Trinnov Theaters

[ttocs]

I got a real treat today! Finally got to spend some hours in a Trinnov 32 channel purpose-built theater!!

The theater was amazing! It has a 22 foot (diagonal) screen, 13 foot ceiling, about 22 feet wide (I think this is correct), and about 35 feet deep. It's got Trinnov WaveForming with eight 18" subs on the front wall and four 18" subs on the rear wall. Plus it's got 3 more 30" subs just for the lowest octave that are combined into a virtual sub and driven by one channel. It's a 9.13.10 configuration.

The room is treated with absorption and diffusion. There's a large diffuser on the rear wall. The room is neither dry nor wet, it sounds very comfortable acoustically. I was shocked at how good the screen looked even with the lights on! Only one set of doors, no windows. It's basically a room within a room considering how much dimension there is between the finished surfaces and the structural walls.

The sound moves effortlessly about the space. All the speakers are hidden. The 9.x.x speakers are line source. I didn't see photos of the 10 Top speakers, but I suspect they are the same (the guy who built this loves line source speakers).

The bass response between rows, about six feet from row to row, was indistinguishably similar (I measured with apps on my phone).

Kaleidescape is what delivers the movie selections, and has a very nice interface. The remote control is Control4.

The experience was fantastic, but not perfect. Since there were many other folks present I didn't get to talk to the owner about some particulars regarding some setup settings I wanted to know about, so I'll talk to him about these things later. The lip sync needed a small adjustment. From video on-screen to having audio-lock was about 6-8 seconds - sometimes longer, so, as is known with Trinnov, it's not a processor meant for just general tv watching when there's going to be a lot of channel surfing. Trinnov's main emphasis is with theater usage. Put on a movie, then watch another movie. When I first got into the theater the three 30" subs weren't working and it took a while to get them to work. The Trinnov needed more than just a reboot, so after trying various things the big subs began to work, so, Trinnov isn't perfect.

One thing I did love is the volume ramping speed, which is perfect! Turning up or down the volume was not too quick or too slow, and has a very predictable end point. This is something that's difficult to achieve.

After a while of high volume sound and watching the same few movie scenes many times over, I had to use my AirPods to limit the SPL to my ears, just couldn't take 105dB any longer. I've known the owner for years and he knew the volume would be a bit much for me, but he was demoing for a bunch of other folks as well, so, . . . . . 

The bass was thunderous and appropriate with no boomy anything, was great seat to seat, articulate, deep, and very fulfilling. The bass never covered up anything, so was tuned very well! All in all, it was a great experience! This theater is fantastic for movies, but for music it had me wanting to go home and listen to my system.

I'm putting this info into its own thread as it really doesn't fit within any other threads. So this is just for discussing Trinnov specifically and theaters in general.

[LCSeminole]

Thanks for the experience write up. While I would probably never spend the money to compare an Altitude processor in an imperfect room environment such as my own, it makes me wonder how much of a sound improvement(if at all) there would be compared to other processors(JBL Synthesis/Antthem/Yamaha/Emotiva/etc) setup manually/ no room correction software. Interesting that the video switching/audio lock on isn’t consistently faster than my RMC-1, I’m left thinking that most current processors aren’t appreciably faster having experienced a couple other current processors(not all) myself. This also makes me wonder if compliance with HDCP/HDMI standards are being strictly adhered to in processors that are according to reviews supposedly “instantaneous” in their switching capabilities.

[simpleman68]

That's a huge image, particularly in a lighted/partially lit room!

What pj was he running?

Scott

[klinemj]

What were the amps and speakers?

For what it's worth, I would love the Emotiva Dream Theater! But, I'm happy enough with my 7.1.4

Mark

[ttocs]

Nov 17, 2024 10:06:32 GMT -5 LCSeminole said:

Thanks for the experience write up. While I would probably never spend the money to compare an Altitude processor in an imperfect room environment such as my own, it makes me wonder how much of a sound improvement(if at all) there would be compared to other processors(JBL Synthesis/Antthem/Yamaha/Emotiva/etc) setup manually/ no room correction software. Interesting that the video switching/audio lock on isn’t consistently faster than my RMC-1, I’m left thinking that most current processors aren’t appreciably faster having experienced a couple other current processors(not all) myself. This also makes me wonder if compliance with HDCP/HDMI standards are being strictly adhered to in processors that are according to reviews supposedly “instantaneous” in their switching capabilities.

