Datasat RS20i BETA test and comparison with ADA Rhapsody/Trinnov TEQ-12!!!! - Page 23

Originally Posted by stephenbr

Dan - the real deal will be when I hook the RS20i up but as indicated this may be a while yet. I have yet to get the Dirac Live software, mic, preamp etc and that may need to wait a little as I also purchased a second subwoofer at the same time as the RS20i so I am a little short of spare cash.

I have swapped over the fuses/power to support our 240v mains power and have powered the unit up. I received no manual with the unit and have asked Datasat to send me one but these are some initial things I have noted:

- fan appears to stay on even after unit is switched into standby (I left it in standby for around 10 minutes and the fan did not turn off). The fan is not obtusive to me (I used to have a G70 sitting above me so I am perhaps already a little deaf to these things);
- IIRC from the AP20 manual the inputs etc have be renamed from AP20 to be consumer orientated;
- fader/volume now displays in db level;
- set up appears (without manual to refer to) to be very different to what I am used to (eg Lexicon MC12 and Denon 5800); and
- it's a good looking unit (side panels are somewhat different to pre-production units as venting holes are in a grid pattern rather than what appeared to be drilled holes in the early versions).

No new codecs are provided over the AP20 (not even Neo X from what I can tell at this stage). Carl has indicated Datasat is still in talks with Dolby about their advanced codecs and a firmware update may be available by Fall/Autumn in the US.

Originally Posted by stephenbr

Thx JapanDave. I had thought I had read that Datasat's modifications to the RS20i from the AP20 had included the fan shutting off when the unit was in standby. Will not really matter to me because I fully shutdown most of my equipment after each session.

Originally Posted by Carl_Huff

Gentlemen,

Please be cautious when cutting off the power to your AP20/ RS20i prematurely. There are 6 power hungry DSPs plus CPU and memory in that box. And they generate heat (lots of heat!) and need to be cooled even in standby mode. The AP20/ RS20i isn't really shutoff in standby mode. The CPU and DSPs are still being powered albeit at a lesser level. The fan still needs to run. Shutting off the power abruptly before everything cools could result in bad things happening to your processor. My habit and recommendation is to leave the unit powered on. Avoid shutting off the power all together and put it in standby mode if you feel the need to reduce power consumption. If your reasons for shutting off the power all together is that you think you are saving wear and tear on the hardware your efforts are probably misguided. The AP20/ RS20i was designed to survive the rigors of 24/7 service. The thermal stress of repeatedly starting and stopping the unit is probably more harmful than leaving it running in standby mode 24/7.
_____________
Best Regards,
Carl Huff

Originally Posted by Carl_Huff

"... The reason I do this is the same as periodically shutting down a PC,to reboot it just in case something is running that don't needs to be. Granted I know nothing of the internals of the AP20. So am I wasting my time doing this?"

What you are doing I expect causes no harm but it doesn't really serve a purpose either. The operating system internal to the AP20/ RS20i is a tight small model Linux. It has been tested (abused??) extensively. There is no reason to think that (unlike a typical Windows computer) that it needs to be regularly rebooted. Many of the AP20s used in commercial Cinemas haven't been shut off since they were installed two plus years ago. To the best of my knowledge there never has been a problem reported that required a reboot.
____________
Best Regards,
Carl Huff

Originally Posted by Pete

My take on Dirac vs. Trinnov vs. Audyssey is that they are all variations on a theme...that one is no less righteous than the other...that each can get you "in the ball park", and from there it's merely a matter of seasoning to taste.

Originally Posted by edorr

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.

Originally Posted by Pete

I'm anxious to hear your opinions as the RS20i is on my radar as possible future upgrade. I'm particularly interested in knowing how the Dirac calibration works out when you get to it. My take on Dirac vs. Trinnov vs. Audyssey is that they are all variations on a theme...that one is no less righteous than the other...that each can get you "in the ball park", and from there it's merely a matter of seasoning to taste.

Originally Posted by StevenLansing

That would be my "current" take on these RC systems as well.There definitely needs to be more comparisons and measurements between all three before I can be convinced otherwise.

