Gravity - did you notice the "overhead flies" sequence? Wow - stunning sound engineering and a worthy test of our "ultra" systems! - Page 17 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 16Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #481 of 537 Old 07-15-2014, 01:00 AM
Senior Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 416
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Well, how does that square for a cinema where the sweet spot is 2/3 of the way back? The overhead arrays extend further forward than rearward. See the figures. There's a 20 deg difference in the vertical angle from one end of the height array to the other for the "best seat in the house."

And come on, a small room should use 2 overheads? That's the same as saying small rooms should use 5.1 instead of 7.1.
First of all i'm on the commercial side. What i call small, as this is the lowest that any of my software will push down to, is a 500 seat house. The "sweet seat" is always the seat that is half way between the walls and half way between the screen and back wall of any cinema house. Why do you think the center seats fill up first?

Again, Atmos overhead speakers is a "effect" not a screen array loudspeaker. I don't have to see any figures or drawings as i have everything, software, paper, etc that Dolby and Auro has sent me for Atmos and Auro-3D. I have, and still have plenty of conversations with them, as two years ago this was all "Bran Spanking new" and to date how it is applied is also "Bran Spanking new". Not every cinema house is square, architects like to experiment, some houses are pie shaped, some pentagon shaped, each one of these raises questions on the best way to do it, in a effective, timely matter that will deliver the product as described.

And yes there is speaker overkill, that warrants a 5.1 system over a 7.1 system. That IS why consumer Atmos will be in 2 and 4 overhead configuration, or the upward firing speakers, that i am still out on cause i have not heard this set up, yet.

One picture shows how to correctly aim your speakers to the ears of the person sitting in the "Sweet seat", the second picture, well it pretty much shows that the people who's name is on the screen is saying that the speaker location is "A OK" the third picture is the recommendations for seating height from Christie Digital, what do you notice there that i can take back to Christie engineers?
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg 21613ef4_11.1idea.jpeg (105.6 KB, 33 views)
File Type: jpg Dolby_Theater_Clean.jpg (102.2 KB, 34 views)
File Type: png MovieTheaterSeatingUSP06164018.png (64.3 KB, 30 views)
CinemaAndy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #482 of 537 Old 07-15-2014, 03:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
The "sweet seat" is always the seat that is half way between the walls and half way between the screen and back wall of any cinema house. Why do you think the center seats fill up first?
They don't in the cinemas I go to. I see the red zone fill up way ahead of the blue zone.



Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
One picture shows how to correctly aim your speakers to the ears of the person sitting in the "Sweet seat"
I'm glad you like my diagram. Perhaps I know how to aim speakers after all?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg seating zones.jpg (37.9 KB, 280 views)

Last edited by Roger Dressler; 07-15-2014 at 04:09 AM.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #483 of 537 Old 07-15-2014, 05:58 AM
Senior Member
 
Perfectionist2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 444
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I suspect most people choose a seat in a commercial theater based on the screen rather than the speakers.
Perfectionist2 is offline  
post #484 of 537 Old 07-15-2014, 06:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfectionist2 View Post
I suspect most people choose a seat in a commercial theater based on the screen rather than the speakers.
Or both.

I guess it would depend on which group of "most people" one would fall in.

On the rare occasion my wife and I attend an IMAX or the local cineplex, we arrive a little early to try to insure a seat as close to the center of Roger's "Red Zone" as possible.

Depending on the venue, something approximating the "red zone" is my first choice for any live musical performance too.
b curry is offline  
post #485 of 537 Old 07-15-2014, 07:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfectionist2 View Post
I suspect most people choose a seat in a commercial theater based on the screen rather than the speakers.
Or for those of us (way) north of 60, we sit close to an isle so we don't disturb folks when we take our 27th trip to the men's room

We actually seldom go to movies any longer. But when we do, we tend to sit closer to Roger's zone as sitting to close (like the front of the blue zone) creates to much horizontal head movement AND looking UP is usually required.

