Trinnov Altitude - Page 264 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3648Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7891 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 04:14 PM
Rise & Grind
 
dinamigym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SW Burb of Chicago
Posts: 527
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by byron69 View Post
Thank you for your detailed answear! It seems that the A16 ou A32 is my next upgrade.


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

Very welcome. Hope it helped!

One last little thing as far as the Bryston SP4 was concerned and this may not even matter to some but it was a fairly important factor in my decision in moving to the Trinnov from the SP4...

I have 2 teenage boys who like to listen to music and watch movies with their friends at, let's just say, very enhanced levels!!! The 8805 and the Trinnov both allowed me to put a governor on the max volume the unit would output. The Bryston Sp4 does not have that functionality. Sounds trivial, I know, but as different sources played at different volumes and my boys not really paying much attention to cranking up the volume as high is at would go it was a big concern for me from a hearing and equipment damage standpoint.

Trinnov Altitude 16, Magico A3, Magico ACC, Magico A1s, Dual Rythmik FV25HP
Amps- ATI AT523NC, AT524NC, AT528NC
Kaleidescape Terra Server/Strato, Oppo UDP-203, Apple TV4k, XFinity X1
Sony VPL-VW5000, 136" 2.35:1 Stewart Studiotek 100 screen, Lumagen Pro 4242
dinamigym is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7892 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 05:15 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
More like many mixers don’t make good use of them. And Disney keeps most to all of their content to 7.1.4 as some sort of corporate philosophy. But it’s not a hard and fast rule across the board.

A bit old, but you can start with this thread:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/86-ul...ng-thread.html

I'd also add Gravity, A House with a Clock on Its Walls, Red Sparrow, and Spiderman: Homecoming among this list.
Thank you for the link
jon1199 is offline  
post #7893 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 05:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennynike1 View Post
Hi there. I went from a Marantz 8802a, to the 8805, and then an Emotiva RMC-1.

The Trinnov beckoned me due to the versatility and 32 channel count, and the fact that the RMC-1 was quite buggy. The RMC-1 seemed to handle bass extremely well IMHO though, and sounded quite clean when not committing errors. The Emotiva could have been a keeper had it not been for other engineering issues and the 9.1.6 limitation.

I must say though, that the RMC-1 seemed quite promising, without even yet having the benefit of Dirac room correction.

I am curious, what specifically, other than channel count, the optimizer and versatility, do you consider the Trinnov provides that is in a different universe?
This is easy

The Altitude got the channel count, optimizer and versatility as you mention. But if we look at versatility - you have all the tools you need to make the sound perfect (or according to your preferences); you have PEQ (together with optimizer this will get you close to perfection). In addition you have target curves, you have input EQ, you have FIR EQ, Preset EQ, User EQ. Together this makes the perfect package that beats all competition. Not to forget, the flexibility - you can do whatever you want (yes, we are still waiting for DTS:X Pro, but besides that - there is nothing missing). On top of all this, you have probably one of the best Roon endpoints in existence included (which is just something Trinnov added because they could). Even minor details like the possibility to set default master volume on each input; also possibility to set max volume - there are x number of these small details that just makes the package complete.

One thing I would like to see improved in the Trinnov software is to support everything we need directly; now you need to use software like REW in addition to know what you are really doing with the massive amount of settings. Without REW (or similar) you are currently working blind. It is not a big problem, running the calibration the correct way will give you a fantastic sound. But I would like to use the magical Trinnov microphone to see the effect of all changes done (you currently get a calculated result of setting, but I need measurements here - yes I know; I'm one of those special guys with all the requirements). Automate the process for us more extreme users

The last part; if you set the Altitude in bypass - it has the best sound I have ever heard from any device in bypass (or direct).
I actually own an Altitude32, but I know people using the Altitude16 known to have the best sound quality in the country (this one guy focuses most on stereo, but uses the system for movies with Atmos/DTS:X as well).

Edit:
I forgot the most important part - all these fantastic tools packed into the Altitude actually does not destroy sound quality when you apply them - even when you push the adjustments to the extreme. One example of this; I have a headphone system with Audeze LCD-4 (rev 2) and Moon 430HA headphone amplifier (and fancy DAC and streamer). The Altitude32 system beats it, even in my not perfect room.
pennynike1 likes this.

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700

Last edited by Berland; 07-10-2019 at 05:59 PM.
Berland is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7894 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 06:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
My dealer finally have some movement regarding delivery and setting up my Amplitude8M and 9 * Piega AP 1.2 speakers. Plan now is to get everything up Friday this week
ss9001 and dinamigym like this.

