or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › R972 Trinnov User Notes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

R972 Trinnov User Notes - Page 20

post #571 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

I don't know if I would call it a "problem," necessarily.

I would guess that the higher filter resolution produces audible benefits, while the real-world audible benefits of sampling rates higher than 48k would be at best debatable.

It is debatable for sure and the systems calculating at 96K or higher will tell you it's better to do so if you have the choice.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #572 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenLansing View Post

It is debatable for sure and the systems calculating at 96K or higher will tell you it's better to do so if you have the choice.

Note that many AVRs actually downconvert 96kHz streams to 48kHz because of limited DSP MIPs & resources...
AVRs whose SRP is <$999 are built to extremely tight budgets and the brand takes this approach to save $, and in many instances the listener is not aware of this...


Just my $0.02... 👍😉
post #573 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

Note that many AVRs actually downconvert 96kHz streams to 48kHz because of limited DSP MIPs & resources...
AVRs whose SRP is <$999 are built to extremely tight budgets and the brand takes this approach to save $, and in many instances the listener is not aware of this...


Just my $0.02... 👍😉

Very true.

I was mostly referring to DRC processors/boxes that have the choice of running internal calculations at 48 or 96hhz that can calculate filters with less of a compromise in the number of filter taps.
post #574 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post
A couple of things to keep in mind..

1. The 972 uses (2) TI DA710 DSPs which are now 5 years old..
2. Think about the DSP power much like the Intel or AMD processors in PCs, about every 2 years the power of the processors double while its cost decreases. Also clock frequency and on-board memory are crucial as well as these are increased...
3. The most powerful audio DSP processor available today is the Cirrus Logic CS49800 available in a tri or quad core (fixed point, 32 bit). As now used in some of the higher end Integra/Onkyo AVRs. While other brands are using AD sharcs or TI..
4. In order to handle the higher bits rates > 48kHz significantly more MIPs are required.

Bottom line..
The DSPs used in todays HDMI 1.4 AVRs are powerful in MIPs compared to previous audio DSPs however its most crucial challenge is to provide enough processing power to handle DTS Master Audio and additional post-processing modes (NEO X, PL2Z) in 7.1 and beyond.. 😳
But since AVRs are being strongly driven by price, there is a tendency to implement an audio DSP with just enough MIPs.
Going forward...
Due to the increasing demand of more digital sources and DSP processing for the main system and secondary zones this will require more powerful DSPs..

Just my $0.02... 👍😉

So is it worth buying the R-972 vs the Integra DHC-80.3? 

post #575 of 633
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenLansing View Post


Very true.

I was mostly referring to DRC processors/boxes that have the choice of running internal calculations at 48 or 96hhz that can calculate filters with less of a compromise in the number of filter taps.

Steve- Exactly: going from 48 > 96k quadruples the CPU load. Running at 48k preserves enough CPU to not compromise the filter taps.  The R972 could have been implemented at 96k with reduced filter resolution; we deemed this a  poor tradeoff.

 

The R972 runs at 32bit floating point, the Trinnovs run at 64bit floating point- another varible in the mix that consumes CPU.

 

Cheers,

post #576 of 633
I understand.

I also read this which I think explains it depth. http://www.four-audio.com/en/technical-articles/fir-filters-calculation-power-length-of-impulse-responses-and-frequency-resolution.html


I was also under the impression that one of the benefits in running internal calculations at 96Khz was that it didn't have adverse affects on the higher frequencies that 48khz could have.
post #577 of 633

I heard buying this receiver is like playing the lottery either the unit your receive works great or it doesn't

post #578 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenLansing View Post

I understand.

I also read this which I think explains it depth. http://www.four-audio.com/en/technical-articles/fir-filters-calculation-power-length-of-impulse-responses-and-frequency-resolution.html


I was also under the impression that one of the benefits in running internal calculations at 96Khz was that it didn't have adverse affects on the higher frequencies that 48khz could have.

Interesting.

But it does seem a bit akin to extrapolating that because time speeds up at a higher altitude (a fact), houses without basements are inferior to houses with bedrooms below ground.

I may be wrong and the differences might be audible, but nothing I have seen so far would support such a claim.
post #579 of 633
I finally bought an R-972, and I have to say that the 2D Trinnov correction is nothing short of amazing.

