The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 1727 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 24820Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #51781 of 54789 Old 09-26-2018, 07:43 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 24,494
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3785 Post(s)
Liked: 2819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
You can’t have 6 Atmos overheads with wides, even on the 8500. As soon as you activate the wides, you are limited to 4 overheads in Atmos.
You can't do 5.1.6(+W)? I thought that was an allowable option.

Josh Z
Home Theater Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
Josh Z is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #51782 of 54789 Old 09-26-2018, 08:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ted99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,927
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 931 Post(s)
Liked: 418
I've got the 13.1 Auro setup as well as 9(wides).1.4 Atmos. I bought the Blade Runner 2049 in Auro as an experiment. The music was largely in the overheads and the emotional involvement from the music was greater than that from the same movie in Atmos. I also like having the music coming from the wides with Dolby. My wides are not as good as the L,R, but are not satellites. Frankly, the extra width on effects from wides in my 14' x 12'-wide room doesn't add much, but putting the music there is noticably better.

JVC RS600 Chad-callibrated, 120" 1.3g in Batcave HT, Denon X8500 Polk LSiM703 fronts,
RTi-12 rears, LSiM 706 center, Monitor 40 Heights, Monitor 60 FW, FXiA4 Bi-pole sides,
LSiC top front, Infinity 6" VOG. 4X 12" subs w/mini DSP on sub 1 and nearfield 18" from sub 2.
Ted99 is offline  
post #51783 of 54789 Old 09-26-2018, 09:09 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
stikle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Sovereign State of Eastern Oregon
Posts: 1,523
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 943 Post(s)
Liked: 1109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
You can’t have 6 Atmos overheads with wides, even on the 8500. As soon as you activate the wides, you are limited to 4 overheads in Atmos.

Unless...
stikle is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #51784 of 54789 Old 09-26-2018, 01:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 24,494
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3785 Post(s)
Liked: 2819
In the X8500 thread, jdsmoothie confirmed that 5.1.6(+W) will not work. Bummer. Guess that ends my thought experiment about possibly adding Front Wides. I'm not giving up the 6 overheads.
Nalleh likes this.

Josh Z
Home Theater Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
Josh Z is offline  
post #51785 of 54789 Old 09-26-2018, 05:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Kwikas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Interesting point. I think if I ever do go ahead with Wides, I may well decide to use the same speakers as my mains. I have room to do it and it makes sense for the reason you suggest unless I am missing something. Originally I was thinking of repurposing my rear surrounds and getting something else for that location (my 4 surrounds are no longer available so one pair at least has to be different to the rest and making it the less important pair - the rear surround - makes sense). But if I could accommodate an extra pair of JBL 3677s that would make sense for the Wides. Hmmm.
Hi Keith,

If you go with wides, you may also want to consider the JBL MR822's.

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/MR8...ries/MR822.pdf

These utilise the same HF driver as the 3677 (2416H-1) and run the same 'family' of L/F driver - the 2022 12" (vs the 2035 15" found in the 3677). IOW, a good timbre match with your mains.

They also wouldn't so imposing as the 3677 in that position either because they would occupy less space.

Anyway, I know this isn't a 'gear thread' per se, so back to Atmos....
kbarnes701 likes this.
Kwikas is offline  
post #51786 of 54789 Old 09-26-2018, 07:28 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,419
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2904 Post(s)
Liked: 1672
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Similarly when Dolby Pro Logic was first introduced [I was there in the trenches selling high end processors and getting technical training from the likes of Dolby, THX, Lexicon, Mark Levinson, Yamaha, Denon, etc.] they specifically recommended using bipole/dipole speakers for the side/rear speakers, not monopoles...
I'd agree that was probably true with everybody you mention with the exception of Dolby. I was there and wrote much of the Dolby collateral. We never recommended dipoles, but of course allowed users to decide for themselves among monopole, bipole or dipole. Our demos were always done with monopoles (with the exception of the RCA Video Acoustics multi-driver surround speakers). All of the THX licensees (everyone mentioned other than Yamaha) certainly towed the THX dipole line.
sdurani and mrtickleuk like this.

