The official Auro 3D thread (home theater version) - Page 188 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1896Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #5611 of 6397 Old 07-18-2018, 08:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,975
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1142 Post(s)
Liked: 661
The problem is in a real room that wasn't built for home theater, the layout is probably going to be dictated by the room itself. One might have to place speakers where they can, not where Dolby or DTS wants them to be. Using something like a bipole or dipole could affect the pattern on the sides as well (obviously they no longer recommend those, but several people have reported good results using them just the same; a long narrow room probably could use more than one side, for example, especially if there are multiple rows of seating.

In other words, if the elevation angle suggests the speakers should go on/in the ceiling and that's a no-no, it's not going to meet the ideal. I just put my B15 bookshelf speakers as high as I could put them beside the screen for dialog lift (see attached image). I can't put them lower or dialog lift won't work right. I can't put them higher because I just met the ceiling and they're too large to go on the ceiling and putting a hanging speaker in front of the bookshelves would looks awful. In-ceiling speakers might work, but it's beyond my carpenter skill level (ceiling is between floors; no attic to easily move things over and cut holes to drop down). I'm left with what I'm left with in the front regardless of the angles. Calculating the angle from the height/distance to say the middle of the speaker, I get (Inverse Tangent 6.5/10) or 33 degrees. For the back of the room in the proposed location at the actual back of the room, it would probably be (InvTan * 7/10 + 90) or ~120 degrees. This would be pretty close to Dolby's "Height" reference. The side speakers are about 2/3 up the wall (old Dolby recommendation of a couple of feet above ear level) so that's no good, but they are bipoles and with Dialog Lift in line with the screen. I'd basically try it first before moving them down (probably use a set of speakers on stands to compare) since I'd have to make new holes, etc.

Math wise, it seems to me speaker delay basically increases or decreases the relative calculated distance away on the triangle to the main speakers by delaying the sound or sending it sooner (thus increasing the geometric angle in math terms). I don't think it would ever work with discrete real signals (too many reflections, etc. to give spatial clues to the true location), but I can't help but wonder if that's why the dialog lift effect on my Yamaha receiver moves up and down the wall if I change the speaker distance (thus altering the delay and the combined wave front. I'm sure there's quite a bit going on in perception terms, but there's no doubt the distance setting affects the dialog lift height here. It actually needs to be slightly off in the distance setting to get the best effect. Otherwise, I still feel like I"m hearing sounds at the center speaker location. Whether that could help even slightly with those DTS angles being somewhat different, I have no idea, but it would be interesting to play with the settings while a height effects are running in a movie and see what happens.

The back of my theater room is a somewhat different story due to the half bathroom and possible extra seating I could put back there. I could mount ceiling angled speakers (on, not in) behind the second row, but given the outboard fireplace in the room (big hassle, but it's not going anywhere), the only place I can put more future theater chairs is where the 4th row would be if you evenly placed theater chairs. I can put two there (sliding glass door blocks the other location and I'm out of space anywhere in-between as there's a half-bathroom entrance that needs to be clear). I've put fold-out chairs in those locations to see how the view of the screen is and it's surprisingly good from the back of the room, even though there's a ceiling beam mid-way across the room with the projector hanging from it (not obstructed at all sitting down).

Thus, with that in mind (i.e. it would be nice in the future to be able to sit more than 4 people in the theater; this expands it to 6, 3 in front, 1 to left and behind and two in the center and right back of the room), I would rather put the rear height/ceiling speakers near the ceiling in the back of the room. This would at least give the back two seats some kind of "surround" sound (since both the side and rear surrounds are in front of them and I can't put the rear surrounds back any further without compromising the width of the soundstage in that direction) and actually makes the front and rear heights almost equidistant (maybe 2 feet further in the back). Luckily, despite the bathroom, the rear left corner is pretty much right in line with the left front speaker and the right height is easily placed in line with the right front speaker. The fronts could be moved outward to sit directly under the front heights (i.e. current receiver recommends above and a bit outward but it's from 2007 before all these newer formats). The side wall surrounds would probably need to come down to just above ear level (at ear level the couch might block some of the frequencies). However, they're bipoles, but I'm not convinced given how narrow the room is that a direct fire would do better there, especially near ear level (don't want the person on the right couch/(future chair) to get beamed right in the ear and there's not enough room to place it directly to the side without a wall hugger like that. I've actually been TRYING to get some feedback on the layout, etc. in a couple of threads (PSB, Yamaha) and I get none. Rather than argue, where I actually would like a bit of feedback, I've been getting none. I'm attaching brand new photos of the room along with the last layout I made with actual/proposed locations).

