The official Auro 3D thread (home theater version) - Page 187 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1873Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #5581 of 6360 Old 07-16-2018, 07:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
smurraybhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Down South
Posts: 4,633
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2291 Post(s)
Liked: 3127
^ unbelievable, you are ignoring facts (plenty has been written as both are almost 4 years old) and making a lot of “box” assumptions. VB overpromised and under delivered right out of the gate nearly 4 years ago. That was Auro’s problem, not Dolby. All us AVSers who have gone the Atmos route must be carpenters. Seriously, like Marc I invested $199 for the Auro upgrade, have a fairly agnostic speaker setup for all immersive formats and I wouldn’t make the investment again. Auromatic showed promise for 2 channel music upmixing, then Neural was released with DTS:X. I’m not a fan of reverb coupled with VB special sauce

I’m glad that there are those who enjoy Auro, just a small group mostly from Europe.
sdurani likes this.

There is no perfect display, quit looking for faults and enjoy

LG OLED 65” B7 and 55” C8
Ascend's with RAAL, Love my PSA v1800 and a 7.2.4 speaker config, Oppo 203 and other stuff
smurraybhm is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5582 of 6360 Old 07-16-2018, 07:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
What "FACTS" have I ignored? Please. Do tell.

Was it my OPINION I don't like up-firing speakers due to smeary half-arse image quality (an opinion I've seen shared elsewhere plenty of times)? My OPINION that putting Atmos ceiling speakers is NO GO for >99% of the people on the planet? My OPINION that Auro 3D's coinciding 2-axis layout should image more smoothly and accurately due to how poorly stereo images outside the axis plane when Atmos separates layers in a cross with a circular "ideal" bed surround pattern? My OPINION that DTS has more clout over here because it's a more established company? My OPINION that Dolby are UTTER ARSES for DEMANDING that licensees not allow competing upmixers to function with ANY Dolby signals (even 1990s Dolby Digital)? Or was it my admission I could be WRONG that bothers you with the so-called "FACTS" ???

Yes, unbelievable.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5583 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 12:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
Sal1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Central FL
Posts: 696
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 447 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by smurraybhm View Post
Seriously, like Marc I invested $199 for the Auro upgrade, have a fairly agnostic speaker setup for all immersive formats and I wouldn’t make the investment again. Auromatic showed promise for 2 channel music upmixing, then Neural was released with DTS:X. I’m not a fan of reverb coupled with VB special sauce

I’m glad that there are those who enjoy Auro, just a small group mostly from Europe.
So are you saying you don't find Auro to bring a worthwhile upgrade for upmixing stereo sources? I haven't been very happy with Dolby Surround or Neural and was hoping for something better but the Auro upgrade will cost me $199

Sony XBR75-X940D, Samsung UBD-K8500 UHD-BD, Xfinity X1 Voice DVR, Marantz AV-7703 Pre/Pro w/Auro, (3) Adcom GFA-545II amps, (2) Adcom GFA-535II amps for ATMOS speakers.
HSU Research 5.2 speaker system (4) HB-1 MK2, (1) HC-1 MK2, (2) STF-2,
Klipsch HT500 satalites (4) for ceiling mounted ATMOS playback
DIY Linux desktop w/Clementine bit perfect media center. Emotiva Stealth DC-1 DAC
Sal1950 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5584 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 08:59 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,565
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6970 Post(s)
Liked: 5950
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
But what is an object?
Sound or combination of sounds not mixed into a channel but instead tied to a location in 3D space or a speaker. Atmos & DTS:X can use objects during playback, Auro3D can't.
Quote:
The layout alone is superior, IMO. Not having to mount speakers in a ceiling is a huge improvement in terms of looks and a PITA to wire.
You're describing convenience, not superiority.
Quote:
How is that desirable one iota (the so-called phantom imaging)? The entire reason Atmos doesn't really want dipoles or bipoles used for side surrounds anymore is that they are too dispersed and not pin-point enough to image well in a system designed to move objects around the room. Upfiring speakers create a giant smear of sound between the speaker and the ceiling and THAT is supposed to be better?
Better than no height imaging. Not everyone can install a height layer of speakers. Dolby planned for that. Auro didn't.
Quote:
If it has upfiring speakers, I don't see how it won any sound-based award.
Because, contrary to your belief, upfiring speakers work.
Quote:
What good is positional object based audio if it can't take advantage of whatever layout you can make work in a given room?
When did Dolby claim that Atmos is based on listener position and/or placing speakers where ever you want? You're inventing straw men in order to knock them down.
Quote:
For an object based system, Atmos is incredibly inflexible, IMO about the layout pattern.
More flexible than Auro.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5585 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 10:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Sound or combination of sounds not mixed into a channel but instead tied to a location in 3D space or a speaker.
Yeah, that's not a technical description. As I said, it's really just panning meta data tied to a location (I didn't make that up; I read it in a more technical article on the system). In other words, it tells the system how to do automatic pans for a given sound using multiple discrete speakers along the path. But it doesn't allow a calculation to account for the speakers being in different places along the path. It wants a fixed set of speakers. Now whether they could make a processor that COULD account for different speaker locations than their prescribed layout and still function correctly, I'm not certain. What is certain is that it doesn't do that today. DTS, OTOH, claims their system IS speaker layout agnostic, but I haven't seen much evidence to prove this either as current AV gear cannot set up a weird layout to test it. I'm not aware of much use of objects in DTS X mixes either which would likely affect its ability to pull it off anyway.

