Trinnov Altitude 16 Review (AV Processor)

[Zooqu1ko]

I know this isn't an altitude CI thread but thought it may be the best place to get some advice. I just ran optimizer on my newly installed CI with wave forming. It sucked all of the life out of my subs. I know it is designed to do this some but I like a bit more bass in my music. I am running 7.4.4. Three questions before I run optimizer again next week after building my sub stands for proper sub positioning vertically.

1. I chose manual mode to set all speaker levels to 75dB prior to running the calibration for each position. It only goes to +/-12. This is not enough for my subs. Is there somewhere else in the software I can change output level for the channels rather than the small slider in the calibration window? For example my front subs natively play at ~92dB with pink noise where the remaining speakers play at 73-80dB. I think there is a menu somewhere pre-calibration I can just remove ~17dB from the subs prior to calibration? Will this help?\

In the old UI, one would mess around with the multi-way speaker setup (even if it's only a single speaker) to adjust levels before calibration.

2. After running optimizer and wave forming if I want to add bass back in is the best way to do it with a target curve? Is there a better way?

A target curve is one method, waveforming has a setting somewhere to adjust the dryness(?) to add some reverberation back. Adjusting the target curve will provide a cleaner result, obviously. I'd say get used to it, but it's still a matter of taste.

3. I have Dutch and Dutch 8Cs as my mains. The crossover is set to LR at 80hZ. Is this optimal or should I try to crossover the 8Cs a little lower?

That may depend on how high you WaveForming setup can provide clean, consistent output.

4. If I want to listen to 2ch plus subs how can I make this work? Is creating a new preset the best/easiest way to do it?

If you're listening to 2 channel material without an upmixer engaged, L+R+Subs should be the only active speakers even if you use a preset that has 7.x.4 speakers available.

 

[murl]

In the old UI, one would mess around with the multi-way speaker setup (even if it's only a single speaker) to adjust levels before calibration.

A target curve is one method, waveforming has a setting somewhere to adjust the dryness(?) to add some reverberation back. Adjusting the target curve will provide a cleaner result, obviously. I'd say get used to it, but it's still a matter of taste.

That may depend on how high you WaveForming setup can provide clean, consistent output.

If you're listening to 2 channel material without an upmixer engaged, L+R+Subs should be the only active speakers even if you use a preset that has 7.x.4 speakers available.

When I listen to 2ch in "Native" it only plays through the L/R and not the subs.

How do I figure out how high wave forming can provide clean consistent output?

I do understand what you are saying about getting accustomed to it. I have never really preferred a flat response.

Thanks for all of your help.

 

[Zooqu1ko]

When I listen to 2ch in "Native" it only plays through the L/R and not the subs.

check the output meters.

How do I figure out how high wave forming can provide clean consistent output?

Calcualate as in DBA. Not sure how much higher you can go depending on whether you're just considering one seat or multiple.

I do understand what you are saying about getting accustomed to it. I have never really preferred a flat response.

I was referring to dry vs. wet bass. Adjust the target curve to your taste.

 

[Fidji]

I know this isn't an altitude CI thread but thought it may be the best place to get some advice. I just ran optimizer on my newly installed CI with wave forming. It sucked all of the life out of my subs. I know it is designed to do this some but I like a bit more bass in my music. I am running 7.4.4. Three questions before I run optimizer again next week after building my sub stands for proper sub positioning vertically.

1. I chose manual mode to set all speaker levels to 75dB prior to running the calibration for each position. It only goes to +/-12. This is not enough for my subs. Is there somewhere else in the software I can change output level for the channels rather than the small slider in the calibration window? For example my front subs natively play at ~92dB with pink noise where the remaining speakers play at 73-80dB. I think there is a menu somewhere pre-calibration I can just remove ~17dB from the subs prior to calibration? Will this help?

2. After running optimizer and wave forming if I want to add bass back in is the best way to do it with a target curve? Is there a better way?

3. I have Dutch and Dutch 8Cs as my mains. The crossover is set to LR at 80hZ. Is this optimal or should I try to crossover the 8Cs a little lower?

4. If I want to listen to 2ch plus subs how can I make this work? Is creating a new preset the best/easiest way to do it?

Thank you in advance.

re 1. You are one of the few people in the world with Alt CI and having new UI. I [and lot of other people] could probably guide you in Alt 16 or 32 [actually I do gain matching in Active Crossover part],

re 2. - you need to experiment with WF settings first - there you can dial in decay, filter aggressivity etc. , I assume you have Pressurization ON etc

re.3 - whatever sounds better to you, I use 60Hz for L-R with WF, 80 for the rest, thing to listen to is whether bass is “collapsed” to the phantom center ]bad] or whther you still have this “window to the sound” [good] experience.

re.4 - you need to have only Bass Management active - then in processor/meters tab you should see L-R active on inputs and L-R + Subs active on output.

