The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 78 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 4942Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2311 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 01:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,047
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
The ±22.5° for the fronts that Toole suggests makes the setup compatible with usage for normal stereo music. If you plan on ever listening to music in your rooms, this is what you should go for. If on the other hand that never happens, by all means go for ±30°.
I'd say 90% of my room's use is with CD music. But rarely with just 2 speakers. It's PLIIx Music for me.

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 offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2312 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 01:45 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,640
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
What does that have to do with consumer Atmos and wides? Adding a pair of speakers at ±55-60° doesn't mean a soundtrack will suddenly contain "reverberation coming from SPECIFIC locations".
But they COULD and this WOULD increase the level of realism. If those speaker locations aren't mandatory then there will be no effect plugin and no recording technique exploiting what's possible.

By the way, stereo recordings DO contain reflections from those locations but they are lumped together with reflections from other angles. There are techniques to fan out directional information from stereo recordings to more than two speakers:
http://decoy.iki.fi/dsound/ambisonic...LD)_Gerzon.pdf

There's also a software that can perform such matrixing:
http://www.audiovero.de/en/acourateconvolver.html
I had it running in my room for 2 channel playback for quite a while.

P.S. The patents of Gerzon have expired, so anybody interested can implement Gerzon's matrix.

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; 07-28-2014 at 01:48 AM.
markus767 is online now  
post #2313 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 01:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I'd say 90% of my room's use is with CD music. But rarely with just 2 speakers. It's PLIIx Music for me.
Ok, that's a first for me - never heard anyone doing sincere music listening in that 'transcoding' before. But great that it works for you!

(8 speakers for me... 6 bass modules handling everything below 80Hz, but I'm not having the receiver handle the filtering - it hasn't got the correct slopes)

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is online now  
post #2314 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 02:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,047
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
Ok, that's a first for me - never heard anyone doing sincere music listening in that 'transcoding' before. But great that it works for you!
There's a few of us around. gbaby, sdurani. I got hooked when I was using a Meridian 861 with Trifield and Music mode. Around that time, I worked with Jim Fosgate to bring Pro Logic II to market, so that's been my drug of choice these many years (14). Hard to go back now.

I still have the Illusonic processor on hand, so I'm looking forward to using it in a 7+4 mode once I install the 4 ceiling speakers.

Quote:
(8 speakers for me... 6 bass modules handling everything below 80Hz, but I'm not having the receiver handle the filtering - it hasn't got the correct slopes)
What slopes do you prefer?

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 offline  
post #2315 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 02:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
What slopes do you prefer?
30db/octave. I don't KNOW the filter topology of the filter I have, but I'd hazard a guess about it being Bessel(ish).


Under construction: the Larch theater

Last edited by Nightlord; 07-28-2014 at 04:25 AM.
Nightlord is online now  
post #2316 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 04:19 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hugo S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: France
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Bonjour Jeff,

Sorry for my delayed answering, but I didn't have enough time this WE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chi_guy50 View Post
Hugo,

Salut d'Atlanta! Je ne suis pas Keith, mais je voulais vous remercier de ma part pour l'hyperlien ci-dessus. Et j'espère que vous passez vous-même un bon weekend!

That's a very interesting write-up on several fronts--regarding your highly favorable impression of an Atmos demo under decidedly sub-par acoustical conditions, your (subjective) thoughts on the viability and future development of HT Atmos, and your ruminations on speaker placement presumably adequate for a variety of processing formats (Atmos/DSX/NEO:X/DTS-UHD).

You made a number of comments about DTS-UHD that drew my attention. Inter alia, you stated your conviction that DTS-UHD, when it emerges, will be able to process Dolby Atmos-encoded recordings. You also said elsewhere (I can't recall the exact post) that the Marantz AV8802 will "very probably" feature DTS-UHD processing (last I heard on this score was that it "might" be added as a FW update in 2015 on certain D&M models). Could you perhaps elaborate on your basis for these statements and also share your thoughts on how you feel the possibility of DTS-UHD should influence our decision to purchase one of these first-generation Atmos AVR's?

