Dolby Atmos White Papers Available - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 68Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 08:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,210
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1677 Post(s)
Liked: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganymed4 View Post
What you wrote tells me, that there are audio objects, spatially encoded in the 'bed'.
Not quite. Atmos soundtracks are made up of objects and channels (referred to as bed channels or channel beds). In commercial theatres, objects are not spatially encoded in the beds. They are separate.

For the home delivery of Atmos soundtracks, objects and beds are combined into a channel-based mix in order to be backwards compatible with current AV receivers. So the objects are spatially encoded into this backwards compatible channel-based mix, not spatially encoded into the beds. When the objects are separated out, the left over information is the bed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganymed4 View Post
It is like the PLIIz tracks.
Keep in mind that Atmos white paper says that spatial encoding is "not a channel-based, matrix-encoding system like Dolby Pro Logic II or Dolby Pro Logic IIz".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganymed4 View Post
If I think of Neo:X and what I learned about the spatial encoding of Atmos and think of Neo:X doing the same for a 9.1/11.1 soundtracks, than a little modification and it could work the same way with a software upgrade.
No, "a little modification" won't allow Neo:X to do the kind of spatial coding that Dolby is talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganymed4 View Post
Is this the death of IIz and Neo:X? Nobody is talking about front heights and wides anymore, isn't it.
Dolby needed new surround processing to upmix legacy content to a 7.1.4 speaker configuration (and eventually scale to larger configurations). So PLIIz was replaced with Dolby Surround. Neo:X can already upmix to a 7.1.4 configuration, so it probably won't be replaced. Front heights and wides are supported by Atmos and Neo:X.
chi_guy50 and Ganymed4 like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 09:27 AM
Senior Member
 
BNestico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Elysburg, Pennsylvania
Posts: 376
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 144
My HT is in my living room, which has flat 8" ceiling that i can get above to run wires cause my house is a rancher, the idea of up-firing speakers and reflective sound seems gimmicky to me so my only future option is in ceiling speakers. right now my main surrounds (Rti6's on stands) are at ear level, just slightly higher than my main channels. However my surround backs are already mounted on the ceiling roughly 5 feet behind me. Would simply adding two in ceiling speakers in front of my listening position give me the effect of 5.1.4 or will it be more like 7.1.2 when using atmos soundtracks? I think adding 4 in ceiling speakers would be overkill because I don't think there'd be enough space between my surround backs and the additional in ceiling atmos channels to notice a difference (they'd be like 2 feet apart).

Also i wouldn't touch any of these receivers until DTS has released their own object based format. You know they're going to.

Panasonic P60U54
Pioneer VSX-1122 K
Polk Audio RTi8's, CSi5, RTi6's, OWM3's
SVSound PC12 Plus, PC Ultra (12")
PS3
BNestico is offline  
post #153 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 10:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,910
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 584 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcG View Post
Where is the data bitrate / throughput bottleneck? Is it the Meridian Lossless Packaging algorithms? The current iteration of the Atmos processor? Is it a limitation of HDMI 1.4 source components vs. HDMI 2.0 source components?

It would seem if most Dolby Atmos demo material was playing off USB thumb drives, which are ultra-fast solid state storage, from a pure data throughput perspective, a USB thumb with Atmos content should be able to provide Atmos' full 24.1.4 channel capability, hypothetically speaking.

Will Gen. 2 residential Atmos processing resolve this throughput bottlenect issue so downmixing to save bitrate will not have to occur?
On BR video, TrueHD has a data rate max of ~18.5mbps and DD+ around 4.5 IIRC..

And you are confusing output channel capability with data rate... the same content that will be released shortly will play on everything from 5.1.2 to 24.1.10 channel systems..
FilmMixer is offline  
post #154 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 10:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
On BR video, TrueHD has a data rate max of ~18.5mbps and DD+ around 4.5 IIRC..

And you are confusing output channel capability with data rate... the same content that will be released shortly will play on everything from 5.1.2 to 24.1.10 channel systems..
I think he possibly meant that if these bottlenecks are eliminated with a wider throughput and a medium with larger storage capacity that possibly Dolby would not have to spatially encode some of these objects and deliver them all as discrete, losslessly compressed items.

Is that a possibility or does this consumer version of Atmos not differentiate encoding quality levels given a larger bitrate and file storage capacity?

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #155 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 11:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,910
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 584 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I think he possibly meant that if these bottlenecks are eliminated with a wider throughput and a medium with larger storage capacity that possibly Dolby would not have to spatially encode some of these objects and deliver them all as discrete, losslessly compressed items.

Is that a possibility or does this consumer version of Atmos not differentiate encoding quality levels given a larger bitrate and file storage capacity?
If that was his comment then I misunderstood.. thanks.