Quote:
Atmos & DTS:X can use objects during playback, Auro3D can't.
My point is that objects are great for large theaters (and even home theaters with more than 11-13 speaker or so as that's what it was designed for, but without the placement flexibility, I simply don't see how it actually benefits a home installation. All the speakers used in a typical 11-13 speaker system are specific locations around the screen and a single listening position. All the speakers added beyond that extend the height/bed into the back of the room and it's those speakers that behave differently in a large setup allowing them to act like discrete locations instead of just a giant delay set array, giving more fluid transitions and allowing different sounds in different speakers at the same time. But at home, those speakers aren't used so it's a "meh" that people make a huge deal out of, IMO. Auro could bring their commercial object system home, but how many people would get any use out of it? They can't even get the industry to carry their regular system at home.


Quote:
You're describing convenience, not superiority.
Well, it would take listening test comparisons to be sure. My comments are anecdotal based on other people's systems that can compare the rare Auro title to Atmos. But then me just saying I don't like Dolby trying to kill off what sounds to me like a superior system (for whatever reason I like I what I read about it) shouldn't be that controversial. You seem to want to pick a fight over nothing. You like Atmos. Ok. I'm not telling you not to use it. I'll be forced to use Atmos too because it's what's out there. That doesn't mean I have to like Dolby. They are fiends, IMO for their licensee restrictions designed solely to monopolize the system. I don't like bullies.

Quote:
Better than no height imaging. Not everyone can install a height layer of speakers. Dolby planned for that. Auro didn't.
Because, contrary to your belief, upfiring speakers work.
I'll just disagree here. You don't have to look very far to find posts on here and elsewhere that agree with my position. I think they work very poorly and I can't see spending much money on the speakers when they do more sound blur than height.

Quote:
When did Dolby claim that Atmos is based on listener position and/or placing speakers where ever you want? You're inventing straw men in order to knock them down. More flexible than Auro.
Everything Dolby writes about positional audio makes it sound like it's a positional audio system where the system doesn't care where the channels are because it moves to the nearest speaker in that position. It's marketing hype. Now maybe it wasn't Dolby that put out all those articles saying that, but rather magazines, web sites, etc. that don't understand how it works and THINK it's a true positional system that only cares where the sound goes, not how it gets there, but that's just not accurate to how it works from what I"ve been reading. It's not simple to find a site that explains it out there because they just want to put it layman's terms and get people excited. Certainly DTS has claimed on their site that they are speaker layout agnostic, but with current AVR manufacturers not allowing that placement flexibility, it's really moot whether it's true or not.

Flexibility? It depends on what you mean by flexible when it comes to Auro. If it's easier for someone to install in a given room than ceiling speakers, they would probably call it more flexible.

