Beyond 7.1.4... Multi-AVR set-up for Immersive Audio - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 224Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 03:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rontalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,082
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 720 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by krholmberg View Post
Using an Atmos enabled AVR with 9 internal amps and having it configured to do 9.2.2 (7.1 + WR/WL and TCR/TCL), one only needs one additional AVR to matrix the ceiling speakers to TFL/TFR, TML/TMR and TRL/TRR + the center channel as the VOG. That would keep all ear level channels discrete and the less critical ceiling speakers as matrixed. Very interesting indeed.

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by asarose247 View Post
^

as Josh Z patiently posted for clarity

got a wiring picture for simplicity

my old 818 is lookiing like a go to unit for this tops matrixing
OK, Although I did not have a VOG to fully test this, I can offer my findings never-the-less.

Critical Listen
Helicopter: the fly around the room effect did not work. I would not have expected it to with only 2 channels of information trying to hit 4 corners. Sorta flew from one side to another jumping sporadically at the corners.

Audiosphere: The Bells were kinda diffused and the synth was just...not prevalent.

747 Flyover: Fail

Casual Listening
Amaze, Encounter, Horizon, Shattered and anything else I listed too sounded...Pretty Darn Good!!!

Much better than .2! So those who have a .2 setup will definitely benefit from this method.

Compared to native .4, with .4 being a 10, I would give this method a strong 7.
Marc Alexander and krholmberg like this.

My Media Room
AVR 1-Yamaha RX-A3050 (7.2 Bed), AVR 2 Pioneer VSX-815-K(Used for 4ch Amp TF+TR)
Mains-Polk Audio RTi8, Center-Polk Audio CSi5, Surrounds-Polk Audio RTi4 Monitor Series II, Ceilings-Micca M-8C, Sub 1-Klipsch RW12D, Sub 2-MTX SW2
Projector-Optoma HD33 DLP 3D, Screen-Da-Lite 100" Model B, TV-Insignia 65" LCD 1080p (NS-65D550NA15)
rontalley is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 03:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rontalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,082
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 720 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
I've been wrapping my head around this, and I think most of it is workable. I do worry, however about the FH and RH channels. Are we reasonably certain they will get correct information from the matrix? That's the only thing I'm really unsure of.

The heights speakers are getting the surround channels. This means they are getting information that normally is out of phase and is steered toward a channel based on other sound directional cues in the mix. The basic surround signal is mono. I don't want to bore people with basic analogue surround sound theory but basically, a left and right channel can be seen as 4 channels: Left Channel Left+Right Channel (Center) Right Channel and Left-Right Channel (Surrounds). The Surround is a mono channel that is played through two speakers. The sound is directed by PLII toward one of the two channels based on cues in the source. Will this work to give a correct FH and RH?
I sorta, test the theory by just using my current floor configuration. I disabled the rear surrounds, put the AVR in PLII processing and played some stereo sounds that had panning in them...very hard to find!

F/C/R all played correct. This would be TF/TM/TR.

LS and RS surround sorta played ambient stuff and not really expanding much of the pan. So no, you will not get a smooth pan from RH-TR-TM-TF-FH but you will get a smooth pan from TF-TM-TR with ambient stuff playing out of the other two speakers that are relevant to that side.

But like you said, Left and Right channels have many common sounds. TF and TR might not have so many common sounds but anything that is directed at TM will play out of Center. RH and FH might not get that much action.

Have to test it correctly.

My Media Room
AVR 1-Yamaha RX-A3050 (7.2 Bed), AVR 2 Pioneer VSX-815-K(Used for 4ch Amp TF+TR)
Mains-Polk Audio RTi8, Center-Polk Audio CSi5, Surrounds-Polk Audio RTi4 Monitor Series II, Ceilings-Micca M-8C, Sub 1-Klipsch RW12D, Sub 2-MTX SW2
Projector-Optoma HD33 DLP 3D, Screen-Da-Lite 100" Model B, TV-Insignia 65" LCD 1080p (NS-65D550NA15)
rontalley is offline  
post #63 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 03:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
billqs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by rontalley View Post
I sorta, test the theory by just using my current floor configuration. I disabled the rear surrounds, put the AVR in PLII processing and played some stereo sounds that had panning in them...very hard to find!

F/C/R all played correct. This would be TF/TM/TR.