My understanding is that the new encoders have a default value for the maximum number of objects that can be changed upwards as desired by the content provider... however, even if new media and bandwidth become available, it will require studios to decide they want to make multiple encodes for a given title...

Knowing what the default object number is now (and please don't ask, it's not for me to discuss) and having seen now a number of Atmos mixes and knowing how they were created, I don't see the current "bottleneck" as being a big issue in terms of audible artifacts...
Dan Hitchman likes this.
FilmMixer is offline  
post #156 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,252
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 469
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcG View Post
Where is the data bitrate / throughput bottleneck? Is it the Meridian Lossless Packaging algorithms? The current iteration of the Atmos processor? Is it a limitation of HDMI 1.4 source components vs. HDMI 2.0 source components?
No. No. No. (I feel a song coming on... Ain't no sunshine...) The BD format is the main issue, and the need to provide all this audio in parallel with video. The VBR peaks of lossless audio make that a challenge. Not because the 18.5 Mbps permitted bitrate is too low, but because content makers do not want to let the audio use that much bitrate. They get all fussy about the video quality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
My understanding is that the new encoders have a default value for the maximum number of objects that can be changed upwards as desired by the content provider...
Since with spatial coding it is possible to carry every object in the source (according to Dolby), I think the upper limit to which you refer is for discretely coded objects, with the rest being spatially coded. Is that right?

Deadwood Atmos theater
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #157 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,910
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 584 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Since with spatial coding it is possible to carry every object in the source (according to Dolby), I think the upper limit to which you refer is for discretely coded objects, with the rest being spatially coded. Is that right?
We didn't discuss that distinction... I will get clarity on that.
FilmMixer is offline  
post #158 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TMcG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 2,951
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I think he possibly meant that if these bottlenecks are eliminated with a wider throughput and a medium with larger storage capacity that possibly Dolby would not have to spatially encode some of these objects and deliver them all as discrete, losslessly compressed items.

Is that a possibility or does this consumer version of Atmos not differentiate encoding quality levels given a larger bitrate and file storage capacity?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
If that was his comment then I misunderstood.. thanks.
Dan captured the essence of my question. Sorry if my phrasing was confusing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
No. No. No. (I feel a song coming on... Ain't no sunshine...) The BD format is the main issue, and the need to provide all this audio in parallel with video. The VBR peaks of lossless audio make that a challenge. Not because the 18.5 Mbps permitted bitrate is too low, but because content makers do not want to let the audio use that much bitrate. They get all fussy about the video quality.
I guess we can hope the BD format bottleneck will be eliminated if / when the new 4K Bluray format comes to fruition, provided there is plenty of storage capacity for both audio and video to be presented in maximum resolution and as close to the original Atmos theatrical release as possible for a residential system.
TMcG is offline  
post #159 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 01:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ganymed4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Not quite. Atmos soundtracks are made up of objects and channels (referred to as bed channels or channel beds). In commercial theatres, objects are not spatially encoded in the beds. They are separate.

For the home delivery of Atmos soundtracks, objects and beds are combined into a channel-based mix in order to be backwards compatible with current AV receivers. So the objects are spatially encoded into this backwards compatible channel-based mix, not spatially encoded into the beds. When the objects are separated out, the left over information is the bed. Keep in mind that Atmos white paper says that spatial encoding is "not a channel-based, matrix-encoding system like Dolby Pro Logic II or Dolby Pro Logic IIz". No, "a little modification" won't allow Neo:X to do the kind of spatial coding that Dolby is talking about. Dolby needed new surround processing to upmix legacy content to a 7.1.4 speaker configuration (and eventually scale to larger configurations). So PLIIz was replaced with Dolby Surround. Neo:X can already upmix to a 7.1.4 configuration, so it probably won't be replaced. Front heights and wides are supported by Atmos and Neo:X.
Thank you very much for the explanation. I found this extremely helpful. You seem to have a lot of knowledge.
Ganymed4 is offline  
post #160 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 02:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
cannga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Cal
Posts: 927
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Atmos is 9.1 channels plus objects. Because all the other surround channels (sides, rears) are in pairs as well?
Ok. I think my confusion was because you were referring to the commercial-theater version of Atmos with 9.1 bed channels, and I thought you were referring to the home theater version.

Do I understand this correctly then:
1. Commercial theater Atmos: 9.1 bed channels + objects. There *is* 1 left and 1 right height channel in the bed channels.
2. Home theater Atmos on Blu-ray: 7.1 bed channels + objects. There is no height info in the bed channel; all height info is carried in the substream as objects?
TIA

Regards, Can
Theta: Stunning 3D soundstage, sublime details, unlimited dynamics and low end response - the processor for music lovers. My system & CBIII HD review & setup help - Post # 3913 and Diagrams & Surround Speaker Rec. Here
Give vinyl and tube gears a try - the sound from heaven :-).
cannga is online now  
post #161 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
Ok. I think my confusion was because you were referring to the commercial-theater version of Atmos with 9.1 bed channels, and I thought you were referring to the home theater version.

