AVS Forum banner

Raising the bar source to end chain with atmos-proteus soundstage

4K views 39 replies 2 participants last post by  CINERAMAX 
#1 · (Edited)
On Monday we have changed our mission statement to include high end systems from the production side to the home cinema side and vice-versa, something I compressed in 500 char. or less on my sig underneath. Just like mixing FUN FUN FUN and HAPPY at the Quested Hans Zimmer scoring room has made for better Cinema and Music experiences for all, not to mention numerous awards to Pharrell, surely replacing the harsh and farty-behind-a-microperf Meyer Acheron system in some Atmos Dubbing-stages will resolve some of the problems audiences experience at the cinema. So I am proposing an across the board SOURCE to END raising of the IMMERSIVE AUDIO bar.

In the production Review Room arena/ High end Home Cinema crossover this problem has to be nipped in the butt.

ENTER PROTEUS THE FIRST NEPTUNE MOON ATMOS SOUNDSTAGE...

I had sent Quested the layout of a Dolby Atmos Sound-stage where the Owner /Producer told me he had been recommended Meyer Acheron by the Atmos Rendering Unit studio-builder/integrator, but that he too had reservations about the Horn systems fatigue and distortion and wanted to have the best sound possible. Music to my ears! The guys initials coincide with those of Jerry Bruckheimer which I did promise to tell a funny very fitting anecdote. So here starts the beginning of the end on trends that settles to the minimum common-denominator in the Movie Television and Music production immersive-audio-space; say hello to Hi-Verisimilitude Maximum-Immersion SOURCE TO END MIX and PLAYBACK systems.

We do have to be competitive budget wise with Meyers and the first proposal with the BOOM ZAP kit introduced at ISE came in at a whopping $275,000 at list.
Proposal request before ISE:

“28 BIAMPED Z-8'S 300X2
3 TRIAMPED Z 16'S 950+300+300
7 QSB18 SUBS LCR +.1ZONE
4 ZUBS IN 2X FOR .2 RIGHT REAR ZONE,

2X FOR .3 LEFT REAR ZONE.”


AMPLIFICATION
28 Z8s requires 56 channels of amplification = 14 “APi300-4”.
7 QSB118s Z16s require 2 x “APi1000-2” LFLCR+LFE.1

4 Zub2.10s require 1 x “APi1000-2” (bass management rear)


SPEAKER MONITORS
Z8 x 28 (surrounds and heights)
Z16 x 3 LCR
Zub 2.10 x 4 (bass management rear) .2.3
QSB118 x 7 LFLCR+LFE.1



As I said not competitive with Meyer Acheron at $275K.


Lets see 2 options on most economical way to do it while preserving the superiorities of the system, shall we?.



While I have been asked to look only at the audio playback side of things, the alarming deference given to the projector X in the above layout sent me on a 60-day research streak investigating what best practices are prevalent, the findings are [FONT=&quot]positively controversial, this thread invites production [FONT=&quot]community members of avsforum [FONT=&quot]( what the heck after spending one year writing letters to myself in the other forum... hecklers are welcomed too) to comment and correct my assumptions.[/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT]
 

Attachments

See less See more
3
#2 · (Edited)
Before proceeding to the Proposed Proteus Quested topographies... see HW standard.

The QSC system as in many Hollywood sound-stages that did not upgrade to Meyer (which as we know is nowhere near what we are proposing). The justyfication by the system integrators is always they want to hear it as it will play in an average movie theater...

YES!!!! LET'S CATER TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR!!!!!

list price of something like this I estimate at $250k, we all have been to movie theaters, plus having repented of using PRO(from the lead designer of QSC) at Skoll, I can only imagine how card-boxy unnatural this system plays.

NOT as long as I breathe, buddies!!!!!-Yours Truly.





[/COLOR][/B]BILL OF MATERIALS VIDEO:



 

Attachments

#3 · (Edited)
And here comes: Honey for the Bees!!! Quested Option -1

Here is the one i know rocks as when my Client nodded "it's cleaner" in Albiorix, Jeff's, Boonyarat store, and at the end... Uwe's (though he will be a/b-ing some speaks first.:D).

LT-8 surrounds:





WE WILL BE sporting Z16 across the front in PROTEUS, diagram from Roger to come.
 

Attachments

#4 · (Edited)
UPCOMING ARTICLE WITH INSIDER INFO OF THE INSTALLATION at NOUVEL SPACE CLUSTER

I think I will call the article :

Did Michael Bay receive a wedgie from Jerry Bruckheimer inside his own ATMOS CINEMA?



AD
The home theater in director Michael Bay’s Los Angeles retreat.
Forget about red velvet seats and old-timey popcorn machines. In terms of picture and sound quality, there are few home theaters in the world that rival the one installed in director Michael Bay’s new Los Angeles retreat. The state-of-the-art screening room was conceived by theater architect and acoustical engineer Jeff Cooper, a mandarin of modern theater design whose client list includes Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, and Robert Zemeckis. For the tech-savvy as well as the Luddites among our readership, Architectural Digest asked Cooper to explain what makes Bay’s screening room so extraordinary.
The 40-seat digital theater is designed “with steeply inclined, curved rows of stadium seating to maximize sight lines and assure optimum hearing lines,” Cooper says. The Stewart MicroPerf screen, which measures 12 feet by 24 feet, has thousands of minuscule perforations to allow for what he calls “acoustic transparency” from the five front speakers and two subwoofers mounted directly behind the screen. A 4K Barco digital video projector, mounted in the projection room, delivers image brightness and clarity that are nothing short of breathtaking.
Bay’s theater is also outfitted with Dolby’s avant-garde Atmos surround-sound system, which operates on a network of independent amplification channels. In addition to the seven units placed behind the screen, the room has 18 powerful speakers hidden in the side walls, ceiling, and rear wall—the sound comes from everywhere except the floor. The entire sound and video system can be operated by a projectionist or by Bay himself using a wireless Crestron system. Furthermore, the system is integrated with Bay’s home editing suites and postproduction facilities to enable viewing of dailies and other material.

Cooper designed the theater’s Art Deco–flavored, curved side walls as acoustic diffusers to maintain “superb acoustical clarity in every audible frequency range at every seat,” he says. The silver wall covering—as well as the plush purple mohair on the seats—was selected by interior designer Lynda Murray, who has worked with Bay for more than 15 years and collaborated with Cooper on fabrics, colors, and finishes.
The theater’s crowning glory is a star-filled elliptical dome illuminated with LED lights that change colors to produce different sky effects (dusk, dawn, etc.). The stars themselves are created by more than a thousand strands of fiber-optic cables in varying diameters to enhance the realistic star effects. Hidden illuminators along with modulation circuits for dimming and twinkling further buttress the starry illusion. Many constellations and other star formations are pre-programmed.
The result of all this technological wonder is a theater in which “every seat is a great seat,” Cooper insists. It certainly brings new meaning to movie night at home.

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

To those that say that you need everything in front (like two pairs of speakers to A/B) for you to determine final value to you...

I PROVE YOU WRONG here and now, see- there is a defect in the Transformers 4 Atmos disc
a ships propeller sound object FALLS FROM THE SKY AND BOUNCES OVER CAR, THE BOUNCE TRAJECTORY IS SILENT YOU HEAR FIRST BOUNCE AND SECOND CRASH BUT NO OVERHEAD EFFECT. EVERYONE WAS MAKING FUN AT THE CEDIA DEMOS WHERE THE DEMO DISC INCLUDED THE SAME TRANSFORMERS CLIP, HOW OBVIOUS THAT 35 FOOT LONG SOUND PAN OVERHEAD DIS-CONTIGUITY WAS...:)



that architect specified star lit ceiling messed up the world's only supply of atmos encoded TRANSFORMER 4 BLU-RAY discs.



Thought: If Michael Bay did Pearl Harbor 2, would the bombs visually but not sonically fall on the SS Arizona instead the explosions heard on the water next to ship?Could see why meself!:D



Ill be setting up a meeting with Jeff Cooper and introduce to the new systems improvements and show him the need of having the fabrics covering the atmos speakers properly placed and aimed at the MLP. Like in Europa Inspired Dolby Cinema





His style is curved but he is messing with everyone's atmos blu-rays with this inappropriate domes going into multiple Producers homes, he did that for Spielberg too, same exact dome (have evidence)!

Rescue time Hollywood producers!

 

Attachments

#5 · (Edited)
PROTEUS OPTION 2-Z8 surrounds, no worries I get to listen first.:)

v2.



This state of the art system blows away the standard QSC fare above for less!!!! 220 vs 214 once the cp-850 and dac3201 are taken out of the equation.

CAVEAT: Pending our GOOD HOUSEKEEPING SEAL OF APPROVAL for Z8's. In this scale of a room they might be perfect, looking forward to listening to ...
 

Attachments

#6 · (Edited)
System CONFIGS:

LISTING FOR $147K AND $214K RESPECTIVELY .




The 3x QSB1118s are for the LFE. They also take the LCR signals below 45Hz.

Other options are just LCR below 45 only with lt-10c.

I see Quested just took dagostino out by making new lt-10 powerable by their top of line ap1550 1550 watt @4 amp. back to drawing board on triton.
 

Attachments

#9 · (Edited)
added .1 4 subs

Lt-10 centered final with ribbon surrounds. The tried and tested Home Method.:D






Im not sure why he is preferring using the 300-4 amp in bridged pairs to drive stereo 950 watts @4, when they have a way better amplifiers that is stereo 950 @4.??!!
 

Attachments

#11 ·
We asked the Dolby Cinema HDR Brass about the possibility of getting HDR DOLBY projectors for the case where the mix follows the image dynamics, not going to happen. Only grading suites and Dolby Cinemas will be equipped with these next gen projectors. There is complete secrecy around this rollout.

 

Attachments

#12 ·
Exclusive. There is also no revenue share opportunity. Theaters invest a lot, and I mean a lot, to meet Dolby's requirements. To be able to offer something people can't replicate at home.

Soundstages only require to be able to follow the story, a regular display, will be more than enough of a proxy for HDR, in that case. Why introduce further points of HDR=premium content leakage.
 
#13 ·
Soundstages only require to be able to follow the story, a regular display, will be more than enough of a proxy for HDR, in that case. Why introduce further points of HDR=premium content leakage.
REAAAAALLLYYYYY???

Just because no one did think about it doesn't mean that someone at corporate should step back and consider it's merit for a moment.

Dolby Atmos Gravity surround field matched perfectly the 3D parallax dynamics with great precision at Dolby Labs Gravity Premiere. So Dolby is not foreign to the concept of 3d audio going in synch with 3d video. Nothing can support the drama of deep dynamic hue ramping in HDR like high dynamic range audio synchronisation, with the camera dynamic range available today it is highly desirable to mix dynamically the movie soundtrack to enhance such visual dynamic range and ample palette. This is just a temporary rollout oversight in my opinion. You will see.... Nonetheless I will try ask at CINEMACON.
 
#14 ·
Go change their minds Peter, if some-one can it will be you, you never give up. For now there are no HDR projectors available at all. There are four theaters waiting for one in Holland alone, three from JT (the Dolby Cinema in eindhoven, the one they told THR will open in June, and the one that opens in December, and that would be the new build in Alkmaar, and the Cine City one Vlissingen. So, how many more are they planning...
 
#27 ·
The only company not bought up, Christie VIVE (sorry but compared to Quested: sub par), SLS audio (recently bought by dolby - did not hear atmos sls demo) the speaker on booth showed issues.

I LIKE ALCONS, for the next level of square footage after the Quested Z series.

The YouTube is so informative am going to upload some...
 
#17 ·
They may have issues but they know what the acoustical treatments are behind the black panels....seeing them on tuesday.

Next Week is CINEMACON which will be my first time strictly focused on building F-1 Class IMMERSIVE SOUNDSTAGES, DTS is giving away the encoding suite for DTS MDA so might as well see how to use dual purpose cinema equipment , trying to make the studio interoperable with both formats.
 
#18 ·
FROM RESIDENTIAL SYS: What the DTS:X Means to the Custom Channel
When DTS first announced its DTS:X format suite at CES, the details were a bit scarce with the promise of more to come in the spring. Spring has definitely sprung, and a good deal of that added information was announced in an “unveiling” this past Thursday at DTS’s headquarters in Calabasas, CA. While some questions still remain unanswered, much more is now known. With this new data it is a bit easier to plan for home theater systems that are designed to accommodate object-based and immersive audio for not just Dolby Atmos and Auro3D, but now for DTS:X as well.

Along with the home-side specifics, DTS also had a few unexpected surprises that, while not directly impacting the home systems world today, do bear on the broader view of where audio is heading in homes and theaters, from physical media and streaming and from broadcast and satellite.



This type of top-down, “polar”, display shows how audio mixers shows how objects are moved to specific speaker positions for DTS:X.

As a background reminder, DTS:X is described as the company’s “next-generation, object-based, multi-dimensional audio technology.” While the same could be said by Dolby and Auro3D for its similar systems, the press briefing went a long way to point out what DTS sees as the advantage of its approach.

With regard to speaker placement, a key point of contention among the formats and their proponents, DTS took a more neutral approach. Their recommended speaker layout is the conventional 7.1 configuration as a base line. Then, the preference for the added speakers is a 7.1.4, or, as they often referred to it, 11.1, placed as front left/right height and rear left/right height speakers. In some ways their configuration is more like that suggested for Auro3D rather than the “top” or ceiling speaker layout recommended by Dolby with the use of “Dolby Enabled” speakers that point upwards and use DSP and psycho-acoustic technologies as an alternative. It should be noted, however, that the off-center angle for the DTS layout is 45 degrees, as opposed to the 40 degrees specified by Auro3D. The mid-ceiling speakers either as pairs or as a single “Voice of God” (VoG) speaker favored by Auro may be accommodated by DTS:X, but are not mandatory. “Phantom top” speakers are possible down the road, according to DTS, but are not part of the initial implementation.

Here is where DTS posits that its approach has the advantage of using spatial remapping to properly render content in layouts not done according to their recommendations. In other words, they recommend that you use their suggested layout, but if a room has speaker placement problems or if you’ve already installed an Atmos- or Auro3D-centric speaker configuration, DTS claims that their system will do the best job of remapping the speakers to virtual locations for the best and most immersive sound field.

Asked to further define the benefits of their new system compared with the competition, DTS pointed to its ability to more finely manipulate the level of dialog when it is presented to the system as an object. In its construction, to increase dialog capability you don’t raise the level of the entire center channel, but rather have the ability to control the dialog without altering the level of anything else positioned in the center speaker.

Indeed, one thing that DTS seems to agree with Dolby on is that, in the words of Dave Casey, DTS’s senior director of technology strategy and marketing, “Objects are the future…channels don’t give you the flexibility of objects.” It will be interesting to see how this “dialog as a manipulative object” works in real life when compared with the other two object-based audio systems. This feature, however, may not be available at launch.

In terms of the number of speakers that DTS:X can handle, the initial products, most of which will begin to appear sometime this summer and into the fall, can accommodate up to 11 speakers. The ability to render soundtracks out to more speakers, as is already the case with Dolby Atmos and Auro3D, will come later as the basic rendering engine is capable of handling larger arrays.

While all three of the object-based/immersive audio systems have their unique benefits, the goal is clearly the same and this is to some degree not unlike prior situations where Dolby and DTS have taken different approaches to reach the same basic end result. Once we have all three systems in the marketplace it will be easier to see which, if any, will be the winner. However, the fact that most future products above the mid-range price point for AVRs and surround sound processors will accommodate Dolby Atmos and DTS:X and some will also add Auro3D.

With this picture of the “what,” and with the comfort factor that the speaker layouts will likely be somewhat compatible across room conditions to all systems, the real question is “when.” With regard to the hardware, according to DTS you can get DTS:X you can look for software upgrades to select current high-end Denon and Marantz models and the Trinnov Altitude32 along with new 2015 models from Denon, Steinway Lyngdorf, and Theta Digital “Summer 2015.” Additional new models will be available from Integra, Onkyo, Outlaw Audio, Pioneer, and Yamaha in “Fall 2015.”

Of course, without software, the new format is like a tree falling in the forest that no one hears. At this point DTS declined to name any titles that will carry DTS:X encoding for Blu-ray or streaming release. “It’s coming,” was the answer, as one would well expect. However, given that the hardware on which to decode and render it out is still somewhat down the road, there is no need for titles at this point. We’ll be looking closely as to how this develops.

Somewhat related to the “when and what” of content, DTS strayed a bit from the home side of the business to announce that it is re-entering the cinema market with the theatrical version of DTS:X. After all, providing technology for digital audio playback in theaters was at the root start of DTS back in 1993. They sold off the hardware side of that business to DataSat some years ago, and will not be going back into that side of things.


The audio system DTS has withdrawn for consideration by ATSC would have included the ability to select the specific commentary desired in a sports event. The technology, itself, may reappear in other content distribution systems.

This time around DTS will rely on outside licensees such as GDC Technology for the China market and QSC and USL for the rest of the world to provide the hardware solutions. Key here is that DTS is, and will continue to be involved in the licensing of the DTS:X technology for use in movie soundtracks. It is already available in several major mixing stages in California and Canada, with more to come. The push to have DTS:X on the theatrical side augers to the benefit of the consumer home theater world by creating a library of encoded titles and building consumer awareness. Dolby has taken a similar route in launching Atmos, and particularly with the announcement that Carmike will update a large number of their theaters for DTS:X it appears that DTS is taking a similar theater-to-home path.

But WHEN, you ask? The answer for the theaters is this year and the same for titles. The timing for all of this is a bit squishy, but it does point to home products, theatrical installations and at least a few titles for both markets well before the end of 2015.

As DTS is re-entering the theater market and rebuilding its offerings for the home theater world, another item from the press event was with regard to a market DTS is, at least for now, exiting. A version of DTS:X specifically aimed for the needs of broadcast delivery was one of the three submissions for the next generation audio system that will be part of the ATSC 3.0 standard. (More about that later this week in our coverage of NAB.) As is the case with the proposed standards from Dolby (AC-4) and Fraunhofer (MPEG-H), DTS:X for broadcast included not only the object-based, immersive sound, but key interactive features such as the ability to use object-based technology and mixes to do things such as allow the home listener to choose from a pallet of different audio commentaries during a sporting event.

Despite the confidence DTS expressed in its system, the company has withdrawn it from consideration by the ATSC. Instead, it will refocus its efforts on content delivery markets such as streaming services, cable, and satellite, where standards are set by the service provider, and do not need any approvals. That means we may yet see DTS:X on “television” programs, just not on those delivered over the air. Again, anything that uses the same eco-system serves the purpose of any “delivery pipe” by adding to the library of available titles.

A final item addressed was DTS Headphone:X. We auditioned this part of the total eco-system strategy and can report that it did an incredible job of delivering a truly immersive presentation from standard headphones. Indeed, after first hearing a standard “channel circulation test” loop on hard speakers, press listeners were asked to don headphones and listen again. More than one attendee was so convinced at the accuracy of the headphone presentation that they removed the headphones to hear if it was the speakers playing – and it wasn’t.

With the need to convince end users that headphones are for more than ear-bud listening, DTS Headphone:X and similar technologies from Dolby will form an important piece of the puzzle. While the full version may not be available in early AVR and processor products, it is definitely on the product technology roadmap.

A few quick final notes. DTS:X has an upmixer mode, similar to the Dolby Surround Upmixer so that non-encoded titles may be presented in an immersive manner. Similarly, it has an effective downmixer so that encoded content will play back properly in systems without DTS:X encoding or the added speaker positions. Again, this is similar to the competitors and provided to offer backwards compatibility.

Although some present left the event still looking for more details on product and content availability, DTS did make good on its CES promise to provide additional data on the new format. Lacking product and titles it is still a bit behind Atmos and Auro3D, but there was no doubt that by the end of the year DTS plans to fully catch up to their competitors. For the custom and home theater world, the bottom line is that yes, there is not yet another format to deal with. However, it seems clearly designed to live along side systems already in progress for the other two solutions.

With that, the proof of “which is better/which should I choose for my clients” is still something that will have to wait. At the end of the day, this may be one that ends up with more than one format continuing in the market as has been the case with other “Dolby vs. DTS” comparisons over the years. If nothing else, it will add some continued excitement to the market as the new gear is anticipated. To be sure, the world of audio will not be dull through the rest of the year!
 
#19 · (Edited)
I am leaving for CINEMACON but wanted to post these here....

Ladies and Gentlemen, TRITON NOT VAPORWARE!!!!

I GIVE YOU THE WORLDS FIRST Quested 32 channel Zero Fatigue High SPL 4k DCI Implementation, Hollywood here we come!

Client was so nice to take these in short notice...

The sound of the surround speakers truly defies it's size. The lt-24 is a Ribbon Speaker, the front behind the screen channels are Air Motion Transducers as an alternative to a very powerful ribbon.

In our Albiorix installation in Moscow the LT series AMT punched through much more effectively than anything heard before through the microperf.













TRINNOV ERGO VOLUME CONTROL











 

Attachments

#23 · (Edited)
I've had the most exciting meeting with Dolby about half a dozen variants to the basic Atmos dubbing stages practices , the specialty acoustics, the ear level one third of screen height, the mola mola dacs for screen channels, the better specification screen channel and screen transition channels, the importance of achieving the best possible specifications on the b chain.

In the Dolby cinema demo some Atmos segments were great by top shelf Qsc b chain standards ( the Disney Stuff rocked), but the movie spy was obviously mixed in a regular dubbing stage. "Garbage in garbage out" I can quote [FOX USED 85 DOLLAR SURROUND speaker in it's canadian blu atmos dub stage]


Dolby will collaborate with us hand in hand to raise the Bar in Atmos Dubbing stage Proteus to raise the bar even if it puts Hollywood dubbing stages at a serious technical disadvantage . They are excited to implement these advancements learned from our F1 class screening rooms [ and they have their own over the top ideas that are very exciting as well] and are very excited to trail blaze a better road to immersive audio. Fantastic meeting as we went point by point, the collaboration is going to be synergistic....
 

Attachments

#25 · (Edited)
scope of work definition phase.....aes 57 possible adoption issues

I feel comfortable taking the creative design lead and project management of this project now that we have who we have @ Dolby on board as a codesdign partner.

So I am pasting things not to forget..

Enhanced Wide-Area Low-Frequency Sound Reproduction in Cinemas: Effective and Practical Alternatives to
Current Sub-Optimal Calibration Strategies
This paper explores strategies for achieving accurate wide-area low-frequency sound reproduction in cinemas. Current
standards for B-Chain calibration call for single channel low-frequency equalization aided by either single-point or spatiallyaveraged
response measurements, an approach only applicable to a reasonably spatially invariant low-frequency response.
A holistic approach to low-frequency coverage optimization is presented exploiting subwoofer arrays, their positioning and
multi-point signal processing. Acoustic-field examples are presented using finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) modeling
software that expose a potential for superior wide-area signal reconstruction over that achieved using the current standards
and recommendations.

Considerations for the Generation and Measurement of Low Frequency Effects in Cinema Rooms
Little has been published about the repercussions of different source locations and measuring positions for the
Low-Frequency Effects (LFE) loudspeakers in cinemas and dubbing theatres. The aim of this study is to determine the
effects of the number and position of the loudspeakers on the uniformity of the response over the listening area, and to
assess the effect of the measuring of those responses by the choices made regarding the positioning of the microphones
within typically used arrays. Some organisations issuing recommendations for the installation of LFE loudspeakers have
long suggested that they should be installed asymmetrically, below the screen. The reason given for this is to avoid the
symmetrical driving of the low-frequency modal responses of the rooms, the sources typically being centred about 20% of
the distance from one side-wall and 33% of the distance from the opposite side wall. However, other organisations, and
many designers, have recommended the mounting of the LFE loudspeakers in tighter-packed clusters. Furthermore, it has
long been suggested that a single microphone position is inadequate for measuring the response of an LFE channel
because the long wavelengths involved make spacial variation in the measurements inevitable. Typically, 4, 5, 8 and
10-microphone arrays have been used, but as rooms differ so much in size, shape and acoustic properties, no universal
instructions exist about precisely how to place the microphones in such arrays. This paper examines how the choice of
low-frequency source positions, and the microphone positions in a 5-microphone array, can affect the measured average
responses over the designated listening areas. It also discusses how the positioning of the loudspeakers can affects the
evenness of coverage. The results of the spacially averaged responses are compared with the responses at individual
microphone positions, in order to assess how representative the averages are of the responses at specific locations.


Dynamics and Low-Frequency Ratio in Popular Music Recordings since 1965
The loudness, dynamic range and energy distribution in low-frequency bands of popular music are analyzed. One objective
was to operationalize popular music and construct a robust, balanced sample that covers a specific but relevant music
market regarding annual revenues. The sample consists of the “German Top 40” year-end charts from 1965 to 2013.
Furthermore, different methods of measurement, such as LKFS or dBFS RMS, are used and compared. It could be shown
that there was a significant increase of loudness, a decrease of the dynamic range and an increasing importance of the
low-frequency bands over time. While our results correspond to most previous research, there is a major difference
regarding the recent data. It is frequently mentioned in studies that the process of decreasing dynamic range peaked in
2004, and after that the opposite trend occurred, namely, an increase in dynamic range. In the German music market,
however, this seems to be true only for the time span from 2004 to 2010. From 2011 to 2013 a significant decrease of the
dynamic range and an increase in loudness were found.


A Description of an Object-Based Audio Workflow for Media Productions
The object-based audio approach can provide the audience with a new immersive sound experience that so far could not be
achieved with conventional channel-based productions. Moved by these benefits, the interest of the media industry in
applying this concept has increased dramatically in the recent years. However, the object-based approach does not only
imply an improved listening experience, but it also brings a much more flexible workflow and new possibilities to sound
engineers, from the recording process to the playback systems. This paper presents the results of a research project in this
regard, in order to provide the creative production process with a flexible and simple workflow using the advantages of the
object-based audio technologies.



Using Audio Objects and Spatial Audio in Sports Broadcasting
This paper gives an overview on how immersive sound and interactive audio objects can be used in sports TV broadcasting
with regard to the characteristic sound elements of different sport families. New broadcast standards target at bringing object
based audio and 3D-Audio to the homes. Once the technical infrastruc- ture has been established, content is needed to
make use of the innovative features. Sports TV broadcasting is a promising field for new audio standards because of its
wide range of sound scenarios and its high market value. Some of these are presented and investigated with the question in
mind, how audio objects can be captured in real time and how spatial audio can be used to make sports TV more exciting.




Properties of Large-scale Sound Field Synthesis
Sound field synthesis has been pursued as a promising approach for spatial audio reproduction for large listening areas.
Research is typically performed on small and mid-size systems. An increasing number of systems of cinema size and larger
exist, which have shown to exhibit properties that cannot be observed with smaller setups. In particular, practical limitations
lead to artifacts whose perceptual saliency increases with array size. Depending on the situation, these artifacts are most
prominent in time domain or in frequency domain. In this paper, we review the current state of knowledge on the properties
of sound field synthesis using large-size loudspeaker arrays regarding both direct sound and reverberation.


Producing 3D Audio in Ambisonics
Ambisonics is a 3D recording and playback method that is based on the representation of the sound field excitation as a
decomposition into spherical harmonics. This representation facilitates spatial sound production that is independent of the
playback system. The adaptation to a given playback system (loudspeakers or motion-tracked headphones) is achieved by
a suitable decoder. This contribution gives an overview of the current state-of-the-art in Ambisonics including content
production using Ambisonic main microphone arrays or panning of virtual sources, spatial effects, and reproduction by
loudspeakers and headphones. The software for the whole production chain is already available as a VST-plugin suite for
digital audio workstations.



Localization of Audio Objects in Multichannel Reproduction Systems
With spatial audio systems the illusion of being in a sound scene should be created, which means to reproduce a natural
sound field enveloping the listener. Perceived audio quality is related to the position of the listener in the reproduction room.
Former studies indicated that with increased number of loudspeakers for reproduction a larger listening area with high audio
quality can be created. In these studies quality was mostly assessed in terms of overall quality or basic audio quality;
different factors like distortion, coloration, envelopment and localization were not assessed separately. The new MPEG-H
standard should enable high efficiency coding and media delivery in heterogeneous environments. Part 3of MPEG-H deals
with the coding and delivery of high-quality 3D audio content, whereas for the producer the number of loudspeaker channels
used for reproduction is unknown and flexible. In MPEG the overall audio quality was used for selection of most suitable
coding and rendering algorithm. In addition to the MPEG testing and selection process, we conducted a study on localization
performance dependent on listener position, number of loudspeakers and rendering algorithms. A new test method with an
innovative testing framework was applied, reducing the influence of visual cues during testing. This method was used to
evaluate three different rendering schemes and different loudspeaker setups at three different listening positions. The results
showed that reproduction via 22 loudspeakers gives a better localization accuracy compared to 10 and 5 channels. More
interestingly, a clear shift of the perceived position of sound objects to the right was observed. In former studies, where the
loudspeakers where visible, such a shift could not be observed. This might support our assumption that the vision highly
influences the localization perception and therefore listening tests without visual cues are required.




Next Generation Surround Decoding and Upmixing for Consumer and Professional Applications
This paper describes a new spatial audio algorithm that creates a channel-based three-dimensional sound scene from two
or more input channels. The algorithm was designed to decode matrix encoded programs (Lt/Rt). It is also an effective
stereo upmixer; the signal relationships that guide the decoding algorithm (e.g. cross correlation) also provide appropriate
cues to the intended spatial scene for standard, unencoded programs – we decode the artist’s intent. Input channel
configurations with more than two channels are decomposed into channel pairs which are then processed independently.
Improvements relative to existing surround decoding systems include improved selectivity and separation due to multi-band
processing; increased listener envelopment through independent processing for direct and diffuse signal components and
user adjustable decorrelation; and support for an arbitrary number of output channels at user specified locations including
elevation. The system described has been recently deployed in consumer and professional products for home, mobile, and
cinema applications. In this paper we give a detailed description of the signal processing, and provide results from a
subjective listening test which indicates significant improvement relative to legacy systems.

Obviously some papers carry more weight than others.... the 3d perception visual correlation paper is a highly meritory paper as Gravity Premiere at Dolby Labs so aptly demonstrated.

GUESS WHAT MY PREDICTION FOR A FUTURE AES WHITEPAPER:

HDR DYNAMICS AND IMMERSIVE SOUND MIX CREATIONS. THE ATMOS SIDE SAID, on the request effort for dolby vision projectors at the atmos dubstage goal..."keep the pressure".:D
 
#26 ·
Quested himself makes a big issue of the stiffness requirements on speaker mounts, yet one of Dolby's companies has introduced a 18 foot span track conveyor belt atmos array hanging mounts. How untight is tight enough. I want to use the sls audio track system, butI can hear Roger Q already protesting about the lack of a final tight fit in conveyor belt delivered overhead and surround speaker deployment and maintenance systems.

YOU WILL HAVE TO SEE THE VIDEO of this conveyor belt mount 1 track segment for 5 speakers, to understand.



So for those weighing the benefits of a track system in order to fine tune the pinpoint accuracy of the around your head envelopment, now we have the possibility of making the installation and service of 5 speakers from just one position (per 18 foot track).

Keeps snafu risk away from critical areas ie, next to NEVE Console, next to projector, next to artwork diffusion sculpture, next to screen.

Also useful for behind the screen installation points too! Reduces service area requirements, and permits optimization of behind screen speaker distances.

the only possible issue is that the system when static may induce vibrations, and vibration induced DISTORTION.

Quested makes a BIG POINT about their supports being sturdy. It is obvious that the Brits have no monopoly on how to build a better speaker stand...

Our favorite German client designed the best darn lt-24 speaker stand!



In triton





Remember the coaxial speaker design?:D

 
#28 · (Edited)
The best dac money can buy: Mola mola



During CINEMACON next gen concept design of ideal IMMERSIVE DUBBING Suites we discussed how desirable back-ending in this case the NEVE dubbing CONSOLE , that the benefits concentrating resources in a highly prioritized fashion will have clear and exponentially beneficial influences BECAUSE the less garbage in the less garbage out DOWNSTREAM AT HOME, AND AT THE THEATERS, the experience will be superior just like a good demo.

We CINERAMAX are beginning to confront the standard practice in Hollywood (with Dolby turning their head away so as to not be looking :D) Anyone found to be engaging in what we will denounce as considered malpractice in the near future will be communicated the benefits of the suggested improvements.