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700
Berland is online now  
post #7895 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 06:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,354
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 682
Couldn't pry it out of my hands! The only processor that I would consider as a replacement for the Altitude 16 is an Altitude 32 I also came from a Marantz 8802A.
Berland likes this.

Steve
ss9001 is online now  
post #7896 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 06:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
Couldn't pry it out of my hands! The only processor that I would consider as a replacement for the Altitude 16 is an Altitude 32 I also came from a Marantz 8802A.
After buying the Altitude32; I sold the Marantz AV8802a (for 65% of what I gave for it new). I'm not missing it My AV8802a also had some issues; regarding triggers - so I turned it in for service to get it fixed before I sold (got the service for free; so it all worked out well).

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700
Berland is online now  
post #7897 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 07:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinamigym View Post
For what its worth here is my take...

First, let me say I do not consider myself a brand loyalist to anyone. I've been at this hobby for 30 years now and, since we are talking processors, I'll stick to that. I've owned the following processors in that time:

Lexicon MC-1
Lexicon MC12B
Classe' CT-SSP
Marantz 8802A
Marantz 8805
Bryston SP4
Trinnov A16

I make every effort to balance need/want, value, & price. Right or wrong I measure everything off the 8805. Mainly because, although it won't dazzle anyone with its specs, it does everything and it does it well. I'm going to compare it to the RMC-1 for a second just to clarify. I was really interested in that piece but it doesn't matter what the specs are, how good the dacs are, how many channels it can implement, what codecs it has available, what room correction it will have available. None of that matters if it cant perform the most basic functions well. So when I measure a piece it has to do the basics well first and then the bells and whistles become the icing on the cake.

The biggest flaw to me with the 8805 was Audyssey. I could not, for the life of me, get it to sound good in my room. I even went so far as to use a Wisdom SC3 in the system just so I could run Dirac to all 15 channels. The Bryston SP4 had the stability of the 8805 and the extras including Dirac made it an excellent bang for the buck in my book. To some, that probably sounds crazy talking about an upper 4 figure piece but we are all in this game at the level we are so it is what it is. I truly struggled with the decision but the Trinnov has always been on my to do list. I've always placed an emphasis on video and spent a good amount of money on projectors from Runco, DPI, & now Sony. As I've gotten older, audio has taken on a new importance for me. At some level it may have over taken video. So I guess, if Im willing to spend that kind of dollars on video then why should audio have different expectations. I will fully admit there are many on here with far more acoustical knowledge than me. I also fully admit that much of the functionality of the Trinnov is probably not being fully utilized in my system yet. That being said, I can also say without a doubt, it provides me with the most acoustical enjoyment of any piece I've owned to date. So much so that I do contemplate moving to an A32 at some point. Not because I think I will be additionally wowed sonically by its more expansive counterpart but because I may want to increase my speaker count. I won't even try to argue that, on paper, the A32 has better sonic capabilities. Just simply, for me...I don't care. Mainly because I honestly don't think I'd hear a difference. If I do upgrade it will be for channel requirements alone.

Is the A16 worth 3x the 8805...probably not. Is it worth 2x? Based on other market options currently available absolutely in my book. It does everything the 8805 did and does it well. The optimizer is light years ahead of anything else. It has every configuration option imaginable and it is upgradable. Again, basing this purely in my room after experiencing Audyssey, Dirac and now Trinnov. So in my book it becomes a question of is the extra $4-$5k of luxury tax as I'll call it for the Trinnov A16 worth the added enjoyment? For me it has been.

Peace Out,
Paul
How deep have you dove into the A16 functionality ? If you have not started to use PEQ, target curves etc; you have a lot more good to come regarding audio-quality in your home. I highly recommend using REW. If you focus on sub 200Hz for all channels (start with sub(s)); clean bass makes the rest follow in a good way. Also smart to use REW to find optimal crossovers for bass management etc.

PEQ should be done pre calibration (you can of course just enable bypass and set the PEQ filters) - then run calibration when PEQ is set and done.
dinamigym likes this.

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700
Berland is online now  
post #7898 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 07:07 PM
Rise & Grind
 
dinamigym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SW Burb of Chicago
Posts: 527
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berland View Post
How deep have you dove into the A16 functionality ? If you have not started to use PEQ, target curves etc; you have a lot more good to come regarding audio-quality in your home. I highly recommend using REW. If you focus on sub 200Hz for all channels (start with sub(s)); clean bass makes the rest follow in a good way. Also smart to use REW to find optimal crossovers for bass management etc.



