Moving past 7.1 into 9.1/11.x/3D ObjectAudio in HT via AudysseyDSX/DolbyPLIIz/DTS Neo:X™/Auro-3D - Page 2 - AVS Forum
1  2 3  4  ... Last
Dedicated Theater Design & Construction > Moving past 7.1 into 9.1/11.x/3D ObjectAudio in HT via AudysseyDSX/DolbyPLIIz/DTS Neo:X™/Auro-3D
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 12:09 AM 11-26-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

I quickly decided I didn't like wides. It really noticed too much sound coming from them, and in some of the clips I played, dialogue was pulled way too far off the screen. Other sounds too, that should have been on the edge of the screen were pulled all the way off. I found it very distracting.
You are not alone in your reaction. The DSX heights also output a similar signal as the wides, but it might not be as distracting as it does not spread offscreen so obviously.

Less obvious is that DSX softens the surrounds by applying decorrelation and reducing the levels a few dB. Not a great idea for hearing details.

And you also have the PLIIz option which is a wholly different process that does not derive from the front channels at all, and doesn't diminish the surrounds. Give it a spin and see what you think.

Not sure if your surround speaker wiring is final and buried or not, but be advised that with a 7.1 setup the surrounds (sides) should be at the sides of the front row. While I agree that it is not possible to make every seat the best seat, it is possible to make the MLP better than some of the others. The Audyssey diagram in post 1 is unfortunately incorrect in how it depicts the surrounds for the 7.1 basic setup.

And speaking of toe-in, it works not only for the front speakers, but the surrounds, too.



SierraMikeBravo's Avatar SierraMikeBravo 02:33 AM 11-26-2012
Absolutely agree on heights and wides. Localization is a very distracting issue.
mtbdudex's Avatar mtbdudex 02:31 PM 11-26-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

I quickly decided I didn't like wides. It really noticed too much sound coming from them, and in some of the clips I played, dialogue was pulled way too far off the screen. Other sounds too, that should have been on the edge of the screen were pulled all the way off. I found it very distracting.
Not sure if your surround speaker wiring is final and buried or not, but be advised that with a 7.1 setup the surrounds (sides) should be at the sides of the front row. While I agree that it is not possible to make every seat the best seat, it is possible to make the MLP better than some of the others. The Audyssey diagram in post 1 is unfortunately incorrect in how it depicts the surrounds for the 7.1 basic setup.

And speaking of toe-in, it works not only for the front speakers, but the surrounds, too.

Good point Roger, I've found the Denon manual for my 4520CI makes it easier to grasp all the 7.1/9.1/11.1 speaker layout.
I copy/paste that into here, and add it to post#1 shortly.
11.x%2520speaker%2520layout%2520via%2520Denon%2520Manual.JPG
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 11:03 PM 11-26-2012
Being a firm believer in the merits of multiple speakers for surround channels, here's a couple of early simulations I made for my project. Now, the design for my room changed after that, so I ended up going for a 3-1-1-3 configuration and slightly different measurements.

( Disregard the swedish text, really nothing of interest for you in it )


Red for surround channels, dark yellow for surround back. 2-1-1-2 and 3-2-2-3 configurations.

( Do note that I never intended that tight curve for the seats, but that was the available pieces of furniture in Micro$oft Visio )
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 11:07 PM 11-26-2012
^^ What do you do about the comb filtering?
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 11:18 PM 11-26-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

^^ What do you do about the comb filtering?

I don't have so much hair that I need to filter my combs anymore. biggrin.gif

On a more serious level, the configuration of the speakers are a bit non-standard and designed for usage in multiples, so as much as possible has been done there to minimize the issue. Not saying it's completely eliminated, but the advantages definitely overtriumph the drawback imo. They are also 16 ohm speakers, so hooking a few in parallell will not choke the receiver.

Here's the speaker configuration:

SierraMikeBravo's Avatar SierraMikeBravo 11:24 PM 11-26-2012
What do you do about timing associated with multiple surround speakers and discrete channels?
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 11:34 PM 11-26-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraMikeBravo View Post

What do you do about timing associated with multiple surround speakers and discrete channels?

