Surround Sound - How many speakers needed? - Page 13 - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: How many speakers do you think are needed for home surround sound?
5.1 - L,C,R,LS,RS - SUB 0 0%
7.1 - L,C,R,LS,RS,LR,RR - SUB 0 0%
9.1 - L,C,R,LS1,RS1,LS2,RS2,LR,RR - SUB 0 0%
11.1 - L,C,R,LW,RW,LH,RH,LS,RS,LR,RR - SUB 0 0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 494 Old 08-15-2010, 03:31 PM
Member
 
henry33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tigard OR
Posts: 97
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You are unfortunately lumping all Ambisonics into the matrixed solution (the only way to get it when limited to two channels) of UHJ. All the other versions of Ambisonics - 3 and 4 channels - are NOT matrixed.
henry33 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 494 Old 08-15-2010, 03:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 142
But are there commercially released recordings using Ambisonics that have discrete channels and are not matrixed? That's news to me.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #363 of 494 Old 08-15-2010, 04:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
Dougofthenorth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa Ontario Canada
Posts: 597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 41
RE: "Don't believe I've seen any references to Ambisonics in this forum."

Roger, Sanjay, myself & others were discussing this & other forms in a thread back around January 2003. Perhaps it was there that Ambisonics was referenced, that had the "infinite number of speakers..." comment.

RE: "SQ & QS (remember those?)."
Back in the day of Dynaco & the Hafler circuit which didn't need any special turntable or records.
- I loved the sound for many years until DD surround came to the forefront.

------------------------
Regards,

Dougofthenorth

Save turtles:
http://www.turtleshelltortue.org
Dougofthenorth is offline  
post #364 of 494 Old 08-18-2010, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Agreed.

How many is necessary? As many as the director inteded based on the theatrical presentation. So far, there is only ONE movie that is intended to be 7.1, which is Toy Story 3.

How many is wanted? You can go up to 11.4 with various matrix and bass management system if you want to.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #365 of 494 Old 08-18-2010, 10:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jeremy Anderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 1,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

So far, there is only ONE movie that is intended to be 7.1, which is Toy Story 3.

Yes, but 7.1 in the home is meant to address psychoacoustic reversal issues caused by single point sources placed directly behind the head in close proximity in a 6.1 setup... and there are a ton of movies mixed for 5.1 EX, even if they aren't flagged as such. 7.1 is the only way to properly reproduce a 5.1 EX mix in a home theater space, which is why Dolby recommends using DPL-IIx to process EX material in 7.1 setups.

My point here is that there's a difference between theatrical and home theater spaces, and the number of speakers required to achieve the same effect in the home. With the surround arrays in a 5.1 EX theater, the only way you can recreate that at home is with 4 surrounds. Strict 5.1 in the home would depend on phantom imaging of in-phase/equal level audio in the surrounds so that it resolves behind you, which tends to come across the same way headphones image - IN YOUR HEAD. 6.1 somewhat addresses this, but having a single point source that close behind you can trick your ears into making it seem like it's coming from in front of you. DPL-IIx Music Mode addresses this somewhat on a 6.1 system by leaving the in-phase surround in the side surrounds at a greater volume so that the three speakers act as a rear array (i.e. one speaker playing behind you plus phantom imaging at a lower level from the sides). 7.1 addresses this more directly in a home space - by placing two speakers behind you so that there's no psychoacoustic reversal, then ensuring that more than one surround is always playing audio steered to the rear (albeit in varying levels, which allows for precise placement).

So even though there may only be one theatrical 7.1 mix, that doesn't mean there's not a ton of material for 7.1 playback in the home, because the two spaces have different requirements for proper imaging.

(Don't even get me started on how DPL-IIz height helps recreate the ambient sounds typically mixed out of phase in the side surrounds as if they were coming from a large side to rear array with lots of space above you. That's a whole other discussion! )

"Never believe any quote you read on the internet." - Abraham Lincoln
Jeremy Anderson is offline  
post #366 of 494 Old 08-19-2010, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Anderson View Post

Strict 5.1 in the home would depend on phantom imaging of in-phase/equal level audio in the surrounds so that it resolves behind you, which tends to come across the same way headphones image - IN YOUR HEAD.

Only if you put the RL and RR speakers next to your ears... which is NOT supposed to be. It's supposed to be about 120 degrees left and right from the centre channel.

Not ONCE I've ever experience the "in-you-head" sound experience.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #367 of 494 Old 08-19-2010, 01:43 PM
Newbie
 
matin.leese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

But are there commercially released recordings using Ambisonics that have discrete channels and are not matrixed? That's news to me.

