The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 1141 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 27457Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #34201 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:11 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 14,835
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4815 Post(s)
Liked: 2853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
Only thing I dont get is why when I stream Netflix or Youtube from my laptop via youtube the video is slightly behind the audio
Auto sync of audio with video sometimes doesn't work as one would like. You'll have to set the audio delay manually in the receiver.

Selden

Marantz SR7009 avr + MM9000 amp --> Atmos 7.1.4
Fronts=NHT 2.9+AC2, FH+TM=DefTech PM1000, LCR+TM amped
Selden Ball is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34202 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:20 AM
Member
 
apesterin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpco View Post
... just because Dolby and DTS have arrived on the height processing scene.
DTS has arrived? They would certainly like everyone to think so
jpco likes this.
apesterin is offline  
post #34203 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:24 AM
Member
 
apesterin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Is there a remote possibility that you were given false information?
Equally remote is the possibility that that is precisely what it really is (not to contest it may remain so for a long time). We can certainly speculate either way. What remains true is that current generation processors certainly don't have that capability (which is what was said anyway), so it's moot for now
apesterin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34204 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:29 AM
 
Rocky3RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post
Auto sync of audio with video sometimes doesn't work as one would like. You'll have to set the audio delay manually in the receiver.
that specific command to set the audio delay manually is not available in bluetooth mode, onlyin BD/DVD mode.
I guess because this is a 5.1 system, bluetooth connection cannot support the passing of the signal properly, as it would with a 2.1 soundbar. The other option would be to just use a cable to plug from my laptop headset portal to the receiver headset portal
Rocky3RD is offline  
post #34205 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Is there a remote possibility that you were given false information?

If you believe that Dolby would deliberately give out false information to the industry in general and to AV journalists in particular, then I guess it is possible. Personally, I have no doubts about Dolby's integrity, so when they say that Atmos for Home can do positional rendering, and that no mainstream AVR makers have chosen to implement it, I believe them.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #34206 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stoked21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Kansas City (Lenexa)
Posts: 2,287
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1526 Post(s)
Liked: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
If you believe that Dolby would deliberately give out false information to the industry in general and to AV journalists in particular, then I guess it is possible. Personally, I have no doubts about Dolby's integrity, so when they say that Atmos for Home can do positional rendering, and that no mainstream AVR makers have chosen to implement it, I believe them.
I have no doubt it is capable. "Can" is the operative word. Sure the DSP is more than capable, the specs exist, and commercial Atmos can. The algorithm is just not deployed in low cost home market models. So I guess I would say it cannot, but it is possible/capable of doing so. Dolby isn't spreading false info.

I have no doubt that in several years Dolby will prove that statement but likely not until we pass 15.1 (9.1.6). I just don't think it's practical until we surpass some level of bed/overheads. At that point additional speaker placement begins to become more user preference and based on room accommodations.
Stoked21 is offline  
post #34207 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
dvdwilly3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Haymarket, VA (metro DC)
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 520 Post(s)
Liked: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
If you believe that Dolby would deliberately give out false information to the industry in general and to AV journalists in particular, then I guess it is possible. Personally, I have no doubts about Dolby's integrity, so when they say that Atmos for Home can do positional rendering, and that no mainstream AVR makers have chosen to implement it, I believe them.
It would seem to me that doing positional rendering on a live audio signal would be the equivalent of doing Audyssey, AccuEQ, etc. initial calibration on the fly and continuously.
That would entail a significant increase in terms of complexity and capability (chip architecture and possibly size leading addional physical size, power consumption, etc.) of any DSP chip which = $$$...one way or the other...

