The OFFICIAL Pioneer Dolby Atmos Speaker Thread - Page 8 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Audio > Speakers > The OFFICIAL Pioneer Dolby Atmos Speaker Thread

Speakers

Walkamo's Avatar Walkamo
02:48 PM Liked: 50
post #211 of 721
07-02-2014 | Posts: 559
Joined: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post
Too bad Pioneer didn't use
Audio DAC Solutions

New! SABRE-2M DAC
The SABRE-2M DAC series consists of high-performance 32-bit, 2-channel audio D/A converters targeted for audiophile-grade portable applications such as mobile phones and digital music players, consumer applications such as Blu-ray players, audio pre-amplifiers and A/V receivers, as well as professional applications such as recording systems, mixer consoles and digital audio workstations.
Device Description Package DNR (dB) THD (dB) I2S/DSD/SPDIF Input ES9018K2M SABRE32 Reference Stereo DAC 28-QFN 127 -120 Yes


With ESS patented 32-bit Hyperstream™ DAC architecture and Time Domain Jitter Eliminator, the SABRE32 Reference Stereo DAC delivers an unprecedented DNR of up to 135dB and THD+N of -120dB, the industry’s highest performance level that will satisfy the most demanding audio enthusiasts.
Device Description Package DNR (dB) THD (dB) I2S/DSD/SPDIF Input ES9018 SABRE32 Reference 32-bit 8-Channel Audio DAC 64LQFP 135 (mono)
133 (stereo)
129 (8ch) -120 Yes

Instead of the


The ES9016 SABRE32 Ultra DAC is the latest addition to the world’s highest performance and critically acclaimed SABRE32 DAC family. With ESS patented 32-bit HyperstreamTM DAC architecture and Time Domain Jitter Eliminator, the ES9016 SABRE32 Ultra DAC delivers spectacular music with an unsurpassed sound stage, with up to 128dB dynamic range and 0.0003% (-110dB) total harmonic distortion, and free from clock jitter common in digital audio systems.
Device Description Package DNR (dB) THD (dB) I2S/DSD/SPDIF Input ES9016 SABRE32 Ultra 32-bit 8-Channel Audio DAC 48-LQFP 128 (2ch)
124 (8ch) -110 Yes
It came down to cost.. The 9018 is way more expensive than the 9016s..... With everything that we added this year (Atmos, New DSP, HDMI 2.0, etc) without changing the price it was too difficult to include the higher end DAC... The 9016 is a very good DAC though.....

Thanks,

Chris Walker
Pioneer Electronics
wse's Avatar wse
02:51 PM Liked: 376
post #212 of 721
07-02-2014 | Posts: 7,045
Joined: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walkamo View Post
It came down to cost.. The 9018 is way more expensive than the 9016s..... With everything that we added this year (Atmos, New DSP, HDMI 2.0, etc) without changing the price it was too difficult to include the higher end DAC... The 9016 is a very good DAC though.....

Thanks,

Chris Walker
Pioneer Electronics
Thanks Chris,

I wonder how these DACs compare? See the OPPO BDP-105D https://www.oppodigital.com/blu-ray-...-Features.aspx
smurraybhm's Avatar smurraybhm
02:54 PM Liked: 560
post #213 of 721
07-02-2014 | Posts: 2,011
Joined: Jul 2007
^ I would be willing to bet you can't hear the difference. It is nice to have the latest greatest even though most people who heard your system would most likely not have a clue about what a DAC is, does or the differences between them. Despite the lower quality DAC I am either buying the SC-89 or comparable Denon.
carfanm's Avatar carfanm
04:13 PM Liked: 36
post #214 of 721
07-02-2014 | Posts: 83
Joined: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
See how addressing your concerns still raises your BS meter? Hence the reaction from others.

