The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 106 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 3491Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #3151 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hugo S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 527
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Bonjour Jeff,

Quote:
Originally Posted by chi_guy50 View Post
Keith,

But I am fairly certain this is already on your list, but could you please ask for an evaluation of the relative authenticity of using a traditional Dolby front height speaker configuration to play back an Atmos track? IOW, how will we benefit from Atmos if we don't change our layout?
Not Keith, but I don't see any Dolby representative giving any other answer to your above question, beyond what is included in the whitepaper (p9):

"While the arrangements recommended above will yield the best experience, a Dolby Atmos
system can support many other configurations you may already have in your home. For
instance, Dolby Atmos supports the standard “wide” speaker positions on the floor and the
“front vertical height” positions usually found on the top of the front wall, as well as many
other speaker positions.
"

Now as far as I'm concerned, I'm convinced that if the angle of location of an actual Height speaker, is within the tolerance for allowed angles of a Top/ceiling speaker, then the subjective Atmos effect will be similar, if not the same.

In other words a Height speaker (on wall or independently positioned) located at an 45° elevation will produce the same effect as a Ceiling speaker located at the same 45° elevation.



Now what would be the subjective Atmos difference between a 45° and 55° speakers elevation? This is something I'd personally like to experience... the same as comparing a complete 55° 4 speakers elevation configuration to another one composed with 4 Heights at 45° and 2 Tops located at @ 75° (a hemisphere-like configuration, which has my preference).

Then in a slightly different context, yesterday we went to see "Apes" in an Atmos Cinéma... and in French. As I was really curious to see (hear) how this movie would sound with a remixing in another language than its' original English.

And I must admit that we were quite pleased with what we heard, which was subjectively very "immersive". Is it better in English? I can't say. But for this movie, the Atmos mix in French is excellent.

Hugo
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Dolby Atmos speakers layout.JPG
Views:	211
Size:	58.9 KB
ID:	199457  
Hugo S is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3152 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Zen Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,255
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by chi_guy50 View Post
Keith,

I am fairly certain this is already on your list, but could you please ask for an evaluation of the relative authenticity of using a traditional Dolby front height speaker configuration to play back an Atmos track? IOW, how will we benefit from Atmos if we don't change our layout?
I am also curious about this. We currently have a 9.1 setup using Heights (about 9 ft up) with SS that are exactly parallel (and within 5 ft of the LP) and rears that are about 8 ft behind along with my second sub (limited placement issues). It's a about a 2,000 cu ft space where the MLP (only LP) is between 2 spaces/rooms.

We sit about 9.5 ft from the front soundstage which is also our Library so we have some natural room treatment but have a high cathedral ceiling (not symmetrical with the room). Behind the LP we have a small, 8 ft x 8 ft "cubby" with a slanted ceiling going from about 4.5 ft to 6ft towards the loveseat....Right above our heads is a shelf that is approx. 8ft up that we could attach some speakers, but seems to be the only practical place for atomos speakers, and if so I wonder how this layout would work with the new format. {Note: I understand that the cathedral ceiling isn't conducive).

Anyway, right now I use this HT primarily for Multichannel Music but both it and Movies sound awesome.
Zen Traveler is offline  
post #3153 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,058
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked: 475
Has anyone actually parsed the wording of the new at home Atmos white paper?

What I find interesting is Dolby's use of the term "spatial audio coding" (psychoacoustic mixing?) and their mentioning that the Dolby TrueHD codec now has an attached fourth substream that contains a "losslessly encoded fully object-based mix."

Is Dolby saying what I think they're saying? That Dolby Atmos for the home is a pure object bitstream and not a hybrid channel+object format as in the cinema? I understand DTS had mentioned at earlier press events that MDA could also be delivered in a pure metadata infused object stream with no traditional channels. So, unless they were being cagey it seems as if the Blu-ray version has two separate lossless soundtracks... a channel based track and a pure object track. If someone knows differently, please correct my assumption.

