I still listen with ambio, and the effect can be unsettling.
Watching some show knowledge network there was a scene where the action happened in a room, the room acoustics where as lousy as the room demanded, but I was suddenly switching off the sound because I heard someone shouting (suppressed, because at a distance) from the outside...the sound came from the speakers, who are in the centre of the listening area, two feet apart.
The sound seem to come from way to the left through the open balcony door. The door is ten feet from the speakers.
Quite some software...
the setting on my processor.
I found most rock and jazz bands well imaged with this method, with extensions several feet to the left and right of the speakers, also most classical orchestral music sounds very well imaged.
The problem comes with records where the ambient sound or the stereo image seem to have been already processed in some way.
An example:
While "kiss my Axe" by Al diMeola sounds very good and spatially extended, "Pictures of an Exhibition" and "Night on a Bald Mountain" produced by Telarc sounds spatially compressed and dull.
The majority of recording however seem to benefit, the reason why I still use this audio scheme.
Watching some show knowledge network there was a scene where the action happened in a room, the room acoustics where as lousy as the room demanded, but I was suddenly switching off the sound because I heard someone shouting (suppressed, because at a distance) from the outside...the sound came from the speakers, who are in the centre of the listening area, two feet apart.
The sound seem to come from way to the left through the open balcony door. The door is ten feet from the speakers.
Quite some software...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
the setting on my processor.
I found most rock and jazz bands well imaged with this method, with extensions several feet to the left and right of the speakers, also most classical orchestral music sounds very well imaged.
The problem comes with records where the ambient sound or the stereo image seem to have been already processed in some way.
An example:
While "kiss my Axe" by Al diMeola sounds very good and spatially extended, "Pictures of an Exhibition" and "Night on a Bald Mountain" produced by Telarc sounds spatially compressed and dull.
The majority of recording however seem to benefit, the reason why I still use this audio scheme.
Last edited:
My apology for not having read this entire thread.
Since switching from stereo to Trinaural (by James Bongiorno, inventor of the full dual differential full complementary amplifier circuit, a legendary high-end audio design history) almost four years ago, I'd never go back to stereo. Stereo thoroughly lacks by comparison. Every source is improved from multi-miked stereo to multi-track to whatever. The best improved are naturally recorded live programs. No known program sounds better in stereo.
This is Bongiorno position: the center channel is dominant. For this reason the speakers need not be exactly matched across the front. In such cases where the speakers are not exactly matched the center channel must be of higher quality. (end JB opinions)
From JB's statement above and my own experience, I conclude the L/R reproduce effects while the center is primary output. It's pure analog, no digital, period. Every channel is algebraically processed including center, which is absolutely not summed mono.
BTW, even the stereo inventor Alan Blumlein admits its flaws. in 08 Stereophile published a well documented article to the same effect. I also understand the AES published similar articles.
In another sound room I heard Trinaural with huge $6k center speaker (flag ship from this company) with the same maker's smallest stand-mounts for L/R (same technology, same driver/Xo type, one mid vs. six on the center). I'd have to agree with JB. It sounded phenomenally good.
Another Trinaural user was similarly addicted to it, but his sweet spot was narrower than with stereo. IIRC this user employed inferior center vs. L/R. He likely had a nice stereo pair of speakers and added a lesser quality center later with the Trinaural. His speaker choice is exactly the opposite of the designer's recommendation. In my case with three matched speakers the sweet is much wider vs. stereo. With stereo the true sweet spot is one person wide. With Trinaural, yes, its ideal in the center, same as stereo. But with stereo, even one person off to the side the stereo imaging is pretty darn awful and quite confused, especially the center image. With Trinaural, for persons on either side of the sweet spot, you loose some center intensity but not too much, and the rest of the stereo imaging is still quite good...it sounds just like you might expect if you moved off to the side at a live event.
Re. stage size, specific image locations within the stage, image outlines, image realism: No stereo except for the $.5M (one-half million USD) MBL Radialstrahler systems displayed at CES is in league with a properly setup Trinaural system (my system total with DIY speakers about $8500 including paying a pro to make the speaker cabinets).