I ask you publicly to please stop insulting me. Regarding my statement on BS meter...I am quite confident that no matter how good Atmos is or is not, the sales staff at Best Buy will be hawking it (and any co-branded product) as a sales gimmick. That is not to belittle Atmos - just a statement of how I think the branding will be used.
carfanm's Avatar carfanm
04:20 PM Liked: 36
post #215 of 721
07-02-2014 | Posts: 83
Joined: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
Hi Carfanm.
So, defenses are beginning to lower....I feel I'm getting closer to you feeling that there might just be a chance that these speakers might be worth searching out...:-)


I really hope this doesn't sound conceited, but I wasn't thinking that I needed Atmos in order to help sell my speakers!!

I confess that my defenses are lowered and I do have an interest in hearing them. I'm not sold on them but my interest is raised. Thanks again for taking the time to explain details related to my concern.


And, you don't sound conceited at all...but I do suspect that little extra branding will help sell them to many people (the typical Best Buy shopper, for example - which is great because that's a Pioneer outlet!). And for Pioneer, that's not a bad thing. For those who follow who the speaker designer is, like many hear, your name will sell plenty also from the way folks talk about you.
wse's Avatar wse
06:15 PM Liked: 376
post #216 of 721
07-02-2014 | Posts: 7,045
Joined: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by smurraybhm View Post
^ I would be willing to bet you can't hear the difference. It is nice to have the latest greatest even though most people who heard your system would most likely not have a clue about what a DAC is, does or the differences between them. Despite the lower quality DAC I am either buying the SC-89 or comparable Denon.
Marantz AV8802 for me unless Classe has a new SSP
AndrewJ's Avatar AndrewJ
10:05 PM Liked: 51
post #217 of 721
07-03-2014 | Posts: 71
Joined: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
How do you define entry level? A subwoofer needs to be able to move lots of air. A single 10" just can't do that. It's simple physics.
I'm glad some physics is simple. Makes me question the complex Physics I studied for 3 years for my Physics degree!!


Ok, to the "simple" physics....
First, size isn't the measure, its volume displacement. SPL at any frequency is governed by the volume of air that needs to be moved. An 8" driver moving 1" pk-pk moves more air than a 10" moving 1/2" pk-pk.
As frequency goes down, we need to move 4 times the air volume to maintain a constant SPL. So, in a subwoofer, we have a trade off between SPL and low frequency capability. Whereas at low levels we can get an extended low frequency response, it won't play equally loud at all frequencies. Once we hit the volume displacement limit output capability drops like a stone. So, How loud? Well that depends on how loud you want to play. Not all of us have listening rooms where we can play as loud as we want. Therefore, for some listeners, 10" may well be enough if the low frequency response is extended enough to give a good aural impression of bass.
Now lets complicate matters...What is the listening environment? The level we can generate at low frequencies in a bounded room is very different from that in free space. Firstly, ignoring the modal response of the room, the SPL is dependent upon room volume. So a small driver in a small room may again outperform a larger driver in a larger room.
Now lets add room modes. The way a sub couples into the room is dependent upon its location and how it couples into the modes. A corner location maximizes the coupling and gives the most gain, though perhaps with an uneven response. Moving the sub out into the room now selectively couples it to the room modes. Not all of them are excited, and this may or may not give a smoother response at the listening location. So once again a small sub coupled optimally into the room may outperform a larger sub sub-optimally coupled (pun intended :-) )
However, talk of room modes brings up the other problem, that of response varying dramatically with listening location. EQ of a single subwoofer cannot fix this. However, the approach of multiple subwoofers spread throughout the room certainly can. variation with listening location is reduced, making EQ fr the remaining variations more acceptable. However, many large subwoofers are probably not domestically acceptable, whereas multiple small subwoofers possibly are. Combined they may have larger volume displacement tah the single large sub, and if they are designed to have the same low frequency extension as the single large sub, then overall this can be a much better solution.
I know the last option goes away from you assertion about a single 10" sub, but I hope you see my point!


