Trinnov Waveforming finally released

[GXAlan]

Re BEQ - I just have 2 presets with Low Shelf boosting sub 20Hz frequencies, and it covers like 90% of BEQ recommendations. Just making sure it is applied in controlled manner [that you need to make conscious effort to turn them on, important, as my wife is often using HT by herself]

Can you share those presets? I thought about trying to use some machine learning to identify the two or three most common presets but if you have empirically determined an ideal generic setting, I would love to try it out.

 

[Fidji]

Can you share those presets? I thought about trying to use some machine learning to identify the two or three most common presets but if you have empirically determined an ideal generic setting, I would love to try it out.

Nothing scientific, just randomly scanned through 10-15 favorite movies

In my case I use Low Shelf in PEQ setting [in the speaker setup menu] AFTER calibration - after some fiddling with REW i have gone for 22Hz or 18Hz Q 1.3 and have 3 presets with gains of 3 6 and 9dB respectively -> equals 6 presets [i use 21-27]

Moderate curve +4.5dB at 50Hz vs 1kHz and add 3dB of sub gain as movie setting [different for Music - there I go with +1.5db and reach null poit at 500Hz].

WF - Max Decay control, Max Limiter control and at 27hz first mode, I use pressurisation as from 18Hz now [alternating with 21Hz]

 

[Fidji]

This may seem hard to believe, but I was of the same view for a time. That changed after watching the video linked in this post. I think that video was well summed up in this post by NTK.

Lot of things happened between Aug 23 and actual release.

One of the most important things to consider that between NTK speculating and not trusting Trinnov;s approach [which is fine] is that meanwhile there are numerous proofs that Waveforming works exactly, as claimed by Trinnov. And also it is quite obvious that is not just "fancy name for DBA" as some claim. Why? It works with setups that are far from DBA and workflow is also completely different to DBA setup.

I was part of Beta Early access - one of first with not-perfect DBA to have WF installed long before official release. So i had bit more contact with Trinnov during that period - and I can only say, that all the time they transparent about what can I expect and limits of WF. In its first iteration it was significant improvement over my DBA-like setup, also Trinnov seemed to be pleasantly surprised.

I can agree, that describing MSO as “cacophony” was not needed. Especially considering the fact, that before WF release, lot of Trinnov owners used MSO as alternative to internal bass calibration, that was quite basic [and still is today - offering either individual sub EQ or “lump up to 4 subs together adjust everything manually and then run the Optimizer”]

 

[sigbergaudio]

The case study we shared earlier is also pretty good evidence that it works pretty impressively in less than perfect rooms. Before/after frequency response + spectrogram is shared in the article.

Perfect bass with Sigberg Audio Inkognito subwoofers and Trinnov WaveForming™

Introduction Bass in domestic rooms Trinnov’s WaveForming technology demands high-end subwoofers that are accurate both with regards to linearity and the time domain. In this case study, we demonstrate how Sigberg Audio’s Inkognito subwoofers — known for their high end performance, low group...

www.sigbergaudio.com

 

[tehas]

Nothing scientific, just randomly scanned through 10-15 favorite movies

In my case I use Low Shelf in PEQ setting [in the speaker setup menu] AFTER calibration - after some fiddling with REW i have gone for 22Hz or 18Hz Q 1.3 and have 3 presets with gains of 3 6 and 9dB respectively -> equals 6 presets [i use 21-27]

Moderate curve +4.5dB at 50Hz vs 1kHz and add 3dB of sub gain as movie setting [different for Music - there I go with +1.5db and reach null poit at 500Hz].

WF - Max Decay control, Max Limiter control and at 27hz first mode, I use pressurisation as from 18Hz now [alternating with 21Hz]

probably silly question, but i'll ask anyway - so long as you apply the same PEQ to all the subs, it doesn't affect WF results, correct? The thing we shouldn't do is apply different peq to each sub?

 

[Fidji]

probably silly question, but i'll ask anyway - so long as you apply the same PEQ to all the subs, it doesn't affect WF results, correct? The thing we shouldn't do is apply different peq to each sub?

yes, think of it as another way of adjusting the target curve. Is just more effective in my case. To be sure you should do it under your first mode frequency,

Use and save each as PEQ Group and then load to all subs. Check with REW afterwards, look at Spectrogram, if you see some issues, than adjust.

 

[OCA]

only "issue" was bit lack of energy below 18Hz

It must be tough having to live with such compromises

 

[Fidji]

It must be tough having to live with such compromises

Oh yes, attending avsforum, trinnov section you feel like somebody arriving to Syndikat-Asphaltfieber with 316d in M Packet ;-). “this is me, John from Texas, I feel my 40 24 inch subs are not having enough punch, I am thinking about adding another 50 of 32 inch, to get real bass extension”

Joking aside - I think 12Hz is good value to set as target for high performance system. Anything below is nice, but not essential.
I tried some experimenting wiht high pass filters for subs - there was significant difference between 15 and 18 and then agian one step further with 12Hz. From 12 to 9Hz - not so much anymore.