Last edited by audioguy; 07-15-2014 at 07:08 AM.
audioguy is online now  
post #486 of 537 Old 07-15-2014, 07:44 PM
Senior Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 416
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Or for those of us (way) north of 60, we sit close to an isle so we don't disturb folks when we take our 27th trip to the men's room

We actually seldom go to movies any longer. But when we do, we tend to sit closer to Roger's zone as sitting to close (like the front of the blue zone) creates to much horizontal head movement AND looking UP is usually required.
You are supporting the statistics as well as the surveys on what age group goes to the cinema. The median age for dropout is 40. However certain films, namely Star Wars, has the broadest age turn out for cinema releases.
CinemaAndy is offline  
post #487 of 537 Old 07-16-2014, 06:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
You are supporting the statistics as well as the surveys on what age group goes to the cinema. The median age for dropout is 40. However certain films, namely Star Wars, has the broadest age turn out for cinema releases.
It seems like the industry created the condition for the statistics. That is, Hollywood doesn't exactly make a lot of product that older people might find interesting. The age of 40 probably has some relation to the point in time where parents stop taking their kids to the movies too.

Regarding Star Wars; a person that is 60 years old today would have been 23 years old when Star Wars came out in 1977. And Star Wars has much more than a casual relationship with the Saturday Matinée move serials Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers which were still being shown into the early 1960's. Most 60+ year olds will fondly remember weekly theater attendance to see Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers type serials.

BTW CinemaAndy, as a friendly FYI, Roger worked for Dolby.
b curry is offline  
post #488 of 537 Old 07-16-2014, 07:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 106
And I think there are other reasons why the (this) 60 year old don't go to the movies and it isn't about the movie, but rather the experience.

When we did attend movies on a regular basis, the audience was significantly less unruly than the typical audience I encounter now AND, quite frankly, with the exception of the grandiose iMax presentations, the audio and video (and comfort and cleanliness and restroom and food) is FAR better in my theater than any typical theater I have attended in the last 20 years.

Facts are (IMO) the demographic that the movie companies are interested is not mine, so they really don't care if I show up or not.
audioguy is online now  
post #489 of 537 Old 07-16-2014, 07:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
And I think there are other reasons why the (this) 60 year old don't go to the movies and it isn't about the movie, but rather the experience.

When we did attend movies on a regular basis, the audience was significantly less unruly than the typical audience I encounter now AND, quite frankly, with the exception of the grandiose iMax presentations, the audio and video (and comfort and cleanliness and restroom and food) is FAR better in my theater than any typical theater I have attended in the last 20 years.

Facts are (IMO) the demographic that the movie companies are interested is not mine, so they really don't care if I show up or not.

Yep. The occasional time we go, we try to pick a time that it is less likely to have the theater populated by a younger audience. Talking out loud, texting, glare from phone screens, bad sound, etc. make theater attendance undesirable for all but the most compelling movies.
b curry is offline  
post #490 of 537 Old 07-16-2014, 11:46 AM
Senior Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 416
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Well Atmos is all about increasing Cinema attendance, same as 3D was. The last 5 years there has been a major turn over on both the theater as well as studio side, and even with this improvement, U.S. attendance still hover's around 4-5%. Of course what happened in Colorado and Florida has not helped that number any. For me i think the biggest problem is just over casting a certain group of people, and a almost complete loss of original material. I guess i should not throw all the studios together on that one, Warner Bros. and Disney understand this more than the rest, they also know people watch there movies more at home than the cinema and they have the most straight to disk content of any of the studio's.
Attached Images
File Type: png Moviegoer-Demo-Wire-Post-Fig.-11.png (49.8 KB, 22 views)
File Type: jpg MPAA-attendance-table.jpg (290.4 KB, 13 views)
File Type: png movie-theaters-suck.png (89.7 KB, 15 views)
File Type: jpg cinema-box-office-decline-trend.jpg (210.1 KB, 13 views)
CinemaAndy is offline  
post #491 of 537 Old 07-16-2014, 12:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 106
I think movie attendance is not only decreasing for the reasons I stated earlier but, there are a LOT of activities now vying for our free time, unlike 40 or 50 years ago: The internet being one of them.
audioguy is online now  
post #492 of 537 Old 07-16-2014, 04:46 PM
Senior Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 416
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post
It seems like the industry created the condition for the statistics. That is, Hollywood doesn't exactly make a lot of product that older people might find interesting. The age of 40 probably has some relation to the point in time where parents stop taking their kids to the movies too.