LS and RS surround sorta played ambient stuff and not really expanding much of the pan. So no, you will not get a smooth pan from RH-TR-TM-TF-FH but you will get a smooth pan from TF-TM-TR with ambient stuff playing out of the other two speakers that are relevant to that side.

But like you said, Left and Right channels have many common sounds. TF and TR might not have so many common sounds but anything that is directed at TM will play out of Center. RH and FH might not get that much action.

Have to test it correctly.
I wonder if keeping the parts that do work really well with your idea, the TF TM TR, and maybe daisy chaining the FH to TF and RH to TR would work better. You'd get a good all around the room from corner to corner and get panning where it really matters.

JVC RS500, Denon 7200WA, 7.2.4 Atmos/DTSX dedicated Theater. 133" Dalite 1.3 screen. M&K S150 + K7 ear level, 4 Tannoy DC overheads.
billqs is offline  
 
post #64 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 03:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rontalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,082
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 720 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
I wonder if keeping the parts that do work really well with your idea, the TF TM TR, and maybe daisy chaining the FH to TF and RH to TR would work better. You'd get a good all around the room from corner to corner and get panning where it really matters.
Explain daisy chaining.

My Media Room
AVR 1-Yamaha RX-A3050 (7.2 Bed), AVR 2 Pioneer VSX-815-K(Used for 4ch Amp TF+TR)
Mains-Polk Audio RTi8, Center-Polk Audio CSi5, Surrounds-Polk Audio RTi4 Monitor Series II, Ceilings-Micca M-8C, Sub 1-Klipsch RW12D, Sub 2-MTX SW2
Projector-Optoma HD33 DLP 3D, Screen-Da-Lite 100" Model B, TV-Insignia 65" LCD 1080p (NS-65D550NA15)
rontalley is offline  
post #65 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 04:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aaranddeeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lover's State
Posts: 3,823
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1703 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by rontalley View Post
Explain daisy chaining.
He's just copying TF to FH and TR to RH.
aaranddeeman is offline  
post #66 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 04:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rontalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,082
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 720 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Oh, how long of a room are we talking about? I would be afraid that having 2 speakers playing the same information would cause comb filtering, unless a small delay is introduced.

2 sets of overheads can easily cover 10 feet without the need of a TM. Expanding further than that then the matrix TM can fill in the gap to a span of 15 feet. This accommodates 2 rows of seating easily.

Going three rows, I can see how this would be beneficial.

My Media Room
AVR 1-Yamaha RX-A3050 (7.2 Bed), AVR 2 Pioneer VSX-815-K(Used for 4ch Amp TF+TR)
Mains-Polk Audio RTi8, Center-Polk Audio CSi5, Surrounds-Polk Audio RTi4 Monitor Series II, Ceilings-Micca M-8C, Sub 1-Klipsch RW12D, Sub 2-MTX SW2
Projector-Optoma HD33 DLP 3D, Screen-Da-Lite 100" Model B, TV-Insignia 65" LCD 1080p (NS-65D550NA15)
rontalley is offline  
post #67 of 1099 Old 02-10-2016, 05:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
billqs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaranddeeman View Post
He's just copying TF to FH and TR to RH.
Yeah, I was referring to copying the channels, although that's my least favorite option. My room is 22 feet long, so it might be a possibility, though of course I'd prefer to have them be active. It could work like an array and possibly provide better results for my front row of seats and the (as yet unrealized) bar at the rear of the room.

JVC RS500, Denon 7200WA, 7.2.4 Atmos/DTSX dedicated Theater. 133" Dalite 1.3 screen. M&K S150 + K7 ear level, 4 Tannoy DC overheads.
billqs is offline  
post #68 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:32 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ALtlOff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St. Louis Mo "ish"
Posts: 2,911
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaGamePimp View Post
Can you share the ebay link for $28 each, I did not see a US based seller for that price?


Thank you,
Jason
http://m.ebay.com/itm/SPDIF-Coaxial-...015?nav=SEARCH

*Warning* None of my suggestions, ideas or even thoughts have any WAF, in any way!
My Build Thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-gen...formation.html
ALtlOff is offline  
post #69 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 02:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ALtlOff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St. Louis Mo "ish"
Posts: 2,911
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked: 616
Soooo, since my decoder boxes are on the way, I've been thinking about connections, wondering what "should" work best to get the proper center imaging while retaining the integrity of the 2 input signals.

For the sake of simplicity, and to lessen confusion, One Box/Side only.

