# H-Audio TRINITY review



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Disclaimer: This review is completely subjective, and will have no real data supporting any outlandish claims that may or may not be contained herewithin. These are just my initial impressions after connecting and listening to the drivers. Your results may vary. That being said, on with the review! 

This review is for the *H Audio TRINITY *3" mid/full range driver.


The Trinity is a 3" mid/fullrange driver from H-Audio that has a nice titanium/magnesium cone material. It also has a compact motor and basket, shallow mounting depth (under 2") and excellent build quality. It is visually very similar to the Fountek FR88 as they share the same basket and magnet, however the Trinity has a higher grade copper in the motor, and more of it. It also has a different cone material and color. The drivers are 4ohm impedance and rated for 15w/30w peak RMS power handling.


*Testing Environment:*
The drivers were installed into PVC test enclosures (appx 0.75 liter volume)which were sealed and placed on the dash of my 2003 Lancer aimed on axis to my drivers seat position, slightly lower than ear level. They were placed as close to the edges of the dash (A-Pillars) as possible to simulate the prospective mounting locations.


*Testing Equipment:*
The Trinity's were powered by an Xtant 404m amplifier, bridged down to 2 channels, providing appx 200 watts @ 4ohms per driver. A second Xtant 
404m amplifier was bridged to 2 channels providing 100 watts @ 8ohms per driver to a pair of M&K SLS 8" midbasses which were installed in the doors. Gains were adjusted for L/R to provide audibly equal output from the drivers position. Signal and processing duties are handled by a Clarion DRZ-9255 source unit. The DRZ output gains for the TRINITY and SLS drivers were adjusted by ear to match levels appropriately. Time alignment was used as well. Further tuning could be done in addition to really dial in this setup, however, since these are test enclosures (not permanently mounted) I wanted to just get a feel for how the drivers would be able to perform.


*Testing Material:* 
Various discs and tracks were used including the Focal "Spirit of the Sound" Demo cd and my Master Demo disc. (Search for "Focal Demo Discs" on the site...)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Photos:*


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

You can see above the visual comparison to the FR88 as well as the Tang Band W3-1364SA.



*Listening Impressions:*

I listened to a number of tracks that I use for testing all of these drivers, to keep things pretty consistent. Im not going to go into great detail as to what I heard on each track etc in this review, but I will give you my overall descriptions and impressions of these drivers. I tried them in the 0.75 sealed enclosures as well as wrapped in cloth on the dash to see the difference the enclosure would make.
The TRINITY is a very smooth driver indeed. When I tested the Fountek FR88, I noted that they had a bit of the usual "metal cone sound" due to the bright nature of the aluminum cones. The Trinity does not exhibit any of this. It actually surprised me by its more laid back and smooth nature. Mark was right about the titanium/magnesium combination making for a smoother overall sound.
On axis, I felt that these drivers didnt quite have the high end extension that the Tangband W3-1364SA or the FR88 had. It was not lacking much, but a little. I believe these were designed to be used in tandem with a small tweeter and I would recommend the use of a tweeter OR using a touch of EQ to add just a little top end. They may actually be just fine for some as they are, but I prefer a more detailed upper frequency range and by addding just a little bit of EQ from 10K up, these sounded pretty damn good. Male and female vocals have very nice detail and are not harsh or in your face by any means. The spots where I noticed a lack of top end detail were in cymbal strikes mainly. A little EQ fixed that up quite well. (+2db @16K, [email protected] 12.5K, [email protected])

They are clear and accurate and played quite well crossed at HPF 315Hz -18db on up. Tonality was quite good and imaging after my usual tuning was tight and locked dead center. Off axis response yields a noticeable drop off in upper frequency extension, so a tweeter is a must in those mounting configurations. I also noticed that they have really good sensitivity as well. It doesnt take much power to get these drivers up to a spirited volume.

