Datasat RS20i BETA test and comparison with ADA Rhapsody/Trinnov TEQ-12!!!! - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 1419 Old 04-09-2012, 06:33 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

What is still helpful, like all the research that Harman publishes, is the broad conclusions reached by testing: smoothness of frequency response and shape of target curve turned out to be the two factors that had the highest correlation with listener preference. I don't see that as "the trouble with that test" but instead the most encouraging aspect of it.

Well I did say

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

...it is more a test of what target curve most people prefer, which may very well be the most important parameter...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Exactly. And, when tested, a perceptually flat response tends to be preferable, where all frequencies are equally audible and certain louder frequencies don't mask details elsewhere in the frequency range.

That further clarifies what "perceptually flat" means, but seems to leave open the possibility that the result is objectively inaccurate, i.e., if some live sound were produced in a given room, then reproduced with speakers EQ'd to perceptually flat, it might sound better but different in spectral balance than the original.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 1419 Old 04-09-2012, 07:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,850
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 565 Post(s)
Liked: 342
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

That further clarifies what "perceptually flat" means, but seems to leave open the possibility that the result is objectively inaccurate, i.e., if some live sound were produced in a given room, then reproduced with speakers EQ'd to perceptually flat, it might sound better but different in spectral balance than the original.

There is no "original." You never, ever know how it all sounded to the talent that approved it. They listened to it in a different room with different speakers. So nothing here is about accuracy in that regard.

All you have left then is what is preferred. And we get to know that with listening tests such as being discussed here. From Dr. Toole's Sound Reproduction Book:

"As consumers of these programs, we cannot know what was intended for the sound of any of these programs. We were not there when they were created. We may have been at performances by similar, or even the same, musicians, but they were likely to have been in different venues and possibly amplified. None of us ever placed our ears where the microphones were located to capture the sounds, nor would we want to; we were almost certainly at a distance, in an audience. A simple reproduction of the microphone signals cannot duplicate the experience.

Descriptors like pleasantness and preference must therefore be considered as ranking in importance with accuracy and fidelity. This may seem like a dangerous path to take, risking the corruption of all that is revered in the purity of an original live performance. Fortunately, it turns out that when given the opportunity to judge without bias, human listeners are excellent detectors of artifacts and distortions; they are remarkably trustworthy guardians of what is good. Having only a vague concept of what might be correct, listeners recognize what is wrong. An absence of problems becomes a measure of excellence. By the end of this book, we will see that technical excellence turns out to be a high correlate of both perceived accuracy and emotional gratification, and most of us can recognize it when we hear it."


This is why I think it is so bad when we don't have proper listening test data and instead folks talk about filter types and such. It is important to comply what we collectively without bias indicate as good sound.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #633 of 1419 Old 04-09-2012, 08:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
The Bogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: GTA, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,438
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post

Raul,
I'm sure that's a given. It was not my intention to lecture everyone on the importance of integrating systems and room treatments. The point I wished to make was that with this approach, very little if any correction should be needed...particularly correction based on complex algorithms and costly hardware. One might find that a $1K Audyssey Bass EQ would be sufficient to counter the most likely remaining trouble spots. I was speaking to the allocation of resources...perhaps in too long-winded a manner.

It's definitely a good point but in my experience after spending $$$$ on a room consultant, room build and treatment etc... it wasn't nirvana. I'm sure part of it was related to my fixed ceiling height. I spent some bucks getting Adam Pelz up here to integrate my front 2 F113s with my main speakers and it was a big improvement. The Trinnov just takes it to the next (and final for this room!) level. I think the best result will be to have a "decent" acoustic environment and good gear and the Trinnov or Dirac or whatever will be the icing on the cake.

Speaking of the Anthem ARC, I found that if you let it correct all the way to 20khz that the sound was too brash. I limited correction to 1khz or so and it is a remarkable improvement for movies without costing very much money (for someone that already had the Anthem product).

Design by Rives...dollars by The Bogg

Click for my build thread
The Bogg is offline  
post #634 of 1419 Old 04-09-2012, 10:33 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
JapanDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Same with the Trinnov - 29 presets permit 29 distinct curves, if desired. It's a very handy feature, given the wide FR variance in recordings.

