DTS Neo.X - Page 8 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 1244 Old 08-30-2011, 08:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by raneil View Post

Podcast released on Home Theater Geeks with Fred Maher of DTS discussing their newest formats. Neo X on new Denon products 4th quarter. http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/78

Yikes, that's an hour long, and the video keeps stopping.

If you managed to get through it, could you summarize the technical highlights, and what products will have it?

Thanks

Noah
noah katz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 1244 Old 08-30-2011, 09:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 515 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

If I understood correctly, he alluded to creation of three matrixed elements: one 'in the L and LS channels' for LW content, a second for RW content, and a third for LH|RH content using (I think?) only the C|LR|RR channels.

That's what I understood as well. Matrix encoding wide channels in their respective fronts and sides is obvious, since extraction is a simple 3-2-3 matrix and those sounds will phantom image at the correct location if you don't have side speakers.

Since height info is matrixed partially using both rear channels, I wonder if it will be encoded in stereo (centre + left rear, centre + right rear) or mono (centre + both rears). Maher said that they'll have an upcoming white paper, so I guess we'll wait and see. I suppose someone with a 7.1 encoder and an Onkyo 1009 could figure it out.

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #213 of 1244 Old 08-30-2011, 09:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

That's what I understood as well. Matrix encoding wide channels in their respective fronts and sides is obvious, since extraction is a simple 3-2-3 matrix and those sounds will phantom image at the correct location if you don't have side speakers.

Exactly.

Quote:


Since height info is matrixed partially using both rear channels, I wonder if it will be encoded in stereo (centre + left rear, centre + right rear) or mono (centre + both rears).

Lh is encoded into L/Lb; Rh in R/Rb. If L/R and Lb/Rb are stereo, the Lh/Rh will be, too.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #214 of 1244 Old 08-30-2011, 09:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 515 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Lh is encoded into L/Lb; Rh in R/Rb. If L/R and Lb/Rb are stereo, the Lh/Rh will be, too.

I know you had hands-on experience with Neo:X height decoding when you had the 1009, but Maher said that height info is matrix encoded into C+Lb+Rb (as SoundChex also mentioned).

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #215 of 1244 Old 08-30-2011, 11:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Skylinestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,317
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 56
http://www.denon.eu/3D-edition/en/

AVC-A1HDA and the AVP-A1HDA will be updated.
Skylinestar is offline  
post #216 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 02:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

I know you had hands-on experience with Neo:X height decoding when you had the 1009, but Maher said that height info is matrix encoded into C+Lb+Rb (as SoundChex also mentioned).

I guess I'm referring to a different section of the chat. Did I miss it?

I listened to the MP3 starting at 38:30. Fred says, essentially: >>in the DAW I take the wides and pan them phantom between side left and front left. Height channels are panned exactly between front and rear-surround.<<

In the recent WSR article on Neo:X:
Quote:
The algorithm determines the correlated
signal present in any two channels and
creates with that signal one channel. Using
DTS Neo:X to process a 7.1 mix, the algorithm
detects the correlated signal present in the
side and front channels that would equate to
wide-left and wide-right, and between the
front and rear channels the correlated signal
is designated height-left and height-right.
Thus, the same principle that generates the
width generates the height. The signals are
calculated based on the correlated signals
present.

No mention of the center channel in either case. For good reason. Mixing two additional height channels into the center speaker would not be a good place to encode them: A) the separation will be lost, and ambience and spatiality need decorrelated signals to be convincing. And B) it would potentially cloud or compete with the dialog.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #217 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 09:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 515 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
No mention of the center channel in either case.
That's bizarre. I could have sworn I heard him mention the centre channel in relation to height encoding. Apparently so did SoundChex. Maybe inception really does work.

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #218 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 09:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by raneil View Post
Podcast released on Home Theater Geeks with Fred Maher of DTS discussing their newest formats. [. . .] http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/78
From the Fred Maher Podcast we "know" that DTS will 'encourage' movie makers to author '11.1 channel pseudo discrete' BD soundtracks as [backward compatible] 7.1 DTS-HDMA with front wide and front height content matrix encoded. We might expect that any such soundtrack will play back correctly in 11.1 and three 'flavors' of 9.1 when upmixed ['matrix-decoded' . . . ?] on any DTS Neo:X equipped AVR . . . but I'll be interested to hear how effectively the 'hidden channel' content is revealed by such 'competitor' upmix processors as might be found on an AVR that is NOT equipped with DTS Neo:X. Will 11.1 matrix encoded DTS-HDMA soundtracks 'play well' with DPLIIz, Audyssey DSX, and Yamaha CinemaDSP post processors, behave 'neutrally', or even interact adversely?