Regarding Star Wars; a person that is 60 years old today would have been 23 years old when Star Wars came out in 1977. And Star Wars has much more than a casual relationship with the Saturday Matinée move serials Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers which were still being shown into the early 1960's. Most 60+ year olds will fondly remember weekly theater attendance to see Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers type serials.

BTW CinemaAndy, as a friendly FYI, Roger worked for Dolby.
I didn't know that. For FYI my dad went to work for Walt Disney studios sound dept when he got back from Korea, he left them and went to work for Dolby in 1968 thru 1981 and worked for a time at Skywalker sound and THX, then he went back to Disney and retired in 1994. Now he just fishes, a lot.

Yes 40 is when most people stop going to the cinema regular and start goin maybe 2 or 4 times a year. Yes that is why i used Star Wars as it made cross the board impact.
CinemaAndy is offline  
post #493 of 537 Old 07-18-2014, 09:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Point taken, but I think this is just another variation of the "sound bar surround-in-a-box" hype where it just doesn't work very well. I'm always on the side of the filmmaker, and if you talk to any pro sound mixer, they'll just shake their heads when you show them gimmicks like top-firing ceiling-bounce speakers.

I have no problem just living with 7.1 and not worrying about Atmos or Aero. I think both are fantastic for theaters, but just very impractical for 99.9% of most people. And I'm reluctant to do a half-ass setup with weird phasey speakers that aren't exactly the real thing.
Marc,
I think if you had heard gravity in the Dolby Atmos reference room in Burbank.


There the objects invade your personal space in a very intimate or intimidating manner is fantastic, the only think I want to improve over that is the fidelity of the pa type system. With studio quality 135 db of headroom highly musical playback systems. So I could not be more excited. At bringing both auromatic the upconverter and atmos to home.

While returning from the Moscow's 3d sound system epiphany in terms of unrestrained musical headroom Quested / Trinnov 3D surround systems, I will quote you from circa 1980, as to what to do with legacy 7.1. If you had heard what I heard : You would take all those legacy systems," and dump them into the bay" ( IRC you were referring to dumping the then inferior broadcast sony monitors in favour of the asaca shibasoku 2010 ).





So I am dumping into the bay the 7.1 in favor of what i know is possible.


Interesting despite all the precision attention to detail placed at the atmos and auro speaker array discussions here yesterday the Datasat people accepted some very atmos conditions in the prometheus rooms existing ceiling speakers. By the same token the behind the screen heights (and projector hushbox mounted forward firing ceiling overhead wash) which are not endemic to atmos were considered acceptable by the cp-850 team including the very top brass, due to far field projection of height channels behind the screen, low ceiling with refraction above audience provides overhead ceiling wash effect same from hush-box mounted.

Besides some kind of ricochet speaker equalization reqirements, I believe that the fact that the cp-850 will have home atmos capability via hdmi, that because of that home atmos and cinema atmos are essentially one and the same, and not 2 different animals.






So in experimentation
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Dolby-Atmos-Van-Nuys-Surround-Array.jpg (925.5 KB, 184 views)
File Type: jpg ae-th901.jpg (368.2 KB, 181 views)
File Type: jpg dolby room.jpg (122.0 KB, 11 views)
File Type: jpg 500x1000px-LL-45c1e3f4_Quested-array-2.jpg (60.2 KB, 181 views)
File Type: jpg albiorix-install (2).jpg (183.3 KB, 179 views)
File Type: jpg skoll.jpg (497.5 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg diffusion.jpg (166.9 KB, 9 views)
File Type: jpg ars diffusion.jpg (140.1 KB, 184 views)
File Type: jpg skoll-p2.jpg (198.6 KB, 180 views)

Last edited by CINERAMAX; 07-18-2014 at 09:41 AM.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #494 of 537 Old 07-18-2014, 04:48 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post
I will quote you from circa 1980, as to what to do with legacy 7.1. If you had heard what I heard : You would take all those legacy systems," and dump them into the bay" ( IRC you were referring to dumping the then inferior broadcast sony monitors in favour of the asaca shibasoku 2010 ).
I was using Conrac monitors in 1980, so I'd be surprised I would have said such a thing in that era. I have used Shibasoku monitors before, but Sony Broadcast has made fine monitors for many years. Can you tell me what publication you're quoting from?