Bien amicalement, Jeff
Now before anything else let me reproduce the sentence that preceded all the analysis that I wrote in the above link :

"Alors merci de bien vouloir garder en mémoire que tout ce qui va suivre correspond à ma propre analyse personnelle et que ceci n'engage que moi." (meaning : Now please bear in mind that that will follow corresponds to my own analysis and that it only engages myself.) and being a pure amateur - but audio/video being a real Passion (among several others ) -, I try to keep my own understanding in this AV field the best I can, as to be able to anticipate the technological evolutions and rightly include them into our own (today 11.2) constantly evolving environment. The reason I'm not "innocent" in this matter, but definitively not an "insider"... linked with NDAs.

Now my opinion is that what summarizes best the Dolby Atmos concept in a HT environment is the attached "Dolby Atmos speakers configuration scheme". Does it officially represent Dolby's requirements concerning speakers possible positionings in HTs? We will obviously have to wait @ Aug 15th for the official Dolby announcement prior to IFA and Cedia editions.

But it still remains that what can be seen in this leaked scheme is that there are angles overlap between speakers designated as Height speakers (1 30° -> 45°) and Top speakers (2 30° -> 55°). What can (but "could" may be more appropriate... ) this indicate?

My opinion is that in the case of a Dolby Atmos processor in a x.1.4 speakers configuration, if the speakers are declared as Tops and if they are physically located between 30° -> 45°, it will be equally possible to adequately use them either as Heights - in DSX (2?) and DTS Neo X contexts - or as Tops - in Dolby Atmos contexts -. All which means (IMHO ) that what seems to be important in the "overhead" Dolby Atmos proposed reproduction, are not speakers locations - on wall or on/in ceiling - but the angle versus a specific reference that those "overhead" speakers create with the ears.

So if the "reference" speakers are at ear level, it seems that creating a 30° -> 45° angle difference to this reference, is adequate.

And to illustrate this let's have a look at the bellow attached "enceintes au plafond" example (initially posted here), where the "reference" speakers are located very high above ear level. But where an Dolby Atmos effect will still be probably perceived as the Top speakers are located on the ceiling, creating the mentioned angle difference. And this is precisely what happens in Cinemas, and why in Cinemas including Top speakers in the ceiling is un-avoidable... .

But does this mean that in our HT contexts, we all need to (re)place our speakers on/in the ceiling? Obviously (IMHO), no! And which also means (IMHO) that this new Dolby Atmos concept can still perfectly co-exist with the previous Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo X processings.


Now concerning my DTS-UHD assumption:

it is now known the the Dolby Atmos concept also includes a specific processing which "batpig" has called here on AVS : Dolby Surround if my memory is correct. A specific Dolby processing which will adequately "render" 5.1,(6.1) and 7.1 (and IMHO also 2.0...) recordings, on the new from 5.1.2 to 7.1.4 or 9.1.2 Dolby Atmos configurations. And the later 9.1.2 Atmos processing being probably IMHO the most interesting, as far as future developments, evolutions into 13.x/15.x processings are concerned.

But then if we look a bit closer into what is the real difference of this new processing compared to what we used to have with DPL IIz previously in 9.1, and/or isn't this new Dolby Surround processing just a slight evolution of the DPL IIz diving it a DPL IIz² 11.1 capacity?

An 11.1 capacity that the DTS Neo X 11 processing already has... And a DTS Neo X processing that (as initially advertised) has been built from scratch, with the capacity to possibly evolve, into processing as many channels as "needed"... IMHO (again) all this indicates not an opposition, but only a real world DTS-Dolby compatibility, even in the new Dolby Atmos concept context. But a Dolby Atmos context, which also introduces Atmos recordings.

Though my assumption that DTS, to adapt itself to this new reality should at least make an evolution of their DTS Neo X processing as to make it compatible with Atmos. So IMHO the new DTS-UHD must inevitably be Atmos compatible, the same way Neo X is compatible with DD & Dolby True HD processings.

But a DTS-UHD as announced here in Jan 2014, that is supposed to be far more powerful through its' Cirrus logic dedicated specific chip. Now nobody has claimed its' presence in the Onkyo xx3x series. Will it be present in the future D&M products and singularly the Marantz 8802? I sincerely hope so!