They also mentioned that their new, efficient coding scheme via Dolby Media Producer software allows all the objects (and positional metadata?) from a theatrical mix to migrate to the near-field, home theater version.

I would also have liked for them to sketch out various potential speaker layouts and degrees and angles of separation for said speakers. Their one 24.1.10 diagram and explanation of "super Atmos" really doesn't go into very great detail like their cinema white paper. A more in-depth white paper should be created that goes into more of the technical nitty gritty for home Atmos installations.

One specification they did briefly mention was that true ceiling speaker dispersion patterns should be greater than 90 degrees x 90 degrees.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 08-06-2014 at 08:45 AM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #3154 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bargervais's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tampa Bay Florida
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 352 Post(s)
Liked: 99
My question... I see that most of the Blu-Ray's i have are DTS-HD Master Audio as the main audio... now is Dolby trying to replace those with Atmos or will DTS have it's own DTS UHD-will any of the new AVR include DTS UHD and Dolby Atmos HT?.... if i'm going to invest in an atmos receiver i want the ability to do both Atmos and DTS. or will i have to upgrade once more down the road.

My main setup
PN60E8000 Plus evolution 2013Kit + Directv genie + Panasonic 3D blu-ray player + Onkyo TX-NR 818 9.2 Bic F12 subs Onkyo M-5010 2-Channel Amplifier for wides.
MY 10' X 15' DEN
PN51F5500 + Directv Genie + Panasonic 3D blu-ray player + Onkyo TX-NR 737 5.2.2 Atmos top front Ceiling Speakers
bargervais is online now  
post #3155 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,883
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Looks like near-field mix re-recording is an integral part of the Atmos home content creation workflow:
It is not "integral"... it's optional. That diagram only shows it can be integrated as it is now.

"Filmmakers frequently remix a film to sound its best in home theaters (a process known as the near-field mix). Spatial audio coding is a tool available during the near-field mix so that the filmmakers can hear exactly how the film will sound when it is encoded to Dolby Digital Plus for streaming or encoded losslessly in Dolby TrueHD for Blu-ray."

Last edited by FilmMixer; 08-06-2014 at 08:52 AM.
FilmMixer is online now  
post #3156 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,058
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by bargervais View Post
My question... I see that most of the Blu-Ray's i have are DTS-HD Master Audio as the main audio... now is Dolby trying to replace those with Atmos or will DTS have it's own DTS UHD-will the new AVR including DTS UHD and Dolby Atmos HT?.... if i'm going to invest in an atmos receiver i want the ability to do both Atmos and DTS. or will i have to upgrade once more down the road.
I don't know if current Atmos receivers and pre-amps will be able to get a firmware update that adds DTS-UHD. Their chips seem to be pretty crammed to the gunnels as is.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #3157 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
...We now replace the boomboxes with an Atmos BD on which the four boomboxes are four static object instances of the same recording. Because the objects all lie on the same radiant, a simplified VBAP algorithm would map the four objects to the same set of speakers, however the distance|time alignment correction for each of the four objects would be different.
I don't think anything different is needed at all; if the mixers want multiple of the same object to be at different distances they'll use the appropriate time delays.

And as I've said, I believe there are already just the two encoded variables of azimuth and elevation for locating the direction of an object, vs. just azimuth that we had before Atmos.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #3158 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 08:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 767 Post(s)
Liked: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
It is not "integral"... it's optional. That diagram only shows it can be integrated as it is now.

"Filmmakers frequently remix a film to sound its best in home theaters (a process known as the near-field mix). Spatial audio coding is a tool available during the near-field mix so that the filmmakers can hear exactly how the film will sound when it is encoded to Dolby Digital Plus for streaming or encoded losslessly in Dolby TrueHD for Blu-ray."
Do I now get to choose which definition from Merriam Webster is closest to what I've meant to say?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/integral

My point was that movie theaters and dubbing stages are acoustically different from living rooms and home theaters hence a remix is warranted. The Dolby paper even says "Filmmakers frequently remix a film". Do you have numbers how many theatrical mixes get the treatment? Will it be more in the future with Atmos?

