Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems Is Trifield Really Better the Stereo

I've had a G68 for a few years now and have been using Trifield for 2 channel music. I've always been really happy with the sound, but started playing with some of the other options a few weeks ago. What I've been surprised by is how good straight Stereo Direct sounds. Compared with Trifield, I think it sounds clearer with base, in particular, more clearly articulated.

I have tried playing with the options like depth and width and phase, but I haven't been able to identify different settings that seem to address this. I wondered if any other users have noticed these types of differences and thought any settings in particular made a significant difference in this regard.

I do use passive speakers -- Definitive Technology Mythos ST which are pretty much full range and have wondered if perhaps Trifield is better suited to Meridian DSP speakers and Stereo settings are better for passive speakers.

Wow, I was just getting ready to ask the very same question! I too have played around with Trifield and usually end up back to the Direct preset as sounding more "solid" and defined and a truer stereo image. I have tinkered with the Trifield settings and don't really detect much difference. I too use passive speakers all around. B&W 800Ds for L & R and B&W HTM1D for center so they should be well matched. Seems like in Trifield the image isn't too stable and instruments will "move around" as I move and turn my head. I listen to mostly classical music and my room is dedicated and sound treated, but I wouldn't think that would make any difference. With all of the applause for Trifield it is a little frustrating that I can't find that sweet spot.

The other question is what do you mean by Trifield is better? I know that's a subjective question but what should I be looking for if I were to hit that Trifield sweet spot?

Thanks,
John Swanson
Omaha, NE, USA

Interesting topic. I have just acquired some DSP 5200's and am waiting for a centre 5200vc so at the moment I am reduced to listening in stereo. Prior to this arrangement I had a complete Mythos speaker system: 1's front, 2's rear and 3 centre. The front 3 were arranged more or less in line with about 2 metres separating the fronts and the centre tweeter pretty well in the same plane as the 1's fronts. Bass was augmented by a velodyne DD12 sub. Width setting for Trifield was 1.2 and depth -0.5,and sub crossover set at 73.

Trifield was excellent with superb soundstaging and imaging so that was my chosen listening parameter.Stereo sounded week and weedy by comparison.

Currently I am using the 5200's placed about 3.5 metres apart with sub crossover set at 60hz. I have to say that the imaging emanating from this is fairly close to that of Trifield previously and I have not yet set up room correction or tweeked the sub.

So I await the imminent arrival of my new centre so as to obtain a true comparison but have to say that if Trifield wasn't available I could get by with stereo

Rod

I use active analogue speakers (ATC System C6) all round with G68/98 driving via balanced lines.

To my ears, Trifield sounds like I imagined stereo should have done all along.
- The centre output locks the image and allows a larger sweetspot so that more than one person can listen optimally.
- The rear ambience lifts the image into the room.

The parameters need tweaking carefully and Meridian don't help themselves here by refusing to publish a "Dummies Guide to Setting-up DSP modes". It's essential to have 3 timbre matched speakers across the front and to set up the system middle depth and level to get the right bass phasing and reinforcement. There have been other threads on here about just this topic. Of the DSP parameters, the width makes the biggest difference to the soundfield and it is important to get this right for your room. I found it just "comes right" as you change the setting. The EQ setting is much more subtle in effect (to the point where I can't hear much difference). The depth setting in the DSP can be used to fine tune the bass.

Regarding the bass, yes, Trifield bass can sound a little reticent compared to stereo and I have +3 bass set in the Trifield preset to offset this (all set up by ear).

Trifield is one of the USPs of Meridian. If you don't use it then changing to other gear becomes easier...

On the whole my experience is Trifield is almost always a significant improvement. It depends a LOT on the type and position of your center speaker. If your center is not as ideal as your mains you may lose a little something (might be less bass or not as tight a bass). The ideal Trifield setup is 3 vertically matched front speakers. Everything else is a compromise. Since Trifield does often add to the experience it usually surpasses any weakness in the center.

It does require some fiddling. Including playing with placements.

That said, I think a "perfect" two channel setup (which is rare) sounds very similar to a "perfect" Trifield setup. What Trifield often does is make up for deficiency in 2 channel setups (usually positions).

Also in highly damped rooms like HT it fills in the holes that a more live 2 channel room naturally has.