[Plus, I'm sure we're all wondering how well QLS 3D processing in the forthcoming 12.4 channel Lexicon MP-20 will upmix a DTS-HDMA "11.1-in-7.1" soundtrack by 'extracting' five height channels!? ]

[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  
post #219 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 09:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by raneil View Post
Podcast released on Home Theater Geeks with Fred Maher of DTS discussing their newest formats. Neo X on new Denon products 4th quarter. http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/78
Fred did discuss 'superficially' the 'encoding mechanism' he is currently using at DTS to convert an 11.1 source mix to 7.1 (for BD authoring using existing technology). If I understood correctly, he alluded to creation of three matrixed elements: one 'in the L and LS channels' for LW content, a second for RW content, and a third for LH|RH content using (I think?) only the C|LR|RR channels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
No mention of the center channel in either case.
That's bizarre. I could have sworn I heard him mention the center channel in relation to height encoding. Apparently so did SoundChex. Maybe inception really does work.
Roger is correct; Fred said 'front' and NOT 'center' . . . which I found ambiguous in this context. With the L|R Mains already convoluted by matrices for the LW|RW channels, it seemed unlikely that they could be further complicated by the [3rd] matrix for LFH|RFH content, given that the extraction process would have to support four "two channel Neo:X upmix" configurations, to 5.x|7.x_Standard+2xFrontWide and 5.x|7.x_Standard+2xFrontHeight, in addition to two "four channel Neo:X upmix" configurations, to 5.x|7.x_Standard+2xFrontWide+2xFrontHeight. Hence, my 'center' paraphrasing . . . but with some uncertainty!?

[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  
post #220 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 10:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
The algorithm determines the correlated signal present in any two channels and
creates with that signal one channel....between the front and rear channels the correlated signal is designated height-left and height-right.

That would seem to make misplaced height effects possible, like voices.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #221 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 11:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Quote:
The algorithm determines the correlated signal present in any two channels and
creates with that signal one channel....between the front and rear channels the correlated signal is designated height-left and height-right.

That would seem to make misplaced height effects possible, like voices.
I know Fred mentioned "any two channels" but he did not mean every possible combination. Unlike DSX, Neo:X will not "false" the dialog into the height channels. The only way it will get there is if it is mixed into both a respective front (L or R) and back (Lb or Rb) pair.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #222 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
From the Fred Maher Podcast we "know" that DTS will 'encourage' movie makers to author '11.1 channel pseudo discrete' BD soundtracks as [backward compatible] 7.1 DTS-HDMA with front wide and front height content matrix encoded. We might expect that any such soundtrack will play back correctly in 11.1 and three 'flavors' of 9.1 when upmixed ['matrix-decoded' . . . ?] on any DTS Neo:X equipped AVR . . .
Yes, for at least two flavors of 9.1 (7.1+heights or 7.1+wides). What's the third flavor?

Quote:
but I'll be interested to hear how effectively the 'hidden channel' content is revealed by such 'competitor' upmix processors as might be found on an AVR that is NOT equipped with DTS Neo:X. Will 11.1 matrix encoded DTS-HDMA soundtracks 'play well' with DPLIIz, Audyssey DSX, and Yamaha CinemaDSP post processors, behave 'neutrally', or even interact adversely?
I'm guessing the other processes will ignore the Neo:X encoding. They do not think the way Neo:X does (none of them look for correlation between front/side or front/rear). It should be benign, acting the same as any other 7.1 content.

Quote:
[Plus, I'm sure we're all wondering how well QLS 3D processing in the forthcoming 12.4 channel Lexicon MP-20 will upmix a DTS-HDMA "11.1-in-7.1" soundtrack by 'extracting' five height channels!? ]
I'm wondering how well QLS 3D will decode on multiple levels, including stereo!
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #223 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 02:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 515 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Yes, for at least two flavors of 9.1 (7.1+heights or 7.1+wides). What's the third flavor?
One height + one wide?