It seems to me the AVR manufacturers (or even whomever makes some of the chipsets) could rectify a lot of these issues themselves. There's no law that says a receiver can store only ONE layout that must be used by all decoders. I'd prefer that it let you set the speaker layout by decoder instead. That would/could also let you use external speaker selectors to potentially use different speakers for different decoders if it makes sense for you to do so. Denon's 13.x receiver has at least two options it can switch for you (i.e. wide front or top-center/VOG, which lets you prioritize Auro over Atmos/X or vice versa and Rear height vs Side height, which lets you switch Auro to its ideal surround speaker while having a separate one for Atmos/X. That's great, but Denon doesn't have similar options on their 11.x and 9.x receivers. However, if you could just swap layouts with a software switch (and perhaps store a second Audyssey set of data as well), you could then use an external switchbox to achieve the same effect and/or swap between wide front and the Auro ceiling speakers as well on the 13.x receiver, letting you have ideal versions of both decoders. I gather you can do this with a USB load, but it would be much better to just store two sets (or even three sets) of settings in the receiver's memory at any given time. How much is memory today that they can't be bothered?

Really, given how much experimentation I've done over the years with side surround placement (what sounds best seems to vary by the room to some degree as well and the type of speaker), I can't say I buy into a "one size fits all" angle layout. What concerns me most is how it sounds. This is why with the areas I CAN play with a bit, I'd rather test before mounting anything on the walls/ceiling to hear how ti sounds first. That could be rough with the back ceiling, but fairly easy to do with speaker stands at the floor level. But I'm severely limited by the layout of the room with all the obstacles in it (as you can see the bathroom and fireplace make it rough in that vicinity, but then 90% of the time, there's no more than two people watching it anyway).

Right now with the new height speakers installed (wires on the sides in the photos, etc. to be cleaned up later with new painted molds I bought) with the old receiver where they do DSP and dialog lift only, it does sound massively more spacious in the vertical domain relative to the 92" screen. This was most obvious in early testing with the new speakers on Sebastican Manascalco's comedy routine from 2-channel. Instead of a line across the front leaving your brain to move the sound up, it actually come from in-between both sets of speakers like a wall of sound with the audience laughing where the bookcases are and Sebastian's voice coming directly from the screen. This is interesting in more than one way, however as the line of audio is no longer coming from ear level. The side surrounds were set to Dolby's old recommendations of a couple of feet above ear level with bipoles instead of dipoles (PSB didn't do dipoles versions at the time; the current generation have a switch to go either way; I thought bipoles made more sense for stereo surround anyway with some nebula of sound, but not extreme). I've tried the couch both along side and a bit in front of the surrounds. I think I liked the speakers slightly behind me better, but both sounded good. Now that the audio comes from the screen to the bipoles, it sounds like a wall of sound flying between the two almost in a straight line (before, a bit odd lower to higher, but most movies have poor panning in the space in-between or at least it doesn't pan well in that space, making me think front wides aren't a bad idea). Now it seems "ideal" for traditional 5.1/7.1 as the phantom middle ofthe screen image lines up with the surrounds and both are at screen level where the visible action is instead of ear level where nothing is.

Going Auro with the 13.1 Denon, I could leave the side speakers where they are and only use it for Auro (obviously can't really mount them higher, though due to the beam across the room). Otherwise, I might have to lower them to just above ear level when all is said and done (I'd try it first to compare, though, probably with some stand speakers to hear the lower before filling wall holes and making new ones).

