or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › DTS Neo.X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DTS Neo.X - Page 13

post #361 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

I should have clarified. That's exactly what I prefer and using.. Thx with PLIIz.

I'm gonna have to try that. With my setup I've been using strictly Neo:X. 9.2 setup with heights and rears, no wides. But I am looking for more of theater like cinematic experience. I hadn't really messed with any of the THX modes but I'll give it a shot.
post #362 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by yadfgp View Post

I'm gonna have to try that. With my setup I've been using strictly Neo:X. 9.2 setup with heights and rears, no wides. But I am looking for more of theater like cinematic experience. I hadn't really messed with any of the THX modes but I'll give it a shot.

Yea, I can't tell you how many times that I have attempted to stray from it to give these other sound schemes a shot. Each scheme seems to have their strengths,but for the most well rounded and natural movie theater sound, I ultimately go back to Thx and now Thx with PlIIz.
post #363 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

Sure the width is a problem. Where would you put them (picture of front of room found below)? Take note that a second subwoofer is going to be placed at the front left shortly, where the subwoofer connection in the stage can be seen.
138a.jpg

I don't see the issue... Be the first with door-mount speakers! You can even adjust the width by opening the door to a degree...

biggrin.gif
post #364 of 1226
If I thought the wife would not have a canniption, I would do it! I was looking over it again critically, due to what sdurani (and others) have said about the angles. He is correct in that the width is not the issue, but that it is the width combined with using the room that is the issue.

I can put the left speaker next to the door, forward a bit, but then the other speaker needs to go behind the TV. If I put the right speaker to the rear of the room so it clears the TV, the left speaker will sit on the door. frown.gif


Anyone know how low or high side surrounds should be?
post #365 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

Anyone know how low or high side surrounds should be?

 

2 to 3 feet above ear height is the usual recommendation.

post #366 of 1226
Ooops...meant front wides! lol

Anyone know how high front wides should be?
post #367 of 1226
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

Ooops...meant front wides! lol
Anyone know how high front wides should be?

Ideally the tweeters on the wides should be at the same height as the tweeters on your front speakers.
post #368 of 1226
I've seen a couple of net postings that indicate the audio on the Step Up Revolution (3D Blu-ray Combo) release from Lionsgate is listed as:
Quote:
Blu-ray Audio Status: 7.1 DTS HD Master Audio, 11.1 Neo: X Playback, Spanish 5.1 Dolby Digital and English 2.0 Dolby Digital

I'm wondering if I should read anything beyond marketing hype into the 11.1 Neo: X Playback detail.

_
post #369 of 1226
Forget DTS NeoX this is what I want Multi-Dimensional Audio (MDA)

In summary : Multi-Dimensional Audio (MDA)

An Innovative Approach to Audio Creation, Distribution and Consumption

MDA is the first true conceptual leap in the art and science of audio reproduction in the hundred year history of recorded audio. The possibilities are limitless.

From its earliest beginnings, the science of audio recording and reproduction has been based on channels. Mono was one channel, stereo two and surround sound five or more. This model has served well for over one hundred years but, given today’s available technology and our current understanding of how people hear, the opportunity presents itself to take audio to an entirely different level.

Introducing Objects
In the real world, sound sources emit from objects in three dimensional space and the sound that we perceive does not only come from the originating source. What we hear is a combination of the direct sound from the source and reflections from the environment. Further, real sound is not confined to specific source positions or locations as it is with channel based audio reproduction systems.

The basic concept of Multi-Dimensional Audio, or MDA, is to represent sound sources as objects in space just as they are in the real world, without regard to the number of channels or speaker locations. Once this level of abstraction is reached, a wealth of opportunities become available to greatly enhance every aspect of the audio ecosystem. MDA and its advantageous effects on audio content creation, distribution and consumption is the subject of this paper.

http://www.srslabs.com/landing.aspx?id=2459

http://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/srs-labs-mda-audio/

http://technewspedia.com/3d-audio-alliance-3daa-and-multi-dimensional-audio-mda-audio-accelerated-gpu/

and now we are talking http://www.3daa.org/ I can't wait to see this implemented has any one heard a demo?

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/blog/2012/05/16/3d-audio-update-srs

http://www.3dfocus.co.uk/3d-news-2/dts-and-srs-to-launch-3d-audio-late-next-year/9551
Edited by wse - 10/2/12 at 9:23pm
post #370 of 1226
^^
+1

I've also read about MDA earlier this summer & I think it's the game-changer in surround processing. It's not tied to a specific number of speakers or their locations. The technique described reminds me of the sound cards based on the Aureal chipset in the late 90's & early 2000's before Creative bought them out & shut them down frown.gif It was superior to Creative's Live which was reverb-ambience processing instead of algorithms for 3D sound location.