Overall, I think these are very, very good. If you're looking for a full range driver to run to 15K I think they will serve you quite well (EQ-ability allows even more potential). If you mate them with a small silk tweeter like the H-Audio Enigma, I think they are a definite winner - A well built, compact, and great sounding widebander.


----------



## niceguy (Mar 12, 2006)

Nice review....I'd like to try a pair but will probably start w/something budget first like the TB 3"....

Jeremy


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

Thanks for the review! I have been waiting for these but as it always seems to happen....things come up now that the drivers are available.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

niceguy said:


> Nice review....I'd like to try a pair but will probably start w/something budget first like the TB 3"....
> 
> Jeremy


Sounds like a good plan. The Fountek FR88 and Tang Band W3-1364SA are both terrific drivers and compare to drivers costing MUCH more money.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Thanks for the great and honest review sir. 

You would be correct, the Enigma High-Res tweeter was brought about if some one want to add that last little bit of top end detail to the Trinity do to its smooth and natural, but detailed sound or any to other wide-band driver for that matter. IHMO (not that it matters) the ET 2-way (Enigma and Trinity) crossed at 10-12khz is a combo for 315hz-up to is hard to beat at any price range. 

I can also tell you this; as the Trinity breaks in even more, it gets better. I recommend 20-30 hours before any critical listening is done as you did. The total break time is around 80-100 hours via the designer/builder of the drivers. I would have to say that is very close to being correct as the more I listen to them the better things got. The high-end extend a little better as did the low-end. I would have to say it is do to the strong motor over the FR88-ex and the higher quality of parts used in the motor.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Hey Mark, how well would the Trinity do crossed around 250Hz with either an 18db/oct or 24db/oct slope?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

^^
They still sounded decent to my ears Zach. I tried them as low as 200hz, in enclosures, and out of the enclosures but wrapped in cloth and they seemed to do pretty well there in both instances. Im not sure what distortion graphs would show at that point, but to the ear they played pretty well. I would probably stick to a higher cross point though if your midbasses are capable enough to extend into that range.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

captainobvious said:


> ^^
> They still sounded decent to my ears Zach. I tried them as low as 200hz, in enclosures, and out of the enclosures but wrapped in cloth and they seemed to do pretty well there in both instances. Im not sure what distortion graphs would show at that point, but to the ear they played pretty well. I would probably stick to a higher cross point though if your midbasses are capable enough to extend into that range.


My midbass can play up to 1KHz cleanly.  I'll experiment with the Trinity when I get my turn. But I'd like to stay between 250-300Hz if at all possible. This is with the mid in a .9L sealed pod.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Boostedrex said:


> My midbass can play up to 1KHz cleanly.  I'll experiment with the Trinity when I get my turn. But I'd like to stay between 250-300Hz if at all possible. This is with the mid in a .9L sealed pod.


In the .9L sealed you can go down to 200hz and be fine. But watch you power running them down that low. As with any small driver; the lower you play them the less power you can throw their way. Also it does have a small adverse affect on the detail in the higher midrange of the driver. I have test a ton of small drivers and this hold true for everyone I have tested. This includes drivers sizes from 2" - 7".

If your mid/bass can play to 1khz without a problem 300-400 would be a better point as captainobvious stated; as the resolution and detail would improve a bit from the small driver not having to extend low and use so much of its excursion. Not that is will sound bad or anything like that is just what I have notice from testing so many drivers. The less work the driver has to do the better the detail.


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

Thanks for another well thought out review, i've just ordered a pair.

My active HU doesn't have the most flexible cross overs unfortunately, i wanted to cross the Trinitys at 250-300hz with some thing like a 18db slope. 

The lowest it can be set is about 600hz iirc, if i use this with a 6db slope will that be OK do you think ?

They are going to be paired up to some SLS 8" which i just got today.