Thanks , I was just pointing out the similarities with the ease and the scope that the Dirac live has compared to the Trinnov. Cheers

My build thread

My 8 x RE XXX 18" Subwoofers, IB build
Couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

Do you know what Nemesis means?

JapanDave is offline  
post #635 of 1419 Old 04-10-2012, 02:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

There is no "original."

There is in the simple scenario I posited.

I do agree with what Toole said.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #636 of 1419 Old 04-10-2012, 02:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 561 Post(s)
Liked: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

That further clarifies what "perceptually flat" means, but seems to leave open the possibility that the result is objectively inaccurate, i.e., if some live sound were produced in a given room, then reproduced with speakers EQ'd to perceptually flat, it might sound better but different in spectral balance than the original.

I suppose that would be one version of "accuracy", not to mention provide for an interesting experiment in equalization: have a vocalist and loudspeaker next to each other in the same room, record the vocalist and try to get the recording to match when it is played back through the loudspeaker. There would be some confounding variables, like the vocalist and loudspeaker being in different locations, lack of consistent repeatability from the vocalist, time gap between hearing the live voice vs the recording, is the EQ compensating for the room or the miking technique, etc.

As far as commercially available music recordings, it is as Amir said: there is no way to judge accuracy since we don't know how it sounded originally. In which case, the best you can hope to do is get results that are pleasing to you. Research shows that most of us humans have similar preferences in this area, which at the very least gives use a useful starting point, after which we can tweak to individual taste (pass the salt please). Since these preferences aren't a secret, it is not surprising to find that some room correction systems have a default target curve that sounds pleasing right out of the box. Which also makes good business sense.

BTW, frequent poster Wayne Pflughaupt has a nice tutorial on how to come up perceptually flat target curve. Again, good starting point (irrespective of the room correction system you plan to use), which you can then salt-n-pepper to taste: House Curve: What it is, why you need it, how to do it.

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #637 of 1419 Old 04-10-2012, 06:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
The Bogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: GTA, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,438
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

IBTW, frequent poster Wayne Pflughaupt has a nice tutorial on how to come up perceptually flat target curve. Again, good starting point (irrespective of the room correction system you plan to use), which you can then salt-n-pepper to taste: House Curve: What it is, why you need it, how to do it.

Thanks for the link, it's a good read.

Design by Rives...dollars by The Bogg

Click for my build thread
The Bogg is offline  
post #638 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 02:26 AM
Member
 
kamenoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Dan, I have a few technical questions:

1. Where do you put in the speaker settings? In Rhapsody or TEQ Trinnov?

2. I understand that during the test you did not connect Rhapsody with TEQ Trinnov via ADA bus? Do they need to be connected via ADA bus during normal operation?

3. How do you regulate the volume? I switched the TEQ on Rhapsody and the sound was too loud and I could not turn it down using the master volume. I was told that this was because I did not have TEQ Trinnov but I understand the TEQ Trinnov doesn't have a volume knob.
4. How did you connect the sub from Rhapsody to TEQ Trinnov (to one of the channels)?

5 My system is 5.1 but I would like to add a second sub. Can I connect the one of the surrounds channels of Rhapsody to TEQ Trinnov or better use Y split from Rhapsody to feed two TEQ Trinnov channels?What about to use the free surround channels on Rhapsody to 2 channels of TEQ Trinnov and to ignore the sub on Rhapsody?

Thanks for the help.

PS If someone has experience with TEQ Trinnov, please join in. Any help will be appreciated.
kamenoff is offline  
post #639 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 03:47 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
DanFrancis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Aurora, IL, USA
Posts: 1,846
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 23
1-2.) both- in the software for the Rhapsody and in the software for the Trinnov. Technically all loudspeaker information is being handled by the TEQ- but you have to make sure that the TEQ sees the proper signals from the Rhapsody (full range all channels).

