The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version) - Page 1948 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 28488Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #58411 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
As I said earlier: The front wall should have 7 speakers: Left, Left Centre, Left Screen, Centre, Right Screen, Right Centre, Right. The diagram shows only 5 speakers on the front wall. That means speakers 6 & 7 (Left & Right) are the first pair of speakers shown on the side wall in that diagram. The Fronts are where the Wides should be. Two pairs later are the Sides directly to the sides (±90°) of the main listening position (blue dot). The diagram is misleading. Refer to the diagram I posted earlier or the linked-to Atmos install guide to confirm that there is only one pair of speakers (SS1) between the Wides and the Sides.


That makes no sense. I’m ok with trying to have faith in Dolby and back them but those angles do not match with how you are portraying the layout.

The Screen Surrounds are directly beside the Center, then L/R Center, and then L/R all the way out to 30* from Center but the L/R must never be anywhere near 70* or 140* triangle which is how you’re saying that diagram is laid out. That just doesn’t make sense.

Overlay it like I have done and you will clearly see that they have eliminated a pair of screen speakers and added an extra set of surrounds between the Widths and Side Surrounds.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #58412 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
And not to mention where they have the Tops aligned from front to rear with the L/R and L/R Rear Surrounds. And the Tops also start where the Widths are located on the side walls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58413 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version)

Oops
audiovideoholic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #58414 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ccool96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Panama City, FL
Posts: 1,601
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 857 Post(s)
Liked: 1206
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
And not to mention where they have the Tops aligned from front to rear with the L/R and L/R Rear Surrounds. And the Tops also start where the Widths are located on the side walls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Here is the reference Dolby Atmos positions in the Trinnov. I posted in response to your earlier post in the Trinnov thread.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
sdurani and Mashie Saldana like this.
ccool96 is offline  
post #58415 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,899
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7867 Post(s)
Liked: 7055
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
The Screen Surrounds are directly beside the Center, then L/R Center, and then L/R all the way out to 30* from Center but the L/R must never be anywhere near 70* or 140* triangle which is how you’re saying that diagram is laid out. That just doesn’t make sense.
Atmos doesn't use angles when rendering. So if you are looking at the angles in the diagram, it won't make sense. If you are instead counting the number of speakers, then it is apparent that the L/R speakers are shown on the side walls, not the front wall.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #58416 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccool96 View Post
Here is the reference Dolby Atmos positions in the Trinnov. I posted in response to your earlier post in the Trinnov thread.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yep. That layout is much better than Dolby’s crazy one.

Thanks Cool! I didn’t get notification. I posted there in hopes of finding if SS2 can be used in any arbitrary place?

I haven’t toyed with my unit at all. Are those channel location icons locked into place or do they appear after running the mic?

Do you know if SS2 can be moved forward of SS? It could be tested easily enough if someone has the channels needed in order to use SS2 I assume. I wouldn’t think one would need anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58417 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ccool96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Panama City, FL
Posts: 1,601
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 857 Post(s)
Liked: 1206
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
Yep. That layout is much better than Dolby’s crazy one.

Thanks Cool! I didn’t get notification. I posted there in hopes of finding if SS2 can be used in any arbitrary place?

I haven’t toyed with my unit at all. Are those channel location icons locked into place or do they appear after running the mic?

Do you know if SS2 can be moved forward of SS? It could be tested easily enough if someone has the channels needed in order to use SS2 I assume. I wouldn’t think one would need anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


So those are the reference positions. You would want to place them as close to those positions as possible.

SS2 can not be relocated to a different position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
ccool96 is offline  
post #58418 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 04:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ccool96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Panama City, FL
Posts: 1,601
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 857 Post(s)
Liked: 1206
Here is a couple other quick layouts to show all the Atmos Heights and Tops as well.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
ccool96 is offline  
post #58419 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 06:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,683
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1596 Post(s)
Liked: 1072
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post

Do you know if SS2 can be moved forward of SS? It could be tested easily enough if someone has the channels needed in order to use SS2 I assume. I wouldn’t think one would need anything else.

You can just put the SS in that position and SS2 where SS would be if you need more in front (or rather that would indicate your listening seat/couch is aligned with SS2 rather than SS). Atmos renders in a straight line order. The names are abritrary as are the angles in a way (it's not like the sounds are out of order if your angles are somewhat off; Dolby even shows a range for the locations for this reason), since with more than one row of seats, there can only be one row of seats that sit with SS at 90 degrees anyway (I have SS behind my front row in-between it and the 2nd row, for example; the SS are at the mid-point of the room itself rather than orientated around the listener).

You see, Atmos is really meant to be a ROOM BASED orientation (L/R at front, Rear at back and SS at mid-point and the extra speakers at 50% midpoints in-between), but Dolby knows most people will only have 5.1.2 or 5.1.4 and maybe 7.1.4 at most so they draw their diagrams around what they think is a common one row layout instead of the room like the cinema version is expected to match. But the 24.1.10 layout is a 360 circle arc meant to be divided into speakers that are mid-points (50%) from each other. The layout is supposed to be fixed; the couch(es) (or individual seats) can go ANYWHERE in the room. The perspective changes by where you sit, but the sounds move around the room more or less the same no matter what (theoretically at least; in the real world off-axis seats end up with precedent issues since Atmos has not center height or top surround speakers to anchor the middle) and sitting really close to any single speaker can skew things as well, but the more speakers you have, the less pronounced the precedent effect will be off-axis. With only one seat in a small room centered, you can get away with just 4 speakers (quad arrangement) on the floor/ear level and it should phantom image everywhere it needs to.

That is actually the basis of Auro-3D's 8.1 configuration (9.1 adds a center speaker, 10.1 adds TS and 11.1 adds CH). Auro-3D 8.1-11.1 was actually designed to be compatible with Dolby's 5.1 layout. Auro-3D 13.1 was designed around Dolby's 7.1 layout. Their problem was that the extra CH/TS speakers made for a bad combo with 11.1 limited AVRs. They seemed to come up with an 11.1 compatible layout that used 9.1+RS (i.e. 7.1 based without CH/TS) as an alternative (the test disc has this as a signal test mode, for example), but for some reason it didn't end up in the firmware and/or D&M never updated the firmware to use it. They seem dead in the water now anyway. People act like Auro-3D wasn't trying to be Dolby layout compatible, but it was always based on the most common surround format used in people's homes, which is 5.1. Their miscalculation seems to be that is the common "low-end" config when their product is only sold in higher level (mid-priced) AVR equipment. There people wanted rear surround support. That along with their seeming inability to get the Blu-Ray manufacturers to include an Auro soundtrack on the disc (a bit ironic since it really doesn't use up that much more space than a typical 7.1 soundtrack so they could probably fit both Atmos and Auro on many discs if they left out all those foreign language tracks).