It's the one that's slightly ahead of your position that has the shortest distance and should take presence in localizing direction. (The Haas effect does the rest, I'd say.)
They are to be placed higher up further back, but it is not a straight arc but rather one that flattens out in the bend at mid-back.
SierraMikeBravo's Avatar SierraMikeBravo 01:15 AM 11-27-2012
My understanding of the Haas effect has to do with reflection, not discrete point sources playing the same signal at different distances. The later arrival time of the exact same signal eminating at the same time from another speaker can lead to a hollow sound. How are you dealing with the differences in arrival time if the "hollow sound" occurs (which I find happens pretty often)? Are the speakers arranged in such a way as to be exactly the same distance from the listening position? In that case, it would be a single listener. Also, how are you dealing with the SPL of multiple surround speakers? The addition of multiple side or rear surrounds will lead to an increase in SPL, and if they are not exactly equidistant from the sole listener, the speaker closest to the listener may not be adequate for reference playback. How are you getting around that? Just genuinely curious as to how you are getting around all of this. Thanks.
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 01:59 AM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraMikeBravo View Post

My understanding of the Haas effect has to do with reflection, not discrete point sources playing the same signal at different distances. The later arrival time of the exact same signal eminating at the same time from another speaker can lead to a hollow sound. How are you dealing with the differences in arrival time if the "hollow sound" occurs (which I find happens pretty often)? Are the speakers arranged in such a way as to be exactly the same distance from the listening position? In that case, it would be a single listener. Also, how are you dealing with the SPL of multiple surround speakers? The addition of multiple side or rear surrounds will lead to an increase in SPL, and if they are not exactly equidistant from the sole listener, the speaker closest to the listener may not be adequate for reference playback. How are you getting around that? Just genuinely curious as to how you are getting around all of this. Thanks.

The brain sums the sounds no matter if it's a reflection (aka mirror source) or a real source as long as it's within the Haas window. ( Might not be correct to call it Haas-effect with a true source from a definition point of view, but who cares if it works the same? )

I have never experienced any "hollow sound" with these speakers, so I've never had any reason to look into it. Do keep in mind that the speakers were designed for this purpose rather than having a new job superimposed on them. Do you use dipoles or direct radiators? These are categorized direct radiators despite the dual tweeter setup. Furthermore, they are phase linear - if that has any bearing on it?

No, as I stated earlier, the speaker slightly in front of you will be the closest one.

The SPL will be set with all speakers connected to the same channel playing. They do not use individual amplification, they are connected in parallell to the same channel. Setting SPL is done by the receiver in the normal manner.

If you hook up three of these to a home theater receiver, that one will run out of power before these babies have a problem. They're recommended up to 250W amplification. Three of them yields a sensitivity of 91dB, so they're not very difficult to play loud with. If you have a very large room then you may want another few, perhaps. There was a larger model previously, but it was realized there was no need for it so it was discontinued in 2006.
I know a few people more crazy than I regarding playing loud (way above Ref), but I never heard any of them having issues with surround speaker capabilities.

Well, I am not "getting around it" in any particular way - I'm just leaning on that the speaker designer has done his job well. I've never, ever, heard anyone with these surrounds voice any complaints.

( Well, I have ONE... I need another four for my new theater (currently only have four not in use) and they're not so often on the used market in that particular number. biggrin.gif )

Anyway, before we drag this out too long, it's not the right thread for it as it has little relevance to 9/11-channels per se. My mistake for showing my graph.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 01:59 AM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

I don't have so much hair that I need to filter my combs anymore. biggrin.gif
That's the trouble. The miserable comb has more hair than the head these days. mad.gif
Quote:
On a more serious level, the configuration of the speakers are a bit non-standard and designed for usage in multiples, so as much as possible has been done there to minimize the issue.
I assume the tweeters are wired in phase for wider dispersion. These appear to be intended for small cinemas or maybe dubbing stages. In that case the distance helps decorrelate, reducing the combing effect. In a home theater, I'd say it could still be an issue. Particularly since in the 3-2-2-3 config the speakers of each channel are all within a millisecond or 2 of each other. The figures represent time arrival relative to the shortest surround path.