I think legacy 7.1 systems will still be useful 10-15 years from now. I'm more concerned with how well-made a loudspeaker system is, rather than how many speakers there are. I don't think even 30 crappy speakers can replace 7 good ones. About the only thing I would certainly dump would be Pro-Logic systems, because I think that kind of came and went once discrete digital became possible.

Again, I'm not trying to sell anybody anything, I'm not a consultant for any company, nor do I work for Dolby. I'm just commenting purely from the point of view of the consumer, and I think people need to have a sense of healthy skepticism about this stuff. And I absolutely don't have a problem with Atmos or Auro if its done well. I'm just of the opinion that this could be an opportunity for companies to slap more logos on receivers and sell more hype at the low-end of the business, which I think is sad.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #495 of 537 Old 07-18-2014, 05:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
I was using Conrac monitors in 1980, so I'd be surprised I would have said such a thing in that era. I have used Shibasoku monitors before, but Sony Broadcast has made fine monitors for many years. Can you tell me what publication you're quoting from?

I think legacy 7.1 systems will still be useful 10-15 years from now. I'm more concerned with how well-made a loudspeaker system is, rather than how many speakers there are. I don't think even 30 crappy speakers can replace 7 good ones. About the only thing I would certainly dump would be Pro-Logic systems, because I think that kind of came and went once discrete digital became possible.

Again, I'm not trying to sell anybody anything, I'm not a consultant for any company, nor do I work for Dolby. I'm just commenting purely from the point of view of the consumer, and I think people need to have a sense of healthy skepticism about this stuff. And I absolutely don't have a problem with Atmos or Auro if its done well. I'm just of the opinion that this could be an opportunity for companies to slap more logos on receivers and sell more hype at the low-end of the business, which I think is sad.
The videophile bi monthly. It's a long time... so i may be years off. But youll agree to having used the dump it into the bay in your late seventies articles, right. It seemed so much fun, I wont rant about the painful years of the implementation of the d65 joe kane programs, quite a few blue mutations reared their head there under runco name and others. Your writing style was genuinely inspirational, fun. JK and the isf have taken an art and turn it into a tax accountants like bean counting with intrumentation. The standards are good if they can aproximate reality if they color or distort what should appear as reality then we require new standards.

But nowadays it's easy to get a good picture, but never let too many rules take the fun out of our hobbies vocation

We are in agreement about the slapping of logos. I am 100% on to something when I tell you that a mini implementation of 24-32 channel atmos will sound incredible when done with high quality playback kit as opposed to home audiophile speakers that become more and more compressed sounding as they age due to overdriving, like dynaudio confidences in prometheus and helene. Or horn speakers which requires copious amounts of high end front end to sound good (ocean way).

I too have a true concern for the average videophile; the way I give back to them is by exploring the ultrahigh end and find what might eventually be found inside their equipment racks. The legacy trend is clear there.wont be blowing my horn tonight.
Marc Wielage likes this.

Last edited by CINERAMAX; 07-18-2014 at 05:27 PM.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #496 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 06:14 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
cannga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Cal
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post
I am 100% on to something when I tell you that a 1. mini implementation of 24-32 channel atmos will sound incredible when done with high quality playback kit as opposed to home audiophile speakers that become more and more 2. compressed sounding as they age due to overdriving, like dynaudio confidences in prometheus and helene. Or horn speakers which requires copious amounts of high end front end to sound good (ocean way).

1. To me speakers crowding like rabbits is reminiscent of 1960's Phil Spector's wall of sound "technology" and is never what Dolby/DTS/Auro recommends. The room size dictates speaker placement, number of speakers, and speaker output level.
While I agree with a more commercial approach if we are talking about a true mega theater with several rows of seats and huge screen, on a smaller scale theater typically seen in the Ultra forum, IMO it's a mis-application and results in smearing of imaging and lack of clarity, at the least. For example, additional screen speakers are recommended by Dolby for screen that is 40 plus wide, for smooth panning and filling up acoustic void across a huge screen, why stuff them into this tiny theater?