PEQ should be done pre calibration (you can of course just enable bypass and set the PEQ filters) - then run calibration when PEQ is set and done.


Thank you! Any help/tips are much appreciated


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Trinnov Altitude 16, Magico A3, Magico ACC, Magico A1s, Dual Rythmik FV25HP
Amps- ATI AT523NC, AT524NC, AT528NC
Kaleidescape Terra Server/Strato, Oppo UDP-203, Apple TV4k, XFinity X1
Sony VPL-VW5000, 136" 2.35:1 Stewart Studiotek 100 screen, Lumagen Pro 4242
dinamigym is online now  
post #7899 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 07:22 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Next plan for my setup is to try a falling curve (0.5dB/oct; flat up to 20Hz) via PEQ. Then run calibration. Currently I created the curve pancake flat via PEQ (well, close to; not everything should be fixed with PEQ, so most negative gain on PEQ). Then set up target curve; do new measurements (REW) and adjust where it is required via FIR EQ to get match with requested target curve.

Trinnov recommended me to use target curve instead of PEQ, this is in my opinion not a good approach - you can never get that detailed adjustments via target curve.
My goal is smooth curve via PEQ (at least up to 200Hz) without any display-smoothing on the curve (I'm always looking at the raw detailed curve).

Also important when playing with PEQ; make sure you don't overdo the negative gain - make sure your amplifier/active sub can handle playback of up to 95dB for each channel without getting into trouble.

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700

Last edited by Berland; 07-10-2019 at 07:26 PM.
Berland is online now  
post #7900 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 08:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,794
Mentioned: 103 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5125 Post(s)
Liked: 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berland View Post
One thing I would like to see improved in the Trinnov software is to support everything we need directly; now you need to use software like REW in addition to know what you are really doing with the massive amount of settings. Without REW (or similar) you are currently working blind. It is not a big problem, running the calibration the correct way will give you a fantastic sound. But I would like to use the magical Trinnov microphone to see the effect of all changes done (you currently get a calculated result of setting, but I need measurements here - yes I know; I'm one of those special guys with all the requirements). Automate the process for us more extreme users
Now THAT is a great idea. Even if it only used the one mic probe, it would be incredible. It could generate the signals, provide the charts, etc. And I would'nt have to run either OmniMic or REW to see what was going on. Even if they took REW and built it into the Trinnov (so they didn't have to re-write all of the code) it would be a real huge time saver.

I would be interested in @appelz or @Curt_Trinnov thoughts on this proposal.

GREAT idea!!
santodx5 likes this.

Last edited by audioguy; 07-10-2019 at 08:21 PM.
audioguy is offline  
post #7901 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 08:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Now THAT is a great idea. Even if it only used the one mic probe, it would be incredible. It could generate the signals, provide the charts, etc. And I would'nt have to run either OmniMic or REW to see what was going on. Even if they took REW and built it into the Trinnov (so they didn't have to re-write all of the code) it would be a real huge time saver.
I would be interested in Adam's or Curt's input on this idea.

GREAT idea!!
It is already registered in Trinnov's feature-list
Please push for this; the more people that wants it the better - so it is not another weird idea from the well known crazy Norwegian at Trinnov HQ

I however don't think Trinnov should add the entire REW code. No need - but I want to be able make measurements in the Trinnov system to see the effects of my settings (or change of settings).
ss9001 likes this.

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700

Last edited by Berland; 07-10-2019 at 08:24 PM.
Berland is online now  
post #7902 of 9422 Old 07-10-2019, 08:34 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,361
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1688 Post(s)
Liked: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Now THAT is a great idea. Even if it only used the one mic probe, it would be incredible. It could generate the signals, provide the charts, etc. And I would'nt have to run either OmniMic or REW to see what was going on. Even if they took REW and built it into the Trinnov (so they didn't have to re-write all of the code) it would be a real huge time saver.

I would be interested in @appelz or @Curt_Trinnov thoughts on this proposal.

GREAT idea!!
Or you could buy the HAA kit for about $3300 and do multi-mic measurement with a mux using Audiotools, to do spatially averaged sub plots. LOL.