Deadwood II Theater (Previous Deadwood Theater HTOM)
Anthem AVM 60 7.4.4; Classé SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4; MiniDSP OpenDRC-AN
Oppo UDP-203; Oppo BDP-93; Win7 media PC w/Roon+Kodi; Roku Ultra; DirecTV Genie
Adam Audio S3V/S3H LCR, KEF Ci200QS 4 srrnd, Tannoy Di6 DC 4 hts, Hsu ULS-15 4 subs
JVC RS520; Stewart Cima Neve screen 125" diag 2.35:1, MLP at 115"
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #51787 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 01:54 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
In the X8500 thread, jdsmoothie confirmed that 5.1.6(+W) will not work. Bummer. Guess that ends my thought experiment about possibly adding Front Wides. I'm not giving up the 6 overheads.
I only have 4 overheads and intend to stay that way for the foreseeable, but do you not think that speakers at ear level, in front of you, are more useful than speakers on the ceiling, above you? Neither Wides nor Overheads are all that much different in terms of Atmos content, but there is a big difference in how we hear sounds in front of us and sounds above us.

Also, as Sanjay pointed out recently, with 6 overheads, the TF pair and the TR pair are mostly silent with almost all the content going to the TM pair, whereas with 4 overheads, the TF and TR pair are active most of the time, with a phantom image for where the TM pair would be. So if I had to choose between TM and Wides, I'd go with the latter I think. But I only have a single row theater, which may be relevant.
gwsat likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51788 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 01:58 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwikas View Post
Hi Keith,

If you go with wides, you may also want to consider the JBL MR822's.

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/MR8...ries/MR822.pdf

These utilise the same HF driver as the 3677 (2416H-1) and run the same 'family' of L/F driver - the 2022 12" (vs the 2035 15" found in the 3677). IOW, a good timbre match with your mains.

They also wouldn't so imposing as the 3677 in that position either because they would occupy less space.

Anyway, I know this isn't a 'gear thread' per se, so back to Atmos....
Very useful info - thanks. I did have a quick measure-up last night and decided that using the 3677s for Wides is a no-go - they are just too big. But those MR822s are real neat. Thanks again.
Kwikas likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51789 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Lesmor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,038
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 697 Post(s)
Liked: 289
I used wides years ago when I had a Denon 7200
they definitely added to the experience but unfortunately processing restrictions meant you had to sacrifice other channels when using Atmos or DTS:X
it was also a squeeze fitting them into proper angular position due to the rooms width
in the end I felt heights and rear speakers were more important

now with my Denon 8500 it would be possible to add them back but yet again I would have to accept a compromise in active speakers plus with the speakers I own now it would be a tighter fit

I would definitely recommend wides if you can comfortably
accommodate the 60 deg angle requirement
kbarnes701 likes this.
Lesmor is online now  
post #51790 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:31 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesmor View Post
I used wides years ago when I had a Denon 7200
they definitely added to the experience but unfortunately processing restrictions meant you had to sacrifice other channels when using Atmos or DTS:X
it was also a squeeze fitting them into proper angular position due to the rooms width
in the end I felt heights and rear speakers were more important

now with my Denon 8500 it would be possible to add them back but yet again I would have to accept a compromise in active speakers plus with the speakers I own now it would be a tighter fit

I would definitely recommend wides if you can comfortably
accommodate the 60 deg angle requirement
I can meet the angle requirement if I go with smaller speakers as suggested just above. I am in no hurry to change anything here but if/when I get the urge for a new AVR I think I would definitely want to consider Wides seriously. I have some 'spare' channels on one of my two miniDSP DDRC-88A units for Dirac-ing the Wides, so I'd just need an additional 2ch amp (and the speakers of course). Thanks for the encouragement!
Lesmor likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51791 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 06:39 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 24,494
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3785 Post(s)
Liked: 2819
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
I only have 4 overheads and intend to stay that way for the foreseeable, but do you not think that speakers at ear level, in front of you, are more useful than speakers on the ceiling, above you? Neither Wides nor Overheads are all that much different in terms of Atmos content, but there is a big difference in how we hear sounds in front of us and sounds above us.