Regards


Andrew
AndrewJ's Avatar AndrewJ
10:18 PM Liked: 51
post #218 of 721
07-03-2014 | Posts: 71
Joined: Apr 2002
[QUOTE=

All of this probably isn't particularly important, because as I understand it research into audibility of specific reflections would indicate that diffraction effects are one of those things, like comb filtering, that measure worse than they sound. Baffle or surround diffraction may have an effect on imaging, and that's certainly something I'd like to hear Andrew's opinion on, but I don't believe it has audible spectral influence.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, diffraction effects certainly measure worse than they sound, but then this is only if you use just a simple measurement as the basis for audibility. The ear brain is more complicated, so measurements must be more sophisticated to properly correlate to audibility. Their effects probably diminish at higher frequencies, but at mid frequencies baffle diffraction is very audible, as their effect is broadband and remains constant over a wide listening area and so contributes to frontal power response.
Regarding imaging, while I cannot immediately quote studies that investigate imaging and diffraction, anecdotal evidence certainly seems to.


Regards


Andrew
markus767's Avatar markus767
12:33 AM Liked: 362
post #219 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 5,473
Joined: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
I'm glad some physics is simple. Makes me question the complex Physics I studied for 3 years for my Physics degree!!


Ok, to the "simple" physics....
First, size isn't the measure, its volume displacement. SPL at any frequency is governed by the volume of air that needs to be moved. An 8" driver moving 1" pk-pk moves more air than a 10" moving 1/2" pk-pk.
As frequency goes down, we need to move 4 times the air volume to maintain a constant SPL. So, in a subwoofer, we have a trade off between SPL and low frequency capability. Whereas at low levels we can get an extended low frequency response, it won't play equally loud at all frequencies. Once we hit the volume displacement limit output capability drops like a stone. So, How loud? Well that depends on how loud you want to play. Not all of us have listening rooms where we can play as loud as we want. Therefore, for some listeners, 10" may well be enough if the low frequency response is extended enough to give a good aural impression of bass.
Now lets complicate matters...What is the listening environment? The level we can generate at low frequencies in a bounded room is very different from that in free space. Firstly, ignoring the modal response of the room, the SPL is dependent upon room volume. So a small driver in a small room may again outperform a larger driver in a larger room.
Now lets add room modes. The way a sub couples into the room is dependent upon its location and how it couples into the modes. A corner location maximizes the coupling and gives the most gain, though perhaps with an uneven response. Moving the sub out into the room now selectively couples it to the room modes. Not all of them are excited, and this may or may not give a smoother response at the listening location. So once again a small sub coupled optimally into the room may outperform a larger sub sub-optimally coupled (pun intended :-) )
However, talk of room modes brings up the other problem, that of response varying dramatically with listening location. EQ of a single subwoofer cannot fix this. However, the approach of multiple subwoofers spread throughout the room certainly can. variation with listening location is reduced, making EQ fr the remaining variations more acceptable. However, many large subwoofers are probably not domestically acceptable, whereas multiple small subwoofers possibly are. Combined they may have larger volume displacement tah the single large sub, and if they are designed to have the same low frequency extension as the single large sub, then overall this can be a much better solution.
I know the last option goes away from you assertion about a single 10" sub, but I hope you see my point!


Regards


Andrew
All valid points Andrew but nevertheless a single 10" simply can't move enough air (Xmax can't simply be increased at will). Especially when the application is home theater. Then add room EQ and/or loudness compensation and you're quickly running out of "gas" even at "normal" listening levels.
markus767's Avatar markus767
01:57 AM Liked: 362
post #220 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 5,473
Joined: Apr 2009
Andrew, did you see my post about polar response? Do you have such data and can you share it?
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar SyntheticShrimp
07:35 AM Liked: 108
post #221 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 359
Joined: Aug 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
All valid points Andrew but nevertheless a single 10" simply can't move enough air (Xmax can't simply be increased at will). Especially when the application is home theater. Then add room EQ and/or loudness compensation and you're quickly running out of "gas" even at "normal" listening levels.
JL E110
SVS PB-1000
markus767's Avatar markus767
07:54 AM Liked: 362
post #222 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 5,473
Joined: Apr 2009
^
Yes but what are you trying to convey? Look at the test conditions. Measure real subs in real rooms, EQ them and then show me that 10" is what you want to have.
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar SyntheticShrimp
08:17 AM Liked: 108
post #223 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 359
Joined: Aug 2013
What I'm trying to convey is that you're over-simplifying and thinking in terms of effective cone area, S_d, when you should be thinking in terms of volume displacement, V_d.

