DTS:X Pro impact on a native 16 Channel MX170/MP-60 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 5Likes
  • 1 Post By G-Rex
  • 1 Post By sdurani
  • 1 Post By sdurani
  • 1 Post By sdurani
  • 1 Post By G-Rex
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 18 Old 11-01-2019, 03:56 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
DTS:X Pro impact on a native 16 Channel MX170/MP-60

With an SSP like an MX170 or MP-60, which is capable of 16 discrete channels, or a combination of discrete and matrixed channels (not to exceed 15 plus LFE)... what does DTS:X Pro bring to the table? The configuration may be 15 speakers consisting of a traditional 7 channel base layer plus 2 wides, 4 atmos/ceiling speakers placed a bit wider than typical, and a Center Height and Center Height Rear.

The wides may end up being matrixed with the Lyngdorf algorithm, which has been reported to be quite good, with the option to go discrete wides. I don’t believe there is much discrete audio info sent to wides these days. The big question is, will DTS:X Pro likely make it worth the installation of the Center Height and Center Height Rear? What sound will DTS:X Pro likely send to the CH and CHR speakers? With a large room and tall ceilings, I would think the middle two speakers (CH/CHR) would fill in the sound field centrally. With such little reported on DTS:X Pro, I realize some of the replies may be a bit speculative.

Thoughts?
joerod likes this.

Last edited by G-Rex; 11-01-2019 at 04:52 PM.
G-Rex is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 18 Old 11-02-2019, 04:02 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
DTS:X Pro lifts the current 11-speaker limit of DTS:X. Since most DTS:X soundtracks are 7.1.4 channels, additional speaker outputs will be fed using matrix 2-in 3-out processing that extract a centre output between 2 adjacent speakers. This matrix extraction has been built into DTS:X decoding since the beginning (that's how Wides were fed with a 9.1.2 configuration).

By comparison, the Lyngdorf "matrix" Wides are simply a copy of the adjacent speakers (Front channels plays through Front speakers & Wide speakers, Side channels plays through Side speakers & Wide speakers; channel levels are dropped by 3dB since each channel is playing through 2 speakers).

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #3 of 18 Old 11-02-2019, 05:14 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
DTS:X Pro lifts the current 11-speaker limit of DTS:X. Since most DTS:X soundtracks are 7.1.4 channels, additional speaker outputs will be fed using matrix 2-in 3-out processing that extract a centre output between 2 adjacent speakers. This matrix extraction has been built into DTS:X decoding since the beginning (that's how Wides were fed with a 9.1.2 configuration).

By comparison, the Lyngdorf "matrix" Wides are simply a copy of the adjacent speakers (Front channels plays through Front speakers & Wide speakers, Side channels plays through Side speakers & Wide speakers; channel levels are dropped by 3dB since each channel is playing through 2 speakers).
Thanks for the reply. I am aware of the 11 speaker limit being lifted For DTS:X Pro. I am also aware of how the Lyngdorf algorithm works for matrix wides (sound data from R/L fronts and R/L side surrounds) as well as the option to matrix the top mids (with sound data taken from top front/rear speakers). What I was not aware of the 2 in 3 out processing of DTS:X Pro. With this info could you please elaborate a bit on these 3 questions:

1) With DTS:X Pro, where will the info come from to matrix the CH speaker? Will it be from the FH left/right speakers (in my case there are none), the base layer center or left/right or the elevation/ceiling layer top front left/right?

2) With DTS:X Pro, where will the info come from to matrix the RCH speaker? Will it be from the left/right Rear Height speakers (in my case there are none), or the elevation/ceiling layer top rear left/right?

3) Relative to wides, it seems very few soundtracks have them discretely encoded these days, so the best way to go is matrix wides. So with the two SSPs I mentioned, I wonder if there will be only one option to go with the Lyngdorf matrix wides algorithm or will there be a second option via a DTS:X Pro matrix wides algorithm? Seems like some overlapping going on with matrix choices.

