One of the reasons these electronic EQ systems exist is because many people can't (for various reasons) locate acoustic treatments in a room. I for one am glad they exist as it gives us one more tool to make acoustics sound better. Every available tool, if it's well implemented, will usually make sounds sound better. The other thing I like about electronic EQ over physical room treatment is it's ease of shut off. I can't as easily take the room treatments out of the room.

The best solution is always to make the space work. I've long been skeptical of room EQ solutions because of the inherent difficulties in "fixing" room acoustics upstream of the speaker. Certainly Audyssey has built a pretty good reputation for itself, but it's taken them a long time to reach that point (the MultEQ solution seems to be where the number of satisfied users started to really move ahead of the number of indifferent users, at least from my casual observation on various forums). Even if Trinnov can match what MultEQ has been doing (or even if it exceeds that, which some of the positive press it's received suggests is a real possibility), the fact remains that fixing the space itself is the best solution.

I've been fortunate in my current listening space to be able to get many things "right" acoustically, but there are certainly some things that I've had to fudge to integrate the system into the existing space and the constraints of a den. Having come about as far as I can, I'd be curious to see what a tool like this can actually do.

I merely wanted to make plain the fact that you don't NEED to have this room correction if you make a good room in the first place. I would imagine this would apply mostly to people who are most interested in the highest quality music listening verses the generic home theater, and who have the liberty of optimizing the room for sonics.

The benefit of acoustic treatments gets a very short shift in most quarters, mostly because they are not "sexy" and "cutting edge". But it is extremely important to point out the fact that getting the acoustics _basics_ right in the beginning is the best course if one is interested in the absolute best quality reproduction, especially for music.

Electronic "compensation" reminds me of the "cure" for feeling bad - staying drunk all the time.

It's a worthwhile point to keep out there, Altec. It's also worth pointing out that (at least in theory) the value of this feature decreases relative to the amount of speaker placement adjustment and room treatment that exists, because you will start out closer to the ideal.

Altec,

I also agree with what you said about proper acoustics when designing the room and, of course, that should be the most important consideration. PeterT added some "real world" scenarios to the mix and for this systems such as Audyssey and Trinnov can clearly (no pun intended) serve a purpose. I would add to this the fact that even the best of rooms sometimes have minor adjustments made after the fact (different furniture, slight change in speaker orientation, some different components, etc. not to mention speakers changing after a break-in period) and only the most ardent among us would take the time to adjust the physical acoustics of the room at that point. For MAJOR renovations - yes. But for the little stuff - probably not. A properly designed room equalization system can complement a properly designed room over the long haul for most applications.

In that respect I think we are on the same page here.

I realize the realities of some people's situation, and in those cases these EQ schemes are fine. I really wanted to make it clear, in the face of heavy marketing here and elsewhere, that the Trinnov is not the ONLY solution, and in fact it is not necessairly the IDEAL solution if highest quality is the goal. Good acoustics is the ideal goal, not an electronic band-aid.

Altec,

If you want to change the voicing of your speakers do you re-do your room acoustics or do you do it electronically through your active crossovers etc?

(Yes I know it's not the same - but there are parallels. Presumably you adjust the voicing etc. of your speakers to give you what sounds best to you in your listening environment - and not a test chamber. While you are aided by measurement equipment etc. it's your experience that tells you what kind of response curve from your speakers will give you the "best" sound in your listening environment. The environment and that sound are linked. You deal with it, at least partly, electronically. It's not Tronnov, or Audyssey. But as I said, there are parallels.)

I think there's room for both - when used judiciously and properly. I see it mostly as that crowning touch - or last piece of the puzzle - not as a a wonder drug.

And when I say "properly" , in the absence of the required test gear, knowledge, and capability, I personally look forward to having a pre/pro that, along with doing a ton of other things that I'm looking for, also handles room EQ etc. That it comes from the Outlaws and at a great price makes it a no-brainer in my books.

Jeff Mackwood

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jeff Mackwood:
Altec,

If you want to change the voicing of your speakers do you re-do your room acoustics or do you do it electronically through your active crossovers etc?


Jeff Mackwood [/QUOTE

The acoustics of my room are made to be an non-influential to the sound from the speakers as possible. The active crossover system of course incorporates equalization, and this is to supply the voicing of the speakers which is taken away when the passive crossovers are removed.

People who are new to this especially need to realize that if they think that they can give no thought to the room's acoustics and assume that this miracle black box will make everything perfect, they are fooling themselves.

While also expressing a preference for correcting physical space acoustic problems in physical space rather than electronic space, I welcome the addition of a well-implemented Trinnov system as an improvement for a significant number of situations. For those who find Trinnov undesirable for some uses, hopefully there will be ways to bypass certain aspects without compromising other wanted features.

Regarding room acoustics: I doubt the 997 is designed as a ‘room analyzer’, but even a consumer version of the Trinnov system does obviously have to at least ‘sense’, via the setup microphone array, what is going on in the room and make changes to a certain set of items it finds in a condition different from what is ‘targeted as optimal’. Depending on what information is passed back to the user via unit display or video menu system, one might get a hint of what the one or two worst problems are in the combination of speaker placement and room acoustics. This would allow a user to experiment a bit in their environment to determine which speaker/room modifications result in less electronic correction needed.

Regardless of acoustic or electronic treatments, modifiable passive crossovers, active crossovers, or any electronics that make ‘voicing’ and other output aspects adjustable, the last electronic item to be implemented will have ‘the last word’. As a very simple example, if you had adjustable loudspeaker voicing, and somehow you preferred frequencies from 5K to 8K to be suppressed by 6db, if you ‘voiced’ first, then implemented an electronic system that determined that suppression to be a problem rather than a positive attribute, the electronic system would likely attempt to ‘correct’ your desired suppression. So, in an instance where you might establish a target and achieve a desired acoustic output with a Trinnov system, a passive or an active crossover would still be needed to divide the frequencies in the desired ranges at the desired slopes, but other voicing aspects would tend to be at least partially overridden by EQ electronics. If the electronics allowed you to either establish a target response that included your preference or if you were able to adjust certain features manually after the automatic sensing/adjustment process, one could maintain a preference. Or one could remove their preference, adjust automatically, then ‘re-install’ their preference afterward.

Excellent points BB4TB!

What I personally want is a system that will, in the end, deliver the sound that I prefer to hear, and not a system that tells me what type of sound I should prefer to hear!

But if I am currently unable to generate the sound that I prefer to hear, then something that gets me closer to that goal is always welcome.