Also, as Sanjay pointed out recently, with 6 overheads, the TF pair and the TR pair are mostly silent with almost all the content going to the TM pair, whereas with 4 overheads, the TF and TR pair are active most of the time, with a phantom image for where the TM pair would be. So if I had to choose between TM and Wides, I'd go with the latter I think. But I only have a single row theater, which may be relevant.
My thinking for prioritizing six height channels:

1) I installed Top Middles because my room has a low ceiling and my other height speakers are spread rather far apart at the Front Height and Rear Height positions. As a result, sounds were not imaging well between them and I had an auditory hole above my head. Top Middles fill that hole.

2) As mentioned earlier in the thread, Wide channels only get much usage if you disable Surround Backs for a 5.1(+W) layout on the ground. This would mean I'd have to disable both Surround Backs and Top Middles, downgrading from 7.1.6 to 5.1.4(+W). That seems like too much of a compromise.

3) Although Atmos content may direct most sounds to the Top Middles and not use the other heights much, the Dolby Surround Upmixer (which is active for most of my viewing) uses all six height speakers. DSU really only has 2 channels of height info, but it's spread across all speakers on each side of the room.

4) One of the reasons I'd been resistant to Wide channels in the past is that I never felt I was missing anything in those locations. Sounds image pretty well between my front mains and Surrounds.

5) My Top Middle speakers are already installed in the ceiling. What am I gonna do, leave them there and not use them? At least on the ground level, I can remove speakers if I don't need them, but removing overheads will require patching and repainting my ceiling.

Josh Z
Home Theater Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
Josh Z is offline  
post #51792 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 06:49 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
My thinking for prioritizing six height channels:

1) I installed Top Middles because my room has a low ceiling and my other height speakers are spread rather far apart at the Front Height and Rear Height positions. As a result, sounds were not imaging well between them and I had an auditory hole above my head. Top Middles fill that hole.

2) As mentioned earlier in the thread, Wide channels only get much usage if you disable Surround Backs for a 5.1(+W) layout on the ground. This would mean I'd have to disable both Surround Backs and Top Middles, downgrading from 7.1.6 to 5.1.4(+W). That seems like too much of a compromise.

3) Although Atmos content may direct most sounds to the Top Middles and not use the other heights much, the Dolby Surround Upmixer (which is active for most of my viewing) uses all six height speakers. DSU really only has 2 channels of height info, but it's spread across all speakers on each side of the room.

4) One of the reasons I'd been resistant to Wide channels in the past is that I never felt I was missing anything in those locations. Sounds image pretty well between my front mains and Surrounds.

5) My Top Middle speakers are already installed in the ceiling. What am I gonna do, leave them there and not use them? At least on the ground level, I can remove speakers if I don't need them, but removing overheads will require patching and repainting my ceiling.
All makes sense Especially 1) -- my overheads are mounted in the 'classic' positions for TF + TR (45 degree angle from MLP) but then I have a very high ceiling to work with (a deliberate part of my room design)). So my phantom central image is good. Point taken for 5) as well.

Although I was a very enthusiastic early adopter of DSU, I am finding these days that I often prefer to watch native 7.1 or 5.1 movies in their native (non-upmixed) format. Not always, but quite often. Upmixers are fantastic when they work well, but sometimes I am finding that sounds which definitely belong at ear level are sent to the overheads and I very much dislike this. Yet other movies are amazingly good at letting the upmixer put appropriate sounds up in the ceiling speakers. My main intention with Wides, if I ever go that route, would be for genuine Atmos content, albeit for objects only.

Bottom line is I'm not sure about Wides yet. More expense, more amps, a new AVR, more setup with Dirac Live via my pair of 88As and of course, two new speakers. I am giving it a definite maybe right now.