Atmos Dolby 7.2.4; GE Triton 5; GE XL center; Monitor Audio Gold FX; GE Aon 2; KEF Q50a (top front and rear); SVS PB-12 Plus & SVS NSD-12; Epson 6040UB; Panasonic UB820; TiVo Roamio; Roku Stick+; Nvidia Shield
dvdwilly3 is offline  
post #34208 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 08:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stoked21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Kansas City (Lenexa)
Posts: 2,287
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1526 Post(s)
Liked: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdwilly3 View Post
It would seem to me that doing positional rendering on a live audio signal would be the equivalent of doing Audyssey, AccuEQ, etc. initial calibration on the fly and continuously.
That would entail a significant increase in terms of complexity and capability (chip architecture and possibly size leading addional physical size, power consumption, etc.) of any DSP chip which = $$$...one way or the other...
Running the algorithm real time would involve substantial mflops above and beyond current capabilities. But I don't believe that was Keith's point. I venture to guess that most of us are not moving our speakers around the room while watching a movie. The principal here is that one could completely ignore recommended placements and angles. The DSP/req calibration would run through all outputs and map the speaker locations. It would then utilize that predefined map for object rendering based on the speaker locations available.

Even then there would have to be some guidelines to achieve optimal immersion. Otherwise some schmuck would put all his speakers in the front and complain of no sound behind...or all at bed level and complain there was no height.
kbarnes701 and dvdwilly3 like this.
Stoked21 is offline  
post #34209 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 09:02 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
lujan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,454
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4967 Post(s)
Liked: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
Let us know how you like it as I'm interested in getting something like that?

lujan
623 Ultra HD
727 HD
4 SD
lujan is online now  
post #34210 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 02:20 PM
 
Rocky3RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lujan View Post
Let us know how you like it as I'm interested in getting something like that?
I think this an entry-level very basic Atmos system.I say this because it seems as if I need to crank up the db levels on all 5 speakers in order to get decent surround quality. If I go by the EQ Calibration with the mic that came in the box I get very low center speaker levels and weak surround speakers levels
Rocky3RD is offline  
post #34211 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 02:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 14,835
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4815 Post(s)
Liked: 2853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
I think this an entry-level very basic Atmos system.I say this because it seems as if I need to crank up the db levels on all 5 speakers in order to get decent surround quality. If I go by the EQ Calibration with the mic that came in the box I get very low center speaker levels and weak surround speakers levels
If you haven't already, please consult with the Audyssey 101 & FAQ here on AVS. The instructions in the equipment owners' manuals are woefully inadequate.
MarkMul1 likes this.

Selden

Marantz SR7009 avr + MM9000 amp --> Atmos 7.1.4
Fronts=NHT 2.9+AC2, FH+TM=DefTech PM1000, LCR+TM amped
Selden Ball is offline  
post #34212 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:13 PM
Senior Member
 
BigScreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WI USA
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoked21 View Post
????

Not sure what's being questioned here? Statement was that Yamaha has the worst nomenclature (Presence?). Not that Yamaha does not use the same dolby processing, which they do. Obviously Yamaha D&M and everyone else use the same angles as well; these are Dolby specifications not specs by AVR vendors.

As for TM. No they are different and their own independent pairs. Different delays and I'm sure other things as well. Plus TM is indeed part of the dolby spec. It should be a specific part of the metadata stream for object rendering.

FH/RH are different speakers than TF and TR in the dolby spec as well. But no where in the dolby papers is "presence" listed. Somehow Yamaha decided to take TF/FH and TR/RH (discretely different speaker pairs per Dolby) and group them into their own made-up category of Presence. Albeit, they do allow for the discrimination in their GUI by selecting the placement of the particular "presence" speaker. If you refer to the papers, you will see these are all different speakers per Dolby. D&M keeps them discretely labeled per Dolby guidelines.

Is this an academic discussing? yes because we can't support them all simultaneously anyway. But WHEN they can be supported, Yamaha will have to redo all of their labeling to fall in-line with specifications.

Just to be clear, I love Yamaha product. I only own 2 of their AVRs now instead of 3, but I still think they make a great AVR. This is not a bash on Yamaha. It is gripe about their nomenclature, which someone else brought up.



EDIT: FYI in the Dolby guidelines, Page 33 "additional speaker placement guidelines" is the starting discussion for Dolby Height speakers. TM is covered in section 3 of the standard x.x.2 diagrams. Same angles as listed in the D&M pic, obviously.
Presence or height, it really doesn't matter too much to me. However, the original statement that Yamaha was off-base by calling them Presence speakers, and then also that they were somehow behind the curve when it comes to implementing Atmos, was what I was disputing.