Amicalement et bonne semaine ou vacances,

Hugo
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Speakers configuration.JPG
Views:	95
Size:	60.3 KB
ID:	183650   Click image for larger version

Name:	Enceintes au plafond.JPG
Views:	103
Size:	63.8 KB
ID:	183658  

Last edited by Hugo S; 07-28-2014 at 04:32 AM. Reason: Typo
Hugo S is offline  
post #2317 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 05:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chi_guy50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,029
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 362 Post(s)
Liked: 172
Hugo,

Thank you very much indeed for that amplification of your thought process. I didn't quite follow you on every point, but I will assume that that is at least in part due to a vagueness necessitated by the NDA you referenced.

I look forward to your further analyses on these issues as more official announcements are made available to us. Jeff

P.S.: IRT Dolby Surround (the apparent successor to PLII)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
. . .it is now known the the Dolby Atmos concept also includes a specific processing which "batpig" has called here on AVS : Dolby Surround if my memory is correct.
Quoting from p. 297 of the AVR-X5200W Owner's Manual (European Edition):
Dolby surround is a next generation surround technology that intelligently
up mixes stereo; 5.1 and 7.1 content for playback through your surround
speaker system. Dolby surround is compatible with traditional speaker
layouts, as well as Dolby Atmos enabled playback systems that employ in-ceiling
speakers or products with Dolby speaker technology.

Last edited by chi_guy50; 07-28-2014 at 05:59 AM. Reason: Adds reference for Dolby Surround
chi_guy50 is online now  
post #2318 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 06:29 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
markus767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,640
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Illusonic processor
Guess that's not the same processor Swiss guy is talking about in this video?
http://www.illusonic.com/iap-16/movie/

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 online now  
post #2319 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 06:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post
Bonjour Jeff,

Sorry for my delayed answering, but I didn't have enough time this WE.



Now before anything else let me reproduce the sentence that preceded all the analysis that I wrote in the above link :

"Alors merci de bien vouloir garder en mémoire que tout ce qui va suivre correspond à ma propre analyse personnelle et que ceci n'engage que moi." (meaning : Now please bear in mind that that will follow corresponds to my own analysis and that it only engages myself.) and being a pure amateur - but audio/video being a real Passion (among several others ) -, I try to keep my own understanding in this AV field the best I can, as to be able to anticipate the technological evolutions and rightly include them into our own (today 11.2) constantly evolving environment. The reason I'm not "innocent" in this matter, but definitively not an "insider"... linked with NDAs.

Now my opinion is that what summarizes best the Dolby Atmos concept in a HT environment is the attached "Dolby Atmos speakers configuration scheme". Does it officially represent Dolby's requirements concerning speakers possible positionings in HTs? We will obviously have to wait @ Aug 15th for the official Dolby announcement prior to IFA and Cedia editions.

But it still remains that what can be seen in this leaked scheme is that there are angles overlap between speakers designated as Height speakers (1 30° -> 45°) and Top speakers (2 30° -> 55°). What can (but "could" may be more appropriate... ) this indicate?

My opinion is that in the case of a Dolby Atmos processor in a x.1.4 speakers configuration, if the speakers are declared as Tops and if they are physically located between 30° -> 45°, it will be equally possible to adequately use them either as Heights - in DSX (2?) and DTS Neo X contexts - or as Tops - in Dolby Atmos contexts -. All which means (IMHO ) that what seems to be important in the "overhead" Dolby Atmos proposed reproduction, are not speakers locations - on wall or on/in ceiling - but the angle versus a specific reference that those "overhead" speakers create with the ears.

So if the "reference" speakers are at ear level, it seems that creating a 30° -> 45° angle difference to this reference, is adequate.

And to illustrate this let's have a look at the bellow attached "enceintes au plafond" example (initially posted here), where the "reference" speakers are located very high above ear level. But where an Dolby Atmos effect will still be probably perceived as the Top speakers are located on the ceiling, creating the mentioned angle difference. And this is precisely what happens in Cinemas, and why in Cinemas including Top speakers in the ceiling is un-avoidable... .

But does this mean that in our HT contexts, we all need to (re)place our speakers on/in the ceiling? Obviously (IMHO), no! And which also means (IMHO) that this new Dolby Atmos concept can still perfectly co-exist with the previous Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo X processings.