Besides the room size, the very audio mix is different, no? At home we are stuck with a Blu-ray and the audio mix it comes with, namely 7.1 channels, NOT the surround mix of the commercial theater. Why should we set up a home with a commercial theater speaker layout, when the audio mix is not designed for a commercial theater layout?

The smaller room size also dictates that you do not need commercial speakers to achieve adequate loudness. I, and very likely many posters here, have never needed to max out the volume of the system because of the smaller room size of typical home theaters. Lastly, noise induced hearing loss at 85 db long exposure is a concern no? I worry for the people in your "mega" home theaters :-).

2. Where does this come from? I would not expect this much mis-information from a professional speaker dealer.



Regards, Can
Theta sound: Powerful and full-bodied, stunning 3D soundstage, spooky imaging in "clean & quiet" soundfield. My system & CBIII HD review & setup help - Post # 3913 & 3914
Give vinyl and tube pre-amp a try - the sound from heaven!

Last edited by cannga; 07-19-2014 at 08:37 AM.
cannga is offline  
post #497 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 07:21 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
cannga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Cal
Posts: 656
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
They don't in the cinemas I go to. I see the red zone fill up way ahead of the blue zone.



....



Thanks Roger for the interesting diagram. Is the hot seat *always* 2/3 of the way back in commercial Atmos theaters? (This is the spot they tune the sound to?)

I've always wondered about the logistic of surround sound in a large theater: a gun shot to the right of row 5, is behind row 1, and ahead of row 10. I imagine in itself this is ok, but coordinating with what happens on screen will be impossible and therefore only a few rows at 2/3 have the "correct" sound?

With object oriented surround, this gives me even more a headache to think about :-). The Atmos renderer will grab speakers per given coordinates, but surely there must be only one area where this rendering will sound right, namely the 2/3 seat?

Regards, Can
Theta sound: Powerful and full-bodied, stunning 3D soundstage, spooky imaging in "clean & quiet" soundfield. My system & CBIII HD review & setup help - Post # 3913 & 3914
Give vinyl and tube pre-amp a try - the sound from heaven!

Last edited by cannga; 07-19-2014 at 07:25 AM.
cannga is offline  
post #498 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 09:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
Thanks Roger for the interesting diagram. Is the hot seat *always* 2/3 of the way back in commercial Atmos theaters? (This is the spot they tune the sound to?)
That diagram is from the Atmos cinema setup paper. I just added the colored zones to distinguish between "half way between screen and rear wall" and 2/3ds of room. So I can only deduce the answer to your question is yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
I've always wondered about the logistic of surround sound in a large theater: a gun shot to the right of row 5, is behind row 1, and ahead of row 10. I imagine in itself this is ok, but coordinating with what happens on screen will be impossible and therefore only a few rows at 2/3 have the "correct" sound?
The shifting source directions with seat location is exactly what must happen for onscreen sounds so they stay connected with visible images. The same thing happens with sounds panned anywhere else in the room, be it the middle of a wall or the rear corner. The come from those places in the room, regardless of the seat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
With object oriented surround, this gives me even more a headache to think about :-). The Atmos renderer will grab speakers per given coordinates, but surely there must be only one area where this rendering will sound right, namely the 2/3 seat?
If you want to hear the perspective exactly as heard by the mixer, well, the 2/3 point is probably a best guess. But actually we do not know precisely what the mixer actually saw wrt screen size nor do we know the shape of dubbing stage. But no matter. If that degree of consistency were the goal, we'd still be using monophonic sound!
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #499 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
If you want to hear the perspective exactly as heard by the mixer, well, the 2/3 point is probably a best guess.
from a viewing angle not good enough for 4k-8k.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #500 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post
from a viewing angle not good enough for 4k-8k.
I thought 4k was supposed to look better than 2k. No?
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #501 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - Coast Island: Vancouver South
Posts: 523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 93



From that graph I like to sit @ row #5 (from the front), and dead center.

...Less 'boomy' bass too. ...And no 120 decibels of pure crashing sound waves.