We might be talking around in circles, but I think the latter detail is worth hashing out nonetheless. Figure 14 on Page 22 of the Dolby Atmos Guidelines shows a 7.1.4 configuration. The angles for the front pair of speakers is 30-55°, and the angles for the rear pair are 125-150°. The only time that Top Middle (TM) comes into play in that document is for a x.x.2 configuration, where only one pair of speakers overhead is used.

Now, I realize that Atmos for the home is capable of having up to five pairs of overhead speakers, which is what is shown in Figure 1 on Page 4, but that is what the technology allows, not how it's been implemented in consumer-grade (non-Trinnov level) equipment at this time. We have the choice of two overhead pairs or one overhead pair. Dolby's document shows the placement for each, and when two pair are being used, TM isn't shown as an option.

In my understanding, that leaves us with two options for how D+M have implement Dolby Atmos for the home
  1. Decoding changes based on whether FH, TF, or TM (and likewise RH, TR, and TM) is chosen. For example, if FH and TM is chosen, the processor decodes for the front-most and middle position in the 10-speaker layout, but if TF and TR are chosen, the processor chooses the second position from the front and back.
  2. Decoding is the same for FH, TF, and TM in a x.x.4 configuration where RH or TR positions are chosen for the rear pair. Regardless if FH or TF is chosen, the processor uses only one of the two front-most positions in the 10-speaker layout for decoding.
#1 would mean that D+M's implementation of Atmos is more sophisticated than Yamaha's, because of the greater placement resolution. However, given that D+M's angles for FH and TF overlap, I'm not thinking that this is the case, because if you had the front pair at 40°, you could label them as TF and be within D+M guidelines, even though it would likely make more sense to label them as FH.

#2 would mean that D+M's decoding would be the same as a Yamaha processor. In a x.x.4 configuration, I could place the front pair at 40° and specify them at the Front Overhead Presence position, and the decoding would be the same as if I was using a D+M processor and labeled them as either FH or TF.

I wish I could find the post that was written (I think by @kbarnes701 ?) where they tried the different rear positions (RH, TR, and TM) in a x.x.4 and found very little (if any) difference between them.

It may not be possible to know the answer to this for sure without someone from Dolby saying so or a rigorous test setup that would allow a pan from front to rear to be analyzed closely to see what's going on.

I find it difficult to believe that these two companies are using drastically different DSP code when it comes to speaker placements. However, I'm willing to proven wrong, as it might affect my choice between a Denon and a Yamaha receiver.
virtualrain likes this.

Publisher - The BigScreen Cinema Guide
DTS:X Resources | Dolby Atmos Resources
Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons, the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas. - Henry Thomas Buckle - historian and author
BigScreen is offline  
post #34213 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 07:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stoked21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Kansas City (Lenexa)
Posts: 2,287
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1526 Post(s)
Liked: 932
^^^^^
Read above again. I never once said Yamaha wasn't doing Atmos correctly. on the contrary the quote you responded too---I actually say the processing algorithms are the same.

I don't know the history on "presence" nomenclature and plead ignorance on it. I loved my Yamaha Atmos but only chose to get rid of it to move to an 11.1 pre that also had X and Auro and supported wides.

D&m and Yamaha both support heights and tops. It's strictly a gui and nomenclature difference. It's honestly a non issue. It just convolutes discussions in a manufacturer agnostic Atmos discussion. As someone could say presence and others won't know what that means and it also doesn't detail mounting location.

Don't draw negatives on Yamaha based on the nomenclature discussion someone brought up, to which I replied. In many ways I prefer the Yamaha over the Marantz.
Stoked21 is offline  
post #34214 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 08:11 PM
Member
 
chicago66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 162
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 69 Post(s)
Liked: 11
might have been posted already.. but when looking at 1145 pages who knows... dolby in there specs suggest side surrounds in standard side postion. yet Yamaha suggest that the side surrounds go in back of four ceiling speakers ... thoughts.. who is correct what is best option.. for use with Yamaha rx-a2040
snips of docs below
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	dolby suggested atmos layout.JPG
Views:	163
Size:	45.9 KB
ID:	1103042   Click image for larger version

Name:	Yamaha manual install atmos.JPG
Views:	171
Size:	29.4 KB
ID:	1103050  
chicago66 is offline  
post #34215 of 57788 Old 12-06-2015, 09:18 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
For the floor speakers: http://www.howtogeek.com/137896/how-...er-experience/

For the overheads: Dolby Atmos guide, and that Yamaha graph is very good (complete 7.1.4 sound bubble).