Don't know of any commercial recordings, but if you want to hear discrete Ambisonics then there are over 200 pieces available for free download from Ambisonia.com. Almost all of these recordings are full-sphere. They can be downloaded as either B-Format files (which require a decoder in your listening room) or as DTS file images. The DTS versions are pre-decoded for four speakers arranged in a square. This has the advantage of not requiring a decoder, but are horizontal-only and lose the possibility of full-sphere. Details of ad-hoc software decoders are available in the Ambisonia.com Wiki.

Note that the nine commercial DVD releases from Nimbus Records were produced from UHJ masters, so are not really discrete. Although Nimbus recorded in B-Format, they only archived the two-channel UHJ. (There is a moral, here.) Anyway, details of the DVD releases are available on the Nimbus website.

Regards,
Martin
matin.leese is offline  
post #368 of 494 Old 08-19-2010, 04:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jeremy Anderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 1,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Only if you put the RL and RR speakers next to your ears... which is NOT supposed to be. It's supposed to be about 120 degrees left and right from the centre channel.

Not ONCE I've ever experience the "in-you-head" sound experience.

Fair enough, but my point remains.

"Never believe any quote you read on the internet." - Abraham Lincoln
Jeremy Anderson is offline  
post #369 of 494 Old 08-23-2010, 05:00 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
mystic_sniper28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
with the right gear you could likely matrix 44.12 setup from a 11.3 processor assuming you could find a 1 in 4-7 out preamp, not to mention the cost of buying the 56 amps to power the speakers..

as for speaker setup, for 7.1 or up to 11.3 wouldn't it be best to work into a rectangle room opposed to a square room assuming you got the proper seat row layout for a proper 7.1 layout you need a min of a 7 row theatre with the rear speaker covering 3.5 rows each, a common misconception takes place when you look at speaker layout as shown in manuals..

with 9.1 9-11 rows of seats, following a commercial cinema layout with staggered rows

my guess with 11.3 if you need 13-15 rows of seats if you followed a typical commercial cinema layout with staggered rows.. I know a typical cinema would likely go somewhere over 21 rows
though for a home setting I think distance wise this would be a good figure to use for speaker layout...

Yes i do realize most people do not have the space to do this method of build, though if you did you would likely remark how much better your sound would be..
mystic_sniper28 is offline  
post #370 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 09:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Theresa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,430
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
I don't want to emulate a "real" movie theater. I find "theaters" to offer poorer quality sound and a flickering image. I want something better and I know I prefer what I have to a theater. Emulating a theater is emulating a reproducer not the source. Of course producers do try to produce the best experience in the theater but due to economics and an an ancient frame rate it is inferior in my experience to a good a/v setup. I also don't see any need for "theater seating." 5.1 is good enough for me although my old and now retired DSP-A1 had "presence" front speakers that added a bit. I would rather try ambiophonics than I would adding rear speakers.
Theresa is offline  
post #371 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 09:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Theresa, ironically, your 5.1 setup IS emulating the theatre 100%. There is not a single theatrical presentation (except for Toy Story 3D) that is in 7.1

PS: a lot of commercial theatres are actually using 72 fps, not 24 fps anymore. Hence you will hardly see the flicker anymore. (I'm prone to see flickers up to approx 75 Hz).

Yamaha's Presence channels are NOT part of the soundtrack but part of the soundfield recreation process, so IMO it's okay (but DPL IIz is NOT okay)

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #372 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 11:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fitbrit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

So far, there is only ONE movie that is intended to be 7.1, which is Toy Story 3.

Pan's Labyrinth has a 7.1 DTS-HD MA track.
fitbrit is offline  
post #373 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 11:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
not for theatrical presentation.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #374 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 11:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fitbrit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

not for theatrical presentation.

I just came to this conclusion too, reading about it after my post. Thanks.
fitbrit is offline  
post #375 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 12:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

PS: a lot of commercial theatres are actually using 72 fps, not 24 fps anymore. Hence you will hardly see the flicker anymore. (I'm prone to see flickers up to approx 75 Hz)

72 fps for a non 3D "film"? (it's actually digital video, not film) I'm finding that hard to believe. Do you have a substantiating link?
---

True film (not video) is pretty much always shot at 24 fps, however it is pretty much always presented (projected) at 48 flashes per second because each frame is flashed twice, via a shutter, specifically to reduce flicker (for at least the vast majority of viewers).