Last edited by G-Rex; 11-03-2019 at 12:08 PM.
G-Rex is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 18 Old 11-03-2019, 09:56 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
With DTS:X Pro, where will the info come from to matrix the CH speaker?
The info to matrix extract a centre output comes from adjacent channels.
Quote:
Will it be from the FH left/right speakers (in my case there are none), the base layer left/right or the elevation/ceiling layer top front left/right?
Extracted centre height info won't come from the base layer, it will only come from sounds in the height layer.
Quote:
With DTS:X Pro, where will the info come from to matrix the RCH speaker? Will it be from the left/right Rear Height speakers (in my case there are none), the base layer rear left/right rear surround or the elevation/ceiling layer top rear left/right?
Same answers as above.
Quote:
So with the two SSPs I mentioned, I wonder if there will be only one option to go with the Lyngdorf matrix wides algorithm or will there be a second option via a DTS:X Pro matrix wides algorithm?
Scaling the number of channels in the sountrack to the number of speakers used for playback has been built into DTS:X decoding since the beginning. That part of decoding change with DTS:X Pro. And, since it is part of decoding, you cannot turn it off (i.e., you can't decide that you want that particular part of the decoding replaced with Lyngdorf's channel copying).
G-Rex likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5 of 18 Old 11-03-2019, 12:04 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
I asked the base layer question for a couple of reasons. I remember the old Yamahas pulling info from the base layer and widening/elevating it. Also wanted to clarify re the CH that DTS:X Pro does not treat it as a dual centers, (similar to the Trinnov). So CH and CHR pulls exclusively from elevation... good to know.

As far as Lyngdorf matrixing wides go, I know the new MX170 still allows matrixing wides and I believe it does it with Lyngdorf processing as that was implied (but the source of the info was a bit vague so perhaps I’m wrong). It would make sense that DTS:X Pro with all its matrixing algorithms takes over the entire show once activated.

It’s nice to have a bit of additional info on DTS:X Pro... thank you.

Last edited by G-Rex; 11-03-2019 at 03:26 PM.
G-Rex is offline  
post #6 of 18 Old 11-03-2019, 01:08 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
I remember the old Yamahas pulling info from the base layer and widening/elevating it.
Sure, when upmixing legacy (2.0, 5.1, 7.1) formats, the height speakers are going to pull from the base layer, since those tracks don't have any height information.
Quote:
As far as Lyngdorf matrixing wides go, I know the new MX170 still allows matrixing wides and I believe it does it with Lyngdorf processing as that was implied (but my source was a bit vague so perhaps I’m wrong).
That should continue until Pro shows up, at which point the scaling built into DTS:X decoding will feed all your speakers, leaving the Lyngdorf processing nothing to do.
Quote:
It would make sense that DTS:X Pro with all its matrixing algorithms takes over the entire show once activated.
DTS:X does that matrixing now, but will do more of it with Pro. The format always intended to scale channels to additional speakers by doing centre extraction. That's why their layout has most speakers exactly in between adjacent speakers.


Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #7 of 18 Old 11-03-2019, 06:44 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
Interesting... re once DTS:X Pro shows up, Lyngdorf Matrixing for wides, CH and CHR will no longer have anything to do. It makes sense.

@sdurani with the speaker configuration as described in post one of this thread, how active do you think the CH and CHR will be once DTS:X Pro is enabled? Are the installation of these two speakers worth the cost? There is a bit of a void where I am putting these 2 speakers so I presume it would be.

I presume matrix wides will be fairly active as they are with the Lyngdorf matrix algorithm.

Last edited by G-Rex; 11-03-2019 at 06:49 PM.
G-Rex is offline  
post #8 of 18 Old 11-03-2019, 11:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,040
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2115 Post(s)
Liked: 766
I wonder if the Lyngdorf wide extraction might actually sound better in some respects than DTS:X extraction.

That would be a more expansive ambient soundstage, because the sound is coming from more speakers.

Of course the DTS:X would give more precise pans and discrete effects for more listeners.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #9 of 18 Old 11-04-2019, 04:49 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
I wonder if the Lyngdorf wide extraction might actually sound better in some respects than DTS:X extraction.

That would be a more expansive ambient soundstage, because the sound is coming from more speakers.

Of course the DTS:X would give more precise pans and discrete effects for more listeners.
It would be nice if we had the ability to choose which wide speaker algorithm, but what from Sanjay says, once DTS:X Pro is released...it will render the Lyngdorf algorithm dormant.