Edit: I made a mistake with the angles as I was using floor to ceiling, not ear level. That puts it closer to 23/20 degrees, a fair bit below the expected heights. Nothing I can do other than going to the ceiling, though and/or moving the couch closer to the screen in the front, but it's really nearly as far as I can go without compromising the right viewing location too much. Rows further back would have even lower angles, but without overheads in the middle that would be true of any home theater with more than one row of seating (why theaters have so many surrounds in the first place). I'd basically need to go 13 channel and put top middle in (or 11 without the rear surrounds, but then the rear seats would only have side surrounds in front of them--far from ideal and that's only three rows).
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	HomeTheaterSnap1_July18s.jpg
Views:	71
Size:	138.3 KB
ID:	2430078   Click image for larger version

Name:	HomeTheaterSnap2_July18s.jpg
Views:	57
Size:	109.4 KB
ID:	2430080   Click image for larger version

Name:	HomeTheaterSnap3_July18s.jpg
Views:	54
Size:	115.0 KB
ID:	2430082   Click image for larger version

Name:	Home Theater Layout 7_1 FutureUpgrades.jpg
Views:	53
Size:	131.0 KB
ID:	2430084  

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 10-13-19)

Last edited by MagnumX; 07-19-2018 at 06:32 AM.
MagnumX is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5612 of 6397 Old 07-18-2018, 10:31 PM
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 Marc Alexander View Post
@Nightlord seem to be simply reading whitepapers without much if any relevant listening experience.
I have heard enough of Atmos to know that anyone with high fidelity ambitions for their theater will never use it for any other case than one listener in prime position, thank you. It's a single person system, and as such - totally uninteresting to me. If you haven't heard that yourself, then I question your ears or your actual interest in the accuracy of the soundtrack. If you're just interested in it being effectful rather than accurate, then you're excused - but don't write me on my nose because I have higher aspirations than that.

Codename - the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #5613 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 12:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CBdicX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hello from Holland !
Posts: 3,285
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1632 Post(s)
Liked: 385
Atmos/DSU is the only one that using ALL my speakers for now.

My last and final setup (), after a lot of testing with Dolby Enabled versus Direct fire, is a 7.1.6 setup with Front and Rear Height and Top Middle.
I was hoping with my X8500H that i could assign the TM as VOG for Auro, but it will not
As TM has a Left/Right function in Atmos/DSU i can hear the differents playing the same file compared to Mono VOG.
In the 8500 finaly Auro3D is using Surround Back, thats a big , to bad VOG is not flexible in the setup.

Also DTSX/NeuralX is missing out, DTS can only do 11 channels now, not 13, so with DTS my TM will stay sillent.
Strange as they are the last of the 3 and "claiming" to use evey speaker setup possible.
They forgot to mention that its limited to 11 channels...........

I will post pics soon of my setup, and as a side note, i use 15 channels, 3 speakers for Center with an external Denon 520, but thats a different case

Last edited by CBdicX; 07-19-2018 at 12:09 AM.
CBdicX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #5614 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 02:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,946
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBdicX View Post
Also DTSX/NeuralX is missing out, DTS can only do 11 channels now, not 13, so with DTS my TM will stay sillent.

Just curious if your reciever plays all channels when set to a DTS:X 5.1.6 configuration.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #5615 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 02:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,725
Mentioned: 312 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2564 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Just curious if your reciever plays all channels when set to a DTS:X 5.1.6 configuration.
All 5.1.6 : yes.
maikeldepotter likes this.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 12xJBL 12" w/6xSLAPS M12 downfiring VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #5616 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:27 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,946
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
All 5.1.6 : yes.
And how active are the Top Middles in a 5.1.6 config when playing a DTS:X track?

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #5617 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:35 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,725
Mentioned: 312 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2564 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
And how active are the Top Middles in a 5.1.6 config when playing a DTS:X track?
It really helps with planting the pannings around the room(ceiling).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
Had me some DTS:X fun time yesterday

I have the 8500 setup with 5.1.6, playing heights only=X.X.6, and the 7200 setup with 9.1.2, playing 9.X.X.

I played the movie clips, object emulator and 7.1.4 call out on the 2017 DTS:X demo disc, and it all worked FLAWLESS !!

The movie clips was awsome with the best height pannings i have heard so far from DTS:X, and even the 7.1.4 call out sounded perfect. Yes, when playing just 9.X.X, the rear heights leaked to the back surrounds, but when playing with both AVR’s active, it was IMPOSSIBLE to hear this «malfunction» , even when muting/unmuting the base layer.

It in no way shifted/muddied the height placement of sound.