Now concerning my DTS-UHD assumption:

it is now known the the Dolby Atmos concept also includes a specific processing which "batpig" has called here on AVS : Dolby Surround if my memory is correct. A specific Dolby processing which will adequately "render" 5.1,(6.1) and 7.1 (and IMHO also 2.0...) recordings, on the new from 5.1.2 to 7.1.4 or 9.1.2 Dolby Atmos configurations. And the later 9.1.2 Atmos processing being probably IMHO the most interesting, as far as future developments, evolutions into 13.x/15.x processings are concerned.

But then if we look a bit closer into what is the real difference of this new processing compared to what we used to have with DPL IIz previously in 9.1, and/or isn't this new Dolby Surround processing just a slight evolution of the DPL IIz diving it a DPL IIz² 11.1 capacity?

An 11.1 capacity that the DTS Neo X 11 processing already has... And a DTS Neo X processing that (as initially advertised) has been built from scratch, with the capacity to possibly evolve, into processing as many channels as "needed"... IMHO (again) all this indicates not an opposition, but only a real world DTS-Dolby compatibility, even in the new Dolby Atmos concept context. But a Dolby Atmos context, which also introduces Atmos recordings.

Though my assumption that DTS, to adapt itself to this new reality should at least make an evolution of their DTS Neo X processing as to make it compatible with Atmos. So IMHO the new DTS-UHD must inevitably be Atmos compatible, the same way Neo X is compatible with DD & Dolby True HD processings.

But a DTS-UHD as announced here in Jan 2014, that is supposed to be far more powerful through its' Cirrus logic dedicated specific chip. Now nobody has claimed its' presence in the Onkyo xx3x series. Will it be present in the future D&M products and singularly the Marantz 8802? I sincerely hope so!

Amicalement et bonne semaine ou vacances,

Hugo
Many good points.

However, Dolby Atmos and Auro-3D have already grabbed the sky. That does not leave DTS much to work with. They are going to have to play with one(Atmos) or the other(Auro), even if there major supporter, Sony, likes it or not.

And the payoff is never certain: Some observers contend that a generation has already been trained to be content with the small screen.
CinemaAndy is offline  
post #2320 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 07:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chi_guy50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,029
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 362 Post(s)
Liked: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Many good points.

However, Dolby Atmos and Auro-3D have already grabbed the sky. That does not leave DTS much to work with. They are going to have to play with one(Atmos) or the other(Auro), even if there major supporter, Sony, likes it or not.
I think that's pretty much in line with what Hugo is saying. QUOTE: . . . Tout ce qui fait que par corrélation et à l'image du DTS Neo X qui sait traiter tous les actuels encodages Dolby, je suis personnellement persuadé que le futur processing DTS-UHD aura certainement une capacité à traiter les pressages comportant un encodage Dolby Atmos, qu'il saura parfaitement traiter, non dans la version basique 5.1/7.1, mais dans toute sa plénitude "objets". END QUOTE

(TRANSLATION: . . . All of which means that, just as DTS NEO:X is able to process all the current Dolby codecs, it is my personal conviction that the forthcoming DTS-UHD will undoubtedly be capable of processing Dolby Atmos-encoded recordings--not only with respect to the basic 5.1/7.1 format but to include the totality of "object" audio.)

(Excuse-moi, Hugo, si je t'interprète mal.)
chi_guy50 is online now  
post #2321 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 08:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
helvetica bold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Sony has been mum on the Atmos subject correct?
helvetica bold is offline  
post #2322 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 08:16 AM
Senior Member
 
PoshFrosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Question Questions about top speaker placement

I've attached a plan for my top speakers for Atmos / Dolby Surround. They will be on-ceiling mounted mini-bookshelf speakers. I have three questions:
  1. Does the placement look good? (they will all be 45 degrees elevation to the MLP)
  2. Should I aim the top speakers directly at the ground, or toe them in to aim at the MLP? (like all the other speakers)
  3. The four gray lines surrounding the couch and attached to the top speakers is a support structure I plan to build. Does this seem like a reasonable plan? (It will basically be four 8' studs (with bracing), two 11.3' two-by-fours and two 10' two-by-fours in an arch over the couch to which I will attach the speakers (to avoid drilling any mounting holes in the ceiling, at least for now).
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Home_Theater_top_speakers.gif
Views:	280
Size:	74.7 KB
ID:	183802  

Energy Speakers' specs spreadsheet.