That said, if you have your L/R speakers set up to have your tweeters approximately level with your ears, but your center speaker is above or below your TV (and thus presumably a few feet above or below your ears), the 3D remapping seems to pretty much take your center speaker out of the equation, at least for dialogue, which is why we have a center speaker in the first place. As others have noted, to move the center speaker image to where it is supposed to be, Trinnov essentially creates a phantom center using the L/R speakers.

I suppose if I had my center toed down (my center is above my TV), this might not happen so starkly, but my center speaker is an in-wall speaker that doesn't allow up/down tilt adjustment. So, for me, 3D remapping isn't worth it, due to the phantom center that I end up with.

Still, the 2D remapping is awesome. My setup is imperfect. Everything would be close to correct if my couch was in the middle of the room, but instead it's close to the rear wall. So my surrounds are well forward of the seating, and my L/R speakers are too narrowly spaces from the center. (Center and rears are positioned much better.) The imaging with 2D remapping is stunning.

In an attempt to address the phantom center that I end up with when I try 3D remapping, I tried calibrating again, this time with the calibration mic placed several feet higher, so that it was closer in height to my center than my L/R speakers. I figured this would convince Trinnov to use the center speaker much more for the center channel, but it had little or no effect - dialogue still came predominantly from the L/R speakers. Very odd. I might try again, with the mic placed even higher this time, but the higher I put the mic, the more below the sweet spot I will be when I'm actually sitting on my couch. Also, raising the calibration mic presumably will induce Trinnov to start using the surrounds and the center in combination to raise the L and R speakers, effectively creating a different problem.

But I'm quite happy with the 2D remapping, so far.
post #580 of 633
Thread Starter 

Great report.  Your config is a good application for 2D; I would suggest optimizing for that.  Get the reported horizontal axis for the center to 1 degree or less.  This will ensure a robust center   3D would be appropriate in your case if you added a center speaker below the screen.  The tow in issue means highs will roll off as you get off axis, and Trinnov will attempt to correct for that (up to 6dB, which may not be enough).  This may also be affecting the perceived image. 

 

Cheers,

post #581 of 633
Thanks. Someday, I might try adding a low center speaker wired to (say) what is nominally rear-left, and then adding a monoblock amp to the rear-right pre-out to power the rear-left speaker. So this would be a standard 6.1 setup, with an added center speaker. But that someday could well end up being never.

On a different ntoe, rereading old posts, I was reminded that a subwoofer with no low pass (or low pass set very high) can result in a high crossover, which explains something about my results.

In my position 1 setup (the one I discussed already), I have high crossovers (around 120), but in my position 2 setup, which is toward the center of the room with a higher calibration mic placement (this setup is for listening to music, where we are more likely to be spread out through the room, rather than all on the couch), I get very high crossovers (around 150 hz).

So when I next have a chance, I'll will try recalibrating with the low pass filter on my sub set to roll off high frequencies more quickly. ("next have a chance" == next time I'm home alone)
post #582 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawtalker View Post

In an attempt to address the phantom center that I end up with when I try 3D remapping, I tried calibrating again, this time with the calibration mic placed several feet higher, so that it was closer in height to my center than my L/R speakers.

Rather than raising the mike, or perhaps in combination with it, you could also try tilting the mike array up toward the center, which should produce the same result of Trinnov not thinking the center is too high.
post #583 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Rather than raising the mike, or perhaps in combination with it, you could also try tilting the mike array up toward the center, which should produce the same result of Trinnov not thinking the center is too high.

Good point, and another thing to add to the "to try" list.

Your idea actually might yield better results than raising the mic. If I raise the mic to the same level as my center, Trinnov will calibrate based the on-axis response of my center speaker. That's actually not ideal, because from my actual sitting position, I do not get on-axis sound from my center.

If I instead keep the mic at approximately ear height, but tilt it up slightly so that it points directly at the center speaker, Trinnov will calibrate based on the center speaker being in-plane with the mic, but based on the off-axis response from that speaker - the very off-axis response that I actually hear when seated.

The potential problem is that the 3D corrected image will be tilted - Trinnov will try to raise the L/R speakers, will assume my side surrounds are lower than they actually are, and will think my rear speakers are higher than they are. Still, for movies and TV, this might be the best 3D-corrected compromise, given the importance of dialogue.
post #584 of 633
Right.

Another option is an additional center hooked to the same amp channel as the first, as equidistant as possible to the first to minimize phase issues.
post #585 of 633
Thread Starter 

Dual, different centers on one output.  