So as far as i could test, it resulted in «correct» DTS:X 9.1.6.

maikeldepotter likes this.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 12xJBL 12" w/6xSLAPS M12 downfiring VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #5618 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 07:44 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ted99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,988
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 441
I've done a direct A:B test for the same movie (BladeRunner 2049) in both Auro 11.1 and Atmos 9.1.4 and my ears say the Auro rendention is better in my room with my speakers. But, I had to go to Poland to get that disc. DTS:X is limited to 7.1.4; plus there aren't many releases in DTS:X, lately, compared to Atmos. Having owned both Betamax and HD-DVD players, I've been on the loosing end of format wars, even though my choices were considered to be technically superior. Content is King, and Atmos has already won the content war in the US. The bad news is that Auro has lost in the US. The good news is that we have a 3D sound format, even if it isn't the "best". Since the format war is over, for all intents and purposes, lets hope the Studios (and filmmakers--Sidney Nolan, I'm speaking to you) begin to use the full capabilities of the format (Disney, I'm speaking to you).

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 CH, Infinity 6" VOG. 4X 12" subs w/mini DSP on sub 1 and nearfield 18" from sub 2.
Ted99 is offline  
post #5619 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 09:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CBdicX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hello from Holland !
Posts: 3,285
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1632 Post(s)
Liked: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
And how active are the Top Middles in a 5.1.6 config when playing a DTS:X track?
Nalleh answered this for you, but in Atmos Top Middle is very active, so active that Front and Rear Height are almost not active.
They come into play when the content has moving objects like plains moving from rear to front.
CBdicX is offline  
post #5620 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 10:09 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,990
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7252 Post(s)
Liked: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
I have heard enough of Atmos to know that anyone with high fidelity ambitions for their theater will never use it for any other case than one listener in prime position, thank you. It's a single person system, and as such - totally uninteresting to me.
Since Atmos rendering is NOT based on listener location, what makes it a "single person system"?

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5621 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 10:43 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Since Atmos rendering is NOT based on listener location, what makes it a "single person system"?
More breaking news….
…..
…..
…..
sdurani and smurraybhm like this.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5622 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 10:48 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted99 View Post
I've done a direct A:B test for the same movie (BladeRunner 2049) in both Auro 11.1 and Atmos 9.1.4 and my ears say the Auro rendention is better in my room with my speakers.
I don't disagree. I would just like to hear your impression when configured for TOPS with Atmos.
@Nalleh have you compared this title?
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5623 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 12:39 PM
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
Since Atmos rendering is NOT based on listener location, what makes it a "single person system"?

It is... visualize the place you're sitting at in the center listening to two overhead speakers, one to each side of you ( to simplify it )... then move 4 feet sideways... how much will the angles to the overhead speakers change... and how much would a virtual center sound move to the closest speaker? There are NO other speakers that will get the same angle difference. ( Surrounds might have a bit if you have more than one row, but that can easily be mitigated with speaker arrays. Front speakers in a normal case is quite a bit ahead of you, so the angle difference isn't particularly more than TIT can handle. )


Note: this is based on normal room height... 8 feet is default ceiling height here in Sweden, so if you want a rear platform, you're down to 7 feet... if you happen to have a much higher ceiling, the problems mitigate the higher it is... pure physics... or geometry rather..

Codename - the Larch theater

Last edited by Nightlord; 07-19-2018 at 12:44 PM.
Nightlord is offline  
post #5624 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 12:46 PM
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 Marc Alexander View Post
More breaking news….
…..
…..
…..

Well... I know a few places where it is... My porch for instace... (Yes, if you're being ridiculous, then I may too...)

Codename - the Larch theater
Nightlord is offline  
post #5625 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 01:10 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
@MagnumX , my room is narrow (13⅓ x 24½ x 8½ ft³) and I use hybrid multi-pole speakers (Mirage OS3-fs OM-R2, and OMD-R) for my floor/base layer. I will be replacing all of the surrounds & wides with Funk Audio 3.4Ds (Hemipole). While I wouldn't recommend di-poles for side-mounted speakers, I find bi-poles beneficial for narrow rooms.

I hope you see that many of us are speaking from real-world experience and are not slaves to Dolby's recommendations. Nor do we intend to talk down to you, but simply to educate. I have experimented with multiple layout placements and configs. Perhaps my input can be helpful for your scenario.

I essentially have three rows. First row (3 seats) is ~9½ft from the front wall, second row (3 seats) is on a 6" riser ~15ft from the front wall. In the rear I have a round bar table and barstools (8) for overflow (third row). I'm in the process of modeling in Roomle.