Some electronic decorrelation would be ideal, but expensive and not easy to find. Delays are easier but a little less effective. Play some applause and listen. Lean forward as if to reach for a glass of some of that fine whiskey you keep back there. wink.gif Do you sense passing through the combs? Compare to using just the 4 surrounds shown with the yellow speakers. Maybe your situation does not seem too bad. Nor will it show up on much content. Bullet dodged.

I had not realized the problem until I was in the rear seats and happened to lean forward during some steady applause and bam, it was wacky, very unnatural. So now I have a different setting for groups that adds 5 ms to the rear speakers which seems to avoid that problem. I'm using direct radiators, so these are probably the least forgiving.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 02:06 AM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraMikeBravo View Post

My understanding of the Haas effect has to do with reflection, not discrete point sources playing the same signal at different distances.
There's not much difference. It applies to both. As an example, Dolby applied delay in the surround channels of their original Dolby Stereo cinema processors, not just because of shorter speaker distances, but to invoke the Haas effect to help mask dialog sibilants that would smear to the surrounds when the optical reader had azimuth errors, or when the logic decoder could not fully steer the dialog during busy mixes. It was very effective as long as the front arrival was at least 10 ms ahead of the leakage. I have not experienced much Haas effect below 5 ms.
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 02:22 AM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

I assume the tweeters are wired in phase for wider dispersion. These appear to be intended for small cinemas or maybe dubbing stages. In that case the distance helps decorrelate, reducing the combing effect. In a home theater, I'd say it could still be an issue. Particularly since in the 3-2-2-3 config the speakers of each channel are all within a millisecond or 2 of each other. The figures represent time arrival relative to the shortest surround path.

Note: I have specified a couple of times not that the closes surround is the one slightly ahead of the listener, so your graph is wrong there.

It will be 3-1-1-3 in the build, but I don't have a drawing of that available. But I can show a pic where you can see the placement of the brackets that will hold them:



Well, it's slightly trickier than that. The tweeters are in phase, though they are reversely phased to the full range element.
Quote:
Some electronic decorrelation would be ideal, but expensive and not easy to find. Delays are easier but a little less effective. Play some applause and listen. Lean forward as if to reach for a glass of some of that fine whiskey you keep back there. wink.gif Do you sense passing through the combs? Compare to using just the 4 surrounds shown with the yellow speakers. Maybe your situation does not seem too bad. Nor will it show up on much content. Bullet dodged.
I had not realized the problem until I was in the rear seats and happened to lean forward during some steady applause and bam, it was wacky, very unnatural. So now I have a different setting for groups that adds 5 ms to the rear speakers which seems to avoid that problem. I'm using direct radiators, so these are probably the least forgiving.

Well, I have the same surrounds in my tv-room and I have never noticed any combfilter effects on any material despite walking around in the room. You have to get VERY close to the speakers to actually hear the individual one playing. I bought my first set non-assembled to save money and it was quite difficult to check that all tweeters were playing ok. Not saying that I won't pay extra attention next time there's applause or rain on a track, though.

Don't have much whiskey around, but whisky I have plenty of. wink.gif (the 'e' denoting it being from the US or Ireland) Shelf is moved, though, to make room for a 1½ foot thick sound dampening back wall. Surround back speakers will be approximately where the lines cross the wall, yes.
mtbdudex's Avatar mtbdudex 04:01 AM 11-27-2012
No sleep for you guys?? Nightlord is in Sweden, so for him it's mid day I guess....
Good discussion, Nightlord can you post a link to your surround speakers, also you should post a link to your build thread in your signature, I can imagine lots of good stuff there.
(I wish the USA would have continued with our metric conversion started in 1976 - I was 14 then, I could then easily grasp the metric dimensions on your drawing, lets see 25.4mm = 1 inch, or is that 24.5mm..... rolleyes.gif )

I've added the Denon 4520CI manual speaker layout to post#1.
My 4520CI + 4 speakers are due this Friday 11/30 at my dealer, it might be a busy weekend down in my HT.....biggrin.gif
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 04:20 AM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post

No sleep for you guys?? Nightlord is in Sweden, so for him it's mid day I guess....
Good discussion, Nightlord can you post a link to your surround speakers, also you should post a link to your build thread in your signature, I can imagine lots of good stuff there.
(I wish the USA would have continued with our metric conversion started in 1976 - I was 14 then, I could then easily grasp the metric dimensions on your drawing, lets see 25.4mm = 1 inch, or is that 24.5mm..... rolleyes.gif )
I've added the Denon 4520CI manual speaker layout to post#1.
My 4520CI + 4 speakers are due this Friday 11/30 at my dealer, it might be a busy weekend down in my HT.....biggrin.gif

Right - lunchtime!