Corrections or additions? Please PM me and I will edit the document.
PoshFrosh is offline  
post #2323 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 08:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,793
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2591 Post(s)
Liked: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post

I don't think there is any huge amount of consumer awareness about Atmos.

And I don't think there is any viable data to support the notion that it helps sell tickets in a meaningful way..

I only know of a few of us geeks that will go out of their way to hear it.

Luckily, it has been packaged with other upgrades, like reserved seating, large screen presentations, etc... I'm not sure if and of itself it would be a draw.. that is what I think keeps people coming.
This is exactly what has happened at my own local Atmos theater. They have packaged it with a proprietary screen format called XPLUS, which is like a sort of small IMAX but is in the usual widescreen ratios as well. Everyone can understand "huge screen" and I'd guess that would be how I would market it if Showcase Cinema chain was my client. Atmos would be an added benefit, along with reserve seating simply because it is harder to explain to Joe Public. I think it is a smart move to emphasize the big screen. The combined benefits of the package enable the chain to charge more for the Atmos presentation than their regular sound/screen shows, but I am sure it is the big screen that will bring the public in. Hopefully, they will also be blown away by the sound.

This is how they are marketing it - image benefits first, sound benefits second.

My first experience, today, of XPLUS was less than brilliant. Not because of the Atmos sound which was fabulous (the movie was Apes) but because of the image quality, which was lower than I'd tolerate at home, with poor contrast ratio/blacks and a slightly 'not sharp' look. But worse was the fact that the screen seems to lack and form of masking, so the entire movie was shown with 'black bars' (grey bars in reality) down each side of the 1.85:1 format of the movie. And worse still, whoever had designed the auditorium had used some form of tile ceiling, with the tile separators in bright aluminum! With the screen going right to the ceiling, this meant that in any moderately bright scene, the ceiling above the screen was lit up like Disneyworld. I found the constant appearing and disappearing of the ceiling very distracting.

The 3D system in use was RealD and I did find that to be very good.
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2324 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 08:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,793
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2591 Post(s)
Liked: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Atmos, Auro-3D, IMAX, and other IMAX encroaching large screen's. Is a way to sell thickets.
Stop beating about the bush
ambesolman, grtuck and CinemaAndy like this.
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2325 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 08:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,793
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2591 Post(s)
Liked: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by kokishin View Post
Don't worry NS. Never seen Barnes gripe about anyone fully quoting his posts (as opposed to: Emotiva XMC-1 Chat Thread: technical talk only please). I and some others fully quoted him and there was never a peep (The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) or The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) or The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version), etc).
It's one thing to do it now and again, and another to do it with relatively short posts. But to do it all the time can be wearing for everyone. It's nothing to worry about though and why you bring it up again is a mystery to me.

But it is especially ironic that NS himself seems to deplore the idea of people quoting fully very long posts:

The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version)
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2326 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,002
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1538 Post(s)
Liked: 1047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
The ±22.5° for the fronts that Toole suggests makes the setup compatible with usage for normal stereo music. If you plan on ever listening to music in your rooms, this is what you should go for. If on the other hand that never happens, by all means go for ±30°.
Other way 'round. From Toole's book:
Quote:
In this example, the center of the front row is almost perfect for listening to stereo through LF and RF loudspeakers. If this were important to the customer, a small positional adjustment to the seating or loudspeakers would yield the ideal ±30° listening angle.
Quote:
The ±30° arrangement is a widespread standard for music recording and reproduction, although many setups employ a smaller separation, especially those associated with video playback.
Quote:
Looking at the evidence just discussed, a front soundstage of 0° center and left and right loudspeakers at ±30° is a solid beginning.
Quote:
The five-channel arrangement described in ITU-R BS.775-2 (2006) with loudspeakers at 0°, ±30° and ±120° performed about as well as any other configuration that was tested. This is obviously good news because this is the arrangement promoted almost universally within the industry.
Toole describes the ±30° placement as "ideal" for listening to 2-speaker stereo and a "widespread standard" for music recording, while noting that a smaller angle is associated with video playback. The exact opposite of what you were saying.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #2327 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,310
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Van Baelen actually goes on to say something similar, concluding that it is a fault or flaw with Atmos and that a sound object appearing off screen, behind us, will take us out of the movie. I can say that this didn't happen with Gravity, where the sounds from all around and behind me immersed me even more in the movie, leading to an almost total suspension of disbelief which resulted in a noticeable quickening of my heart rate and temperature, so much was I 'part of the action' out there, 'in space' along with Clooney and Bullock. For someone who sees 350 or more movies a year, it takes something special to do that to me!
Yes, I got quite the opposite reaction than what sound engineers always complain about: distracting the audience with aggressive and highly positional surround sound. Gravity's approach to audio improved a rather lackluster (IMHO) movie, it didn't detract from it.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #2328 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,002
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1538 Post(s)
Liked: 1047
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
But they COULD and this WOULD increase the level of realism. If those speaker locations aren't mandatory then there will be no effect plugin and no recording technique exploiting what's possible.
Real vs reel. The movie industry doesn't seem interested in increasing the level of realism to whatever amount you want but instead creating an aural illusion that supports the picture on screen. Therefore, no specific support for speakers at ±55-60° locations (those speakers are part of an array that starts forward of them and extends well rearward of them).