Last edited by NorthSky; 07-19-2014 at 12:22 PM.
NorthSky is online now  
post #502 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - Coast Island: Vancouver South
Posts: 523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I thought 4k was supposed to look better than 2k. No?
Yes no. ...Definitely. ...I'm sure you saw some true 4K viewing material on a 4K screen display Roger,
and like me you were probably blown away by the much higher definition picture.

It is not supposed to look better, it does.
NorthSky is online now  
post #503 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Cannga said:1. To me speakers crowding like rabbits is reminiscent of 1960's Phil Spector's wall of sound "technology"... ...IMO it's a mis-application and results in smearing of imaging and lack of clarity, at the least.

For example, additional screen speakers are recommended by Dolby for screen that is 40 plus wide, for smooth panning and filling up acoustic void across a huge screen, why stuff them into this tiny theater?

Besides the room size, the very audio mix is different, no? At home we are stuck with a Blu-ray and the audio mix it comes with, namely 7.1 channels, NOT the surround mix of the commercial theater. Why should we set up a home with a commercial theater speaker layout, when the audio mix is not designed for a commercial theater layout?
Why do you make assumptions about the different goals of using 5 speakers up front? Meridian was going to do that with the very first 861 which had the labels for it (LC,RC). With meridian steering like the original sides.

1) Valid concept a speaker every 5 feet Bob said.

Or maybe I wanted to use 2)the presets on the trinnov to move the left and right position physically to match aspect ratio on the 16.5 239 screen vs the smaller 16 by 9 which would occupy the second sets of lr. Like the dpl2 panorama idea but to matych aspect ratioo. How do you know sound designers dont create two mixes for precisely just that? I bet they do as dcp files are custom to ar, or format 3d 4k hfr atmnos etc etc.

Or in 3) an atmos setup with a wall to ceiling screen I want to put the front side widths inside the screen instead of just in front of the screen on the corner sides.

Or 4)on an object based system there would be zero semearing atmos is a speaker every meter and a half.

5) How about all four of the above?


While cinema Auro is different from home and Atmos Nippon-ricochet-light is different than Atmos Cinema, The CTO in charge of atmos is implementing home atmos into the cp-850 come March 15 and there is no additional reprocessing involved. So Home Atmos = Cinema Atmos.

In fact with the existing Atmos upconverter used in the cinema, the one I played with up-converting avatar on the fly, you can have the best of surround sound today, of course you may need a dci projector to buy it ( I must discuss exception circumvention with Dolby) and the dts hd will have to be fed lpcm decoded but it will be played back on the necessary cocoon of loudspeakers, and you will need a Dolby certified install and inspection.

But to me this is a confirmation that both atmos are the same, sorry.


The smaller room size also dictates that you do not need commercial speakers to achieve adequate loudness. I, and very likely many posters here, have never needed to max out the volume of the system because of the smaller room size of typical home theaters.

To me you are justifying doing high end cinema sound with audiophile speakers, you know the hobbit 2 the havoc wrecking it has created on many tweeters and mids including yours.


Lastly, noise induced hearing loss at 85 db long exposure is a concern no? I worry for the people in your "mega" home theaters :-).

Re Headroom: I am not talking about using the headroom but I am talking about speakers that dont go into overdrive mode that easily.

2. Where does this come from?

From systems Helene and Promethus of my own doing that have not held up very well over the course of 6- 7 years. The speakers are not blown per se but they overload quickly and volume stays stagnant on previously dramatic sounding transient crescendos. The client so much admitted they are anemic and worn out, they don't have the dynamics of when brand new, a motor and heat induced accelerated decrepitude. Not so with the best system in the world in this regard, yeah Albiorix. The client pointed out to his 5 Dolby True HD discs and said they sound much better than dts, one quick look in the datasat processor setup menu another subset of the important bass management screen and lo and behold the DRC compressor was set to on. I told him yes it sound better because it is 15-22 % less dynamic. I will do a system redesign with the knowledge I personaly have.

And pre-finally do not pretend to tell me what sounds "what and how in my designs", I have great ears too and they are focused exclusively in surround sound. You have not listened to what I have listened "specially the personal space invasion of sonic pirouettes" TM at Dolby Burbank on Gravity Premiere, so don't pretend to comprehend my goals.