3.)turn OFF TEQ on the Rhapsody ( that setting is for the ADA bus - to use the gain control of the TEQ as main volume, there's plenty of adjustment without that bus connection). Essentially, treat the TEQ as an outboard multichannel DSP.

4.) just run the sub output to one of the inputs of the TEQ, you "split" the signal internally with the software.

5.) If you're using a TEQ 8, then "y" the output channel of the TEQ you're using for the subwoofer; if you have the TEQ 12, then you just tell it which channels are subs. (output)

hope that helps, I'll be unavailable until the evening Central time- so I'll check in later.

Dan

Dan Francis
Head of Sales US
C'SEED Entertainment Systems GMBH
www.cseed.tv
df@cseed.tv
DanFrancis is online now  
post #640 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 10:33 AM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamenoff View Post

2. I understand that during the test you did not connect Rhapsody with TEQ Trinnov via ADA bus? Do they need to be connected via ADA bus during normal operation?

3. How do you regulate the volume? I switched the TEQ on Rhapsody and the sound was too loud and I could not turn it down using the master volume. I was told that this was because I did not have TEQ Trinnov but I understand the TEQ Trinnov doesn't have a volume knob.

While you can run the TEQ as a DSP and adjusting the volume on your Rhapsody or other processor with good results, it's not the optimum way to do it.

Ideally you would use the ADA bus. We designed it so that when the bus use, the Rhapsody is always sending full audio levels to the TEQ, while also sending 2 way control of Volume to the TEQ. The TEQ then adjusts volume accordingly and confirms this back to the Rhapsody. That is why when you selected TEQ the Rhapsody was LOUD.

If you forgo the ADA bus, you could get the same results manually: set the Rhapsody or other processor to optimum level and use the TEQ to change Volume level. The TEQ DOES have a Volume Knob and, as well can be controlled remotely via VNC on an iPad or other device.

Both methods will give you optimum listening results.

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #641 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 12:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
Brucemck2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post


.... how can you create height channels with the ada or the trinov pro piece?

Bump
Brucemck2 is offline  
post #642 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 12:50 PM
Member
 
kamenoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Dan & Curt, thank you for the help. I am expecting my unit (TEQ 8) next week and I am trying to get everything ready for the arrival of the new baby...
Appreciated.
kamenoff is offline  
post #643 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 01:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
edorr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

While you can run the TEQ as a DSP and adjusting the volume on your Rhapsody or other processor with good results, it's not the optimum way to do it.

Ideally you would use the ADA bus. We designed it so that when the bus use, the Rhapsody is always sending full audio levels to the TEQ, while also sending 2 way control of Volume to the TEQ. The TEQ then adjusts volume accordingly and confirms this back to the Rhapsody. That is why when you selected TEQ the Rhapsody was LOUD.

If you forgo the ADA bus, you could get the same results manually: set the Rhapsody or other processor to optimum level and use the TEQ to change Volume level. The TEQ DOES have a Volume Knob and, as well can be controlled remotely via VNC on an iPad or other device.

Both methods will give you optimum listening results.

Curt, if you control volume on the ADA, would this not be done in the analog domain, and (at least theoretically) be superior than doing it in the digital domain on the TEQ? If so, bypassing the ADA DSP, and just doing decoding, D/A conversion and volume control, and then sending that signal to the TEQ should give the best resutls.
edorr is offline  
post #644 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 02:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

Curt, if you control volume on the ADA, would this not be done in the analog domain, and (at least theoretically) be superior than doing it in the digital domain on the TEQ? If so, bypassing the ADA DSP, and just doing decoding, D/A conversion and volume control, and then sending that signal to the TEQ should give the best resutls.

Good point Erik, there is an analog volume on the ADA, but it still turns out better to do it digitally on the Trinnov. If you were to use the analog volume control upstream of the Trinnov, you loose both bits and s/n as you turn it down. If you leave it with optimal levels and then turn down the Trinnov, you only loose bits at the rate of 1 bit per 6 dB.

Example: Lets say one lowers the volume from max 24dB. If you do it up stream of the Trinnov/TEQ, you loose 4 bits and give up 24dB of S/N. If you do it in the Trinnov, S/N is not impacted, and end up with 20 bit resolution.

