The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 37 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 4892Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1081 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 12:04 PM
Member
 
BillFree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Round Rock, Texas
Posts: 113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post
We have over 150 3D titles and when people come over many times they prefer the 3D version. I keep the majority of glasses always charged.
I totally agree. I look forward to each and every 3D release. If I have it and 3D version comes out I replace. I have a huge collection too. There are crummy 3D titles but thats expected. I enjoy 3D music bluray videos as they are released. Most of the people I know that complain about 3D always complain about the glasses. Been there dun it! Passive 3D solved that problem for us.
BillFree is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1082 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 12:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
kokishin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 361 Post(s)
Liked: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillFree View Post
I totally agree. I look forward to each and every 3D release. If I have it and 3D version comes out I replace. I have a huge collection too. There are crummy 3D titles but thats expected. I enjoy 3D music bluray videos as they are released. Most of the people I know that complain about 3D always complain about the glasses. Been there dun it! Passive 3D solved that problem for us.
BillFree aka FreeWill? [j/k]

avsforum Members Atmos & Auro Configuration Spreadsheet

How to Create a Dolby Atmos Demo Disc (post #15199)

I'm just a caveman. Your modern world frightens and confuses me.
kokishin is offline  
post #1083 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 01:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Chucka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern Connecticut
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 21
I wonder what effect that Audyssey XT32 will have on Atmos Ceiling or reflected speakers and I wonder if adjustments in delay and EQ by XT32 could make up for a mild cathedral ceiling to make it work even slightly acceptable. Most of us cannot convert our Cathedral or slanted ceilings to flat surfaces (and moving may not be an option for the sake of Atmos) so we will be trying to figure out how to make this work for these situations - though admittedly not as good as for a flat ceiling. I am sure we are all going to learn a lot about this in the next year once some hardware is actually out there. But many of us are anxiously thinking ahead...
Chucka is offline  
post #1084 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 01:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,028
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 876 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
I don't know exactly how Atmos works but in theory as long as a sound source is inside a triangular area created with 3 speakers, it should be able to create the sound in the correct spot.
That exactly how VBAP (vector base amplitude panning) works. MDA and Atmos support VBAP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
If the speakers are too far apart, it may have trouble producing enough volume, but it should be able to pinpoint the location.
If there's enough volume when driving one speaker (e.g., today's 7.1 home systems), then there's enough when driving 2 or 3 speakers (VBAP can use 1, 2, or 3 speakers, and possibly 4).

Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
Of course the current AVR offerings don't do this, but if Atmos knows the coordinates of each speaker in terms of horizontal and vertical angle, it should be able to create a sound as long as it falls with a triangle. All of this assumes you're sitting in the primary spot. For everyone else, the locations will be off. It won't work for things like sounds from the floor because the sounds wouldn't fit within any triangle. Or at least it won't work until floor speakers are added.
You have a very good understanding of these things. The question of how much the imaging degrades as one leaves the MLP will vary with the speaker density. Just think, if someone must find a way to improve things, they might someday be able to add another set of speakers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
If I were writing the algorithm to do this, I would first split the room into triangles and store this data in persistent memory. For every discrete sound, I would first determine which triangle it falls into and then adjust the relative volumes on each of the 3 speakers. Whether or not this can be done in real time is something I don't know. If timing is an issue, then it may be possible to pre-process the soundtrack into the discrete channels prior to playback.
I cannot speak for Atmos, but this is exactly how MDA works, and while the tessellation process (defining the triangle patches) is done as part of the initial calibration process, the rendering runs in real time.

Deadwood Atmos theater
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

Last edited by Roger Dressler; 07-16-2014 at 11:41 AM.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #1085 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 5,387
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2288 Post(s)
Liked: 678
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Is reflected sound immune to peaks & dips?
Touche!
NorthSky is online now  
post #1086 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 02:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 5,387
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2288 Post(s)
Liked: 678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucka View Post
I wonder what effect that Audyssey XT32 will have on Atmos Ceiling or reflected speakers and I wonder if adjustments in delay and EQ by XT32 could make up for a mild cathedral ceiling to make it work even slightly acceptable. Most of us cannot convert our Cathedral or slanted ceilings to flat surfaces (and moving may not be an option for the sake of Atmos) so we will be trying to figure out how to make this work for these situations - though admittedly not as good as for a flat ceiling. I am sure we are all going to learn a lot about this in the next year once some hardware is actually out there. But many of us are anxiously thinking ahead...
That, is a very interesting perspective. ...And I am looking forward to it with a passion.
asarose247 likes this.
NorthSky is online now  
post #1087 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 02:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 5,387
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2288 Post(s)
Liked: 678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
That exactly how VBAP (vector base amplitude panning) works. MDA and Atmos support VBAP.
Onkyo and Integra have some AV receivers and separates with Vector Linear Shaping Circuitry (VLSC).
NorthSky is online now  
post #1088 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 06:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
Glenn Baumann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Long Island, NY, USA
Posts: 821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
Providing links to old articles about someone's opinion is all well and good but in order for 3D to have failed, it would have to no longer be offered in new products. Laser Disk, Betamax and HD-DVD are examples of failed products. Since 3D is being offered for just about every new movie and every new TV, it is far from failed. For some unknown reason many believe that 3D was to replace 2D in every way and since it hasn't, it's failed. I don't think it was ever intended to completely replace 2D viewing. I think it was always something that would be used periodically for movie viewing and it's succeeded in that regard.


"Laser Disk, Betamax and HD-DVD are examples of failed products."


I have to diagree about "Laser Disc" being a failed product! But I guess it depends on your definition of failed.

Laserdisc was the "defacto" High End, High Quality, Audiophile/Videophile way to see and hear the best for a number of years!

In fact, when DVD and Laserdisc coexisted for a time, the Dolby Digital and especially some of the DTS soundtacks were absolutely stunning! Actually better then some of the best dvd's... in the sound department anyway.

Betamax and HD-DVD OK, maybe those were failed products, however Betamax was actually heralded as being better than VCR.

Another example is CRT technology. It did not fail, it was just replaced with a new and superior (in most ways) technology... time and technology marches on!

One thing I can say is that those pesky 3D glasses just got to go!

Sorry for getting off track... back to our regularly scheduled programming!


...Glenn

Last edited by Glenn Baumann; 07-15-2014 at 07:40 PM.
Glenn Baumann is offline  
post #1089 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:02 PM
Member
 
D.Theater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Columbus, GA
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemaandy View Post
for me it is the bouncing the sound off the ceiling that hangs me up. All the years and years of controlling the sound bounce, now it is ok. I'm sure $$$ was spent to achieve this effect, but oh well, i guess if you aim the speakers to bounce the sound off the ceiling fan, the helicopter on the movie will sound very real.
+1
D.Theater is offline  
post #1090 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
But I disagree that their
I don't know if "standstill" is the word I would use, but I think Dolby is concerned enough about their long-term viability and profits that they're desperately trying to carve out new businesses they can get into. If you ask me, DTS is in a much worse position. It doesn't help that upstarts like Barco have gotten into multichannel sound with Auro, and it's doing relatively well for theaters that are happy with "only" having 11.2 channels.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #1091 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Baumann View Post
"Laser Disk, Betamax and HD-DVD are examples of failed products."
I have to diagree about "Laser Disc" being a failed product! But I guess it depends on your definition of failed.
Whenever I mentioned Betamax in conversation with Sony execs in the 1980s, they'd quickly correct me and insist that they made hundreds of millions of dollars in profits on Betamax. It was pure gravy for several years, a huge part of Sony's revenues. From their point of view, it wasn't a failure; it just ran out of steam, and they went on to making new things. (And they were the #3 VHS manufacturer by 1989-1990, as I recall.)

Laserdisc, on the other hand, was never more than a breakeven product at best, and I think Pioneer and the others were stunned when it sank so quickly upon the release of DVD in mid-1997. As a long-time observer of consumer electronics -- literally 45 years -- I've never seen a format get jettisoned as quickly as I did Laserdisc. And I had many, many thousands of Laserdiscs in my time.

It's always sad when superior technology comes along and stomps the crap out of the old stuff, and people abandon the old and jump on the new bandwagon. We saw it happen with Dolby Pro-Logic, and it happened big-time when HDMI came in and rendered many receivers and surround processors obsolete. I accept that some of that is just a fact of life.

But Atmos makes me wince a little bit, because at some point, you gotta kinda say, "enough already. We don't really need this much at home." In a cost-no-object system, sure. But many average people I see can't even figure out a way to deal with 5 or 7 speakers in a regular living room. Enthusiasts... sure, there's always a market there. But I don't see this being a huge success at Best Buy, Costco, and Walmart. It's a niche of a niche market.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #1092 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,909
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 582 Post(s)
Liked: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
I don't know if "standstill" is the word I would use, but I think Dolby is concerned enough about their long-term viability and profits that they're desperately trying to carve out new businesses they can get into. If you ask me, DTS is in a much worse position. It doesn't help that upstarts like Barco have gotten into multichannel sound with Auro, and it's doing relatively well for theaters that are happy with "only" having 11.2 channels.
Marc, with a "c" like me, I again don't agree with the situation as "desperate" or being "concerned enough" that these new avenues are responses to that..

Were they supposed to wait around and develop nothing new?

As far as where DTS and Barco are... I don't disagree that both have work to do with the upcoming changes happening..

If Atmos is moderately successful, and DTS doesn't have a compelling, competing codec for broadcast/streaming, then I'm not sure how they are competitive without a ton of exclusive content....

Interesting times.. and maybe I'm just reading too much into your choice of words, but I think where Dolby is heading makes sense for a company trying to move on with the times and innovate.... whether or not there is a consumer based Atmos, Dolby Vision, etc will we all have to wait and see.
kbarnes701 likes this.
FilmMixer is offline  
post #1093 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:31 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,992
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1535 Post(s)
Liked: 1045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
I think Dolby is concerned enough about their long-term viability and profits that they're desperately trying to carve out new businesses they can get into.
No more desperate than surround sound. The introduction of Atmos was an eventual next step in sound mixing that overcame channel-based limitations. Once that happened on the professional side, it was a matter of time before it migrated to the consumer side.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #1094 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fookoo_2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,782
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
But Atmos makes me wince a little bit, because at some point, you gotta kinda say, "enough already. We don't really need this much at home." In a cost-no-object system, sure. But many average people I see can't even figure out a way to deal with 5 or 7 speakers in a regular living room. Enthusiasts... sure, there's always a market there. But I don't see this being a huge success at Best Buy, Costco, and Walmart. It's a niche of a niche market.
Yes, just like the niche market for color tv's following black & white tv's, followed by plasma screens, followed by......

Bottom line is no one forces anyone to buy it. As to figuring out 5 or 7 speakers, that can be an adventure with great rewards. It would not be too surprising to find Dolby Atmos to be as common as Dolby PLII-X in the not too distant future amongst new generation AVR's.
fookoo_2010 is online now  
post #1095 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
petetherock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Down Under
Posts: 1,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Re: LDs vs DVDs.
IMHO, the LDs are much bigger, and the machines need that RF adaptor, and the newer DVD players were smaller, and about the same cost. No brainer.
petetherock is offline  
post #1096 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
Providing links to old articles about someone's opinion is all well and good but in order for 3D to have failed, it would have to no longer be offered in new products.
When it's on the front page of Forbes and Business Week, and when Sony fires their CEO (back in 2012) mainly because he invested the entire future of the consumer electronics division in 3D, then you get the impression it was a failure. And when the new 3D models at CES go from 200 one year to a dozen the next, you start realizing the trend has slowed to a snail's crawl.

Maybe we have different ideas of what a failure is. I have no personal investment in 3D, so I can speak from a distance. I have worked on quite a few 3D titles in mastering over the years, and I think 3D can work very well in theaters, under very controlled circumstances. But I don't think it's practical at the moment for home use. Please feel free to disagree.

Bear this in mind: there's an important business principle called Post-Purchase Rationalization, and it basically says that once you commit to buying something -- especially something expensive and complicated -- you're going to be compelled to defend it, just to justify your expense. The problem is, you can no longer be objective; you're in a state of cognitive dissonance, where you reject anybody telling you the truth (or at least a contrary opinion), because you're locked into your decision. And that also means you reject lots of evidence that flies in the face of your belief.