You're barking up the wrong tree with the movie business. You might be better off arguing this with content creators of multi-channel music. Their 7.1 mixes could incorporate surrounds and wides, and they're not tied to a specific picture.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #2329 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,310
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
That would be a premier in the world of AV receivers Andy.
Do you have more info in how those 32 channels would be distributed; like with a bunch of preouts?
...I'm trying to imagine and ... what are they; like 20 mains (floor and walls) and 8 overheard (top/ceiling) and 4 subwoofer channels (summed up for the .1 LFE)?
If it's anything like the cinema version, it's something like 22 mains, 10 overheads, and two sub outputs (LFE and summed bass from all other speakers).

The 22 mains would probably be like five front screen speakers (left, left extra, center, right extra, right), multiple front wides, multiple side walls, multiple rear walls.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #2330 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,310
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
Methinks that Marc (FilmMixer) and Markus should work together.
...In making/mixing great Dolby Atmos audio soundtracks for our Blu-ray movies @ home.
If they don't kill each other first.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #2331 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,310
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post
I thought that I read that ticket sales are down 5% this year as compared with last year. Obviously that must be caused by the availability of Atmos sound tracks.

I know about Atmos, but I must admit I don't care about Atmos at all relative to its availability in a theater. As far as home use is concerned, I will leave the Atmos implementation to the extreme fringe elements of the home theater crowd.
To hear Atmos is to love Atmos.
kbarnes701 likes this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #2332 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Other way 'round. From Toole's book: Toole describes the ±30° placement as "ideal" for listening to 2-speaker stereo and a "widespread standard" for music recording, while noting that a smaller angle is associated with video playback. The exact opposite of what you were saying.
Ok, I take it back. Toole just got lucky on that graph then, otherwise he was wrong too.

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is online now  
post #2333 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,310
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
My point is that they would still be going to see the film, Atmos or not... that they prefer to seek it out when available is a different conceit.



Which is why exhibitors have chosen to spend money on their own solutions..

Why give any money to IMAX when you can pocket it all yourself... and again, why would they give away any concession sales profit, to IMAX, if they didn't have to?

Wasn't that the impetus for the creation of RPX, ETX, XD, etc?

I'm not disparaging IMAX.. it's a great format, and as you state it has huge market visibility and consumer recognition.

It's just a fact that it costs exhibitors in more ways than straight ticket sales.
I always wondered why exhibitors haven't combined forces en masse and strong-armed Hollywood to back off their front loading scheme. It's a studio con game that has theater owners sucking air during the most profitable time of a movie's "life" and a big reason why concessions are so damned expensive. No wonder some can't keep up with the maintenance of their auditoriums, pay their know-nothing employees minimum wage, and only have one or two premium houses in their complexes. The studios don't care about the film surviving in the theater long enough for the theaters to get a higher profit from ticket sales... they have home video to look forward to.

The whole thing is messed up and also help perpetuate making movies with throw-away stories rather than long-term classics with staying power. It reminds me of our broken governmental institutions.
ambesolman likes this.