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #645 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 03:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 3,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

BTW, frequent poster Wayne Pflughaupt has a nice tutorial on how to come up perceptually flat target curve. Again, good starting point (irrespective of the room correction system you plan to use), which you can then salt-n-pepper to taste: House Curve: What it is, why you need it, how to do it.

His "house curve" shows a 16db drop from 20hz to 20khz?? I tried a "house curve" with about a 10db drop (with my TacT) and it sounded awful -- DEAD. Bass heavy. I can not imagine what this would sound like.
audioguy is offline  
post #646 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 03:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post

How easy is it to create height channels?...

I know doing the width channels is easy, how can you create height channels with the ada or the trinov pro piece?

Peter and I have been discussing his project off-line. The answer to the question is not obvious, as there are several aspects that are operating in concert when we consider "height channels." Therefore I'm going to provide some insight and some AVS quotes from a Trinnov user who has done all three height possibilities.

At Trinnov we are not after fabricating something that is not in the mix. Rather, we are after spatial accuracy inherent in every mix. We can speculate that the use of height and width in the fixed speaker positions products are there to give a further sense of envelopment, to make the speakers disappear, and render more life like sound. This is not an constraint with Trinnov Remapping, so the approach to height is different: height speakers in Trinnov contribute to building the original acoustic field. Example (thanks Ryan1 and sdurani, R972 Trinnov User Notes thread)....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

...in my case I hooked up the Heights to the Surround Back outputs of the R-972 and ran Trinnov Optimizer.

I have a Center below the TV, Fronts a bit wider and lower than the TV and Heights wider yet and almost at ceiling level.

What Trinnov's 3D setting does is quite remarkable: the dialog appears to come from the TV screen, with other sounds seemingly coming from various points around the whole frontal area.

The precise positions of the individual speakers themselves are not really identifiable -- it's more of an enveloping field.

After some experimenting, I have settled to using the Music setting, rather than the Cinema one -- it just gives an extra sense of airiness, at least in my room, which I like.

I also find using Heights in this way to be significantly more beneficial than using Surround Backs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Keep in mind that folks in this thread are using height speakers differently from how they are used on all other receivers, where information is extracted (Dolby PLIIz) or generated (Audyssey DSX) with the intent of being played back from speakers placed high up. The heights in the case of Trinnov remapping are used to create phantom imaging slightly above your LCR speakers in order to raise the soundstage to appear closer to ear level. That's very different from the height effect from PLIIz or DSX.

This makes sense, but it does go beyond this. A characteristic of Trinnov Remapping is to give a sense of width and height space that extends to the borders of the speakers, while the image remains in a focused. It is one of the reasons I've encouraged the use of height in the R972 Trinnov User Guide. I've not used the other systems, so can't comment on the relative merits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

This is, true, as far as I know. But while the dialog does appear to come from wherever the "center" was during calibration (in my case the middle of the screen), other sounds appear to come from all over, including from higher up.

So, at least in my opinion, the end result is a much fuller and more seamless sound stage, both horizontally and vertically, than I was ever able to achieve with Audyssey DSX or Dolby PLIIz.

Of course, I may well be hearing things. Curt can probably explain how Trinnov Surround distributes sound to the Heights.

Perhaps I'll be able to go into more details later. For now, I hope the experiences of Trinnov users give you some insight to the possibilities.

Cheers,

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #647 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 03:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
Brucemck2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post


At Trinnov we are not after fabricating something that is not in the mix. Rather, we are after spatial accuracy inherent in every mix. We can speculate that the use of height and width in the fixed speaker positions products are there to give a further sense of envelopment, to make the speakers disappear, and render more life like sound. This is not an constraint with Trinnov Remapping, so the approach to height is different: height speakers in Trinnov contribute to building the original acoustic field.

This makes sense, but it does go beyond this. A characteristic of Trinnov Remapping is to give a sense of width and height space that extends to the borders of the speakers, while the image remains in a focused. It is one of the reasons I've encouraged the use of height in the R972 Trinnov User Guide.