I'm not saying 3D can't make people happy, or it can't perform well. What I am saying is that it was pretty much a definitive flop as a mass-market product in North America. I think it's a niche market at best, I don't think it works very well for most people, and I think it's very difficult to pull off. When it works well, it's fantastic. But I think it's extremely impractical for most people. Most manufacturers are looking at 4K as the new gee-whiz format to promote, but in all honesty, I'm not convinced this is really going to add much for people having screen sunder 65". But 4K at least works anywhere you sit in the room, you don't have to wear glasses to see it, you can watch it lying down, slumped over, or sitting up, it looks OK when you walk around the room, and it's something you can do casually while eating a meal or on the phone. 3D commands 100% of your attention, so it's not quite the passive experience regular TV is. For that alone, I don't think it works for most people.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #1097 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 09:59 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I was referring to your statement that "almost nobody has ever seen a really great uncompressed HD picture at home." It's not almost nobody. It's nobody. Not at home. Not in a cinema.
Eh, I've seen it. I can even accept people seeing a very high-bitrate HD picture. My point is that the industry is jumping to higher-res standards at a point where we never perfected the old standard. I find this sad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
It was a joke, and offers no insight to the real question before us: Can additional speakers enhance the spatial effect?
Sure. But are 20 junky, cheap low-powered speakers really an enhancement, or are they just a gimmick? This is the reality of how Atmos is going to be sold. I'd have no problem with large, full-range speakers... which are not practical in the real world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
What exactly is so complicated, in your opinion?
Doing surround right, without massive acoustic or aural compromises. And what I hear in dealers' showrooms is massively compromised. I particularly find it sad when you see $799 receivers claiming to add features like Atmos, when you know it takes more than that to even do something relatively simple and straightforward like 5.1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
If I understand correctly, if you have a couple of decent height speakers properly installed in a well treated room, you'll be knocked out? Then just think how much better you'll like having 4 height speakers! So why all the doom and gloom?
If I'm knocked out, how will I enjoy the movie? I could take an overdose and get the same effect.

If you mean impressed, I don't think height alone is enough. I need reasonable levels, very low distortion, no reflections, good off-axis response, no bass nodes, wide frequency response, all the things that they figured out make up good sound more than 50 years ago. Done well, Atmos can sound fantastic; I just think what I'm seeing in the initial Atmos announcements are glitzy features added to cheap receivers designed to hype the model -- not something really useful. I'd have no problem with high-end surround decoders and dedicated speakers used in an Atmos setup... but you can't do that for $799.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
BTW, since they do not use full range speakers in cinemas, you hardly need to use them for a home system.
Eh, it's a high enough range for me, at least at the better theaters. I just went to a screening of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes today, and was really impressed by how terrific it sounded. When you have a guy like Andy Nelson at the helm doing the mix, there's a good chance it's going to sound good -- and this was among the best-sounding films I've heard all year. What I heard sounded full enough; this particular screening room used JBL Screen Arrays, and I've always liked how they sounded (though like everything else, it's very much a room-dependent experience).
RichB likes this.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #1098 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 10:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,028
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 876 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Eh, I've seen it. I can even accept people seeing a very high-bitrate HD picture. My point is that the industry is jumping to higher-res standards at a point where we never perfected the old standard. I find this sad.
You remind me of the venerable Yves Faroudja, who said the same of analog video when he was perfecting Super NTSC when digital video was coming on. Anyway, how does going to higher res prevent further perfection? Wouldn't it be nice to have more than 8-bit video?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Sure. But are 20 junky, cheap low-powered speakers really an enhancement, or are they just a gimmick? This is the reality of how Atmos is going to be sold. I'd have no problem with large, full-range speakers... which are not practical in the real world.
Junky is in the ear of the beholder. You'd ban McDonald's too? No one is stopping you from using large, full range speakers, but it's not smart engineering to go that route. The alternative by no means has to be junk. The user gets to choose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Doing surround right, without massive acoustic or aural compromises.
Oh. I thought you were saying there was something particularly complicated about Atmos. If you mean all surround sound is complicated, well, that's why we have this great AVS Forum. We're here to learn from each other the make things easier to understand. Welcome aboard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
And what I hear in dealers' showrooms is massively compromised. I particularly find it sad when you see $799 receivers claiming to add features like Atmos, when you know it takes more than that to even do something relatively simple and straightforward like 5.1.
Really? What is it these AVR's are not doing for a proper 5.1 presentation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
If I'm knocked out, how will I enjoy the movie? I could take an overdose and get the same effect.
Your choice of words, not mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
If you mean impressed, I don't think height alone is enough. I need reasonable levels, very low distortion, no reflections, good off-axis response, no bass nodes, wide frequency response, all the things that they figured out make up good sound more than 50 years ago. Done well, Atmos can sound fantastic; I just think what I'm seeing in the initial Atmos announcements are glitzy features added to cheap receivers designed to hype the model -- not something really useful. I'd have no problem with high-end surround decoders and dedicated speakers used in an Atmos setup... but you can't do that for $799.
No AVR includes speakers, so you can hardly criticize them on that basis.
kbarnes701 likes this.