Auro-3D is probably unnecessary at this point, though since there isn't much difference between the Auro and Atmos (or X) soundtracks when played back on the same 5.1 based speaker setup (tested here against the Atmos versions limiting my room to half length as 5.1.4 (plus matrixed FW) the Atmos titles were almost identical to the Auro-3D ones like that. DTS:X (particularly the Pro version) can use the Auro speaker layout anyway so it can leverage both room layouts or even a combination of them. The extra speakers really just anchor off-axis seats in practice, IMO. It's not like Atmos can't image something at the CH/TS locations if you're sitting in the center seat(s). Many Atmos titles have objects move across those locations as a matter of course as do DTS:X titles. DTS:X, however can use CH/TS speakers and render them directly (as long as you're below the 11-channel limit or have the Pro iteration with no limit). Some might even prefer to use Neural X with Atmos base soundtracks to make use of those speakers. It's theoretically possible Neural X may give a better overhead impression from some Atmos base soundtracks with Neural X than Atmos itself (given many Atmos movies make poor use of overheads). The worst thing about Auro-3D not gaining traction is they really supported nice binaural-like music recordings with fixed dual-quad microphone stands. This renders the performance in your room exactly like you're there. Atmos "could" make music recordings that way, theoretically, but given they don't want to push fixed channel configurations, they don't really want to push fixed channel recordings. DTS:X, on the other hand could easily handle the same Auro-3D style music recordings as it does support fixed channel layouts in addition to objects. Neural X will use more speakers even with fixed channel recordings and thus the "binaural-like" reality effect would be preserved even with higher count speakers in operation.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 6-22-20)
MagnumX is offline  
post #58420 of 58861 Old 05-09-2020, 11:04 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,948
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5202 Post(s)
Liked: 5980
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
I would like to avoid any arraying which is why I’m so interested in the proper 24.1.10 layout. It’s not that I want to use all 24 base channels it’s that I would like to use those that appear forward in the diagrams.
I want to reiterate something Sanjay said, just in case you blew past it on the hunt to make your primary point.

The surround info will not be arrayed across multiple speakers like it is in commercial cinema, with objects being treated separately and allowed to pass through individual speakers within the array.

The vast majority of the ear level sounds in Atmos (with some mixes, in fact, it will be 100% of the ear level sounds) will behave exactly like a 7.1 track. One speaker on each side wall (the "side" surrounds) will make noise during the movie, even if you have 4 speakers lining the side wall (FW > SS1 > SS > SS2).

The reason I mention this is because your diagram depicted a multi-row theater, and if the goal is to have an even surround field across both rows, it's important to be aware that you're going to have a single speaker on each side wall producing all the side surround effects. So if the Ls/Rs speakers are positioned adjacent to one row, they will be way out of position for the other row (and vice versa) and it will be impossible to balance the sound between the two rows. Especially if you've gone to all direct-firing monopole speakers to adhere to Atmos "specs" vs the old diffuse / wide dispersion surrounds that were typical previously.

Most people assume the "channel" part of the mix will array across those side surrounds, spreading the sound and providing even coverage across the rows. Arraying the side surrounds for multiple rows was common pre-Atmos, but now instead of those 2-3 side surround speakers all putting out surround info, with an Atmos mix (with no arrays) only 1 of the 2-3 speakers is producing it (worse coverage / more hot-spotting).

Trinnov themselves recommends arraying some side surrounds + top surrounds if you want even coverage across multiple rows, specifically because of this unfortunate behavior. If you installed a 15.1.10 setup and popped in that 4K + Atmos remaster of Saving Private Ryan, you might be surprised to discover only 9 of your 25 speakers make any noise. The extra 16 speakers are only used for dynamic objects, but if the mixer / studio decides to "print" the mix to a specific channel layout, tough luck

If you think "Dolby was pulling the wool over your eyes" because you took a simple marketing diagram too literally and couldn't reconcile a rectangle vs a circle so you decided "THIS INJUSTICE WILL NOT STAND, time to raise hell on an internet forum".... imagine how the affront of realizing only 9 out of 25 speakers are active would feel to you!! Thankfully Trinnovs are magical things and they have workarounds, for example they let you save different presets so you can switch on the fly between arrayed and non-arrayed setups.

Condescension and (well-earned) snark aside, can I ask a serious question? You are talking about a Trinnov setup with a lot of speakers and what looks like a really, really nice room. So I can only assume you've got a healthy budget. Can I ask why you are not working with a professional calibrator who is an expert with Trinnovs and knows the answers to these questions? It seems odd to me that you are making this kind of investment and yet determinedly seeking precise answers FROM STRANGERS ON AN INTERNET FORUM, when you can clearly afford to at minimum to consult with a world-class audio calibrator like Adam Pelz or Curt Hoyt who knows Trinnovs inside/out and would work closely with you to produce the desired result.

I'm not (well, only partially) trying to be a jerk about it, but I sincerely think you'd be happier working with a pro who is a literal expert in what we are discussing, someone who could be your consultant and guide and ensure you get the results you are looking for. Even if you're a DIY guy who doesn't want to contract out the whole project to an integrator/installer, you could at least leverage their vast experience and detailed knowledge as a consultant/advisory basis.

If you already are doing so, forgive me for ass-u-me-ing, but I also ass-u-me that if you had Adam or Curt already on staff as the Trinnov calibrator, you wouldn't be asking these questions here.
sdurani, sdrucker, galonzo and 5 others like this.

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #58421 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 07:44 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
You can just put the SS in that position and SS2 where SS would be if you need more in front (or rather that would indicate your listening seat/couch is aligned with SS2 rather than SS). Atmos renders in a straight line order. The names are abritrary as are the angles in a way (it's not like the sounds are out of order if your angles are somewhat off; Dolby even shows a range for the locations for this reason), since with more than one row of seats, there can only be one row of seats that sit with SS at 90 degrees anyway (I have SS behind my front row in-between it and the 2nd row, for example; the SS are at the mid-point of the room itself rather than orientated around the listener).