If you've heard MBL at CES you'd like say it was too loud and there was too much midbass...I've heard them several times, occasionally experiencing the areas in which they perform with singular excellence (those mentioned above).
The following are my audio reference points:
• VMPS huge planar arrays, two huge outboard sub columns each column with four or six 12”
• Andrew Jones TAD Reference 1 speakers, 5.0 channel, $200k worth of PASS class A and class AB, playback program source was the original master hard-drive and Pacific Microsonic ADC/DAC used to make the recording, which in one case was Boz Scaggs recorded singing solo while playing the huge grand piano in his San Francisco home…also stereo Reference 1 at later date.
• MBL Radialstrahler, always awesome, though too loud and a bit too much mid-bass at CES, nothing known presents such dense vivid images, CES attendees mesmerized by the look and sound effects, incredibly powerful midbass through midrange presence and density
• Ray Kimber's Iso-Mic CES array, 4-ch, two huge Roger West Sound Lab stats per corner, stack of Pass Class A, never again to be shown because of stat damage due to road wear and tear, about $350k MSRP, Ray's proprietary Iso-Mic 4-ch discreet master recordings, vivid 3-d imaging and most natural staging of any system
• Roger West huge Sound Lab stats at T.H.E. Show estimate 2006, Bob Crump’s Blowtorch preamp, Parasound JC-1 monos (IIRC they were too hot to risk physical contact, bordering on dangerous), demo'd by the preamp co-designer Bob Crump very shortly before he passed away, absolutely incredible transparency, powerful dynamic presence, deep and transparent see-through bass (but still lacking the locking power grip of state of the art dynamic subs), one problem was larger than life imaging of the piano
• Infinity IRS III, 12x servo-controlled 12”, huge dedicated soundroom, DAT source, Onkyo M-510 power amp, at the Tiburon, California home of the owner of Landmark Greeting Cards and Calendars
• Duke LeJeune's AudioKinesis Jazz Module speakers (discontinued TAD 11” midbass, 93 dB, Lynn Olson favorite) with Jolida 200W Music Envoy Monos, custom TT like mine, custom tube line and phono preamps, played Ozzie Ozbourne like he was standing in the room at live levels with no dynamic compression even leading transient edges, an amazing audio highlight…Duke’s Dream Maker is the same as the monopole Jazz Module but DM has bipolar vertical offset radiation pattern, won Robert E. Greene’s 2008 TAS Golden Ear Award.
Since switching from stereo to Trinaural (by James Bongiorno, inventor of the full dual differential full complementary amplifier circuit, a legendary high-end audio design history) almost four years ago, I'd never go back to stereo. Stereo thoroughly lacks by comparison. Every source is improved from multi-miked stereo to multi-track to whatever. The best improved are naturally recorded live programs. No known program sounds better in stereo.
This is Bongiorno position: the center channel is dominant. For this reason the speakers need not be exactly matched across the front. In such cases where the speakers are not exactly matched the center channel must be of higher quality. (end JB opinions)
From JB's statement above and my own experience, I conclude the L/R reproduce effects while the center is primary output. It's pure analog, no digital, period. Every channel is algebraically processed including center, which is absolutely not summed mono.
BTW, even the stereo inventor Alan Blumlein admits its flaws. in 08 Stereophile published a well documented article to the same effect. I also understand the AES published similar articles.
In another sound room I heard Trinaural with huge $6k center speaker (flag ship from this company) with the same maker's smallest stand-mounts for L/R (same technology, same driver/Xo type, one mid vs. six on the center). I'd have to agree with JB. It sounded phenomenally good.
Another Trinaural user was similarly addicted to it, but his sweet spot was narrower than with stereo. IIRC this user employed inferior center vs. L/R. He likely had a nice stereo pair of speakers and added a lesser quality center later with the Trinaural. His speaker choice is exactly the opposite of the designer's recommendation. In my case with three matched speakers the sweet is much wider vs. stereo. With stereo the true sweet spot is one person wide. With Trinaural, yes, its ideal in the center, same as stereo. But with stereo, even one person off to the side the stereo imaging is pretty darn awful and quite confused, especially the center image. With Trinaural, for persons on either side of the sweet spot, you loose some center intensity but not too much, and the rest of the stereo imaging is still quite good...it sounds just like you might expect if you moved off to the side at a live event.