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole

Last edited by markus767; 08-06-2014 at 09:00 AM.
markus767 is offline  
post #3159 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,883
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Has anyone actually parsed the wording of the new at home Atmos white paper?

What I find interesting is Dolby's use of the term "spatial audio coding" (psychoacoustic mixing?) and their mentioning that the Dolby TrueHD codec now has an attached fourth substream that contains a "losslessly encoded fully object-based mix."

Is Dolby saying what I think they're saying? That Dolby Atmos for the home is a pure object bitstream and not a hybrid channel+object format as in the cinema?
AFAIU No.. it is a bed + objects (7.1 + objects) and will be encoded as one bitstream (the objects in an extension.)

One TrueHD bitstream on a BR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
They also mentioned that their new, efficient coding scheme via Dolby Media Producer software allows all the objects (and positional metadata?) from a theatrical mix to migrate to the near-field, home theater version.
Yes, but you still need to create a near field of the cinema master if desired... it isn't automatic (which isn't what you are implying at al, but I wanted to clarify..)

I believe they have a translation tool to create the DAMF from an RMU (theatrical) "wrapped" file if needed. I will see if I can get you more information on that.
Dan Hitchman likes this.
FilmMixer is online now  
post #3160 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)
Liked: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
AFAIU No.. it is a bed + objects (7.1 + objects) and will be encoded as one bitstream (the objects in an extension.)
I noticed in the Aug-dated Dolby paper that the bed for cinema Atmos is 9.1, which means some work is involved in going to a home, hopefully not enough to dissuade them from doing it.

Speaking of the nearfield mix, what's involved in creating it; anything more than response shaping?

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #3161 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,058
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
AFAIU No.. it is a bed + objects (7.1 + objects) and will be encoded as one bitstream (the objects in an extension.)

One TrueHD bitstream on a BR



Yes, but you still need to create a near field of the cinema master if desired... it isn't automatic (which isn't what you are implying at al, but I wanted to clarify..)

I believe they have a translation tool to create the DAMF from an RMU (theatrical) "wrapped" file if needed. I will see if I can get you more information on that.
Thanks for the clarification.

The way the white paper was written it seemed to imply that the substream contained a complete mix as objects rather than a hybrid approach. Hmmm... easy for the lay person to get confused.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #3162 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 18,662
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1890 Post(s)
Liked: 1980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
Bonjour Jeff,



Not Keith, but I don't see any Dolby representative giving any other answer to your above question, beyond what is included in the whitepaper (p9):

"While the arrangements recommended above will yield the best experience, a Dolby Atmos
system can support many other configurations you may already have in your home. For
instance, Dolby Atmos supports the standard “wide” speaker positions on the floor and the
“front vertical height” positions usually found on the top of the front wall, as well as many
other speaker positions.
"

Now as far as I'm concerned, I'm convinced that if the angle of location of an actual Height speaker, is within the tolerance for allowed angles of a Top/ceiling speaker, then the subjective Atmos effect will be similar, if not the same.

In other words a Height speaker (on wall or independently positioned) located at an 45° elevation will produce the same effect as a Ceiling speaker located at the same 45° elevation.

Now what would be the subjective Atmos difference between a 45° and 55° speakers elevation? This is something I'd personally like to experience... the same as comparing a complete 55° 4 speakers elevation configuration to another one composed with 4 Heights at 45° and 2 Tops located at @ 75° (a hemisphere-like configuration, which has my preference).
Good points, Hugo. The White Paper is pretty explicit and I, like you, think that so long as the angles are respected, everything should be OK. What I want to explore with Dolby, if possible, is whether there is any degradation from using the Height Speakers and if so, then how much. The WP says that the suggested layouts are the "best" but the Front Heights are "supported". What I want to know is, really, how critical is it that we follow the angles to the letter and if people cannot, then what sort of degradation can they expect?