You see, Atmos is really meant to be a ROOM BASED orientation (L/R at front, Rear at back and SS at mid-point and the extra speakers at 50% midpoints in-between), but Dolby knows most people will only have 5.1.2 or 5.1.4 and maybe 7.1.4 at most so they draw their diagrams around what they think is a common one row layout instead of the room like the cinema version is expected to match. But the 24.1.10 layout is a 360 circle arc meant to be divided into speakers that are mid-points (50%) from each other. The layout is supposed to be fixed; the couch(es) (or individual seats) can go ANYWHERE in the room. The perspective changes by where you sit, but the sounds move around the room more or less the same no matter what (theoretically at least; in the real world off-axis seats end up with precedent issues since Atmos has not center height or top surround speakers to anchor the middle) and sitting really close to any single speaker can skew things as well, but the more speakers you have, the less pronounced the precedent effect will be off-axis. With only one seat in a small room centered, you can get away with just 4 speakers (quad arrangement) on the floor/ear level and it should phantom image everywhere it needs to.



That is actually the basis of Auro-3D's 8.1 configuration (9.1 adds a center speaker, 10.1 adds TS and 11.1 adds CH). Auro-3D 8.1-11.1 was actually designed to be compatible with Dolby's 5.1 layout. Auro-3D 13.1 was designed around Dolby's 7.1 layout. Their problem was that the extra CH/TS speakers made for a bad combo with 11.1 limited AVRs. They seemed to come up with an 11.1 compatible layout that used 9.1+RS (i.e. 7.1 based without CH/TS) as an alternative (the test disc has this as a signal test mode, for example), but for some reason it didn't end up in the firmware and/or D&M never updated the firmware to use it. They seem dead in the water now anyway. People act like Auro-3D wasn't trying to be Dolby layout compatible, but it was always based on the most common surround format used in people's homes, which is 5.1. Their miscalculation seems to be that is the common "low-end" config when their product is only sold in higher level (mid-priced) AVR equipment. There people wanted rear surround support. That along with their seeming inability to get the Blu-Ray manufacturers to include an Auro soundtrack on the disc (a bit ironic since it really doesn't use up that much more space than a typical 7.1 soundtrack so they could probably fit both Atmos and Auro on many discs if they left out all those foreign language tracks).



Auro-3D is probably unnecessary at this point, though since there isn't much difference between the Auro and Atmos (or X) soundtracks when played back on the same 5.1 based speaker setup (tested here against the Atmos versions limiting my room to half length as 5.1.4 (plus matrixed FW) the Atmos titles were almost identical to the Auro-3D ones like that. DTS:X (particularly the Pro version) can use the Auro speaker layout anyway so it can leverage both room layouts or even a combination of them. The extra speakers really just anchor off-axis seats in practice, IMO. It's not like Atmos can't image something at the CH/TS locations if you're sitting in the center seat(s). Many Atmos titles have objects move across those locations as a matter of course as do DTS:X titles. DTS:X, however can use CH/TS speakers and render them directly (as long as you're below the 11-channel limit or have the Pro iteration with no limit). Some might even prefer to use Neural X with Atmos base soundtracks to make use of those speakers. It's theoretically possible Neural X may give a better overhead impression from some Atmos base soundtracks with Neural X than Atmos itself (given many Atmos movies make poor use of overheads). The worst thing about Auro-3D not gaining traction is they really supported nice binaural-like music recordings with fixed dual-quad microphone stands. This renders the performance in your room exactly like you're there. Atmos "could" make music recordings that way, theoretically, but given they don't want to push fixed channel configurations, they don't really want to push fixed channel recordings. DTS:X, on the other hand could easily handle the same Auro-3D style music recordings as it does support fixed channel layouts in addition to objects. Neural X will use more speakers even with fixed channel recordings and thus the "binaural-like" reality effect would be preserved even with higher count speakers in operation.


Right but SS2 is an object only channel not a true Surround so it wouldn’t sound as good if I aligned the MLP with SS2 for those reasons. If I had a CP-850-C then that would be perfect since the channels are used with that processor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58422 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 07:48 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
I want to reiterate something Sanjay said, just in case you blew past it on the hunt to make your primary point.



The surround info will not be arrayed across multiple speakers like it is in commercial cinema, with objects being treated separately and allowed to pass through individual speakers within the array.



The vast majority of the ear level sounds in Atmos (with some mixes, in fact, it will be 100% of the ear level sounds) will behave exactly like a 7.1 track. One speaker on each side wall (the "side" surrounds) will make noise during the movie, even if you have 4 speakers lining the side wall (FW > SS1 > SS > SS2).



The reason I mention this is because your diagram depicted a multi-row theater, and if the goal is to have an even surround field across both rows, it's important to be aware that you're going to have a single speaker on each side wall producing all the side surround effects. So if the Ls/Rs speakers are positioned adjacent to one row, they will be way out of position for the other row (and vice versa) and it will be impossible to balance the sound between the two rows. Especially if you've gone to all direct-firing monopole speakers to adhere to Atmos "specs" vs the old diffuse / wide dispersion surrounds that were typical previously.



Most people assume the "channel" part of the mix will array across those side surrounds, spreading the sound and providing even coverage across the rows. Arraying the side surrounds for multiple rows was common pre-Atmos, but now instead of those 2-3 side surround speakers all putting out surround info, with an Atmos mix (with no arrays) only 1 of the 2-3 speakers is producing it (worse coverage / more hot-spotting).



Trinnov themselves recommends arraying some side surrounds + top surrounds if you want even coverage across multiple rows, specifically because of this unfortunate behavior. If you installed a 15.1.10 setup and popped in that 4K + Atmos remaster of Saving Private Ryan, you might be surprised to discover only 9 of your 25 speakers make any noise. The extra 16 speakers are only used for dynamic objects, but if the mixer / studio decides to "print" the mix to a specific channel layout, tough luck



If you think "Dolby was pulling the wool over your eyes" because you took a simple marketing diagram too literally and couldn't reconcile a rectangle vs a circle so you decided "THIS INJUSTICE WILL NOT STAND, time to raise hell on an internet forum".... imagine how the affront of realizing only 9 out of 25 speakers are active would feel to you!! Thankfully Trinnovs are magical things and they have workarounds, for example they let you save different presets so you can switch on the fly between arrayed and non-arrayed setups.



Condescension and (well-earned) snark aside, can I ask a serious question? You are talking about a Trinnov setup with a lot of speakers and what looks like a really, really nice room. So I can only assume you've got a healthy budget. Can I ask why you are not working with a professional calibrator who is an expert with Trinnovs and knows the answers to these questions? It seems odd to me that you are making this kind of investment and yet determinedly seeking precise answers FROM STRANGERS ON AN INTERNET FORUM, when you can clearly afford to at minimum to consult with a world-class audio calibrator like Adam Pelz or Curt Hoyt who knows Trinnovs inside/out and would work closely with you to produce the desired result.



I'm not (well, only partially) trying to be a jerk about it, but I sincerely think you'd be happier working with a pro who is a literal expert in what we are discussing, someone who could be your consultant and guide and ensure you get the results you are looking for. Even if you're a DIY guy who doesn't want to contract out the whole project to an integrator/installer, you could at least leverage their vast experience and detailed knowledge as a consultant/advisory basis.