Honestly, I don't know why you seem to want to pick a fight over an opinion about Auro 3D in an Auro 3D thread. If you don't like Auro 3D, don't use it. I think it sounds pretty interesting as an alternative in the home environment and would like to explore the format further. However, it's lack of support in receivers makes that unlikely as I have a good reason (dialog lift) to go with Yamaha instead and there's little chance they are going to offer a firmware upgrade to get it.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5586 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 10:38 AM
Newbie
 
TechnoDad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Mammoth Lakes, Ca
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesmor View Post
It has already been discussed on the thread
you can only get Auro discs in europe
Jumanji welcome to the jungle has both Dolby Atmos and Auro and is available on Amazon.de
Copy that! I just need to make sure they are region free, right? I got a copy of Pixels on the way from the UK. I found it on eBay. Stoked for that! I'll try the german amazon site.
TechnoDad is offline  
post #5587 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 10:39 AM
Newbie
 
TechnoDad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Mammoth Lakes, Ca
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by dschulz View Post
I would check out some Auro-3D music as well, especially as the format was originally developed as a surround music recording/playback system. The two showcase recordings that I've heard are the TrondheimSolistene "Magnificat" on the 2L label (a gorgeous piece of contemporary classical music), and Lichtmond 3: Days of Eternity (sort of prog-rock I guess, makes me think of Alan Parsons). Both are natively Auro 9.1 (so a 5.1 bed with height channels corresponding to the Left, Right, Left Surround, and Right Surround channels).

Honorable mention as well to Ozark Henry's "Paramount," also in Auro-3D 9.1.

The Lichtmond disc is on Amazon, although I note the price has gone through the roof. The others you may need to source from Europe now, they seem to have dropped off Amazon US.
Hi! Thanks for the tips, I'll look into some music as well!
TechnoDad is offline  
post #5588 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 01:24 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,565
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6970 Post(s)
Liked: 5950
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
Yeah, that's not a technical description.
You're moving the goal post. I already described what an object was. Switching it to a "technical" description won't get around the advantage that Atoms has over Auro.
Quote:
But at home, those speakers aren't used so it's a "meh" that people make a huge deal out of, IMO.
Merely stating the fact that Auro doesn't use objects isn't making a "huge deal" out of it. Again, you're erecting a straw man just to knock it down.
Quote:
My comments are anecdotal based on other people's systems that can compare the rare Auro title to Atmos. But then me just saying I don't like Dolby trying to kill off what sounds to me like a superior system (for whatever reason I like I what I read about it) shouldn't be that controversial.
You're stating subjective preference as objective superiority. Pointing that out isn't "controversial". Sadly, it isn't even your preference, just what you "read about it" on the internet.
Quote:
I think they work very poorly and I can't see spending much money on the speakers when they do more sound blur than height.
No one is asking you to spend money on anything. Fact is that Dolby has an alternative for consumers that cannot install a height layer of speakers. Likewise, DTS has an alternative (height virtualization using Virtual:X). No one is saying they're better than physical height speakers. Just pointing out that Auro has no such alternative.
Quote:
Everything Dolby writes about positional audio makes it sound like it's a positional audio system where the system doesn't care where the channels are because it moves to the nearest speaker in that position.
That's something you're inferring, not anything they explicitly claimed. Not fair to hold them accountable for something you imagined they said.
Quote:
Flexibility? It depends on what you mean by flexible when it comes to Auro. If it's easier for someone to install in a given room than ceiling speakers, they would probably call it more flexible.
Again, you're describing convenience, not flexibility. Atmos can support configurations from 2.0.2 to 24.1.10. Auro simply doesn't have that kind of placement flexibility, let alone real-time rendering that can adapt to different speaker layouts. No one is arguing preference (yours or what you "read about"). But if you're going to claim superiority, then it needs to be backed up with something (anything).
smurraybhm and Dark Matter like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5589 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 01:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
Sdurani, YOU WIN. You are IMPOSSIBLE to have a conversation with without you posturing and attacking anything everyone else says with an attitude that just reeks of smugness, even when it's just an opinion. But you cannot tell an opinion from a fact and insist everyone else "thinks this". Right. I believe i had you on IGNORE before. Back you go where you belong. You are not worth wasting my time reading your nonsense.
sdurani likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5590 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 02:17 PM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Beershorn
Posts: 3,069
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
….reeks of smugness....
Actually, it "reeks" of accurate, objective information. Sanjay knows more about these codecs than 99.9+% of the AVS population. Honestly, you'd be better served by reading and learning.
RUR is offline  
post #5591 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 03:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post
Actually, it "reeks" of accurate, objective information. Sanjay knows more about these codecs than 99.9+% of the AVS population. Honestly, you'd be better served by reading and learning.
Thanks for the advice, but you don't know me from Job, mister. I've got two Electronic Engineering degrees and have been doing high-end audio and home theater since the 1990s and I've seen Sanjay before talk down to people all day long like he's the only one on Earth that knows a damn thing about audio. I've got better things to do than argue with someone about their OPINION. (e.g. look at the comments about up-firing speakers; go around and see how many people LIKE those speakers and then look again how he says WE'RE ALL just flat out WRONG for thinking they're a waste of time. You see that's our OPINION and has NOTHING to do with his supposed vast realms of so-called "knowledge". Yeah, that kind of "advice" I don't need or want to listen to and the argue until you just give up because you have better things in life to do than argue about NOTHING attitude even less.