In my own HT I can follow their recommendations pretty well and remain 'on spec' if I use ceiling mounted speakers for the top fronts, but designate them as 'front heights' (staying all the time within the recommended angles of 30-45 degrees for front heights and also the recommended angles of 30-55 degrees for Top Fronts, by using an angle of 40 degrees - which is on spec for both sets of speaker layout). This will then mean that I can use my other pair of ceiling speakers with a designation of Top Middle (65-100 degrees). What I can't do is use the forward pair designated as Top Front, because you can’t use Top Front and Top Middle, and I cannot achieve the required angles for Top Rear. But Front Height (even though they are on the ceiling) can be used with Top Middle, so that is what I am hoping to do. I am hoping I can get some better info from the Dolby guys than is in the WP.
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #3163 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bargervais's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tampa Bay Florida
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 352 Post(s)
Liked: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I don't know if current Atmos receivers and pre-amps will be able to get a firmware update that adds DTS-UHD. Their chips seem to be pretty crammed to the gunnels as is.
Are studio's going to abandon using DTS In favor of atmos or will they live side by side like DTS HD master audio and Dolby 5.1 do now. Or Instead of Dolby 5.1 will it have Atmos in its place....

My main setup
PN60E8000 Plus evolution 2013Kit + Directv genie + Panasonic 3D blu-ray player + Onkyo TX-NR 818 9.2 Bic F12 subs Onkyo M-5010 2-Channel Amplifier for wides.
MY 10' X 15' DEN
PN51F5500 + Directv Genie + Panasonic 3D blu-ray player + Onkyo TX-NR 737 5.2.2 Atmos top front Ceiling Speakers
bargervais is online now  
post #3164 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,713
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post

Unfortunately Pulkki's paper doesn't address the question I raised because it's really an implementation technology issue: Dolby must attempt to perform as much "pre rendering" before|during the BD authoring process as possible in order to minimize the computational load imposed on the AVR. Just how much can be achieved depends on which rendering calculations are independent of the AVR and speaker configuration, plus listener choices at playback time. I can't tell if object time|distance (or real|apparent volume) normalization can be partially|fully performed before the BD is authored (and even if it could be under the current "architecture", to what extent Dolby chose to do so|not do so in order to avoid foreclosing possible rendering algorithm "upgrades" in the future...?!)
_

[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 offline  
post #3165 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:19 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 767 Post(s)
Liked: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Thanks for the clarification.

The way the white paper was written it seemed to imply that the substream contained a complete mix as objects rather than a hybrid approach. Hmmm... easy for the lay person to get confused.
Here's a paper explaining the concept of extensions:
http://www.dolby.com/us/en/technolog...hite-paper.pdf

Markus

"In science, contrary evidence causes one to question a theory. In religion, contrary evidence causes one to question the evidence." - Floyd Toole
markus767 is offline  
post #3166 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,058
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by bargervais View Post
Are studio's going to abandon using DTS In favor of atmos or will they live side by side like DTS HD master audio and Dolby 5.1 do now. Or Instead of Dolby 5.1 will it have Atmos in its place....
God only knows what goes on in the studios' heads. If it takes more time and money to prep a home Atmos version that hasn't already been accounted for in a movie's budget, I don't know how supportive these studios will be. Will it be a trickle or will it be a landslide? Will this finally supplant traditional channel based approaches of delivery audio? Who knows...