If you already are doing so, forgive me for ass-u-me-ing, but I also ass-u-me that if you had Adam or Curt already on staff as the Trinnov calibrator, you wouldn't be asking these questions here.


Nope. I didn’t blow past it and this is a Selfish Bastard Seat built theater room designed for one seat to have all the envelopment. I’ll have a separate preset for when other seats/rows are being used that will take advantage of my ultra wide dispersion Mundorf AMT driven speakers. It will work great ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58423 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 08:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,683
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1596 Post(s)
Liked: 1072
@audiovideoholic - You can easily make your own Atmos arrays to behave like the cinema even without a Trinnov. Contrary to what certain holier-than-thous think, there's nothing particularly complicated about Atmos. A simple Y-adapter can split the side surround pre-out to handle more channels and if you use the internal amp on an AVR, you can get a three channel array for "side surround" with one Y-adapter. If you want separate room correction, you'd need something like a Mini-DSP for the pre-outs. You'd then combine the outputs with the extra speaker (object output) using an active mixer, which also gives you independent level control. Voila. Arrayed Atmos at home.

You can combine that with steered Pro-Logic extracted channels (or matrixed ones) and have >7.1.4 without a $30k+ Trinnov plus cinema arrays and even dialog lift (so speakers above/below place dialog and/or front stage effects at screen level rather than below it in home theaters that don't have the mains behind an audibly transparent screen.

You, however, have indicated you do NOT want arrays. That's viable too. Real world sounds are NOT magically at 90 degrees to your side at every seat in the room so there's a valid argument that Atmos should not array ANY speakers for that reason as the whole point of Atmos is that sounds will travel through the room like real "objects" would (hence the name 'objects' in Atmos). Everyone should agree where in the room a bird flying around is. Arrays mean that changes by seating position. Of course, due to the precedent effect, there will always be some level of placement error using speakers, but arrays make it worse.

Objects can already span across multiple speakers using a larger object size so arrays shouldn't be needed to achieve a more dispersed effect. But Hollywood is slow to change how they mix movie soundtracks which is probably why so many Atmos soundtracks are anything BUT "immersive".

For example, why are birds in the forest in the Natalie Portman movie "Annihilation" only in the front mains? Ineptitude that's why. People rave about how all those weird synth sounds move around the room and ceiling, but they couldn't even manage to make it feel like you're in the forest with birds all around. They only use Atmos for special "jump" moments instead of always being immersive the entire movie, which I feel misses the entire point of Atmos (Atmospheric sound). It's disappointing to say the least. Hopefully, old school mixing guys will retire and let people with more imagination take over in the near future.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 6-22-20)
MagnumX is offline  
post #58424 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 08:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
The official Dolby Atmos thread (home theater version)

Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
I want to reiterate something Sanjay said, just in case you blew past it on the hunt to make your primary point.



The surround info will not be arrayed across multiple speakers like it is in commercial cinema, with objects being treated separately and allowed to pass through individual speakers within the array.



The vast majority of the ear level sounds in Atmos (with some mixes, in fact, it will be 100% of the ear level sounds) will behave exactly like a 7.1 track. One speaker on each side wall (the "side" surrounds) will make noise during the movie, even if you have 4 speakers lining the side wall (FW > SS1 > SS > SS2).



The reason I mention this is because your diagram depicted a multi-row theater, and if the goal is to have an even surround field across both rows, it's important to be aware that you're going to have a single speaker on each side wall producing all the side surround effects. So if the Ls/Rs speakers are positioned adjacent to one row, they will be way out of position for the other row (and vice versa) and it will be impossible to balance the sound between the two rows. Especially if you've gone to all direct-firing monopole speakers to adhere to Atmos "specs" vs the old diffuse / wide dispersion surrounds that were typical previously.



Most people assume the "channel" part of the mix will array across those side surrounds, spreading the sound and providing even coverage across the rows. Arraying the side surrounds for multiple rows was common pre-Atmos, but now instead of those 2-3 side surround speakers all putting out surround info, with an Atmos mix (with no arrays) only 1 of the 2-3 speakers is producing it (worse coverage / more hot-spotting).



Trinnov themselves recommends arraying some side surrounds + top surrounds if you want even coverage across multiple rows, specifically because of this unfortunate behavior. If you installed a 15.1.10 setup and popped in that 4K + Atmos remaster of Saving Private Ryan, you might be surprised to discover only 9 of your 25 speakers make any noise. The extra 16 speakers are only used for dynamic objects, but if the mixer / studio decides to "print" the mix to a specific channel layout, tough luck



If you think "Dolby was pulling the wool over your eyes" because you took a simple marketing diagram too literally and couldn't reconcile a rectangle vs a circle so you decided "THIS INJUSTICE WILL NOT STAND, time to raise hell on an internet forum".... imagine how the affront of realizing only 9 out of 25 speakers are active would feel to you!! Thankfully Trinnovs are magical things and they have workarounds, for example they let you save different presets so you can switch on the fly between arrayed and non-arrayed setups.



Condescension and (well-earned) snark aside, can I ask a serious question? You are talking about a Trinnov setup with a lot of speakers and what looks like a really, really nice room. So I can only assume you've got a healthy budget. Can I ask why you are not working with a professional calibrator who is an expert with Trinnovs and knows the answers to these questions? It seems odd to me that you are making this kind of investment and yet determinedly seeking precise answers FROM STRANGERS ON AN INTERNET FORUM, when you can clearly afford to at minimum to consult with a world-class audio calibrator like Adam Pelz or Curt Hoyt who knows Trinnovs inside/out and would work closely with you to produce the desired result.



I'm not (well, only partially) trying to be a jerk about it, but I sincerely think you'd be happier working with a pro who is a literal expert in what we are discussing, someone who could be your consultant and guide and ensure you get the results you are looking for. Even if you're a DIY guy who doesn't want to contract out the whole project to an integrator/installer, you could at least leverage their vast experience and detailed knowledge as a consultant/advisory basis.



If you already are doing so, forgive me for ass-u-me-ing, but I also ass-u-me that if you had Adam or Curt already on staff as the Trinnov calibrator, you wouldn't be asking these questions here.


I’m not doing all this by myself by any means. I have Cineramax and TheWolf working on this project and may have Appelz join in at some point. Walter (TheWolf my acoustician) has what I will say a very modest hourly wage ;-). I spent over $8,000 just to get my Altitude32 calibrated, LCRs laid out, room measurements for acoustic plan, and Altitude32 setup.