There's nothing to link to regarding the speakers - they are not possible to buy outside Stockholm unless looking for used ones and I doubt there are very many of those outside Sweden. There is an international brand nowadays too, but they don't carry surrounds (yet): Guru audio

Well, I didn't have a build thread when you wrote that, but I have sort of started on now, so I'll figure out how to link to it sooning.

25.4mm for the inch. Just drop the .4 unless it's something really important.

4520... that one would be on my list if I had cash left for one... hopefully it will be cheaper when I'm ready use one...
wse's Avatar wse 01:38 PM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post

I'm sure many here have built their Dedicated Home Theater to 7.1 (or 5.1) surround sound, did nice job pre-routing the speaker wire's in wall for integrated look, and lived with it for a few years.
And now with Audyssey DSX and its competition Dolby Pro Logic IIz / DTS Neo:X™ in the market for a few years, some of you are like me and considering "upgrade" time.
Audyssey visual:
dsx_480x335.jpg
This visual from my Denon 4520CI manual, makes it easier to grasp all the 7.1/9.1/11.1 speaker layout.
11.x%2520speaker%2520layout%2520via%2520Denon%2520Manual.JPG
Here is the DTS Neo:X™ visual:
DTS_NeoX_.JPG

There are threads on DSX and PL IIz / DTS Neo:X™ in the "Receivers, AMPs, and Processors forum" , so I don't want to duplicate those, rather add to them from the construction viewpoint then impressions captured also.
[edit 10/30]
I'll be posting my DSX questions in the "Official" Audyssey thread, http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/official-audyssey-thread-faq-in-post-1/57240#post_22539710
[edit 11/25]
Denon 4520CI owners manual speaker layout visual added, info on DTS Neo:X added

Fabulous, can I come see a movie smile.gif What speakers will you use?
wse's Avatar wse 01:44 PM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

You are not alone in your reaction. The DSX heights also output a similar signal as the wides, but it might not be as distracting as it does not spread offscreen so obviously.
Less obvious is that DSX softens the surrounds by applying decorrelation and reducing the levels a few dB. Not a great idea for hearing details.
And you also have the PLIIz option which is a wholly different process that does not derive from the front channels at all, and doesn't diminish the surrounds. Give it a spin and see what you think.
Not sure if your surround speaker wiring is final and buried or not, but be advised that with a 7.1 setup the surrounds (sides) should be at the sides of the front row. While I agree that it is not possible to make every seat the best seat, it is possible to make the MLP better than some of the others. The Audyssey diagram in post 1 is unfortunately incorrect in how it depicts the surrounds for the 7.1 basic setup.
And speaking of toe-in, it works not only for the front speakers, but the surrounds, too.

Cool I didn't know DTS was not that great
mtbdudex's Avatar mtbdudex 02:51 PM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

Fabulous, can I come see a movie smile.gif What speakers will you use?
Ha - that's what my wife said when I showed here where 4 more speakers were going rolleyes.gif

Proof is in the pudding, I have high expectations for DSX 11.x surround sound.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 07:16 PM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

The DSX heights also output a similar signal as the wides, but it might not be as distracting as it does not spread offscreen so obviously.
Less obvious is that DSX softens the surrounds by applying decorrelation and reducing the levels a few dB. Not a great idea for hearing details.
Cool I didn't know DTS was not that great
Roger was talking about DSX, not DTS.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 07:48 PM 11-27-2012
There was a bit of discussion about placement of height speakers in the Dolby Atmos thread. Worthwhile re-posting it in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwikas View Post

Have any companies done work on this and reported their findings?
Sean Olive at Harman has done some testing to find out what height speaker locations were prefered by listeners. They ended up with 5 height speakers above a standard 7.1 layout. The centre height goes above the centre speaker. The front heights split the angle between your front speakers and side speakers. The back heights split the angle between your side speakers and rear speakers. He mentioned that centre height speaker was helpful some of the time, though not as much as the others.

