Trinnov Altitude - Page 253 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2814Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7561 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 06:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,420
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2861 Post(s)
Liked: 2049
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
DTS:X? Pretty much.

Auro 3D, is a much different story. Look at the following for at least one of the recommended Auro 3D layouts and you will see how much different it is than Atmos. BUT, with the Trinnov/Remapping, and at least in my opinion, it will be more than good enough.

I think Auro translates fairly well to Atmos; Atmos TM > Auro HLS/HLR, ATMOS TF or FH > AURO HL/HR. The VOG, if you can even hear its separate impact, should phantom just fine from Atmos TM speakers, and likewise Auro HC should phantom just fine from Atmos TF's or FH's.

For upmixing, given how the system works (channel copying and adding reverb) I don't feel accurate speaker locations are that critical as its not extracting specific effects, and just creating a combined reverberant sound field. For native mixes, do the home market releases not max out at 9.1 (5.1 base layer + 4 heights) anyway?
Wookii is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7562 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 06:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
At least for those of us in the US, Auro 3D is a non-issue. There is simply almost no source material. I have one Auro music disc and an Auro demo disc (some of the demos are quite good). I do use AuroMatic (up-mixing) for all 2 channel music listening.
audioguy is offline  
post #7563 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 06:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,232
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by santodx5 View Post
I just installed 6 overhead speaker speakers in Dolby Atmos Layout, will this work fine for Auro 3D and DTS X-10 as well?Thanks

If one row of your overheads is Atmos Top Mids, you can designate both as the T (Voice of God) top overhead in Auro(matic) and they will render as such. The caveat is you would want to be in the center seat since they will phantom image the Auro T channel. Jon Herron @ Trinnov showed me this trick.

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7564 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 07:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,232
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 626
Watched Annihilation 4K last night. Not as much overhead activity as I was hoping but what was there was used effectively. Mostly TM but TF/TR on occasion.

Now to Stu's post about possibly using dual side surrounds to split the angle between sides and rears - Lrs2, Rrs2. I have them since they were a hold-over from my Pioneer Elites which could have an A & B set of side surrounds. Meters showed no activity during the entire movie. With extras, with Dolby upmixer on top of 5.1 Dolby Digital, all speakers were used, incl the rearward surrounds so it's definitely the "fault" of the Atmos mix which did make full use of 7.1 throughout.

So another Atmos title that under-utilizes high-channel count systems.

I think Chuck is right - the sweet spot is 7.x.4. No reason not to install additional speakers just be aware some studios seem hellbent to "simplify" Atmos to fixed channels and/or few objects.

Steve

Last edited by ss9001; 06-24-2019 at 08:00 AM.
ss9001 is offline  
post #7565 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 08:12 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,248
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1605 Post(s)
Liked: 1251
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
Now to Stu's post about possibly using dual side surrounds to split the angle between sides and rears - Lrs2, Rrs2. I have them since they were a hold-over from my Pioneer Elites which could have an A & B set of side surrounds. Meters showed no activity during the entire movie. With extras, with Dolby upmixer on top of 5.1 Dolby Digital, all speakers were used, incl the rearward surrounds so it's definitely the "fault" of the Atmos mix.
Not quite - what I was actually thinking of doing was using Lrs/Rrs2, not Ls2/Rs2. Lrs2/Rrs2 is a location between 150 and 165 degrees on the Dolby guidelines, inside the angle formed by Lrs/Rrs (135 to 150 degrees). These speakers would be placed to bisect the difference between the standard rear surrounds. Alternatively I could utilize Lcs/Rcs at 165 degrees.

However, the only reason for me to do so in my room would be to parallel, on the opposite front wall, the Lc/Rc at 15-20 degrees, as per the comment Jon Herron made in the WSR review about a special case where a single row HT would be recommended to use five screen speakers (counting Lc/Rc) rather than three. Trinnov has its own placement recommendations outside of Dolby, of course, depending on narrow vs. wide screen (which is really room dependent), number of rows and number of seats, as well as accounting for elevation angle in a multi-row theatre.