No one outside the industry seems to know what DTS has planned to answer Dolby's home Atmos format or if DTS-UHD can be easily added to the current crop of Atmos products.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 08-06-2014 at 09:27 AM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #3167 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,151
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Not many. It is common on AVS for people to confuse "niche market" with "no market". Let me ask you a different, but illustrative, question: Q: How many consumers will run out and buy a Lamborghini?. A: not many. Does that mean Lamborghini should pack up their business and start making $13,000 SUVs?
True but Lamborghini is also charging what amounts to an insane markup on the car due to the volume of sales it has and the demand for that small volume. We see this from niche audio brands all the time, but in most cases with audio you are paying for manufacturing inefficiencies. With Atmos you aren't really paying a premium as you've already pointed out before, so Dolby is making their money by hoping that every AVR and pre-pro company will want to license the tech to have the badge on it regardless of whether the end user needs or wants it. They've already been doing this for years and years with all the other DSP stuff.

Now whether Hollywood reacts the same way is the question. Hopefully they just start putting these soundtracks on by default so they are there if you need them but transparent if you don't. That would be the best you could hope for. If they try to do a special market like they do for 3D where you have to pay a premium for it the results could backfire if there isn't enough market and it could eventually become an issue due to lack of volume in sales. I'm REALLY hoping that they just start including these soundtracks as the default for movies that have an Atmos mix, then sales volume won't really matter.
Dan Hitchman likes this.

Senior Video Editor
Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity

Click Here To See My Current Setup
Kris Deering is offline  
post #3168 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,058
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Here's a paper explaining the concept of extensions:
http://www.dolby.com/us/en/technolog...hite-paper.pdf
I understand the core+extension approach of DTS and Dolby's codecs, however the language used in the lastest white paper for the Atmos "substream" could leave one with the impression that it contains a full soundtrack encoded as metadata+objects only. That, after all, was always a possibility as a means to deliver soundtracks without using channels.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #3169 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
Unfortunately Pulkki's paper doesn't address the question I raised because it's really an implementation technology issue: Dolby must attempt to perform as much "pre rendering" before|during the BD authoring process as possible in order to minimize the computational load imposed on the AVR.
Given the 24.1.10 maximum number of speakers, I guess you could code how much of each object is going into each 'ideal' speaker... And then you create a translation in the avr on how to transcode those ideal channels into what you've got. Should not require much computing power. If it works? No idea, but that would be my initial attempt at getting it to work...

Under construction: the Larch theater

Last edited by Nightlord; 08-06-2014 at 09:34 AM.
Nightlord is online now  
post #3170 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:28 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 18,662
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1890 Post(s)
Liked: 1980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
True but Lamborghini is also charging what amounts to an insane markup on the car due to the volume of sales it has and the demand for that small volume. We see this from niche audio brands all the time, but in most cases with audio you are paying for manufacturing inefficiencies. With Atmos you aren't really paying a premium as you've already pointed out before, so Dolby is making their money by hoping that every AVR and pre-pro company will want to license the tech to have the badge on it regardless of whether the end user needs or wants it. They've already been doing this for years and years with all the other DSP stuff.

Now whether Hollywood reacts the same way is the question. Hopefully they just start putting these soundtracks on by default so they are there if you need them but transparent if you don't. That would be the best you could hope for. If they try to do a special market like they do for 3D where you have to pay a premium for it the results could backfire if there isn't enough market and it could eventually become an issue due to lack of volume in sales. I'm REALLY hoping that they just start including these soundtracks as the default for movies that have an Atmos mix, then sales volume won't really matter.
I hope so too. AFAIK, sound has never commanded a price premium, either in commercial cinema or HT, so I am expecting an Atmos BD will cost the same as a current DTS-HD MA or TrueHD BD. We'll know soon enough...
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #3171 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,058
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
I hope so too. AFAIK, sound has never commanded a price premium, either in commercial cinema or HT, so I am expecting an Atmos BD will cost the same as a current DTS-HD MA or TrueHD BD. We'll know soon enough...
Actually, Atmos does command a higher price per ticket because theater owners have wrapped it within their "premium" auditorium pricing structure. It used to be that giant screen auditoriums were just standard ticketed items, but not any more.

It boils down to whether or not the studios will look at Atmos and DTS-UHD on home video the same way.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #3172 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,883
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Do you have numbers how many theatrical mixes get the treatment? Will it be more in the future with Atmos?
Today I would guess the number is 75-80%.

