Romy the Cat wrote:

In terms of speakers and amplifications for reverberation channels by Yamaha topology it is kind of tricky. As you would be listening quote Yamaha field injection channels output you will see it is not a normal signal and you will find that good acoustic system not necessary need to be there.

Romy the Cat wrote:

You are about to discover a lot of very interesting experiences and I sincerely believe service proper reverberation injection you would not be looking for an options to extend the bottom knee of your Dannoy.

Romy the Cat wrote:

If you read carefully what I stated in my thread about ampX then you recognize the time made some comments which suggest that a proper bass during sound reproduction should not be the same signal as a driven that mid frequency channels. I know that old people pretty much bypasses is comment as meaningless but it is not, and people do not understand what I meant. What I meant however is very crucial. The distribution of harmonic context across amplitude for meat frequency and base supposed to be different and you would need a very very very very very very very smart amplifier which would not be working linear in terms of harmonics but to have on brain how to bias it in actave-dependent fashion. AmpX doesn it natively, for most of us are amplifiers you would need a harmonics equalizer, which is very hard to implement properly. Hypothetically, you might have educated bass amplifier which act at combination of direct, delayed, and harmonically reformed signal but to the best of my knowledge there is no amps who does it. So, when you see super good Bass driver in any enclosure driven by a super good amplifier.... then it is just a bad design from the people who are completely blind to the fact that a linear signal should not be driven base channels.

Romy the Cat wrote:

It is not necessary needs to be DSP 100. There are around a dozen of Yamaha DSP processors good for reverberations. I probably need to record a video about entering a reverberation injection world. If I have a time I will record it later on today

anthony wrote:

Dual voice coils Romy.  Not sure if the Auros have dvc but if they do then perhaps different amps on each voice coil.

I personally do not support any multi-channel audio concept and I really opposed of idea of high quality audio for movie reproduction. I mean it perfectly fine to be at the level of normal consumer electronic but in my view it should not diving into high end world. I was there back in the end of the nighties and I do not like the result, not necessarily the result that I got but conceptually I don't like it. 

Regarding what you are trying to do. Are you trying to replace line level conserving in your amplification with Trinnov processor? It might be a good idea but if I was going to this direction I would certainly keep my main right and left channels not driven by Trinnov. I think if you use Auro Trinnov compromises main right and left channels. I'm not convinced but it is feels like. What however absolutely shock me about Trinnov is the quality of stereo it produces when it does not use any immersive processing. I am not kidding, Bill has absolutely stunning stereo, absolutely the best I ever seen. I do not know if it is his Trinnov or he's quite unique room but the result is very very cool. It would be interesting to hear your feedback about Trinnov stereo. It's very much might not be the quality of Trinnov processing by the fact that build channels are time aligned this insane precision that Trinnov can offer. Another hypothesis is that I have that country to all Bills assurancs Trinnov immersive channels are still shipping some signals through even when the unit is set to run pure stereo.

I certainly not an expert on Trinnov but I think the table is set to make a great experiment for you Anthony, that would be very expensive and very difficult for anybody else to repeat. It is my strong conviction that digital filtration is a fundamental evil. No matter how it implemented it's damages sound purely theoretically and practically. So, if I have multichannel DSET amplification with line level filtration then it would be perfectly fine to drive them from Trinnov channels, witch have spectacular time alignment capacity, but do not engage the crossovering at Trinnov. Time delay at digital is perfect.  You steal might use Trinnov crossovering for low frequency channels if you feel you need to. 

Another very interesting would be to see if Trinnov own DAC are as good as forever best DAC are available out there.  Then of course there is a reasonable question: if Trinnov has DACs which let's say inferior to some kind of other DAC then can it be compensated by writing a custom curve with  Trinnov? A custom curve means digital crossovering inside of Trinnov. It would be fun to learn where you find and where you lose practicing all of this.

The best explanation of my position in regards of hypothetical best is my possession of multi-channel horns and multi-channel amplifications with line level filtration. This is concepts that I "invented" for myself tested it and was inherented for 25 years. I have all evidences and justifications aligned, very much supported with my practical results. The fact that I do not listen right now my Milq and Macondo absolutely does not defeat the concept of DSET.  My main system performs significantly better than my corner horn in so many parameters and you was the witness of it. Those corner horns mapped to AmpX is an accident which is by the way still not completely explained by me. I do not develop from my success with this corner horn and this amplifier as a some kind of universal theory of success as I am not completely convinced where success is coming from.  If you ask me what I feel today is the most advantageous topology in Audio I would certainly proclaim that vertically arranged multi-channel horns with DSET amplification and line filtration. 

From what I observe I do feel that substitution DSET with AmpX is very very very very interesting direction to try. And I am planning to do it sometimes in the future. There is a problem however, and I've been talking with many people about it. AmpX is at solid state device and neither me or anybody else know how to get specific quality of tone from solid state amplification.

Anthony, there is another option for you. If I remember correctly you have 8 sanspeak drivers per side driven by Milq DSET. This is very serious configuration that should produce plenty of base. It will be very very difficult for you to find a ULF channel which will work under your current base channel and produce good result. A typical SS amplification most likely will not work out. Also, money contemporary car woofers that most likely use produce completely different character of sound. They will give you SPL but they will not give you warmth. 

So, I would suggest you to try LF tone control. Tone control have very bad reputation in high end audio because people do not understand what they are dealing with.  If you begin equalize Bass then your face all type of the problems, and none of them can be truly result if you close up your equalization. However,  if you do not close your equalization and keep It wide open to the end Spectra then there are no face distortions equalization is perfectly appropriate. You open prevented surprise for your that very many base sections actually are equalized by internal tone control. So if you, define for yourself let's say 80 HZ to be your turnover point then you can set up your low frequency Milq to increase let's say 3gb at 80 HZ and to let it go all the way down. So, at 40hz you be + 6db at 20 cycles you will be plus 12 DB. I am not sure if your LF Milq both have power for this but you can measure it easily. This type of equalization provide no phase distortions and completely benign.  Is just a few parts. You can do something more sophisticated. Like having two taps at you LF OPT. One tap to drive let's say two roofers for upper mid base between 80 and let's say 40 HZ, and another top driving for woofers under 40 Hertz, equalized. If all of this not going to work then I would like to consider two things. Your current woofer array in my view work significantly better at 30Hz then at 80hz. So, if I were you I would consider to add a separate after the bus channel then low bass channel. A single Vitavox or  vintage Altec or JBL 15  change woofer in a relatively small box of 2-4 sq feet will do a spectacular job as a filler between your upper Bay score in your line array. It is actually what I do. There is another kink in this. You might not have a smart amplifier to produce signal for this dedicated mid-based channel but playing with this channel you will discover that it is hugly impact the overall presentation of your system. It is my strong conviction that whatever system does between 50 and  150 HZ pretty much defines allegiance  of a playback to high end.