So I would at least do a grid of 4 height speakers, at the angles mentioned. They can be high up on the walls (at/near ceiling height) or on the ceiling itself and moved in from room boundries (preferred). Either way, the grid will create phantom imaging between them (appear to come from above you) while avoiding the kind of hot-spotting you would get from a speaker directly above you. Increasing the levels of one or two height speakers will allow the overhead sound to be steered in any direction (left, right, front, back, diagonally), based on what's happening in the 7 main speakers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Nothing final, just preliminary placement. Last time I checked (early June), Dr. Olive was still doing double blind testing to find final placement. Keep in mind they're using the height extraction in their proprietary surround processing (QuantumLogic), since there is no content with actual height information. Things could change once movies with height channels show up.
The attached diagram shows the same idea with the angles shown. I'm assuming 45° elevation for now.

In terms of adding value, these locations do well because they are furthest away from the other speakers. The closer they get to other speakers, the less unique their contributions. Whether that matters psychoacoustically is another matter!


fst96se's Avatar fst96se 08:24 PM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

You are not alone in your reaction. The DSX heights also output a similar signal as the wides, but it might not be as distracting as it does not spread offscreen so obviously.
Less obvious is that DSX softens the surrounds by applying decorrelation and reducing the levels a few dB. Not a great idea for hearing details.
And you also have the PLIIz option which is a wholly different process that does not derive from the front channels at all, and doesn't diminish the surrounds. Give it a spin and see what you think.
Not sure if your surround speaker wiring is final and buried or not, but be advised that with a 7.1 setup the surrounds (sides) should be at the sides of the front row. While I agree that it is not possible to make every seat the best seat, it is possible to make the MLP better than some of the others. The Audyssey diagram in post 1 is unfortunately incorrect in how it depicts the surrounds for the 7.1 basic setup.
And speaking of toe-in, it works not only for the front speakers, but the surrounds, too.

thanks for the suggestion on PLIIZ. Hadn't thought of that, I will give it a whirl.

BTW, I thought DSX Wides really cut the center channel output too. DSX Heights does not do this. Strange.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 09:02 PM 11-27-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Note: I have specified a couple of times not that the closes surround is the one slightly ahead of the listener, so your graph is wrong there.
err, well, it's your diagram, not mine. You posted two versions, I just picked one I liked. Not important, really.
Quote:
Well, it's slightly trickier than that. The tweeters are in phase, though they are reversely phased to the full range element.
That's a pretty normal technique so as to get a smooth transition in the crossover region.
Nightlord's Avatar Nightlord 12:19 AM 11-28-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

That's a pretty normal technique so as to get a smooth transition in the crossover region.

Yes, but normally there would be a LP-filter on the woofer/midrange to transition with. In this case, it used full-range in conjunction with the tweeters. (Same kind of element would be in the Guru QM10s where it has some unusual workload too.) Don't have access to do three-dimensional sound radiation plots, but it would have been interesting to see how it behaves.

Anyway, this could very well be the odd one out - I'm sorry you're not anywhere close so I could demo them for you.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 01:15 AM 11-28-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Anyway, this could very well be the odd one out - I'm sorry you're not anywhere close so I could demo them for you.
Me too! Chances are pretty small, though. I have not been in Sweden since development of the Pro Logic system in the Volvo C70. Really enjoyed that experience.
kbarnes701's Avatar kbarnes701 04:56 AM 11-28-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

 
thanks for the suggestion on PLIIZ. Hadn't thought of that, I will give it a whirl.
 

Some time ago I did a lot of experimentation and listening tests with DSX Heights and I could never get over the impression that my previously carefully designed 'envelopment' was somehow diminished by the use of DSX-H. Sure, DSX-H created a great 'wall of sound' in front of me, but it was just too front-centric. I kept asking myself where my surround sound had gone, where the much loved surround ambiance had gone etc.