Don't expect the number to change because of Atmos. However, I suspect some of the initial release will not be due to the simple fact that there are very few studios setup to do so at this point. We're sciguring this out now.
FilmMixer is online now  
post #3173 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,616
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1213 Post(s)
Liked: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
What I find interesting is Dolby's use of the term "spatial audio coding" (psychoacoustic mixing?) and their mentioning that the Dolby TrueHD codec now has an attached fourth substream that contains a "losslessly encoded fully object-based mix."
I think TrueHD has used 3 substreams so far: a 2-channel lossless core, the audio data and instructions needed to reconstitute a lossless 5.1 mix, the audio data and instructions needed to reconstitute a lossless 7.1 mix.

The next substream will carry objects. Wonder if it might also carry the audio data and instructions needed to reconstitute 9.1 lossless channels (height beds)? Or has Dolby decided to limit the home version to 7 bed channels?

Don't know how Dolby is using the term "spatial audio coding", but here is what it means to MPEG, as applied to objects: http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standar...-object-coding
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Is Dolby saying what I think they're saying? That Dolby Atmos for the home is a pure object bitstream and not a hybrid channel+object format as in the cinema?
This could get into semantics, since it could be argued that channels are objects that don't go anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I understand DTS had mentioned at earlier press events that MDA could also be delivered in a pure metadata infused object stream with no traditional channels.
They can play with object parameters (size, location, etc) to mimic a channel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
They also mentioned that their new, efficient coding scheme via Dolby Media Producer software allows all the objects (and positional metadata?) from a theatrical mix to migrate to the near-field, home theater version.
Interesting they say "all" without actually giving a number.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I would also have liked for them to sketch out various potential speaker layouts and degrees and angles of separation for said speakers.
What's to sketch out? There are 24 possible speaker locations "on the floor" (their short-hand for non-height speakers). 360 ÷ 24 = 15 degrees. You can either think of it as a possible speaker location every 15 degrees or 24 zones of 15-degree arcs (bit of flexibility in placement).

If receivers don't end up allowing you to measure actual speaker angles, like Trinnov or Yamaha does, then I think the diagram in the whitepaper would make a nice interface in the receiver's speaker set-up menu.

Of the 24 possible locations, users simply click to highlight the locations of their 2, 5, 7, 9 or however many speaker they have. Doesn't have to be super precise, just pick the potential locations in the graphic that most closely match the physical locations of your speakers.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #3174 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
chi_guy50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
Bonjour Jeff,

Not Keith, but I don't see any Dolby representative giving any other answer to your above question, beyond what is included in the whitepaper (p9):

"While the arrangements recommended above will yield the best experience, a Dolby Atmos
system can support many other configurations you may already have in your home. For
instance, Dolby Atmos supports the standard “wide” speaker positions on the floor and the
“front vertical height” positions usually found on the top of the front wall, as well as many
other speaker positions.
"

Now as far as I'm concerned, I'm convinced that if the angle of location of an actual Height speaker, is within the tolerance for allowed angles of a Top/ceiling speaker, then the subjective Atmos effect will be similar, if not the same.

In other words a Height speaker (on wall or independently positioned) located at an 45° elevation will produce the same effect as a Ceiling speaker located at the same 45° elevation.

Hugo
Salut, mon vieux!