K
humbland likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51793 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 08:44 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,464
Mentioned: 190 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6915 Post(s)
Liked: 5874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
All of the THX licensees (everyone mentioned other than Yamaha) certainly towed the THX dipole line.
I remember Lexicon mentioning dipoles as an option, but not their preferred choice since they were using 4 surrounds. The home THX program was attempting to mimic what was heard on the dubbing stage (to whatever extent it was possible) and Holman found that dipole surrounds came closest to sounding like arrays. Had nothing to do with Pro Logic's mono surround channel (which was addressed with THX Decorrelation).

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #51794 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 12:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,738
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4655 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
I remember Lexicon mentioning dipoles as an option, but not their preferred choice since they were using 4 surrounds. The home THX program was attempting to mimic what was heard on the dubbing stage (to whatever extent it was possible) and Holman found that dipole surrounds came closest to sounding like arrays. .
I can see how as the more deluxe systems moved to 7 or more instead of 5 speakers the interest in dipoles waned although there are still supporters. [For the record, I used THX (dipole) sides at one point but only very briefly].

Here's an interesting perspective from 2010:
" Audyssey Labs July 05, 2010 10:15

We recommend using dipoles for surrounds for the reasons you mention. They have nothing to do with Dolby Surround--that's just an encoding method for the content. The purpose of dipoles is to reproduce the diffuse ambient sound that one gets in a movie theater with multiple speakers playing the same content (and thus sounding diffuse).

Bipoles are not recommended because they don't really achieve the diffuse sound needed. I guess they are a compromise between dipoles and direct radiators. Yes, some surround music content was mixed with direct radiators as surrounds, but since that is a dead format at this point I would recommend going with dipoles."

https://audyssey.zendesk.com/hc/en-u...ound-speakers-

Another interesting [but unofficial] approach I've never used but have read about is placing a monopole speaker on the floor, perhaps behind a chair, sofa, or plant, and having it shoot straight up. This was said to "paint the entire side wall with sound". Interesting.

Last edited by m. zillch; 09-27-2018 at 01:09 PM.
m. zillch is offline  
post #51795 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,302
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4638 Post(s)
Liked: 4826
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Here's an interesting perspective from 2010:
" Audyssey Labs July 05, 2010 10:15

We recommend using dipoles for surrounds for the reasons you mention. They have nothing to do with Dolby Surround--that's just an encoding method for the content. The purpose of dipoles is to reproduce the diffuse ambient sound that one gets in a movie theater with multiple speakers playing the same content (and thus sounding diffuse).

Bipoles are not recommended because they don't really achieve the diffuse sound needed. I guess they are a compromise between dipoles and direct radiators. Yes, some surround music content was mixed with direct radiators as surrounds, but since that is a dead format at this point I would recommend going with dipoles."
Remember that Tomlinson Holman -- one of the inventors of THX -- is co-founder of Audyssey along with Chris Kyriakakis. So no surprise that a lot of THX principles leaked into Audyssey.

batpig's "Denon-to-English Dictionary"
Setup Guide and FAQ
http://batpigworld.com/

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #51796 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bass addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A padded room
Posts: 4,630
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 616 Post(s)
Liked: 629
I have been getting ready to upgrade to 7.1.6 but a statement I read has me a little concerned.

Others have mentioned that when using DSU in a .6 config the overhead centers receive most of the information. Wouldn't this be a step backwards compared to FH and RH?

The purpose of listening shouldn't be to respond as much as it should be to understand.
bass addict is offline  
post #51797 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:22 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,738
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4655 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
Remember that Tomlinson Holman -- one of the inventors of THX -- is co-founder of Audyssey along with Chris Kyriakakis. So no surprise that a lot of THX principles leaked into Audyssey.
Good point.
m. zillch is offline  
post #51798 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,464
Mentioned: 190 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6915 Post(s)
Liked: 5874
Quote:
Originally Posted by bass addict View Post
Others have mentioned that when using DSU in a .6 config the overhead centers receive most of the information.
SOME Atmos titles have the majority of their height info in the middle speakers, with very little in the forward & rearward height speakers. If you run into this, you can always switch over to a X.x.4 configuration.