But hey, listen if you want. Meanwhile, I'll add you to my ignore list also.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5592 of 6360 Old 07-17-2018, 10:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Sal1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Central FL
Posts: 696
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 447 Post(s)
Liked: 470
My God, reading all this quibbling over tiny codec minutia is making my brain hurt.
Think I'll just go listen to some music.
vn800art likes this.

Sony XBR75-X940D, Samsung UBD-K8500 UHD-BD, Xfinity X1 Voice DVR, Marantz AV-7703 Pre/Pro w/Auro, (3) Adcom GFA-545II amps, (2) Adcom GFA-535II amps for ATMOS speakers.
HSU Research 5.2 speaker system (4) HB-1 MK2, (1) HC-1 MK2, (2) STF-2,
Klipsch HT500 satalites (4) for ceiling mounted ATMOS playback
DIY Linux desktop w/Clementine bit perfect media center. Emotiva Stealth DC-1 DAC
Sal1950 is offline  
post #5593 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 12:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 2,610
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 856 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
That's something you're inferring, not anything they explicitly claimed. Not fair to hold them accountable for something you imagined they said.
If you read the fundamental Atmos documentation they've put out, as far as I remember they don't (or didn't) anywhere explicitly state that it does not apply to home/BluRay version of Atmos, so it's quite logical to assume from reading their tech papers that what goes for (Cinematic) Atmos also applies to (Home) Atmos. You can't expect people to be psychic in finding omitted lines in their specs... Or even what tech papers don't apply at all....

Codename - the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #5594 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 05:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
smurraybhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Down South
Posts: 4,633
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2291 Post(s)
Liked: 3127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal1950 View Post
So are you saying you don't find Auro to bring a worthwhile upgrade for upmixing stereo sources? I haven't been very happy with Dolby Surround or Neural and was hoping for something better but the Auro upgrade will cost me $199
If $199 isn't a budget breaker for you I would definitely give Auromatic (you a buying an upmixer) a shot, as you can read for yourself there are a number of rational posters who enjoy the format. It wasn't worth it for me, but I'm glad I tried it, similar to adding a few amps to my HT
Fortunately the Auro experiment was a lot less expensive.

As for the debate, I'm just glad we have a choice and we've got more content being released weekly with immersive mixes. Its good to see immersive mixes available via streaming, even if they aren't lossless. Remember there are a few frequent posters in this thread who have never tried/heard Auro and/or Atmos. The best thing is to compare them and decide which one you prefer for different content. On the technical side, Sanjay knows his xxxx so I would pay attention to his posts.

Unfortunately for those who are fans of Auro 3-D, it has never lived up to VB's hype and releases are far/few between especially in the States (see big goose egg - 0).
Sal1950 likes this.

There is no perfect display, quit looking for faults and enjoy

LG OLED 65” B7 and 55” C8
Ascend's with RAAL, Love my PSA v1800 and a 7.2.4 speaker config, Oppo 203 and other stuff
smurraybhm is offline  
post #5595 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 07:24 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,565
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6970 Post(s)
Liked: 5950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
If you read the fundamental Atmos documentation they've put out, as far as I remember they don't (or didn't) anywhere explicitly state that it does not apply to home/BluRay version of Atmos, so it's quite logical to assume from reading their tech papers that what goes for (Cinematic) Atmos also applies to (Home) Atmos.
Where in the fundamental Atmos documentation do you remember it saying that "it's a positional audio system where the system doesn't care where the channels are because it moves to the nearest speaker in that position."?

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5596 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 08:05 AM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Beershorn
Posts: 3,069
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
But hey, listen if you want. Meanwhile, I'll add you to my ignore list also.
Oh dear.

