlikely going to make audible differences in DBTs enough for people to conclude which one "sounds better" if a large enough group of the so called trained listeners based on Harmon's. the 1 cm precision, even the incorrect calculate distance many raved about Audyssey, imo are bs, super overrated, exaggerated to the nth degree by people who wanted to make their point about something that are factual but are not good indicators of perceived sound quality. Good to have though, at least imo, on money no object basis.

Personally, between the best measured results after tweaking for days for even my stereo systems, vs the non tweaked, I could not say which one "sounds better" but difference for sure. That's just me, may be in a study with enough participants, conclusion could be made, I doubt it, and have never seen such a study except for the one that Harman did ages ago and in that one, I don't recall everyone converged on a clear winner and loser by enough margin (such as better than 80%).

 

[GXAlan]

the differences that are easily measurable between Trinnov, DL, Audyssey, if used and tweaked for the best measurable performance, is unlikely going to make audible differences in DBTs

I would agree for well placed 7.1.4 setups.

You can easily feel and hear the differences when your speakers are out of place from spec. This is better than frequency response variation or phase correction. The way things pan across a room for special effects and localization of sound effects sound different. For giant multi row theaters, you need stuff like StormXT or Trinnov to spread the sound appropriately.

The biggest problem is that most people that can afford Trinnov can usually also put their speakers in ideal positions. The people who can benefit the most from remapping are ordinary people whose home theater has to fit in the decor or a living space.

Edit: The Sherwood R972 was a premium AVR which did just that for ordinary people. It would probably be Cinema 40 pricing

This was early in Trinnov’s consumer focus. Nowadays, they are profitable and making steady progress at their premium price point so it’s hard to see them moving to something else in the foreseeable future. Alt16 is already their budget line and they don’t want to cannabilize the premium line since that is what has kept them stable.

Music in the Round #42

An audio/video receiver in Stereophile? Heresy!

www.stereophile.com

The consumer line had fewer corrections (7 IIR filters for the bass compared to as many as you want for the Altitude line, 20 default and people commonly boost it to 30.)

@Kal Rubinson reviewed it back then and mentioned

“The display says that computations can take up to 25 minutes for a 7.1-channel system”
…
“I experimented by moving my right front speaker about 3' farther to the right, to the other side of a doorway. I then quickly remeasured, using 2D Remap to rebalance the soundstage to a degree I would not have imagined possible. To test 3D Remap, I again had to disfigure my system by laying the center speaker on its side, on the floor. Another quickie measurement, and I was able to virtually "raise" the center source to the level of the L/Rs. Remarkable.”

As he points out in the paragraph preceding what I quoted, his speakers are in pretty good positions so he didn’t need the remapping but from the perspective of a reviewer, he intentionally moved speakers to wrong positions to see how well it sounded and really did work!

Importantly it was doing 3D (height) correction even in the era of plain 7.1 surround. In the world of Atmos and with the added premium analog stages of the current super expensive Trinnov’s, it’s a whole different story…

 

[CINERAMAX]

REGARDING THE DACS.

 

[CINERAMAX]

Well this certainly opens up waveformingtm possibilities for the Altitude 16: 7.7.4

Trinnov | Trinnov expands WaveForming applications at Munich High-End

Trinnov expands WaveForming applications at Munich High-End

www.trinnov.com

 

[Gorth33]

Hello !
I'm the happy owner of an Altitude 16 and I have questions concerning sub management.
After an auto calibration, I made some measurements and I've noticed that sub starts after the LCR.
Dis you noticed that ?

Problem: I cannot correct that delay because we cannot set negative delay in Trinnov and distances cannot be updated.

Any idea ?

Thanks for your help

 

[GXAlan]

Hello !
I'm the happy owner of an Altitude 16 and I have questions concerning sub management.
After an auto calibration, I made some measurements and I've noticed that sub starts after the LCR.
Dis you noticed that ?

Problem: I cannot correct that delay because we cannot set negative delay in Trinnov and distances cannot be updated.

Any idea ?

Thanks for your help

I would also reach out to [email protected]

One of the reasons it’s so expensive is the support you get, and their ability to remote into the unit to make adjustments. There should be a way to alter the calibration data by exporting and importing the settings.

 

[Gorth33]

I would also reach out to [email protected]

One of the reasons it’s so expensive is the support you get, and their ability to remote into the unit to make adjustments. There should be a way to alter the calibration data by exporting and importing the settings.