Re. stage size, specific image locations within the stage, image outlines, image realism: No stereo except for the $.5M (one-half million USD) MBL Radialstrahler systems displayed at CES is in league with a properly setup Trinaural system (my system total with DIY speakers about $8500 including paying a pro to make the speaker cabinets).
If you've heard MBL at CES you'd like say it was too loud and there was too much midbass...I've heard them several times, occasionally experiencing the areas in which they perform with singular excellence (those mentioned above).
The following are my audio reference points:
• VMPS huge planar arrays, two huge outboard sub columns each column with four or six 12”
• Andrew Jones TAD Reference 1 speakers, 5.0 channel, $200k worth of PASS class A and class AB, playback program source was the original master hard-drive and Pacific Microsonic ADC/DAC used to make the recording, which in one case was Boz Scaggs recorded singing solo while playing the huge grand piano in his San Francisco home…also stereo Reference 1 at later date.
• MBL Radialstrahler, always awesome, though too loud and a bit too much mid-bass at CES, nothing known presents such dense vivid images, CES attendees mesmerized by the look and sound effects, incredibly powerful midbass through midrange presence and density
• Ray Kimber's Iso-Mic CES array, 4-ch, two huge Roger West Sound Lab stats per corner, stack of Pass Class A, never again to be shown because of stat damage due to road wear and tear, about $350k MSRP, Ray's proprietary Iso-Mic 4-ch discreet master recordings, vivid 3-d imaging and most natural staging of any system
• Roger West huge Sound Lab stats at T.H.E. Show estimate 2006, Bob Crump’s Blowtorch preamp, Parasound JC-1 monos (IIRC they were too hot to risk physical contact, bordering on dangerous), demo'd by the preamp co-designer Bob Crump very shortly before he passed away, absolutely incredible transparency, powerful dynamic presence, deep and transparent see-through bass (but still lacking the locking power grip of state of the art dynamic subs), one problem was larger than life imaging of the piano
• Infinity IRS III, 12x servo-controlled 12”, huge dedicated soundroom, DAT source, Onkyo M-510 power amp, at the Tiburon, California home of the owner of Landmark Greeting Cards and Calendars
• Duke LeJeune's AudioKinesis Jazz Module speakers (discontinued TAD 11” midbass, 93 dB, Lynn Olson favorite) with Jolida 200W Music Envoy Monos, custom TT like mine, custom tube line and phono preamps, played Ozzie Ozbourne like he was standing in the room at live levels with no dynamic compression even leading transient edges, an amazing audio highlight…Duke’s Dream Maker is the same as the monopole Jazz Module but DM has bipolar vertical offset radiation pattern, won Robert E. Greene’s 2008 TAS Golden Ear Award.
Living with the free software for some time, I grew somewhat annoyed at the rather limited controls. So I decided, because I like the concept and the possibilities the free software hinted upon, to purchase this processor:
Electro-Music.com
What a powerful component this is, one has to be very careful changing the parametres, especially zentrum and space. Talk about the image removed from the speakers...listened with this tool now for almost a month, and almost any recording - though there are exceptions - portray a spatial image that is much beyond stereo, and really portrays the instruments in their space.
This is what my settings are as an example:
ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting
Discussion forum
electro-music.com :: View topic - AmbiophonicDSP VST Plugin Now Available
a lot cheaper if you run PC based system than a processor and the added speakers.
Works beautifully with the kef 104/2 and gives impressive spatial imaging.
Electro-Music.com
What a powerful component this is, one has to be very careful changing the parametres, especially zentrum and space. Talk about the image removed from the speakers...listened with this tool now for almost a month, and almost any recording - though there are exceptions - portray a spatial image that is much beyond stereo, and really portrays the instruments in their space.
This is what my settings are as an example:
ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting
Discussion forum
electro-music.com :: View topic - AmbiophonicDSP VST Plugin Now Available
a lot cheaper if you run PC based system than a processor and the added speakers.