I am running 7.x.4 with a 9.x.6 layout but with 5 + Wides rather than Rear Surrounds. I use a Yamaha RX-V1800 to extract a mono Rear Surround (feeding 2 speakers) via 3-ch Neural decoding. The wides are just forward of first row and the side surrounds are slightly forward (100°) of the 2nd-row. The in-ceilings are Mirage Omnicans which are aimable, wide-dispersion. The Top Middles are directly inline with the side-surrounds and wider than the mains and other in-ceilings. The Top F/R are about 40°. I had to work around the beams and crossbeams in my attic.

If my setup interests you, I will gladly post more as well as assist in your planning.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5626 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 01:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,990
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7252 Post(s)
Liked: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
There are NO other speakers that will get the same angle difference.
By that logic, you can claim every format is a single person system. Auro heights aren't somehow immune to this.
Quote:
Surrounds might have a bit if you have more than one row, but that can easily be mitigated with speaker arrays.
If arrays are the solution, then the problem can be mitigated for all formats. Connecting one channel from your AVR to multiple speakers isn't exclusive to Auro.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #5627 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 01:30 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
It is... visualize the place you're sitting at in the center listening to two overhead speakers, one to each side of you ( to simplify it )... then move 4 feet sideways... how much will the angles to the overhead speakers change... and how much would a virtual center sound move to the closest speaker? There are NO other speakers that will get the same angle difference. ( Surrounds might have a bit if you have more than one row, but that can easily be mitigated with speaker arrays. Front speakers in a normal case is quite a bit ahead of you, so the angle difference isn't particularly more than TIT can handle. )


Note: this is based on normal room height... 8 feet is default ceiling height here in Sweden, so if you want a rear platform, you're down to 7 feet... if you happen to have a much higher ceiling, the problems mitigate the higher it is... pure physics... or geometry rather..
Why visualize when we have experienced multiple setups (Atmos and Auro3D) in homes (from 5.1.2 to 11.x.8 for me) and cinemas from multiple seating positions.

I don't understand why you've been posting in this thread for 3+ years yet haven't installed anything immersive in your room.

I've been reading your posts for years and have found value in your experience and contributions. We simply disagree in regards to immersive audio. It's surprises me is that you've formed such strong opinions without significant 1st-hand experience IMO.

I am a big Auro3D fan. I was also a fan of D-Theater and HD-DVD. I don't have to dislike or disparage one format simply because I like another.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post
(Yes, if you're being ridiculous, then I may too...)

On that note, have you considered buying Atmos and/or Dts:X headphones to provide your listeners a 100% identical listening experience?


sdurani and duckymomo like this.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5628 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 01:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ted99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,988
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I don't disagree. I would just like to hear your impression when configured for TOPS with Atmos.
@Nalleh have you compared this title?
No longer an option. I onsold the disc to another member. I've bowed to the King of Content and rolled over for Atmos.

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 CH, Infinity 6" VOG. 4X 12" subs w/mini DSP on sub 1 and nearfield 18" from sub 2.
Ted99 is offline  
post #5629 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 01:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CBdicX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hello from Holland !
Posts: 3,285
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1632 Post(s)
Liked: 385
Whatever the setup, Mono, Stereo or Multi Channel, when a listerner moves, the music or sound effects will not move and create a disbalance for that listener.
This is the way "nature" works, and the ears.
Auro Atmos DTSX will all suffer from the same effect when a person or persons are posisioned out of the middle.
This will also be the case even with Mono........
MagnumX likes this.
CBdicX is offline  
post #5630 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 02:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,975
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1142 Post(s)
Liked: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
@MagnumX , my room is narrow (13⅓ x 24½ x 8½ ft³) and I use hybrid multi-pole speakers (Mirage OS3-fs OM-R2, and OMD-R) for my floor/base layer.

I will be replacing all of the surrounds & wides with Funk Audio 3.4Ds (Hemipole). While I wouldn't recommend di-poles for side-mounted speakers, I find bi-poles beneficial for narrow rooms.
Short of starting over, I'm pretty much limited to PSB at this point.

Quote:
I hope you see that many of us are speaking from real-world experience and are not slaves to Dolby's recommendations. Nor do we intend to talk down to you, but simply to educate.
Yes, I can tell that from your Earth is not f-ing flat snippet directed at Nightlord.