 

Hard to get the tambour right with two centers on the same channel when one is in wall and the other is not.  It's a stretch when they are identical speakers- but it can work in some specific cases, as both will be corrected to their combined response.  I have done this trick successfully when there weren't enough channels- but it was on surround pairs, where the ear is less sensitive to the image stability. It was a dubbing stage in LA, no less.  

 

I give hi probability of having the image wander between the two speakers.   Better to sacrifice a back channel.  Easy to try both ways, and cheers to Noah for stretching the boundaries.  972's have successfully been used for 9.1.  Think about that... when you couldn't before, maybe now you can.  And remember- there is no magic to 3D- it's application based- if your system sounds llike it's more suited to 2D, then it probably is. Trust your ears.  Cheers-

post #586 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Right.

Another option is an additional center hooked to the same amp channel as the first, as equidistant as possible to the first to minimize phase issues.

Another interesting idea, but with the size of modern TVs, there is enough separation that I fear, as Curt suggested, that the effective center channel would wander as the listener. If I were to try this, though, I would use another identical in-wall center. And, as I think about it, the issue largely would come from movement in the vertical direction, so perhaps the separation wouldn't cause that much of a problem.

But the bigger problem, at least for now, is that toys tend to get stacked up against the wall in the space below my TV. So a center down there would often be occluded. (Or, alternatively, would require moving things before watching TV.)

I think any possibility of adding another center speaker is off in the distance, but if I were to do it, adding the second center to the same input would allow use of the speakers without remapping. Using a rear channel for the second center would offer better results, but would require use of remapping (with remapping turned off, rear channel sounds would come out from the bottom center). Not sure I care about the ability to use the speakers without remapping - the remapping results are so good! - but maybe I'll feel differently once I've used the system longer.
post #587 of 633

Hello,

 

I am new to this forum. I have a question about how well R-972 w/Trinnov might handle my preferred speaker setup. 

 

It is basically 4.0 with a subwoofer. Front left and right speaker terminals run to the subwoofer and subwoofer speaker terminals to the front left and right speakers. 

 

Will this setup in the front "confuse" Trinnov? I am thinking that low frequencies will be seen as coming from a totally separate location than the FL and FR speakers and that might be outside the capability of this Trinnov implementation.

 

Has anyone used this speaker configuration with success?

post #588 of 633
Thread Starter 
I have. Can work very well. You've a couple of details to solve that are system specific to make it happen with optimum fidelity. Start with 972 User Notes. You'll perhaps need a bit of professional guidance to get it right. It's possible you can use a 972 amp channel to power the sub seperately. Cheers
Edited by Curt_Trinnov - 10/12/13 at 1:27pm
post #589 of 633
Hello,

I recently purchased a 972 and I am enjoying it very much. I have a Trinnov setup question:

When positioning the microphone, do I point the red dot:
(a) straight ahead to the front wall, or
(b) towards the front wall but angled towards the center (speaker)

This is most relevant where the seating position is not itself centered.

Thank you.
post #590 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by loganross View Post

Hello,

I recently purchased a 972 and I am enjoying it very much. I have a Trinnov setup question:

When positioning the microphone, do I point the red dot:
(a) straight ahead to the front wall, or
(b) towards the front wall but angled towards the center (speaker)

This is most relevant where the seating position is not itself centered.

Thank you.

IIRC, you point the red dot at where you want the sound to come. So, center of TV.

Did you read the guide that Curt has put together? It's full of really good info.
post #591 of 633
Thank you for your response. I can clearly understand the impact of pointing the mix now. Thank you again!
post #592 of 633
HI folks,
I'm going to help bring this thread out of dormancy for a bit with a question. Yes, I'm FINALLY getting around to getting out the R-972 and doing some calibration with my setup, which I still need to document for the thread I'm going to set up for what someone on the REW thread called the "automatic REQ death match".

Here's my question for Curt or somebody with experience with complex sub/speaker setups:
I have DefTech Mythos ST mains and a CS-8080 HD center channel, all powered and having an optional LFE input. I also have two HSU ULS-15 subs that are co-located. My system is 5.2, with no surround backs or heights/wides at the moment, so there's at least one spare channel that would be available on the R-972.

Currently, I have the three speakers mentioned above on speaker wire, and use my Denon's Audyssey XT32 to manage the HSUs, with the Sub EQ feature. The powered and non-powered sections of my three speakers are individually level matched at 75 db, and run Small with an 80 Hz crossover. With Audyssey XT32, the two subs, which are equidistant from one another, are on two independent sub inputs on my Denon. Audyssey EQs the subs as one, but using the separate inputs for independently setting distance and trim levels first. In practical terms, the subs get almost identical distance settings and levels from Audyssey.