Works beautifully with the kef 104/2 and gives impressive spatial imaging.
Then re-master it with processing and "burn" it to a DVD rom.
..or use a dedicated hardware processor (or several processors) that provide the effects you are interested in.
Ex. for ambiophonics:
expensive: TACT.
inexpensive: miniAMBIO
Then re-master it with processing and "burn" it to a DVD rom.
..or use a dedicated hardware processor (or several processors) that provide the effects you are interested in.
Ex. for ambiophonics:
expensive: TACT.
inexpensive: miniAMBIO
OK. Ambio4YOU looks good. Thanks.
I think I know a source that may have Trinaural for about 45% off the original $2k msrp. IMO Trinaural would be far more popular if the inventor had a superb, mid-priced, 3-ch amp available when Trinaural was released circa 2001. Maybe he should have offered it (or a digital version of the circuit) for mass market (receivers) and high-end companies (pre-pros, multi-ch analog preamps). OTOH this might have resulted in reverse engineering followed by minor changes to the circuit and license fee theft...From my reading and listening experience it appears Trinaural is best described as a pure analog version of Meridian's Trifield DSP.
Re. value: IMO the Trinaural is such a big step up from 2-ch (originally called "binaural") that once the system hits the $6-8k msrp range, you could assemble a better sounding Trinaural system than a same-value stereo system (at least with current Trinaural prices best I can tell).
Trinaural can be inserted after any stereo preamp. It has a screw-adjustment pot on the face for center level control. But I far prefer inserting Trinaural in front of a multi-channel analog preamp having remote trim controls for at least two channels, allowing remote trim of bass and center channel (used sporadically but nice when necessary). It may sound overly complex, but its about as natural as a regular volume after some use.
Immediately this sounds way too costly I'm sure. But I happened to audition a particular component recommended by Dr. Earl Geddes valued about $200 used. As a 6.1 remote pure analog preamp with remote channel trim I heard no difference between it and my $7500 40 lb state of the art SS preamp (which I put on par with better known brands costing up to $17k). So it's quite fun using it as a remote analog preamp and occasionally to remotely adjust center or bass levels.
The Trinaural has sub output with variable level, fixed 12 dB crossover @ 80 Hz. The sub output can be used or ignored. A switch allows the mains to run full range or high-pass crossed with the same 12 dB crossover @ 80 Hz.
One Trinaural user I know enjoyed the sound with Acoustat speakers (model 1s IIRC) for L/R and Aerial Acoustics original flagship for center.
Lastly, one of Trinaural's best features is its bypass inputs for 3.1 channels from a HT processor, allowing perfect integration of premium music and HT systems. A retracting perforated screen allows the center speaker to be perfectly set up for both music and HT with absolutely no compromise what so ever in either format.
My L/R speakers employ Dr. Floyd Toole's latest recommendation for ambiance effects: ambiance drivers are duplicates of the main primary drivers. Relative to the main forward firing drivers the ambiance drivers fire 65-degrees offset toward the side walls associated with each L/R channel, and the ambiance drivers are vertical offset to delay arrival 7ms to maintain primacy of the forward firing main drivers. I'd never want to live without this feature. I have separate passive Xo's for main/ambiance systems, parallel wired to require only one amp channel per speaker channel.
But the discreet Xo's allow me to connect/disconnect the ambiance drivers to compare, requiring 5-6 dB more system gain when disconnected (3 dB for impedance increasing from 4 to 8 Ohms, about 2 dB less mechanical gain). Minus the ambiance drivers the stage and image performance fall off a cliff and the entire system performance drops significantly. This would instantly become an industry reference standard if it was widely auditioned IMO.
Because the center speaker has no nearby side wall I modified Toole's application to fire the ambiance drivers 65-degrees downward off a pedestal base on the floor.
The ambiance effects are so good with these three front speakers that I waited about three years to install the surround speakers for HT (needed paint and new grill cloth to match the room).
Sorry, I apologize for not starting a new thread. I thought it was relevant because I've heard Ambiophonics and thought some of the effects were similar.