SRS is now owned by DTS so DTS can either develop it or bury it. I sincerely hope it's the former, since it just makes sense. We could forget about heights, wides, maybe even rears and still have 3 dimensional positioning of sound not bound by putting more & more speakers all over the room. IF some companies are seriously entertaining creating a 22 channel format, MDA should be the logical, common sense alternative.
post #371 of 1226
Isn't this what the Sherwood Newcastle 972 is supposed to do?
post #372 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

Isn't this what the Sherwood Newcastle 972 is supposed to do?

Nope
post #373 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

In the real world, sound sources emit from objects in three dimensional space and the sound that we perceive does not only come from the originating source. What we hear is a combination of the direct sound from the source and reflections from the environment. Further, real sound is not confined to specific source positions or locations as it is with channel based audio reproduction systems.

The above sets up a false straw man to knock down with MDA, which isn't to say it's not a great leap forward; multiple microphones capture reflections, and channels are not necessarily limited to a single source.
post #374 of 1226
Thread Starter 
The strength of MDA is its capability to take the master and produce various output configurations..
1.0, 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, 11.2, 22.4....
In today's active lifestyle, there is economic $ payback in selling final audio mixes to multiple market segments...
Cinema, phones, tablets, automotive, personal devices, casual listener, serious listener.
Once the original performance is captured in MDA (object-based), it is straight-forward to produce stunning mixdown outputs..


Just my $0.02... wink.gif
post #375 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

The above sets up a false straw man to knock down with MDA, which isn't to say it's not a great leap forward; multiple microphones capture reflections, and channels are not necessarily limited to a single source.

You need to hear a demo then you can see for yourself smile.gif
post #376 of 1226
^^
going back to the Aureal A3D sound card days, it was stunning to have sounds literally fly around your head from only 2 speakers - it was HRTF based algorithms - much the same I think as what SRS is working on. Not just surround but true positioning in all 3 dimensions and doesn't require a large number of speakers to do it. I expect the positioning becomes more fixed as you add speakers but it can work just with 2, especially headphones smile.gif

this makes more sense than continuing to add past 7.1 for sliced & diced derived effects wink.gif

wse, how does one find an SRS demo? I'd love to hear it.
post #377 of 1226
In July 2012, 3D Focus (link) and others reported that "Having completed the acquisition of SRS Labs, DTS has confirmed the two companies will jointly bring multi-dimensional audio (MDA) or '3D audio' technology to market in 2013" . . . in which case we might expect to see some pre-production product demos at CES 2013 (and perhaps start making cost estimates of the changes|upgrades required to make a noticeable improvement to in-home playback performance). However, because an 'MDA home audio' soundtrack likely starts with the studio choosing to use the applicable theatrical audio mix technology, there is also the question of when there will be enough (movie) soundtracks so authored such that the 'serious home theater aficionado' might feel the upgrade worthwhile.
_
post #378 of 1226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

^^
going back to the Aureal A3D sound card days, it was stunning to have sounds literally fly around your head from only 2 speakers - it was HRTF based algorithms - much the same I think as what SRS is working on. Not just surround but true positioning in all 3 dimensions and doesn't require a large number of speakers to do it. I expect the positioning becomes more fixed as you add speakers but it can work just with 2, especially headphones smile.gif
this makes more sense than continuing to add past 7.1 for sliced & diced derived effects wink.gif
wse, how does one find an SRS demo? I'd love to hear it.

We have heard the MDA demo a couple of times, @ WCES 2012 and @ SRS/DTS HQ...
It is most impressive.. cool.gif

For the record...
Alot of the R&D development work was done by some of the long-tenured pros who had left Dolby...


Just my $0.02... wink.gif
post #379 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

The strength of MDA is its capability to take the master and produce various output configurations..
1.0, 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, 11.2, 22.4....
In today's active lifestyle, there is economic $ payback in selling final audio mixes to multiple market segments...
Cinema, phones, tablets, automotive, personal devices, casual listener, serious listener.
Once the original performance is captured in MDA (object-based), it is straight-forward to produce stunning mixdown outputs..
Just my $0.02... wink.gif

The 22.x(?) speaker config in use for the NHK-JEITA SHV TV exhibit at CEATEC Japan 2012 this week (apparently a DSP processing variation from the nominal Hamasaki 22.x layout required to compensate for use of a direct view display . . . and the missing ceiling!) looks like an excellent platform MDA might use to deliver a 'fully rendered' soundfield! biggrin.gif


_
post #380 of 1226
From what I read in the latest Sound and Vision, Dolby's main focus is theater applications whereas DTS's is HT first when it comes to their new 3d audio formats.
post #381 of 1226
Thanks for all the info and opinions, everyone. I'm new here. This thread is exactly what I've been looking for.