So when I can research on my own when there is an issue like we have now where Two channels fit the room best ahead of the MLP I don’t have any grievance at all by researching some on my own. Heck this is my hobby that I’ve been into since the age of 11-12. I bought my first AVR and 4 KLH big box three way 15” speakers for my bedroom. One thing about working with Pros is that they have all kinds of ways of dealing with small issues such as I’m debating now that may seem trivial to them is that all the extra expenses in regards to physical speakers, amps, DSP, labor for mounting it aesthetically, design, calibration, etc... goes by the wayside so to speak when they are making it an option.

Just to be clear I am by no means a tech guru or Altitude32 tinkerer. I love Home Theat and have been into it for over a decade and a half but when it comes to the Altitude32 and digital audio I’m a rookie. Heck I’m actually afraid to mess with my Altitude32 unit for real! I could blow up my entire room by pressing the wrong button casually. That would be the fastest $100,000+ mistake ever created is how I look at it. Sure it’s an awesome piece of kit but it’s for the Pros and for those who take the time to learn its ins and outs to a tee. I’ve read and watched every seminar, white paper, etc that Trinnov has published to its community and they are the BEST when it comes to community support but that doesn’t mean I am ready to jump in and start toying with my unit just yet.

What people have to realize with the Trinnov is that it can do so so much more than what is published that many would be surprised by some of its features. That’s why I asked here and in the Trinnov page specifically about the SS2 channel. That Dolby Diagram is pinched which screws with all their specified angles they published throughout that document so looks like can have more rearward facing channels than what actually can. It just doesn’t make sense in my head why they would limit the front half of rooms by focusing more on the rear half. The angles work out mathematically so that if a room with 3 or more rows have a MLP in the middle/rear of a long room that more than 12.5* spacing between each forward channel is easily doable but that doesn’t seem to be the case with processing unless array which I want to avoid.

My room is 34’x18’x10’ so it’s long and more narrow than wide which was done on purpose back before all these other channels were possible. It was from the ground up build by Dennis E back years ago before wides or Dolby Atmos. It’s being totally renovated now based around the custom Quested LT20 LCRs. Walter came and installed those at the same time he did all the Trinnov work and now we are moving forward slowly one step at a time with everything being carefully considered. I am far from rich/wealthy so can’t just give free reign to Walter like some of his bigger clients so have to pick where and when I need to bring him on board. He is extremely enthusiastic about my approach of taking on the majority of this process as it gives him a different approach for a change. This is the only time he has done a project like this but we have talked a ton both “on the clock” and “off the clock” leading up to starting my project. Heck I feel like he has good faith in me/my decisions acoustically by offering such an agreement in the first place. If you compare my acoustic knowledge to my Trinnov/digital knowledge I’m a digital idiot by all measures lol. Give me a room, poor speakers, and a mic, I can make it sound good I’m fairly confident but give Walter just the Trinnov along with his ears he can make it sound magical before any room treatment not to mention after....

It’s an odd situation that’s for sure but it’s what I can afford. I can read and learn all day at zero expense so I choose to take advantage of that. But at the end of the day it will be magical because I did spend my money in the correct places when needed is how I view it.

Hope that clears up some questions being asked. ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Last edited by audiovideoholic; 05-10-2020 at 08:33 AM.
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58425 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 08:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
You can just put the SS in that position and SS2 where SS would be if you need more in front (or rather that would indicate your listening seat/couch is aligned with SS2 rather than SS). Atmos renders in a straight line order. The names are abritrary as are the angles in a way (it's not like the sounds are out of order if your angles are somewhat off; Dolby even shows a range for the locations for this reason), since with more than one row of seats, there can only be one row of seats that sit with SS at 90 degrees anyway (I have SS behind my front row in-between it and the 2nd row, for example; the SS are at the mid-point of the room itself rather than orientated around the listener).



You see, Atmos is really meant to be a ROOM BASED orientation (L/R at front, Rear at back and SS at mid-point and the extra speakers at 50% midpoints in-between), but Dolby knows most people will only have 5.1.2 or 5.1.4 and maybe 7.1.4 at most so they draw their diagrams around what they think is a common one row layout instead of the room like the cinema version is expected to match. But the 24.1.10 layout is a 360 circle arc meant to be divided into speakers that are mid-points (50%) from each other. The layout is supposed to be fixed; the couch(es) (or individual seats) can go ANYWHERE in the room. The perspective changes by where you sit, but the sounds move around the room more or less the same no matter what (theoretically at least; in the real world off-axis seats end up with precedent issues since Atmos has not center height or top surround speakers to anchor the middle) and sitting really close to any single speaker can skew things as well, but the more speakers you have, the less pronounced the precedent effect will be off-axis. With only one seat in a small room centered, you can get away with just 4 speakers (quad arrangement) on the floor/ear level and it should phantom image everywhere it needs to.



That is actually the basis of Auro-3D's 8.1 configuration (9.1 adds a center speaker, 10.1 adds TS and 11.1 adds CH). Auro-3D 8.1-11.1 was actually designed to be compatible with Dolby's 5.1 layout. Auro-3D 13.1 was designed around Dolby's 7.1 layout. Their problem was that the extra CH/TS speakers made for a bad combo with 11.1 limited AVRs. They seemed to come up with an 11.1 compatible layout that used 9.1+RS (i.e. 7.1 based without CH/TS) as an alternative (the test disc has this as a signal test mode, for example), but for some reason it didn't end up in the firmware and/or D&M never updated the firmware to use it. They seem dead in the water now anyway. People act like Auro-3D wasn't trying to be Dolby layout compatible, but it was always based on the most common surround format used in people's homes, which is 5.1. Their miscalculation seems to be that is the common "low-end" config when their product is only sold in higher level (mid-priced) AVR equipment. There people wanted rear surround support. That along with their seeming inability to get the Blu-Ray manufacturers to include an Auro soundtrack on the disc (a bit ironic since it really doesn't use up that much more space than a typical 7.1 soundtrack so they could probably fit both Atmos and Auro on many discs if they left out all those foreign language tracks).