Right or wrong, that's just rude, IMO and the type of thing that would get me heading for the ignore button. I don't agree with his conclusion about Atmos versus any other imaging based system, but let's face it, nearly all home theaters have only one of two truly "perfect" seats at best. Stereo only truly images correctly in the center of all things. It starts to slide downhill from there. Movies don't tend to use truly perfectly spaced effects, perhaps for that very reason (compared to music albums where the spread is anywhere in-between for any instrument while many movies tend to put mostly dialog in the center and leave the side and surround speakers for effects, which don't have to be "perfect" since there's no picture to correlate the effect to. Even panning is probably more important than absolute placement of a given sound.

Quote:
I have experimented with multiple layout placements and configs. Perhaps my input can be helpful for your scenario.
Given my limitations in angles here without going to ceiling mount speakers (which present their own issues since the main support beam of the house is in a box that dips down into the room and pretty much divides the upper near ceiling air space into two rooms at distances close to it and isn't high enough to mount speakers directly "on" it, the question becomes what happens to the sound imaging at less than 30 degrees? (I'm guessing the phantom image will start to sound closer to a "jump" beyond the typical 60 degree arc that phantoms are considered limited to and hence the reason Dolby chose 30 degrees minimum (30 to 90 and 90 to 120 are two 60 degree arcs).

This is the same reason front wides are needed to fill dead space, but most people seem less worried about that and manufacturers for some unknown reason have been removing that option from 9 and 11 channel receivers (no idea why they wouldn't let you choose between top center + front wide and top front + rear front; it seems like it would just be a firmware/software option to allow unless some decoder chips simply don't offer it any longer. The new Denon 8500H can allow both (at the expense of top middle instead, but at least they have the option; you'd need 15 channels to really do Atmos properly in any real size of room and that's ideally just for ONE row of seating. I'd like to see more receivers process more channels even if they don't supply the power for them. Stereo 100 Watt amplifiers aren't that expensive (plenty around the $100 range if you don't want to go high-end) while receivers with more channels start to go through the roof after 7 channels while processor only (use your own amps) start to go through the roof immediately (there was a time when "separates" weren't THAT much more than receivers and things like outboard decoders were semi-common (I still have a Technics DD/DTS decoder I use with my Carver 4.0 system so that I can keep my fully analog pre-amp (you could also connect such a pre-amp or outboard unit to connect something like Sonic Holography with a simple tape loop back then. Now there's no simple way to insert processing before the amp stage of the receiver without using all outboard amps (otherwise adding something like DIRAC might be a lot easer) whereas adding DIRAC to my Carver 2-channel setup would be simple as could be (I could insert it either via tape loop on the Carver C-5 preamp or between it and the active crossover network).

With the B15s as high as i can put them, I'm looking at around 20 degrees elevation from my ear level. I can move the couch perhaps another foot forward at mot before it's just too darn close to the front speakers and the screen for that matter. That still only nets me 23 degrees or so. The rear heights are even worse if placed in the back of the room (for the front row, at least; the second row is better, but partially blocked by the half bathroom back wall (blocking the left rear height speaker). The proposed rear seating locations would have rear heights almost right overhead by comparison and have their own issues as bed level speakers would be in front of them.

I could put the rear heights to along the edge of the bathroom wall that extends behind the recliner and on the ceiling on the other side (only have to fish wire a couple of feet between the support box and speaker), but then I'd need to do the same in the front to get any kind of balance and again, the rear of the room wouldn't get anything above (let alone behind) it and the second row would now have the rear ceiling speakers almost directly overhead instead of the back row. The front height thing is a lost cause either way if I really want 30+ degrees. The ceiling at 7'4" simply isn't high enough. Even flush ceiling speakers mounted in the ceiling itself would only net around 23 degrees with a 3.5' ear height. There would literally be no choice but to move to ceiling speakers if 30 degrees is considered the minimum acceptable angle.