----------



## handy (Feb 23, 2007)

I use H-audio speaker setup in my car.
my systems consist of Alpine dvd, PXA. PPI power amps and old Lanzar Sub
i use Ebony midbass , FR88ex/X3/AP3FR and Enigma Tweeter.










in this photo i use FR88EX










in AP3FR and Enigma Tweeter

i also tested FR88ex with Soul midbass










tested X3/AP3 in TL Box










My RTA response in car 
Green left speakers yellow right speakers










Black Box Pro


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Here-I-Come said:


> In the .9L sealed you can go down to 200hz and be fine. But watch you power running them down that low. As with any small driver; the lower you play them the less power you can throw their way. Also it does have a small adverse affect on the detail in the higher midrange of the driver. I have test a ton of small drivers and this hold true for everyone I have tested. This includes drivers sizes from 2" - 7".
> 
> If your mid/bass can play to 1khz without a problem 300-400 would be a better point as captainobvious stated; as the resolution and detail would improve a bit from the small driver not having to extend low and use so much of its excursion. Not that is will sound bad or anything like that is just what I have notice from testing so many drivers. The less work the driver has to do the better the detail.


Thank you sir. And I completely agree with asking as little as possible out of a driver. My biggest thing is just getting as much of the vocal spectrum out of my dedicated mid as possible. We seem to have very similar schools of thought on that as it is.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

handy said:


> I use H-audio speaker setup in my car.
> my systems consist of Alpine dvd, PXA. PPI power amps and old Lanzar Sub
> i use Ebony midbass , FR88ex/X3/AP3FR and Enigma Tweeter.
> 
> ...


How is it going Handy, I pass by the Indonesian forum quite a bit to see what you guys are talking about. I have to use a translator, but I get the idea of most topics. I seen your photos in the AP thread.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Boostedrex said:


> Thank you sir. And I completely agree with asking as little as possible out of a driver. My biggest thing is just getting as much of the vocal spectrum out of my dedicated mid as possible. We seem to have very similar schools of thought on that as it is.


At 400hz try a 12 or 18db slope on the Trinity on the highpass and crossed the mid/bass at about 200hz with a 12 or 18db slope, it should transition pretty well.

I'm with you, I try not to run any driver to its limits. It just insures clear and dynamic sound reproduction.


----------



## jonnyanalog (Nov 14, 2007)

The only real downside I see to these drivers is their high price in comparison to say the Fountek or Tang Band. 
Overall great review. I really like your standardized format; it makes it very easy to read and compare to your other reviews.


----------



## unpredictableacts (Aug 16, 2006)

jonnyanalog said:


> The only real downside I see to these drivers is their high price in comparison to say the Fountek or Tang Band.
> Overall great review. I really like your standardized format; it makes it very easy to read and compare to your other reviews.


Or cheap when compared to the Scan 12m and other similar drivers.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

jonnyanalog said:


> The only real downside I see to these drivers is their high price in comparison to say the Fountek or Tang Band.
> Overall great review. I really like your standardized format; it makes it very easy to read and compare to your other reviews.


Thanks Jonny, much appreciated.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

jonnyanalog said:


> The only real downside I see to these drivers is their high price in comparison to say the Fountek or Tang Band.





unpredictableacts said:


> Or cheap when compared to the Scan 12m and other similar drivers.


 Well, I guess it can be said that we now have quality small mids at all price points. Tang Band, Peerless, Aura, Fountek, Dayton Audio, H-Audio, Pioneer PRS, Scan-Speak, Focal, etc. *From ~ $40- $600 a set for 3"-4" mids. *Don't compare prices...just pick a set that suites your budget. 


It seems as if these Trinity drivers are right in the middle in terms of price but have some pretty good potential in terms of sound....just a matter of choice....the more the better. IMO, I would rather spend the $180 on these now then go all out at the $500-$600 range for something like a FOCAL Be driver. Others, will go for the $50 Fountek or the $100 Tang Band set and not spend a dime more. All nice sets!

I WILL REPEAT, it is all about choices....the more the better....no need to compare prices....Stay within your budget....there are NICE 3"-4" drivers in every price range right now, today, October 1, 2009!