Frankly, it's overkill, and only usable for content at the moment where you a) have Atmos object passthrough in those locations and/or b) the DSU upmixer where you could copy the rears at a lower level and/or suitable delay. I think that as long as you avoid having a single center rear surround speaker at 180 degrees you'd avoid the ventriloquist effect where the sound directly behind MLP is thought to be in front rather than behind the listener, which would contaminate the front soundstage.

I could test this on some of my content - it's easy enough to temporarily repurpose my Ls1/Rs1 and Ls/Rs as Ls/Rs and Lrs/Rrs for test purposes ONLY, and repurpose my existing Lrs/Rrs as Ls2/Rs2 just to see if there's any object passthrough there measured on object movement-rich movies like Gravity, The House with a Clock on Its Walls, and maybe Black Hawk Down on the Input meters. But I'd have to add the physical speakers in the right locations and pick up a Xilica or (ugh) MiniDSP to handle the individual subs that right now are using up three Altitude channels for actual listening. Not sure that's worth the trouble compared to adding a CH speaker up front for future planning (DTS:X Pro depending on how it ultimately uses > 11 channels in practical terms, leaving native Auro out of it).

Steve: did you actually have a configuration where you are using Lrs/Rrs2 with Atmos along with the bed Ls/Rs?

Quote:
So another Atmos title that under-utilizes high-channel count systems.

I think Chuck is right - the sweet spot is 7.x.4. No reason not to install additional speakers just be aware some studios seem hellbent to "simplify" Atmos to fixed channels and/or few objects.
I don't agree. That may be the common denominator for a typical Atmos mix and today's DTS:X "baked in" mixes, but why design a room around a common denominator when there IS content that goes well beyond that, as I've found on some of my testing? And who knows what the future will portend for upmixers making more use of existing mixes for additional channels. I'd plan for that rather than just settle for 7.x.4 because some studios (Disney, some other releases like SPR) think that way?
Lasalle likes this.

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification

Last edited by sdrucker; 06-24-2019 at 06:06 PM.
sdrucker is offline  
post #7566 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 08:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,232
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Not quite - what I was actually thinking of doing was using Lrs/Rrs2, not Ls2/Rs2. Lrs2/Rrs2 is a location between 150 and 165 degrees on the Dolby guidelines, inside the angle formed by Lrs/Rrs (135 to 150 degrees). These speakers would be placed to bisect the difference between the standard rear surrounds. Alternatively I could utilize Lcs/Rcs at 165 degrees...

Steve: did you actually have a configuration where you are using Lrs/Rrs2 with Atmos along with the bed Ls/Rs?

I don't agree. That may be the common denominator for a typical Atmos mix and today's DTS:X "baked in" mixes, but why design a room around a common denominator when there IS content that goes well beyond that, as I've found on some of my testing?
I think part of the problem is symantics plus the obtuse abbreviations they all use for locations.

1. Got it! Mine bisects the space between side-side and rear. To make it easier for you to see my setup, see attached Dolby page with arrows indicating my surround designations. IIRC, I got red when I tried calling them Lrs1/Rrs1. Just tried it again, the only designation it accepts for that location is Lrs2/Rrs2. It even says that in the right side help pop-up. Not Lrs1, nor will it allow me to change the sides from Ls. The only config it accepts is the one I already have: Ls/Rs, Lrs/Rrs, Lrs2/Rrs2. Perhaps it's the measured angles? Don't know.

2. Yes. All turned on in the Atmos column in my 9.1.6 preset. I re-checked it during the movie when I didn't see any meter activity with rears & sides playing. So nothing was rendering between the sides & rears in Atmos. With DS on top of something it works 100%. So that leads me to think Annihilation's a "baked" 7/4 mix.

3. I agree that if you are designing, design to your optimum. Just that 7/4 & 7/2 mixing looks to increasing as a trend so if one had to make a hard choice due to room space, WAF, budget, or starting out, 7.1.4 is a good place. Maybe that clarifies my meaning. Hope so And I agree that there's content that uses more, I've seen it too - several Sony's, Unbroken & Hurricane Heist come to mind. I've seen all meters lit up & I enjoy it immensely.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	6-24-2019 12-47-55 PM.png
Views:	25
Size:	80.3 KB
ID:	2583922  

Steve

Last edited by ss9001; 06-24-2019 at 11:32 AM.
ss9001 is offline  
post #7567 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 08:51 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 19,747
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
At least for those of us in the US, Auro 3D is a non-issue. There is simply almost no source material. I have one Auro music disc and an Auro demo disc (some of the demos are quite good). I do use AuroMatic (up-mixing) for all 2 channel music listening.
2L pure audio blu ray discs have some with Auro 3D and also some with Dolby Atmos.

http://www.2l.no/

https://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show....php?t=1158431 No dealer is authorized to tell you I refer to them - any referrals I make will be done personally by me. Over the years I have found certain dealer(s) who I cannot recommend for good reason.
! 9.4.13 Trinnov Altitude 32 Theatre renovation/upgrade starts end of July 2019!
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #7568 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 11:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
Just as an FYI, by "sweet spot" I meant that speaker configuration in a well treated room that is at or near the point of diminishing returns in terms of overall audio envelopment.

I am familiar with films (and music) that use more speakers. I (and you) can easily compare 7.x.4 to 9.x.6 on a 9.x.6. film. Is there improvement? Yes, but nothing when compared to the improvement of moving toward 7.x.4. Not even in the same ball park. My contention, based upon all demos I have heard and a number of other Trinnov rooms I have visited is that after getting to 7.x.4, the "percent" of improvement for each additional uptick in speaker count diminishes significantly, even with movies that contain objects that will use more speakers. I am not nor would I suggest that more speakers is not better, but incrementally, the improvement gets smaller and smaller after 7.x.4, while moving toward 7.x.4 the improvement is very large. Hence the use of the term, "sweet spot".

Maybe it's just me but my observations have been consistent.
ss9001 likes this.
audioguy is offline  
post #7569 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 11:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,232
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 626
"Frankly, it's overkill, and only usable for content at the moment where you a) have Atmos object passthrough in those locations and/or b) the DSU upmixer where you could copy the rears at a lower level and/or suitable delay"


Agreed.


BTW - if you decide in the future to get an ext DSP for subs, Xilica is >>better than minidsp. I can share my own experience with both if you ever get serious about it. It's simply superior to the minidsp 2x4HD in every way. Even without the severe RF interference controller issues I had with the mini, having to have a laptop next to it for USB was a real pain. I know minidsp has an add-on wifi-ethernet module for $75-80 but that doesn't make the 2x4 equal to the design & build quality of the xp2040.

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #7570 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 02:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
"Frankly, it's overkill, and only usable for content at the moment where you a) have Atmos object passthrough in those locations and/or b) the DSU upmixer where you could copy the rears at a lower level and/or suitable delay"


Agreed.


BTW - if you decide in the future to get an ext DSP for subs, Xilica is >>better than minidsp. I can share my own experience with both if you ever get serious about it. It's simply superior to the minidsp 2x4HD in every way. Even without the severe RF interference controller issues I had with the mini, having to have a laptop next to it for USB was a real pain. I know minidsp has an add-on wifi-ethernet module for $75-80 but that doesn't make the 2x4 equal to the design & build quality of the xp2040.
My personal opinion, based only upon my personal opinion, is that all installs with subs that are not all equa-distant from the MLP need an external device for managing subs. My reasons for believing so would require too much typing so let's just call it my personal opinion. (Part of it has to do with the ability to not always have to re-measure the entire room.) I have felt that way since I first got multiple subs maybe 18 years ago when I used a QSC device.
audioguy is offline  
post #7571 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 02:38 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,248
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1605 Post(s)
Liked: 1251
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
My personal opinion, based only upon my personal opinion, is that all installs with subs that are not all equa-distant from the MLP need an external device for managing subs. My reasons for believing so would require too much typing so let's just call it my personal opinion. (Part of it has to do with the ability to not always have to re-measure the entire room.) I have felt that way since I first got multiple subs maybe 18 years ago when I used a QSC device.
Different strokes - for me, since you can define individual sub level and delay via the n-way active crossover, and the Altitude has individual as well as global (summated sub response) PEQ capacity for the subs, it's been convenient to do everything in the Altitude. However, it's a better strategy to free up channels on the Altitude and use an external high quality DSP so that it's possible to add more speakers where your fancy (or calibrator) takes you, unless you really have the channels to burn.

Easy enough to save PEQ settings as a file and save/load, and with presets you can just copy in the correct settings on the active crossover menu. And the Altitude can have a nearly infinite number of PEQ filters AFAIK, which isn't necessarily true in the MiniDSP world where there's hard limits to PEQ filters (six?) per channel as well as less control over the delay that can be set. I wouldn't get anything less than a Xilica or QSC device for managing individual subs for that reason.

EDIT: I took a look again at the Xilica manual. Apparently the I/O level can be adjusted on each I/O in 0.25db increments. After the Altitude’s PEQ level flexibility for implementing MSO, I might find that a bit annoying. Likewise there’s a limit of eight PEQ filters per I/O slot. In practice that’s unlikely to matter at an individual sub level, though.
RUR likes this.

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification

Last edited by sdrucker; 06-25-2019 at 05:15 AM.
sdrucker is offline  
post #7572 of 8076 Old 06-24-2019, 04:43 PM
Member
 
Venger99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 108 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Apologies if this is a stupid question. I know the altitude can remap speaker positions, but can it create additional phantom speakers? I.e. if I have a 7.1.4 layout can it create additional phantom speakers for a 9.1.4 layout?
Thanks
Venger99 is offline  
post #7573 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 03:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,420
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2861 Post(s)
Liked: 2049
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
BTW - if you decide in the future to get an ext DSP for subs, Xilica is >>better than minidsp. I can share my own experience with both if you ever get serious about it. It's simply superior to the minidsp 2x4HD in every way. Even without the severe RF interference controller issues I had with the mini, having to have a laptop next to it for USB was a real pain. I know minidsp has an add-on wifi-ethernet module for $75-80 but that doesn't make the 2x4 equal to the design & build quality of the xp2040.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Easy enough to save PEQ settings as a file and save/load, and with presets you can just copy in the correct settings on the active crossover menu. And the Altitude can have a nearly infinite number of PEQ filters AFAIK, which isn't necessarily true in the MiniDSP world where there's hard limits to PEQ filters (six?) per channel as well as less control over the delay that can be set. I wouldn't get anything less than a Xilica or QSC device for managing individual subs for that reason.

EDIT: I took a look again at the Xilica manual. Apparently the I/O level can be adjusted on each I/O in 0.25db increments. After the Altitude’s PEQ level flexibility for implementing MSO, I might find that a bit annoying. Likewise there’s a limit of eight PEQ filters per I/O slot. In practice that’s unlikely to matter at an individual sub level, though,

I've never had an issue with my MiniDSP 2x4 Balanced.

I've never tried the Xilica XP2040, but the MiniDSP actually provides 6x PEQ filers on each individual output channel, in addition to 6x PEQ filters on each input channel. I believe you can also utilise a further 16 filters per output channel if you use the cross-over section - though I've never tried, so don't know how it would work in practice. The MiniDSP has 0.1dB gain setting resolution, and you can also import REW calculated filters directly into it. You also have to then consider that the MiniDSP is less than an 8th of the price of the Xilica (at least in the UK). The direct USB connection is a PITA though I agree - I didn't know there was an add-on wifi option, I may have to get that!
Wookii is offline  
post #7574 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 03:33 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 555 Post(s)
Liked: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Just as an FYI, by "sweet spot" I meant that speaker configuration in a well treated room that is at or near the point of diminishing returns in terms of overall audio envelopment.

I am familiar with films (and music) that use more speakers. I (and you) can easily compare 7.x.4 to 9.x.6 on a 9.x.6. film. Is there improvement? Yes, but nothing when compared to the improvement of moving toward 7.x.4. Not even in the same ball park. My contention, based upon all demos I have heard and a number of other Trinnov rooms I have visited is that after getting to 7.x.4, the "percent" of improvement for each additional uptick in speaker count diminishes significantly, even with movies that contain objects that will use more speakers. I am not nor would I suggest that more speakers is not better, but incrementally, the improvement gets smaller and smaller after 7.x.4, while moving toward 7.x.4 the improvement is very large. Hence the use of the term, "sweet spot".

Maybe it's just me but my observations have been consistent.
As you approach SOTA in anything there is almost always diminishing returns the closer you get. I think the question for the fanatics that read these threads is how much better the mixes, decoders and up mixers will get in the future. Immersive audio is still fairly early in its adoption lifecycle. If DTS:X Pro and some of the new reference mixes are any indication there is more improvement to come in high channel count systems.
sdrucker likes this.
Lasalle is offline  
post #7575 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 04:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
I've never had an issue with my MiniDSP 2x4 Balanced.

I've never tried the Xilica XP2040, but the MiniDSP actually provides 6x PEQ filers on each individual output channel, in addition to 6x PEQ filters on each input channel. I believe you can also utilise a further 16 filters per output channel if you use the cross-over section - though I've never tried, so don't know how it would work in practice. The MiniDSP has 0.1dB gain setting resolution, and you can also import REW calculated filters directly into it. You also have to then consider that the MiniDSP is less than an 8th of the price of the Xilica (at least in the UK). The direct USB connection is a PITA though I agree - I didn't know there was an add-on wifi option, I may have to get that!
HERE is the wifi option. It would have been nice had it been available when I first set it up but I have not touched it in well over a year.

I have always found the miniDSP way more than satisfactory. They no longer make the product I use (miniDSP OpenDRC AN) but it has (real) XLR connectors instead of those "Mickey Mouse" thingies the other products have. If I were going to use a product such as this for higher frequencies, this one might not be a consideration since I suspect it is not PERFECTLY noise free, but for 10Hz to 100Hz it works and is incredibly straightforward to use (and would have been more so with the wifi option).

And unlike the one that Steve bought, I have had zero interference issues with mine. I actually have a new backup for mine which I would be more than willing to re-sell for $27,500 if anyone is interested (which just so happens to be the amount that is needed to update my Trinnov to a 32-32, buy additional amplifiers, buy additional speakers, and install all of them. Just sayin')
audioguy is offline  
post #7576 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 04:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
As you approach SOTA in anything there is almost always diminishing returns the closer you get. I think the question for the fanatics that read these threads is how much better the mixes, decoders and up mixers will get in the future. Immersive audio is still fairly early in its adoption lifecycle. If DTS:X Pro and some of the new reference mixes are any indication there is more improvement to come in high channel count systems.
You are most certainly correct with your SOTA comparison. As I have said more than once, I am sure higher speaker count is better and does move one closer to "the best". But what is the number of speakers that would cause me to say, "this was worth it"? The only way to insure that I don't "get the bug" by hearing a great room with something like a 20.x.10 speaker count is to never visit such a room. I know me and that would be a very bad (and very expensive) idea.
audioguy is offline  
post #7577 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 06:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,232
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 626
One can buy something like these for diminishing returns:

https://www.dandagostino.com/product...-monoblock.php

1500watts @ 8 ohm and doubles into 4 ohm and doubles again into 2

Only $125,000 each

I've heard demos with their stereo amp. Along with the room's dCS stack, $20K Audio Research preamp, $30K turntable setup & $60K speakers, way beyond me. But I do enjoy coming in once/yr to the store to see what's new, shop & listen. More than that & my system won't seem the same when I get home!

Expensive disease, this is.

Steve

Last edited by ss9001; 06-25-2019 at 07:39 AM.
ss9001 is offline  
post #7578 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 07:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,420
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2861 Post(s)
Liked: 2049
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
One can buy something like these for diminishing returns:

https://www.dandagostino.com/product...-monoblock.php

1500watts @ 8 ohm and doubles into 4 ohm and doubles again into 2

Only $125,000 each

I've heard demos with their stereo amp. Along with the room's dCS stack, $20K Audio Research preamp, $30K turntable setup & $60K speakers, I'm definitely not a buyer. But I do enjoy coming in once/yr to the store to see what's new, shop & listen. More than that & my system won't seem the same when I get home!

Expensive disease, this is.
There is some utterly crazy stuff in the audiophile high end world, some of it simply beggars belief. Like that D'Agostino stuff, there's what in manufacturer parts cost - $5k worth of high spec aluminium and copper machining and finishing work there maybe, and perhaps $2-3k of internal components at most? Even if you massively rounded it up and called it $10k of manufacturing cost - how do they get to $125k? lol
Wookii is offline  
post #7579 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 08:02 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 19,747
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
One can buy something like these for diminishing returns:

https://www.dandagostino.com/product...-monoblock.php

1500watts @ 8 ohm and doubles into 4 ohm and doubles again into 2

Only $125,000 each

I've heard demos with their stereo amp. Along with the room's dCS stack, $20K Audio Research preamp, $30K turntable setup & $60K speakers, way beyond me. But I do enjoy coming in once/yr to the store to see what's new, shop & listen. More than that & my system won't seem the same when I get home!

Expensive disease, this is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
There is some utterly crazy stuff in the audiophile high end world, some of it simply beggars belief. Like that D'Agostino stuff, there's what in manufacturer parts cost - $5k worth of high spec aluminium and copper machining and finishing work there maybe, and perhaps $2-3k of internal components at most? Even if you massively rounded it up and called it $10k of manufacturing cost - how do they get to $125k? lol
Actually, our Arizona Audio Video Club had a tour and demo of D'Agostino's factory in Carefree, AZ at the end of last month. Quite something and very interesting. Its a family owned and run business, with his wife and daughter heavily involved along with who I call the "Van Gogh" of the audio industry, Dan D'Agostino. Dan sells to the very top 1% (of 1% of 1%) who can afford his gear (and occasionally to "poorer" folks who drool over his gear - I have an audio friend with a pair of his monoblocks). Dan spent a lot of time explaining how and why he builds his gear like he does and I came away that this is one guy who is living the dream - "painting" his audio gear without regard to cost and time (unless his wife intervenes and tells him enough is enough and ship it out), much like an artist like "Van Gogh". We mere "20k+" forumers will never perhaps appreciate or spend that kind of money for amplifiers, etc. but WOW!

https://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show....php?t=1158431 No dealer is authorized to tell you I refer to them - any referrals I make will be done personally by me. Over the years I have found certain dealer(s) who I cannot recommend for good reason.
! 9.4.13 Trinnov Altitude 32 Theatre renovation/upgrade starts end of July 2019!
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #7580 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 08:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,420
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2861 Post(s)
Liked: 2049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post
I came away that this is one guy who is living the dream
I can imagine - I'd be living the dream at 80%+ margin
ss9001, adidino, sdrucker and 1 others like this.
Wookii is offline  
post #7581 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 11:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 555 Post(s)
Liked: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
You are most certainly correct with your SOTA comparison. As I have said more than once, I am sure higher speaker count is better and does move one closer to "the best". But what is the number of speakers that would cause me to say, "this was worth it"? The only way to insure that I don't "get the bug" by hearing a great room with something like a 20.x.10 speaker count is to never visit such a room. I know me and that would be a very bad (and very expensive) idea.
I find DTS:X Pro very encouraging for us high speaker count people (11.4(10).10). Not only will it upmix 2,5.1, and 7.1 mixes to all your speakers connected (upto 32), it will also take a DTS:X 7.1.4 mix and up mix it was well. Wides, CH, OH, and full complement of surrounds and heights. If Atmos/Surround 2.0 follows suit all the initial crippled 3D mixes take on a new life.
Wookii likes this.
Lasalle is offline  
post #7582 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 11:51 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,359
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4467 Post(s)
Liked: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post
2L pure audio blu ray discs have some with Auro 3D and also some with Dolby Atmos.

http://www.2l.no/

There's just not enough material to bother with an Auro3D speaker layout. Better to just remap if you can to a Dolby Atmos configuration.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #7583 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 12:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
I find DTS:X Pro very encouraging for us high speaker count people (11.4(10).10). Not only will it upmix 2,5.1, and 7.1 mixes to all your speakers connected (upto 32), it will also take a DTS:X 7.1.4 mix and up mix it was well. Wides, CH, OH, and full complement of surrounds and heights. If Atmos/Surround 2.0 follows suit all the initial crippled 3D mixes take on a new life.
That will be nice. That will help insure I don't go anywhere and hear such a system .

Part of the reason I struggle going to higher speaker count (costs notwithstanding) is that I get such amazing imaging, as is. For example, on the REM Atmos disc, I can run it in 7.x.4 (vs 9.x.6) and get an absolutely perfect image where my wides are located, and only going up to where my wides are actually located is it obvious that they are not playing. And when I compare that to the 9.x.6 version, the differences are at best, subtle. That might be related to the fact the while my center is behind my screen my L+R are in the room. As a result, they are closer to my side surrounds and hence the ability to create a great phantom river where my wides are located. IF, I were to add more speakers, I would add 2 additional side surrounds, one center rear and two more ceiling speakers and be 12.x.8 - and as a result I would have speakers every 30 degrees at ear level.
audioguy is offline  
post #7584 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 12:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 555 Post(s)
Liked: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
That will be nice. That will help insure I don't go anywhere and hear such a system .

Part of the reason I struggle going to higher speaker count (costs notwithstanding) is that I get such amazing imaging, as is. For example, on the REM Atmos disc, I can run it in 7.x.4 (vs 9.x.6) and get an absolutely perfect image where my wides are located, and only going up to where my wides are actually located is it obvious that they are not playing. And when I compare that to the 9.x.6 version, the differences are at best, subtle. That might be related to the fact the while my center is behind my screen my L+R are in the room. As a result, they are closer to my side surrounds and hence the ability to create a great phantom river where my wides are located. IF, I were to add more speakers, I would add 2 additional side surrounds, one center rear and two more ceiling speakers and be 12.x.8 - and as a result I would have speakers every 30 degrees at ear level.
Other than surround backs, I would not put any speakers past 120 deg, your ability to identify direction behind and above and behind your head is very diminished with little/no phantom imaging. My Surround layer looks like W,S1,S(where S is in the Auro position between the Atmos S and S2), SB. The surround layer is slightly sloped to match the riser elevation and avoid head collusion. The Height layer is FH,TF,TM,TB (in addition to CH,VOG/OH). This was done on recommendations from Arnaud.

Last edited by Lasalle; 06-25-2019 at 12:44 PM.
Lasalle is offline  
post #7585 of 8076 Old 06-25-2019, 02:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,070
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4571 Post(s)
Liked: 3340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
Even if you massively rounded it up and called it $10k of manufacturing cost - how do they get to $125k? lol
Because they can and will.

My guess would be the Wilson WAMM Master Chronosonic at a mere $685,000 per pair sort of falls into the same category. I'm sure part of the price comes from the engineering research, time and development expenses divided by the number of units expected to be sold (in this case, something like 100).

I want to hear the Atmos System with 9 (or so) of these at ear level, and a Wilson Subsonic Sub in each corner.
audioguy is offline  
post #7586 of 8076 Old 06-26-2019, 12:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,420
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2861 Post(s)
Liked: 2049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
I find DTS:X Pro very encouraging for us high speaker count people (11.4(10).10). Not only will it upmix 2,5.1, and 7.1 mixes to all your speakers connected (upto 32), it will also take a DTS:X 7.1.4 mix and up mix it was well. Wides, CH, OH, and full complement of surrounds and heights. If Atmos/Surround 2.0 follows suit all the initial crippled 3D mixes take on a new life.
Yep, I'm excited to have a play with DTS:X Pro upmixing. I really hope it puts pressure on Dolby to sort out Dolby Surround, and have it upmix to all available channels and upmix on native Atmos tracks also - though I'm not sure how willing Dolby will be to do that given their previous stance on 'preserving artistic intent' with respect to upmixing to wides.