So, rather than using DSX or similar, I add extra height and/or side speakers to the mix, and Trinnov remaps them to the original soundfield?

If I used an ADA Reference I could add a couple of heights, a couple of sides, even a couple of "downs" (inverse heights") and Trinnov would remap those to create what should be an enveloping, seamless, "7.x soundfield" created by the 7.x speakers plus the six additional speakers (two additional heights, two additional sides, and two additional "inverse heights")?

As opposed to DSX or similar, which is "synthesizing heights" and/or "synthesizing wides" from the mix?

Is that approximately correct?
Brucemck2 is offline  
post #648 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
edorr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

Good point Erik, there is an analog volume on the ADA, but it still turns out better to do it digitally on the Trinnov. If you were to use the analog volume control upstream of the Trinnov, you loose both bits and s/n as you turn it down. If you leave it with optimal levels and then turn down the Trinnov, you only loose bits at the rate of 1 bit per 6 dB.

Example: Lets say one lowers the volume from max 24dB. If you do it up stream of the Trinnov/TEQ, you loose 4 bits and give up 24dB of S/N. If you do it in the Trinnov, S/N is not impacted, and end up with 20 bit resolution.

I see. Does this mean that if I play a 44/16 2 channel digital source at about -40db on the Trinnov, I loose between 6 - 7 bits, leaving me with just between 9 -10 bits resolution?
edorr is offline  
post #649 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 03:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucemck2 View Post

So, rather than using DSX or similar, I add extra height and/or side speakers to the mix, and Trinnov remaps them to the original soundfield?

If I used an ADA Reference I could add a couple of heights, a couple of sides, even a couple of "downs" (inverse heights") and Trinnov would remap those to create what should be an enveloping, seamless, "7.x soundfield" created by the 7.x speakers plus the six additional speakers (two additional heights, two additional sides, and two additional "inverse heights")?

As opposed to DSX or similar, which is "synthesizing heights" and/or "synthesizing wides" from the mix?

Is that approximately correct?

Bruce- Yes, you are on the right track... and could experiment with the 7.1 Trinnov unit you now have- borrow back channels to try in the front. Look in the R972 Trinnov User Guide for the "W" configuration using 5 fronts. You'll have fun with that one. Cheers-

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #650 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 04:09 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
JapanDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,327
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

His "house curve" shows a 16db drop from 20hz to 20khz?? I tried a "house curve" with about a 10db drop (with my TacT) and it sounded awful -- DEAD. Bass heavy. I can not imagine what this would sound like.

I on the other hand find a 16db drop good. I guess speakers could add to the equation, but I think the fact that I am pretty sensitive to highs is also a big factor.

My build thread

My 8 x RE XXX 18" Subwoofers, IB build
Couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

Do you know what Nemesis means?

JapanDave is offline  
post #651 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 04:41 PM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

I see. Does this mean that if I play a 44/16 2 channel digital source at about -40db on the Trinnov, I loose between 6 - 7 bits, leaving me with just between 9 -10 bits resolution?

Ah, more like 18 bits left. Trinnov output is 24 bits. When attenuating, your lowering all bits, so it doesn't come off the top, it comes off the bottom. Lowering 6 bits leaves 18 bits.
What do you loose: we start with 16. We process EQ at 64 bits. This gets truncated to 24bits EQ resolution for full output. In this example, we now throw away the 6 bottom bits.

If those of you following along here get lost here because we started with 16 bits, keep in mind we change the original program material when we EQ/remap, and our accuracy in doing so is bit depth. More bit depth is better, because the intermediate math can otherwise eat up your resolution. So to keep resolution, we typically see anywhere from 24 to 64 bits, either fixed or floating point. Trinnov uses 64 bits floating pt. We want to retain resolution on output, as the signal has changed with EQ/remapping, which leads us to Erik's interest. On output, theoretically, we would want to keep all 24 bits, even for 16 bit source material. In a no costs barred world, one might add some analog attenuators after the converters. Some do in their products and they can be an add on as well.

What if you play at full level, but program material that has quiet passages at -40dB? We'd want more then the 9-10 bits of resolution in the program material. That's what 24 bit HD content gives us.