Do I understand this correctly then:
1. Commercial theater Atmos: 9.1 bed channels + objects. There *is* 1 left and 1 right height channel in the bed channels.
2. Home theater Atmos on Blu-ray: 7.1 bed channels + objects. There is no height info in the bed channel; all height info is carried in the substream as objects?
TIA
As far as we can guess with the info that has slipped out... you're correct.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #162 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 02:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 6,948
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2851 Post(s)
Liked: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcG View Post
I guess we can hope the BD format bottleneck will be eliminated if / when the new 4K Bluray format comes to fruition, provided there is plenty of storage capacity for both audio and video to be presented in maximum resolution and as close to the original Atmos theatrical release as possible for a residential system.
That'll be the day. For that they need a new Audio/Video medium, like with 100GB minimum of storage space.

And paranoia will ensure for sure (piracy).
NorthSky is online now  
post #163 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 03:03 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,210
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1677 Post(s)
Liked: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
Commercial theater Atmos: 9.1 bed channels + objects. There *is* 1 left and 1 right height channel in the bed channels.
Correct, the L/R height channels are reproduced by the 2 arrays of overhead speakers (the same way all other surround channels are played back via arrays in commercial theatres).
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
Home theater Atmos on Blu-ray: 7.1 bed channels + objects. There is no height info in the bed channel; all height info is carried in the substream as objects?
Don't know. The extension packet on BD might contain just objects OR objects and overhead bed channels. Will try to get some clarification.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #164 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 03:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TMcG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 2,951
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
That'll be the day. For that they need a new Audio/Video medium, like with 100GB minimum of storage space.

And paranoia will ensure for sure (piracy).
You mean like this? http://www.cnet.com/news/100gb-discs...to-4k-blu-ray/

Unfortunately, paranoia will always be present....
TMcG is offline  
post #165 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcG View Post
You mean like this? http://www.cnet.com/news/100gb-discs...to-4k-blu-ray/

Unfortunately, paranoia will always be present....
And so will Hollywood lawyers...

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #166 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 04:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 6,948
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2851 Post(s)
Liked: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcG View Post
You mean like this? http://www.cnet.com/news/100gb-discs...to-4k-blu-ray/

Unfortunately, paranoia will always be present....
Did you read all the comments? ... "Bring back HD DVD"

* Perhaps we'll see 100GB Blu-ray discs with 4K picture quality, 3D awesome 3-dimensional experience, and DTS-UHD sound quality in 2016. ...That would be...majestic. ...I'm glad to be alive.
NorthSky is online now  
post #167 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 05:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
Luke M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 545
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
2. Home theater Atmos on Blu-ray: 7.1 bed channels + objects. There is no height info in the bed channel; all height info is carried in the substream as objects?
I have a related question: what is the minimum number of "bed" channels? Could you have 5.1, or even 2.0?
Luke M is offline  
post #168 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 06:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
I have a related question: what is the minimum number of "bed" channels? Could you have 5.1, or even 2.0?
Since most cinema mixes have 7.1 or 9.1 channel beds, I would imagine the Blu-ray versions will have 7.1 beds with the overhead channel beds encoded as fixed objects, though you can have 5.1 beds in home-Atmos, which seems silly.

The idea was that a theatrical Atmos mix wouldn't have to be overly tweaked to transform it into a home video version... unless the studio opted for a near-field re-mix. It saves time. And time is money in this industry.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #169 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 07:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
Luke M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 545
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Since most cinema mixes have 7.1 or 9.1 channel beds, I would imagine the Blu-ray versions will have 7.1 beds with the overhead channel beds encoded as fixed objects, though you can have 5.1 beds in home-Atmos, which seems silly.
Not silly if it saves bitrate.
Luke M is offline  
post #170 of 213 Old 08-10-2014, 08:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
Not silly if it saves bitrate.
It depends on the mix and since you already have at least a 7.1 bed in cinema Atmos, why make two extra conversion steps if you don't have to?