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #224 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 02:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
[. . .] two flavors of 9.1 (7.1+heights or 7.1+wides). What's the third flavor?
5.x_Standard+2xFrontWide+2xFrontHeight (DTS refers to it as 9.1 Front-Height & Wide)

Afterthought: On hearing that the LR|RR channels are involved in the 'matrix encode process' for LFH|RFH content, it seems to me that all hypothetical|future "Neo:X encoded" soundtracks might have to be authored as DTS-HDMA 7.1 . . . leading to the possibility that "9.x stemmed" soundtracks mixed for 5.x_Standard+2xFrontWide+2xFrontHeight may actually 'upmixed status display' as 7.x_Standard+2xFrontWide+2xFrontHeight . . . but contain NULL LR|RR content after Neo:X expansion...?!

[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  
post #225 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 02:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
One height + one wide?
Which raises a fascinating question about whether the best way to address sound issues in a "non axially symmetrical" listening environment might be to allow 'some future version of Trinnov room correction' to add unpaired off-axis speakers.

[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  
post #226 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 02:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 18,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 515 Post(s)
Liked: 619
It was a joke.

Sanjay
sdurani is online now  
post #227 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
It was a joke.


Nonetheless, my response was serious.

[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  
post #228 of 1244 Old 08-31-2011, 03:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I know Fred mentioned "any two channels" but he did not mean every possible combination. Unlike DSX, Neo:X will not "false" the dialog into the height channels. The only way it will get there is if it is mixed into both a respective front (L or R) and back (Lb or Rb) pair.
Actually I was mistakenly thinking of the heights actually having a significant elevation, like if they were to the sides, not front wall placement like DTS shows.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #229 of 1244 Old 09-01-2011, 06:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Another thought following the Fred Maher Podcast on Home Theater Geeks:

It seems to me that the matrix encode|decode mechanism Fred Maher described for the Front Wide channels allows for the full content of (say) the Left Main channel (found in the 5.1|7.1_Standard authored mix on a BD) to be 'relocated' into the (extracted|inferred) Left Wide channel (output in a 5.1|7.1_Standard+2xFrontWide Neo:X upmix). That should make it possible to create, either intentionally OR unintentionally, some great FULL POWER pans across all FIVE front speakers, e.g., LW => L => C => R=> RW.

I don't know what are the suggested 'performance characteristics' for speakers to be used as Front Wides in Audyssey DSX post-processing, but perhaps those to be used as Front Wides in DTS Neo:X post-processing should have a recommendation for similar power handling capabilities to the L|R Mains [after Bass redirection is considered]...?!

[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  
post #230 of 1244 Old 09-02-2011, 01:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

It seems to me that the matrix encode|decode mechanism Fred Maher described for the Front Wide channels allows for the full content of (say) the Left Main channel (found in the 5.1|7.1_Standard authored mix on a BD) to be 'relocated' into the (extracted|inferred) Left Wide channel (output in a 5.1|7.1_Standard+2xFrontWide Neo:X upmix).

Yes, I can confirm that based on my tests. It completely steers equal signals in L/LS to Lw.


Quote:


That should make it possible to create, either intentionally OR unintentionally, some great FULL POWER pans across all FIVE front speakers, e.g., LW => L => C => R=> RW.

Yes.

Quote:


I don't know what are the suggested 'performance characteristics' for speakers to be used as Front Wides in Audyssey DSX post-processing, but perhaps those to be used as Front Wides in DTS Neo:X post-processing should have a recommendation for similar power handling capabilities to the L|R Mains [after Bass redirection is considered]...?!

Same as any other speaker. Think of it as just one more surround channel.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #231 of 1244 Old 09-03-2011, 07:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Woof Woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 38
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post20901062

Room done. Now I just want a new AVR/prepro that can give me Audyssey DSX and Neo:X. LFC would be nice too.

Currently using my old Denon AVR4810. Have to say that DSX does a stand up job panning sounds across the wide to side surrounds seamlessly. Hope DTS Neo:X is even more impressive.
Woof Woof is offline  
post #232 of 1244 Old 09-03-2011, 01:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof Woof View Post

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post20901062

Room done. Now I just want a new AVR/prepro that can give me Audyssey DSX and Neo:X. LFC would be nice too.

Currently using my old Denon AVR4810. Have to say that DSX does a stand up job panning sounds across the wide to side surrounds seamlessly. Hope DTS Neo:X is even more impressive.

Neo:X does wide panning correctly, and does not muck with the surrounds along the way. Whether that sounds more impressive is a matter of opinion.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #233 of 1244 Old 09-04-2011, 06:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Yes, I can confirm that based on my tests. [Neo:X] completely steers equal signals in L/LS to Lw.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Neo:X does wide panning correctly, and does not muck with the surrounds along the way. Whether that sounds more impressive [than DSX] is a matter of opinion.

Roger:
I wondered if, based on your own testing, you think the 'performance' of the Neo:X expansion process might be more sensitive to 'correct' speaker placement angles [i.e., L|R Mains 'near' ±30°, LW|RW 'near' ±60°, and LS|RS 'near' ±110°] than is (say) DSX...?

[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  
post #234 of 1244 Old 09-04-2011, 06:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

Roger:
I wondered if, based on your own testing, you think the 'performance' of the Neo:X expansion process might be more sensitive to 'correct' speaker placement angles [i.e., L|R Mains 'near' ±30°, LW|RW 'near' ±60°, and LS|RS 'near' ±110°] than is (say) DSX...?

No. I would not think so at all. What did you have in mind?
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #235 of 1244 Old 09-04-2011, 08:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

Roger: I wondered if, based on your own testing, you think the 'performance' of the Neo:X expansion process might be more sensitive to 'correct' speaker placement angles [i.e., L|R Mains 'near' ±30°, LW|RW 'near' ±60°, and LS|RS 'near' ±110°] than is (say) DSX...?

No. I would not think so at all. What did you have in mind?

It occurred to me that, consequent to our prior discussions, there exists the possibility for an 'encoded' DTS-HDMA "11.1-in-7.1" soundtrack 'to circle the front of the room', stepping from (e.g.) LS to LW to L to C to R to RW to RS., at (say) a constant angular velocity. The intervals between each speaker are "nominally" 50°, 30°, 30°, 30°, 30°, and 50°, respectively. Obviously, even on a 5.1 configuration, a speaker 'angular placement error' will have the effect of speeding up or slowing down the rotation at [some successive] intervals. Perhaps I'm just imagining the worst, but it seems that Neo:X matrix encode+decode process we've heard described allows for the possibility of replacing (say) a 'moderate' LS-to-L velocity vs. L-to-C-to-R velocity discrepancy with a 'more offensive' LW-to-L velocity vs. L-to-C-to-R velocity discrepancy through placements of the LW closer than -60° and the L Main wider than -30°...?!

[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  
post #236 of 1244 Old 09-04-2011, 11:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

Perhaps I'm just imagining the worst, but it seems that Neo:X matrix encode+decode process we've heard described allows for the possibility of replacing (say) a 'moderate' LS-to-L velocity vs. L-to-C-to-R velocity discrepancy with a 'more offensive' LW-to-L velocity vs. L-to-C-to-R velocity discrepancy through placements of the LW closer than -60° and the L Main wider than -30°...?!

If the soundtrack was mixed in a 5.1 setup, then let's assume that the mixing engineer regulated the panning such that the angular velocity from Ls to L is what he wanted, and from L to C to R was what he wanted.

If the Neo:X wide speakers were placed to bisect the L/Ls included angle, it would be positioned at 70° rather than 60°. That would yield a perfectly uniform angular pan through Ls-Lw-L. If the Lw speakers are at 60°, will the 10° offset hurt the pan? Can a human detect that shift in angular velocity whilst being engrossed in the movie? Will phantom image localization be any better? And considering the wide speakers are off-screen, there can be no visual disparity to alert the viewer.

If one is concerned about all this, then DSX wides are a non-starter, as it takes L-R pans and a) accelerates their rate of trajectory, and b) places the hard L (or R) sounds wider than the screen. In cases where a corresponding on-screen image exists, there will no longer be accurate alignment. And don't forget the level and bass emphasis DSX imparts along the way, further altering the nature of the original source.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #237 of 1244 Old 09-14-2011, 05:44 AM
Senior Member
 
AVTrauma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Gotta say thanks to all contributors to this discussion. This is why so many come here... to learn from those in the know! I'm waiting awhile till I take the plunge. Just recently got an Onkyo 7.2 that does heights or wides or rear that I enjoy playing with and it makes me want 11.2 now!
AVTrauma is offline  
post #238 of 1244 Old 09-14-2011, 11:59 AM
Senior Member
 
erwinfrombelgium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Flanders, Belgium
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Attachment 222625

I am in the middle of a house build for which I designed a semi-dedicated HT. Here's a surround sound floor plan with 12 speakers and 2 subs. The front is basic DSX Wide (towers) & Height (in-ceiling). But on the back, I added 2 in-ceilings @ 135° off axis (or @ 45° off rear axis) such as Yamaha uses (Rear Presence). I tested my RX-V2700 with Front Presence and I liked it. Having these in-celing rear "Heights", I feel 1 single Back Surround (tower) would be adequate.

I am simply speculating of course, but I might just wire everything for this, since I'd hate to mess up the drywall after a few years to set-up newest surround formats.

I'd still wire for 2 Back Surrounds. But without those rear in-ceilings, 1 Back Surround means only 10 channels of amplification, which are 2 five-channel amps (think Emotiva XPA-5 or future XPR-5), where 11 channels would mean 3 multichannel amps (with the exception of the Onkyo 9-ch amp + 1 stereo amp)

Please share your thoughts!

 

Ronse2010B_HTplan9_DSX12.pdf 468.9287109375k . file

Building a HT with 7.2.4 layout and SEOS-24 LCR.
erwinfrombelgium is offline  
post #239 of 1244 Old 09-14-2011, 02:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post

Attachment 222625

I am in the middle of a house build for which I designed a semi-dedicated HT. Here's a surround sound floor plan with 12 speakers and 2 subs. The front is basic DSX Wide (towers) & Height (in-ceiling). But on the back, I added 2 in-ceilings @ 135° off axis (or @ 45° off rear axis) such as Yamaha uses (Rear Presence). I tested my RX-V2700 with Front Presence and I liked it. Having these in-celing rear "Heights", I feel 1 single Back Surround (tower) would be adequate.

I am simply speculating of course, but I might just wire everything for this, since I'd hate to mess up the drywall after a few years to set-up newest surround formats.

I'd still wire for 2 Back Surrounds. But without those rear in-ceilings, 1 Back Surround means only 10 channels of amplification, which are 2 five-channel amps (think Emotiva XPA-5 or future XPR-5), where 11 channels would mean 3 multichannel amps (with the exception of the Onkyo 9-ch amp + 1 stereo amp)

Please share your thoughts!

Have you looked at Report ITU-R BS.2159-1 (10/2010) Multichannel sound technology in home and broadcasting applications...? I see that your proposed layout 'bears a strong resemblance' to the Typical small room installation schematic (page 14, FIGURE 8)--except that you have added a pair of Rear Height speakers 'consistent with the Yamaha Rear Presence channel requirements'.

You might also note that some possible future '8 channel downmix' configurations "tested" for A. Ando's paper Conversion of reproduced sound field based on the coincidence of sound pressure and direction of particle velocity (pages 4 and 5) include retention of one or two 'bottom layer' speakers, placed below the screen . . . plus various other 'unusual' choices.

[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  
post #240 of 1244 Old 09-15-2011, 04:05 PM
Senior Member
 
erwinfrombelgium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Flanders, Belgium
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I haven't seen that, but I will read it asap. I love these idea's. Thanks for the links!

I go the idea for the single back surround from Tomlinson Holman 10.2 system before he and Chris Kyriakakis developed DSX. It was Chris who confirmed me by e-mail that they use 2 back surrounds (11.1) because that's what the AVR's are used to do anyway. The second back surrounds brings very little extra vs only one, except for the largest rooms.

With the 2 rear "Heights" I added, you also have complete control over height IMO. Imagine a scene shot from beneath the runpath of an aeroplane during take off... But you'd need discrete channels to have full effect.

Building a HT with 7.2.4 layout and SEOS-24 LCR.
erwinfrombelgium is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Dts , Denon Avr 4311ci 9 2 Channel Network Multi Room Home Theater Receiver With Hdmi 1 4a
Gear in this thread

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