The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 27 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!



Forum Jump: 
 14636Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-10-2014, 11:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jima4a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
It's a processing/AVR issue..

The codec is scalable...

I think 5.1.2 is the sweet spot for smaller spaces... if the ceiling will allow for the add on of speaker modules...
I currently have ceiling surrounds and standard heights that are not being used. Will I be able to use all four with ATMOS or just the ceilings? Running 5.1 at moment.

Jim
jima4a is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-10-2014, 11:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,789
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked: 3049
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post
I currently have ceiling surrounds and standard heights that are not being used. Will I be able to use all four with ATMOS or just the ceilings? Running 5.1 at moment.

Jim
A lot up in the air right now in terms of specific receiver configuration options. From most of what we've seen an Atmos mix won't (at least initially) be able to utilize traditional "height" channels, i.e. as installed for PLIIz or DSX/Neo:X.

The big problem is that if you use your in-ceiling surrounds as Atmos "top" speakers.... then you don't have surround speakers. To really get Atmos to work well with the core 5.1.2 configuration, you would need to get more traditional surrounds (to the sides, closer to ear level, not in the ceiling) and then what you currently use as the surrounds in ceiling would become the Atmos "top" speakers.

Could you relocate the current height speakers to the sides for surround duty? That would put you in place for a 5.1.2 setup without any additional speaker purchases.

batpig's "Denon-to-English Dictionary"
Setup Guide and FAQ
http://batpigworld.com/

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 11:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jima4a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 1,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
A lot up in the air right now in terms of specific receiver configuration options. From most of what we've seen an Atmos mix won't (at least initially) be able to utilize traditional "height" channels, i.e. as installed for PLIIz or DSX/Neo:X.

The big problem is that if you use your in-ceiling surrounds as Atmos "top" speakers.... then you don't have surround speakers. To really get Atmos to work well with the core 5.1.2 configuration, you would need to get more traditional surrounds (to the sides, closer to ear level, not in the ceiling) and then what you currently use as the surrounds in ceiling would become the Atmos "top" speakers.

Could you relocate the current height speakers to the sides for surround duty? That would put you in place for a 5.1.2 setup without any additional speaker purchases.
I have towers currently as side surrounds. The ceilings are not currently in use.
jima4a is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 11:55 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,828
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3235 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
If you mix using only 7.1 channels (no objects, no overhead beds) will the end result be a 7.1 mix?

Tougher question: if you mix using only 2 channels (no objects, no overhead beds, no centre nor surround channels) will the end result be a 2.0 mix.
No need to act condescending. Go back and read the "discussion" in context: The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version)

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  
Old 07-10-2014, 11:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,789
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked: 3049
Ah. I see, you were asking if you could go to 5.1.4.

Like I said above, it remains to be seen if the first gen of professors will allow traditional "heights" to be used in an Atmos mix.

You can definitely do 5.1.2 as a minimum. And worst case you could always "lie" to the receiver and tell it the heights are front tops and the in ceiling speakers are top rears. There is a wide latitude for placement if you note the diagrams that have been posted, but the efficacy of the above will depend on how close your speakers are located to the "ideal".
batpig is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 12:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,824
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1456 Post(s)
Liked: 667
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
^
Would that process reduce bandwidth requirements for the max. 118 simultaneous objects?
From the graphic it looks like objects have to be transmitted in 1...n separate transmission channels in order to be removable from the downmix.
Correct. This "compatibility core" process has no bearing on the number of objects. The number of objects in consumer media is limited only by bitrate.

Deadwood Atmos theater [HTOM]
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 12:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,824
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1456 Post(s)
Liked: 667
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
Roger... assuming Dolby did something similar for Home Atmos, how would the TrueHD and DD+ also handle the 5.1?
Exactly the same as they do today. In TrueHD a 7.1 mix carries an embedded 5.1 mix and adds a 2-ch extension that is subtracted out. DD+ 7.1 (on Blu-ray only) starts with a standard 5.1 DD core, then adds a 4-ch extension to replace the surrounds so as to avoid subtraction of lossy audio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
From what I have been told they are doing something different... they also have to account for the overhead bed which is absent in the home version.. however, converting it to an object and encoding as described in your post may be their way around it... my info is a couple of months old and I will try and get some clarity on it.
A channel is nothing more than a stationary object pointed to a defined speaker (or array), so that would work perfectly.