DSU is an upmixer, so it is only used on non-Atmos titles. DSU only extracts 2 height outputs. So all the left height speakers get the same feed; all the right height speakers get the same feed. No concentration on the middle speakers overhead.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #51799 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 02:53 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
SOME Atmos titles have the majority of their height info in the middle speakers, with very little in the forward & rearward height speakers. If you run into this, you can always switch over to a X.x.4 configuration.

DSU is an upmixer, so it is only used on non-Atmos titles. DSU only extracts 2 height outputs. So all the left height speakers get the same feed; all the right height speakers get the same feed. No concentration on the middle speakers overhead.
Am I right in thinking that I read somewhere that Neural:X uses both of the overhead pairs independently - so the TFL and TFR can receive different signals, as can the TRR and TRL? If so, wouldn't this give better potential steering of sound above us?
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51800 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 03:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,464
Mentioned: 190 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6915 Post(s)
Liked: 5874
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Am I right in thinking that I read somewhere that Neural:X uses both of the overhead pairs independently - so the TFL and TFR can receive different signals, as can the TRR and TRL? If so, wouldn't this give better potential steering of sound above us?
Yes, but it extracts direct (correlated) sounds, so steered dialogue can find its way into the height layer. By comparison, DSU only extracts diffuse (uncorrelated) content, so directional sounds don't make it up to the height layer. One of these days when you're in the mood to experiment, you should turn off the amp to your base layer speakers and just listen to what is happening in the height layer when upmixing. One of them will make you wonder where all the ambient sounds went; the other will make you wonder why you can't precisely localize any of the sounds.
batpig and ahblaza like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #51801 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 03:19 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 0
i am very new to dolby atmos and avr's

so i read many websites and watched many videos

and now i am confused, if i am right or wrong

please have a look

Click image for larger version

Name:	atmos.jpg
Views:	93
Size:	114.9 KB
ID:	2461108
upgradehomesetup is offline  
post #51802 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 03:22 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Yes, but it extracts direct (correlated) sounds, so steered dialogue can find its way into the height layer. By comparison, DSU only extracts diffuse (uncorrelated) content, so directional sounds don't make it up to the height layer. One of these days when you're in the mood to experiment, you should turn off the amp to your base layer speakers and just listen to what is happening in the height layer when upmixing. One of them will make you wonder where all the ambient sounds went; the other will make you wonder why you can't precisely localize any of the sounds.
Thanks. In fact, I have done this experiment several times already, trying to compare DSU and Neural:X. I can very easily turn off all the floor level speakers (including subs) simply with a button press because I have a button which mutes the miniDSP DDRC-88A which controls the floor level speakers. Instant silence from the floor speakers while the overheads continue to play. The differences between the two upmixers are very easy to notice. Depending on the content, one can be more dramatic than the other.

For example, a favorite movie of mine for demoing the two upmixers and their differences is Spectre -- at the very beginning of the movie there is a sustained fight in a helicopter which is shot from both inside the helicopter and from the ground. DSU does a good job of creating the effect of the helicopter above one's head, with some of the score up there as well. Neural:X is much more dramatic and the helicopter is much more noticeable, swooping and swirling around the room over my head. BUT... Neural:X also puts up there some of the crowd sounds from the thousands of onlookers enjoying the festival below. This is a shame, because Neural:X's presentation of the helicopter is better than DSU's, but clearly the crowd is not in the sky and so the overall impact is spoiled. HST, with the floor level speakers playing at the same time, this isn't all that noticeable (unless you are already aware of it perhaps) so Neural:X makes for a more dynamic demo. Overall, I find Neural:X is better for demoing the effect but DSU is more listenable over the longer haul.
sdurani likes this.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51803 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 03:33 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
Quote:
Originally Posted by upgradehomesetup View Post
i am very new to dolby atmos and avr's

so i read many websites and watched many videos

and now i am confused, if i am right or wrong

please have a look

Attachment 2461108
The AVR has only 7 channels of amplification so it cannot do more than 7 channels in total using its internal amps - 7.1.

However the unit has 9.2 channel processing, so if you add an external 2 channel amp, you can expand this to 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 (9 channels in total).