Sound quality, well, it was great for the movie scenes we watched! The tuning is such that nothing seemed smeared or covered up, all the sound was articulate and distinct, and especially the sounds all around were in fact all around! So the theater does a fantastic job with ATMOS!

[ttocs]

Nov 17, 2024 10:17:40 GMT -5 simpleman68 said:

That's a huge image, particularly in a lighted/partially lit room! :o

What pj was he running?

Scott

He mentioned the PJ but I wasn't paying attention to that. The one he's got will be replaced with another when it arrives. The lights are extinguished for full effect when the movies are running, but I was pleasantly amazed at how good it looks with lights on.

[LCSeminole]

Nov 17, 2024 10:59:23 GMT -5 ttocs said:

Nov 17, 2024 10:17:40 GMT -5 simpleman68 said:

That's a huge image, particularly in a lighted/partially lit room!

What pj was he running?

Scott

He mentioned the PJ but I wasn't paying attention to that. The one he's got will be replaced with another when it arrives. The lights are extinguished for full effect when the movies are running, but I was pleasantly amazed at how good it looks with lights on.

.................which begs the question, did you take any pictures?

[ttocs]

Nov 17, 2024 10:45:08 GMT -5 klinemj said:

What were the amps and speakers?

For what it's worth, I would love the Emotiva Dream Theater! But, I'm happy enough with my 7.1.4

Mark

Krell amps for the speakers. It's a KMA i400 stereo amp, some older models - a seven channel S-1500, a seven channel Showcase amp, which gets us up to 16 channels, but I didn't see what else there was for the last 3 channels of the 9.x.10 speakers. The 12 main subwoofers are powered by GIGA AUDIO amps, but again, I didn't see what's powering the three 30" subs. There's a couple cabinets accessible from the theater under the screen that probably houses the extra components I couldn't find.

The speakers are all custom, he built them. He's been building speakers for years. In the last few years he's developed it into a business that is now at the launch stage. I went to his commercial location yesterday with the intent being to hear the super duper new speakers, not the line source speakers, but the newer ones developed from the evolution of building many line source and morphing into what "appears" to be more conventional drivers except for the planar mid/tweeter in a "coaxial" configuration. Instead I stayed in the theater for several hours trying to soak in as much as I could. Plus, there were too many people in the room with the stereo setups and I could only stay out as long as I did, so I'll demo the super speakers another time. He enlisted the help of a crossover guru to develop the crossovers for everything, which took years to get to this point.

I was very happy that he's not one of these guys that pumps up the bass just because he can. The theater system is tuned extremely well. I enjoyed it more than going to the IMAX theater.

The great thing about line source speakers is that the SPL is about the same no matter which row I sat in. But, when sitting in the front row, which is not the sweet spot row, there is a drop in impact from the front line source speakers which I am thinking is due to being just a tad below the optimum beam of sound coming from them.

All things considered, it's a wonderful theater in which to watch movies! Very pleasing indeed.

[ttocs]

Nov 17, 2024 11:47:30 GMT -5 LCSeminole said:

Nov 17, 2024 10:59:23 GMT -5 ttocs said:

He mentioned the PJ but I wasn't paying attention to that. The one he's got will be replaced with another when it arrives. The lights are extinguished for full effect when the movies are running, but I was pleasantly amazed at how good it looks with lights on.

.................which begs the question, did you take any pictures?

Yes, but I won't be posting any without permission.

[LCSeminole]

Nov 17, 2024 11:48:04 GMT -5 ttocs said:

Nov 17, 2024 11:47:30 GMT -5 LCSeminole said:

.................which begs the question, did you take any pictures?

Yes, but I won't be posting any without permission.

Fair enough.

[klinemj]

Nov 17, 2024 11:47:33 GMT -5 ttocs said:

I was very happy that he's not one of these guys that pumps up the bass just because he can. The theater system is tuned extremely well. I enjoyed it more than going to the IMAX theater.

I wouldn't like excessive bass either. It's surprising how many subs he has yet it's not bass-heavy.

Why does he have so many? I can imagine it's due to a need to balance the sound out. Surely that could be handled by just a few.