Auro-3D is probably unnecessary at this point, though since there isn't much difference between the Auro and Atmos (or X) soundtracks when played back on the same 5.1 based speaker setup (tested here against the Atmos versions limiting my room to half length as 5.1.4 (plus matrixed FW) the Atmos titles were almost identical to the Auro-3D ones like that. DTS:X (particularly the Pro version) can use the Auro speaker layout anyway so it can leverage both room layouts or even a combination of them. The extra speakers really just anchor off-axis seats in practice, IMO. It's not like Atmos can't image something at the CH/TS locations if you're sitting in the center seat(s). Many Atmos titles have objects move across those locations as a matter of course as do DTS:X titles. DTS:X, however can use CH/TS speakers and render them directly (as long as you're below the 11-channel limit or have the Pro iteration with no limit). Some might even prefer to use Neural X with Atmos base soundtracks to make use of those speakers. It's theoretically possible Neural X may give a better overhead impression from some Atmos base soundtracks with Neural X than Atmos itself (given many Atmos movies make poor use of overheads). The worst thing about Auro-3D not gaining traction is they really supported nice binaural-like music recordings with fixed dual-quad microphone stands. This renders the performance in your room exactly like you're there. Atmos "could" make music recordings that way, theoretically, but given they don't want to push fixed channel configurations, they don't really want to push fixed channel recordings. DTS:X, on the other hand could easily handle the same Auro-3D style music recordings as it does support fixed channel layouts in addition to objects. Neural X will use more speakers even with fixed channel recordings and thus the "binaural-like" reality effect would be preserved even with higher count speakers in operation.


Yea there are always pros and cons to everything and I just feel at this point that I don’t want to array only because I want the smooth object panning provided by DTS-X Pro and Atmos. Heck if I feel like these channels are being wasted then it won’t be hard to add some external DSP to try it out. That’s the beauty of all this. Nothing other than the baffle wall is in stone. One should never need to change the screen wall speakers anyway as long as they were installed correctly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58426 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 08:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
skylarlove1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Honey Brook Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,165
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
I’m not doing all this by myself by any means. I have Cineramax and TheWolf working on this project and may have Appelz join in at some point. Walter (TheWolf my acoustician) has what I will say a very modest hourly wage ;-). I spent over $8,000 just to get my Altitude32 calibrated, LCRs laid out, room measurements for acoustic plan, and Altitude32 setup.

So when I can research on my own when there is an issue like we have now where Two channels fit the room best ahead of the MLP I don’t have any grievance at all by researching some on my own. Heck this is my hobby that I’ve been into since the age of 11-12. I bought my first AVR and 4 KLH big box three way 15” speakers for my bedroom. One thing about working with Pros is that they have all kinds of ways of dealing with small issues such as I’m debating now that may seem trivial to them is that all the extra expenses in regards to physical speakers, amps, DSP, labor for mounting it aesthetically, design, calibration, etc... goes by the wayside so to speak when they are making it an option.

Just to be clear I am by no means a tech guru or Altitude32 tinkerer. I love Home Theat and have been into it for over a decade and a half but when it comes to the Altitude32 and digital audio I’m a rookie. Heck I’m actually afraid to mess with my Altitude32 unit for real! I could blow up my entire room by pressing the wrong button casually. That would be the fastest $100,000+ mistake ever created is how I look at it. Sure it’s an awesome piece of kit but it’s for the Pros and for those who take the time to learn its ins and outs to a tee. I’ve read and watched every seminar, white paper, etc that Trinnov has published to its community and they are the BEST when it comes to community support but that doesn’t mean I am ready to jump in and start toying with my unit just yet.

What people have to realize with the Trinnov is that it can do so so much more than what is published that many would be surprised by some of its features. That’s why I asked here and in the Trinnov page specifically about the SS2 channel. That Dolby Diagram is pinched which screws with all their specified angles they published throughout that document so looks like can have more rearward facing channels than what actually can. It just doesn’t make sense in my head why they would limit the front half of rooms by focusing more on the rear half. The angles work out mathematically so that if a room with 3 or more rows have a MLP in the middle/rear of a long room that more than 12.5* spacing between each forward channel is easily doable but that doesn’t seem to be the case with processing unless array which I want to avoid.

My room is 34’x18’x10’ so it’s long and more narrow than wide which was done on purpose back before all these other channels were possible. It was from the ground up build by Dennis E back years ago before wides or Dolby Atmos. It’s being totally renovated now based around the custom Quested LT20 LCRs. Walter came and installed those at the same time he did all the Trinnov work and now we are moving forward slowly one step at a time with everything being carefully considered. I am far from rich/wealthy so can’t just give free reign to Walter like some of his bigger clients so have to pick where and when I need to bring him on board. He is extremely enthusiastic about my approach of taking on the majority of this process as it gives him a different approach for a change. This is the only time he has done a project like this but we have talked a ton both “on the clock” and “off the clock” leading up to starting my project. Heck I feel like he has good faith in me/my decisions acoustically by offering such an agreement in the first place. If you compare my acoustic knowledge to my Trinnov/digital knowledge I’m a digital idiot by all measures lol. Give me a room, poor speakers, and a mic, I can make it sound good I’m fairly confident but give Walter just the Trinnov along with his ears he can make it sound magical before any room treatment not to mention after....

It’s an odd situation that’s for sure but it’s what I can afford. I can read and learn all day at zero expense so I choose to take advantage of that. But at the end of the day it will be magical because I did spend my money in the correct places when needed is how I view it.

Hope that clears up some questions being asked. ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Rich and wealthy are relative to the perspective of the people making those assessments. To a billionaire a multi millionaire is a pauper. Many people who can afford a Trinnov Altitude, along with all the programming costs associated with it, would consider themselves rich in the monetary sense. Before this global pandemic there were approximately 50 million people in the world who would be considered a millionaire. 7.5 billion people in the world.

Even less of those millionaires whose hobby is AV. So you certainly are in the upper stratosphere of AV enthusiasts. Rare air where you find yourself. Like NBA player rare, of all the millions of people worldwide who dribble a basketball.

I admire that you have higher expectations of yourself as to when you would consider yourself wealthy. Thanks for sharing about your home theater. Very interesting to read , knowing 99.99% of people will never experience the levels of AV you have created, but can live somewhat vicariously through your postings.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
galonzo and highmr like this.

Tristan Jones
skylarlove1999 is online now  
post #58427 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 09:18 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,899
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7867 Post(s)
Liked: 7055
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
That Dolby Diagram is pinched which screws with all their specified angles they published throughout that document so looks like can have more rearward facing channels than what actually can. It just doesn’t make sense in my head why they would limit the front half of rooms by focusing more on the rear half. The angles work out mathematically so that if a room with 3 or more rows have a MLP in the middle/rear of a long room that more than 12.5* spacing between each forward channel is easily doable but that doesn’t seem to be the case with processing unless array which I want to avoid.
The Dolby diagram shows SS as the midpoint of the layout, directly in line with MLP, with 11 speakers forward of the midpoint and 11 speakers rearward of the midpoint. Since the diagram shows an even distribution of speakers, what do you mean when you ask "why they would limit the front half of rooms by focusing more on the rear half"? The Atmos renderer sees the same number of speakers in every cardinal direction (front, back, left, right).

