Originally Posted by richmagnus
Have to agree with the above re 18gbs etc.
The Trinnov will never sound better than the Lyngdorf. It’s horses for courses between them. For us, and we supply Trinnov, is the simplicity of set up with the MP-50. RoomPerfect is so easy to use and is in no way outperformed by TEQ. The. There’s the Lyngdorf bass management and philosophy behind woofers and speakers blending.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With all due respect, that's a sweeping, absolute statement. Are you a dealer for more recent Trinnov products than TEQ? That was actually an ADA product that incorporated an older version of the Trinnov Optimizer and hardware circa 2011-2012, if memory serves. The most recent developments with the Optimizer for things like bass management/high and low pass slope settings, measurement with respect to crest factor, and under the hood algorithm enhancements have taken place on the Altitude product line in particular.
I won't argue that a "measure to 99% Room Knowledge, including random measurement positions" in a relatively small number of measurements, hit "click" and compute filters is easier to use than the Optimizer. But a large number of Trinnov settings are user configurable, as I indicated in a previous post on this thread a few days ago, and/or under the touch of a trained calibrator. Sure, it's easy to ride a bike than drive a car, and that may be fine for where you want to go, but which can outperform the other in a head to head test to travel 150 miles to your destination?
One can argue calibration philosophies, but I would like to see some evidence beyond word of mouth that Lyngdorf offers something for speaker/sub integration to optimize the delay at a specific crossover. For example, a pre/post calibration measurement in REW with no smoothing in the 15 to 300 Hz range, and 55 to 105 db on the Y axis, with waterfalls or spectrograms to access what's happening with ringing/bass decay. I can do that on my Altitude - measure using the computed levels and delays and turn off acoustic correction to then compare in REW.
Not saying that the MP-50 isn't just fine for Marc or a rave review/push product for you or Arrow, of course. But in my opinion the MP-50 is still a relative budget/value proposition compared to the capabilities of an Altitude with Trinnov Optimizer, its degree of flexibility to upmix to arrays or render to very specific numbers of 3D audio channels beyond a select superset, or to run an active (n-way) crossover setup. It also offers PEQ for "before the Optimizer" or speaker-specific pre-EQ settings, not to mention native sample rate processing. Granted it's not for everyone, even starting with an Altitude 16 at a $15k+ price point, but at best the MP-50 holds its own compared to those (objective) capabilities the ephemeral issue of "sound quality". And there's nothing wrong with that.