Seriously, even while REW integration per se is a can of worms to open (off the top of my head, programming, functionality difference, and legal/licensing), it would be a great add-on module (software) for Trinnov to do post-Optimizer measurement on real data. And not just speakers or subs as such, but in particular the critical speaker/sub relationship up to about, say 300 Hz. That way you could optimize (pun intended) bass management related delay settings and crossover frequency and slope. It might require a second measurement after the filters and bass management are applied in an ideal world, but I could work with that. Imagine you measure, calculate filters, measure again and see the results.

As long as we're on the subject, a waterfall or spectrogram to able to access bass decay would be nice as well .

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification

Last edited by sdrucker; 07-10-2019 at 08:37 PM.
sdrucker is offline  
post #7903 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 12:07 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
appelz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: A Hilton property near you!
Posts: 895
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 681 Post(s)
Liked: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Now THAT is a great idea. Even if it only used the one mic probe, it would be incredible. It could generate the signals, provide the charts, etc. And I would'nt have to run either OmniMic or REW to see what was going on. Even if they took REW and built it into the Trinnov (so they didn't have to re-write all of the code) it would be a real huge time saver.

I would be interested in @appelz or @Curt_Trinnov thoughts on this proposal.

GREAT idea!!
Eh, my first reaction is lukewarm at best. An old analogy of mine is about the car manufacturer trying to build a 4 wheel drive off-road sports car that also excels on the track. Unlikely. Any purpose built vehicle will outperform it in the environment it was designed for. Why not use the right tool for the job?

I use Smaart, REW, Arta, Terrasonde depending on what I am looking for. AudioTools is great, along with others. Why limit yourself to one system? Each tool has strengths. Even something incredibly powerful like a QSC Core processor is still just a DSP. It does what it does incredibly well, and still requires other exceptional tools to get the most out of it.

With many measurement tools, you also get the benefit of seeing changes in real time. When I am running Smaart for example with 5-8 mic locations, I can watch in real time any changes I make, looking at each location independently, or a spatial average of any set of mics. Entire seating area, front row only, back row only, primary seats, etc. *That* is the huge time saver, aside from being an incredibly powerful tool.

Unless the architecture of the Altitude completely changed, having all of that in one system would be incredibly time consuming. Take your measurements, across multiple locations, compile/compute, look at the graphs, make some changes, do it again. No thanks. And I would still want some independent system to verify SPL, do near field measurements, etc.

I've some thoughts about the electret condensers used in the microphone also, but given that Trinnov provides calibration files, probably irrelevant.
jamin likes this.

Adam Pelz ,Acoustic Mafia - Hear No Evil
JBL Master ARCOS Calibrator, CEDIA Designer, Home Acoustics Alliance Instructor LIII, THX HT1+ HT2+ Video, Level III Trinnov Altitude Calibrator
Mercenary Calibrator for Manufacturers, Integrators and System Owners
appelz is offline  
post #7904 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 12:13 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,127
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2170 Post(s)
Liked: 795
Why not use the same measurement system that's already there that measures pre-EQ?

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #7905 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 02:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,993
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Why not use the same measurement system that's already there that measures pre-EQ?
One could add a more philosophical reason for Trinnov not to go that route. Trinnov is not the kind company that is likely to let marketing slogans overtake honesty in what their products have to offer. We all know companies in the high-end audio market that claim to deliver true magic when it comes to audio-calibration. Trinnov promotes its Optimizer as a tool to get the very best sound, but advices to first take really good care of the room acoustics. The better you get that right, the more value the final treatment by the Optimizer will bring. As Adam explains, getting those room acoustics right involves much more than taking a couple of measurements around the main listening position. I can imagine that Trinnov does not want to create a false illusion that their products are able to effectively handle basic room issues, and for that reason refrain from adding any specific tools to aid with that.
mikela and sdrucker like this.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.

Last edited by maikeldepotter; 07-11-2019 at 03:05 AM.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #7906 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 06:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,794
Mentioned: 103 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5125 Post(s)
Liked: 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Or you could buy the HAA kit for about $3300 and do multi-mic measurement with a mux using Audiotools, to do spatially averaged sub plots. LOL.

Seriously, even while REW integration per se is a can of worms to open (off the top of my head, programming, functionality difference, and legal/licensing), it would be a great add-on module (software) for Trinnov to do post-Optimizer measurement on real data. And not just speakers or subs as such, but in particular the critical speaker/sub relationship up to about, say 300 Hz. That way you could optimize (pun intended) bass management related delay settings and crossover frequency and slope. It might require a second measurement after the filters and bass management are applied in an ideal world, but I could work with that. Imagine you measure, calculate filters, measure again and see the results.

