Trinnov Altitude - Page 286 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3993Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #8551 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 02:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,577
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3026 Post(s)
Liked: 2245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
What are the 5 layers? Where can I find this?
This is the layout Marc:



The Overhead (VOG) speaker is at 90 degrees elevation

The 'Top' speakers are at 60 degrees elevation

The 'Height' speakers are at 45 degrees elevation

The 'Base' level speakers are at zero degrees elevation

I'm not sure on the 'Bottom' speakers (yes, there's a joke or two in there!)

Personally I think the base layer speakers shouldn't be an issue, they align pretty much with where I have my Atmos base layer. The height speakers (Lh, Rh, Lhr, Rhr, Lhs, Rhs) approximate pretty well with Atmos Tops (Top Front, Top Rear, Top Middle). I'm hopeful the Atmos front heights and rear heights should approximate a phantom image for DTS Ch and Chr, and I have a VOG in place for Auro anyway.

I personally can't really see much merit in the DTS top layer at this stage if you have the VOG and heights in place, and as for the bottom layer, I'm not even going to entertain that idea.
Marc Alexander likes this.
Wookii is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #8552 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 04:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,046
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1636 Post(s)
Liked: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
Imagine the Leaf from the Atmos demo that was moving in 360 degree space around the room, where the leaf passing through, say, front side surrounds gets steered back to the wides by the DTS:X Pro tech then cycling back into the beds. No thank you.
In your example the (perceptual) position of the sound steered to the Atmos front side surround (ss1) position will not change, as the DTS:X up-mixer will not steer it back to the wides, but rather divide the sound between wides and side surrounds. But I agree that you would’t want the spatial (speaker) resolution reduced, especially in the region where you want solid sounds instead of phantom images (between 45 and 90 degrees).

Thinking a bit further about this DTS:X up-mixing on top of 7.1.4/6 decoded Atmos, having for example a 15 base speaker Atmos lay-out (LCR, L&R center, wides, sidesurrounds1, sidesurrounds, rearsurrounds1, rearsurrounds), you could put the DTS:X sidesurround (bed) channels onto the Atmos sidesurround1s, the DTS:X surround channels onto the Atmos sidesurrounds, the DTS:X surroundrear (bed) channels onto the Atmos rearsurrounds1s, and a paired DTS:X centersurround channel onto the Atmos rearsurrounds. Assuming a clear center extraction process out of a 7.1.4/6 decoded Atmos, the only region where you then will lose spatial resolution will be in the rear (where it least matters). And if you only have a hard coded 7.1.4 Atmos track to start with, the spatial resolution will importantly increase in the regions where it matters most (front and sides), again at the expense of resolution in the rear. And then there are still the height and top layers that could possibly benefit from such up-mixing scenario. e.g. by adding center height and top speaker to 4 or 6 decoded Atmos ceiling channels. Putting all things together, I would certainly like to try out such scenario if it would become available...

BTW: In such "DTS:X up-mixing of decoded ATMOS" scenario an option to apply this for overhead speakers only could be added, leaving the listener level speakers untouched. But again, just thinking out loud as it may not happen in any foreseeable future ...

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.

Last edited by maikeldepotter; 08-30-2019 at 04:02 AM. Reason: adding BTW
maikeldepotter is offline  
post #8553 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 08:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pennynike1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 698 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post

I personally can't really see much merit in the DTS top layer at this stage if you have the VOG and heights in place, and as for the bottom layer, I'm not even going to entertain that idea.
The bottom layer is intriguing to me, since it is something I have yet to experience. The way I look at DTS-X pro is that it is something that I wish to try, but when I do, it will likely be with a less expensive speaker than what I am using for my Atmos speakers. I am glad that DTS is still innovating.

For sale: Oppo 203 UHD player; 2 Mackie c300z speakers, Tag Mclaren av32r preamplifier
pennynike1 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #8554 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 09:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,942
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5237 Post(s)
Liked: 4158
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennynike1 View Post
I am glad that DTS is still innovating.
And I still believe that innovation might force Dolby to improve their up-mixing abilities.
Marc Alexander and pennynike1 like this.
audioguy is offline  
post #8555 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 09:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pennynike1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 698 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
And I still believe that innovation might force Dolby to improve their up-mixing abilities.
I am all for it. Competition between Dolby and DTS is good for our hobby! While it would be nice if one universal speaker layout could be adapted by both, I realize that isn't a realistic expectation. My theater space is filled with speakers as it is, and I know I will ultimately acquire more for DTS-X pro, once the format releases
Marc Alexander likes this.

For sale: Oppo 203 UHD player; 2 Mackie c300z speakers, Tag Mclaren av32r preamplifier
pennynike1 is online now  
post #8556 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 09:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,577
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3026 Post(s)
Liked: 2245
Does anyone know the proposed elevation angle for the 'bottom' speakers?
Wookii is offline  
post #8557 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 10:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,046
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1636 Post(s)
Liked: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
Does anyone know the proposed elevation angle for the 'bottom' speakers?
I believe it’s between -15 and -30 degrees.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is offline  
post #8558 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 11:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
pasender91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 546
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 481 Post(s)
Liked: 263
Talking

OMG, indeed there are 3 Bottom positions on the DTS:X Pro slide mentioned, Lb Cb Rb below the 3 main channels
I guess that as long as the speakers are not in OUR bottoms we're safe, but come on, aren't those guys taking the concept of 3D audio a bit too far now ???
Sorry but no one made that bad joke until now, i couldn't resist ...

9.2.4 : Panasonic UBD700 / Marantz 7009 + Lexicon CX-7 / Monitor Audio Gold GX (300+center+S12+S6+S6) [bottom 9] + Bose 101 monitors [top 4] / Klipsch R 115 + Sydney AR12 / Epson 9300
pasender91 is offline  
post #8559 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 11:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,577
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3026 Post(s)
Liked: 2245
Quote:
Originally Posted by pasender91 View Post
OMG, indeed there are 3 Bottom positions on the DTS:X Pro slide mentioned, Lb Cb Rb below the 3 main channels
I guess that as long as the speakers are not in OUR bottoms we're safe, but come on, aren't those guys taking the concept of 3D audio a bit too far now ???
Sorry but no one made that bad joke until now, i couldn't resist ...
There’s got to be a joke in there about Centre Bottoms, but I’m really not going to go there
Wookii is offline  
post #8560 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 11:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 970
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 607 Post(s)
Liked: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
I'll pass. I have no problem with applying upmixing to channel-based content. However, once you've thrown in objects to the mix that are rendered in 3D space locations in combination with traditional bed channels, with an upmix on top of Atmos, you're risking artifacts due to the upmixing steering methodology. Imagine the Leaf from the Atmos demo that was moving in 360 degree space around the room, where the leaf passing through, say, front side surrounds gets steered back to the wides by the DTS:X Pro tech then cycling back into the beds. No thank you.

If you want that sort of thing, I'd rather just work with the PCM of the core 7.1 track and let the upmixers (DSU, Auromatic, Neural:X or DTS Pro) do what they will, with the upmixing just providing additional ambience from adjacent channels. Or get creative and do a speaker array (i.e. copy mains or side surround to wides at some reduced level).
I'm not sure I would necessarily agree. I believe some testing would be needed to come to that conclusion. Essentially you are arguing less information is better to get an accurate upmix. I can't imagine that being true on the constrained 7.X.4 or 7.X.2 mixes with static "height objects". On better mixes with good use of panning objects this may cause artifact problems, but I would want to verify that it is indeed more detrimental than a 7.1 upmix before dismissing it out of hand. The upmixing capability may also improve in this area over time , or there maybe fewer crippled mixes, hopefully, both.
Lasalle is offline  
post #8561 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 02:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,577
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3026 Post(s)
Liked: 2245
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
I believe it’s between -15 and -30 degrees.
Thanks Maikel - so if the trig calculator I’ve used is correct, that puts the speaker between 1300mm and 3000mm from a seated listener (800mm ear height). For many people that means the speakers will be somewhere in the middle of the floor?
Wookii is offline  
post #8562 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 02:41 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 14,051
Mentioned: 268 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5884 Post(s)
Liked: 5449
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennynike1 View Post
Hi Marc, @SOWK posted about the 5 layers on the 66th page in the WI GTG thread, located here:



https://www.avsforum.com/forum/61-ar...thread-66.html



As you can see, the layout includes ground speakers below the mains, left and right center mains (ala Atmos 24.1.10), an overhead VOG channel, tops and heights.



Here is also a video I found on youtube that puts things into a visual perspective:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBc8dcrm998
I couldn't locate this set of slides anywhere in this thread so I am copying it here. (I'm guessing I missed it being posted in the Dts:X thread originally).

Quote:
Originally Posted by SOWK View Post
Speaking of the future:



This is DTS:X Pro





If you have setup your system for Atmos 9.1.6



Here are the optimal speakers you would enable for DTS:X Pro



L

C

R

Lw

Rw

Lss

Rss

Lsr

Rsr

Ltf

Rtf

Ltm

Rtm

Ltr

Rtr

LFE
Dts:X Pro is going to be a big highlight at CEDIA. I expect there are going to be many to folks dissapointed. Reason being that I believe the wait for Pro to come to come to DSP platforms could be extensive. The AV8805/X8500, Acurus and Emotiva may be the only platforms that don't require new DSP hardware. Perhaps Emotiva can benefit from Sound United's work with ADI as I expect the D+M flagships to be the first to offer Pro after the Trinnov debut.

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 08-29-2019 at 02:58 PM.
Marc Alexander is online now  
post #8563 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 02:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pennynike1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 698 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
I'm not sure I would necessarily agree. I believe some testing would be needed to come to that conclusion. Essentially you are arguing less information is better to get an accurate upmix. I can't imagine that being true on the constrained 7.X.4 or 7.X.2 mixes with static "height objects". On better mixes with good use of panning objects this may cause artifact problems, but I would want to verify that it is indeed more detrimental than a 7.1 upmix before dismissing it out of hand. The upmixing capability may also improve in this area over time , or there maybe fewer crippled mixes, hopefully, both.
I would be interested in finding out if DTS-X pro could introduce new life into a movie like "Shadow." The film is beautiful, but aside from some sporadic rain effects, doesnt take good advantage of height information.

For sale: Oppo 203 UHD player; 2 Mackie c300z speakers, Tag Mclaren av32r preamplifier
pennynike1 is online now  
post #8564 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 03:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 14,051
Mentioned: 268 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5884 Post(s)
Liked: 5449
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennynike1 View Post
The bottom layer is intriguing to me, since it is something I have yet to experience. The way I look at DTS-X pro is that it is something that I wish to try, but when I do, it will likely be with a less expensive speaker than what I am using for my Atmos speakers. I am glad that DTS is still innovating.
For the bottom speakers to truly be utilized, object encoded soundtracks would be necessary. Or, am I missing something?

I see this as a feature primarily for marketing. It may only be utilized on Dts demo clips, if that. Dialog control is a feature heavily advertised that has not been utilized. Is there even a demo clip that utilizes it?

We need to refer to the bottoms as something else. VOD, VOS and VOH come to mind (Devil/Satan/Hell).

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 08-29-2019 at 03:14 PM.
Marc Alexander is online now  
post #8565 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 03:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pennynike1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 698 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post

Dts:X Pro is going to be a big highlight at CEDIA. I expect there are going to be many to folks dissapointed. Reason being that I believe the wait for Pro to come to come to DSP platforms could be extensive. The AV8805/X8500, Acurus and Emotiva may be the only platforms that don't require new DSP hardware. Perhaps Emotiva can benefit from Sound United's work with ADI as I expect the D+M flagships to be the first to offer Pro after the Trinnov debut.
The rollout of multi-channel audio has been painstakingly slow, which is the real dissapointment for a non-trinnov user, in my experience. Marantz is still stuck on 9.1.4, and while Emotiva shows promise, their rollout of 9.1.6 has been less than smooth.

I was originally going to purchase a Trinnov back around 2016, and I regret waiting this long progressing to my desired 32 channels. It would have saved a lot of hassle, but it did allow me to educate myself along the way.

For sale: Oppo 203 UHD player; 2 Mackie c300z speakers, Tag Mclaren av32r preamplifier
pennynike1 is online now  
post #8566 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 03:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pennynike1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 698 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
For the bottom speakers to truly be utilized, object encoded soundtracks would be necessary. Or, am I missing something?

I see this as a feature primarily for marketing. It may only be utilized on Dts demo clips, if that. Dialog control is a feature heavily advertised that has not been utilized. Is there even a demo clip that utilizes it?
I actually don't think you are missing something with those bottom channels there Marc. If there isn't an object for a floor speaker in the track, I wonder if the bottom speakers would even activate. I feel like little is known yet about what pro really will do, but the anticipation is high on the hope front.

Right now, my hope is that my center heights can get some use with pro, since there is next to no auro 3d content for me to play with. Going to see if my "Inferno" disc has the desired auro 3d track tonight.

For sale: Oppo 203 UHD player; 2 Mackie c300z speakers, Tag Mclaren av32r preamplifier
pennynike1 is online now  
post #8567 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 03:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,858
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4801 Post(s)
Liked: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Kudos to the lawyers and management of Xperi, AuroTechnologies ánd Dolby for solving this issue in such a timely manner and avoiding lengthy lawsuits, supported by European antitrust legislation (EU competition law - Abuse of Dominance, article 102 TFEU).

I wouldn't give Dolby any thanks. If not for a successful lawsuit, they would have gone ahead with their anti-consumer plans.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #8568 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 03:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,858
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4801 Post(s)
Liked: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
It really depends on where the upmixer is able to do the processing though - ideally one would want the upmixing to happen only on the beds and leave the objects in tact, but I don't know if that is possible.

We wouldn't need to do this if Dolby just enabled speaker arraying of Bed Left Side Surround, Bed Right Side Surround, Bed Left Back Surround, Bed Right Back Surround, and the two objects making up the Bed Left Overhead and Bed Right Overhead. Plus allowing for array trim and delay settings for fine tuning.



This is what happens in a commercial Dolby Atmos theater and is used at the theatrical dubbing stage.



Only their Dolby Atmos cinema processor as of now seems to have this feature... for both home and cinema Atmos tracks.
pasender91 likes this.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #8569 of 10058 Old 08-29-2019, 03:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,858
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4801 Post(s)
Liked: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennynike1 View Post
I actually don't think you are missing something with those bottom channels there Marc. If there isn't an object for a floor speaker in the track, I wonder if the bottom speakers would even activate. I feel like little is known yet about what pro really will do, but the anticipation is high on the hope front.

Right now, my hope is that my center heights can get some use with pro, since there is next to no auro 3d content for me to play with. Going to see if my "Inferno" disc has the desired auro 3d track tonight.

It sounds like most DTS: X tracks will continue to be 7.1.4 fixed (only Well Go put out a couple DTS: X Blu-rays a while back with the maximum amount of moveable objects - now they release in Dolby Atmos), so DTS: X Pro is mostly wishful thinking... and a whole lot of Neural: X upmixing.
appelz likes this.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #8570 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 05:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 970
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 607 Post(s)
Liked: 493
Final section of Trinnov’s articles in the WSR on multi format speaker placement. Covers wides and height/tops/VOG.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	D04D11F4-8D4B-4CCF-8271-A8F095A4D0FF.png
Views:	47
Size:	5.22 MB
ID:	2609392   Click image for larger version

Name:	AE7BEBD7-108C-4E2E-9BDF-B90D15FAE0A0.png
Views:	45
Size:	4.12 MB
ID:	2609394   Click image for larger version

Name:	56E03D1E-CD25-473D-A30A-962C9E5D9B9C.png
Views:	47
Size:	4.96 MB
ID:	2609396   Click image for larger version

Name:	8164A91E-F346-4976-B859-D45C31D65995.png
Views:	43
Size:	4.75 MB
ID:	2609398   Click image for larger version

Name:	8C5F20B9-8F61-4732-80FE-D753F7E300B1.png
Views:	43
Size:	6.50 MB
ID:	2609400  

ss9001, A7mad78 and gwthacker like this.
Lasalle is offline  
post #8571 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 06:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Kain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 4,373
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2073 Post(s)
Liked: 940
Quick question...

Does background noise in a room (such as A/C noise or amplifier fan noise) affect or interfere with the room correction process?
Kain is offline  
post #8572 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 06:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,942
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5237 Post(s)
Liked: 4158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kain View Post
Quick question...

Does background noise in a room (such as A/C noise or amplifier fan noise) affect or interfere with the room correction process?
ABSOLUTELY!!

For truly accurate results, AC needs to be off (very low level low frequency interference). Not sure how one would deal with amp fan noise, but if the measurement mic is far enough away from the amp/fan and unless the fan is particularly noisy, it should not greatly affect results.
audioguy is offline  
post #8573 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 08:55 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
appelz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: A Hilton property near you!
Posts: 935
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
ABSOLUTELY!!

For truly accurate results, AC needs to be off (very low level low frequency interference). Not sure how one would deal with amp fan noise, but if the measurement mic is far enough away from the amp/fan and unless the fan is particularly noisy, it should not greatly affect results.
Street noise and bldg service equipment is always a problem when I am working in NYC. Even 30 floors up, the LF from heavy vehicles and HVAC systems is a problem. Keep your test signals well above ambient noise, and make sure you wear suitable ear plugs. Also, there are methods of measurement, such as MLS or ESS, that can reject spurious noise. I believe that the Trinnov generates noise with some sort of embedded MLS burst, but I'm not clear if it is used in that way, or used to analyze early reflections, spatial positioning of speakers, etc. I think I have an AES paper somewhere...
audioguy and sdrucker like this.

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 online now  
post #8574 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 09:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 9,942
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5237 Post(s)
Liked: 4158
Quote:
Originally Posted by appelz View Post
Keep your test signals well above ambient noise, and make sure you wear suitable ear plugs.
Excellent advice!
audioguy is offline  
post #8575 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 09:59 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,387
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1701 Post(s)
Liked: 1369
Quote:
Originally Posted by appelz View Post
Street noise and bldg service equipment is always a problem when I am working in NYC. Even 30 floors up, the LF from heavy vehicles and HVAC systems is a problem. Keep your test signals well above ambient noise, and make sure you wear suitable ear plugs. Also, there are methods of measurement, such as MLS or ESS, that can reject spurious noise. I believe that the Trinnov generates noise with some sort of embedded MLS burst, but I'm not clear if it is used in that way, or used to analyze early reflections, spatial positioning of speakers, etc. I think I have an AES paper somewhere...
I live in downtown Chicago, and along with the HVAC off, even almost 20 floors up, I sometimes have to stop a measure when I hear a garbage truck in our loading dock or the buildings in back of us. In practice it means I often run calibrations or REW sweeps on weekends or after 11 pm during the week. Urban problems...

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 online now  
post #8576 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 11:01 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,387
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1701 Post(s)
Liked: 1369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
It sounds like most DTS: X tracks will continue to be 7.1.4 fixed (only Well Go put out a couple DTS: X Blu-rays a while back with the maximum amount of moveable objects - now they release in Dolby Atmos), so DTS: X Pro is mostly wishful thinking... and a whole lot of Neural: X upmixing.
Barring any “bug fixes and enhancements” (as I think Oppo used to put it), what DTS:X Pro is bringing to the table AFAIK is simply removing the 11 channel limitation from its processing. Which is not inconsiderable to extend out the typical 7.1.4 DTS:X mix to the usable channel count supported by the DTS:X layout by upmixing, as well as upmix of other sources from 2-channel to 7.1 for 2D content.

That’s fine with me, since Atmos is still really the only game in town for high channel count rooms with native 3D content, as long as the mixers take advantage of object placement for a higher resolution experience from the precision possible. Otherwise it’s just more speakers, more sound IMO. Not that there’s anything wrong with that...see the CEDIA 2014 room with some > 16 channel arrayed layout with the church organ on the Auro demo disc of the time.

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; 08-31-2019 at 11:08 AM.
sdrucker is online now  
post #8577 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 12:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 8,780
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2381 Post(s)
Liked: 3179
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
In your example the (perceptual) position of the sound steered to the Atmos front side surround (ss1) position will not change, as the DTS:X up-mixer will not steer it back to the wides, but rather divide the sound between wides and side surrounds. But I agree that you would’t want the spatial (speaker) resolution reduced, especially in the region where you want solid sounds instead of phantom images (between 45 and 90 degrees).

Thinking a bit further about this DTS:X up-mixing on top of 7.1.4/6 decoded Atmos, having for example a 15 base speaker Atmos lay-out (LCR, L&R center, wides, sidesurrounds1, sidesurrounds, rearsurrounds1, rearsurrounds), you could put the DTS:X sidesurround (bed) channels onto the Atmos sidesurround1s, the DTS:X surround channels onto the Atmos sidesurrounds, the DTS:X surroundrear (bed) channels onto the Atmos rearsurrounds1s, and a paired DTS:X centersurround channel onto the Atmos rearsurrounds. Assuming a clear center extraction process out of a 7.1.4/6 decoded Atmos, the only region where you then will lose spatial resolution will be in the rear (where it least matters). And if you only have a hard coded 7.1.4 Atmos track to start with, the spatial resolution will importantly increase in the regions where it matters most (front and sides), again at the expense of resolution in the rear. And then there are still the height and top layers that could possibly benefit from such up-mixing scenario. e.g. by adding center height and top speaker to 4 or 6 decoded Atmos ceiling channels. Putting all things together, I would certainly like to try out such scenario if it would become available...

BTW: In such "DTS:X up-mixing of decoded ATMOS" scenario an option to apply this for overhead speakers only could be added, leaving the listener level speakers untouched. But again, just thinking out loud as it may not happen in any foreseeable future ...

One thought ...

Even in a 7.1.4 “fixed” Atmos mix the rendering engine has no idea there are static’s objects, ie it doesn’t differentiate it from any other Atmos mix.

While there seems to be a lot of hope that DTS:X can be used on an Atmos mix I don’t see how that will be possible....

The Atmos rendering engine uses all available speakers... what exactly is Pro supposed to add to that? DTS cannot look into the encode and differentiate between a side surround channel and an object when sound is coming out of said speakers....



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
sdrucker likes this.
FilmMixer is offline  
post #8578 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 02:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,858
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4801 Post(s)
Liked: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
One thought ...

Even in a 7.1.4 “fixed” Atmos mix the rendering engine has no idea there are static’s objects, ie it doesn’t differentiate it from any other Atmos mix.

While there seems to be a lot of hope that DTS:X can be used on an Atmos mix I don’t see how that will be possible....

The Atmos rendering engine uses all available speakers... what exactly is Pro supposed to add to that? DTS cannot look into the encode and differentiate between a side surround channel and an object when sound is coming out of said speakers....



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

And that is definitely the reason I wouldn't want an upmixer like Dolby Surround or DTS Neural: X applied to a real immersive mix like a full fledged Dolby Atmos track (non-fixed).



What I would want is for Dolby to implement side and rear surround channel bed arraying for consumer Atmos products of >7.1.4 (and during mixing and encoding have the two fixed objects that are often used to recreate the two overhead bed channels of a theatrical mix with a 9.1 channel bed) be able to array as well (besides allowing pannable 3D objects through). Just like theatrical Atmos.



It seemingly can be done if the talk is true that Dolby's own cinema processor can supposedly handle consumer Atmos tracks just like a commercial track. This would be a wonderful feature for owners or potential owners of larger home Atmos systems. Why Dolby hasn't even blessed Trinnov with that ability is beyond me.
mikela and sdrucker like this.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 08-31-2019 at 02:30 PM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #8579 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 02:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 8,780
Mentioned: 170 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2381 Post(s)
Liked: 3179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
And that is definitely the reason I wouldn't want an upmixer like Dolby Surround or DTS Neural: X applied to a real immersive mix like a full fledged Dolby Atmos track (non-fixed).



What I would want is for Dolby to implement side and rear surround channel bed arraying for consumer Atmos products of >7.1.4 (and during mixing and encoding have the two fixed objects that are often used to recreate the two overhead bed channels of a theatrical mix with a 9.1 channel bed) be able to array as well (besides allow objects through). Just like theatrical Atmos.



It seemingly can be done if the talk is true that Dolby's own cinema processor can handle consumer Atmos tracks just like a commercial track. This would be a wonderful feature for owners or potential owners of larger home Atmos systems. Why Dolby hasn't even blessed Trinnov with that ability is beyond me.

Again I’m note sure it CAN be done.

Not that this is a popular opinion on this thread but Dolby has very little incentive to devote resources to such an use case specific feature for such a small number of consumers... Haines wise I’m not sure I could make that case.

DTS had to do something. They created a codec that is very limited (hence all the 7.1.4 titles) and they saw 9.1.6 coming down the path... that market will be much much larger than anything greater than 16 channels, and even then it’s going to be a very small market vs 5.1.2-7.1.4 installs....

Dolby already adapts to 9.1.6 natively.... DTS does not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
FilmMixer is offline  
post #8580 of 10058 Old 08-31-2019, 04:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
Berland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 852
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
Again I’m note sure it CAN be done.

Not that this is a popular opinion on this thread but Dolby has very little incentive to devote resources to such an use case specific feature for such a small number of consumers... Haines wise I’m not sure I could make that case.

DTS had to do something. They created a codec that is very limited (hence all the 7.1.4 titles) and they saw 9.1.6 coming down the path... that market will be much much larger than anything greater than 16 channels, and even then it’s going to be a very small market vs 5.1.2-7.1.4 installs....

Dolby already adapts to 9.1.6 natively.... DTS does not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
The market for 5.1.2 and 7.1.4 is really small; the 16 channels+ market is close to non existing

HT: Trinnov A32 (AL32-1632)/AMP8/8M - BRYSTON 4B SST2 - B&W 802D3, 803D2, 2*DB1, HTM2D2, 804D2, SCMS, Nautilus SCM1, 805D2 - NORDOST Heimdall2/Frey2 - ISOTEK EVO3 Titan,Sigmas - LG OLED65B7V - GIK ACOUSTICS
HP: 2*MOON 430HA D, 2*MiND2 - 2*Yggdrasil - 2*Hydra Z/ZPM - ISOTEK EVO3 Sigmas, Aquarius - NORDOST Heimdall 2 - AUDEZE LCD-4 rev2, 2*LCD-XC - SHURE SE846 - Bose NC 700
Berland 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