Mark

[ttocs]

Nov 17, 2024 15:06:36 GMT -5 klinemj said:

Nov 17, 2024 11:47:33 GMT -5 ttocs said:

I was very happy that he's not one of these guys that pumps up the bass just because he can. The theater system is tuned extremely well. I enjoyed it more than going to the IMAX theater.

I wouldn't like excessive bass either. It's surprising how many subs he has yet it's not bass-heavy.

Why does he have so many? I can imagine it's due to a need to balance the sound out. Surely that could be handled by just a few.

Mark

More than one reason applies here.

Firstly, Trinnov's WaveForming.
This is done using at least 4 subs on the front wall and 4 subs on the rear wall. The front wall subs create a wave, the rear wall subs cancel it at the rear wall, so there's little to no wave reflecting back into the room once it hits the rear wall. Using more subs makes this work more like Trinnov wants it to work. Trinnov expects an equal amount of subs per wall if possible, but in the case of this particular theater I can only speculate about all the reasons why there's 8 on the front wall and only 4 on the rear wall. One big possible reason is that there's a huge diffuser on the rear wall, which is directly in the path of where other possible subs would be. Plus, the room is very well treated, so I would expect less difficulty controlling most of the bass frequencies with the WaveForming system.

Another reason for using many subs vs only one or two is that each additional sub in a system means all the subs can produce more output with less effort, less distortion, and in less time due to needing less excursion. Think quick. In my room, which is a bit more than half the cubic footage of this Trinnov theater, I have 8 subs. Using just one sub in my room will not get me to the Dolby spec of 31.5Hz @ 105dB at the MLP without a lot of distortion, and is noticeably slower reacting while doing so. But with 8 subs, each sub works very little comparatively. I ended up with 8 subs after using 2 subs for a while, then adding 2 more for a longer while, and so on until I am super happy with 8 subs in two stacks of four each.

The Trinnov theater is using the correct amount of subwoofer level along with the speaker levels. It's not bloated at all. It's just plain enough and not too much. My system is no different. It's set for not too much, it's the right amount as I can demonstrate using REW response plots, but my plots won't be as nice looking as this Trinnov theater's plots using WaveForming which can make for some incredibly good looking measurements. So yes, I can crank the subs so they rattle the house more than they do now, but then the bloated bass would mask more of the other sounds and become unnatural.

[klinemj]

Nov 17, 2024 15:56:27 GMT -5 ttocs said:

Nov 17, 2024 15:06:36 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I wouldn't like excessive bass either. It's surprising how many subs he has yet it's not bass-heavy.

Why does he have so many? I can imagine it's due to a need to balance the sound out. Surely that could be handled by just a few.

Mark

More than one reason applies here.

Firstly, Trinnov's WaveForming.
This is done using at least 4 subs on the front wall and 4 subs on the rear wall. The front wall subs create a wave, the rear wall subs cancel it at the rear wall, so there's little to no wave reflecting back into the room once it hits the rear wall. Using more subs makes this work more like Trinnov wants it to work. Trinnov expects an equal amount of subs per wall if possible, but in the case of this particular theater I can only speculate about all the reasons why there's 8 on the front wall and only 4 on the rear wall. One big possible reason is that there's a huge diffuser on the rear wall, which is directly in the path of where other possible subs would be. Plus, the room is very well treated, so I would expect less difficulty controlling most of the bass frequencies with the WaveForming system.

Another reason for using many subs vs only one or two is that each additional sub in a system means all the subs can produce more output with less effort, less distortion, and in less time due to needing less excursion. Think quick. In my room, which is a bit more than half the cubic footage of this Trinnov theater, I have 8 subs. Using just one sub in my room will not get me to the Dolby spec of 31.5Hz @ 105dB at the MLP without a lot of distortion, and is noticeably slower reacting while doing so. But with 8 subs, each sub works very little comparatively. I ended up with 8 subs after using 2 subs for a while, then adding 2 more for a longer while, and so on until I am super happy with 8 subs in two stacks of four each.

The Trinnov theater is using the correct amount of subwoofer level along with the speaker levels. It's not bloated at all. It's just plain enough and not too much. My system is no different. It's set for not too much, it's the right amount as I can demonstrate using REW response plots, but my plots won't be as nice looking as this Trinnov theater's plots using WaveForming which can make for some incredibly good looking measurements. So yes, I can crank the subs so they rattle the house more than they do now, but then the bloated bass would mask more of the other sounds and become unnatural.

I kind of get it, but...my room is pretty big (17*26 feet). My Rythmik dual 15" sub fills it with ease. I could imagine 1 more, but...4 or 8 our more? I just can't even imagine.

Mark

[ttocs]

Nov 17, 2024 17:34:53 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I kind of get it, but...my room is pretty big (17*26 feet). My Rythmik dual 15" sub fills it with ease. I could imagine 1 more, but...4 or 8 our more? I just can't even imagine.

Mark

Dual 15" subs are like having just a bit more than three 12" subs. Assuming your room has 9 foot ceilings the amount of cubic air space is less than my room, even with 10 foot ceilings. So yeah, your subs would be expected to handle the space just fine.

But, with more and more subs each one will use less effort to achieve the same SPL in a space. This makes all the subs quicker to respond which makes impact sounds more immediate. Dynamics go through the roof.

My room worked ok with two 12" subs, but worked really well with four. Again, the big difference is in the dynamics.

I really dislike using car analogies, but here goes. A car with a one cylinder engine can reach 60MPH in a certain amount of time. The same car with an eight cylinder engine being eight times the displacement can reach 60MPH much quicker and with less effort from the engine.

With more subs needing to move with less excursion to achieve a certain level of SPL simply means they can get there quicker with less effort, less distortion, better impulse, etc. The caveat being that the tuning needs to be done with care to be able to achieve great results.

[marcl]

Nov 17, 2024 17:34:53 GMT -5 klinemj said:

Nov 17, 2024 15:56:27 GMT -5 ttocs said:

More than one reason applies here.

Firstly, Trinnov's WaveForming.
This is done using at least 4 subs on the front wall and 4 subs on the rear wall. The front wall subs create a wave, the rear wall subs cancel it at the rear wall, so there's little to no wave reflecting back into the room once it hits the rear wall. Using more subs makes this work more like Trinnov wants it to work. Trinnov expects an equal amount of subs per wall if possible, but in the case of this particular theater I can only speculate about all the reasons why there's 8 on the front wall and only 4 on the rear wall. One big possible reason is that there's a huge diffuser on the rear wall, which is directly in the path of where other possible subs would be. Plus, the room is very well treated, so I would expect less difficulty controlling most of the bass frequencies with the WaveForming system.

Another reason for using many subs vs only one or two is that each additional sub in a system means all the subs can produce more output with less effort, less distortion, and in less time due to needing less excursion. Think quick. In my room, which is a bit more than half the cubic footage of this Trinnov theater, I have 8 subs. Using just one sub in my room will not get me to the Dolby spec of 31.5Hz @ 105dB at the MLP without a lot of distortion, and is noticeably slower reacting while doing so. But with 8 subs, each sub works very little comparatively. I ended up with 8 subs after using 2 subs for a while, then adding 2 more for a longer while, and so on until I am super happy with 8 subs in two stacks of four each.

The Trinnov theater is using the correct amount of subwoofer level along with the speaker levels. It's not bloated at all. It's just plain enough and not too much. My system is no different. It's set for not too much, it's the right amount as I can demonstrate using REW response plots, but my plots won't be as nice looking as this Trinnov theater's plots using WaveForming which can make for some incredibly good looking measurements. So yes, I can crank the subs so they rattle the house more than they do now, but then the bloated bass would mask more of the other sounds and become unnatural.

I kind of get it, but...my room is pretty big (17*26 feet). My Rythmik dual 15" sub fills it with ease. I could imagine 1 more, but...4 or 8 our more? I just can't even imagine.

Mark

The real point of all those subs is not "fill the room" ... it's how Trinnov wave forming works to cancel resonances in the room.  You can "fill the room" and have huge resonances that linger for 600-800ms.  Trinnov needs the front subs to create a planar wave, which - with sophisticated signal processing - propagates through the room quite differently than just having a couple subs on the floor.  They have to be in the front wall.  And then the rear subs work to intercept the planar wave and cancel the resonances.  Yes, it sure has a "brute force" look to it, in conjunction with some pretty fancy processing.  But that is the point of having all those subs.  It's not the same as just having a lot of subs around the room.

And yes, what ttocs says is true .... as with my dipole subs that each have three 12" drivers, having more drivers means they don't have to move as far and can return to zero faster.

[PaulBe]

Nov 17, 2024 17:34:53 GMT -5 klinemj said:

Nov 17, 2024 15:56:27 GMT -5 ttocs said:

More than one reason applies here.

Firstly, Trinnov's WaveForming.
This is done using at least 4 subs on the front wall and 4 subs on the rear wall. The front wall subs create a wave, the rear wall subs cancel it at the rear wall, so there's little to no wave reflecting back into the room once it hits the rear wall. Using more subs makes this work more like Trinnov wants it to work. Trinnov expects an equal amount of subs per wall if possible, but in the case of this particular theater I can only speculate about all the reasons why there's 8 on the front wall and only 4 on the rear wall. One big possible reason is that there's a huge diffuser on the rear wall, which is directly in the path of where other possible subs would be. Plus, the room is very well treated, so I would expect less difficulty controlling most of the bass frequencies with the WaveForming system.

Another reason for using many subs vs only one or two is that each additional sub in a system means all the subs can produce more output with less effort, less distortion, and in less time due to needing less excursion. Think quick. In my room, which is a bit more than half the cubic footage of this Trinnov theater, I have 8 subs. Using just one sub in my room will not get me to the Dolby spec of 31.5Hz @ 105dB at the MLP without a lot of distortion, and is noticeably slower reacting while doing so. But with 8 subs, each sub works very little comparatively. I ended up with 8 subs after using 2 subs for a while, then adding 2 more for a longer while, and so on until I am super happy with 8 subs in two stacks of four each.

The Trinnov theater is using the correct amount of subwoofer level along with the speaker levels. It's not bloated at all. It's just plain enough and not too much. My system is no different. It's set for not too much, it's the right amount as I can demonstrate using REW response plots, but my plots won't be as nice looking as this Trinnov theater's plots using WaveForming which can make for some incredibly good looking measurements. So yes, I can crank the subs so they rattle the house more than they do now, but then the bloated bass would mask more of the other sounds and become unnatural.

I kind of get it, but...my room is pretty big (17*26 feet). My Rythmik dual 15" sub fills it with ease. I could imagine 1 more, but...4 or 8 our more? I just can't even imagine.

Mark

ttocs and marcl have covered a description of Waveforming very well. Also why large SD is valuable for quality, more than maximum displacement.

I have a slightly different description, or way of saying it:

The goal is to eliminate room boundary problems and inconsistencies as much as possible. I want to produce bass waves at the front, and soak up those waves at the back – all in a room that has small dimensions compared to the wavelengths of the bass. The room isn’t perfect in any way.

Think of the front and back walls as drivers with multiple voice coils. All of the coils, on a wall, could be driven at the same time in the same way and produce a large piston approximating the size of the wall. The back wall is supposed to soak the wave from the front wall in anti-phase. The ‘waves’ may or may not be ‘formed’ correctly to compensate for room and wall problems. This is like a simple DBA – Double Bass Array – which is the foundation for Trinnov Waveforming.

The coils can also be driven with different delays; different phase; different EQ; and different amplitudes – and This is where the ‘Waveforming’ takes place as determined by measurements and the software algorithm. This may compensate for room and wall problems, and keep the 'wave' off the side walls.

A large number of woofers is needed to make this work. If all you were looking for is enough volume, four 15” subs would probably fill the room size as ttocs described.

Dirac Live with DLBC can do the same manipulations, and give consistent bass level at multiple seats, but cannot form waves from front to back. The bass quality will be different. Some may not be able to hear a difference; nor care even if they can hear a difference.

Anyone - Please freely correct my description if you see something wrong.

[klinemj]

ttocs marcl PaulBe

Thanks for the explanations...makes sense. It does seem that there would be a point of diminishing returns on the gains vs. the pains.

I would think that if ttocs' friend hasn't reached it, nobody would! LOL!

Mark

[PaulBe]

Nov 18, 2024 5:28:24 GMT -5 klinemj said:

ttocs marcl PaulBe

Thanks for the explanations...makes sense. It does seem that there would be a point of diminishing returns on the gains vs. the pains.

I would think that if ttocs' friend hasn't reached it, nobody would! LOL!

Mark

A point of diminishing returns is reached when reason collides with ego and the amount of money spent.  Then the pain starts. 

[KeithL]

That sounds about right... and certainly conveys the right idea...

However I think I would add a few more "qualifications"...

First of all, unless you actually cover those two walls with drivers, they will not act as "perfect single planar sources".
You can improve matters with strategic manipulation of phase and amplitude - but only to a degree.

As an approximation the idea that "a flat wave originates at the front wall and is absorbed at the back wall" is a nice idea.
However, in real life, the room has other dimensions, and so other resonance modes...
And real world walls have characteristics that will cause "drag" and "diffraction" as well...

In a sense you are creating the equivalent of "a perfect dipole woofer"...
But, at the same time, you are ELIMINATING any effect that could be described as "pressurizing the room"...
This means that, especially in a small room, this is going to be a very INEFFICIENT way of making bass...

If you look at it in terms of how many drivers you'll need, with how much air displacement, to make how much bass.

And, to take the extreme cases, let's look at two rooms...
One is ten feet wide, ten feet long, and eight feet high...
The other is ten feet wide, fifty feet deep, and eight feet high...
You will need the same number of drivers to cover the front and rear walls of both rooms...
And, on the longer room, it will take 50 msec for the wave to reach the back row from the front wall...
So, for the people in the BACK row, the timing would be better if the subs on the rear wall were running IN PHASE... 
And, if you have a large room, with people all around, I suspect that one sub in each corner, or the center of each wall, would be better...
(Because the bass would be closer to being in phase at every location in the room.)

Clearly this is far from a solution that is going to ALWAYS be optimal.

ALL of these sorts of solutions are compromises, but in different ways, and for different reasons.

Nov 17, 2024 20:52:59 GMT -5 PaulBe said:

Nov 17, 2024 17:34:53 GMT -5 klinemj said:

I kind of get it, but...my room is pretty big (17*26 feet). My Rythmik dual 15" sub fills it with ease. I could imagine 1 more, but...4 or 8 our more? I just can't even imagine.

Mark

ttocs and marcl have covered a description of Waveforming very well. Also why large SD is valuable for quality, more than maximum displacement.

I have a slightly different description, or way of saying it:

The goal is to eliminate room boundary problems and inconsistencies as much as possible. I want to produce bass waves at the front, and soak up those waves at the back – all in a room that has small dimensions compared to the wavelengths of the bass. The room isn’t perfect in any way.

Think of the front and back walls as drivers with multiple voice coils. All of the coils, on a wall, could be driven at the same time in the same way and produce a large piston approximating the size of the wall. The back wall is supposed to soak the wave from the front wall in anti-phase. The ‘waves’ may or may not be ‘formed’ correctly to compensate for room and wall problems. This is like a simple DBA – Double Bass Array – which is the foundation for Trinnov Waveforming.

The coils can also be driven with different delays; different phase; different EQ; and different amplitudes – and This is where the ‘Waveforming’ takes place as determined by measurements and the software algorithm. This may compensate for room and wall problems, and keep the 'wave' off the side walls.

A large number of woofers is needed to make this work. If all you were looking for is enough volume, four 15” subs would probably fill the room size as ttocs described.

Dirac Live with DLBC can do the same manipulations, and give consistent bass level at multiple seats, but cannot form waves from front to back. The bass quality will be different. Some may not be able to hear a difference; nor care even if they can hear a difference.

Anyone - Please freely correct my description if you see something wrong.

[AudioHTIT]

Nov 17, 2024 11:47:33 GMT -5 ttocs said:

…
The great thing about line source speakers is that the SPL is about the same no matter which row I sat in. But, when sitting in the front row, which is not the sweet spot row, there is a drop in impact from the front line source speakers which I am thinking is due to being just a tad below the optimum beam of sound coming from them ...

Harold Beverage was a line source proponent, and had a unique way of delivering it through an acoustic lens; I had a pair of his electrostats for over 20 years. The even sound field is helped by the fact that the SPL from line sources dissipates at 3dB for each doubling of distance (linear), as opposed to the 6dB of typical point source speakers (logarithmic, inverse square law). They also (if you’re within the line) tend to give an even tonal balance, regardless of how tall you are, or whether sitting or standing. Sounds like this system had many of these qualities, great experience that you got to hear it!