Then there's dialog lift. Obviously, it's going to work best more or less where I have the presence speakers right now. Atmos ceiling speakers in front of the screen location (to get over 30 degrees) would image in front of the screen not AT the screen. The only way I can see to get dialog lift at the screen and still get a minimum 30 degree angle in the room is to have two sets of speakers (existing and ceiling mounted in front of the screen) and use two receivers in order to generate a separate presence and top front (or top middle) set of signals. In fact, that's pretty much the only way I can think of to keep dialog lift and get a Denon with Audyssey and Auro 3D too. Connect the Denon as normal with top front/rear and/or top middle plus use the pre-outs for the front L/C/R channels to feed the Yamaha which would then extract a dialog lift presence channel and power it along with the front three bed channels. You would lose Audyssey for those front channels (unless you can use the pre-out and amp for them both whereas you'd only lose it for the presence channels there). That would create potentially a 7.x.8 or a 9.x.6 system (where 2 channels are presence/dialog height only channels). Obviously, with a better alternate second receiver than the old one I have which isn't even HDMI, you could manage 9.x.8 that way and even 11.x.8 with an extra row of side surrounds as a delayed array set feeding 3-4 rows near perfectly and 5-6 with slight compromises (depending on room dimensions). That could easily seat 30-40 people with a decent sized room.

But in my room with something less than the Denon 8500, that would probably mean 7.1.6 at most with two receivers, keeping dialog height channels only for that and having 4 ceiling speakers. With the Denon 8500, I'd still have to choose between front wides and top middle. I don't think top middle would image well for both front and back of the room due to the ceiling beam blocking line of site for the rear rows so it would probably be better use to front wide there. I'm not even sure if the line of sight would extend to the rear of the room in the Dolby top front position. None of these are "ideal" for all possible rows in this room. Some seats are going to get surround effects mostly or entirely in front of them. I suppose I could put side wall rear surrounds in the back instead and then the back would have it good, but the recliner in the second row wouldn't get the left rear channels well (heights or bed) and the front row would have constrained rear width compared to the side surrounds. Everything is a compromise. OTOH, 95% of the time, it'd just be one or two people using the system so perhaps it's better to simply set up around that and either not do two seats in the back or not worry about those seats being ideal.

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 10-13-19)

Last edited by MagnumX; 07-19-2018 at 02:52 PM.
MagnumX is online now  
post #5631 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 02:59 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted99 View Post
No longer an option. I onsold the disc to another member. I've bowed to the King of Content and rolled over for Atmos.
It would be great if you would just compare the Atmos version with Tops vs Heights. I think you will find an improvement.

When comparing immersive formats with lossless tracks (speaker config optimized for each format), I suspect that easiest conclusion to come to will be that they are different… rather than declaring a winner.

The only Auro3D movie I own is Red Tails. Everything else is music. Even 2L's Pure Audio releases now contain both Auro3D and Atmos. I just bit the bullet and ordered Arneson Magnificat ($30). I suspect the Atmos version will sound identical, even though its sampling rate is 48kHz vs 96kHz for Auro3D. We'll see.

This is a list of immeresive music titles: http://www.audiophile.no/en/item/2288-musikk-i-3d

PM me if you have any immersive music you'd like to sell.

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-19-2018 at 04:06 PM.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5632 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,725
Mentioned: 312 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2564 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I don't disagree. I would just like to hear your impression when configured for TOPS with Atmos.
@Nalleh have you compared this title?
Yes, i have 2049 in both versions. However i tested it in Atmos 7.1.6 vs Auro 13.1. And i agree, Auro sounds better. I have said it before, Auro tends to sound more natural and logical, sounds eminate more from where they should sound compared to what happens on screen. And the ambiance, the feeling of being in the space you see on screen is noticable better in Auro.

Same in Jumanji: Welcome to the jungle, when they are in the jungle, there is so much better sense of being there, compared to Atmos.
Ted99 and vn800art like this.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 12xJBL 12" w/6xSLAPS M12 downfiring VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #5633 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:35 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
Short of starting over, I'm pretty much limited to PSB at this point.
@sdrucker 's 11.x.8 setup is all PSB. He may be able to help you in speaker selection and placement.
Quote:
Yes, I can tell that from your Earth is not f-ing flat snippet directed at Nightlord.

Right or wrong, that's just rude, IMO and the type of thing that would get me heading for the ignore button.
You are right. While I may feel that way about his argument and find the meme both appropriate and funny, I can see why some may take offense.