For 16 bit, could you hear the difference if you went to a analog attenuator? Probably not, but Erik might hear it because he has a stunning system. Cheers,

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #652 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 04:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
edorr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

Ah, more like 18 bits left. Trinnov output is 24 bits. When attenuating, your lowering all bits, so it doesn't come off the top, it comes off the bottom. Lowering 6 bits leaves 18 bits.
What do you loose: we start with 16. We process EQ at 64 bits. This gets truncated to 24bits EQ resolution for full output. In this example, we now throw away the 6 bottom bits.

If those of you following along here get lost here because we started with 16 bits, keep in mind we change the original program material when we EQ/remap, and our accuracy in doing so is bit depth. More bit depth is better, because the intermediate math can otherwise eat up your resolution. So to keep resolution, we typically see anywhere from 24 to 64 bits, either fixed or floating point. Trinnov uses 64 bits floating pt. We want to retain resolution on output, as the signal has changed with EQ/remapping, which leads us to Erik's interest. On output, theoretically, we would want to keep all 24 bits, even for 16 bit source material. In a no costs barred world, one might add some analog attenuators after the converters. Some do in their products and they can be an add on as well.

What if you play at full level, but program material that has quiet passages at -40dB? We'd want more then the 9-10 bits of resolution in the program material. That's what 24 bit HD content gives us.

For 16 bit, could you hear the difference if you went to a analog attenuator? Probably not, but Erik might hear it because he has a stunning system. Cheers,

So just to make absolutely sure I understand, when I feed the Trinnov 44/16 from my USB converter, and the Trinnov is in slave mode using the converter as its master clock, the Trinnov still stretched up the word lenght to 24 bit for internal processing?

Irrespectively, I am now sufficiently intrigued to put my very transparent MCH analog preamp (Six Shooter) behind the digital chain, play the Trinnov at 0Db attenuation and see how it compares with digital domain volume control.

I currently use my preamp before the Trinnov for MCH sources only, attenuating in the analog domain before A/D conversion. This is analogous to applying analog domain volume control in the ADA before the TEQ, so if I understand you correctly, feeding the Trinnov full volume analog singal, playing the Trinnov at 0Db and applying analog domain volume control after the final D/A conversion should be better as well.
edorr is offline  
post #653 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 05:09 PM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

So just to make absolutely sure I understand, when I feed the Trinnov 44/16 from my USB converter, and the Trinnov is in slave mode using the converter as its master clock, the Trinnov still stretched up the word length to 24 bit for internal processing?

You'll have 64 bit floating point processing (program material becomes altered by compensation), with 24 bit output.

Quote:


I currently use my preamp before the Trinnov for MCH sources only, attenuating in the analog domain before A/D conversion. This is analogous to applying analog domain volume control in the ADA before the TEQ, so if I understand you correctly, feeding the Trinnov full volume analog signal, playing the Trinnov at 0Db and applying analog domain volume control after the final D/A conversion should be better as well.

Affirmative.

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #654 of 1419 Old 04-11-2012, 11:50 PM
Advanced Member
 
StevenLansing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 629
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

His "house curve" shows a 16db drop from 20hz to 20khz?? I tried a "house curve" with about a 10db drop (with my TacT) and it sounded awful -- DEAD. Bass heavy. I can not imagine what this would sound like.

It depends on how far your seating distance is from the speakers and what kind of power response they have.Typically, the closer you sit to the speakers the less of a "curve/tilt" that you may need.

I sit pretty much nearfield to my monitors and I use a very shallow "tilt" and it sounds much more natural to me than "flat". The 10dB "tilt" sounds dull and way bass heavy to me.
StevenLansing is offline  
post #655 of 1419 Old 04-12-2012, 12:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 561 Post(s)
Liked: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

I can not imagine what this would sound like.

Perceptually flat (at least to the listener who dialed in the house curve).

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #656 of 1419 Old 04-12-2012, 06:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
edorr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

You'll have 64 bit floating point processing (program material becomes altered by compensation), with 24 bit output.