Option A:
Analog stereo input = TF/TR signal
Output = L/C/R to TF/TM/TR speakers/amp
or
Option B:
Split the TF/TR signal for the input, One side to TF/TR speakers/amp, the other side to the Analog Stereo Input.
Output = C to TM speaker/amp only.

While option A is simpler and sounds right, I'm wondering about the integrity of the original TF/TR signal since the decoder box/chip is actually creating 5.1 and not 3.1.

Thoughts?

*Warning* None of my suggestions, ideas or even thoughts have any WAF, in any way!
My Build Thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-gen...formation.html

Last edited by ALtlOff; 02-11-2016 at 02:54 AM.
ALtlOff is offline  
post #70 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 03:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,525
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 804 Post(s)
Liked: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALtlOff View Post
Soooo, since my decoder boxes are on the way, I've been thinking about connections, wondering what "should" work best to get the proper center imaging while retaining the integrity of the 2 input signals.

For the sake of simplicity, and to lessen confusion, One Box/Side only.

Option A:
Analog stereo input = TF/TR signal
Output = L/C/R to TF/TM/TR speakers/amp
or
Option B:
Split the TF/TR signal for the input, One side to TF/TR speakers/amp, the other side to the Analog Stereo Input.
Output = C to TM speaker/amp only.

While option A is simpler and sounds right, I'm wondering about the integrity of the original TF/TR signal since the decoder box/chip is actually creating 5.1 and not 3.1.

Thoughts?
Just using the 3.0 out of the PLII 5.1 won't cause any trouble as nothing is removed from L or R in the process (unfortunately).

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room

Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Pioneer KRP-600a, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is offline  
post #71 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 03:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ALtlOff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St. Louis Mo "ish"
Posts: 2,911
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
Just using the 3.0 out of the PLII 5.1 won't cause any trouble as nothing is removed from L or R in the process (unfortunately).
I guess that was the real question, didn't know if there might be some extraction going on for the unused surround channels, that would then be lost.

Thanks

*Warning* None of my suggestions, ideas or even thoughts have any WAF, in any way!
My Build Thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-gen...formation.html
ALtlOff is offline  
post #72 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 05:41 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 16,045
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 449 Post(s)
Liked: 501
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALtlOff View Post

Thanks again, be sure to let us know how it goes with that seller, some questionable feedback within the last 6 months.


Also it appears that might be the model that requires mini-jack to rca cables for the analog output (same as the AUX input would need).





Best of luck,
Jason

HT = JVC RS40 / Lumagen Radiance / Vivitek 1186 /@133" / Denon x5200 7.3.4 Atmos / B&K 5000 II amp / Boston VR2/VR12/CR67 speakers / Rythmik 12" subs x2 / CV 15" sub / Sony BDP s1000ES / Yamaha DV-S5860 / Toshiba HD-A3 / PureAV PF31
Media Room = Samsung 65KS8000 / Denon x3300 / Klipsch speakers / Velodyne subs / Samsung K8500 / PS4 Pro + PSVR / WiiU / PS3 / 360 / Wii / 1080 TI - i7 game PC / Multi-Arcade / My HT SLIDESHOW

Last edited by DaGamePimp; 02-12-2016 at 03:39 PM.
DaGamePimp is offline  
post #73 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 05:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ALtlOff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St. Louis Mo "ish"
Posts: 2,911
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked: 616
Both of the CA vendors that had them at that price had about the same ratting, figured for $57, couldn't be much worse than ordering from China.

Yes, it appears to be that model, since I'll be in it to do surgery to get rid of the frequency limiting, I may just swap the 3.5 connectors out for RCA's, esp. since I'll only be using 3 outputs anyway.

We'll see.

*Warning* None of my suggestions, ideas or even thoughts have any WAF, in any way!
My Build Thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-gen...formation.html

Last edited by ALtlOff; 02-11-2016 at 06:11 AM.
ALtlOff is offline  
post #74 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 08:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
billqs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Do we have anymore feedback on Josh Z's Zatmos? Or Scott's Scatmos? I'm intrigued by Josh's VOG configuration directly over the seats as I notice a "hole" there in processing sound myself. Do others see the same?