Overall - bass levels and Waveforming - this is absolutely normal - by removing resonances and shortening decay times WF is taking lot of “energy” out of the room [actually people with DBA and ART are experiencing the same thing]. I had it too.

Good news is, that WF allows for lot of tuning to your room. It can be done in several ways, but it would probably be bit guessing on my end, as I do not know, all the other settings you have. It will probably require few loops, but you will get there. There is nothing better out there than properly tuned Waveforming.

Feel free to PM me, I think it could be more efficient that way.

 

[etc6849]

AVRs suck though, and the difference is very audible, not only measurable. It takes three circuits to power my theater without voltage droop. No way can an AVR with an inadequate power supply power my 5.1 system... and no clipping indicators, don't need to worry about that I guess

Using an all pro-audio signal chain, I've been in audio nirvana for 8 years, and would never go back to a consumer level signal chain: https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/ahb2-tri-amp-setup-ellery-coffman

I've ordered a Trinnov Altitude CI with 10 channels to use it's AES outputs and decode Atmos. For what I paid, it's very affordable. I personally wouldn't buy an Altitude 16, now that the CI is out. I'd rather have the flexibility of AES out for up to 32 channels if I need to purchase additional channels later.

I plan to keep everything at pro level voltages with a single D/A conversion for good. I'll keep using my Xilica XD4080's with the Trinnov for now, but may buy extra channels to try wave forming with my subs and connect them directly to the CI's analog outputs after I run a stepped sine test in REW. I really want all DAC3 B's for my output chain; maybe someday...

Sure. That's why I see so many on here dismissing AVRs based on inaudible measurements and overpriced DACs that have NO audible effects beyond the usual golden ear claims. Oh, that AVP would be excellent if it weren't for the ultrasonic ringing of the DAC at 80kHz....

 

[etc6849]

Why resort to name calling? Lighten up. No one attacked you. I just said AVRs suck, when, well they do.

Hey, a fudging idiot... Who would have thunk?

 

[Andysu]

For people that claim to believe in Science, I sure see a lot of audiophile nonsense in these forums. $10k for an amp? Wait! That's too cheap! You need one that costs as much as the processor itself! Your reputation as a snob will be in jeopardy if your amp costs less than $30k! SMH

if make you feel better a cobra 148GTL-DX has more channels than a trinnov 32 even when 64 ch , GTL-DX still be the king of TX/RX with just a little over 360 channels

 

[Magnus]

Channels without content means little save bass. 34 is the max for home Atmos.

 

[Everett T]

Channels without content means little save bass. 34 is the max for home Atmos.

I'm e guessing a lot of Trinnov users have
Kaleidescape, which supports uncompressed object based 3d audio.

 

[Oddball]

Why resort to name calling? Lighten up. No one attacked you. I just said AVRs suck, when, well they do.

Now do they? They obviously might for you but plenty of guys downsizing their AVP setups - because they feel AVRs are really good.

Anyway, you are barking up the wrong tree IMO - it is the speakers and subs that will carry the day nowadays. Trinnov is great, but since you did not try wave forming yet I guess you must be drowning in the uncontrolled bass decay which is what most of us had to do for decades - but not any more.

 

[Magnus]

I'm e guessing a lot of Trinnov users have
Kaleidescape, which supports uncompressed object based 3d audio.

That doesn't change a thing. It's still 34 active rendered speaker channels max for home Atmos. Everything else is less than that (13.1 for Auro-3D, 7.1.4+Neural X expansion for 30.2 max for DTS:X).

Oddball said,
Now do they? They obviously might for you but plenty of guys downsizing their AVP setups - because they feel AVRs are really good.

Even Storm makes high end AVPs now. I think Trinnov has a new model out too. There's nothing inherently wrong with putting amps into the same cabinet as long as it's well designed. Separates are meaningless. My amplification is all external (due to "Scatmos" more than anything else), but it's still driven by a Marantz AVR for 11.1.8.4 final output (4 are floor ambience speakers derived from out-of-phase main-to-side signal).

Any decent speaker in an Atmos setup can reach Dolby levels with minimal power (25W-60W per channel typically does the job), particularly when it's rare for all channels to need to be at max power at once. I've got 25 speakers. It gets quite loud quite easily. I use PSB with +/- 1.5dB frequency response. Best speaker for the money, IMO.

 

[etc6849]

Because no AVR I've seen delivers anywhere near what best in class amps like the Benchmark AHB2 can. If it says 11 channels 200W max, you don't really get 2200W of amplification out. No clipping lights either, and of course its voltage rails are going to support all 11 channels being driven without any voltage droop, right...