Nous sommes tout à fait d'accord sur ce point. But it will be interesting, from both the technical and marketing aspect, to hear how the Dolby rep addresses this issue. There has been some discussion here on whether Dolby is targeting a "niche of a niche" market. I don't believe that they are; but if they push the angle of "You must have either Dolby speakers or tops to truly appreciate Atmos," then I think you will have your answer. But more than anything, I would like to hear their rep assess in as much detail as possible the results over a "traditional" 9CH or 11CH layout. Jeff

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Good points, Hugo. The White Paper is pretty explicit and I, like you, think that so long as the angles are respected, everything should be OK. What I want to explore with Dolby, if possible, is whether there is any degradation from using the Height Speakers and if so, then how much. The WP says that the suggested layouts are the "best" but the Front Heights are "supported". What I want to know is, really, how critical is it that we follow the angles to the letter and if people cannot, then what sort of degradation can they expect?
That is precisely what motivated me to pose the question.
chi_guy50 is offline  
post #3175 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,713
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
Given the 24.1.10 maximum number of speakers, I guess you could code how much of each object is going into each 'ideal' speaker... And then you create a translation in the avr on how to transcode those ideal channels into what you've got. Should not require much computing power. If it works? No idea, but that would be my initial attempt at getting it to work...

Congratulations! You have pretty much reinvented the downmix capability strategy employed with Hamasaki 22.2 audio as it is currently being implemented by NHK Japanese TV as the audio component of their forthcoming SHV broadcast technology. (Nonetheless, it seems they may still intend to implement a hybrid channel|object-based audio delivery mechanism in the form of (possibly only static) user-interactive objects.)
_

[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 offline  
post #3176 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnAV View Post
Doing a Atmos mix for a theater release makes sense, but practicality aside, whats in it for the studios to produce BD's that support Atmos nevermind if it is easy or cheap?

How many consumers at this point in time will to run out and buy a minor re-release or a new release that offers a Atmos coded track over a 5.1/7.1 release? Probably not enough to make the studio even consider it yet.

I just don't see any tidal wave happening with this. Hell the industry kinda blundered 3D, has over promised with 4K, and now Dolby thinks 3D sound is a cakewalk, I don't so.


I am not sure if Atmos will gain traction in a home setting in the near future. However, if Atmos becomes a standard no cost option in every AVR then a lot of people will play around with it. Then again, will all Atmos decoders be "the same" or will their be Atmos decoder "tiers"?

A lot of people do not even use a dedicated 5.1 sound system with their large screen TV sets.

As a side note I have a 3D capable bluray player and 3D capable TV, but I have never watched a 3D encoded movie at home. Not sure if I ever will either.
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
post #3177 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,616
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1213 Post(s)
Liked: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
AFAIK, sound has never commanded a price premium, either in commercial cinema or HT, so I am expecting an Atmos BD will cost the same as a current DTS-HD MA or TrueHD BD.
Yup, one of the local Atmos installs (Buena Park) is not in a premium auditorium, so the ticket price is the same as the rest of the multiplex, irrespective of whether they are showing an Atmos movie or not. Can't beat an Atmos matinee for just $7.50 (if you can handle the re-cycled Styrofoam they sell as "popcorn").
Scott Simonian likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #3178 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 09:58 AM
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 14,048
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 688 Post(s)
Liked: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Yup, one of the local Atmos installs (Buena Park) is not in a premium auditorium, so the ticket price is the same as the rest of the multiplex, irrespective of whether they are showing an Atmos movie or not. Can't beat an Atmos matinee for just $7.50 (if you can handle the re-cycled Styrofoam they sell as "popcorn").
Nachos, my good friend.

*whispers* Nachos...

ambesolman likes this.

My Dual 18" LLT subs 120dB down to 10hz

 

Plan9Reloaded Co-host

Listen to the Plan9Reloaded Gaming and Technology Podcast (may contain NSFW language)

https://soundcloud.com/plan9reloaded/sets/podcast - direct pod link

http://plan9reloaded.com/site/ - main website

Scott Simonian is online now  
post #3179 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 10:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,616
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1213 Post(s)
Liked: 944
^^^ Mmmm, nachos. Can drink the cheese sauce as a beverage.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #3180 of 11576 Old 08-06-2014, 10:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

It doesn't matter if I have Gone with the Wind in 7.1 even though it wasn't originally. As it exists on disk it is a true 8ch signal.


It may be a true 8 channel signal, but that does not make it a true 8 channel mix.
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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