As mentioned earlier:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The diagram is misleading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Atmos doesn't use angles when rendering.
IF you are willing to ignore the diagram (rather than continue to dwell on it) and put aside the notion of specified angles (because Atmos rendering isn't based on angles), then you can get a better understanding of how Atmos works, making it easier to figure out where to place your speakers and why.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #58428 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 10:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
eaayoung's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,016
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 215
Finally got my Atmos system up and running. My Atmos journey started about year and a half ago when I upgraded my Onkyo 876 to a Denon 4500. I had my Onkyo setup as a 7.1 system in my old house. In my new downsized home, was only setup as a 5.1 system. My family room is around 20x24 but opens into the kitchen and breakfast area. My current system is all Def Tech with two SM55, PC2000 center, SC6000 sub, two DI 6.5S in-wall speakers for surrounds and four DI 8R in-wall speakers for the height. Modest compared to most on this forum. The new setup sounds great so far. And I haven’t had the time to run Audyssey. Really like how immersive Atmos is. Watched 1917 after getting the system set and it sounded really good. Even the wife agrees it was worth the expense.

I can’t recall who on this forum recommended I go with four Atmos speakers. But they were right.

Last edited by eaayoung; 05-10-2020 at 11:26 AM.
eaayoung is offline  
post #58429 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 10:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
skylarlove1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Honey Brook Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,165
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by eaayoung View Post
Finally got my Atmos system up and running. My Atmos journey started about year and a half ago when I upgraded my Onkyo 876 to a Denon 4500. I had my Onkyo setup as a 7.1 system in my old house. In my new downsized home, was only setup as a 5.1 system. My family room is around 20x24 but opens into the kitchen and breakfast area. My current system is all Def Tech with two SM55, PC2000 center, SC6000 sub, two DI 6.5S in-wall speakers for surrounds and four DI 8R in-wall speakers for the height. Modest compared to most on this forum. The new setup sound great so far. I haven’t had the time to run Audyssey. Really like how immersive Atmos is. Watched 1917 after getting the system set and it sounded really good. Even the wife agrees it was worth the expense.



I can’t recall who on this forum recommended I go with four Atmos speakers. But they were right.
Everybody who has heard 4 Atmos speakers recommends 4 . Everybody who has heard 6 Atmos speakers recommends 6. People who have the room and processing for more recommend more. LOL . The more the better.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
eaayoung and ss nimrod like this.

Tristan Jones
skylarlove1999 is online now  
post #58430 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 11:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Geraldton - 250miles from Perth Western Australia
Posts: 823
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 454 Post(s)
Liked: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by skylarlove1999 View Post
Everybody who has heard 4 Atmos speakers recommends 4 . Everybody who has heard 6 Atmos speakers recommends 6. People who have the room and processing for more recommend more. LOL . The more the better.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Not everyone - I tried 6 in my 20 x 14 room and didn't think it had any benefit over 4, and that was with the 4 being front and rear heights so only at 30deg elevation.
niterida is offline  
post #58431 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 11:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
skylarlove1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Honey Brook Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,165
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by niterida View Post
Not everyone - I tried 6 in my 20 x 14 room and didn't think it had any benefit over 4, and that was with the 4 being front and rear heights so only at 30deg elevation.
LOL obviously you have to have the room length and the height to be able to take advantage of 6 Atmos speakers

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Tristan Jones
skylarlove1999 is online now  
post #58432 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 11:22 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by skylarlove1999 View Post
Rich and wealthy are relative to the perspective of the people making those assessments. To a billionaire a multi millionaire is a pauper. Many people who can afford a Trinnov Altitude, along with all the programming costs associated with it, would consider themselves rich in the monetary sense. Before this global pandemic there were approximately 50 million people in the world who would be considered a millionaire. 7.5 billion people in the world.

Even less of those millionaires whose hobby is AV. So you certainly are in the upper stratosphere of AV enthusiasts. Rare air where you find yourself. Like NBA player rare, of all the millions of people worldwide who dribble a basketball.

I admire that you have higher expectations of yourself as to when you would consider yourself wealthy. Thanks for sharing about your home theater. Very interesting to read , knowing 99.99% of people will never experience the levels of AV you have created, but can live somewhat vicariously through your postings.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Well I saved my money for 5 years to be able to afford the Altitude and the custom LT20 LCRs along with their amps so if saving for 5 years for $40,000-$50,000 is in the class of NBA then they have taken a huge pay cut. No way would I work as hard as an NBA player on my salary!!!!!!

Saving $5,000-$10,000 a year isn’t really all that hard as long as one is disciplined enough by their goals/wants. Sure we make more than the average American but we are not “rich” by any means. I have AV and fishing as hobbies now that I can’t play golf because of major back injuries.

There a tons of ways to make extra money which I have also done so could add to my savings.

Just wanted to point out this all wasn’t just purchased. I literally went without purchasing other items for years so I could have my dream AV setup. To each their own when it comes to dreams and goals as anything is possible if one sets their mind on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
gwsat and Poepsnor like this.
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58433 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 11:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The Dolby diagram shows SS as the midpoint of the layout, directly in line with MLP, with 11 speakers forward of the midpoint and 11 speakers rearward of the midpoint. Since the diagram shows an even distribution of speakers, what do you mean when you ask "why they would limit the front half of rooms by focusing more on the rear half"? The Atmos renderer sees the same number of speakers in every cardinal direction (front, back, left, right).



As mentioned earlier: IF you are willing to ignore the diagram (rather than continue to dwell on it) and put aside the notion of specified angles (because Atmos rendering isn't based on angles), then you can get a better understanding of how Atmos works, making it easier to figure out where to place your speakers and why.


That diagram is skewed. Check out the Trinnov diagram for 24 channel layout. All 7 screen channels are crammed together leaving far wider variations between the other channels in the front of the room.

There is no way one could tell the difference between 5 screen channels and 7 screen channels in a room that would be classified as residential. Spread out the love!!!!! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
skylarlove1999 likes this.
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58434 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 11:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
skylarlove1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Honey Brook Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,165
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
Well I saved my money for 5 years to be able to afford the Altitude and the custom LT20 LCRs along with their amps so if saving for 5 years for $40,000-$50,000 is in the class of NBA then they have taken a huge pay cut. No way would I work as hard as an NBA player on my salary!!!!!!

Saving $5,000-$10,000 a year isn’t really all that hard as long as one is disciplined enough by their goals/wants. Sure we make more than the average American but we are not “rich” by any means. I have AV and fishing as hobbies now that I can’t play golf because of major back injuries.

There a tons of ways to make extra money which I have also done so could add to my savings.