MISNORMER # 1:


The Production dubbing stages need to monitor on the same exact type of b-chain equipment the people will hear at the THEATER. That means amplifiers with a certain measurable distortion, frequnecy responses with a certain limitations, and amplifiers with dsp recreatable distortion and fatigue. Therein lies the key operating mode, we will comply with this least common denomination achieving goal NOT BY USING A CRAP SYSTEM, but by having a system so advanced that it can recreate a crap system's performance limitations for final qc testing, but a system that in at of itself is the most musical accurate and perfect in the world.

We propose to raise the standards significantly but at the touch of a button our same systems with immersurable distortion and fatigue free presentation, will shift the imaging of the sound from the correct screen 1/3 to the spectators knees, we can bring in the commercial 32 channel dolby dacs that use TI chips all of those undesirable imperfections can be simulated with DSP on our perfect dubbing system.



Just hit a button that says PLAY IN GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT MODE and believe us when we tell you it will sound exactly like those systems embraced at FOX and Warner and pushed down the industry's throat by inadvertently complicit architects and mosnter industry Integrators like MiT. We can recrate all kind of crap performance parameters filter, choose your pallate, bvut when you are done satifying your sadomassochist audio turoture chamber personal ego stroke, there will be the opposite of garbage mode, the true unfiltered resolution of the next gen syste.
Is it understood why such an easy sell this is.

DSP is your friend, force the system to pronounce standing waves, cut of system response at 39hz or any other undesirable parameter. This is how we erraqdicate the myth and save peoples ears from the systemic organized genocide.

Those are the goals,


And we can say that for the LEFT CENTER AND RIGHT CHANNEL the MOLA MOLA DAC is the working benchmark. For the surround speakers the actual Bechmark Dacs are in the general ballpark for consideration.

LOOK AT AMPS cause it applies.... Big part of B chaIN.:)


Secret Intel confirms Theta is looking to replace their current dacs (super duper stereophile class a for a decade) by this industry-wide highly anticipated ICONOCLASTIC next gen design, sounds to me we will need a modular 32 channel version for Atmos Premier Rank.

Why use 2001 dacs when you can have 2021 dacs? The field changes too often and NEVE seems too slow to react. Should investigate. Left message at Mola-Mola about 8 channel modular unit.

This also applies to TRITON with the very neutral analytical sounding 32 channel Trinnov altitude's internal dacs (as it applies to LCR where 80 percent of the signal comes out of per SMPTE 2014 study).

The Mola-Mola DAC: Future-Proof by Being Far Ahead.

You probably know the frustration of discovering your DAC has suddenly gone out of date because some new super chip has hit the market. We decided to stay out of that cycle and design, from the ground up, a discrete DAC whose unbeatable staying power results simply from being more than 10 years ahead of the performance curve. There's room enough for improvement: today’s best DAC chip claims no better than 22 bits’ worth of dynamic range and only 20 bits’ worth of linearity. High resolution music deserves better than that. Mola-Mola’s DAC is designed from the ground up using circuits and digital algorithms that were entirely developed in house.

Block Diagram of DAC




The converter is a three board stack that fits in one of the option slots in the preamp. On the first board, all incoming digital audio is upsampled to 3.125MHz/32 bits and converted to noise shaped PWM. The two remaining boards are mono DACs, in which a discrete 32-stage FIR DAC and a single-stage 4th order filtering I/V converter convert the PWM into analogue with a breathtaking 140dB SNR. This is near the theoretical limit for 24-bit files and far beyond that of even quad-speed DSD. Uniquely, distortion remains below the noise floor even for full scale signals. A quick look at current and historic trends of high-end IC’s indicates that for the foreseeable future this kind of performance will remain unavailable to manufacturers forced to rely on the same “chip du jour” that also powers their competitors’ products.

Even by today’s exacting standards, extraordinary care has been taken deal with jitter. Mola-Mola’s DAC uses a home-grown asynchronous upsampling algorithm whose input frequency measurement slows down rapidly until after a few seconds of lock, the frequency ratio measurement is frozen. Frequency stability is then wholly determined by the internal clock, a laboratory grade 100MHz SC-cut oscillator. This is effectively an atomic clock sans the physics package (which contributes nothing to spectral purity but quite a lot to cost).

Inputs
XLR, Optical, USB and Bluetooth (A2DP)

Supported formats
PCM up to 384 kHz /32 bits (>192 kHz and >24 bits only via USB)
DSD up to quad speed (DDSD and up only via USB)

Performance
Full-Scale Output Level: 20 dBu
Signal to Noise Ratio: 140 dB (standalone version), 130dB (preamp option board)
THD, IMD: not measurable (estimated -150 dB).
Bandwidth: Up to 80 kHz. Choice of sharp or slow upsampling filters, minimum or linear phase.
Integrated jitter:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top