JVC RS500, Denon 7200WA, 7.2.4 Atmos/DTSX dedicated Theater. 133" Dalite 1.3 screen. M&K S150 + K7 ear level, 4 Tannoy DC overheads.
billqs is offline  
post #75 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 10:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
asarose247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DIY enabled in SoCal / OC
Posts: 3,180
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked: 644
GEEEEEESSSHH!
@rontalley :2 sets of overheads can easily cover 10 feet without the need of a TM.

while all of this this is almost too much, there's some wisdom is "softly, softly catchee monkey" and "less might be more" (blasphemy!?!)

anyway it took me a bit of plundering of current resources to put up (matching paint, of course) these SLX's as TM, not yet wired up

wrt ron's statement, FTR my tops are 7' CTC front to rear and side to side. the Volt 6's replaced the SLX set and as of yet have been heard by other ears and I welcome any locals ,mol, to make it a point to show up. I have some ATMOS BD's.

so these TM's measure about 42" CTC spacing wrt TF and TR.

The down angle is pretty much a cross fire wrt MLP but that's wiggle room for improvement.

It's kinda hot to be in the attic wrt wiring but in sending out a big K.I.S.S., to the Scatmos process, I'll be using an Onkyo 260 and the 818 for the time being.

The angle lumber hanging up there is for 6" Roxul clouds for each speaker, another work in progress . .

as the pics show, Yep! , that's 'nother speaker up there.

keep it coming . . .
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Scatmos before.jpg
Views:	192
Size:	144.9 KB
ID:	1246337   Click image for larger version

Name:	Scatmos after.jpg
Views:	181
Size:	142.2 KB
ID:	1246345  
billqs likes this.

DIY FAN Denon X5200 , ATI A 2000 for 7.4.6 SCATMOS/DSU Sammy 82" 4K/HDR
L/R: Fusion 15 V2 , C: 88 Special , SL/SR: 88 Special(V2) , RL/RR: F-3, TF/TR: Volt 6's TM: SLX, FH: F4Q4
SUBMAXIMUS, ,Submaximus V3,LOWARHORNCustom Dual Driver VBSS,2 x 6000DSP
www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/1485120-submaximus-large-front-loaded-horn
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...orn-build.html
asarose247 is offline  
post #76 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 11:22 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
asarose247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DIY enabled in SoCal / OC
Posts: 3,180
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked: 644
1 more pic, front to rear shot

shows alignment and angles,

I will say that currently as a smaller .4 ATMOS/DSU set-up, kinda tough to nitpick it,

but its an experimental area, hence the adaptability of the trestles,. without ceiling holes, 0 WAF helps

I'm just glad I had managed to acquire so much Unistrut items, over time, looking on Amazon or EBay, stuff is costly
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Scatmos front to rear.jpg
Views:	159
Size:	165.4 KB
ID:	1246417  

DIY FAN Denon X5200 , ATI A 2000 for 7.4.6 SCATMOS/DSU Sammy 82" 4K/HDR
L/R: Fusion 15 V2 , C: 88 Special , SL/SR: 88 Special(V2) , RL/RR: F-3, TF/TR: Volt 6's TM: SLX, FH: F4Q4
SUBMAXIMUS, ,Submaximus V3,LOWARHORNCustom Dual Driver VBSS,2 x 6000DSP
www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/1485120-submaximus-large-front-loaded-horn
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...orn-build.html
asarose247 is offline  
post #77 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 11:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rontalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,082
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 720 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by asarose247 View Post
GEEEEEESSSHH!
@rontalley :2 sets of overheads can easily cover 10 feet without the need of a TM.

while all of this this is almost too much, there's some wisdom is "softly, softly catchee monkey" and "less might be more" (blasphemy!?!)

anyway it took me a bit of plundering of current resources to put up (matching paint, of course) these SLX's as TM, not yet wired up

wrt ron's statement, FTR my tops are 7' CTC front to rear and side to side. the Volt 6's replaced the SLX set and as of yet have been heard by other ears and I welcome any locals ,mol, to make it a point to show up. I have some ATMOS BD's.

so these TM's measure about 42" CTC spacing wrt TF and TR.

The down angle is pretty much a cross fire wrt MLP but that's wiggle room for improvement.

It's kinda hot to be in the attic wrt wiring but in sending out a big K.I.S.S., to the Scatmos process, I'll be using an Onkyo 260 and the 818 for the time being.

The angle lumber hanging up there is for 6" Roxul clouds for each speaker, another work in progress . .

as the pics show, Yep! , that's 'nother speaker up there.

keep it coming . . .
wrt=?

Don't know if I am in the hot seat or not.


My statement was more in regards to "daisy-chaining" two sets of fronts and/or rears. Want to put a TM and your spread is only 8'? Why not!