Turning to the Trinnov world, it struck me that I might get better bass frequency response and better bass decay on my REW waterfalls and spectrograms by connecting my mains via LFE, and using a Y-splitter to hook them together onto a single input (they're also symmetrically located). I would think that I would then want to take them and either EQ them as a separate channel compared to the real subs, so that I'd get separate distance and trims, or use another Y-splitter to hook my subs together, and a third Y-splitter to have all the LFEs on a single input, which would form the sub channel on the R-972. But if I do so, what happens to the distance settings for the sub on the Sherwood? Would I need a separate device to make sure that this setting is right? And with the "mono" approach, note that my real subs can go below 20 Hz comfortably, while the "woofer" subs from the speakers have more like a 35 Hz F3 point. Would the mono approach weaken my lower bass by EQing to the acoustic center?

Overall, does the giant "mono bass" input seem like a reasonable strategy, or will the single bass approach screw up the calibration process and finding of F6 points? Alternatively, is there any way to be creative and have what amounts to two sub channels EQd, and somehow use remapping to convert them into a single signal at the end of the day? That assumes that the sub output is coming from the R-972's pre-out, of course. And that I could fake out a channel on the R-972 to be a "front sub" channel.

Hope that make sense...
Edited by sdrucker - 11/14/13 at 4:57pm
post #593 of 633
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

Turning to the Trinnov world, it struck me that I might get better bass frequency response and better bass decay on my REW waterfalls and spectrograms by connecting my mains via LFE, and using a Y-splitter to hook them together onto a single input (they're also symmetrically located). I would think that I would then want to take them and either EQ them as a separate channel compared to the real subs, so that I'd get separate distance and trims, or use another Y-splitter to hook my subs together, and a third Y-splitter to have all the LFEs on a single input, which would form the sub channel on the R-972. But if I do so, what happens to the distance settings for the sub on the Sherwood? Would I need a separate device to make sure that this setting is right? And with the "mono" approach, note that my real subs can go below 20 Hz comfortably, while the "woofer" subs from the speakers have more like a 35 Hz F3 point. Would the mono approach weaken my lower bass by EQing to the acoustic center?

Overall, does the giant "mono bass" input seem like a reasonable strategy, or will the single bass approach screw up the calibration process and finding of F6 points? Alternatively, is there any way to be creative and have what amounts to two sub channels EQd, and somehow use remapping to convert them into a single signal at the end of the day for an external amp?

Hope that make sense...

 From your post, you have potentially 4 subs. 2 LFE ins on the DefTech Mythos ST mains, and 2 HSU subs.  You can use the single SUB out of the R972 to drive all 4.  Splitters are OK. (Watch out for added  hum caused by possible ground loops between the power cords and the Y audio signal.)  The key is you only have the one SUB out, so levels, distances have to be factored in before you hook up.  It's possible you may improve performances by using all 4 to warrant the exercise.  Depends on several factors- speakers, room, placement, measurement data...  

 

I suggest:  First, define the benefit, which you don't describe.  Is the goal individual listening or group listening area, etc?  Second, learn how the two speaker types perform/differ, so they may be configured in a complementary way.  (great, your already considering this)  Third, learn about the room by collecting data (you identify measuring tools).  Lastly come up with alternative game plans to try.  This will be where you add up the data- on the speakers and room, then decide your approach.   For this process, there is a lot of information available on configurations and measuring to improve room mode interaction.  Go this route (build on what you know/understand), and possibly get some professional guidance.  However far you go in the process, Trinnov will improve it further.   

 

By and by, you are on the right track and paying attention to the right details.

 

Cheers,


Edited by Curt_Trinnov - 11/14/13 at 5:29pm
post #594 of 633
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

 Alternatively, is there any way to be creative and have what amounts to two sub channels EQd, and somehow use remapping to convert them into a single signal at the end of the day? That assumes that the sub output is coming from the R-972's pre-out, of course. And that I could fake out a channel on the R-972 to be a "front sub" channel.
 

 

Full channels and sub channels are not interchangeable.  Cannot create an extra sub channel by using a full channel output.  Trinnov would try to localize it, but won't if it's a band limited sub. 

post #595 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

 From your post, you have potentially 4 subs. 2 LFE ins on the DefTech Mythos ST mains, and 2 HSU subs.  You can use the single SUB out of the R972 to drive all 4.  Splitters are OK. (Watch out for added  hum caused by possible ground loops between the power cords and the Y audio signal.)  The key is you only have the one SUB out, so levels, distances have to be factored in before you hook up.  It's possible you may improve performances by using all 4 to warrant the exercise.  Depends on several factors- speakers, room, placement, measurement data...  

I suggest:  First, define the benefit, which you don't describe.  Is the goal individual listening or group listening area, etc?  Second, learn how the two speaker types perform/differ, so they may be configured in a complementary way.  (great, your already considering this)  Third, learn about the room by collecting data (you identify measuring tools).  Lastly come up with alternative game plans to try.  This will be where you add up the data- on the speakers and room, then decide your approach.   For this process, there is a lot of information available on configurations and measuring to improve room mode interaction.  Go this route (build on what you know/understand), and possibly get some professional guidance.  However far you go in the process, Trinnov will improve it further.   

By and by, you are on the right track and paying attention to the right details.

Cheers,

Thanks!

I knew I forgot something.....the goal would be individual listening. While our listening would be done from our sofa (MLP), I'd be doing serious listening about 70% of the time on my own from the center of the MLP, so I'd optimize for individual listening as I'm the only one that's going to care all that much. Although once my wife hears Trinnov that may change...tongue.gif: (the R-972 cooperating with the Harmony doing the RC duties).

My own listening is about 60/40 music over movies, with a heavily multichannel music leaning toward concert BluRays and DVDs. However, I plan to do separate calibrations for multichannel vs. two-channel, and ultimately use the virtual inputs on the Sherwood for HT Cinema, HT Music, TV, and two-channel. Right now, my sole input into the R-972 will be an Oppo 103, which is a universal player for BluRay, DVD, SACD etc.. I'm using it as my "hub" for evaluating Trinnov, and the HDMI input on the Oppo will handle video from my TiVO via HDMI as well as decoding audio. Hence there will only really be one physical source for the R-972 to worry about. And the Oppo's doing decoding to LPCM, so about the only thing I'm using the Sherwood for music processingwise is converting two-channel music to Dolby PLII or DTS Neo:X, possibly. Basically I'm thinking of it as a 40 lb. processor between the Oppo and the Denon 4311 I'm using as an amp via Ext. In.

As to getting all the sub sources to play together, that's going to mean level-matching or possibly even gain matching them if I go for the mono bass/single input route. And I'll have to pick up an external device for setting distance, since they're in two different locations (front and back). Anybody on the list got thoughts about that one?

The easy thing to do is keep the powered woofer and non-powered section operate as a single speaker, run them Small, and let the Sherwood do its job with my two equidistant real subs operating as one. But it struck me that I could get creative....so basically I've got at least two alternative approaches, maybe three, to try.

FWIW, Curt, I have REW/HDMI, and am part of the group that's obsessively looking at how to use it for accessing our rooms...tongue.gif When I actually get into running Trinnov calibrations in the next few weeks, I'm going to get some FR, waterfall, spectrogram, and impulse response charts together. It will be very interesting to see what Trinnov can do for me there. I'll have to work out a protocol for just how to access remapping (probably 2D), if at all.

As to the two "sub channels", I figured it probably wouldn't be feasible, but it was worth throwing out to see.

I may look into the professional guidance aspect... smile.gif, or try some creative things down the road with non-standard speakers (maybe a "center height"?) as you outlined in your notes too.
post #596 of 633
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

.....As to getting all the sub sources to play together, that's going to mean level-matching or possibly even gain matching them if I go for the mono bass/single input route. And I'll have to pick up an external device for setting distance, since they're in two different locations (front and back). Anybody on the list got thoughts about that one?
 

You are on it... covering the details well.  Important to note one would not necessarily want the sub distances and/or levels equal.  Depends what room data you measure.  Consider this: once you measure the room for possible optimal sub placement for 1-2-4 subs, you can then measure/listen to the subs with measuring system alone first.  Get that approximately right, then connect/run with the Trinnov.  Then you can measure the Trinnov setup using the stereo analog ins.

 

Cheers,

post #597 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curt_Trinnov View Post

You are on it... covering the details well.  Important to note one would not necessarily want the sub distances and/or levels equal.  Depends what room data you measure.  Consider this: once you measure the room for possible optimal sub placement for 1-2-4 subs, you can then measure/listen to the subs with measuring system alone first.  Get that approximately right, then connect/run with the Trinnov.  Then you can measure the Trinnov setup using the stereo analog ins.