 

It was after a conversation here with Roger Dressler that it all became clear. Because DSX-H derives its information from the front L&R channels and because it also decorrelates and reduces the levels in the surrounds, this explained what I was hearing. I switched to PLIIz and have never looked back. PLIIz derives its information from the surround channels and does not mess with the surround channels themselves and, for me at least, it gave me what I wanted: some extra ambient sound high up at the front and preservation of the envelopment bubble I had worked so hard to create in the first place. I occasionally switch back to DSX-H for a few minutes to hear the difference, but I never deviate from PLIIz for movie watching. It's quick, easy and free to try them both of course, so you will form your own conclusion - just thought that my experience might add to Roger's earlier response in some small way.


mtbdudex's Avatar mtbdudex 10:16 AM 11-28-2012
From post #1:
Quote:
and.....frank assessment of that...simply was it "worth it" :
-did the "experience" improve in your viewpoint, also your wife/sig/kids viewpoint

I've gathered the assessment comments from posts so far below, gave a simple +1 if liked and comments, -1 is not liked and comments.
What I need to gather for each of these is room size/speaker layout (with image is possible).

Can pauleyc/fst96se/Roger Dressler/kbarnes701 PM me that info I'll add that to this post as edit/summary for less thread clutter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pauleyc View Post

I recently moved from 7.1 to 11.2 and I also followed part of the discussion on facebook (Audyssey Tech Talk). I agree with Chris (100%) that wides are substantially more of an impact that heights. I lucked into my height speakers, but if I were buying speakers knowing what I know now, I would save my money and go 9.2.

I recently got irule running and added all the Audyssey toggles for the different effects which has allowed me to instantly turn heights/wides on/off w/o needing to go into the menus. The wides stand out, but the heights are just barely noticeable. Unfortunately wides are A LOT more difficult for most people to implement b/c of the placement. I suspect this is why most people go heights first or don't bother at all.

Because I need to rebuild my columns to fit my wide speakers, my wides are at about 45 degrees and I notice the improvement. I'm guessing moving them back to 60 will make it even better. I also run all Emotiva power (XPA5+UPA2+UPA2+UPA2) w/ a Denon 4311.
+1 for wides, -1 for heights
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

I just tried out wides and heights in my theater. I had actually been running heights for a few months and have been very happy with the results. I picked up bookshelves (large ones) that match my towers and decided to use them as wides. I have RBH 1266 towers and 661 bookshelves. I was using 41-BEs for heights.

I have a larger theater room, plenty of width and depth. After pulling wire for the wides and runnying Audyssey on my 4311ci, I quickly decided I didn't like wides. It really noticed too much sound coming from them, and in some of the clips I played, dialogue was pulled way too far off the screen. Other sounds too, that should have been on the edge of the screen were pulled all the way off. I found it very distracting. I ended up moving the 661s up to the hieght position, and will use the smaller 41s in another spot in another room.

I really am happy with the heights... just didn't like the wides.
-1 for wides, +1 for heights
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

I quickly decided I didn't like wides. It really noticed too much sound coming from them, and in some of the clips I played, dialogue was pulled way too far off the screen. Other sounds too, that should have been on the edge of the screen were pulled all the way off. I found it very distracting.
You are not alone in your reaction. The DSX heights also output a similar signal as the wides, but it might not be as distracting as it does not spread offscreen so obviously.

Less obvious is that DSX softens the surrounds by applying decorrelation and reducing the levels a few dB. Not a great idea for hearing details.

And you also have the PLIIz option which is a wholly different process that does not derive from the front channels at all, and doesn't diminish the surrounds. Give it a spin and see what you think.

Not sure if your surround speaker wiring is final and buried or not, but be advised that with a 7.1 setup the surrounds (sides) should be at the sides of the front row. While I agree that it is not possible to make every seat the best seat, it is possible to make the MLP better than some of the others. The Audyssey diagram in post 1 is unfortunately incorrect in how it depicts the surrounds for the 7.1 basic setup.

And speaking of toe-in, it works not only for the front speakers, but the surrounds, too.
DSX: -1 wides, neutral to heights? (ymmv?)
PLIIz: +1 height

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

 
thanks for the suggestion on PLIIZ. Hadn't thought of that, I will give it a whirl.

