It also applies more weighting to peaks by using a cubic mean (cube root of the average of the cubed values) to produce a plot that more closely corresponds to the perceived frequency response." "Psychoacoustic smoothing uses 1/3 octave below 100Hz, 1/6 octave above 1 kHz and varies from 1/3 octave to 1/6 octave between 100 Hz and 1 kHz. In my post #318 and #321, I shared Frequency (Fq) Responses (relative SPLs) of my multichannel multi-driver multi-amplifier system measured by REW's quick sine-sweep method and graphically represented after its "psychoacoustic smoothing". ST: Metal Horn Super-Tweeter Fostex T925A (L & R) SW: Sub-Woofers Yamaha YST-SW1000 (L & R)īe-SQ: Beryllium Mid-Range Squawkers of Yamaha NS-1000 (L & R)īe-TW: Beryllium High-Range Tweeters of Yamaha NS-1000 (L & R)
In any way, at least in my case, now I feel much relieved about my decision made two years ago that I would not go into the extraordinary expensive Trinnov-path for my multichannel multi-driver multi-amplifier project.įrequency Response Measurements by Using Flat Pinck Noise: Another Primitive but Reliable, Reproducible, Flexibly Re-Analyzable Methodįirst of all, abbreviations in this post I find the above rather disappointing results and comments on Trrinov Altitude 16 is in good conformity with my worries shared here on Trrinov and Scott Borduin's nice response to my thoughts he wrote there "For a stereo multi-driver application like you mention, there is probably little advantage in the Trinnov." Listening tests are paramount." I fully agree with amirm's stance and confidences. If you mean room EQ, then measurements are not that useful. But, in his post #39 there, Amirm clearly, simply and confidently replied to those people by saying "Stuff like xover I could test but i suspect there is nothing exciting there. Furthermore, Trinnov Altitude 16 is not able to play anything above 96 kHz.Īs expected, many people pointed and emphasized that the main value (fit for US $17,000?) of Trinnov Altitude 16 would be its room EQ-DSP software and capabilities. The reported DAC performance of Trinnov Altitude 16 was really disappointing as you find in amirm's review much inferior to OKTO DAC8PRO (which I am using) and DAC8 STEREO. Just today, amirm finally posted his review of Trinnov Altitude 16 which costs US $17,000! It is very interesting for me that, this time, amirm only objectively measured DAC capabilities of Trinnov Altitude 16, then he intentionally (or not?) abandoned further evaluation of Trinnov Altitude 16 as room correction EQ-DSP instrument. This post is a follow-up of my post #344 sharing the possible, soon to be available, amirm's review on Trinnov Altitude. The article is really nice and delivers almost the same messages as amirm just gave to us. I hope your web browser would properly translate it into English. The issue has been also discussed around 2015 in Japan, like in this page even though in Japanese Then, you would please read carefully my above posts here to here. If you have enough relaxed time, you would please watch all of the four amirm's YouTube clips in his threads Just for your reference, (I shared this also here.) As for the UHF noises which we are intensively discussing here now.
0 kommentar(er)