I would assume with a Dolby Atmos movie track, the Lyngdorf wide algorithm would kick back in.
G-Rex is offline  
post #10 of 18 Old 11-04-2019, 09:33 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
@sdurani with the speaker configuration as described in post one of this thread, how active do you think the CH and CHR will be once DTS:X Pro is enabled? Are the installation of these two speakers worth the cost? There is a bit of a void where I am putting these 2 speakers so I presume it would be.
The height layer in general doesn't get much info. If you were to examine how audio is distributed in a movie soundtrack, you'd see that most of the audio (85-90%) is in the front soundstage, less in the surround field and even less in the height layer. So don't expect the CH and CHR to be very active since the height layer in general isn't very active.

If you are using CH to fill a void between the two front height/top speakers, then you're fixing a problem created by those speakers being far enough apart to create the void. Moving the front height/top speakers closer together, per Dolby or DTS recommendations, avoids the void to begin with. CHR can be problematic for the same reason a single rear speaker (6.1 layout) is usually not recommended: imaging reversals (sounds heard equally in both ears tend to image in front of us, even if the source of the sound is behind us).
G-Rex likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #11 of 18 Old 11-04-2019, 09:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
I wonder if the Lyngdorf wide extraction might actually sound better in some respects than DTS:X extraction.
Play a 2-channel source using 3 speakers. Instead of using a matrix extracted centre, use Y-splitters to copy the left & right channel to the centre speaker. You can then judge for yourself whether copying channels (like Lyngdorf does) sounds better than matrix extraction.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #12 of 18 Old 11-04-2019, 10:54 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,040
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2115 Post(s)
Liked: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
I would assume with a Dolby Atmos movie track, the Lyngdorf wide algorithm would kick back in.

Sanjay can verify (or not), but I'd expect Atmos to disable both Lyngdorf's and DTS' algorithms, because Atmos supports Wides.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #13 of 18 Old 11-04-2019, 11:22 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Sanjay can verify (or not), but I'd expect Atmos to disable both Lyngdorf's and DTS' algorithms, because Atmos supports Wides.
The Atmos format is designed to scale to the playback speaker layout, even if some Atmos soundtracks don't take advantage of that capability. The previous Lyngdorf processor (MP-50) had 15.1 outputs but only 11.1 native Atmos decoding, which left 4 outputs to be filled by Lyngdorf upmixing. The new MP-60 has 15.1 native Atmos decoding, which means that Atmos tracks will be rendered with that speaker layout in mind, even if some of the speakers never get sound (fault of the mix, not the format). So, unlike the previous processor, the new one will not be able to apply upmixing to Atmos.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #14 of 18 Old 11-04-2019, 09:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The height layer in general doesn't get much info. If you were to examine how audio is distributed in a movie soundtrack, you'd see that most of the audio (85-90%) is in the front soundstage, less in the surround field and even less in the height layer. So don't expect the CH and CHR to be very active since the height layer in general isn't very active.

If you are using CH to fill a void between the two front height/top speakers, then you're fixing a problem created by those speakers being far enough apart to create the void. Moving the front height/top speakers closer together, per Dolby or DTS recommendations, avoids the void to begin with. CHR can be problematic for the same reason a single rear speaker (6.1 layout) is usually not recommended: imaging reversals (sounds heard equally in both ears tend to image in front of us, even if the source of the sound is behind us).
I am aware of the fact that we hear much differently with sounds coming from the rear (vs sounds from the sides and front). What I find interesting is what you stated relative to imaging reversal being much more prominent with a monopole speaker. I also found the link below very informative where Flint elaborates further on what you stated relative to how we perceive/hear sound from various direct radiating speakers in a theater in pairs vs monopole at different locations.

Sanjay, from what you are saying, as well as Flint in the link, it may be advisable to forgo the CHR, but do note that the CHR would be placed only a foot or 2 behind the one listening row mounted flush with the angle of the cathedral ceiling so the drivers are aimed at the listener. Due to this location, I wonder if the sound will appear to come from above centrally more so than the problems of one speaker mounted centrally far behind the listener? My CHR may appear to sound more like a VOG/top middle speaker than a CHR speaker. Do you still see this as a problem? If so I can just scrap the CHR and either do 2 center height speakers instead (located equidistant above the screen) or just keep it simple and do one CH speaker located centrally above the screen.