Lastly as an audiophile you should stop snipping at the only cinema designer that has 32 channels of D'agostino milenium amplification and Raidho 2 carat ea. x 2 10" diamond woofer equipped custom speakers (again coated to to prevent compression) on a dual processor atmos trinnov system with high end dacs to boot
On the shop drawings that are ready for construction.



I would not expect this much mis-information from a professional speaker dealer.

I fail to see the misinformation side of it, see above. Au contraire ....




Thanks! I am going to do what our president did with the OBAMACARE label: embrace the term and take ownership. The onlydifference is that the cineramax wall of sound will be complemented by the cineramax canopy of surround sound.

Last edited by CINERAMAX; 07-19-2014 at 01:00 PM.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #504 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I thought 4k was supposed to look better than 2k. No?
exactly that is why you want to sit in the blue zone for 4k. Like 3d it is more comfortable with a wider viewing angle.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #505 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 12:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post
exactly that is why you want to sit in the blue zone for 4k. Like 3d it is more comfortable with a wider viewing angle.
That's the beauty of cinemas -- each person can sit where they prefer. I'm sure I will enjoy 4k from my usual seat. I do not want to see even more judder.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #506 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 01:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
That's the beauty of cinemas -- each person can sit where they prefer. I'm sure I will enjoy 4k from my usual seat. I do not want to see even more judder.
Very valid point, but with motion compensated frame interpolation like some of the high end flat panels and of course with 4K 60 and HFR and pc gaming being judder free, you can always program a masked zoom smaller screen if that ailment should show up on specific content and eat your cake in life size 4k too.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #507 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 01:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - Coast Island: Vancouver South
Posts: 523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 93
CINERAMAX, what is your take on improving our viewing pleasure regarding frame speed; rate @ 30, 48, 60, or even higher fps?

...From Blu-ray movies for example. ...At home, and also @ the public Theater venues, from their projectors. ...4K, and 3D.
NorthSky is online now  
post #508 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 03:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post
Very valid point, but with motion compensated frame interpolation like some of the high end flat panels and of course with 4K 60 and HFR and pc gaming being judder free, you can always program a masked zoom smaller screen if that ailment should show up on specific content and eat your cake in life size 4k too.
I don't think the cinema manager would know how to turn that on. If he did, I'd have him activate bass management, too.

Last edited by Roger Dressler; 07-19-2014 at 09:13 PM.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #509 of 537 Old 07-19-2014, 04:49 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
CINERAMAX, what is your take on improving our viewing pleasure regarding frame speed; rate @ 30, 48, 60, or even higher fps?

...From Blu-ray movies for example. ...At home, and also @ the public Theater venues, from their projectors. ...4K, and 3D.
I am a maximum immersion type of guy and coming from the torus screen Showscan 60fps school, I welcome anything that enhances realism.

CASE IN POINT OF IMAGE NIRVANA:

The hobbit 2 hfr at 13 foot lamberts 3d 6p at the Christie booth, aint nothing better than that.

That being said if $$$$ 4k tv's can do an excellent job of motion compensated frame intepolation why can't a cinema projector capable of supporting high bandwidth signals?

As I know it can be done right I say welcome it with open arms.

LOVE IT!

Rogers ;-) point is so true specially for 4k content panning in 3D. The chritie 6p HFR licked it with gusto.

Last edited by CINERAMAX; 07-19-2014 at 09:00 PM.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #510 of 537 Old 07-20-2014, 05:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,627
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 91
Getting there...

Note Columns rewrapped with new fabric and solid metal corners to reduce diffraction from surrounds.

Note brackets for mounting for Surround Sides and Surround Heights (Side and Rear).

I chose the LT-24s (narrow speaker) as they will tuck up nicely in my tray ceiling yet will still achieve ~100 db at main listening position.

Equipment room is complete (sound proofed)... time to add amplifiers and equipment and re-wire.

Still unsure of where to place REAR Surround Heights?? - In rear corners toe'd in towards main listening position or directly above rear surrounds. Side Surround Heights will be directly in line with second row seating (main listening position).






There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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