Please let me know if you place me on ignore. Reading and responding to your posts are quite time consuming.
Quote:
I don't agree with his conclusion about Atmos versus any other imaging based system, but let's face it, nearly all home theaters have only one of two truly "perfect" seats at best.
While I disagree with @Nightlord I do find that Auro3D/Barco 11.1 has a much wider sweet spot in the cinema than Atmos. In my home setup, I prefer Atmos/Dts:X for their use of Wides. I matrix the Wides with Auro (and it does produce a more consistent sound throughout the room), but it isn't the same as discrete Wides or 3ch extraction. I could use additional AVRs/AVPs to extract Wides but I prefer not to apply any external processing to my front stage (LCR). If I chose to I would sell my Lyngdorf and use something less expensive.

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-19-2018 at 04:07 PM.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5634 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
Yes, i have 2049 in both versions. However i tested it in Atmos 7.1.6 vs Auro 13.1. And i agree, Auro sounds better. I have said it before, Auro tends to sound more natural and logical, sounds eminate more from where they should sound compared to what happens on screen. And the ambiance, the feeling of being in the space you see on screen is noticable better in Auro.

Same in Jumanji: Welcome to the jungle, when they are in the jungle, there is so much better sense of being there, compared to Atmos.

I'm going to order Jumanji. Is there a 3D version that contains the Auro3D track (or the Blu-ray included in the 3D pack)? How about BR 2049?

I prefer 3D over 4k in most cases.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5635 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,975
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1142 Post(s)
Liked: 661
You would have to mux your own 3D version with Auro from the 2D one, I think.

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 10-13-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #5636 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 03:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,725
Mentioned: 312 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2564 Post(s)
Liked: 3456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post

I'm going to order Jumanji. Is there a 3D version that contains the Auro3D track (or the Blu-ray included in the 3D pack)? How about BR 2049?

I prefer 3D over 4k in most cases.
As with many Atmos BD releases, Auro too is limited to 2D BD only.

I posted links to all Auro BD releases a page or two ago

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 12xJBL 12" w/6xSLAPS M12 downfiring VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #5637 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 04:05 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,321
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1658 Post(s)
Liked: 1329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
@sdrucker 's 11.x.8 setup is all PSB. He may be able to help you in speaker selection and placement.
You are right. While I may feel that way about his argument and find the meme both appropriate and funny, I can see why some may take offense.

Please let me know if you place me on ignore. Reading and responding to your posts are quite time consuming.

While I disagree with @Nightlord I do find that Auro3D/Barco 11.1 has a much wider sweet spot in the cinema than Atmos. In my home setup, I prefer Atmos/Dts:X for their use of Wides. I matrix the Wides with Auro (and it does produce a more consistent sound throughout the room), but it isn't the same as discrete Wides or 3ch extraction. I could use additional AVRs/AVPs to extract Wides but I prefer not to apply any external processing to my front stage (LCR). If
I chose to I would sell my Lyngdorf and use something less expensive.
13.4.6. Details are in my signature

Audio Gear: Trinnov Altitude 32 (24 channel), NAD M27 amps (3)
Video: JVC RS600, Seymour 100" UF Screen, Lumagen Radiance Pro 4444 (coming soon)
Speakers: PSB Imagine T3 LCR, Imagine T Wides/Side Surround 1, T2 Side Surrounds, Imagine XB rears, Image B6 screens, PSB CS1000 ceilings (6), HSU ULS-15 Mk 2 subs (4) - 13.4.6
HAA HT1 and HT2 Certification
sdrucker is offline  
post #5638 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 04:09 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
You would have to mux your own 3D version with Auro from the 2D one, I think.
Yes, I have this ability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
As with many Atmos BD releases, Auro too is limited to 2D BD only.

I posted links to all Auro BD releases a page or two ago
I'm just unsure whether the 2D BD in the 3D pack has the Auro3D track.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5639 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 04:12 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
13.4.6. Details are in my signature
My bad… 13.x.6 w/4 subs not 11.x.8.

Have I told you how jealous I am yet this month?
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #5640 of 6397 Old 07-19-2018, 04:26 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,518
Mentioned: 240 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5472 Post(s)
Liked: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I'm just unsure whether the 2D BD in the 3D pack has the Auro3D track.
I found the answer. Yes, it does. I am going to assume the same for BR 2049 and others.

https://surround-sound.info/news/jum...blu-ray-15251/
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