 
Some time ago I did a lot of experimentation and listening tests with DSX Heights and I could never get over the impression that my previously carefully designed 'envelopment' was somehow diminished by the use of DSX-H. Sure, DSX-H created a great 'wall of sound' in front of me, but it was just too front-centric. I kept asking myself where my surround sound had gone, where the much loved surround ambiance had gone etc.

It was after a conversation here with Roger Dressler that it all became clear. Because DSX-H derives its information from the front L&R channels and because it also decorrelates and reduces the levels in the surrounds, this explained what I was hearing. I switched to PLIIz and have never looked back. PLIIz derives its information from the surround channels and does not mess with the surround channels themselves and, for me at least, it gave me what I wanted: some extra ambient sound high up at the front and preservation of the envelopment bubble I had worked so hard to create in the first place. I occasionally switch back to DSX-H for a few minutes to hear the difference, but I never deviate from PLIIz for movie watching. It's quick, easy and free to try them both of course, so you will form your own conclusion - just thought that my experience might add to Roger's earlier response in some small way.
DSX: -1; seems to take away from front soundstage for the added wide/height speakers
PLIIz: +1
via PM to me kbarnes701 room info:
Quote:
My room is small, 11 L x 12 W x 8 H. About 1000 cu feet. Equipment is MK S150s for LCR, M&K SS150 Tripoles for surounds, M&K LCR5 for Heights, dual Seaton Submersive subs. Power is all Emotiva. Prepro is Onkyo 5509. Audyssey MultEQ XT32 plus Audyssey Pro. OmniMic for measuring.

fst96se's Avatar fst96se 06:07 PM 11-28-2012
I am sitting my theater room right now, and I am absolutely shocked at what I'm hearing. I had no idea DSX took so much from the side rear surround. PLIIz sounds so much better. The surrounds are much louder. I think you are right about the heights them being more for presence this way, but I can't believe how much I was actually losing from the sides and rears. I will not be using DSX again.

My room is about 26x30 if I recall. Screen is 120" diagonal. In the picture below, the wides are not present, but I had them hooked up they were on the outside of the cabinets you see on either side of the screen. Of course the couch, seat, and gumball machine were not there either. Sweet spot in my room is the second row.




mtbdudex's Avatar mtbdudex 06:11 AM 11-29-2012
fst96se - nice looking room and thx for your comments.
How are you managing acoustics in your dedicated HT room?
Just visually I don't see any treatments, but that does not mean they are not "hidden" type.
I won't let this thread de-rail into a "acoustics are mandatory for 9.1 or 11.1" , just want the facts as people present their HT and listening experience clear.
mtbdudex's Avatar mtbdudex 09:54 AM 11-30-2012
Just update on my Denon 4520CI arrival......looks like weekend of Dec-7 I'll be busy-busy-busy biggrin.gif
Quote:
FedEx ® Tracking Estimated delivery : Tues 12/04/2012

cuzed2's Avatar cuzed2 10:29 AM 12-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by fst96se View Post

I am sitting my theater room right now, and I am absolutely shocked at what I'm hearing. I had no idea DSX took so much from the side rear surround. PLIIz sounds so much better. The surrounds are much louder. I think you are right about the heights them being more for presence this way, but I can't believe how much I was actually losing from the sides and rears. I will not be using DSX again.
My room is about 26x30 if I recall. Screen is 120" diagonal. In the picture below, the wides are not present, but I had them hooked up they were on the outside of the cabinets you see on either side of the screen. Of course the couch, seat, and gumball machine were not there either. Sweet spot in my room is the second row.


fst96se,
Good to hear from you. Especially nice to see this great theater again (I saw it years ago - but forget who it belonged to) smile.gif
So are you telling us you are liking PLIIz thru a 7.1 set-up >> and NOT liking 9.1 or 11.1 (heights and/or widths)?
Just making sure; because I have been very curious (actually a case of "upgrade-itis") about heights and widths, am still procrastinating about finding a way to integrate more speakers into the front of my room.
Tags: Emotiva Xpa 5 5 Channel Power Amplifier , Denon Avr 4311ci 9 2 Channel Network Multi Room Home Theater Receiver With Hdmi 1 4a , Sony Vpl Vw1000es Projector , Panamax , Audyssey
1  2 3  4  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop