Marantz AV8802 13.2 XLR processor - HDMI 2.0 ISF - Wifi + Bluetooth details - Page 8 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 535 Old 07-28-2014, 11:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Woof Woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
Remember Denon? ...They used to have two options for the Side surrounds, Movie & Music.
...With accommodating/dedicated connections and easy switching between the two pairs from the remote.

Onkyo high-end receivers? ...With easy switching between two main front pairs (A & B).
...Best pair for dedicated music listening, and the other pair for movie watching time.
I am not sure how this (side surrounds and A/B speakers) relates to wide speakers

But for good stereo placement, you'd want an almost equilateral triangle so the 30 degrees from the centre to the L and R works pretty well for music too.
Woof Woof is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 535 Old 07-28-2014, 11:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
As Sanjay noted, the 60 deg gap between L/R and side surrounds.

When I had DSX 11.1 setup the wides created a more unified soundfield vs. less cohesive front and surround soundfields.
And for others it created a discordance because the sound coming from them Wides wasn't exactly what was supposed to be there in the first place.
For some films it wasn't that bad, but for others it was detrimental.

The DSX Front Wides simply weren't sound consistant for all people and with all movies.
And same with the front Heights.

DTS Neo:X ...More a competitive novelty with Audyssey DSX than an intelligent dose of surround sound. Fun entertainment but certainly not scientifically effective with all.

Welcome to Dolby Atmos, where a 7.1.4 should kick real ass.
And that Marantz 8802 with optional 9.2.4 (doesn't look like it) in two configurations is still not enough for some, and overachieving for others.

My view, my world, my surround sound experience, less Atmos for now.

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by NorthSky; 07-29-2014 at 11:59 PM. Reason: ( )
NorthSky is offline  
post #213 of 535 Old 07-28-2014, 11:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
As Sanjay noted, the 60 deg gap between L/R and side surrounds.
I'm just pointing out there are five 60-deg gaps in the space, and for some reason folks seem obsessed with addressing only two of them.

Quote:
When I had DSX 11.1 setup the wides created a more unified soundfield vs. less cohesive front and surround soundfields.
That is also achieved by shifting the surrounds forward to 80 deg, which is not only free, it avoids the heavy hand of the DSX process both front and back.
Scott Simonian likes this.

Roger

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #214 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 12:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof Woof View Post
I am not sure how this (side surrounds and A/B speakers) relates to wide speakers

But for good stereo placement, you'd want an almost equilateral triangle so the 30 degrees from the centre to the L and R works pretty well for music too.
A simple mention on how Denon back then was trying to please ALL people with one product, that's all.

And I agree with you, mostly, with that 60° angle for your two front mains.
Mostly because it is not the Golden Holy Trail Rule of all Laws in Sound.
The hail of the grail is flexible; from 45 to 75° angle in them two front mains.
We have music, we have movies, we have rooms, we have people, we have ears, ...and all very diversified in their own authoritarian right.

All the audio gurus of sound reproduction @ home weren't all exactly stuck with all type of various loudspeakers and room's sizes and type of music/movie recordings.
It is a constant changing evolution with advanced technologies (DSP & DRC & DEQ),
and guidelines based on psychoacoustic experiments are not over yet; there are new acoustic scientists coming with improved laws of digital/acoustical manipulation on triangulation and object positioning in a determined space.

One specific sound direction can be reproduce by another speaker position.
We are only scratching the infinity. And there is no reason to be stuck by our imagination and fundamental audio laws.
There is a whole world of exploration out there, and that's the next one we'll be living in till the next one...

Nothing in this audio hobby is sacrilegious. The mind is always open to new and better and more advanced technologies from bright ideas put @ test by man's own brain.

This is my opinion, not a statement.

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NorthSky is offline  
post #215 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 12:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Woof Woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 38
I think we are getting sidetracked here.

In the case of most users, adding wide speakers provided a very cohesive front stage. It probably helped that I had timbre matched speakers throughout as well but that's going to be beneficial even for 5.1
Woof Woof is offline  
post #216 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 01:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Albert Einstein was sidetracking too...and @ a "c" speed.

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NorthSky is offline  
post #217 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 05:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
erwinfrombelgium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Flanders, Belgium
Posts: 643
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
Here ya go! ...Excellent example Roger.

* And also why not fill the gaps between the floor and ceiling?
...Like @ la Auro 3D with three layers.

<<>> & Experiment: Put your two front mains to form a 70° angle (35° each from center).
...And your two Side surrounds @ 80° from center.
Like this:

Click image for larger version

Name:	990 7.2.4 Atmos.jpg
Views:	86
Size:	85.5 KB
ID:	185610

This is following Floyd Toole's suggestions which he based on the ITU standard for 7.1. I added the Top speakers for Atmos 7.2.4. I have adapted this for our HT. I cannot post that design because the apparent size restrictions for pdf files.
Scott Simonian likes this.

Building a HT with 7.2.4 layout and ◤SEOS-24◥ LCR.
erwinfrombelgium is offline  
post #218 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 10:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,409
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1045 Post(s)
Liked: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I'm just pointing out there are five 60-deg gaps in the space, and for some reason folks seem obsessed with addressing only two of them.
Maybe the two gaps in front are more important to them than the three gaps behind.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #219 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 10:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Maybe the two gaps in front are more important to them than the three gaps behind.
Maybe. I guess it depends. Is the front gap a problem because the phantom "gap" images are fragile to seating position? If so, the rear gaps have equal fragility.

If the front phantom "gap" images are weak/fuzzy even in the MLP, then there may be other remedies, like better system/room tuning that would help there.

Roger

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #220 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 11:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,507
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 201 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I'm just pointing out there are five 60-deg gaps in the space, and for some reason folks seem obsessed with addressing only two of them.
Fair question.

For one thing, most of the time the sound is predominantly front-centric; I often find myself wishing there was more use of the surrounds.

And like Sanjay said, often there's a lot more distance from the seating area to the front speakers than to the surrounds, so that it looks like and/or is a bigger gap between L/R and surrounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
That is also achieved by shifting the surrounds forward to 80 deg, which is not only free, it avoids the heavy hand of the DSX process both front and back.
Yep, that's what I did when I ditched the Denon.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #221 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 11:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,409
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1045 Post(s)
Liked: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Is the front gap a problem because the phantom "gap" images are fragile to seating position?
For a listener seated in the sweet spot, those gaps (and the one between the front L/R speakers) are not a problem. For listeners outside the sweet spot, speakers at the centre of all three gaps would help stabilize imaging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
If so, the rear gaps have equal fragility.
But not equal importance. For better or worse, most people think asymmetrically when it comes to home theatre. Rather than split their speaker budget evenly 7 ways, they'll spend a little more on the L/C/R speakers and skimp a bit on the surrounds. Maybe not optimal, but I can understand folks prioritizing certain speakers over others.

Likewise, it's not uncommon to see people prioritize the front hemisphere over the rear hemisphere. Which is why filling a gap forward of the listening position might be more important to them than filling a similar gap rearward of the listening position. Like I said, if I had the extra outputs, I would fill the gap between my sides and rears. But you already know that that's an even lower priority for me than wides.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
If the front phantom "gap" images are weak/fuzzy even in the MLP, then there may be other remedies, like better system/room tuning that would help there.
Yes, this is a good example of using all the tricks you learned about music playback and applying them to home theatre. We've all heard systems that sound like 5 or 7 pools of mono, where better system/room tuning could have made all 7 pairs of speakers deliver stereophonic imaging. But that doesn't replace the greater stability that additional speakers provide.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #222 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 12:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
For one thing, most of the time the sound is predominantly front-centric; I often find myself wishing there was more use of the surrounds.
There's the temporal realities, as you note. But should that affect the quality of the surround effects when they happen, even if less often than frontal sounds? Are we not moving away from the mushy surround arrays (and dipoles) of channel-based delivery to a more uniform soundfield with improved articulation all around thanks to object rendering?

If the surround channels need less power 95% of the time, can we use a smaller power amp? What happens the other 5% of the time when the rare peak comes along?

Quote:
And like Sanjay said, often there's a lot more distance from the seating area to the front speakers than to the surrounds, so that it looks like and/or is a bigger gap between L/R and surrounds.
But surely we realize that this not important. The subtended angles are as required, and the arrival times, levels, EQ etc, are all normalized just as if the speakers were disposed about the notional ITU circle.

Roger

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #223 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 12:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
For a listener seated in the sweet spot, those gaps (and the one between the front L/R speakers) are not a problem. For listeners outside the sweet spot, speakers at the centre of all three gaps would help stabilize imaging.
Good.

Quote:
But not equal importance. For better or worse, most people think asymmetrically when it comes to home theatre. Rather than split their speaker budget evenly 7 ways, they'll spend a little more on the L/C/R speakers and skimp a bit on the surrounds. Maybe not optimal, but I can understand folks prioritizing certain speakers over others.
Me too. Inexpensive speakers offer the same localization as expensive ones, assuming monopoles, so the difference in budget does not have to mean directionality suffers. I support budget asymmetry for that very reason in my own room -- I can trade of cost and size without compromising spatial effect.

Quote:
Likewise, it's not uncommon to see people prioritize the front hemisphere over the rear hemisphere. Which is why filling a gap forward of the listening position might be more important to them than filling a similar gap rearward of the listening position.
We certainly saw that expressed with Audyssey DSX. They have every right to warp the soundfield as they like, even advocating 5 speakers in the front and 2 in the rear, and I have a right to activate the off switch. Some people, having seen all the flurry over DSX and some reinforcement of wides by Neo:X, may have come to accept "well, this must be important if these respected companies support it."

Home theater folks just want to do what's right. If Atmos (or MDA) says hey, great news, you can put speakers wherever you want, the first question is, where to put the speakers!

Quote:
Like I said, if I had the extra outputs, I would fill the gap between my sides and rears. But you already know that that's an even lower priority for me than wides.
I guess I am simply advocating the same thing that happened when we went from 5.1 to 7.1. Rather than just adding a pair of rear speakers, the surrounds shifted forward to better cover the space. If we add yet another pair, why not shift the 4 surrounds accordingly? And so forth each time another pair is added?

Roger

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #224 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 01:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,507
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 201 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
There's the temporal realities, as you note. But should that affect the quality of the surround effects when they happen, even if less often than frontal sounds? Are we not moving away from the mushy surround arrays (and dipoles) of channel-based delivery to a more uniform soundfield with improved articulation all around thanks to object rendering?

If the surround channels need less power 95% of the time, can we use a smaller power amp? What happens the other 5% of the time when the rare peak comes along?
Not sure how this got to be sacrificing surround for front quality, but yes, I would if I had to since most of the sound is in the front most of the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
But surely we realize that this not important. The subtended angles are as required, and the arrival times, levels, EQ etc, are all normalized just as if the speakers were disposed about the notional ITU circle.
Yes, was just agreeing with how we can mislead ourselves.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #225 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 01:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,409
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1045 Post(s)
Liked: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
We certainly saw that expressed with Audyssey DSX. They have every right to warp the soundfield as they like, even advocating 5 speakers in the front and 2 in the rear...
Oh it was worse: if you had 9 speakers, they advocated 7 up front and only 2 to cover the entire surround field. I'm not suggesting anything remotely that lopsided.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
If Atmos (or MDA) says hey, great news, you can put speakers wherever you want, the first question is, where to put the speakers!
Indeed, if you already have a 7.1.4 set-up, where to put the next two speakers? Front wides, rear wides or another pair of heights? I'd opt for front wides. Less clear on the next pair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Rather than just adding a pair of rear speakers, the surrounds shifted forward to better cover the space. If we add yet another pair, why not shift the 4 surrounds accordingly?
Just to clear up the semantics, whenever I've talked about adding more speakers, I'd taken it for granted that the other speakers would be re-arranged. Sorry if that didn't come across. When I say "add", that's just a short-hand for incorporating another pair of speakers (and whatever adjustments that might include). So when I say that after 5.1, I'd "add" a pair of rears, I don't mean the 2 current surrounds would stay where they are.

BTW, there was some rumor early on that the Marantz 8802 might support 13 speakers (9.1.4). Anyone know if that has been clarified one way or the other?

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #226 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 03:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Just to clear up the semantics, whenever I've talked about adding more speakers, I'd taken it for granted that the other speakers would be re-arranged. Sorry if that didn't come across.
Even if that is your understanding, that is not what I see being talked about regarding "filling the gap." For that, the 30 and 90 deg speakers stay put, and the added speaker slides in at 60. Have I been misunderstanding this all along?

Roger

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #227 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 04:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,409
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1045 Post(s)
Liked: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Even if that is your understanding, that is not what I see being talked about regarding "filling the gap." For that, the 30 and 90 deg speakers stay put, and the added speaker slides in at 60. Have I been misunderstanding this all along?
You're right that most people do think that way (along with consumers and manufacturers that leave the surrounds at 110 deg when adding surround-backs). But there are a few who understand that speakers have to be re-distributed as more are added. Best you can hope to do is present your case and see if others agree.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #228 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 04:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
<<>> & Experiment: Put your two front mains to form a 70° angle (35° each from center).
...And your two Side surrounds @ 80° from center.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post
Like this:

Attachment 185610

This is following Floyd Toole's suggestions which he based on the ITU standard for 7.1. I added the Top speakers for Atmos 7.2.4. I have adapted this for our HT. I cannot post that design because the apparent size restrictions for pdf files.
Floyd got it atmos right. {From picture/attachment @ post #217}

* Are you Erwin from Belgium who recently built/completed a new "cool" house?
If yes (indeed you are) then we met before, on the Internet, @ another audio forum, faraway in the same galaxy.
Nice to see you again Erwin; and I know that like me you're deep into it right "overhead" over your head and ears.

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by NorthSky; 07-29-2014 at 04:31 PM.
NorthSky is offline  
post #229 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 05:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Arrow Marantz AV8802 SSP - 13.2-channel - Eleven active @ once (7.1.4 or 9.1.2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
So from this ITU document, my understanding is that the 8802s' 13.2 outputs should be optimaly hemisphericaly spread around as

(4+9).2 = (FHL/FHR/BHR/BHL + WL/L/C/R/WR/SR/BR/BL/SL).2 and (eventually 2 subs).
http://www.hdfever.fr/2014/06/24/mar...e-savait-deja/ (in French)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
... and to go a bit slightly further concerning this Marantz 8802 13.2 vs Onkyo 5530 11.2(4) context, as can be seen in 5530's specs sheet (.pdf), the Onkyo is described as being a 7.2.4 Dolby Atmos compatible processor.

So what remains to be confirmed is : today or in the near future, does a 9.2.4 context exist in the Dolby Atmos processing, as this is the configuration that the Marantz 8802 has the potential to drive
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
I'd have the same request for the 8802's Dolby Atmos processing : a 9.2.4 capacity declined as (7+Wides).2.4 .

Alas for the time being it seems that this 1st generation Dolby Atmos processing is limited to "only" an 11 channels handling and in this context I don't see it having a (5+Wides).2.4 capacity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
BTW, there was some rumor early on that the Marantz 8802 might support 13 speakers (9.1.4). Anyone know if that has been clarified one way or the other?
Nothing concise yet, and who knows...

So far it is what my post's title says. ...1st Generation Dolby Atmos from the super duder huber Marantz AV8802 newest SSP (September, or October 2014).

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NorthSky is offline  
post #230 of 535 Old 07-29-2014, 05:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Me, I might get the AV7702 and screw the Wides! ... 7.2.4
...Or more precisely 7.1.4 (& some of you guys can do 9.1.2 as you wish - I won't).

Because, what's inside those speakers doesn't belong there. ...If you want the Wides, @ least put the right sound material in there.
...God lock! ...I already got that with my front mains and side surrounds.

It's my money, it's my head, it's your money, it's your head, and everything is so fine.

_____________

erwinfrombelgium likes this.

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by NorthSky; 07-30-2014 at 12:15 AM. Reason: Typo (definitely)
NorthSky is offline  
post #231 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 12:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
You're right that most people do think that way (along with consumers and manufacturers that leave the surrounds at 110 deg when adding surround-backs). But there are a few who understand that speakers have to be re-distributed as more are added. Best you can hope to do is present your case and see if others agree.
We can't assume other people guessing our line of thinking and distribution and arrangement and position and ...

Everything has to be explained real clear, and here you did not. ...Roger is right regarding the specificity of the "space gap" between the two front mains and pair of sides (main side surrounds).
Audyssey DSX Width speakers positioning are explained in the Audyssey thread, and so are DTS Neo:X Height speakers.
And a standard 7.1-channel setup doesn't change the equation. Am I right, or are we flexible in changing speakers positioning, but without being clear?

My view of it all. ...Without prejudice.

Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NorthSky is offline  
post #232 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 12:56 AM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,259
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
Me, I might get the AV7702 and screw the Wides! ... 7.2.4
...Or more precisely 7.1.4 (& some of you guys can do 9.1.2 as you wish - I won't).

Because, what's inside those speakers doesn't belong there. ...If you want the Wides, @ least put the right sound material in there.
...God lock! ...I already got that with my front mains and side surrounds.

It's my money, it's my head, it's your money, it's your head, and everything is so fine.

_____________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSck6PIBOh4

I cannot do wides my room won't allow it. The 7702 might be a better choice for me as well. I guess I'll wait and see.

_________________________

Frank

Franin is offline  
post #233 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 01:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 2,449
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1079 Post(s)
Liked: 394
Frank, I don't think that there are too many rooms that can allow front Width speakers, like normal rooms in real people's homes.

Audyssey DSX is for the hardcore surround addicts. ...Similar to Yamaha four Presence speakers (front & rear).

Because, with each music recording, and with each movie soundtrack, even within each track or chapter, the sound coming from them varies constantly. With Yamaha DSP you can hear that effect easily, and you have to switch audio mode or adjust the parameters.
...And I don't know if you know but those high-end Yamaha receivers have tons of those EQ parameters. ...And several music and movie modes, all in DSP power of course.
For certain type of music on CD, when recorded @ different studios for different tracks, it is a constant moving target; forget it.
For well recorded Jazz music (ECM record label), it can add more presence indeed, but with restraint.

Audyssey DSX, the front Width and Height channels; one movie not too bad the next movie awful.
For music the same. ...So here too you are with your remote control in hand, don't put it on the table or you risk to miss what the music recording/mixing engineer, or what the movie director in collaboration with the sound/music engineer wanted you to hear.
You have roughly a 95% chance of being addicted to your own sound mixing, and not the one from the maestro.

...And no matter how well Yamaha implemented his Trifield or Quadfield DSP in their products. ...Like I said, it is a constant moving target that requires constant manual calibration.
And no matter how well Audyssey DSX algorithms work. ...Because it simply doesn't always, and no matter how meticulously you position your front Width and Height speakers with all the room treatments more or less acoustically corrected and calibrated and equalized..

Yes, it's a sound addiction, like a drug, and you can easily overdose from it without even noticing.

Anyway, that's my take and I highly respect people who extensively love to experiment with drugs (sounds).

Now there is a new sheriff in town, a new conductor:


Bests, ~ Robert § (Bob)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NorthSky is offline  
post #234 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 03:53 AM
Advanced Member
 
erwinfrombelgium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Flanders, Belgium
Posts: 643
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
Floyd got it atmos right. {From picture/attachment @ post #217}

* Are you Erwin from Belgium who recently built/completed a new "cool" house?
If yes (indeed you are) then we met before, on the Internet, @ another audio forum, faraway in the same galaxy.
Nice to see you again Erwin; and I know that like me you're deep into it right "overhead" over your head and ears.
Yes, it's me! The house is far from complete though. The floating concrete underfloor for the (multifunctional) HT has just gone in now. Now, the box-in-box construction can start. Then, wiring > OSB > drywall > ... It will probably be the year end before we can watch movies there. I have been constantly tweaking the design and it will be an exceptional sounding room. There's even an acoustician involved.

I knew it was you from the amount of posts and the optimistic tone of them.

Building a HT with 7.2.4 layout and ◤SEOS-24◥ LCR.
erwinfrombelgium is offline  
post #235 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 03:56 AM
Member
 
kenoh89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Since Atmos is using object based audio, I assume it's up to the processor on how it will be able to utilize a 9.2.4 configuration? Dolby Atmos home version is scaled down to 32 channels max compared to the full blown theater setup of 64 channels, so in essence if a processor has enough computing power then it should be able to handle the full 32 channel spec? When it comes to Dolby Atmos, companies are not limited to the standard 7.1, 9.1, 11.1 configurations, it's up to the hardware if you can utilize 13.2 channels or more!


If wide's are added then you will have a more surreal and accurate front stage, just like adding 2 more ceiling speakers will enhance the overall experience for sounds coming above you! I for one want to use Wide's and front Heights "just not for the cost of an arm and a leg". Personally, I want A/V manufactures to have more options then the standard configuration I mentioned above, all the way up to 32 channels if you want that, that way they are more options and flexible prices on the market for everyone.


Say you only wanted to use more then13 channels but not more then the full specification, say 16.1 surround. Instead of having to buy a very expensive 32 channel receiver/processor, you could just buy a processor that's limited in the available channels it can output and will be much cheaper for you instead of having to buy a flagship and not being able to use all the available channels!


I say the more options the better!


BTW, I just found out on Onkyo's web site "in fine print" that they will indeed be utilizing wide's for there two Flagships, the PR-SC5530 and the TX-NR3030 and they advertise 9.1.2 capabilities on there website! Denon and Marantz are the only one's I know that can do 9.2.4, with four ceiling speakers and two wide's for the fronts.


I suspect more speaker out-puts will be added on next years models? http://dolbyatmos.onkyousa.com/



Last edited by kenoh89; 07-30-2014 at 05:12 AM.
kenoh89 is offline  
post #236 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 06:10 AM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,259
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 205
I'm curious to see next year models to see if they will come out with 4 LFE channels as well .
PoshFrosh likes this.

_________________________

Frank

Franin is offline  
post #237 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 07:45 AM
Senior Member
 
PoshFrosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenoh89 View Post
Denon and Marantz are the only one's I know that can do 9.2.4, with four ceiling speakers and two wide's for the fronts.http://dolbyatmos.onkyousa.com/
Denon (and I assume, Marantz) cannot do 9.2.4

You can hook up 13 speakers, but only use 11 at a time (even while using pre-outs), so this means 9.2.2 or 7.2.4

You can use 9.2.2 as shown in the picture you posted (i.e. it is just like the Onkyo flagship).

Also, note wides are used only with real ATMOS content, not Dolby Surround upmixing.

So I would (and will) pick 7.2.4 definitely, unless you are really keen on using Neo:X or DSX.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Corrections or additions? Please PM me and I will edit the document.
PoshFrosh is offline  
post #238 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 08:06 AM
Member
 
kenoh89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoshFrosh View Post
Denon (and I assume, Marantz) cannot do 9.2.4

You can hook up 13 speakers, but only use 11 at a time (even while using pre-outs), so this means 9.2.2 or 7.2.4

You can use 9.2.2 as shown in the picture you posted (i.e. it is just like the Onkyo flagship).

Also, note wides are used only with real ATMOS content, not Dolby Surround upmixing.

So I would (and will) pick 7.2.4 definitely, unless you are really keen on using Neo:X or DSX.
I'm actually not only hoping to utilize Wide's with Atmos content I'm also planning to use it for PC gaming. Lots of PC titles use Object Based Audio, so I would naturally get my gaming fix that way, until it's adopted by consoles that is? The experience should be something I look forward to!
kenoh89 is offline  
post #239 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 12:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,507
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 201 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoshFrosh View Post
You can hook up 13 speakers, but only use 11 at a time (even while using pre-outs), so this means 9.2.2 or 7.2.4

You can use 9.2.2 as shown in the picture you posted (i.e. it is just like the Onkyo flagship).
I thought the wides could only be used with DSX or DTS Neo X, not Atmos.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #240 of 535 Old 07-30-2014, 12:17 PM
Senior Member
 
PoshFrosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
I thought the wides could only be used with DSX or DTS Neo X, not Atmos.
I've attached a page from the Denon 5200 manual which shows which channels play from which sound modes. It shows that "Atmos" is capable of producing sound from ALL channels.

This implies that Atmos content can include "wide" channels, however, I don't know if all Atmos content will utilize them or not.

You will also notice that "Dolby Surround" (which upmixes non-Atmos content to play back on Atmos systems) cannot utilize wides.

For now, I would suggest not getting wides and instead use 4 overhead speakers, as this conforms more closely with the "typical" Atmos configurations we've seen.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	5200_sound_output.png
Views:	30
Size:	85.0 KB
ID:	188402  


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Corrections or additions? Please PM me and I will edit the document.
PoshFrosh is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
marantz av8802
Gear in this thread

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