 

[Oddball]

Oh yes, attending avsforum, trinnov section you feel like somebody arriving to Syndikat-Asphaltfieber with 316d in M Packet ;-). “this is me, John from Texas, I feel my 40 24 inch subs are not having enough punch, I am thinking about adding another 50 of 32 inch, to get real bass extension”

I think these guys have already lost sense from whatever they are on, and their hearing from the 140dB levels of bass they have been up to for years. What matters is your setup and your limits in how low you want or can go.

 

[Fidji]

I think these guys have already lost sense from whatever they are on, and their hearing from the 140dB levels of bass they have been up to for years. What matters is your setup and your limits in how low you want or can go.

There are several angles to it.

1) waveforming, DBA, SBA and ART - all the sytems that aim for controlled low decay objectively require much more subwoofer real estate. I still remember how I was surprised after having 8x18in subs installed in DBA config. I was expecting bass inferno, as i replaced 7x15in subs, but it subjectively felt as less bass, Half of the output is gone, as rear wall acts as absorber. Also energy is not bouncing around for 1 second with all the resonances, that are usual in standard setups.
2) This is why Pressurization is so important WF feature - it allows lowest bass to be addtiive. Usually 30+Hz every system has abundant energy, what matters is 25Hz and below
3) I had a chance to visit some American HT;s with insulated drywall walls - and you can not keep bass in, and also need much more subs to get to the same result as we get here in Europe with our 30cm reinforced concrete walls [in my case] - gives you 6dB room gain minimum, compared to drywall.

And I think - only more is enough, in terms of bass capabilities - I am not basshead myself, I think my bass preferences go towards clean, controlled and tight, but I also appreciate to have reserve and overkill. Nothing is worse than sub bottoming out, because of missing woofage.

20.000W, 8x18in subs, 32 sqm, feels about appropriate in order to be far from limits of the system.

 

[Oddball]

I

And I think - only more is enough, in terms of bass capabilities - I am not basshead myself, I think my bass preferences go towards clean, controlled and tight, but I also appreciate to have reserve and overkill. Nothing is worse than sub bottoming out, because of missing woofage.

20.000W, 8x18in subs, 32 sqm, feels about appropriate in order to be far from limits of the system.

You are more than a basshead by all traditional standards. The power you note is well in excess of anything needed in such small space. Though, more is generally better if you know how to deal with it, so happy for you to have found your measure.

My measure is what I have - and it is already much more than I need or would want.

 

[OCA]

There are several angles to it.

1) waveforming, DBA, SBA and ART - all the sytems that aim for controlled low decay objectively require much more subwoofer real estate. I still remember how I was surprised after having 8x18in subs installed in DBA config. I was expecting bass inferno, as i replaced 7x15in subs, but it subjectively felt as less bass, Half of the output is gone, as rear wall acts as absorber. Also energy is not bouncing around for 1 second with all the resonances, that are usual in standard setups.
2) This is why Pressurization is so important WF feature - it allows lowest bass to be addtiive. Usually 30+Hz every system has abundant energy, what matters is 25Hz and below
3) I had a chance to visit some American HT;s with insulated drywall walls - and you can not keep bass in, and also need much more subs to get to the same result as we get here in Europe with our 30cm reinforced concrete walls [in my case] - gives you 6dB room gain minimum, compared to drywall.

And I think - only more is enough, in terms of bass capabilities - I am not basshead myself, I think my bass preferences go towards clean, controlled and tight, but I also appreciate to have reserve and overkill. Nothing is worse than sub bottoming out, because of missing woofage.

20.000W, 8x18in subs, 32 sqm, feels about appropriate in order to be far from limits of the system.

You seem to have solved the lack of bass response problem with electrostatics.

 

[Fidji]

My measure is what I have - and it is already much more than I need or would want.

That is, usually, good way to stay happy in life.

You seem to have solved the lack of bass response problem with electrostatics.

Actually my electrostats are hybrids with active bass section, panels get crossed over at around 250Hz. MartinLogan is specialist in hybrid electrostatic speakers. L-R go comfortaby below 20Hz. But still I prefer to leave everything to Waveforming below 80Hz - it just sounds better. Not because ML are bad at bass, but because Waveforming is so much better than anything else.

Curious about the next phase of WF development, which is supposed to be infra-sub integration and/or inclusion of non-sub speakers into Waveforning, similar to ART.

 

[Oddball]

That is, usually, good way to stay happy in life.


Actually my electrostats are hybrids with active bass section, panels get crossed over at around 250Hz. MartinLogan is specialist in hybrid electrostatic speakers. L-R go comfortaby below 20Hz. But still I prefer to leave everything to Waveforming below 80Hz - it just sounds better. Not because ML are bad at bass, but because Waveforming is so much better than anything else.

Curious about the next phase of WF development, which is supposed to be infra-sub integration and/or inclusion of non-sub speakers into Waveforning, similar to ART.

That would be quite something if in the works.

 

[OCA]

That is, usually, good way to stay happy in life.