When I first setup my 6000's I had them about a 1/3 out into the room. With just running in stereo they sounded amazing. It was not practical to leave them in the middle of the room. Once I put them in a more practical location they lost a lot of what they had. But when I turn Trifield on it comes back. It does not sound the same as it did with 2 channels in the middle of the room but sounds very good. One person may prefer one over the other.

So the bottom line is there are tons of variables here. And I like to think of Trifield as a tool to solve problems in common practical installations.

So I can find it plausible someone may prefer the 2 channel over Trifield. I've never heard a "perfect" 2 channel or a "perfect" Trifield. There is no such thing. You may think your 2 channel is perfect and with a few tweaks a Trifield may top it. Then with a few more tweaks 2 channel may top that. And so on... So it's always worth playing with. You may find with fiddling you can "top" what ever you currently think is best.

Just a quick reply on the initial responses.

My post was simply on whether Trifield really sounds better than stereo, which seems to almost be taken as a given in post after post on this site.

I would agree Trifield improves the stereo image, particularly if off axis. While this is clearly a plus, what I was getting at is the articulation of instruments and voices does not appear to me to be as clear with Trifield as with Stereo direct.

Bass in particular does not appear to be as articulate rather than just loud which makes me think it may be more what I might describe as a phase masking issue that just turning up the base setting does not completely satisfactorily address.

Looking forward to more comments...

Read my post. There are too many variables from one persons setup to another to make a blanket statement like that. I guarantee there are many here that feel the reverse (Trifield articulates instruments etc.). In my setup bass improves with Trifield (but it required a lot of fiddling and it was previously making it worse, the depth does not always fix all the bass in my opinion).

If bass is a problem in Trifield try setting your center small and play with the crossover.

Also describe your setup. Namely how matched is your front 3? Trifield definitely stresses the center be very good. If your center tweeter is off from your mains tweeter axis and stuffed in a cabinet there starts a lot of problems with Trifield. But don't blame Trifield for that.

I was very interested to read this thread because it also seemed to me that everyone on the hitchhikers used and loved Trifield so we were the odd ones out. One of the two main reasons that we added the G68 to our G91 start was to get musiclogic as we were not thrilled with Trifield or "just" stereo. Our system is in one room but it is open to 2 other rooms. With the musiclogic we hear a realistic full soundstage no matter where we are.

For us the question of stereo vs Trifield is moot as we consider musiclogic the ultimate. This preference could be a carry over from out previous system where we used the Proceed AVP2 surround sound in our completely open layout previous house

Please note I said "does not appear to me", recognizing others may have different perceptions.

In terms of my set up, the L and R speakers are Mythos ST. The Centre is a Mythos 10 which has the same midranges and tweeters and is supposed to be "matched", recognizing the cabinet and horizontal orientation of the centre is by definition not matched. The Centre is on the top of a table and only a couple inches below the midrange and tweeters of the STs, so I think the positioning is relatively good, given it's not practical for most to get the tweeters on exactly the same axis

The quality of the center channel is crtical (both the speaker and amplification). If you have top notch gear for R and L but one of those horizontal speakers designed for movies at C then probably standard 2-channel IS going to sound better. If, however, you can put something better at C then in my experience Trifield will be better in almost all situations.

The problem is that many speaker manufacturers don't make a comparable quality center channel speaker so you are forced to experiment/compomise. I have had more center speakers in my system than nay other compnenet and it has just been quite recently that I have found something (partly bought, partly made) that is acceptable. It has been stated extensively elsewhere, but if you cannot go with three identical speakers/amplifiers across the front, at least try to find a center that is a tonal match with reasonably close frequency range (the calibration tones in the Meridian processors are a good way to get a sense of how close tonally your speakers are).

My thoughts, at least!

Having just popped out a "driver identical" L/R and CC grouping and putting back in my identical speakers it is (to me) an enormous difference.

I've said this before and I'll say it again here. One of the biggest myths in HT is the "timbre matched" center channel. Are the drivers identical? Often not. Is the cabinet identical "often not". Those are two big gotchas.

Personally, I prefer Trifield to stereo as it truly anchors the sound field. However, just like everything it has to be tweaked, not the least of which is the speaker positioning. I have a few recordings I use to lock in my speaker locations. Then I sit back and enjoy

Cheers,

I used the Trifield exclusivly for the first couple of months I had my M speakers (dsp5000 & 5000c)- The last week or to I've had a chance to play a little and I like the direct I think a little better - The Trifield makes the soundstage more concrete, but the direct lets the instruments breathe better (a little more airy)the soundstage is also wider with the direct mode