Deadwood Atmos theater [HTOM]
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 01:20 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 8,839
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1706 Post(s)
Liked: 680
Auro has a postprocessing mode for legacy material.

Does any one know if ATMOS allows you to upmix anything from a mono source all the way to a 9.2.4 source?

Look at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RjP-...ature=youtu.be

I want one of these too bad DATASAT left DIRAC out!


I didn't know that DTS's Multi-Dimensional Audio (MDA) format that is not only objects based, as well, but also open and royalty-free; no doubt to rain on Dolby's parade. So why is it that all the manufacturers only have ATMOS?

Last edited by wse; 07-10-2014 at 01:38 PM.
wse is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 01:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 23,677
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3857 Post(s)
Liked: 2389
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
No need to act condescending.
Relax, just having a little fun, since you asked a tautological question (is it a standard channel-based mix if you don't use Atmos).

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 01:44 PM
Okv
Senior Member
 
Okv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Aalesund, Norway
Posts: 284
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 81
There seems to be a lot of focus on ceiling speakers and speaker configurations.

But I believe the greatest benefit is that it is easier to produce better soundtracks, and they are independent of speaker configurations.
This should be a huge improvement even if there are no ceiling speakers.

Today I find that many, if not most, of the movies I have are only 5.1.
If it were not for Dolby Pro-Logic the back surrounds would be silent on most of my movies.
If movies were encoded and produced using object-based audio the decoder should be able to utilize the speaker configuration much better, so that it will be a real improvement to have 4 surrounds instead of the 2 used in a 5.1.
Okv is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 26,416
Mentioned: 79 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6740 Post(s)
Liked: 5015
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post


I think 5.1.2 is the sweet spot for smaller spaces... if the ceiling will allow for the add on of speaker modules...
Music (movies!) to my ears. My small space will accommodate 5.1.2 nicely.
kbarnes701 is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 02:23 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 23,677
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3857 Post(s)
Liked: 2389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okv View Post
If it were not for Dolby Pro-Logic the back surrounds would be silent on most of my movies.
If movies were encoded and produced using object-based audio the decoder should be able to utilize the speaker configuration much better, so that it will be a real improvement to have 4 surrounds instead of the 2 used in a 5.1.
Indeed, if upmixing fewer channels to more speakers sounds good to you, then having soundtracks that map/render themselves to your speaker layout will be even better.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 03:34 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,828
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3235 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Exactly the same as they do today. In TrueHD a 7.1 mix carries an embedded 5.1 mix and adds a 2-ch extension that is subtracted out. DD+ 7.1 (on Blu-ray only) starts with a standard 5.1 DD core, then adds a 4-ch extension to replace the surrounds so as to avoid subtraction of lossy audio.
So the question is what is Atmos based upon. Both TrueHD and DD+ are optional on Blu-ray. DD is mandatory...

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  
Old 07-10-2014, 03:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,824
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1456 Post(s)
Liked: 667
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
So the question is what is Atmos based upon. Both TrueHD and DD+ are optional on Blu-ray. DD is mandatory...
I expect we will see both, again following current practice. TrueHD for main language, DD+ for others.

Deadwood Atmos theater [HTOM]
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 04:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Orbitron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 448 Post(s)
Liked: 328
Is there enough space on Blu-ray for Dolby Atmos and also DTS-HD MA?
Orbitron is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 04:34 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 8,839
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1706 Post(s)
Liked: 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okv View Post
There seems to be a lot of focus on ceiling speakers and speaker configurations. But I believe the greatest benefit is that it is easier to produce better soundtracks, and they are independent of speaker configurations. This should be a huge improvement even if there are no ceiling speakers. Today I find that many, if not most, of the movies I have are only 5.1. If it were not for Dolby Pro-Logic the back surrounds would be silent on most of my movies. If movies were encoded and produced using object-based audio the decoder should be able to utilize the speaker configuration much better, so that it will be a real improvement to have 4 surrounds instead of the 2 used in a 5.1.
I love the idea of 9.2.4! Then I am done

Yes there are only:

- 813 movies in DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 (http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/search...&action=search)

- 176 in Dolby TrueHD 7.1 (http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/search...&action=search)

- 120 in ATMOS (http://www.dolby.com/us/en/experienc...os/movies.html) of course none on Blu Ray yet

- 31 in AURO 3D (http://www.auro-3d.com/consumer/)

- None in DTS UHD MDA!!

When DTS demoed DTS MDA They used a quad core Cirrus Logic chip!!!

I am sure the studios will release them again at a major premium just like 3D!!!

Last edited by wse; 07-10-2014 at 04:47 PM.
wse is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 05:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 12,414
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3135 Post(s)
Liked: 1594
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post
I love the idea of 9.2.4! Then I am done

Yes there are only:

- 813 movies in DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 (http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/search...&action=search)

- 176 in Dolby TrueHD 7.1 (http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/search...&action=search)

- 120 in ATMOS (http://www.dolby.com/us/en/experienc...os/movies.html) of course none on Blu Ray yet

- 31 in AURO 3D (http://www.auro-3d.com/consumer/)

- None in DTS UHD MDA!!

When DTS demoed DTS MDA They used a quad core Cirrus Logic chip!!!

I am sure the studios will release them again at a major premium just like 3D!!!

DTS Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD don't mean the soundtrack was IN anything. They're lossless packed files of uncompressed, multi-channel LPCM (Linear Pulse Code Modulation) master tracks. The idea is to "unzip" the audio data and recreate the same LPCM track once more without throwing away data. If anything, the soundtracks were "in" LPCM to begin with.

Semantics, yes, but DTS MA and Dolby TrueHD are deliverable codecs. Might as well lump your 7.1 audio list into one pile.

When engineers work with Atmos and DTS MDA mixes they're also originally dealing with the LPCM domain. Those are also, in a way, deliverable formats, though with differences in their DAW software and implementation of object language.

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

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 07-10-2014 at 05:11 PM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 05:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 8,217
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1590 Post(s)
Liked: 1923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post
Is there enough space on Blu-ray for Dolby Atmos and also DTS-HD MA?
Why? What's would be the point?

Do you think that DTS-HD MA sounds better than TrueHD?

There would be no sense in doing so.
FilmMixer is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 05:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 10,179
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Semantics. Anyway he also said that he's "not clear on how they will integrate it into the package for the home.". I take it as "I don't know" and bow out of this "discussion".
It is not semantics. It seems like you just want to be right for the sake of being right.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 05:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 10,179
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
Why? What's would be the point?

Do you think that DTS-HD MA sounds better than TrueHD?

There would be no sense in doing so.
Unfortunately too many people don't grasp the meaning of "lossless". Not too long ago I had a discussion with a person who asked why there is no BD that comes with 5.1 LPCM, 5.1 TrueHD and 5.1 DTS-MA. He is adamant that all three of them sound different. When I mentioned that the only way the three of them can only sound different IF they each use different master or something is erroneous in the encoding process, he got angry and told me that I don't know what I'm talking about.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 05:52 PM
Member
 
Rumble Devo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Baltimore Area
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Audiohuh...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post
The flip side opinion wise.

http://youtu.be/OXLQ4mIwyAk
What was the point of Audioholics producing this 16 minute video?

To me it seems that they were only interested in expanding upon the negative possibilities of atmos products that do not yet exist.
tjenkins95 likes this.

Devo
Rumble Devo is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 06:02 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 10,179
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Don't forget that Audioholics is a "very good friend" of Emotiva...which XMC-1 will not have Dolby Atmos. Emotiva thus far have been dissing the potential of Dolby Atmos. You get my drift?

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 06:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 12,414
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3135 Post(s)
Liked: 1594
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post
Don't forget that Audioholics is a "very good friend" of Emotiva...which XMC-1 will not have Dolby Atmos. Emotiva thus far have been dissing the potential of Dolby Atmos. You get my drift?
Seems pretty unprofessional to me. Hell, that video was downright childish in some instances.
David Susilo, Keenan and MED8 like this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 06:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Orbitron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 448 Post(s)
Liked: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
Why? What's would be the point?

Do you think that DTS-HD MA sounds better than TrueHD?

There would be no sense in doing so.
Gravity was released in DTS-HD MA but Atmos in theaters. Let's assume it is reissued with Atmos - for those of us who are not Atmos ready, DTS-HD MA is no longer an audio option? Just trying to get a handle on all of this.
Orbitron is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 07:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 8,217
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1590 Post(s)
Liked: 1923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post
Gravity was released in DTS-HD MA but Atmos in theaters. Let's assume it is reissued with Atmos - for those of us who are not Atmos ready, DTS-HD MA is no longer an audio option? Just trying to get a handle on all of this.
If they release it you will have the 7.1 TrueHD track as your option.