Actually my electrostats are hybrids with active bass section, panels get crossed over at around 250Hz. MartinLogan is specialist in hybrid electrostatic speakers. L-R go comfortaby below 20Hz. But still I prefer to leave everything to Waveforming below 80Hz - it just sounds better. Not because ML are bad at bass, but because Waveforming is so much better than anything else.

Curious about the next phase of WF development, which is supposed to be infra-sub integration and/or inclusion of non-sub speakers into Waveforning, similar to ART.

Just trying to understand if they implemented radar phase array MIMO systems here...Do you need to measure each sub near field along with all the other subs in that sub's near field in Waveforming?

 

[sigbergaudio]

Just trying to understand if they implemented radar phase array MIMO systems here...Do you need to measure each sub near field along with all the other subs in that sub's near field in Waveforming?

You only measure in the "normal" measurement positions (in and around the sweetspot) as far as I know.

 

[Fidji]

Just trying to understand if they implemented radar phase array MIMO systems here...Do you need to measure each sub near field along with all the other subs in that sub's near field in Waveforming?

wft

www.trinnov.com

lot of technical info, including sub layouts, trade-offs, limitations

specifics to measurement - at least my experience - it really matters if you do it properly, and it pays off to experiment - e.g. in my case I got best results in “alternative” layout and going up to 15 measurements for 2 seats [better seat to seat consistency and better first mode control] - i have gone for tighter grid. Technically you measure every sub x number of measurement points, so it quite tedious process, so you do not want to do it every second week.

wft

www.trinnov.com

after you measure you can start all the tweaking
- agresiveness of used filters [i go for most limits on filters]
- decay times - everybody I know goes for driest setting [here the point is to get smooth handover betwee WF and rest of the room] - you do not want to have e.g. 0.2s up to 90Hz and then room starts to be on 0.4s [which was one of the topics that I noticed during my recent ART enabled system audition - just sounded weird]
- pressurisation frequency - below first modal frequency WF just starts to pump the pressure into room.

 

[Keith_W]

Just trying to understand if they implemented radar phase array MIMO systems here...Do you need to measure each sub near field along with all the other subs in that sub's near field in Waveforming?

I wonder what you're working on now!

Don't forget Trinnov have that fancy mic that can detect which direction sound comes from.

 

[Fidji]

I wonder what you're working on now!

Don't forget Trinnov have that fancy mic that can detect which direction sound comes from.

to be precise - once you assign speaker as sub - it is not collecting direction info anymore, just distance and FR/phase/GD/Impulse information. Actually speaker position info is used [to my knowledge] if you want to apply 3D remapping for non-ideally placed speakers.

Saying that, there are more “fancy” features, outside of 3D mic:
- pre-emphasis - just before Trinnov takes measurements it measures the background and adjusts the correction to take into account e.g. HVAC or external noise, really useful.
- working with measurements data - it allows for individualisation - e.g. I take 15 subs only measurements and then 12 full range all-speaker.
You assign 1 measurement as “reference” for calculation of delays and volume levels and then you can choose to assign weight to each measurement [so it tries to get filters right for each position, based on its weight] and important to mention - you have 29 independent presets.

Why is it great feature - in my case - 1 row, usually 1-2 people, foldable chairs, I take data from where the heads are and some around to have cube around each of them.
My presets:
1) Solo - I use MLP + small cube around to generate filters, all the rest is set to 0 weight
2) I change reference measurement position to one that is where my head is with chair folded back [which is around 50cm difference]
3) 2 seats - get best possible seat to seat
4) MLP at “wife’s” seat - overall my wife likes to sit in “my” best seat, so I change MLP to the other seat - I still get best sound and she does not care ;-)

So I can switch between presets and get what I want in any specific situation.

And you have flexibility and adjustment options for every other parameter or functionality you can think of, e.g. you can set how trim levels are calculated with 7 different parameters, based on your setup or preferences.

There is lot of misunderstanding on “what is making Trinnov special, its SINAD is bang average, Denon for 5% of the costs measures better” [or in that direction]. Filters - it is still bunch of IIR, FIR and APF filters so probably nothing that you would not have in other systems. What makes it different is the level of adjustments and individulisation options, based on your specific setup and preferences. If you know what you are doing you will get significantly better results compared to other systems, in terms of immersion, filter efficiency and that “sound quality” type of thing. Bass Management, possibility to use Altitute as active crossover up to 4 way for 1 speaker, ability to choose different filter/crossoer types, ability to manipulate phase/GD manually if you want to, countless parameters for filter calculation etc etc.

I like to tweak things by myself - and I was OK with what I was able to achieve myself, but then I snatched the opportunity and had one world-class calibrator visiting my HT and he has done lot of manual tweaks to the results and it pushed all the immersion one level higher - L-C-R coherency, mains-sub alignment for all the speakers, some dark arts on “it measures worse, but sounds better” type of things.

Is it perfect? Nope, you will find people complaining and wanting more - but to be honest - I have gone through top of the line Denon, had Storm for some time at home - and ended with Trinnov. And my next AVP for second HT will be Trinnov too.