In addition, the unit has 13.2 channel pre-outs (which is what is confusing you) - but they cannot all be used at the same time (because the unit has only 9.2 channel processing). It enables you to switch to different layout formats without swapping cables.

Bottom line: with only 9.2 channel processing the unit cannot do more than 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 for Atmos/DTS:X.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51804 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 03:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,227
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7737 Post(s)
Liked: 7012
^^^ If you want to go to more than 7.1.2 or 5.1.4 you need a unit with 9 channels of amplification and 11.2 channel processing. This would give you 7.1.2 or 5.1.4 'internally' and with the addition of an external 2 channel amp you could expand to 7.1.4 or 5.1.6 (11 channels in total). This is how my Marantz 7010 allows me to have a 7.x.4 setup (although I actually externally amplify all my channels, using the AVR more like a pre-pro).

(Apologies for tacked-on post - the editor wasn't responding when I tried to add this to the original post).

Last edited by kbarnes701; 09-27-2018 at 03:43 PM.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #51805 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 03:54 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,738
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4655 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by upgradehomesetup View Post
i am very new to dolby atmos and avr's

so i read many websites and watched many videos

and now i am confused, if i am right or wrong

please have a look

Attachment 2461108
I think the part you may be missing is that there can be more positions labelled on the back panel than can be enabled simultaneously. So there may be, for example, a pair that are labelled as working in some way but they rely on another pair not being enabled when they are used. The limitation of what works and when is not just based on how many amp channels are on board but also the processor chip.

I don't know the specifics of your AVR but hopefully reading the owner's manual will clear things up.
m. zillch is offline  
post #51806 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 05:36 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,419
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2904 Post(s)
Liked: 1672
Quote:
Originally Posted by m. zillch View Post
Another interesting [but unofficial] approach I've never used but have read about is placing a monopole speaker on the floor, perhaps behind a chair, sofa, or plant, and having it shoot straight up. This was said to "paint the entire side wall with sound". Interesting.
I have a been to a friend's system like this and it works surprisingly well for producing general surround ambience. It's pretty easy to try out if one is left with few options.
Nalleh likes this.

Deadwood II Theater (Previous Deadwood Theater HTOM)
Anthem AVM 60 7.4.4; Classé SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4; MiniDSP OpenDRC-AN
Oppo UDP-203; Oppo BDP-93; Win7 media PC w/Roon+Kodi; Roku Ultra; DirecTV Genie
Adam Audio S3V/S3H LCR, KEF Ci200QS 4 srrnd, Tannoy Di6 DC 4 hts, Hsu ULS-15 4 subs
JVC RS520; Stewart Cima Neve screen 125" diag 2.35:1, MLP at 115"
Roger Dressler is offline  
post #51807 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 06:34 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,738
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4655 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
I have a been to a friend's system like this and it works surprisingly well for producing general surround ambience. It's pretty easy to try out if one is left with few options.
Another plus for some is "invisibility". That works well for the technical measurement "SAF".
m. zillch is offline  
post #51808 of 54789 Old 09-27-2018, 11:51 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 6
Question about my Atmos setup At the risk of sounding 'dumb', here is my question

The atmos content I find is mostly 7.1.x , I am going to setup 5.1.4 for my home theater. Will 5.1.4 send the signal to all 4 Atmos speakers even when 7.1 content is played?
musicallife is offline  
post #51809 of 54789 Old 09-28-2018, 12:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
pasender91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 533
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 466 Post(s)
Liked: 246
If 5.1 or 7.1 is the source, then Dolby Surround will get activated by default.
It is DS that will generate content for the .4 height speakers ... so to make it short the answer is YES

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 #51810 of 54789 Old 09-28-2018, 05:10 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 14,826
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4807 Post(s)
Liked: 2844
Quote:
Originally Posted by upgradehomesetup View Post
i am very new to dolby atmos and avr's

so i read many websites and watched many videos

and now i am confused, if i am right or wrong

please have a look

Attachment 2461108
A point which I don't see in Keith's response is that you counted "Height 1" twice in your image. The "Height 1" speaker binding posts receive the same (but amplified) signals as the "Height1 " preamp outputs.

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
 
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