In general, but with many variations; depending of the room, the listener's preference, and with movies and multichannel music listening.

How the sound mixers position their own monitors in their studio recording/mixing rooms should be a good indication.

Last edited by NorthSky; 12-06-2015 at 09:23 PM.
NorthSky is offline  
post #34216 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 12:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
virtualrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 973
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 845 Post(s)
Liked: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicago66 View Post
might have been posted already.. but when looking at 1145 pages who knows... dolby in there specs suggest side surrounds in standard side postion. yet Yamaha suggest that the side surrounds go in back of four ceiling speakers ... thoughts.. who is correct what is best option.. for use with Yamaha rx-a2040
snips of docs below

As I mentioned in the Yamaha owners thread, the Dolby illustration is correct. That particular Yamaha illustration takes some liberties and I don't think is meant to serve as a placement guide for anything other than ceiling speakers (it should be accompanied by a disclaimer like "Your side-surrounds are closer than they appear").

There is a better illustration on page 19 of the Yamaha manual that shows angles for side surrounds (10-30-deg) which is close (but not identical) to the Dolby recommendation of 0-20-deg (normalizing to the same axis).

SONY 75X850C | YAMAHA RX-A2050 | 5 DAYTON AUDIO APA150 | KLIPSCH RP 5.2.4
virtualrain is offline  
post #34217 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 01:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,103
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1674 Post(s)
Liked: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
If you believe that Dolby would deliberately give out false information to the industry in general and to AV journalists in particular, then I guess it is possible.
I don't believe Dolby would deliberately do such thing. As I don't believe DTS would do a similar thing either. So what strikes me is that a claimed feature also not materialized in real products nor expected in the foreseeable future, is called BS when coming from DTS.

Quote:
Personally, I have no doubts about Dolby's integrity, so when they say that Atmos for Home can do positional rendering, and that no mainstream AVR makers have chosen to implement it, I believe them.
I respect that. But what's the origin of your doubts about DTS' integrity then? Why would in terms of believability DTS' claim of DTS:X being speaker lay-out agnostic be any different than Dolby's claim of home Atmos being able to determine the precise speaker locations?
witchdoctor likes this.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is offline  
post #34218 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 03:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 2,610
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 856 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
If you believe that Dolby would deliberately give out false information to the industry in general and to AV journalists in particular, then I guess it is possible. Personally, I have no doubts about Dolby's integrity, so when they say that Atmos for Home can do positional rendering, and that no mainstream AVR makers have chosen to implement it, I believe them.
I can believe that too. But in such a case I would have liked to see a different logo on the machine... If I read Dolby's material, I would expect a machine with an official Logo on to adhere to that.

Codename - the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #34219 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 03:46 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigScreen View Post
I wish I could find the post that was written (I think by @kbarnes701 ?) where they tried the different rear positions (RH, TR, and TM) in a x.x.4 and found very little (if any) difference between them.
I've been following your recent posts on this topic with interest. My situation here is that I can mount the forward pair of overhead speakers at the correct angles for either a FH or TF designation, albeit they are on the ceiling. But the rearmost pair cannot be accommodated in the TR position, angle-wise, so my rearmost pair are designated as TM. Thus I can only run a FH+TM setup if I want both the forward and rearmost speakers to be within officially recommended angles of MLP.

However, and without moving the speakers, I have done extensive listening tests with the overheads designated as FH+TM and as TF+TR. You will note that in the latter designation, the rearmost pair are out of spec, angle-wise, so that may have a bearing on what I am about to type. In the listening tests, I cannot reliably discern any audible difference at all between the FH+TM and TF+TR designations. I don't know what conclusions to draw from this but this is my experience. Currently, the overheads are designated as TF+TR which means my TR set are out of spec, but I still can't reliably hear any significant difference to the FH+TM designation, to which I will return sooner or later if past experience is any guideline