The masters for films not mixed in Atmos are straight LPCM. How it gets home (DTS-HD MA or TureHD) is inconsequential.
FilmMixer is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 07:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 8,217
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1590 Post(s)
Liked: 1923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Seems pretty unprofessional to me. Hell, that video was downright childish in some instances.
There is a lot of misinformation in it. And in Andrew Robinsons video as well.

The same can be said of the Emotiva Lounge....

They keep intimating how there really are no objects, how it really won't gain any kind of meaningful traction, how Dolby is withholding information because the system can't possibly be like the cinematic counterpart, how reflective sound can't possibly work.

On the last point I agree it doesn't work as well as direct firing speakers.

But I've heard it.

But at least Dolby invented something for those that can't install ceiling speakers. But they just want to mock it.

IMO it's the last time I'll visit their site and I've lost all respect for Gene as a reviewer. He prefers 2.0 anyways (he says so in the video) so why should I seek his opinion on MC.

Keith of Emotiva tried to opine on how object based mixing makes life so much easier for us know twirlers.

If Emotiva employees spent as much time finishing the XMC-1 as they did posting misguided information about Atmos maybe we'd be able to buy one this year.

Misinformed are both sites, and neither has heard even a demo.

Last edited by FilmMixer; 07-10-2014 at 07:16 PM.
FilmMixer is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 07:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, Not as far east
Posts: 2,420
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 601 Post(s)
Liked: 490
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Not more "like we hear things" but more "like where sounds can come from". Multichannel does NOT try to recreate a real wave field (like wave field synthesis tries to). It's an extension to stereo with warts and all. It's largely based on an artifact of our hearing, also known as summing localization. It's highly fragile and the reason why stereo and even multichannel is really just a single seat solution.

Good read: Stanley P. Lip****z, "Stereo Microphone Techniques - Are the Purists Wrong?", J. Audio Engineering Society, vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 716-744 (Sept. 1986)
Not if you do multi-channel right. While stereo may not have the biggest sweet spot, if it's a one seat solution, get different speakers.
Dan Hitchman likes this.

"If you build it they will come.." Ok, what is this "It" you speak of and who, are they???! Do I want to know?...
tenthplanet is offline  
Old 07-10-2014, 08:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bootman_head_fi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Nanny State
Posts: 1,663
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
There is a lot of misinformation in it. And in Andrew Robinsons video as well.

The same can be said of the Emotiva Lounge....

They keep intimating how there really are no objects, how it really won't gain any kind of meaningful traction, how Dolby is withholding information because the system can't possibly be like the cinematic counterpart, how reflective sound can't possibly work.

On the last point I agree it doesn't work as well as direct firing speakers.

But I've heard it.

But at least Dolby invented something for those that can't install ceiling speakers. But they just want to mock it.

IMO it's the last time I'll visit their site and I've lost all respect for Gene as a reviewer. He prefers 2.0 anyways (he says so in the video) so why should I seek his opinion on MC.

Keith of Emotiva tried to opine on how object based mixing makes life so much easier for us know twirlers.

If Emotiva employees spent as much time finishing the XMC-1 as they did posting misguided information about Atmos maybe we'd be able to buy one this year.

Misinformed are both sites, and neither has heard even a demo.
Andrew maned up and took his video down and issued an apology.
I have to tip my had to someone that admits when they were wrong.

Let's see if Audioholics does the same.....
bootman_head_fi is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 08:25 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 10,179
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked: 561
The problem is that he intentionally issued false information. Only when under attack he admit his wrongdoing. I can not believe that he is THAT clueless about Atmos. He didn't have internet to go to Dolby.com to learn the very basis of Atmos?

Didn't he said that XMC-1 will be the only pre-pro people need for the next 15 years?...yet he knows nothing about Atmos? He then made false claim about DTS UHD release date...the list goes on.


follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is online now  
Old 07-10-2014, 08:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 23,677
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3857 Post(s)
Liked: 2389
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
There is a lot of misinformation in it. And in Andrew Robinsons video as well.
That video has been taken down and an apology video has been put up instead:


Fair enough.
Dan Hitchman likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 
Thread Tools


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