Deadwood Atmos theater
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 online now  
post #1099 of 16287 Old 07-15-2014, 11:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,808
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 416 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
But are 20 junky, cheap low-powered speakers really an enhancement, or are they just a gimmick? This is the reality of how Atmos is going to be sold. I'd have no problem with large, full-range speakers... which are not practical in the real world.
... but you can't do that for $799.
What's the point of continually lamenting compromised executions of Atmos?

As has been alluded to, you could say the same about any previous format; there will always be people who don't care or can't afford to do it right, regardless of channel count.
kbarnes701 likes this.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #1100 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 12:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
brwsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 740
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 96
I hate how the biggest announcements have the longest wait times.
brwsaw is online now  
post #1101 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 01:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
steveting99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,040
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 402 Post(s)
Liked: 136
I'm looking forward to Keith Barnes impressions and write-up of Atmos for the home. Keith has recently attended a listening session offered by Dolby using Onkyo gear.

How is the write-up coming along Keith?

Maranatz NR1504, Oppo BPD-93, MTV 7000D, LG LW6500, aTV, WDTV Live, Harmony 650 remote, KEF E301, MiniDSP(2x4), Rythmik F12G
steveting99 is online now  
post #1102 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 05:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JonStatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 48
The Onkyo 838 (and 636) models only have 7 channels of amplification. They have binding posts separate for the height/ceiling connections however. But what this means is either you run 7.1, or 5.1.2. Typically the optimal speaker placement for 5.1 is with the rear speakers just behind the sides of the listening seats. But for 7.1, they are nearer to the actual sides of the seating with the additional speakers directly behind. This means no set-up with these models will be optimal I believe. Onkyo should have put 9 channels into the 838 I feel. In the UK the Onkyo retails for 1000, and its next nearest model in price is the Denon X4100 which DOES have 9 channels of amplication and is cheaper than the Onkyo 1030 at nearly 2000 pounds.
JonStatt is offline  
post #1103 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 06:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,974
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Maybe we have different ideas of what a failure is.

That's the crux of my gripe. What exactly did 3D fail at? Was there some specific goal it was supposed to obtain that it failed to obtain?
tjenkins95 likes this.
KidHorn is offline  
post #1104 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 06:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,974
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Baumann View Post
"Laser Disk, Betamax and HD-DVD are examples of failed products."

I have to diagree about "Laser Disc" being a failed product! But I guess it depends on your definition of failed.

Laserdisc was the "defacto" High End, High Quality, Audiophile/Videophile way to see and hear the best for a number of years!

You're probably right about Laser Disc. I honestly don't know much about it other than it was a product that used to exist and no longer exists. I remember the discs were big and shiny.


I spent maybe 5 seconds coming up with examples of failed products and didn't do enough fact checking
KidHorn is offline  
post #1105 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 06:27 AM
Senior Member
 
tjenkins95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
That's the crux of my gripe. What exactly did 3D fail at? Was there some specific goal it was supposed to obtain that it failed to obtain?