Cheers,

Roughly where I was coming from. I'm fine tuning my placements to try to have as much bass decay across the subwoofer frequency range @ 450 ms controlled as possible. Originally I'd placed speakers and subs for getting smoother FR before running Audyssey Pro, but the latest thinking with our little group is that looking at bass decay is at least as meaningful. So I'll be looking into measuring pre-Trinnov, needless to say.

I may also have to pick up MiniDSP 10x10 HD or something similar to manage the levels and distance for the individual sub components feeding from the single sub pre-out, although not (obviously) for EQ competing with Trinnov.

This will be an adventure....
post #598 of 633
I realize it would introduce another A/D and D/A conversion, but has anyone tried using the R-972 purely as a Trinnov sound processor?

That is, insert the R-972 between another preamp and an amp, using the R-972's ext. in and pre-out jacks (or alternatively skip the amp, and use the R-972 amps). By using analog in/out on the R-972, you presumably would get around the codec glitchiness that causes the sound to drop out when you switch sources, channels, etc. The extra roundtrip between analog and digital is not ideal, and neither is the energy consumption involve

(And, for anyone wondering, I tried Noah's idea of placing the mic at listening position, and tilting it to point straight at my center speaker, which is above my TV. With this calibration, I can use 3D-remapping without getting a phantom center. The results are quite good, and I'm using this as my standard setting when watching TV. I continue to be floored by how well the Trinnov remapping works, and what a difference it makes. The codec glitch is still annoying though.)
post #599 of 633
That's actually what I'm doing. I have an Oppo 103, which has two HDMI inputs and video processing, feeding into an R-972 on LPCM audio output. The Oppo has a TiVo fed into it, and i have a free input for either Apple TV or HDMI from my laptop.

The R-972 is used almost exclusively as a dedicated Trinnov processor, except for playing CDs from the Oppo where I use the R-972 as a surround processor when I want to go that route (Dolby PLII Music or sometimes Neural Surround, believe it or not, I seem to like with running two channel sources as multichannel surround). At the moment, all five Video HDMI settings are used for either cinema or music configurations, from the single HDMI physical input. And at end of the day, the audio goes via pre-out to my Denon 4311 on EXT. IN (multichannel analog audio), which provides the amplification.

I also use video bypass to keep the HDMI video signal from the Oppo unmolested when it goes to my display. There is the A/D issue, but AFAIK the analog feeding into the Denon's EXT. iN doesn't suffer particularly in SQ.

In practical terms you can't completely avoid the codec issue, but you learn to live with it given the quality of the sound.

BTW one nice thing about having a second AVR as an amp is that I can, if I want, tweak the channel trim levels on the feed from the Sherwood after Trinnov is run. That's not directly doable from the R-972, since manual settings for speaker trim aren't applied to the Trinnov calibrations. It's more of a fine tune if you're trying to level match pre/post Trinnov results for charting with a program like REW. It's also handy if you want to raise/lower the sub trim for the sub signal that Trinnov picks up, without needing to change the volume on the physical sub(s). That's useful if you want to try to lower the crossover that Trinnov gives you for mains.

I also have a MiniDSP to manage my subs, which is nice because I can do an Audyssey-style "distance tweak" to try to smooth the mains/sub crossover splice. But that's a whole separate subject.
Edited by sdrucker - 1/16/14 at 2:14pm
post #600 of 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post

The R-972 is used almost exclusively as a dedicated Trinnov processor, except for playing CDs as multichannel from the Oppo when i want to go that route. At the moment, all five Video HDMI settings are used for either cinema or music configurations, from the single HDMI physical input. And at end of the day, the audio goes via pre-out to my Denon 4311 on EXT. IN (multichannel analog audio), which provides the amplification.

So if I understand you correctly, your path when you watch something off of your TiVo looks like this:

TiVo ---HDMI---> Oppo ---LPCM-over-HDMI---> R-972 ---analog-7.1---> Denon ---> speakers

Is that right? Does it take a second or two or three seconds before audio kicks in when you start a program this way? Because that's the delay I'm trying to get rid of, and as best I can tell this is a problem introduced by the R-972 when it processes digital audio (but perhaps the problem disappears when all the digital audio is simply LPCM). The audio path I'm proposing (again using TiVo as an input) is something like this:

TiVo --HDMI---> prepro ---analog-7.1---> R-972 ---> speakers

For the video signal, I would connect my TV directly to the prepro.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › R972 Trinnov User Notes