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #171 of 213 Old 08-11-2014, 11:17 AM
Member
 
hurricanebob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I agree with fierce_gt I am glad I waited to by a new AVR when I implemented 3D on my 6.1 setup several years ago. It wasn't worth it just to have 3D compatibility with the AVR, but now, by upgrading my AVR and adding two Dolby Atmos add-on speakers (Def Tech is releasing the A60 in Sept...?) I can have not only 3D compatibility (no more switching HDMI cables and using the toslink out on my PS3) but a whole new type of surround sound that is backwards compatible with other formats. More speakers = betterer! I already love listening to 2 ch music in "All Channel Stereo" mode. The addition of reflected sound from the ceiling will just be icing on the cake

ISF Calibrator
hurricanebob is offline  
post #172 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 12:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,210
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1677 Post(s)
Liked: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
Home theater Atmos on Blu-ray: 7.1 bed channels + objects. There is no height info in the bed channel; all height info is carried in the substream as objects?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Don't know. The extension packet on BD might contain just objects OR objects and overhead bed channels. Will try to get some clarification.
Got clarification from Dolby today: the substream that carries the objects can also carry the two height beds IF those channels were used in the original mix, which isn't always the case (some Atmos mixes are 7.1 + objects). So the 4th substream isn't limited to objects. Like the other 3 substreams, it can carry channels as well.
cannga, Hugo S and J_P_A like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #173 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 01:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
Luke M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 545
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Got clarification from Dolby today: the substream that carries the objects can also carry the two height beds IF those channels were used in the original mix, which isn't always the case (some Atmos mixes are 7.1 + objects). So the 4th substream isn't limited to objects. Like the other 3 substreams, it can carry channels as well.
I wonder if we'll see receivers that can decode 9.1 and output 9.1, but don't do anything with objects. With or without Atmos branding.
Luke M is offline  
post #174 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 08:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
I wonder if we'll see receivers that can decode 9.1 and output 9.1, but don't do anything with objects. With or without Atmos branding.
I don't think Atmos sound tracks will be coded that way and I don't think manufacturers would implement Atmos software decoding without object rendering.. If some Dolby TrueHD track is 9.1 discrete (using the extra substream for two channels rather than channels + objects or just objects), I don't think they'll label it as an Atmos track. Atmos means that objects are somehow involved.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #175 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 08:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,194
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Got clarification from Dolby today: the substream that carries the objects can also carry the two height beds IF those channels were used in the original mix, which isn't always the case (some Atmos mixes are 7.1 + objects). So the 4th substream isn't limited to objects. Like the other 3 substreams, it can carry channels as well.
So do I understand correctly that this means ATMOS receivers will have the ability to support a 9.1 bed with heights, but not wides?

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #176 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 08:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post
So do I understand correctly that this means ATMOS receivers will have the ability to support a 9.1 bed with heights, but not wides?
There are a couple upper level models (not in the super rich category of the Trinnov or Datasat) that will do 9.1.2 with wides (object based locations), but only two height speakers (2 channel "top" bed + objects based locations).

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #177 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 10:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,210
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1677 Post(s)
Liked: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post
So do I understand correctly that this means ATMOS receivers will have the ability to support a 9.1 bed with heights, but not wides?
The Atmos format supports a 9.1 bed that includes heights but not wides. So, Atmos-equipped receivers have no choice in the matter. Speakers placed at the wide location and between the L/C/R speakers are supported, but only for objects. There are no channel beds for those locations.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #178 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 11:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,194
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Dan/sdurani

I'm confused, now. If wides are not included in the channel bed, and, with the exception of receivers like Trinnov, the processor will not know the "wides" are NOT on the ceiling, how are they used for objects?

Thanks for information, guys!

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #179 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 11:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,542
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1269 Post(s)
Liked: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post
Dan/sdurani

I'm confused, now. If wides are not included in the channel bed, and, with the exception of receivers like Trinnov, the processor will not know the "wides" are NOT on the ceiling, how are they used for objects?

Thanks for information, guys!
The front wides locations are "known" by the metadata instructions keyed to particular objects. If the instructions point the object towards the location of those particular speakers, that's where the object will be placed by the renderer. If a receiver that has 9.1.2 rendering capabilities knows you have wides attached, the appropriate sound objects will be placed there.

Well, if you place wide speakers on the ceiling and get screwy surround sound because of it... that's your own fault for not reading the directions!

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #180 of 213 Old 08-12-2014, 11:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,806
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 152
I guess my confusion about the specifics of Atmos processing continues...

For example: If I were to play back an "optimized for 5.1.4" Atmos soundtrack on a 9.1.2 configuration, my uncertainties are a follows:

(1) Are the 9 Main Layer and 2 Height Layer speakers all available to be used to reproduce the Objects? (I think the answer here is "yes".)

(2) Is some Base FL|FC|FR|SL|SR content from the BD "post processed" and sent to the Back Left|Right (BL|BR) Main Layer speakers, "somewhat like old style DLPIIx processing?" (I think the answer here is "yes".)

(3) Is some Base FL|FC|FR|SL|SR content from the BD "post processed" and sent to the Front Left|Right wide (FLw|FRw) Main Layer speakers, "somewhat like *** Neo:X processing?" (I think the answer here is "NO".)

Anyone have any insight?


And of course the interesting question is: Will DTS-UHD perform the same tasks in a similar manner?
_

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Latest Industry News

Tags
frontpage



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off