Of course, in other rooms people may have different experiences, but I can't recall anyone giving a definitive answer on this.
BigScreen likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #34220 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 03:59 AM
 
Rocky3RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post
If you haven't already, please consult with the Audyssey 101 & FAQ here on AVS. The instructions in the equipment owners' manuals are woefully inadequate.
Is it comkon to see calibration settings in the "negative" range? The calibration I am getting with the mic gives me results with center speaker and a few other speakers at -3 or -4 db...why so low?
Rocky3RD is offline  
post #34221 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 04:37 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
Is it comkon to see calibration settings in the "negative" range? The calibration I am getting with the mic gives me results with center speaker and a few other speakers at -3 or -4 db...why so low?
It's normal. Audyssey attempts to get all your speakers playing at movie 'reference level' at 0dB on the MV. So when it calibrates it adjusts the speaker trims to that end. It's all explained in the Audyssey FAQ (linked in my sig).
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #34222 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 05:42 AM
 
Rocky3RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
It's normal. Audyssey attempts to get all your speakers playing at movie 'reference level' at 0dB on the MV. So when it calibrates it adjusts the speaker trims to that end. It's all explained in the Audyssey FAQ (linked in my sig).
I am skimming through your Audyssey FAQ. I dont have a tripod and you dont recommend holding mic in my hand when calibrating. What is the other alternative?
Also you said that the mic must face the ceiling...The mic that came with my Onkyo looks round in shape, with a hole on one side, so which side must face the ceiling exactly? Thank you for your time
Rocky3RD is offline  
post #34223 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 05:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AllenA07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,637
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 704 Post(s)
Liked: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
I am skimming through your Audyssey FAQ. I dont have a tripod and you dont recommend holding mic in my hand when calibrating. What is the other alternative?
Also you said that the mic must face the ceiling...The mic that came with my Onkyo looks round in shape, with a hole on one side, so which side must face the ceiling exactly? Thank you for your time
Buy a tripod, they're cheap and a very useful tool to have when trying to run Audyssey. When it comes to Audyssey you holding the mic in your hand while it runs is going to have a big effect on your results.

My Theater: The Ugly Theater
AllenA07 is offline  
post #34224 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 05:59 AM
 
Rocky3RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenA07 View Post
Buy a tripod, they're cheap and a very useful tool to have when trying to run Audyssey. When it comes to Audyssey you holding the mic in your hand while it runs is going to have a big effect on your results.
Do you have any pics of illustrations showing the positioning of the mic during calibration? I cant figure out what side must face the ceiling
Rocky3RD is offline  
post #34225 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 06:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stoked21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Kansas City (Lenexa)
Posts: 2,287
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1526 Post(s)
Liked: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
I am skimming through your Audyssey FAQ. I dont have a tripod and you dont recommend holding mic in my hand when calibrating. What is the other alternative?
Also you said that the mic must face the ceiling...The mic that came with my Onkyo looks round in shape, with a hole on one side, so which side must face the ceiling exactly? Thank you for your time
Hey Rocky,
Spend the $10-20 for a cheap tripod or I'm assuming it came with a cardboard one? Maybe redirect most, if not all, your questions to the Onkyo thread specific to your model. Conversations here are all about Atmos and it's less likely that anyone has the exact same mic as the HTIB. The other threads will really be much more helpful as they will have hands-on owner experience with your setup.

Not running you off if there's a legitimate Atmos question....just trying to help you by redirecting your off-topic questions to a place where people have ownership experience and more knowledge about specific product issues and resolution.
Stoked21 is offline  
post #34226 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 06:16 AM
 
Rocky3RD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 854
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoked21 View Post
Hey Rocky,
Spend the $10-20 for a cheap tripod or I'm assuming it came with a cardboard one? Maybe redirect most, if not all, your questions to the Onkyo thread specific to your model. Conversations here are all about Atmos and it's less likely that anyone has the exact same mic as the HTIB. The other threads will really be much more helpful as they will have hands-on owner experience with your setup.