My spread from Front to Back is about 7'6" CTC and from Right to Left is about 9'6". My MLP is about 1'8" back from Center. I actually would like to spread my Front and Rear out further as I believe they are too close as it is. My Side to Side is pretty much ideal. I think they would have been better if they were at 9' exactly.

I am going to put a "True" VOG right over MLP and that should plug any hole that I may have when listening outside of MLP.

My Media Room
AVR 1-Yamaha RX-A3050 (7.2 Bed), AVR 2 Pioneer VSX-815-K(Used for 4ch Amp TF+TR)
Mains-Polk Audio RTi8, Center-Polk Audio CSi5, Surrounds-Polk Audio RTi4 Monitor Series II, Ceilings-Micca M-8C, Sub 1-Klipsch RW12D, Sub 2-MTX SW2
Projector-Optoma HD33 DLP 3D, Screen-Da-Lite 100" Model B, TV-Insignia 65" LCD 1080p (NS-65D550NA15)
rontalley is offline  
post #78 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rontalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,082
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 720 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
Do we have anymore feedback on Josh Z's Zatmos? Or Scott's Scatmos? I'm intrigued by Josh's VOG configuration directly over the seats as I notice a "hole" there in processing sound myself. Do others see the same?
I checked out Zatmos and believe it to be an improvement in two situations:

You only have a .2 Atmos process. Expanding this way to .3(+2) will give more dimension to overhead in Top Rears and give a true VOG.

You don't want to avoid using three AVRs to do Scatmos.

Now, if Zatmos was extended to two AVRs then it has the potential to be the best of them all! TF would be 3 speakers across the front and then two extended more toward the Front Stage for FH. Same thing for TR.

FH * *

TF * * *

MLP

TR * * *

RH * *

IMHO, TM+anything already shrinks the Front to Back image by +/- 50% vs a true TF+TR. I believe that it is theoretically proven, mathematically proven and audibly proven. Some might disagree. So the Zatmos approach, does expand the TM but not as good as it would be if using 2 AVRs and true TF and TR.

I will be doing a #5 dice

Did you check out my proposed and now ordered VOG config? For ceiling, I believe that this is going to do it for me until I upgrade my subs. I will do 9.4.6 when I buy my next home.

My Media Room
AVR 1-Yamaha RX-A3050 (7.2 Bed), AVR 2 Pioneer VSX-815-K(Used for 4ch Amp TF+TR)
Mains-Polk Audio RTi8, Center-Polk Audio CSi5, Surrounds-Polk Audio RTi4 Monitor Series II, Ceilings-Micca M-8C, Sub 1-Klipsch RW12D, Sub 2-MTX SW2
Projector-Optoma HD33 DLP 3D, Screen-Da-Lite 100" Model B, TV-Insignia 65" LCD 1080p (NS-65D550NA15)

Last edited by rontalley; 02-11-2016 at 01:08 PM.
rontalley is offline  
post #79 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 22,743
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2474 Post(s)
Liked: 1627
Quote:
Originally Posted by asarose247 View Post
sort of a follow up revelation;

a denon X2000 set to PLIIz mode will also generate and amp a set of FH's

and then follow your above hook up and get 9.x.8

and on sale at A4less @ only $350.

awesome
Are you talking about using the X2000 as your main receiver or the secondary receiver? Either way, I don't see how this would work.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #80 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:22 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 22,743
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2474 Post(s)
Liked: 1627
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
Do we have anymore feedback on Josh Z's Zatmos? Or Scott's Scatmos? I'm intrigued by Josh's VOG configuration directly over the seats as I notice a "hole" there in processing sound myself. Do others see the same?
Since writing that article, I have changed my wiring and no longer have a matrixed VOG channel. Instead, I wired each of my two VOG speakers to be a clone of the TM speaker to its side (one clones TML and one clones TMR).

In general, this gives me more noticeable sound directly over my head. However, I'm undecided on whether it's actually better than the previous setup or not. I may change it back.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #81 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:24 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 22,743
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2474 Post(s)
Liked: 1627
Quote:
Originally Posted by rontalley View Post
IMHO, TM+anything already shrinks the Front to Back image by +/- 50% vs a true TF+TR. I believe that it is theoretically proven, mathematically proven and audibly proven. Some might disagree. So the Zatmos approach, does expand the TM but not as good as it would be if using 2 AVRs and true TF and TR.
I have tested switching the setup in my primary AVR from TM to TR and heard no audible difference. YMMV.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #82 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:30 PM
Member
 
Superslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Your all nuts
pjvader and Justin Walker like this.
Superslim is offline  
post #83 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 12:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
asarose247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DIY enabled in SoCal / OC
Posts: 3,180
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked: 644
^
Pretty much many of us knew this going in but we've adapted well to living with denial . . .