Jaime
post #382 of 1226
Will next year's receivers potentially include this MDA surround technology? I want to upgrade to either a Denon AVR-4520CI or an Onkyo TX-NR3010, but would probably be willing to wait for the CES 2013 show in January.
post #383 of 1226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TazExprez View Post

Will next year's receivers potentially include this MDA surround technology? I want to upgrade to either a Denon AVR-4520CI or an Onkyo TX-NR3010, but would probably be willing to wait for the CES 2013 show in January.

No...
MDA Software is still aways off, the content studios have not yet announced their confirmation...

Just my $0.02.. wink.gif
post #384 of 1226
It is apparent that conventional class AB receivers are too inefficient to be used with the Neo 11 channels.
They get hotter, nosier fan cooling, require more space around and with weak power supplies that cannot keep up. For instance a claimed 150W receiver effectively becomes 75watts.
Heat reduces component life or Mean-Time-Between-Failure (MTBF). The room requires extra cooling. Then you always worry about shutting it off as the beast gets so darn hot.

So what are the solutions? Pioneer class-D receivers and powered speakers

Not surprisingly in testing of the Pioneer against competing receivers, the Pioneers sounds louder with less strain.
At the moment, the main limitation is the Pioneer SC-65-67-68 DSP cannot generate height and width channels to the pre-outs simultaneously, as do the new Onkyo 3010 and 5010. Someone posted that Pioneer may upgrade the firmware to allow it. The SC-65 would then rate an outstanding best buy. Pioneer also includes combined Thx processing which several members indicate a preference:


There are many excellent powered/active speakers choices from the studio world. Most are bi-amped internally and accept unbalanced, XLR and 1/4 jack.


Note: I've updated this post to depict the small Sealed Box speakers the experts at SRS selected. When using 6+ speakers up front, you don't want more quantity of bass. You want less but more tuneful and articulate. I plugged my ports up on my FW speakers to increase the bass articulation. I did not follow the THX advice to set the speakers small (and filter out the "too much bass" which ported enclosures are known for.)
In summary the higher the count of ported speakers, the more ill-defined bass and skewed spectral-balance become.
Edited by HiFiFun - 10/9/12 at 8:30pm
post #385 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

It is apparent that conventional class AB receivers are too inefficient to be used with the Neo 11 channels.
They get hotter, nosier fan cooling, require more space around and with weak power supplies that cannot keep up. For instance a claimed 150W receiver effectively becomes 75watts.

Not true, my Onkyo 3010 does not get hot at all.
post #386 of 1226
Can the new flagship Denon run height and width simultaneously? I know their previous models could.
post #387 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoastin View Post

Can the new flagship Denon run height and width simultaneously? I know their previous models could.
There is no new flagship Denon. No successor in sight for the AVP or the 5308. A flagship is the very best a company can do without considering the budget.

If you mean the 4520? Yes that can do 11.2 simultaneously hence with height and width. It has 9 internal amps, so you need an extra stereo amp if you want al 11.
post #388 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post

There is no new flagship Denon. No successor in sight for the AVP or the 5308. A flagship is the very best a company can do without considering the budget.
If you mean the 4520? Yes that can do 11.2 simultaneously hence with height and width. It has 9 internal amps, so you need an extra stereo amp if you want al 11.

Yes. The 4520 that is being called Denon's new flagship model.
post #389 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by erwinfrombelgium View Post

There is no new flagship Denon. No successor in sight for the AVP or the 5308. A flagship is the very best a company can do without considering the budget.
If you mean the 4520? Yes that can do 11.2 simultaneously hence with height and width. It has 9 internal amps, so you need an extra stereo amp if you want al 11.

The era of 66+lbs flagship receiver has been looooong gone. Considering how weak/bad Japan's economy is right now, we probably won't see another one from the big six(Yamaha, Pioneer, Denon, Marantz, Sony, Onkyo)in the next 10 to 15 years.
post #390 of 1226
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuenMuner View Post

The era of 66+lbs flagship receiver has been looooong gone. Considering how weak/bad Japan's economy is right now, we probably won't see another one from the big six(Yamaha, Pioneer, Denon, Marantz, Sony, Onkyo)in the next 10 to 15 years.
I want to go with separates anyway myself for the new house build with HT. Already have the Emotiva XPR-5 and I hope their matching pre-pro (9.3 most likely) will be a worthy device when it surfaces next year. If not, I will take the Marantz AV8801. Both are round the 3K mark. With the XPR-5 (2K) it's about the same price as the Yamaha Z11. I need two or three more 2ch amps, but these can be more modest. In the long run, only the pre-pro has to be replaced every 5 years or so...

Also, don't be so fast to assume the Japanse folks have nothing up their sleeve for the next 1 1/2 decade. 4-5 years is a long time in that sector. I am also watching out for Dolby Atmos to be implemented in home surround... Not with 61.3, but why not 14.2 or so? Not a giant leap from 11.2 the Marantz will do.

61 A4 Atmos™14.pdf 83k .pdf file
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › DTS Neo.X