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #376 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 04:23 PM
 
iq100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have two ears.
So 2 channels.
Caveat- Each channel must be capable of reproducing inner ear sound pressure wave front per originally experienced.
Use In Ear Monitors or direct monitor speakers (outside if necessary, to remove any room reflections)
Use wireless head positioner monitor, if you want to simulate changes in sound as you get out of your seat and walk toward front or rear of the original auditorium.


iq100
the best way to delete an idea is to post one of your own .
iq100 is offline  
post #377 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 06:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by iq100 View Post
I have two ears.
So 2 channels.
Caveat- Each channel must be capable of reproducing inner ear sound pressure wave front per originally experienced.
When there is a way to do with 2 speakers, let us know.

Quote:
Use In Ear Monitors or direct monitor speakers (outside if necessary, to remove any room reflections)
Even if outside, how to you prevent the L speaker from being heard by the R ear? Or by "outside" maybe you meant outer space where this topic lives?
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #378 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 07:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 142
^Q. When walking around in real life, not listening to reproduced music, how do you prevent the L side sounds from being heard by the R ear?

A. You don't, but there is a roughly 6dB reduction in level; this along with timing delay cues and HRTF is all you need to perceptually form all the sound localization your brain needs to determine direction. The need for perfect inter-aural crosstalk separation is over rated. We do just fine without it in real life.

Listening outdoors on a soft surface (grass/dirt) in an open, dead quiet, windless environment is a good "poor man's" anechoic chamber and is sometimes used for sound recording/testing when a multi-million dollar anechoic chamber isn't available.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #379 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 08:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
^Q. When walking around in real life, not listening to reproduced music, how do you prevent the L side sounds from being heard by the R ear?

A. You don't, but there is a roughly 6dB reduction in level; this along with timing delay cues and HRTF is all you need to perceptually form all the sound localization your brain needs to determine direction. The need for perfect inter-aural crosstalk separation is over rated. We do just fine without it in real life.
IQ100 was not discussing real life but reproducing sound from 2 speakers. That is what I was asking about, and it's a completely different issue from what you are describing.

In fact, your explanation supports my point. You cannot get a proper effect when playing a binaural recording over speakers, only headphones. The crosstalk prevents it.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #380 of 494 Old 11-06-2010, 08:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Oh the topic is binaural recordings (not to be confused with common stereo, which is different)? I guess I missed that post. [Actually I was the first and only person to utter the word, or suggest its use (some months ago), in this entire thread, prior to your above post, but nobody else seemed to have any interest in discussing it.]

ETA: Yeah, I guess "inner ear sound pressure wave front per originally experienced" could be a loose description for it, I admit.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #381 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 01:55 PM
Member
 
henry33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tigard OR
Posts: 97
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Boy, what a discussion started by that person who said 2 ears equal 2 channels!
The person who indicated binaural might be the only way is right. Google binaural.

Big Question: WHY is Dolby ProLogic IIx or z NOT OK? From great experience I think it is surpassed in the creation of reasonable surround fields from 2-channel sources only by the no-longer-made Cantares Ambisonic processor (and the one built into Meridian gear). Often it sounds even better than the discrete 5.0-channel surrounds on some classical SACDs.
henry33 is offline  
post #382 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 02:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

72 fps for a non 3D "film"? (it's actually digital video, not film) I'm finding that hard to believe. Do you have a substantiating link?
---

True film (not video) is pretty much always shot at 24 fps, however it is pretty much always presented (projected) at 48 flashes per second because each frame is flashed twice, via a shutter, specifically to reduce flicker (for at least the vast majority of viewers).

What link? It's used in a couple of commercial theatre I've built overseas.

and yes, just like you said, in film projection, each frame is flashed twice to reduce flicker.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #383 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 02:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry33 View Post

Big Question: WHY is Dolby ProLogic IIx or z NOT OK? From great experience I think it is surpassed in the creation of reasonable surround fields from 2-channel sources only by the no-longer-made Cantares Ambisonic processor (and the one built into Meridian gear). Often it sounds even better than the discrete 5.0-channel surrounds on some classical SACDs.

Did I say DPL IIx is not OK? If I did say that, my apology. A handful of movies were mastered with DPL IIx (the first one, IIRC, is Episode I: The Phantom Menace). The extracted sound from the RL and RR channels to create psuedo rear-centre channel is calculated during the mix.

DPL IIz is a no-no because there is absolutely no way anybody can create a height-sound from whatever number of channels they're derived from. Furthermore, there is not a single commercial movie mixed with DPL IIz in mind.

Heck, even during Dolby's own DPL IIz demo they failed time and time again to effectively show the DPL IIz effect.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #384 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 02:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post

Oh the topic is binaural recordings (not to be confused with common stereo, which is different)? I guess I missed that post. [Actually I was the first and only person to utter the word, or suggest its use (some months ago), in this entire thread, prior to your above post, but nobody else seemed to have any interest in discussing it.]