ALL YOU'RE NUT ARE BELONG TO US!
sdurani likes this.

DIY FAN Denon X5200 , ATI A 2000 for 7.4.6 SCATMOS/DSU Sammy 82" 4K/HDR
L/R: Fusion 15 V2 , C: 88 Special , SL/SR: 88 Special(V2) , RL/RR: F-3, TF/TR: Volt 6's TM: SLX, FH: F4Q4
SUBMAXIMUS, ,Submaximus V3,LOWARHORNCustom Dual Driver VBSS,2 x 6000DSP
www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/1485120-submaximus-large-front-loaded-horn
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...orn-build.html
asarose247 is offline  
post #84 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 01:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
billqs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
Since writing that article, I have changed my wiring and no longer have a matrixed VOG channel. Instead, I wired each of my two VOG speakers to be a clone of the TM speaker to its side (one clones TML and one clones TMR).

In general, this gives me more noticeable sound directly over my head. However, I'm undecided on whether it's actually better than the previous setup or not. I may change it back.
So you're not using the C channel on your 2nd AVR for VOG? Are you using the remainder of the outputs and just double wiring the mids so they each go to 2 speakers?

JVC RS500, Denon 7200WA, 7.2.4 Atmos/DTSX dedicated Theater. 133" Dalite 1.3 screen. M&K S150 + K7 ear level, 4 Tannoy DC overheads.
billqs is offline  
post #85 of 1099 Old 02-11-2016, 02:01 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 22,743
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2474 Post(s)
Liked: 1627
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
So you're not using the C channel on your 2nd AVR for VOG?
Not at the moment, no.

Quote:
Are you using the remainder of the outputs and just double wiring the mids so they each go to 2 speakers?
Correct.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #86 of 1099 Old 02-12-2016, 03:28 PM
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 21,499
Mentioned: 185 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5972 Post(s)
Liked: 5036
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
Has anyone tried the Atmos 9.1.6 test tones from the September Demo with any of these setups? Would be interesting to hear the result.
Yes. For x.x.6 the Atmos-EX method works and you get clear front, middle and rear height separation.

Can't test the wides because Yamaha doesn't support wides and the tone for the wide "snaps" to the front left and right speakers.
Scott Simonian is offline  
post #87 of 1099 Old 02-12-2016, 03:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
asarose247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DIY enabled in SoCal / OC
Posts: 3,180
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 838 Post(s)
Liked: 644
^

Yes. For x.x.6 the Atmos-EX method works and you get clear front, middle and rear height separation.

in my sights

Could it be there is a subliminal Maidenform commercial parsed into that statement?

DIY FAN Denon X5200 , ATI A 2000 for 7.4.6 SCATMOS/DSU Sammy 82" 4K/HDR
L/R: Fusion 15 V2 , C: 88 Special , SL/SR: 88 Special(V2) , RL/RR: F-3, TF/TR: Volt 6's TM: SLX, FH: F4Q4
SUBMAXIMUS, ,Submaximus V3,LOWARHORNCustom Dual Driver VBSS,2 x 6000DSP
www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/1485120-submaximus-large-front-loaded-horn
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...orn-build.html
asarose247 is offline  
post #88 of 1099 Old 02-12-2016, 05:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aaranddeeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lover's State
Posts: 3,823
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1703 Post(s)
Liked: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post
Yes. For x.x.6 the Atmos-EX method works and you get clear front, middle and rear height separation.

Can't test the wides because Yamaha doesn't support wides and the tone for the wide "snaps" to the front left and right speakers.
I have wides and IIRC the wide test tone plays from the wide. But I can check and confirm later.
aaranddeeman is offline  
post #89 of 1099 Old 02-14-2016, 09:13 AM
Dyx
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 0
7.2.6 with ancient analog passive surround box ?