Horses, water and all that.
Dark Matter likes this.
RUR is offline  
post #5597 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 08:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ted99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,948
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 944 Post(s)
Liked: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechnoDad View Post
Copy that! I just need to make sure they are region free, right? I got a copy of Pixels on the way from the UK. I found it on eBay. Stoked for that! I'll try the german amazon site.
When I purchased my copy of the Polish edition of Blade Runner 2049, a picture of the back side of the box showed a triangle with Regions "A,B,C". It played in Region A perfectly. I'd suggest that you look for this symbol. My USA Blu Rays state Region A, but in very fine print. I suspect that if a disc is multi-region (not region free), it is shown more prominently.

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 #5598 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 08:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 2,610
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 856 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Where in the fundamental Atmos documentation do you remember it saying that "it's a positional audio system where the system doesn't care where the channels are because it moves to the nearest speaker in that position."?

In
Dolby Atmos® for the Home Theater
August 2014



On Page 15




Figure 10: Dolby Atmos for home theaters supports as many as 24 speakers on the floor and 10 speakers producing overhead sound




That's pretty close to everywhere you'd manage to put a speaker, I'd say. But when did you last see Dolby Atmos for home theaters support these options?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	atmos24.1.10.jpg
Views:	16
Size:	13.6 KB
ID:	2429840  

Codename - the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #5599 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 09:49 AM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Beershorn
Posts: 3,069
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
Dolby Atmos for home theaters supports as many as 24 speakers on the floor and 10 speakers producing overhead sound

That's pretty close to everywhere you'd manage to put a speaker, I'd say. But when did you last see Dolby Atmos for home theaters support these options?
In the Trinnov Altitude since Nov. 2014, but even it assumes any given speaker is in it's specified location.

NB Yes, it has a proprietary remapping function, but that has nothing to do with Atmos decoding.
RUR is offline  
post #5600 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 09:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
Even in that layout, they don't allow for speakers in a different location (e.g. High side wall instead of that middle track). DTS says they can do it (put them anywhere you want and it can use them as best it can), but thus far no AVR has supported a method to set speakers to more than the accepted Atmos or Auro locations to test this claim.

There really should be no technical reason Dolby or even someone else couldn't update Atmos or adjust the panning to account for such speaker locations (it all just comes down to how much signal goes to what speaker at a given time as this object travels along its set path, so all that is needed are variable locations in space and perhaps a few more computations for the system to determine the new data to pan (think of star drift calculations on the Stargate TV show compensating for star positional changes to determine the new location only simpler since the speaker locations are still preset by the user.)

All it needs to do is adjust the panning around those locations. Obviously, you could do some pretty stupid setups that way if you wanted (e.g. All the speakers in the corner), but all in all, at least more rooms could make better use of Atmos without compromising the sound field as it does now by putting a speaker where it doesn't expect it to be.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5601 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 11:23 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,565
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6970 Post(s)
Liked: 5950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
That's pretty close to everywhere you'd manage to put a speaker, I'd say.
That's like posting a Dolby diagram of a traditional 7.1 layout and saying it implies you can do a 3.1 configuration made up of a Centre speaker and 2 Rear speakers. We both know that's not possible because speaker layouts have always been based on pre-requisites. You cannot configure Rears without first configuring Sides. You cannot configure Sides or Centre without first configuring Fronts.

There has never been a movie sound format that allowed users to pick arbitrary speaker locations from the full configuration. And that didn't change with Atmos. Dolby has never implied otherwise, let alone saying it explicitly. As I said, it's not fair to hold Dolby accountable for something you (or anyone else) imagined they said.

To counter to what I said above, you replied:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
...it's quite logical to assume from reading their tech papers that what goes for (Cinematic) Atmos also applies to (Home) Atmos. You can't expect people to be psychic in finding omitted lines in their specs... Or even what tech papers don't apply at all....
Where in the "(Cinematic) Atmos" tech papers does it say (or imply) that the format does positional rendering and/or allows for speakers to be placed anywhere?
Dark Matter likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5602 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 01:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
I found this article interesting given what some have said:

"One of the things that’s supposed to set DTS:X apart from Atmos is their claim that it can support any channel layout. In theory, you should be set up your system however you want (within the limits of your AVR’s configurations) and it should work regardless, Unlike Atmos’ prescribed layouts.

"One benefit of this is that it should be compatible with the Auro 3D 10.1 layout, which Atmos is not. Atmos does not support the Voice of God channel (a single overhead speaker) nor does it support Side Heights or Front Top Center. DTS:X should be able to. Dolby doesn’t come right out and say their system supports many different speaker layouts, but it clearly does, considering it can be scaled from 8 channels to 34 in the home. In addition to height/overhead channels, front wides, rear wides, rear centers, and everything in between is supported outside of placing height channels above the surrounds. Atmos requires height channels, while DTS:X does not. This is good, considering not everybody has the ability or desire to add overhead speakers (and dolby enabled speakers really suck in my experience)" -- -- https://rantingsofamadaudiophile.wor...erence-part-i/

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5603 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 02:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,269
Mentioned: 230 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5279 Post(s)
Liked: 4796
I have respect for @CBdicX as he has come by his opinions by listening/experimentation. @MagnumX and @Nightlord seem to be simply reading whitepapers without much if any relevant listening experience. (Reading this thread, the Atmos and the Dts:X threads in their entirety would be much more beneficial.) This can be extremely misleading, especially in the case of Dts:X. The initial press releases by Dts seems have been to buy time as they were way behind Auro and Dolby in developing an immersive format. Much of what they promised has never come to pass. It's vaporware! Dts and Auro have much more to do with Auro3D's demise in the home than Dolby.

Some folks seem to be assuming that high-wall mounting (heights) is only supported by dts and Auro. While I can see how this could be inferred by reading whitepapers, it is far from the truth. Atmos supports in-ceiling, on-ceiling, high-wall, and Dobly-enabled (bouncy) positions. All positions can work quite wall from my experience. You work with the room you've got. I have 6 in-ceilings upstairs, but I will have to use high-wall mounting in my downstairs den (for 5.1.2).


https://www.svsound.com/blogs/svs/75...to-dolby-atmos
https://www.svsound.com/pages/prime-elevation
VideoGrabber, sdurani and RUR like this.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5604 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 02:56 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,269
Mentioned: 230 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5279 Post(s)
Liked: 4796
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
I've got two Electronic Engineering degrees and have been doing high-end audio and home theater since the 1990s
It is a mistake to come to the forum assuming you know more than others. This is a great place to increase one's knowledge as there are always folks who will know more than you. I have two degrees too (including EE) but that doesn't qualify me to know any more than someone with a GED. Especially if they work in the industry. I spent a large part of my career in Telecom/IT. I have learned tons more about high-end A/V from other forum members than I ever did at a University (or working in Telecom/IT). We all have our strengths and weaknesses. That is the beauty of a forum, wide range of expertise and experience from a wide pool of members.

Can we hit the reset button and start over?
Dark Matter and vn800art like this.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5605 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 03:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
Blaming DTS for the AV receiver makers poor implementation or Hollywood's non-object mixes isn't really their fault, IMO.

I don't think I've ever inferred you cannot use front/rear height speakers (all the receiver manuals I've looked at thus far support it), but I believe Dolby considers it less than ideal as it doesn't match their preferred layout. In other words, it's probably going to be at a non-ideal angle from their mixing standpoint and therefore may not put sounds quite where they "could" be otherwise. DTS, on the other hand, appears to be mixed with front/rear height speakers above the front/rear channels (very similar to Auro 3D), so it would probably be very close to the mixing room using height speakers with X soundtracks. It's sad one has to be compromised somehow, but I guess you can't expect corporations to work with each other very often for the benefit of everyone (look at the HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray mess many years ago).