I've reach the support and the are surprised about that do they don't understand that point.

And they cannot know what to change.

 

[GXAlan]

I've reach the support and the are surprised about that do they don't understand that point.

And they cannot know what to change.

Huh. That’s weird. You could email Curt Hoyt or Jon Herron directly. Does the time delay make sense from the standpoint of DSP delays in your speakers or distances? Is your REW mic exactly where your Trinnov mic was? Did you try a single point measurement for both?

My Alt32 is offline right now since I am redoing my theater, but I recall the optimizer export menu having everything in an XML like format. Are there ways to correct the delay there?

 

[DonH56]

I don't have an Altitude 16, bit rather a JBL SDP-75 which is a Harman version of the Altitude 32. In that, and most every processor, there is no option for "negative" delay (hard to go into the future), but you can go in and tweak all the other channels to increase their delay by the same fixed amount to compensate for the sub. AFAIK all settings can be adjusted after running the Optimizer; there may be a setting you have to change to "unlock" the settings (been too long since I worked with mine).

It is a strange situation, however, when the sub responds late and the Optimizer (or any room correction program) does not compensate. How did you determine the sub "starts after the LCR", what measurements and measuring system did you use? Unless the mic and measurement system are accurately calibrated, transient time-domain data may be wildly off. Another possibility is that the measurement test signal has a delay built in, or performs a sweep so frequencies may be delayed during the test. IME Trinnov's mic and measurements have been very accurate.

 

[GXAlan]

In that, and most every processor, there is no option for "negative" delay (hard to go into the future), .

The Monolith HTP-1 allows you to provides negative user correction as long as the delay is positive.

A really smart processor could allow negative delay by just adding the delay to the video.

 

[Gorth33]

I don't have an Altitude 16, bit rather a JBL SDP-75 which is a Harman version of the Altitude 32. In that, and most every processor, there is no option for "negative" delay (hard to go into the future), but you can go in and tweak all the other channels to increase their delay by the same fixed amount to compensate for the sub. AFAIK all settings can be adjusted after running the Optimizer; there may be a setting you have to change to "unlock" the settings (been too long since I worked with mine).

It is a strange situation, however, when the sub responds late and the Optimizer (or any room correction program) does not compensate. How did you determine the sub "starts after the LCR", what measurements and measuring system did you use? Unless the mic and measurement system are accurately calibrated, transient time-domain data may be wildly off. Another possibility is that the measurement test signal has a delay built in, or performs a sweep so frequencies may be delayed during the test. IME Trinnov's mic and measurements have been very accurate.

I have determined the delay with REW.
Impulse measurements.

No option for negative delay but we can often increase the distance. Not possible with Trinnov.

 

[ban25]

I have determined the delay with REW.
Impulse measurements.

No option for negative delay but we can often increase the distance. Not possible with Trinnov.

Can you post the numbers in ms? Are you using any wireless interconnects?

 

[Gorth33]

Can you post the numbers in ms? Are you using any wireless interconnects?

Actually I've watch impulse measurements and wavelet to determinate the delay at the crossover frequency.
The estimated delay is around 11.5ms.

No wireless. Guess it is just due to dsp of subwoofer ?

What is intersting is the delay applicated by Trinnov to the sub which is around 12ms.

 

[Gorth33]

I don't have an Altitude 16, bit rather a JBL SDP-75 which is a Harman version of the Altitude 32. In that, and most every processor, there is no option for "negative" delay (hard to go into the future), but you can go in and tweak all the other channels to increase their delay by the same fixed amount to compensate for the sub. AFAIK all settings can be adjusted after running the Optimizer; there may be a setting you have to change to "unlock" the settings (been too long since I worked with mine).

It is a strange situation, however, when the sub responds late and the Optimizer (or any room correction program) does not compensate. How did you determine the sub "starts after the LCR", what measurements and measuring system did you use? Unless the mic and measurement system are accurately calibrated, transient time-domain data may be wildly off. Another possibility is that the measurement test signal has a delay built in, or performs a sweep so frequencies may be delayed during the test. IME Trinnov's mic and measurements have been very accurate.

To be more spécific. I use Umik-1 microphone with its own calibration file.
I use REW with a time reference speaker.
I put microphone at the listening position.

Maybe there is another explanation but I don't know.
Did you try to measure after calibration ?