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

^^ Very true. However, I will say this much...Higher price does NOT mean substantially better quality or better sound.
The $50/pair Fountek FR88 and $60/pair Tang Band W3 bamboo's are easily as good in both quality and sound departments as the big dollar drivers. The thing is, each of these drivers has a different overall sound, so I would recommend starting with the material that suits you best. Paper/ aluminum / mixed alloy metals / poly, etc all have some different sonic qualities because of the mass and stiffness of the cones.
I prefer paper and paper hybrid cones myself and because of that I ws naturally drawn more to the warmer sound of the Tang Band W3 bamboo's, the HAT L4's and surprisingly, even these Trinity's with the softer metal alloy.


----------



## zacjones99 (May 11, 2009)

Thanks for another great review. On a side note, did you notice a difference between the M&K SLS8 and the 830667?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

zacjones99 said:


> Thanks for another great review. On a side note, did you notice a difference between the M&K SLS8 and the 830667?


Funny you ask that as I was just thinking about this today. The M&K's are now well broken in (over 100 hours of actual use) and I can say this about them- They seem to have *slightly* better low frequency extension (30-40hz area) but they dont play as cleanly throughout the entire bandwidth I use them at (63/80hz up to 250hz). I suspect the HD plots between this driver and the 830667 Peerless SLS would look close, with the M&K rising a bit more at those extremities.
I think the extra low end is probably noticed due to the higher qts, with both drivers being mounted in doors of a guestimated 40liters or so.

My preference is defintely the cleaner Peerless 830667. I'm also very interested in trying the Usher 8955A 8" driver as that should have excellent HD performance in the range Im using them at, and they would allow me more flexibility with a higher crossover point (say 400-500hz) to ease up on the Trinity mids. Anyone have experience with the Ushers in doors or IB?

Shame Mark doesnt have an 8"er to try out with these yet :surprised:

Oh, and I DO now have the Enigma's in my posession so I will be testing out the Trinity's along with the Enigma tweeters most likely next week. Stay tuned.


----------



## zacjones99 (May 11, 2009)

Thanks for that. I've got the 830667 in my doors playing the same range as you are, but I couldn't help but wonder about the M&K's. I wonder no more.


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

How are you finding the Trinitys now you've had them a while ?

Which out of all the WB drivers you've tested are you going to use long term ?

Thanks


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

andy335touring said:


> How are you finding the Trinitys now you've had them a while ?
> 
> Which out of all the WB drivers you've tested are you going to use long term ?
> 
> Thanks


The Trinity's are very good. They have a different sound than the W3 bamboo's that I also really enjoy. difference between the two is that the Trinity needs a tweeter whereas the W3 does not, in my opinion...and when used on axis. But the Trinity was designed to be used with one, so thats not sleight against it.
I have the Enigma tweets in my posession and I am trying to find some time here to get them tested. Im moving to a new house soon here so there is alot going on right now. But I WILL get up a review with the Trinity/Enigma combo as promised.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I got a chance to hear the trinity and enigma’s installed in Ryan’s (slade) car this weekend at the BBQ.
He hadn’t done any tuning to them. He had only roughly set the crossovers. Tweets and midranges were in the pillars. The install looked like this (hope you don’t mind me posting this, Ryan):









^ that’s Mark Brooks, owner of H-Audio doing some tuning later in the day


Anyway, while Mark and I were sitting in Ryan’s car listening together and talking about tuning, we didn’t do anything except for toy with crossovers. Ryan had the trinity from 500-8khz and the enigma from 9khz+, iirc when he showed up. *keep in mind that Ryan was literally setting gains the minute he drove up to my house. He hadn't done any tuning at all on them yet.