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

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 07-28-2014 at 10:28 AM.
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #2334 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 20,002
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1538 Post(s)
Liked: 1047
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
This is exactly what has happened at my own local Atmos theater. They have packaged it with a proprietary screen format called XPLUS, which is like a sort of small IMAX but is in the usual widescreen ratios as well.
All the local Atmos installs are in the "premium" auditorium of the multiplex. They charge for the premium experience, but not specifically for Atmos (i.e,, the ticket price doesn't change if the movie is not in Atmos). However, they do charge extra for 3D. Cinema owners must be thinking twice about installing Atmos or Auro, knowing they can't charge specifically for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
...the Atmos sound which was fabulous (the movie was Apes)...
Do tell.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #2335 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 09:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,310
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I agree.

Were I able/willing to install 9.1.4, I'd like to place the 9 something like this. I think it will give the best immersion and directional coverage.

[Strokes chin while speaking with a German scientist's accent] Interesting... very interesting.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #2336 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 10:08 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 19,793
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2591 Post(s)
Liked: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
All the local Atmos installs are in the "premium" auditorium of the multiplex. They charge for the premium experience, but not specifically for Atmos (i.e,, the ticket price doesn't change if the movie is not in Atmos). However, they do charge extra for 3D. Cinema owners must be thinking twice about installing Atmos or Auro, knowing they can't charge specifically for it. Do tell.
OK... As expected I had the auditorium more or less to myself. There were five of us in total - it is always the same at the 11am Monday showing. So it was easy for me to sit dead-centre, in line with the surround speaker that had no toe-in. That put me about 1.5-2 screen heights back so it was visually perfect as well.

First thing I noticed was they had 4 huge in-ceiling subwoofers, two at the front and two at the rear. The auditorium wasn't huge and I counted 7 surround speakers on each side, front to back. It was too dark on the back wall for me to count the number of speakers there. The ceiling array was 6 speakers each side that I could see.

First up was the Atmos 'triangles' trailer and it did sound fabulous, although the bass was not as good as at Dolby's demo room in London. I very much enjoyed the movie sound and noticed after a while I had stopped 'listening' for the sound and was just enjoying it as part of the movie. Good sign.

Very obvious to me was the way that voices followed actors on the screen. This was noticeable right from the beginning when they are doing those TV and radio clips setting up the story. I have never experienced this before and I think it added to my enjoyment quite a lot - making the presentation more 'believable'. I’d like to see a Scope format movie do this - it must be even better.

In the scene where the young man helps teach Maurice the Orang Utan to read, there is rain falling gently and this was reproduced all around me with amazing realism. More so than the storm a few moments into the movie, although that was perhaps better to demonstrate height effects. I looked out for the scene you mentioned where the humans were hiding under the logs and the apes ride over above them and that was just fantastic IMO. Added greatly to the 'being there' feeling. Only snag to it was that I had to look up towards the ceiling and then could see those damn aluminum strips I mentioned - crazy choice. But that isn't Atmos's fault.

For me, the subtle 'presence' effects are as good as the more obvious effects and I noticed all the way through how small audio cues were all around me and above me. Of the less subtle effects, I thought that being surrounded by apes added considerably to the immersiveness of the experience, but not so much as the way those sort of effects were used in Gravity.

The final battle scene towards the end of the movie was also terrific with sounds crashing down from above when the Tower was blown to bits by Gary Oldman's character.

One other interesting observation is that they showed several trailers and ads (yes we have to watch ads in the cinema in the UK), none of which were made in Atmos but all of the speakers seemed to be alive including the top ones. IDK if this was some form of upmixing or what but it was definitely there. It was very noticeable with the 5.1 trailers how differently the surrounds sounded, with sound just 'coming from the side' as opposed to the pinpoint precision during the Atmos movie.

All in a all, a good first time for me.

And I thought the movie was pretty good too.
kbarnes701 is online now  
post #2337 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 10:50 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 25,101
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1208 Post(s)
Liked: 1613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davefromuk View Post
Hi,

I've been following the thread with great interest having recently invested in a 11.1 setup but I'm not quite as confident as some around the scope of utilising front heights in conjunction with Atmos on the 5200w or indeed any other receiver.

Page 205 lists the Amp Assign settings with 11.1 and Dolby Atmos listed separately with references to pages 208 and 219 respectively. I think the fact that they are listed separately could be significant.