By the way you really should be using at least two sub woofers. Give me the choice of two relatively small subs and one super sub and I'll pick the former every time.
Flyquail56
08:50 AM Liked: 0
post #224 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 3
Joined: Jul 2014
Are these new speakers related to or developed from the European market S-71 range?
markus767's Avatar markus767
09:22 AM Liked: 362
post #225 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 5,473
Joined: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyntheticShrimp View Post
What I'm trying to convey is that you're over-simplifying and thinking in terms of effective cone area, S_d, when you should be thinking in terms of volume displacement, V_d.
I know. Did you read my posts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SyntheticShrimp View Post
By the way you really should be using at least two sub woofers. Give me the choice of two relatively small subs and one super sub and I'll pick the former every time.
Then Pioneer should sell them as pairs
Besides that, what you're saying isn't generally true. Someone might just need to optimize a single seat and/or use a near field sub.
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar SyntheticShrimp
09:37 AM Liked: 108
post #226 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 359
Joined: Aug 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
I know. Did you read my posts?
Yes. Your claim was that a single 10 inch sub woofer can't move enough air for home theater applications. The sub woofers I linked to most definitely can. A sub woofer's output is always considerably higher in a room than in free-field conditions due to a reduction in the solid angle of radiation so your objection to the testing procedures is strange.

To be fair, I'm not saying that the pioneer sub will be as capable as those two subs I linked to. One is massively more expensive, and the other is a bass reflex design in a much larger cabinet. What I am saying is that your claim is too sweeping and ignores too many variables.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Then Pioneer should sell them as pairs
Besides that, what you're saying isn't generally true. Someone might just need to optimize a single seat and/or use a near field sub.
Who only sits alone in a room and watches movies by themselves?
zieglj01's Avatar zieglj01
09:46 AM Liked: 542
post #227 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 11,358
Joined: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyntheticShrimp View Post
Did you mean to say JL E110, instead of JBL

It sure looks good to me
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar SyntheticShrimp
09:48 AM Liked: 108
post #228 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 359
Joined: Aug 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by zieglj01 View Post
Did you mean to say JL E110, instead of JBL

It sure looks good to me
Yeah, Whoops. Edited. Thanks
taichi4's Avatar taichi4
10:45 AM Liked: 90
post #229 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 2,411
Joined: Dec 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyntheticShrimp View Post

...By the way you really should be using at least two sub woofers. Give me the choice of two relatively small subs and one super sub and I'll pick the former every time.
Because the two subs will have less excursion than one large one for the same output, and have better transients...cleaner bass?
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar SyntheticShrimp
12:36 PM Liked: 108
post #230 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 359
Joined: Aug 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post
Because the two subs will have less excursion than one large one for the same output, and have better transients...cleaner bass?
Mostly because of the nature of bass reproduction in small rooms. Bass frequencies are best described by wave physics rather than ray tracing like higher frequencies. At certain frequencies that depend partially on the dimensions of the room and partially on other things such as room construction, standing waves build up. The nodes and antinodes depend on where you are in the room and the amplitude at that resonant frequency will depend entirely on where you sit.

The short story is that, with one subwoofer, frequency response in one seat is completely different than in another seat. And every seat will have sub-optimal response before EQ. You can EQ one position to be correct, but the filters will be applied to other positions in ways that are not correct for them. If you only care about one seat, then that's fine. If you EQ an average of all the seats, huge problems will be hidden by the average, and some seats will get better, but some will likely get worse. The former solution at least has utility in some circumstances, the latter is almost useless with one sub, and is one reason why using Audyssey with one sub won't give you good results (among other problems with Audyssey).

