Originally Posted by gsr
Have you looked at the pictures of the rear panel of the Trinnov? There's clearly a regular motherboard in there, but everything else is clearly custom boards. So it's not just a standard PC with some minor refinements and a bunch of software added.
Surely, that's how I would also build such a thing. It is also my understanding how to do this. However, in contrary to an AVR which you design from scratch - which the AVP was - here you already have a solid base - Linux and PC - you build your pre/pro onto.
This does not justify the price they are asking for in my understanding.
Originally Posted by gsr
As a software developer, I'd beg to differ with what you're saying here. The type of software needed for a surround sound processor most definitely isn't trivial to write and I doubt they're just grabbing a bunch of public domain code and throwing it in there. Writing code for FPGA's is probably somewhat more difficult in some respects, but the algorithms used are going to be pretty similar either way.
I also agree to your point of view. Writing code for audio and especially surround applications is not this easy and you have to take into account the completely different environment you are working in, compared to writing e.g. a database application. However, in case of Trinnov, they already had this knowledge and also the experience from their former products. Compared to a product like the AVP, I find the prices for PC based products, where they can at least re-use parts of the already developed software, too expensive.
Especially because they can re-use the algorithms already developed and I strongly agree, to what you wrote, that they are nearly the same, if not at all.
This means in my understanding, that a lot of work can be transferred to new models and this does not justify these high prices. Or somebody, please explain to me, why the R20 or the Altitude cost so much money. Thank you.
I mean the AVP is EoL because they could only make it live longer by changing hardware, which was already done. This means to me, that the AVP is using dedicated hardware, which cannot be programmed, like e.g. a universal D/A board which can be enlarged, by putting in another D/A card to allow for more channels in a PC based environment.
This also means, that we, as the customers, have to buy every three to six years new hardware, depending on how fast we are following the new marketing promises from the AV industry. A completely PC based pre/pro would change this. And my feeling is, that we are seeing the beginning of this already. Can't you buy the Auro 3D upgrade in software for 150 US$?
I mean I agree to your point of view in principle and this is a very early stage of this development, however, I find these PC boxes currently way too expensive. But this will only change when a big player is coming and doing the same. And if this will ever happen, is questionable imo, because it will change the whole business plan.
But I would like to have a PC based pre/pro with add-on cards and software upgrades I would have to pay for. This would be OK for me and would also produce a constant income for the manufacturer.
Just my two cents...