Originally Posted by TempTag

From TempTag on the "R972 Trinnov User Notes" Thread:

Great thread, I would like to add a bit about my experience with Trinnov on the R-972. I originally purchased the R-972 with the intent to use it in our family room. However, to test the unit I installed it in a small sitting room that already had a 5.1 system. Since there was no real way to add more side/rear speakers to make a standard 7.1 system (due to room size) I added 2 speakers in the front up high.

My experience:
-I was blown away by the "wall of sound" effect with 3D remapping - the dialog and front effects seemed to float and I could not locate the speakers.
-Speech was understandable even at very low volumes which impressed my as I often have issues understanding speech with many surround systems at low volumes. (I am used to doing a lot of fiddling with the center channel and was super impressed at this "auto set up" experience.
-I have never liked the results for most auto setup systems but in my room the Trinnov seemed to nail setup.
-Overall, i find the 3d setting yields a very smooth and pleasing sound.

- Unfortunately, the R-972 has way too many idiosyncrasies (and that is being charitable) to work in our family room so I have (happily) left it in our sitting room. The sitting room is now my favorite room to watch movies.
- I can only imagine how well the "full" Trinnov experience works once the ability to tweak settings is added.

I wrote this post to thank Trinnov for a great product - and - express my hopes that in the near future Trinnov can find another AV Receiver partner who is able to release a more stable product for those of us who are unable to afford the "full" Trinnov experience.
Our family room is waiting...
:-)

Originally Posted by Pete

Curt,
Your passion for Trinnov's particular recipe is understandable. I'm sure the engineers at Dirac and Audyssey are equally enthusiastic about their respective designs and algorithms. All three represent great leaps forward from the days of simple frequency-based correction. And just as the makers of high-end cables each have their fanatic faithful, I'm sure there will be devotees for each of the above RC systems. By virtue of their being more than one talented cook, a category of cooking is defined. So it now is with time-based correction.

Originally Posted by Raul GS

Pete,

1. You are missing his point. Trinnov is more than a RC device. It also has a 3d mapping system that can deal with speaker placement problems and affects how sound can be experienced.

2. To suggest that the differences between these units is tantamount to differences in cables suggests you have either not heard these units or you attribute qualities to cables that have never been validated in blind tests.

BTW, before you jump the gun, I'm not a Trinnov devotee (but I'm contemplating buying the Sherwood 972 because it is so cheap and it would be nice to play with). However, I do own a piece that has Dirac Live (which I have yet to play with, but should be doing so in July), and I have had less than exemplary experiences with Audyssey. Regarding the latter, I suggest you look up Amir and Audyssey, he has intimate knowledge of the product, has posted many concerns, and can comment further if you need more info.

Originally Posted by chrapladm

The Sherwood is an option that I might be able to wing and budget friendly. Thanks again.

Originally Posted by StevenLansing

My comments on the subject were directed strictly at the RC portion and the principles of DSP and pyschoacoustics that they must adhere to in order to create the filters for the correction and not at the devices' feature sets.All of these devices bring unique features to the table outside just the RC portion of the equation.

Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov

Remapping is "spatial room correction." Fourier Bessel transforms follow the laws of pyschoacustics- It's a 3d extension of the Fourier Transform all modern room corrections use today, and it's not available any other way.

It's not about creating or fabricating something new, but accurately recreating the spatial content inherent in the playback media over irregular speaker placements. It's why it's such a game changer. It's real science and it took years of development. Scientific context:

http://www.trinnov.com/technologies/...nd/?lang=en_us

I emphasize this so that others are not misled by unknowing comments to the contrary.

Cheers,

Originally Posted by noah katz

Don't wait too long; I believe they're no longer being produced.

Originally Posted by JonasHansen

I am very curious to why Trinnov/Dirac has decided only to include one microphone. I use a correction method which is very similar to what JBL Synthesis does. 8 microphones spread out over the listening room and taking individual measurements, averaging them and calculating the correction filters (PEQs). I always test the filters by re-measuring and in some cases the resulting curve is not like the simulated curve. I then apply a second round of a small amount of filters to correct, and it then looks perfect. (Sometimes more than two re-measurements).

By only using one microphone, this is impossible to do, as it would require that you use the exact same positions every time (And it would take a REALLY long time to do the calibration process).

Is the single-mic solution to keep the cost down?