Bragging rights had nothing to do with this. BTW, I thought this is an Ambiophonics "thread", at the DIYAudio "forum". Threads often stray off topic without such hostile replies, mr. kraut
I'm happy for the moderator to delete my posts.
Last edited:
It's no big deal, but perhaps next time consider sharing your experience with ambiophonics in comparison to Trinaural (..and then continuing with information on Trinaural).
In fact I wouldn't mind that now.
It's always interesting to have comments about an other process that has finally the same goal than Ambi, Ambio or whatever. It would have been even better to have a deeper technical explanation of the Trinaural.
But it would have been also very fair to say that ro9397 is "probably" in the Trinaural business (see here and here).
It's absolutely not a shame or a curse, but some comments could then be perceived differently...
But it would have been also very fair to say that ro9397 is "probably" in the Trinaural business (see here and here).
It's absolutely not a shame or a curse, but some comments could then be perceived differently...
no, maybe even worse: undisclosed business interests?
I find it rather suspicious when a product that is rather expensive for a DIY web forum
is pushed so vociferously, and I also find it telling that my rather restraint criticism of what I perceive pushing a product with such singular zeal, without any comparison to or even mentioning the process the forum was opened to adress, is perceived as being hostile.
If that is being hostile - are there any hidden economic reasons to perceive it as such? It is usually those with undisclosed financial interests posting here that perceive themselves hurt by fair comment.
Last edited:
If I might interject here, I asked James the question about the comparison between the Trinaural processor and the TriField processor.
I asked because I am looking at Multichannel for audio. I am looking at the Burwen software (no commercial interest) for the multichannel and program eq capabilities.
AUDIO_SPLENDOR
We then exchanged a number of emails, about the different approaches to multichannel audio and different speakers. I can say he was very interested in the Burwen software and Dick's approach, he was also helpful in our discussion of speakers. In our conversations he did not push any product at all, either speakers or the Trinaural processor.
James is (AFAIK) very passionate about the difference that going beyond stereo can make and isn't pushing an agenda. His information and experiences are very valuable to this conversation. The area if going beyond 2 channels for audio is still a niche and the different approaches deserved to be discussed. I am unsure whether different threads are needed?
You're welcome!
Maybe someone can help me out, but products like the miniAmbio, miniDSP, etc, all seem to have D/A and A/D converters inside of them. Why can't these products be offered in digital only format so that we don't have to do all this conversion between analog and digital? Doesn't all this conversion degrade the signal quality? Are there straight digital boxes like these that connect up to the digital outputs of Blue Ray players, CD players, etc?
Yes, the TACT Ambiophonics does take in digital and can output digital or analog but it costs. I have been trying to get the Hong Kong company, DSP4you, to make a digital version and they were going to do it but sales of this miniambio product have been so slow that they have shelved it even though Stereophile was waiting to review it.
Basically what is happening is that the market place has shifted from components almost entirely to iPad and Android gizmos. There is a free Ambiophonic app featured in the Apple store and now a $4.95 one for the Android crowd. Jambox may also incorporate such a feature.
The Apple Ambiophonic app has already been downloaded by more users than all the other Ambiophonic products rolled into one. This is an all digital solution if that is what you want. You load a digital file into iTunes and then into an iPad or directly into the iPad. Then you use the Ambiophonic app to output it digitally via Bluetooth or USB to whatever you like. Analog out also of course.
Yes, we can argue about sampling rates and whether anybody on this list will do this because they heard that the iPad does not process at 192/24, etc. but most Apple and Droid devices accept and preserve any file resolution you can download from HD Tracks or copy from a CD or DVD. But I am not an expert on this.
Take a look at Neutron Music Player if you want to see what is possible now for strictly hand held digital devices, wireless to boot.
There are also the VST plugins and the Transcoders that are digital in and out but they reside in a computer so if you think computers/soundcards are not up to the 192/24 standard, then this PC/Mac/Linux digital method is not for you. I think it safe to predict that within ten years there will be no components made except speakers and maybe a few large digital power amplifiers. Same for any stand alone home theater sound products.
Ralph Glasgal
Home Page
