Originally Posted by TMcG
Dolby and JBL had the same size rooms and both used high channel count processors (Trinnov, Datasat)....
The JBL room used a Dolby CP850, AFAIK
. Dolby's room was just basic 7.1.4 from their PC. But no matter.
if unrestricted reference performance is your goal, would it be better to set things up like a mini version of the commercial cinema like JBL did or better to use the Dolby approach? In other words, what is the harm in using the commercial approach?
It's not the Harman approach vs. the Dolby approach. What Harman did was the Dolby cinema approach. No harm in doing that at all.
Is it only the lower residential ceiling height that is driving the recommendation to shift the ceiling speakers to the outer perimeter???
I have not seen a Dolby document discuss placing ceiling speakers at the outer perimeter. They have been fairly vague on the width of ceiling speakers for consumer systems. Maybe I missed it -- really. There's a lot of Dolby material floating around. If you spot something specific, please advise.
Would ceiling heights greater than 14', which seems to be the upper limit mentioned in the Atmos guidelines, trigger a recommendation to height speakers placed at the thirds of the room over the seating???
No. The 14' limit relates to the ability of the bounce effect to work as intended. I presume any higher and a) the beam spreads too wide -- imaging reduced, b) the SPL is limited, c) the HF is too attenuated. There is no limit for ceiling speakers.
Procella was another that had the speakers over the listening area, although I'd say the speakers were between the thirds of the room and the aisle ways....so an in-between approach. Wisdom Audio's room also had the ceiling speakers over the seating vs. the aisle ways but was clearly illustrating a luxury home environment.
Yes, Atmos is a flexible and tolerant system. Dolby has stated that you'd have to work pretty hard to make it not work.