In general AVRs have a limited power supply. Yes, driving a few channels, you will get full output. But, unless the AVR requires two separate 15A circuits, it will never perform in the same ballpark when driving that many channels. This is supposed to be a science forum based on real electrical engineering.

People are free to use AVRs of course, but why go post about that in this sub forum lol. I want top level performance and more dynamic range, no clipping, etc...

PS: I already have 5 subs that are time aligned and level match, and I'm using 12 bass traps... Pretty sure my bass is fine without the Trinnov, but of course I will eventually try wave forming if I buy the extra channels.

Now do they? They obviously might for you but plenty of guys downsizing their AVP setups - because they feel AVRs are really good.

Anyway, you are barking up the wrong tree IMO - it is the speakers and subs that will carry the day nowadays. Trinnov is great, but since you did not try wave forming yet I guess you must be drowning in the uncontrolled bass decay which is what most of us had to do for decades - but not any more.

 

[Everett T]

That doesn't change a thing. It's still 34 active rendered speaker channels max for home Atmos. Everything else is less than that (13.1 for Auro-3D, 7.1.4+Neural X expansion for 30.2 max for DTS:X).



Even Storm makes high end AVPs now. I think Trinnov has a new model out too. There's nothing inherently wrong with putting amps into the same cabinet as long as it's well designed. Separates are meaningless. My amplification is all external (due to "Scatmos" more than anything else), but it's still driven by a Marantz AVR for 11.1.8.4 final output (4 are floor ambience speakers derived from out-of-phase main-to-side signal).

Any decent speaker in an Atmos setup can reach Dolby levels with minimal power (25W-60W per channel typically does the job), particularly when it's rare for all channels to need to be at max power at once. I've got 25 speakers. It gets quite loud quite easily. I use PSB with +/- 1.5dB frequency response. Best speaker for the money, IMO.

You're correct 34 is the max, I was confusing the number of objects and channels..

 

[Oddball]

Because no AVR I've seen delivers anywhere near what best in class amps like the Benchmark AHB2 can. If it says 11 channels 200W max, you don't really get 2200W of amplification out. No clipping lights either, and of course its voltage rails are going to support all 11 channels being driven without any voltage droop, right...

In general AVRs have a limited power supply. Yes, driving a few channels, you will get full output. But, unless the AVR requires two separate 15A circuits, it will never perform in the same ballpark when driving that many channels. This is supposed to be a science forum based on real electrical engineering.

People are free to use AVRs of course, but why go post about that in this sub forum lol. I want top level performance and more dynamic range, no clipping, etc...

PS: I already have 5 subs that are time aligned and level match, and I'm using 12 bass traps... Pretty sure my bass is fine without the Trinnov, but of course I will eventually try wave forming if I buy the extra channels.

I think you are overestimating the power requirements, although in a very conservative case, I am with you. For this and various other reasons I have 7 stereo amps with a bunch of toroidal transformers, some 20kg or more is the rough estimate.

Your bass traps seem impressive, but not sure what they ultimately do for your bass. If you shared some decay graphs perhaps it would be more convincing?

But then there is the thing with AVRs. I don't think this guy was joking at all. Underestimated the physics in one respect, but not related to the AVR he was using.

Focal 1000 Utopia IWLCR & IWSUB Speaker System Review

Focal's 1000 Utopia and Astral 16 deliver reference grade performance from an in-wall speaker. Check out our exclusive, in-depth, Focal 1000 Series Theater installation and a sneak peek at Dirac ART.

www.audioholics.com

 

[Oddball]

That doesn't change a thing. It's still 34 active rendered speaker channels max for home Atmos. Everything else is less than that (13.1 for Auro-3D, 7.1.4+Neural X expansion for 30.2 max for DTS:X).



Even Storm makes high end AVPs now. I think Trinnov has a new model out too. There's nothing inherently wrong with putting amps into the same cabinet as long as it's well designed. Separates are meaningless. My amplification is all external (due to "Scatmos" more than anything else), but it's still driven by a Marantz AVR for 11.1.8.4 final output (4 are floor ambience speakers derived from out-of-phase main-to-side signal).

Any decent speaker in an Atmos setup can reach Dolby levels with minimal power (25W-60W per channel typically does the job), particularly when it's rare for all channels to need to be at max power at once. I've got 25 speakers. It gets quite loud quite easily. I use PSB with +/- 1.5dB frequency response. Best speaker for the money, IMO.