As long as we're on the subject, a waterfall or spectrogram to able to access bass decay would be nice as well .
I am not suggesting that the "future" Trinnov pre/post Optimizer measurement tools be the "be all end all" product. And maybe such a feature would be of no use to the Adams, Curts and Mark Seatons of the world. There may be, I suspect, more folks whose audio knowledge and abilities are one (or more) steps removed from the capability of those guys where such a built in tool could be quite helpful. Obviously, we are getting the measurements analysis done now with external products (REW or ??) but how nice it would be if we used the same mic and same box to do it all. And the Altitude already has actual measurements pre-optimizer so add the abilities to re-measure but with the filters in place. And then enhance the plotting abilities. That is a lot less effort than integrating REW into the hardware.

We can only wish.
dinamigym likes this.
audioguy is offline  
post #7907 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 09:29 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 20,211
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1665 Post(s)
Liked: 847
Quote:
Originally Posted by appelz View Post
Eh, my first reaction is lukewarm at best. An old analogy of mine is about the car manufacturer trying to build a 4 wheel drive off-road sports car that also excels on the track. Unlikely. Any purpose built vehicle will outperform it in the environment it was designed for. Why not use the right tool for the job?

I use Smaart, REW, Arta, Terrasonde depending on what I am looking for. AudioTools is great, along with others. Why limit yourself to one system? Each tool has strengths. Even something incredibly powerful like a QSC Core processor is still just a DSP. It does what it does incredibly well, and still requires other exceptional tools to get the most out of it.

With many measurement tools, you also get the benefit of seeing changes in real time. When I am running Smaart for example with 5-8 mic locations, I can watch in real time any changes I make, looking at each location independently, or a spatial average of any set of mics. Entire seating area, front row only, back row only, primary seats, etc. *That* is the huge time saver, aside from being an incredibly powerful tool.

Unless the architecture of the Altitude completely changed, having all of that in one system would be incredibly time consuming. Take your measurements, across multiple locations, compile/compute, look at the graphs, make some changes, do it again. No thanks. And I would still want some independent system to verify SPL, do near field measurements, etc.

I've some thoughts about the electret condensers used in the microphone also, but given that Trinnov provides calibration files, probably irrelevant.
Years from now there will be a new Trinnov product, the "Trinnov Adam AI", a super advanced artificial intelligence 2nd box which connects to the SSP wirelessly and intelligently leads you through each and every step that Adam does in super calibrating a system. Of course, Adam has no time to contribute to this project now, but when he is ready to stop all the traveling and partly "retire" then Trinnov can scan his brain (painfully long process) and program all this into an AI box. Odds are I will be off into the blue CEDIA yonder by then though!

Theater Renovation: 3 Aerial Acoustics 7ts & 6 7LCRs; 13 Triad Rotating Silver/9 Sat; 9 Seaton 21" sealed subwoofers; Trinnov Altitude 32 SSP; 3 Theta Digital Prometheus, Trinnov Amplitude 8 & 8M, and ATI AT526NC amplifiers; Sony VW5000 projector; Lumagen Radiance Pro; Panamorph DCR lens; Stewart Filmscreen Vistascope 14' wide 2.40 SnoMatte 100 screen; Kaleidescape & Pioneer UDP-LX500 4k players; Apple TV 4k; TIVO Bolt OTA.
Steve Bruzonsky is online now  
post #7908 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 10:00 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,127
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2170 Post(s)
Liked: 795
I don't understand.

Why would anyone assume having a way to measure the room with the existing processor as opposed to a 3rd-party system has any effect on room acoustics?


Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
One could add a more philosophical reason for Trinnov not to go that route. Trinnov is not the kind company that is likely to let marketing slogans overtake honesty in what their products have to offer. We all know companies in the high-end audio market that claim to deliver true magic when it comes to audio-calibration. Trinnov promotes its Optimizer as a tool to get the very best sound, but advices to first take really good care of the room acoustics. The better you get that right, the more value the final treatment by the Optimizer will bring. As Adam explains, getting those room acoustics right involves much more than taking a couple of measurements around the main listening position. I can imagine that Trinnov does not want to create a false illusion that their products are able to effectively handle basic room issues, and for that reason refrain from adding any specific tools to aid with that.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #7909 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 10:06 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,127
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2170 Post(s)
Liked: 795
Why would anyone assume having a way to measure the room with the existing processor as opposed to a 3rd-party system has any effect on room acoustics?


Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
One could add a more philosophical reason for Trinnov not to go that route. Trinnov is not the kind company that is likely to let marketing slogans overtake honesty in what their products have to offer. We all know companies in the high-end audio market that claim to deliver true magic when it comes to audio-calibration. Trinnov promotes its Optimizer as a tool to get the very best sound, but advices to first take really good care of the room acoustics. The better you get that right, the more value the final treatment by the Optimizer will bring. As Adam explains, getting those room acoustics right involves much more than taking a couple of measurements around the main listening position. I can imagine that Trinnov does not want to create a false illusion that their products are able to effectively handle basic room issues, and for that reason refrain from adding any specific tools to aid with that.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #7910 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 10:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
The Bogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: GTA, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,329
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 625 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Or you could buy the HAA kit for about $3300 and do multi-mic measurement with a mux [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif[/IMG] using Audiotools, to do spatially averaged sub plots. LOL.

Seriously, even while REW integration per se is a can of worms to open (off the top of my head, programming, functionality difference, and legal/licensing), it would be a great add-on module (software) for Trinnov to do post-Optimizer measurement on real data. And not just speakers or subs as such, but in particular the critical speaker/sub relationship up to about, say 300 Hz. That way you could optimize (pun intended) bass management related delay settings and crossover frequency and slope. It might require a second measurement after the filters and bass management are applied in an ideal world, but I could work with that. Imagine you measure, calculate filters, measure again and see the results.

As long as we're on the subject, a waterfall or spectrogram to able to access bass decay would be nice as well [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG].
I am not suggesting that the "future" Trinnov pre/post Optimizer measurement tools be the "be all end all" product. And maybe such a feature would be of no use to the Adams, Curts and Mark Seatons of the world. There may be, I suspect, more folks whose audio knowledge and abilities are one (or more) steps removed from the capability of those guys where such a built in tool could be quite helpful. Obviously, we are getting the measurements analysis done now with external products (REW or ??) but how nice it would be if we used the same mic and same box to do it all. And the Altitude already has actual measurements pre-optimizer so add the abilities to re-measure but with the filters in place. And then enhance the plotting abilities. That is a lot less effort than integrating REW into the hardware.

We can only wish.
Exactly! Most end users aren't looking for pro installer level software but just want real (not "estimated") in-room post calibration measurements. Shouldn't be hard to implement in the Trinnov. Most people will understand that unless the mic is in the exact same position or positions pre and post calibration then the measurement estimate and actual values won't match.

Design by Rives...dollars by The Bogg

Click for my build thread
The Bogg is offline  
post #7911 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 10:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
kingwiggi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: UK -> FL, USA
Posts: 873
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 571 Post(s)
Liked: 365
Trinnov Altitude

Quote:
Originally Posted by Molon_Labe View Post

For those that own the 16, have you been pleased with your 16 or do you regret not buying the 32? If you upgraded, would you mind sharing why? I am at 7.4.4 and plan to stay there. I bought the Trinnov for the sound quality, software vs DSP chipset to be more "future-proof", and the room correction which is supposedly the "cats meow". I did not buy it for the channel count. I can change my order for the 32 but the reasons would have to be substantial quality differences at my current channel count. I could always reduce my subs to splitters or MiniDSP (which I currently use) to free up for wides or middle ceiling, but I am seriously over buying more speakers. Thoughts?


I upgraded from the A16 to the 32 because of an itch to go fully digital that I had to scratch. If AES67 had been supported within a reasonable timeframe after the A16 purchase then I would probably have remained happy with it. Although channel count was not my main motivation I am planning a purpose built room so the extra channels will be useful.

If you really have no plans to go beyond 16 channels then pocket the difference and be happy with your decision. If your main use of the Trinnov is movies then the above still applies.

The only thing left then is music. You have JBL M2’s and 708’s which have very hi resolution drivers, so if music is important to you and your room is treated well, IMHO you probably would be able to hear a difference. I’m saying that because I own the same speakers.

Then the question becomes, is it worth the extra $10K for a relatively small increase, 96/24 - 192/24 in music/audio resolution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Molon_Labe likes this.

