2. home-theater
  3. 1076773766

Opinions On Ampzilla Trinaural Processor?

http://www.ampzilla2000.com/trinaural.html

I am asking for opinions on this odd piece of equipment. In effect it seems to take a traditional 2 channel source and turn what goes out into 3 channels worth of "3 channel stereo". Some old-schoolers have mentioned that when stereo was first invented, 3 channel stereo was said by some to have been superior. This device seems to try to go back and sort-of right that "wrong". The inventor also seems to be alleging that it would be superior to, or competetive with, a 3 channel or multi-channel solution offered by today's more-advanced processing.

It's hard to know which forum to place this question in, but that's sort of the point. I was going to place it in tech talk, but the electronics-related answers wouldn't be as meaningful to me. What I want to know is whether this might be a good way for me to explore and find more natural sound, going from 2-channel, as opposed, say, to going to HT sound whole-hog. I think we've all read a lot of posts from folks who had a good 2 channel setup that they were sort of satisfied with, and then they tried the multichannel thing and on balance it bugged them, so then they went back to 2 channel. I'm sort of wondering if this ampzilla device would be an interesting experiment to add a 3rd channel without "ruining" anything the way some purists seem to think happens when they try multi-channel.

One of the reviewers did mention, I think, that the sound takes getting used-to, and that someone else walking into the room would, upon initial hearing, possibly take the sound as not as meaningful as he (the reviewer) thought it was.

Last note: One other person tried to start a thread on this topic last year in amps/preamps. I tried posting in response to that topic and the moderator(s) in their infinite wisdom, somehow decided to nix my post. Why on Earth?

That is why I am trying to start a new thread... because I'm interested to hear if anyone has developed an opinion of this ampzilla 3-channel stereo (trereo?) sound.
joshl
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Joshl...Logic assisted matrix decoders were around before digital. Sure, it can be all analog.

However, there are some real advantages to doing the job in the digital domain. Most important, the signal that you are listening to can be delayed slightly so as to give the logic time to figure out how gains should be adjusted for the signal. With analog processing the logic is always just a little bit behind the action, and this can lead to "pumping". Some analog processors were much better than others in this regard. Also, if your signal comes from a CD player it is digital already, so it makes sense to process it digitally.
jasonalanpowell's avatar
jasonalanpowell
5 posts
 
The points raised about the benefits of staying within the digital domain are by far my greatest concerns with this unit.

Though I love what the Tri P has done of my current system, I will likely go with a heavily modded all in one digital receiver using the digital out of a modded universal player next year when I spend some serious money. Digial receivers have made great leaps as of late, and will likely do so even more in the year to come. This will allow me to spend even more on my main speakers.

I feel the greatest benefit of the Tri P is is frees up the side speakers from having to create a phantom center image. This really lets them "breathe" and spend time focusing on the elements of music that most of the time may simply be lost.

I will be buying either the VMPS RM40s or E/Xs next year, and I really feel both of these speakers are capable of handling the complexities of most music on their own.

The all digital age in audio is upon us, and I feel I should move forward with my next purchase rather than staying behind in analog. The Tri P is a great product and has really made my current system sound fantastic. But onward to all digital I go.

Just my two cents...
joshl OP
26 posts
 
Thanks for the response. I must admit, it mirrors some of my situation and thus may influence some of my decision-making. I have a decent affordable TT on the way that I just bought on audiogon, since mine's a bit worn out, and I *definitely* prefer the sound of vinyl up until now.

But I happen to have a third speaker I want to play, and two surround-speakers, and my music-purchasing is likely to be not only of used vinyl but also of downloads and multi-channel disks.

I spend much more on software than hardware (I refuse to get audiophilia nervosa and get obsessed with hardware). I want to get a chance to remain open to the future and see what there is to offer there. If the future is four or more channels, than I'm going to see what that sounds like.

For my analog listening, though, I'm going to keep an eye on that as a separate issue. I just find myself enjoying it more up until now, and that's the test of things for me. I guess I'm sort of like a photographer who preferred film to digital up until digital got very very good, and still wants to preserve some ability to do film for his art.

So for my analog listening I may maintain some separate ability to hook up some modestly-priced separate equipment pieces (i.e. a separate preamp going to my amp to my front two speakers), to play back the recordings in a straighforward less-lossy manner.
jasonalanpowell's avatar
jasonalanpowell
5 posts
 
If I was staying with analog this item would be a no brainer for me. In fact, I was listening to it today - have to take it back on Thursday - thinking just how much I was going to miss it.

Just when I think I've finally made up my mind the Tri P does some magic with some of my favorite recordings. I guess I have a full year to make my decision.

Must.....go....digital....can't....look...back....

I'll probably go digital, but I guess the pure digital route will really have to blow me away to keep me from going with this type of set up.
More to discover