It's the SIDE height speakers you can't "officially" use instead of middle height on a receiver like the Denon 8500H (you can tell it's top middle to get it to work). Similarly, many reviews have stated that setting receivers to use "height" speakers puts less content in the mix than lying to it and telling it that it's a top speaker. I hope that's just a temporary glitch, but given Dolby's firm encouragement for ceiling speakers, I wouldn't count on it.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5606 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 03:14 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,565
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6970 Post(s)
Liked: 5950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
Some folks seem to be assuming that high-wall mounting (heights) is only supported by dts and Auro. While I can see how this could be inferred by reading whitepapers, it is far from the truth. Atmos supports in-ceiling, on-ceiling, high-wall, and Dobly-enabled (bouncy) positions.
Indeed, Atmos has height speaker locations high up on the front & back walls. By comparison, the lowest height layer for DTS:X is at 45 degrees elevation. That means in a typical domestic room with 8-foot ceilings, 4 of their height speakers would end up at the corners of a 7' x 7' square above the MLP, which would put them firmly on the ceiling and not high up on the walls of a typical room. Yet, as you pointed out, folks have been assuming that DTS:X supports high-wall placement while Atmos doesn't, when the reality is the opposite.
VideoGrabber likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5607 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 03:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,269
Mentioned: 230 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5279 Post(s)
Liked: 4796
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
DTS, on the other hand, appears to be mixed with front/rear height speakers above the front/rear channels (very similar to Auro 3D), so it would probably be very close to the mixing room using height speakers with X soundtracks.
It may seem this way from reading, but it is far from the truth. Dts Heights locations are not above the front/rear channels, the correspond more closely to Dolby TOPS. Dolby's Heights locations are far closer than Dts to Auro's. You should really read the Dts:X thread. Warning, there is a ton of relevant info posted by @sdurani . So you may miss it since he is to be ignored.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5608 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 03:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,812
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1050 Post(s)
Liked: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
It is a mistake to come to the forum assuming you know more than others. This is a great place to increase one's knowledge as there are always folks who will know more than you. I have two degrees too (including EE) but that doesn't qualify me to know any more than someone with a GED. Especially if they work in the industry. I spent a large part of my career in Telecom/IT. I have learned tons more about high-end A/V from other forum members than I ever did at a University (or working in Telecom/IT). We all have our strengths and weaknesses. That is the beauty of a forum, wide range of expertise and experience from a wide pool of members.

Can we hit the reset button and start over?
Is it also not a mistake to ASSUME that I don't know anything because I disagree with Sanjay on up-firing speakers or whatever subjective topic? I've got people talking down to me like I'm an idiot (I'm not saying Sanjay did) who don't have any idea what my knowledge level is on audio and I don't appreciate that. I don't just have engineering degrees (I'm only saying there that I'm not an idiot and I've written papers on digital audio in the past and even made my own analog audio scrambling system as my senior project from scratch from Cad-Cam to final product (great for talking privately over CB while sounding like you're on a side-band when you're not and thus no one is likely to hunt you down for using digital over public airwaves; the head of my program who worked at NASA during the moon shot and appreciates all things analog years LOVED it and commented how he thought that would throw the newer NSA guys for a loop, at least at first since they expect everything to be digital that's encoded these days. OTOH, he immediately guessed correctly the algorithm used to scramble it).

As I said, I've been active in this hobby for some time. No, I don't know everything and I'm just now preparing to upgrade to an immersive setup, but "experience" hearing a home setup can mean 5.1.2 and that's not the same as 9.1.4 either. There's also different rooms and different speaker types. Listening to Dolby's advice, you shouldn't use bipoles or dipoles anymore, but I've read numerous people's reports of trying them and they're pretty happy with the result. I've seen FAR too many threads (not just this site) just parroting Dolby's official recommendations and angles for speakers like nothing else will work. Without being able to compare their setup with another directly, it's pretty hard to know which one sounds "better". You might be able to infer it's closer to what was used to mix it, but that's not the same thing as a subjective experience as "better".

My simple point here is that I'm not here to get into full page "arguments" over opinions (like which format is "better"). It's subjective on the level I'm referring to. Technical superiority? Objects aren't everything, especially at home with less than 13 channels. That's all I'm saying. Given I haven't heard Auro 3D at home yet, it's really more like my impression reading other people's views. Being taken to task for that? No thanks. I'd like to hear them and judge for myself, ideally not take someone's word for it. And I'm sorry, but I don't like Dolby's monopolistic PUSH to rid its signals of competing upmixers.

It's very irritating to me for someone to jump into a thread on Auro and start going on how Atmos is better. Has he even heard it or is he also going by reviews and/or technical superiority of the home format (ignoring speaker placements which I still disagree with as a starting point for 3D audio; DTS/Auro both agree with each other from the mixing rooms I've seen). Still, I've been trying to find a way to do all three in my room without compromising too much, but the $4000 price tag for that high-end Denon is a put-off. I can afford it, but it's a waste of money if there are no titles and Dolby clamps down on the upmixer too. But then Yamaha's dialog lift not working with the Dolby Surround and Neural:X upmixer is a put off too.

Now I see bits about DTS not using the same kind of height speakers (despite their claims of agnostic speaker locations) and yet when I look at photos of mixing studios, I see height speakers just to the side right above front/rear speakers. But I guess that's all nonsense too. Let's get hung up on the height and angles as well. Have any of you actually TRIED something other than those exact angles? No, that would make Dolby angry!