Trinnov Altitude 32, LCR JBL M2, JBL LSR 708i, 705i, Q-SYS Core 110f, Amps- QSC CXD4.2Q, 4.3Q, 4.5Q
Kaleidescape Strato, Zapitti 4K HDR Duo, Xbox One X, 8TB Tivo Roamio Pro,
JVC RS600 + ISCO IIIL, 158" 2.40:1 AT screen, Calman 5 Enthusiast, i1 Pro 2, i1 Display Pro, Spyder 5, 3D LUT Box
Oppo UDP-203, BDP-105, Onkyo DAC-1000s, Onkyo DP-X1 DAP, QNAP TVS-871

Last edited by kingwiggi; 07-11-2019 at 11:41 AM.
kingwiggi is online now  
post #7912 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 11:14 AM
Rise & Grind
 
dinamigym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SW Burb of Chicago
Posts: 527
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molon_Labe View Post
I recently purchased the Altitude16 and should have it in a couple of weeks. However, the initial experience thus far has been reminiscent of growing up in the early 1980s when all my parents could afford were the canvas Nikes, while the rich kids had the leather Nikes. I learned very quickly a Nike isn't a Nike in the halls of middle school. Apparently the Trinnov32 is owned by those who had the leather Nikes in school

For those that own the 16, have you been pleased with your 16 or do you regret not buying the 32? If you upgraded, would you mind sharing why? I am at 7.4.4 and plan to stay there. I bought the Trinnov for the sound quality, software vs DSP chipset to be more "future-proof", and the room correction which is supposedly the "cats meow". I did not buy it for the channel count. I can change my order for the 32 but the reasons would have to be substantial quality differences at my current channel count. I could always reduce my subs to splitters or MiniDSP (which I currently use) to free up for wides or middle ceiling, but I am seriously over buying more speakers. Thoughts?
As a current owner of the A16 running a 7.2.6 going to 9.2.6 I am very happy with my choice. As long as Trinnov supports the A16 in the same manner it does the A32 (ie. firmware/software updates) anything extra the A32 would have had available to me would have purely been a very nice piece of window dressing. I obviously knew going in that my channel count would be maxed at 16 and that music/audio resolution was a bit less 96/24 instead of 192/24 plus missing the RCA inputs/outputs of the A32. I am in no way implying that the additional features of the A32 aren't extemely beneficial to those that have those needs/uses in their media room but, for me, they would be currently unused with no current plan in place of ever using them. If you knew me well you'd know that my first inclination is always get all the bells and whistles but, after really giving it some serious thought, I realized for me the A16 did all I wanted and more. Buying an A32 at this point would have been for all the wrong reasons. My personal opinion is if you are happy at a 16 channel count and have no immediate plans of wanting more channels (I also use a minidsp for multiple subs to save the output on the A16) then go A16 and don't look back. You will arguably be the owner of the second best AV processor on the market.

Trinnov Altitude 16, Magico A3, Magico ACC, Magico A1s, Dual Rythmik FV25HP
Amps- ATI AT523NC, AT524NC, AT528NC
Kaleidescape Terra Server/Strato, Oppo UDP-203, Apple TV4k, XFinity X1
Sony VPL-VW5000, 136" 2.35:1 Stewart Studiotek 100 screen, Lumagen Pro 4242
dinamigym is online now  
post #7913 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 11:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinamigym View Post
As a current owner of the A16 running a 7.2.6 going to 9.2.6 I am very happy with my choice. As long as Trinnov supports the A16 in the same manner it does the A32 (ie. firmware/software updates) anything extra the A32 would have had available to me would have purely been a very nice piece of window dressing. I obviously knew going in that my channel count would be maxed at 16 and that music/audio resolution was a bit less 96/24 instead of 192/24 plus missing the RCA inputs/outputs of the A32. I am in no way implying that the additional features of the A32 aren't extemely beneficial to those that have those needs/uses in their media room but, for me, they would be currently unused with no current plan in place of ever using them. If you knew me well you'd know that my first inclination is always get all the bells and whistles but, after really giving it some serious thought, I realized for me the A16 did all I wanted and more. Buying an A32 at this point would have been for all the wrong reasons. My personal opinion is if you are happy at a 16 channel count and have no immediate plans of wanting more channels (I also use a minidsp for multiple subs to save the output on the A16) then go A16 and don't look back. You will arguably be the owner of the second best AV processor on the market.
Both A16 and A32 runs on the same software. So I would say it is 100% guaranteed that the A16 will be supported the same way A32. What we might see is some updates will only apply to A32 because of difference in CPU power.

We actually have seen improvements coming first for the A16; regarding the setup wizard. My guess is that this is feature-toggled; and actually available in 4.2.8.2 for the A32 as well, but not activated since it is not made ready for more than 16 channels
dinamigym likes this.