If Dolby don't step up it will leave us with a difficult choice as to whether we stick with a native Atmos mix that might use half the available speakers, or use the 7.1 core and upmix with DTS:X Pro's upmixer to all available speakers!
Lasalle likes this.
Wookii is offline  
post #7587 of 8076 Old 06-26-2019, 05:48 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 9,232
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
..difficult choice as to whether we stick with a native Atmos mix that might use half the available speakers, or use the 7.1 core and upmix with DTS:X Pro's upmixer to all available speakers!

While I really prefer Dolby Surround to Neural X the vast majority of the time, based on 2 Atmos movies in 2 days, I have to agree with you.

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #7588 of 8076 Old 06-26-2019, 06:18 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,248
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1605 Post(s)
Liked: 1251
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post
While I really prefer Dolby Surround to Neural X the vast majority of the time, based on 2 Atmos movies in 2 days, I have to agree with you.
Just curious - what were you watching?

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification
sdrucker is offline  
post #7589 of 8076 Old 06-26-2019, 09:30 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
appelz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: A Hilton property near you!
Posts: 767
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 563 Post(s)
Liked: 562
I can't find the post, but I thought I recalled someone mentioning the R.E.M. Atmos disc and commenting that every channel lit up but their width channels. In case I am remembering correctly, I am sitting in an 11.1.6 system right now with front widths, and they definitely light up the meters. Back in my Lab, I was running 15.1.8 at times, and also recall every speaker playing.

Btw, in case some aren't aware, the Input meters are actually the output of the decoder. I'm sure this is obvious to the owners in this thread, but probably not for any who are reading along.

On another note, finally found a home in Nashville, so after 7 months of being on the road homeless, I should have Lab 2.0 up and running soon..ish.

Adam Pelz ,Acoustic Mafia - Hear No Evil
JBL Master ARCOS Calibrator, CEDIA Designer, Home Acoustics Alliance Instructor LIII, THX HT1+ HT2+ Video, Level III Trinnov Altitude Calibrator
Mercenary Calibrator for Manufacturers, Integrators and System Owners
appelz is offline  
post #7590 of 8076 Old 06-26-2019, 09:35 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,248
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1605 Post(s)
Liked: 1251
Quote:
Originally Posted by appelz View Post
I can't find the post, but I thought I recalled someone mentioning the R.E.M. Atmos disc and commenting that every channel lit up but their width channels. In case I am remembering correctly, I am sitting in an 11.1.6 system right now with front widths, and they definitely light up the meters. Back in my Lab, I was running 15.1.8 at times, and also recall every speaker playing.
That's what I remember as well. What struck me is that when I tried different layouts (I have 7.1.4, 9.1.6, 11.1.6 and 13.1.6 as presets), all the channels lit up. It's as if they took the multitrack mix and had objects located so that the resolution scaled directly with number of channnels. I remember this for the Lc/Rc in particular...where sounds that were mixed into the center channel or the mains got spread out into the Lc/Rc when I went from three to five speakers up front, such as an acoustic guitar and one of the vocal tracks getting separated out with more clarity. I don't remember the exact case, but I saw the same thing with one vs. two pair of side surrounds. That's why the R.E.M. disc is such great demo material for high(er) channel count.

Quote:
Btw, in case some aren't aware, the Input meters are actually the output of the decoder. I'm sure this is obvious to the owners in this thread, but probably not for any who are reading along.
Yup, can't leave home with them .

Quote:
On another note, finally found a home in Nashville, so after 7 months of being on the road homeless, I should have Lab 2.0 up and running soon..ish.
Congratulations...I can't imagine not sleeping in our own bed for 7 months, but I'm sure it's worth the wait.

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification
sdrucker is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

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