I missed that post. IMO, Binaural is the ONLY way to do it when the person is sitting in the sweet spot of the visual vista. Outside of that, get (or make your own) binaural recording. Listen to the recording while sitting down, in complete darkness AND close your eyes. It's bliss!

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #385 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 03:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

What link? It's used in a couple of commercial theatre I've built overseas.

Your previous post didn't say "a couple", it said "a lot of commercial theatres are actually using 72 fps". In regards to the US, and with the possible exception of 3D, I think you are wrong. Also, just because a digital video projector installed has the capability of 72 fps, or even higher, doesn't mean that theater has ever shown even a single presentation in 72 fps. (again, except for 3D perhaps)

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #386 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 03:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

A handful of movies were mastered with DPL IIx (the first one, IIRC, is Episode I: The Phantom Menace). The extracted sound from the RL and RR channels to create psuedo rear-centre channel is calculated during the mix.

I'd never heard that story before. Is there any way to get more details? An article mayhaps? And what sort of PLIIx gear would they have used for that--a consumer AV processor?

Quote:


DPL IIz is a no-no because there is absolutely no way anybody can create a height-sound from whatever number of channels they're derived from. Furthermore, there is not a single commercial movie mixed with DPL IIz in mind.

While this is strictly correct, there is a difference between reality and illusion. I think we all agree we are willing to suspend our disbelief when we enter a movie theater, and are drawn into the story via the visuals and sound cues, even though very little of it is either real or represents real things. Sounds in outer space, for example. But any reproduction system is trying to create an illusion, be it a perfectionist's 2-speaker vinyl/tube mecca, or our humble home theaters. PLIIz is just one more tool in the box. It attempts to extract particular aspects of the sounds from the source such that when reproduced from height speakers, the illusion of spatial envelopment is enhanced. Some folks appear to like it. Those of us who don't can avoid it easily.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #387 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 03:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

I missed that post. IMO, Binaural is the ONLY way to do it when the person is sitting in the sweet spot of the visual vista.

We already force movie goers to wear goofy looking glasses to watch some movies and they seem to buy that; why not force them to wear headphones for binaural sound? We already have installed a complete and operational, stereophonic, IR sound distribution system for hearing impaired individuals in many theaters and lend them out IR wireless headphones per performance. All we have to do is make that 2ch soundtrack binaural and we're in!

I conceptualize taking it a step further with cochlear implants and IR receivers built in to our bionic skulls originally in this post.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
post #388 of 494 Old 11-07-2010, 05:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 369
They didn't call it DPL IIx for the theatre presentation of Episode I, it was called THX Surround EX which for the home is called DPL IIx.

I got the info from THX themself.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

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

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

David Susilo is offline  
post #389 of 494 Old 11-08-2010, 12:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

They didn't call it DPL IIx for the theatre presentation of Episode I, it was called THX Surround EX which for the home is called DPL IIx.

I got the info from THX themself.

Now I think I understand what it is you were trying to say.

Yes, Lucasfilm mixed any number of films in Surround EX, as they helped invent the format. They wouldn't have called it PLIIx since that did not exist at the time. In fact it was the shortcomings of EX that led to the development of PLIIx.
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #390 of 494 Old 11-08-2010, 01:50 PM
 
iq100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

... You cannot get a proper effect when playing a binaural recording over speakers, only headphones. The crosstalk prevents it.

Thanks for thinking about this.
I am going to leave Effects of Interaural Crosstalk for a possible later discussion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-re...nsfer_function
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=5009

But with regard to headphones/In Ear Monitors, would you agree that their frequency range and other dynamics can be more than a match for very expensive heavy speakers?

edit: I see many here have already thoroughly examined systems like:
http://www.smyth-research.com/technology.html
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ighlight=smyth
some with STAX quality headphones.
My apologies for trying to re-invent existing technology, although since the key to this is the processing, which is NOT necessarily part of an expensive proprietary box, it would be nice if this were available at very low cost, as part of a poor-boys downloadable 'filter'/kit.

iq100
the best way to delete an idea is to post one of your own.
Best to enjoy music as well as analysing it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49dbl...re=BF&index=21
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i38w...re=BF&index=22
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...ield=viewcount
http://www.youtube.com/user/DivaAnnF.../3/dsDISeErJ8s
http://www.youtube.com/user/DivaAnnFisher?feature=mhum
iq100 is offline  
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
Surround Sound Speaker Placement , Polls

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off