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700

Last edited by Berland; 07-11-2019 at 11:26 AM.
Berland is online now  
post #7914 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 11:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,993
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post
Exactly! Most end users aren't looking for pro installer level software but just want real (not "estimated") in-room post calibration measurements.
I can understand that a serious high end user would want such feature to satisfy his analytical desires, but I don't see why he would need such post calibration (Optimizer) measurements as this is typically the end point of the whole sound optimization process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Why would anyone assume having a way to measure the room with the existing processor as opposed to a 3rd-party system has any effect on room acoustics?
My point is that enabling taking measurements with the Trinnov mic and showing the results does not automatically provide a way to properly analyze acoustical issues caused by the room and speaker placement, and to take adequate measures based on that (e.g. acoustical treatment, seat and speaker re-positioning). There's a whole lot more to it than that.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.

Last edited by maikeldepotter; 07-11-2019 at 12:03 PM.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #7915 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 12:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
The Bogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: GTA, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,329
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 625 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Being able to look at REAL vs interpolated data helps one to more accurately explain/troubleshoot certain things. Call it Quality Control if you will. If we are supposed to just trust the machine then why bother with Adam/Curt/etc? I'm joking with that question, but the point is that a knowledgeable end user can get better results with post-calibration measurements and iterative changes. The best example I can give from personal experience is with time aligning subs to mains - accurate post adjustment measurements were necessary in order to see what adjustments in phase were doing in the actual room vs what the Trinnov ST2 (that I used to own) "expected" the response to be. No one said that taking post-calibration measurements provides the "whole picture" but it's one more useful piece in that puzzle...

Design by Rives...dollars by The Bogg

Click for my build thread
The Bogg is offline  
post #7916 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 12:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,993
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post
Being able to look at REAL vs interpolated data helps one to more accurately explain/troubleshoot certain things. Call it Quality Control if you will. If we are supposed to just trust the machine then why bother with Adam/Curt/etc? I'm joking with that question, but the point is that a knowledgeable end user can get better results with post-calibration measurements and iterative changes. The best example I can give from personal experience is with time aligning subs to mains - accurate post adjustment measurements were necessary in order to see what adjustments in phase were doing in the actual room vs what the Trinnov ST2 (that I used to own) "expected" the response to be. No one said that taking post-calibration measurements provides the "whole picture" but it's one more useful piece in that puzzle...
I get your point. IMO there's no right or wrong here. Just exchanging points of view and philosophies on why some Altitude feature should be or would probably not be on Trinnov's to-do list.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #7917 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 12:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
The Bogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: GTA, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,329
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 625 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Yeah I hear you. The Trinnov and Datasat are not mass market products and I think that the people that buy them are either hardcore enthusiasts who like to tinker or wealthy people who just want the best...or both (lucky bastards, lol)!

Design by Rives...dollars by The Bogg

Click for my build thread
The Bogg is offline  
post #7918 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 12:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post
Yeah I hear you. The Trinnov and Datasat are not mass market products and I think that the people that buy them are either hardcore enthusiasts who like to tinker or wealthy people who just want the best...or both (lucky bastards, lol)!
I'm not swimming in money; we have a cheap car that cost 1/20 of the Altitude32 32 channel version. It is all about priority. I still feel the Altitude is the best investment I have ever done regarding audio/video equipment. You start really happy with the device, but get more and more excited as time goes by. Not many devices are able to pull this off; so I'm impressed.

This is even after my device had issues with the firewire boards. Trinnov even managed to make a faulty device feel good

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700
Berland is online now  
post #7919 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 01:16 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,127
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2170 Post(s)
Liked: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
My point is that enabling taking measurements with the Trinnov mic and showing the results does not automatically provide a way to properly analyze acoustical issues caused by the room and speaker placement, and to take adequate measures based on that (e.g. acoustical treatment, seat and speaker re-positioning).

Of course not, nor does using REW.

The below question remains unanswered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Why not use the same measurement system that's already there that measures pre-EQ?

Ah, perhaps you mean that REW has more built-in tools for acoustic analysis than Trinnov is likely to provide?

Noah

Last edited by noah katz; 07-11-2019 at 01:21 PM.
noah katz is online now  
post #7920 of 9422 Old 07-11-2019, 02:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,993
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Ah, perhaps you mean that REW has more built-in tools for acoustic analysis than Trinnov is likely to provide?

Precisely that, it needs more than Trinnov is likely to provide without turning the Altitude into a complete HAA calibration kit.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

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