Mark dropped the trinity down to 300hz with a 12db slope and it was a huge difference in sound. The vocals had much more depth and bottom to them (as they should, really, from 500hz to 300hz). The tonality was great. There was no sibiliance in this install AT ALL. NO EQ work was done. Just x-overs. I was truly impressed! 
Bottom line, if I were building a setup I’d own a set of these drivers. They sounded very, very nice to me. Almost had a Scanspeak sound to them. Tonality was great. Imaging was nice. My cup of tea.


----------



## KARPE (Nov 9, 2008)

Mark just sent me my Trinity's. I cant wait to get these installed


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

captainobvious said:


> The Trinity's are very good. They have a different sound than the W3 bamboo's that I also really enjoy. difference between the two is that the Trinity needs a tweeter whereas the W3 does not, in my opinion...and when used on axis. But the Trinity was designed to be used with one, so thats not sleight against it.
> I have the Enigma tweets in my posession and I am trying to find some time here to get them tested. Im moving to a new house soon here so there is alot going on right now. But I WILL get up a review with the Trinity/Enigma combo as promised.


Thanks a lot for your feed back, i was hoping the Trinitys wouldn't need a tweeter from a KISS point of view, not the end of the world though as i've got some dyn tweeters i can use.

I'll have to get my enclosures finished off and see how i get on with them.


----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

if you have an eq.. I wouldn't stress with the top end roll off...


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

the other hated guy said:


> if you have an eq.. I wouldn't stress with the top end roll off...


You're going to have to do a good bit of cutting to level them out enough to where the top end doesnt sag.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

Mark looks like he's asleep in that pic!


----------



## friction (Apr 24, 2008)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Mark looks like he's asleep in that pic!


seems to me its the trinity affect lol


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Oh my goodness thats one ugly mug. Ryan's car does sound nice. Once it gets some real tunning on it, its going to be pretty bad a**. He'e running the Ebony in the doors to round out the EET 3-way arrangement.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

The funny thing is that Mark was smiling until he saw the camera. Then he got serious. As soon as the flash went off, he started smiling again.
Mean muggin!


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

bikinpunk said:


> The funny thing is that Mark was smiling until he saw the camera. Then he got serious. As soon as the flash went off, he started smiling again.
> Mean muggin!


LOL, .


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)




----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

not talking about cutting.. a gental ramp from say 10k and up will help and fix most issues


captainobvious said:


> You're going to have to do a good bit of cutting to level them out enough to where the top end doesnt sag.


----------



## OSN (Nov 19, 2008)

the other hated guy said:


> not talking about cutting.. a gental ramp from say 10k and up will help and fix most issues


I think I would prefer a tweet that wouldn't need the artificial boost.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Well, if you’re going to be hard headed about it, just raise your tweeter gain and then lower your EQ bands so that you then have a boost in the upper frequency.


----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

why.. so you can add phase issues and a possibility to not have it optimally placed because know you have a tweeter to contend with?.. I don't see your logic..

It's not the EQ that causes unatural sounds.. it's the person not knowing how to work that EQ who does



OldSchoolNewbie said:


> I think I would prefer a tweet that wouldn't need the artificial boost.


----------



## OSN (Nov 19, 2008)

the other hated guy said:


> why.. so you can add phase issues and a possibility to not have it optimally placed because know you have a tweeter to contend with?.. I don't see your logic..
> 
> It's not the EQ that causes unatural sounds.. it's the person not knowing how to work that EQ who does


So you are saying that raising eq gains has no negative effects? That seems to be what you're implying. What happens to your signal voltage?


----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

you are realy search for something here aren't you.. what ever small ... and I do mean small issue with signal voltage will be trumped 10 fold by the flexibility of equilization... this holds true with any driver... and any install.. in any car..



OldSchoolNewbie said:


> So you are saying that raising eq gains has no negative effects? That seems to be what you're implying. What happens to your signal voltage?


----------



## OSN (Nov 19, 2008)

the other hated guy said:


> you are realy search for something here aren't you.. what ever small ... and I do mean small issue with signal voltage will be trumped 10 fold by the flexibility of equilization... this holds true with any driver... and any install.. in any car..