Just wanted to point out this all wasn’t just purchased. I literally went without purchasing other items for years so I could have my dream AV setup. To each their own when it comes to dreams and goals as anything is possible if one sets their mind on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Thanks for sharing your journey. Kudos for that discipline. I wasn't saying your net worth was in the NBA range just that owning a Trinnov Altitude 32 was statistically in the same ratio of people playing basketball who make the NBA. Enjoy.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
gwsat likes this.

Tristan Jones
skylarlove1999 is online now  
post #58435 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 01:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,683
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1596 Post(s)
Liked: 1072
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
Right but SS2 is an object only channel not a true Surround so it wouldn’t sound as good if I aligned the MLP with SS2 for those reasons. If I had a CP-850-C then that would be perfect since the channels are used with that processor.
The only difference is where the sound comes from for "sides". I have mine behind the front row so that 5.1 type material can be run straight if desired and still be behind me (the matrixed FW creates a nice even fill in-between). From the 2nd row (sits between side and SS#2), the side sounds are somewhat forward (adjusted slightly because SS#2 is also matrixed so I can adjust its "side" output to where I want it, but I didn't like it directly to the side as the Atmos pans weren't even then with things like the bird that flies around the room in the one Atmos demo. I basically got it where the Atmos demos are evenly moving around the room and the side fill sounds good regardless. Because FW and SS#2 are matrixed, they're technically "half" arrays (down 3dB for each channel and even 0dB where they meet the way I have it set up). The top middle is Pro Logic steered so it sounds just like a discrete channel for the most part (I ended up leaking a little bit on purpose to even it out a bit as Pro Logic 1 steers a bit hard towards center). Now it all sounds even with the helicopter test run at ear level (shut off overheads) or overhead no matter which row I sit in in terms of a center seat. Off-axis isn't 'perfect', but better than it would have been with 7.1.4 or even 7.1.6 by far). The partial arrays also work particularly well with older material that was meant to be arrayed in the first place (5.1/7.1), even when upmixed with Neural X.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 6-22-20)
MagnumX is offline  
post #58436 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 01:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 28,899
Mentioned: 257 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7867 Post(s)
Liked: 7055
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
Check out the Trinnov diagram for 24 channel layout. All 7 screen channels are crammed together leaving far wider variations between the other channels in the front of the room.
The Atmos renderer sees the same number of speakers in all directions with the same spacing between them. That means the separation between the Fronts & Rears is the same as the separation between the Front Left & Right.



The Trinnov diagram has the separation between the Fronts & Rears (120°) as double the separation between the Front Left & Right (60°). That's not how the Atmos renderer spaces them.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #58437 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 02:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
The only difference is where the sound comes from for "sides". I have mine behind the front row so that 5.1 type material can be run straight if desired and still be behind me (the matrixed FW creates a nice even fill in-between). From the 2nd row (sits between side and SS#2), the side sounds are somewhat forward (adjusted slightly because SS#2 is also matrixed so I can adjust its "side" output to where I want it, but I didn't like it directly to the side as the Atmos pans weren't even then with things like the bird that flies around the room in the one Atmos demo. I basically got it where the Atmos demos are evenly moving around the room and the side fill sounds good regardless. Because FW and SS#2 are matrixed, they're technically "half" arrays (down 3dB for each channel and even 0dB where they meet the way I have it set up). The top middle is Pro Logic steered so it sounds just like a discrete channel for the most part (I ended up leaking a little bit on purpose to even it out a bit as Pro Logic 1 steers a bit hard towards center). Now it all sounds even with the helicopter test run at ear level (shut off overheads) or overhead no matter which row I sit in in terms of a center seat. Off-axis isn't 'perfect', but better than it would have been with 7.1.4 or even 7.1.6 by far). The partial arrays also work particularly well with older material that was meant to be arrayed in the first place (5.1/7.1), even when upmixed with Neural X.


Do you have a diagram or pic of your setup to better demonstrate where each speaker is located in relevance to seating and screen?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58438 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 02:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The Atmos renderer sees the same number of speakers in all directions with the same spacing between them. That means the separation between the Fronts & Rears is the same as the separation between the Front Left & Right.







The Trinnov diagram has the separation between the Fronts & Rears (120°) as double the separation between the Front Left & Right (60°). That's not how the Atmos renderer spaces them.


Yes I’m aware of everything you are mentioning regarding how Atmos is rendered. Im just speaking about how to set up channels in the room based on angles relevant to the MLP and screen.

I will never bring my L/R way outside of the screen unless the processor can make well and certain no onscreen content will be played by those channels!!!!!!

What the Trinnov does better than any other processor I have ever experienced from $500-$30,000 is sync ALL sounds with the objects on the screen. It’s literally magical and seems like the actors are truly speaking right where they are on screen.

If the processor could only use the Screen Channels and L/R Center Channels for “on-screen” content then that would open up placing the L/R at the furthest most points in the square as long as the speakers played well in those locations.

I have my Rear L/R in the corners for a number of reasons, one being your example above! ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #58439 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 03:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,683
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1596 Post(s)
Liked: 1072
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post
Do you have a diagram or pic of your setup to better demonstrate where each speaker is located in relevance to seating and screen?
Theater Page: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-re...l#post56799092

Angle Diagram and Layout Diagram:



360 Views attached below
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Front Middle Screen s.jpg
Views:	64
Size:	166.9 KB
ID:	2724108   Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Front Right Screen s.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	168.4 KB
ID:	2724110   Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Mid Right Front s.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	178.4 KB
ID:	2724112   Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Right Mid s.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	231.0 KB
ID:	2724114   Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Rear Center s.jpg
Views:	60
Size:	201.4 KB
ID:	2724116  

Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Rear Left Corner s.jpg
Views:	60
Size:	174.4 KB
ID:	2724118   Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Left Mid s.jpg
Views:	58
Size:	188.5 KB
ID:	2724120   Click image for larger version

Name:	Theater Room Front Left Screen s.jpg
Views:	60
Size:	174.2 KB
ID:	2724122  
audiovideoholic likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 6-22-20)
MagnumX is offline  
post #58440 of 58861 Old 05-10-2020, 08:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Geraldton - 250miles from Perth Western Australia
Posts: 823
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 454 Post(s)
Liked: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by skylarlove1999 View Post
LOL obviously you have to have the room length and the height to be able to take advantage of 6 Atmos speakers

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Well with my front heights 10' in front and rears 8' behind and 9' ceilings I would have thought mine would really benefit from top middles. But I couldn't tell any difference between 4 and 6 - but it was matrixed Top Middles so maybe that would skew my results.
galonzo likes this.
niterida 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