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) 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 7-5-19)

Last edited by MagnumX; 07-18-2018 at 03:27 PM.
MagnumX is online now  
post #5609 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 03:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,269
Mentioned: 230 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5279 Post(s)
Liked: 4796
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
Is it also not a mistake to ASSUME that I don't know anything because I disagree with Sanjay on up-firing speakers or whatever subjective topic? I've got people talking down to me like I'm an idiot (I'm not saying Sanjay did) who don't have any idea what my knowledge level is on audio and I don't appreciate that.
That is not what I observed, I am sorry you felt that way.
Quote:
I've seen FAR too many threads (not just this site) just parroting Dolby's official recommendations and angles for speakers like nothing else will work. Without being able to compare their setup with another directly, it's pretty hard to know which one sounds "better". You might be able to infer it's closer to what was used to mix it, but that's not the same thing as a subjective experience as "better".
Actually, we try to promote the exact opposite here. The official recommendations are just that, recommendations. Compromises in elevation placement are rarely significant compromises in listening experience.
Quote:
My simple point here is that I'm not here to get into full page "arguments" over opinions (like which format is "better"). It's subjective on the level I'm referring to. Technical superiority? Objects aren't everything, especially at home with less than 13 channels. That's all I'm saying. Given I haven't heard Auro 3D at home yet, it's really more like my impression reading other people's views. Being taken to task for that? No thanks. I'd like to hear them and judge for myself, ideally not take someone's word for it. And I'm sorry, but I don't like Dolby's monopolistic PUSH to rid its signals of competing upmixers.
I'm pretty sure it was you that brought up Atmos, and me who questioned your statement.

No matter how you slice it, object based is superior. Channel based is legacy. Dolby True HD and DD+ support up to 16 channels (since 2007?), so Dolby could have supported a channel based 9.1.6 without the object based Atmos. An object based system can be channel based but a channel based system cannot be object based.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_TrueHD
https://www.dolby.com/us/en/technolo...by-truehd.html
Quote:
It's very irritating to me for someone to jump into a thread on Auro and start going on how Atmos is better. Has he even heard it or is he also going by reviews and/or technical superiority of the home format (ignoring speaker placements which I still disagree with as a starting point for 3D audio; DTS/Auro both agree with each other from the mixing rooms I've seen).
Again, that was me. And yes, I have all three formats running. @maikeldepotter and @sdurani (there are two Sanjay's) chimed in. Most of what I know about immersive audio I learned from them.
Quote:
Now I see bits about DTS not using the same kind of height speakers (despite their claims of agnostic speaker locations) and yet when I look at photos of mixing studios, I see height speakers right above the front speakers. But I guess that's all nonsense too because some DTS thread says otherwise (for both their claims and the studio photos I've looked at).
Spoiler!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
^^ I configure my setup with Atmos in mind and let the other formats fall where they may. However, I do think it is important to get dts:X right as it is being used a channel based format and not object based (for now and into the future it appears). There's is no need to phantom image any of the main dts:X 7.1.4 channels. Reserve that for WIDES & TOP MIDS.

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-18-2018 at 04:05 PM.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5610 of 6360 Old 07-18-2018, 04:01 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,269
Mentioned: 230 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5279 Post(s)
Liked: 4796
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
Still, I've been trying to find a way to do all three in my room without compromising too much, but the $4000 price tag for that high-end Denon is a put-off. I can afford it, but it's a waste of money if there are no titles and Dolby clamps down on the upmixer too. But then Yamaha's dialog lift not working with the Dolby Surround and Neural:X upmixer is a put off too.
If you have to choose, Auro is the least necessary codec to support. Read back through this thread and take note of @CBdicX 's posts.

Working around Dolby's upmixer restriction is so easy. You simply set the Blu-ray player to decode to LPCM. You don't even have to pause the movie with Oppo players. Lyngdorf has restricted upmixing of Dolby True HD tracks already. I can still upmix DD and DD+ 5.1 with Auromatic.

One could implement Yamaha's dialog lift by using dual AVRs.

My advice is to wait until CEDIA 2018 in September. New Yamaha [and other brands] models should be announced then.

Enter the Bubble: about format agnostic immersive lay-outs

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-18-2018 at 04:25 PM.
Marc Alexander 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