Now this is a busy post. Scatmos and things. But what makes you think that Atmos speakers can do a job at 60W per channel. They are specd for full range and full throttle to start with. Mixing engineers might or might not provide some practical relief. At the end they are supposed to be bass managed.

 

[etc6849]

Class D amps inside an AVR might get you closer, but I have doubts without real measurements, with all channels driven close to max. A setup must be able to handle peaks without clipping, and most pro gear actually tells you when clipping occurs.

Every AVR I've seen independently measured with all channels driven can't compete. People with no technical background have been posting that it can for decades, doesn't make it true. Sure there might be the 1/10000 $24k AVR that's good enough for most, but that still means AVRs suck because 9999/10000 do.

I can get 5 Benchmark AHB2's, the Trinnov Altitude CI plus some high performance multichannel DACs for under $24k if you shop around. Unless you need everything crammed in one box and want to lose 10-20dB of dynamic range, I don't see the point.

My setup measures better with no EQ compared to that one that likely costs 3-4x more, and that's with using $1500 pro grade speaker processors. I've posted waterfall plots before here, even ones with no curve smoothing and no EQ.

Also, I have doubts on the in wall/in ceiling speakers BS ever being top performance gear. They trade looks lesser performance. Most acoustic engineers will tell you that aiming speakers yeilds better performance.

But then there is the thing with AVRs. I don't think this guy was joking at all. Underestimated the physics in one respect, but not related to the AVR he was using.

 

[Everett T]

Now this is a busy post. Scatmos and things. But what makes you think that Atmos speakers can do a job at 60W per channel. They are specd for full range and full throttle to start with. Mixing engineers might or might not provide some practical relief. At the end they are supposed to be bass managed.

The Focal Astral AVR that Theo uses in your link was a decent bargain after it came out with a street price around $16000 after a few months (lower at A4Less) with 12 channels of internal amplification, 250w @8ohm / 500w @4ohm @1% THD. At 40#s it is close to half the weight of the A1H,

The Denon certainly is a value compared to the Focal even after purchasing all of the Dirac add-ons. The amps have good headroom , just not as much as the Astral. The Focal has better routing and internal factory options but many would never use them who are looking at most AVRs. Other than the weight, out the door for an all in one solution it's pretty nice.

 

[Oddball]

My setup measures better with no EQ compared to that one that likely costs 3-4x more, and that's with using $1500 pro grade speaker processors. I've posted waterfall plots before here, even ones with no curve smoothing and no EQ.

Also, I have doubts on the in wall/in ceiling speakers BS ever being top performance gear. They trade looks lesser performance. Most acoustic engineers will tell you that aiming speakers yeilds better performance.

Can you please post them again. I probably have a system that is 10x what you have so always curiours what could be done for much less.

Not getting the in wall/ceiling part at all. What's the story there?

 

[Magnus]

Let's do some basic math!

One 90dB efficient speaker will produce at 1 meter 90dB pink band rated sound with 1W of input power! Every 3dB of increased output requires doubling the power. Every 10dB of output "sounds" twice as loud.

Dolby requires 105dB peak ratings for their certified standard based off an 85dB per channel continous calibration.

You'll need 32W for 106dB continous output at one meter. Typical distance is 3m for front row. With typical room boundaries, you're looking at 128W per channel fully driven for all channels, which would hit insane ear shattering levels were even 11 channels driven to those levels at once (~115dB!!!)

Show me one person who listens at 115dB and I'll show you a deaf person! Even so, a 11 channel home theater could realistically achieve 11 channels at 128W each with external amplification.

Realistically, most people are listening to movies averaging 85dB and they turn their 0dB calibration down 6dB-20dB based on what I've read on Avs over the years. Down a mere 6dB from maximum, you'd only need an an average of 32W per channel, well within the range of almost any decent AVR.

Go to 96dB efficient speakers (some pro JBL speakers are 100dB efficient horn loaded) and you can achieve ear crushing levels at a mere 32W per channel (subs separate).

In general, the idea the average person needs not only separates, but two circuits worth of amps is patently absurd.

 

[Oddball]

The Focal Astral AVR that Theo uses in your link was a decent bargain after it came out with a street price around $16000 after a few months (lower at A4Less) with 12 channels of internal amplification, 250w @8ohm / 500w @4ohm @1% THD. At 40#s it is close to half the weight of the A1H,

The Denon certainly is a value compared to the Focal even after purchasing all of the Dirac add-ons. The amps have good headroom , just not as much as the Astral. The Focal has better routing and internal factory options but many would never use them who are looking at most AVRs. Other than the weight, out the door for an all in one solution it's pretty nice.

Agreed. The link was to substantiate how AVRs have place in the ultimate setups. I can't really say that I am all in on Theo's theory. I still prefer my stereo amps...