Using two subwoofers reduces the variation between the seats so EQ can be used for multiple positions and you can have good bass in multiple spots and not be confined to one "sweet spot".
taichi4's Avatar taichi4
12:48 PM Liked: 90
post #231 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 2,411
Joined: Dec 2007
Thanks for that erudite, informative answer. Very interesting.

Don't you think there is also a benefit in having less excursion in a subwoofer? Less excursion means less mass to be moved, and better transient response.
(or more properly, the given mass needs to be moved to a lesser degree)
AndrewJ's Avatar AndrewJ
12:57 PM Liked: 51
post #232 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 71
Joined: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyquail56 View Post
Are these new speakers related to or developed from the European market S-71 range?
There is no connection between the two. All of these speakers have been developed entirely independently of thos sold in Europe.


Regards


Andrew
SyntheticShrimp's Avatar SyntheticShrimp
01:04 PM Liked: 108
post #233 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 359
Joined: Aug 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post
Thanks for that erudite, informative answer. Very interesting.

Don't you think there is also a benefit in having less excursion in a subwoofer? Less excursion means less mass to be moved, and better transient response.
(or more properly, the given mass needs to be moved to a lesser degree)
My intuition is that if there is any effect at all it would be small compared to the time domain effects from modal ringing in the room, but I'm sure Mr. Jones could give you a more complete answer.
kokishin's Avatar kokishin
01:38 PM Liked: 148
post #234 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 676
Joined: Sep 2006
I thought this was a good read:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums...view-9.html#81
ss9001's Avatar ss9001
04:13 PM Liked: 343
post #235 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 8,708
Joined: Jun 2003
^^
agreed! He addressed a number of issues.
taichi4's Avatar taichi4
05:15 PM Liked: 90
post #236 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 2,411
Joined: Dec 2007
Including the point that the way Atmos information is mixed from one film to another (and I imagine transferred to disc) has a real impact on what the home user experiences. It seems to be like 3D, where a handful of filmmakers use it to advantage, and others use it with considerably less finesse.
Flyquail56
05:24 PM Liked: 0
post #237 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 3
Joined: Jul 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
There is no connection between the two. All of these speakers have been developed entirely independently of thos sold in Europe.


Regards


Andrew
Got it. Thanks for your reply!

Best regards,

Mike
Walkamo's Avatar Walkamo
10:26 PM Liked: 50
post #238 of 721
07-04-2014 | Posts: 559
Joined: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyquail56 View Post
Are these new speakers related to or developed from the European market S-71 range?
Nope... These are all developed and engineered in our Long Beach office. In my opinion these are much better speakers that the S-71 series...

Chris Walker
Pioneer Electronics
sdg4vfx's Avatar sdg4vfx
12:19 AM Liked: 96
post #239 of 721
07-05-2014 | Posts: 1,352
Joined: Sep 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by kokishin View Post
Thanks - good perspective to read.
markus767's Avatar markus767
03:58 AM Liked: 362
post #240 of 721
07-05-2014 | Posts: 5,473
Joined: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post
Don't you think there is also a benefit in having less excursion in a subwoofer? Less excursion means less mass to be moved, and better transient response.
(or more properly, the given mass needs to be moved to a lesser degree)
This is mostly a non-issue. The actual problem is what your room does to the signal.

An example. 50Hz has a wavelength of 6.86m (22.5'). Before your hearing even had the chance to determine pitch of the direct sound, the signal will be completely swamped by the "waves splashing back" from the walls.

In rooms the ideal "transient" response goes from this...



...to something like that...


Attached: dirac.png (29.8 KB)  sub-room.png (173.8 KB) 
Tags: andrew jones , dolby atmos , Pioneer

Reply Speakers

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3