http://theaudioannex.com/forum/threa...-imaging.1651/

Last edited by G-Rex; 11-05-2019 at 08:48 AM.
G-Rex is offline  
post #15 of 18 Old 11-05-2019, 08:57 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
Sanjay, from what you are saying, as well as Flint in the link, it may be advisable to forgo the CHR, but do note that the CHR would be placed only a few feet behind the one listening row mounted flush with the angle of the cathedral ceiling so the drivers are aimed at the listener. Due to this location, I wonder if the sound will appear to come from above centrally more so than the problems of one speaker mounted centrally far behind the listener? My CHR may appear to sound more like a VOG speaker than a CHR speaker. Do you still see this as a problem? If so I can just scrap the CHR and either do 2 center height speakers instead (located equidistant above the screen) or just keep it simple and do one CH speaker located centrally above the screen.
The idea behind reversals is pretty straightforward. If you hear a sound louder in your right ear, then you know the source of that sound is towards your right. If you hear a sound louder in your left ear, the source is to your left. If you hear the sound equally in both ears, the sound is directly in front of you.

Or is it?

The same sound equally in both ears IS what you hear when a sound is directly behind you or above you (which is why it helps to use 2 speakers to play back a mono surround-back channel or an overhead VOG channel). Reversals aren't a problem for sound sources forward of us, since that's where we reflexively think those sounds are anyway. So a CH speaker is fine while a CHR speaker can be problematic. I would not do a single rear or overhead speaker along the listener centre line anywhere above or rearward of the listening position.

Flint mentions that moving your head can help confirm location. This is true: we humans make tiny involuntary head movements to constantly recalibrate to our surroundings. So if you played a steady tone from a mono rear speaker, your initial reflex might be to perceive the sound in front of you but you'd soon figure out that it was coming from behind you. Problem is, sound effects in movie soundtracks are often fleeting, so by the time your hearing recalibrates, the sound effect is gone.
G-Rex likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #16 of 18 Old 11-05-2019, 09:10 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The idea behind reversals is pretty straightforward. If you hear a sound louder in your right ear, then you know the source of that sound is towards your right. If you hear a sound louder in your left ear, the source is to your left. If you hear the sound equally in both ears, the sound is directly in front of you.

Or is it?

The same sound equally in both ears IS what you hear when a sound is directly behind you or above you (which is why it helps to use 2 speakers to play back a mono surround-back channel or an overhead VOG channel). Reversals aren't a problem for sound sources forward of us, since that's where we reflexively think those sounds are anyway. So a CH speaker is fine while a CHR speaker can be problematic. I would not do a single rear or overhead speaker along the listener centre line anywhere above or rearward of the listening position.

Flint mentions that moving your head can help confirm location. This is true: we humans make tiny involuntary head movements to constantly recalibrate to our surroundings. So if you played a steady tone from a mono rear speaker, your initial reflex might be to perceive the sound in front of you but you'd soon figure out that it was coming from behind you. Problem is, sound effects in movie soundtracks are often fleeting, so by the time your hearing recalibrates, the sound effect is gone.
Very interesting Sanjay. So looks like I will scrub the CHR idea. As far as the front CH speakers go, do you think there is much to gain by adding 2 speakers over the 14’ wide screen vs one speaker? My front mains are about 15’ wide, and the CH is about 66”+ above the base front layer. It’s a tricky install up there with the sloping ceiling, but I figure if I go with 2 CH speakers they would be about 4’ or 5’ apart vs one speaker installed dead center above the screen.
G-Rex is offline  
post #17 of 18 Old 11-05-2019, 10:00 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,119
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7336 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post
As far as the front CH speakers go, do you think there is much to gain by adding 2 speakers over the 14’ wide screen vs one speaker? My front mains are about 15’ wide, and the CH is about 66”+ above the base front layer. It’s a tricky install up there with the sloping ceiling, but I figure if I go with 2 CH speakers they would be about 4’ or 5’ apart vs one speaker installed dead center above the screen.
Stick with a single CH speaker (for the same reasons to use a single Centre speaker). BTW, that is a valid speaker location for DTS:X and Auro. It's only Atmos that doesn't use that location.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #18 of 18 Old 11-05-2019, 04:56 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 2,519
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1164 Post(s)
Liked: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Stick with a single CH speaker (for the same reasons to use a single Centre speaker). BTW, that is a valid speaker location for DTS:X and Auro. It's only Atmos that doesn't use that location.
Ok, got it. I appreciate your advice. You have been very helpful.
sdurani likes this.
G-Rex 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