Since I am also not satisfied with max 7.2.4 I thought I will try a different approach since I own a very old analog power-surround-processor. This processor has 4 speaker in and 4 speaker out. I bought it someway around 1995 in Germany directly from a developer-engineer who was at that time exlusively developing a surround system for a major brand, which was able to to create from TL and TR also SL and SR and was attached directly to the speakers. I remember that time, this system was maybe 10 years in advance of its time. This engineer waos of course not allowed to sell his system to anybody, but in clever way he made a small black box and advertised it in newspaper "buy/sell audio". I remember how astonished I was when I heard the DEMO at that time from LASERDISC in his house and after that it was NOT possible to decide not to buy it. At that time even movie theaters were NOT able to create such natural spacial impression like this small box did !!! I remember using this ADD-ON surround box (which is analog and passive with no need for powering) more than 10 years very often for analog satelite Scifi movies (Babylon, Star Trek, etc.etc.) since the first surround system comparable by quality was Dolby Digital Surround Sound.
For nostalgic reasons I have still kept it in my garage even in the age of now Atmos, DTS and Auro 3D.
Since I have now 7.1.4 using most time DSU anyway (FTR and FTL and RHL and RHR) and I am little bit missing sound above my head, after reading about ZATMOS and ScATMOS I got following idea:

Since the "ancients-surround-box" was able to derive and create very natural spacial impression from virtually and stereo signal, why not to attach it and split signal either from the TOP left and TOP right or from the surround high Left and Surround High right and put another pair of speakers on right and left side of my head? I have no top middle speakers at the moment and also nowhere to attach them.
My question to more experienced experimentators (like ZATMOS and ScATMOS users) would it be better to derive the Top Middle R and L from the surround high L and R or would it be better to derive it from Front Top L and R ?

thx in advance for your ideas, recomendations and hints

P.S: the surround box has only one button min - max you can screw how much the surround effect for your both rear surround speakers you like (loudness)
Dyx is offline  
post #90 of 1099 Old 02-14-2016, 11:36 AM
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 21,499
Mentioned: 185 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5972 Post(s)
Liked: 5036
Hey guys...

I just had a thought while redoing everything while adding a Yamaha 5100 to my system.


This is important for anyone attempting x.x.6 Atmos-EX


In order for the center extraction to work flawlessly you must set the distance/delay for each respective front/rear pair to be identical.




If you have the Dolby Atmos 9.1.6 layout test tones, I HIGHLY suggest you use them to make sure of this correct processing.

Suggest using the furthest distance as the one. If your front heights are 10ft away but your rear heights are 8ft away, use the 10ft one. Or whatever really but the important part is that they are the same. 10ft for the front, 10ft for the rear pair. In this example stated, the number itself was arbitrary. Also, since the left and right side of the room are on different receivers it's okay if one side is a different distance. Just as long as that sides front and rear are the same distance/delay. Left and right are independent from one another.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aaranddeeman View Post
Please see my signature for wiring schematic for the x.x.6 setup that is based on Scott's idea.

My external AVRs are very basic (Denon 1603 and Denon 1803). They do not have any room EQ.
So here's what I have done for level matching the heights

1. Using internal test tones of the AVR, set the LCR levels to 75db.
2. Add of 3 dB to the center. This is to compensate as the extracted center will be bit weaker than the main (height) speakers.
3. Now run Audyssey from main AVR and leaving external AVRs in PL-II mode. Make sure to set the MV on external AVRs to 0.
4. You will see that Audyssey sets fairly long distances (about 22 feet vs actually 6-7 feet) to factor in the delay.
5. Don't alter the distances what Audyssey sets.
6. If you have access to 9.1.6 test tones, when the tones reach the TM, it sounds exactly +3db of other speakers. (e.g. at MV=0 all speakers will be at 85dB while the TM will be 88dB)
I HIGHLY suggest editing this line. What you want to do is make sure that each respective side front and rear distance are identical to one another. If Audyssey sets the front and rear speakers different, change it immediately.


@rontalley

That was an excellent write up and jives with my own experience with Atmos-EX 7.1.6 sound. Critical listening to some Dolby demo disk reveals some limitations of this arrangement. You can improve from there though. But still, demos like the helicopter a really rough. Sounds bad. The 747 I thought sounds better when processing with MUSIC mode, oddly enough. Including some others. I highly recommend you test with MUSIC mode if you find MOVIE mode doesn't sound well enough.

Actual movie watching OTOH sounds really good with a great sense of front, back and direct overhead imaging.

Last edited by Scott Simonian; 02-14-2016 at 11:56 AM.
Scott Simonian is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
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