3D blu-rays haven't failed in my neighborhood. Anybody who comes to watch a movie on my system always asks if I have it in 3D!

Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 5030 UB
Denon AVR-X5200W
Blu-Ray: Oppo 103
Pioneer Dolby Atmos enabled Elite Concentric Speakers: SP-EFS73, SP-EBS73, and SP-EC73
Klipsch Speakers: RF-82, RC-62, RS-52, RB-61
tjenkins95 is offline  
post #1106 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 06:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,974
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
You have a very good understanding of these things.

I don't know how to respond. No one on these forums ever compliments another forum member. Thanks, I guess.


A while back I developed and maintained a graphics package for a major financial institution. The user clicks their mouse on something and you have to figure out what they clicked on. Basically the same logic but fortunately I had more than a few milliseconds to figure it out.
KidHorn is offline  
post #1107 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 06:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
You're probably right about Laser Disc. I honestly don't know much about it other than it was a product that used to exist and no longer exists. I remember the discs were big and shiny.


I spent maybe 5 seconds coming up with examples of failed products and didn't do enough fact checking
as one who embraced LaserDisc early on, it existed from the late 70's through the early day's of DVD in late 90's. It was still a viable format while DVD was gaining acceptance as the superior format for consumers. There are still some movies that were on laserdisc that have never made to DVD, let alone BD.

A 20+ yr run for a "niche" format is hardly a failed one

DVD used 480i while laserdisc had about 425 lines resolution. But when VHS had 240-250 lines, Beta 300 lines or so, the only format close to LD was SuperVHS at 400 lines and AKAIK, there were no commercial releases on S-VHS tape so LD was the go-to format for videophiles until DVD's came along. With respect to audio, Dolby Stereo, Dolby Surround, ProLogic and AC-3 (Dolby Digital) all appeared on laserdisc long before DVD's ever came out. And movies with digital PCM audio got launched on laserdisc in the 80's, when DVD wasn't even a concept

now you know...

and you could still buy laserdisc players up until about 2008 or 2009. Pioneer still had one you could buy in the US.

Steve

Last edited by ss9001; 07-16-2014 at 07:01 AM.
ss9001 is offline  
post #1108 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 07:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2258
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveting99 View Post
I'm looking forward to Keith Barnes impressions and write-up of Atmos for the home. Keith has recently attended a listening session offered by Dolby using Onkyo gear.

How is the write-up coming along Keith?
Almost ready. Once I've written something like that, I like to stand back from it for a little while to see if it still comes across as intended when published. Look out for it in this thread tomorrow (or even later tonight, UK time).

EDIT: see below.

Last edited by kbarnes701; 07-16-2014 at 07:37 AM.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1109 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 07:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2554 Post(s)
Liked: 2258
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post
The Onkyo 838 (and 636) models only have 7 channels of amplification. They have binding posts separate for the height/ceiling connections however. But what this means is either you run 7.1, or 5.1.2. Typically the optimal speaker placement for 5.1 is with the rear speakers just behind the sides of the listening seats. But for 7.1, they are nearer to the actual sides of the seating with the additional speakers directly behind. This means no set-up with these models will be optimal I believe. Onkyo should have put 9 channels into the 838 I feel. In the UK the Onkyo retails for 1000, and its next nearest model in price is the Denon X4100 which DOES have 9 channels of amplication and is cheaper than the Onkyo 1030 at nearly 2000 pounds.
Not to mention that the Denons also have a form of room EQ which EQs the front speakers and the subwoofer... And the X5200 can do 7.1.4 as well, for less than $2,000.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #1110 of 16287 Old 07-16-2014, 07:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,992
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1535 Post(s)
Liked: 1045
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
DVD used 480i while laserdisc had about 425 lines resolution. But when VHS had 240-250 lines, Beta 300 lines or so, the only format close to LD was SuperVHS at 400 lines
All those delivery media were 480i vertically The "lines of resolution" was a horizontal measurement (how many dots could each scan line resolve). But they were all NTSC, so they all had the same number of scan lines (480i).
Craig Mecak likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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