OK. Before I start messing with cabling and configuration one final question. If I start out with 44/16 material, and this gets stretched up to 44/24 by the Trinnov for processing, and then cut back to something in the 44/16 - 44/20 range for volume control, am I right concluding I lose absolutely no information? After all, the Trinnov cannot create more information than the original 44/16 out of thin air, so as long as I have at least 44/16 I lose no resolution? This is important, because if that is the case, outputting full volume 44/24, and adding an analog volume control at the end of the chain may not buy me anything. In fact, running through an extra cable and circuit will probably just induce signal degration.
edorr is offline  
post #657 of 1419 Old 04-12-2012, 01:31 PM
Senior Member
 
Curt_Trinnov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

After all, the Trinnov cannot create more information than the original 44/16 out of thin air, so as long as I have at least 44/16 I lose no resolution?

After compensation, you have more then the original 44/16, because the original has been altered. As you have a Trinnov, you could actually look to see how much. As an example, you have level changes due to EQ and speaker differences that eat up dynamic range. If these amounted to 4 bits, well, then you may need the 16+4=20 bits to keep it whole. If you want more detail regarding your specific situation, then we'll need to chat.

Cheers,

___________
Curt Hoyt
3D Audio Consultant

Trinnov Audio
USA

Curt_Trinnov is offline  
post #658 of 1419 Old 04-12-2012, 02:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
edorr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

After compensation, you have more then the original 44/16, because the original has been altered. As you have a Trinnov, you could actually look to see how much. As an example, you have level changes due to EQ and speaker differences that eat up dynamic range. If these amounted to 4 bits, well, then you may need the 16+4=20 bits to keep it whole. If you want more detail regarding your specific situation, then we'll need to chat.

Cheers,

I think I understand. If I need to jack up my mains by say 6db to get the same level as my subs, and there is a max of +12db boost in eq, I need 1+2 = 3 bits, so if I drop below 16+3 = 19 bits I lose information. If I chop of say 6 bits for 36db attenuation, I am at 24 - 6= 18, and lose resolution. This is actually a compelling reason to set volume levels of the subs so that very little of no bits are consumed by equalization of subs and mains. Since I do in fact attenuate by over 42 bits late a night I may be losing resolution, and it may be worthwhile trying out the MCH analog preamp for attenutation instead.
edorr is offline  
post #659 of 1419 Old 04-12-2012, 03:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,293
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

I think I understand. If I need to jack up my mains by say 6db to get the same level as my subs, and there is a max of +12db boost in eq, I need 1+2 = 3 bits,

It's just 16+2=18 bits to cover a 12 dB boost.

Quote:


so if I drop below 16+3 = 19 bits I lose information. If I chop off say 6 bits for 36db attenuation, I am at 24 - 6= 18, and lose resolution. This is actually a compelling reason to set volume levels of the subs so that very little of no bits are consumed by equalization of subs and mains.

The question of losing resolution also depends on the noise floor in the source and whether the lower level bits are audible in the playback system. It might not be as bad as you think.

Quote:


Since I do in fact attenuate by over 42 bits late a night I may be losing resolution, and it may be worthwhile trying out the MCH analog preamp for attenuation instead.

Maybe you mean 42 dB?? If 42 bits you are losing a lot more then resolution. The source signal is losing resolution when the volume is reduced (this applies to analog or digital volume controls), but it does not matter since the noise floor (or the quantization floor) of the playback system is not increasing.

If you reduced the MV by 40 dB then added 40 dB in the power amp, the signal would be full volume and have much worse noise/distortion. No one does that, though.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #660 of 1419 Old 04-13-2012, 10:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bulldogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Clinton,MS
Posts: 6,648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post


His "house curve" shows a 16db drop from 20hz to 20khz?? I tried a "house curve" with about a 10db drop (with my TacT) and it sounded awful -- DEAD. Bass heavy. I can not imagine what this would sound like.

That's what most want, rolled off highs and jacked up bass. I prefer closer to flat response. Not sure I would like that either.

Never become so involved with something that it blinds you.
Bulldogger is offline  
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off