The page 208 11.1 configuration describes a front height and top middle combination sure, but the page 219 which is the Dolby Atmos page still only refers to combinations of top front and top rear or top middle.

I can't see anything which says front heights can be used with Atmos.

Am I just bring paranoid ?
You found Keith's post but the better reference is the more detailed discussion a few pages earlier where PoshFrosh and myself were analyzing the Denon model.

A key piece you missed is the chart on pg 287 - the "relationship between surround modes and channel output" chart is always one of the pithiest in Denon manuals if you really want to know what the options are. On this chart it's explicit that Dolby Atmos (the surround mode) can make sound in ANY of the possible speaker positions.

Initially, there were some sneak previews of certain pages from the Denon X5200W manual which showed the "Dolby Atmos" amp assign option and this caused us to reach a similar conclusion as you did -- that in order to use Dolby Atmos, you HAD to use the special "Dolby Atmos" amp assign mode and this "locked in" the speaker positions to one of the four standard Atmos layouts (5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.2., 7.1.4) with "tops" required by necessity.

However, the full manual makes it clear this is not so. In addition to the chart on pg 287, note that one of the options in 11.1 amp assign mode (pg 208) is "Using Dolby Speakers" and then there are sub options for telling the receiver which channels are using reflected Atmos enabled speakers. If you want to use Atmos with reflected up-firing speakers you HAVE TO use something other than the "Dolby Atmos" amp assign mode. This, together with the other clues, implies unequivocally that Atmos surround mode is available even when you aren't using "Dolby Atmos" amp assign mode.

With this new info, I think the correct interpretation is that "Dolby Atmos" amp assign mode is for use when you have an "ideal" Atmos setup. If you don't care about "legacy" upmixing like Neo:X or DSX or non-standard speaker locations like wides or heights, you just put the receiver in "Dolby Atmos" mode, pick which of the four layouts you are using, and you call it a day. This saves time for you (not having to configure a bunch of extra sub-menu options) and also probably makes Audyssey calibration run more quickly since it doesn't even try to measure speakers that aren't going to be there. You just say "I'm using Dolby Atmos mode in 7.1.2 config" and you are locked and loaded.

If you are doing something outside of the "ideal" (i.e. trying to incorporate front wides, trying to use Atmos-enabled elevation speakers, trying to maintain support for Front Height speakers so you can still use Neo:X, etc) then you select a different Amp Assing mode and spend extra time customizing the sub-menu options.

So in short I think the paranoia is unfounded. If you have an existing pair of Front Height speakers and you don't want to relocate them, and just want to add a pair of in-ceilings and then use a x.x.4 Atmos layout, you will be fine.

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is online now  
post #2338 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 11:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,047
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus767 View Post
Guess that's not the same processor Swiss guy is talking about in this video?
http://www.illusonic.com/iap-16/movie/
That is indeed one in the same. Why not?

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 offline  
post #2339 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,047
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoshFrosh View Post
I've attached a plan for my top speakers for Atmos / Dolby Surround. They will be on-ceiling mounted mini-bookshelf speakers. I have three questions:
  1. Does the placement look good? (they will all be 45 degrees elevation to the MLP)
  2. Should I aim the top speakers directly at the ground, or toe them in to aim at the MLP? (like all the other speakers)
Placement and elevation angles look very good to me. I plan to aim them toward the MLP (slightly behind as there are two rows of seats), so yes, at the MLP is my vote.
PoshFrosh 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 offline  
post #2340 of 16490 Old 07-28-2014, 11:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I always wondered why exhibitors haven't combined forces en masse and strong-armed Hollywood to back off their front loading scheme. It's a studio con game that has theater owners sucking air during the most profitable time of a movie's "life" and a big reason why concessions are so damned expensive. No wonder some can't keep up with the maintenance of their auditoriums, pay their know-nothing employees minimum wage, and only have one or two premium houses in their complexes. The studios don't care about the film surviving in the theater long enough for the theaters to get a higher profit from ticket sales... they have home video to look forward to.

The whole thing is messed up and also help perpetuate making movies with throw-away stories rather than long-term classics with staying power. It reminds me of our broken governmental institutions.
Seriously. Really?

And the payoff is never certain: Some observers contend that a generation has already been trained to be content with the small screen.
CinemaAndy 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