:laugh: I'm not searching for anything- just was always told that it's best to cut eq bands that peak and keep boosting frequencies to a minimum. I wanted to hear your rationale, which you provided. I am guessing that cutting the other frequencies to match the lower output of the top end (and adjusting with gains) would have a different end result than boosting the top end. Granted, harmonics are limited at that range, just seems unorthodoxed.


----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

nothing unorthodox about it.. you have ot get out of that mindset.. the bottom line is.. if you need to cut... then cut... if you need to boost then boost... +/- 10db I don't care.. 

doing spacial averaging at listening position will show you this... 



OldSchoolNewbie said:


> :laugh: I'm not searching for anything- just was always told that it's best to cut eq bands that peak and keep boosting frequencies to a minimum. I wanted to hear your rationale, which you provided. I am guessing that cutting the other frequencies to match the lower output of the top end (and adjusting with gains) would have a different end result than boosting the top end. Granted, harmonics are limited at that range, just seems unorthodoxed.


----------



## slade1274 (Mar 25, 2008)

captainobvious said:


>


FTMFW :laugh:


----------



## less (Nov 30, 2006)

captainobvious said:


> ^^ Very true. However, I will say this much...Higher price does NOT mean substantially better quality or better sound.
> The $50/pair Fountek FR88 and $60/pair Tang Band W3 bamboo's are easily as good in both quality and sound departments as the big dollar drivers. The thing is, each of these drivers has a different overall sound, so I would recommend starting with the material that suits you best. Paper/ aluminum / mixed alloy metals / poly, etc all have some different sonic qualities because of the mass and stiffness of the cones.
> I prefer paper and paper hybrid cones myself and because of that I ws naturally drawn more to the warmer sound of the Tang Band W3 bamboo's, the HAT L4's and surprisingly, even these Trinity's with the softer metal alloy.


First, thanks for the review... its nice to see some information about some of the neat new products coming out lately. 

ABSOLUTELY - well said Captain! I too am a paper products person - with no disrespect to anyone who prefers any other material... and it is clear that all materials do have an inherent sound quality that as of yet, remains unquantifiable, yet unquestionably exist. Naturally, there are a number of factors that contribute to the difference in sound of various drivers, but the cone/dome/driver surface material is most easily distinguished. 

Naturally, there are exceptions to every rule, but I learned about this through my experience using Rainbow drivers. I owned Profi's - both paper and alum versions, and the Platinum. Blindfolded and with plugs in my ears (ok - maybe I am overstating things a nick) I could tell and prefer the paper cone - while obviously many others liked the other options more. To me, more often than not, poly cones sound somewhat slow or dull - metal cones/domes sound either sterile or bright and silk/paper sounds relaxed and natural. 

I'd sure love to hear a set of these guys though! Ever since I had my tweeters mounted on the apillars, I've missed the super high sound stage. It just wasn't quite right though without the mids beingup there too... I've been tinkering with ways to get something to fit my Civic coupe's pillars and these look interesting indeed. 

Thanks again for the review.

Less


----------



## less (Nov 30, 2006)

BTW - the enclosures in that shot look nicely small! Is that near the recommended/optimum volume for the midrange driver or just what fit the installers vision? Didn't H- Audio just join the ranks of the DIYMA manufactures club too? Wouldn't it be sweet to see a couple give aways to help get the word out on these buggers?


Less


----------



## thsiow10 (Nov 16, 2007)

captainobvious said:


> Oh, and I DO now have the Enigma's in my posession so I will be testing out the Trinity's along with the Enigma tweeters most likely next week. Stay tuned.



waiting for your review....


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

less said:


> BTW - the enclosures in that shot look nicely small! Is that near the recommended/optimum volume for the midrange driver or just what fit the installers vision?
> 
> Less


Recomended volume is 0.75ltr with some wadding, Mark said if you go smaller than that you might get some unwanted frequency peaks


----------