Not running you off if there's a legitimate Atmos question....just trying to help you by redirecting your off-topic questions to a place where people have ownership experience and more knowledge about specific product issues and resolution.
You are totally right, but I dont see any threads dedicated specifically to my Onkyo model
Rocky3RD is offline  
post #34227 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 06:24 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 14,835
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4815 Post(s)
Liked: 2853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
Do you have any pics of illustrations showing the positioning of the mic during calibration? I cant figure out what side must face the ceiling
The side with the hole in a bump should be up. The microphone's sensor element is inside the hole, at the bottom. If the hole you're talking about is threaded, that's the hole used for fastening it to a tripod. If one side doesn't have a bump, then the microphone is damaged. See the picture below.

I'm guessing that you have one of the early Onkyo receivers which came with what's commonly called a "hockey puck" microphone and no microphone stand. If you can, you should consider getting a boom microphone stand like those used at musical events. They aren't very expensive (< $30 U.S.) and can be used to position the microphone very reliably.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	audyssey-mic.jpg
Views:	84
Size:	11.7 KB
ID:	1103826  

Selden

Marantz SR7009 avr + MM9000 amp --> Atmos 7.1.4
Fronts=NHT 2.9+AC2, FH+TM=DefTech PM1000, LCR+TM amped
Selden Ball is offline  
post #34228 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 06:33 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky3RD View Post
I am skimming through your Audyssey FAQ. I dont have a tripod and you dont recommend holding mic in my hand when calibrating. What is the other alternative?
Also you said that the mic must face the ceiling...The mic that came with my Onkyo looks round in shape, with a hole on one side, so which side must face the ceiling exactly? Thank you for your time
A cheap mic stand is the best solution - you can pick them up at music stores for about $20 or from the Internet of course. Failing that a camera tripod can be used. If you have neither you have a problem because there is no other way guaranteed to give you a good result. Holding it your hand is guaranteed to give you a poor result though. Some members have made makeshift arrangements using stepladders, pillows or towels, but really, 20 bucks isn't much of an investment to get a good result.

The side of the mic with the mic 'capsule' must face the ceiling. The bottom of the mic is the side with the mounting hole for the tripod or mic stand.

EDIT: gee, I thought I was replying in the Audyssey thread! Genuinely. So apologies for the OT post. Best to take this to the Audyssey thread, Rocky, if you want to continue the discussion.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #34229 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 06:41 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
London nightclub first to introduce Atmos speaker system...

http://stoneyroads.com/2015/12/mos-l...y-sound-system

"Move over Funktion-One. London club Ministry of Sound is getting a monster 60-speaker, 22-audio channel upgrade with the very first 'Dolby Atmos', a brand spanking new sound-system technology that's described as 'moving audio that flows all around you with breathtaking realism.'

The London club's main room will see the new rig installed mid to late January for a takeover by drum 'n' bass label Hospital Records - fitting to say the least!

Ministry CEO Lohan Presencer told media, "Dolby Atmos allows our patrons to experience the future of dance music, creating multidimensional soundscapes the likes of which have never been heard before in a nightclub environment. It's simply breathtaking."

This will be the first major Dolby sound system installed to a club. Previous homes of the cutting edge sound systems has been movie cinemas."
Scott Simonian likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #34230 of 57788 Old 12-07-2015, 06:50 AM
Senior Member
 
PoppaC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
London nightclub first to introduce Atmos speaker system...

http://stoneyroads.com/2015/12/mos-l...y-sound-system

"Move over Funktion-One. London club Ministry of Sound is getting a monster 60-speaker, 22-audio channel upgrade with the very first 'Dolby Atmos', a brand spanking new sound-system technology that's described as 'moving audio that flows all around you with breathtaking realism.'

The London club's main room will see the new rig installed mid to late January for a takeover by drum 'n' bass label Hospital Records - fitting to say the least!

Ministry CEO Lohan Presencer told media, "Dolby Atmos allows our patrons to experience the future of dance music, creating multidimensional soundscapes the likes of which have never been heard before in a nightclub environment. It's simply breathtaking."

This will be the first major Dolby sound system installed to a club. Previous homes of the cutting edge sound systems has been movie cinemas."
Take the shade off of a table lamp, and screw the mic into that. If you are sitting the lamp at the MLP, then it should be close in height to where to where your head would be if it is a full size lamp.

Done that many times.
Daryl L, Carrick and Stoked21 like this.
PoppaC is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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