The Official Anthem AVM 60 thread - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 4141Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 9522 Old 05-27-2015, 07:24 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,560
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6964 Post(s)
Liked: 5942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
Is there going to me any material for more than 11 channels?
Already is, since Atmos and DTS:X material can render to more than 30 output channels.
Nemesis.ie likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 9522 Old 05-27-2015, 10:00 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
In fact receiver sales are down as more consumers are using sound bars instead of surround sound
True in general because most AVRs cost hundreds not thousands. I haven't seen an effect on our price category and even there, 5.1 installation is more common than 7.1. That's because the couch is against the back wall and this could mean that 5.1.4 will be more common than 7.1.4.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #33 of 9522 Old 05-27-2015, 12:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1887 Post(s)
Liked: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Already is, since Atmos and DTS:X material can render to more than 30 output channels.

Is it going to be widely used on the UHD discs or other formats for consumers? Or will it just be on a few demo and reference material? Personally, I want this to happen but it may end up being more like SACD is to music where most people have no clue it exists.
Ellebob is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 9522 Old 05-27-2015, 12:21 PM
J.P
Senior Member
 
J.P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Few more questions

-Will we be able to use IOS(Apple) running ARC on AVM 60 ?
-Can ARC on AVM60 correct up to 20khz ?
J.P is offline  
post #35 of 9522 Old 05-27-2015, 06:59 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,560
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6964 Post(s)
Liked: 5942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
Is it going to be widely used on the UHD discs or other formats for consumers?
It will eventually be used on UHD BD and streaming, but don't know how "widely".
Quote:
Or will it just be on a few demo and reference material?
It's already gone past that (I wouldn't call 'Step Up: All In' reference material, but it does have an Atmos track).

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #36 of 9522 Old 05-27-2015, 09:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1887 Post(s)
Liked: 1084
I thought Atmos on current Blu-Rays was made for 7.1.4 speaker layout and that is why they give recommendations for 7.1.4 speaker placement? I am hoping with HDMI 2 with more possible audio tracks and true object based audio, the processor should know where the speakers are positioned and angled to give the best presentation regardless of placement and number of speakers for Atmos and DTS-X.
Ellebob is offline  
post #37 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 12:25 AM
J.P
Senior Member
 
J.P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
I thought Atmos on current Blu-Rays was made for 7.1.4 speaker layout and that is why they give recommendations for 7.1.4 speaker placement? I am hoping with HDMI 2 with more possible audio tracks and true object based audio, the processor should know where the speakers are positioned and angled to give the best presentation regardless of placement and number of speakers for Atmos and DTS-X.
7.1.4 was probably chosen to make the transition as easy as possible for both the manufacturing/production side and to the public. But it is not mandatory, manufacturers can chose how many speakers they want within the Atmos/DtsX spec.
J.P is offline  
post #38 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 07:46 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,560
Mentioned: 192 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6964 Post(s)
Liked: 5942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
I thought Atmos on current Blu-Rays was made for 7.1.4 speaker layout and that is why they give recommendations for 7.1.4 speaker placement?
Most manufacturers haven't gone beyond 11 channels, hence the 7.1.4 (or 9.1.2) limitation on immersive audio receivers. As for the formats themselves, the consumer version of Atmos can natively render the soundtrack to 34 speaker locations and DTS:X can render to 32 speaker locations. The Atmos and DTS:X soundtracks on Blu-ray conform to that.
Quote:
I am hoping with HDMI 2 with more possible audio tracks and true object based audio, the processor should know where the speakers are positioned and angled to give the best presentation regardless of placement and number of speakers for Atmos and DTS-X.
Atmos and DTS:X are encoded as TrueHD and DTS-HD MA bitstreams, respectively, for backwards compatibility. This means the full soundtracks (all the bed channels, all the objects) can be transmitted via old HDMI 1.3 that was on players dating back 7 years. HDMI 2.0 is not required.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #39 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 10:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.P View Post
Few more questions

-Can ARC on AVM60 correct up to 20khz ?
Why would you want to correct up to 20kHz? The wavelength of 20kHz is less than an inch. ARCs approach of correcting only bass to low midrange frequencies makes a lot more sense to me.
Scott B is offline  
post #40 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 10:41 AM
J.P
Senior Member
 
J.P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B View Post
Why would you want to correct up to 20kHz? The wavelength of 20kHz is less than an inch. ARCs approach of correcting only bass to low midrange frequencies makes a lot more sense to me.

From Kal Rubinson`s review of the MRX700 :

It's nearly the same version of ARC as is used in the Anthem Statement D2v processor: the MRX receivers have slightly less DSP power, and correction is limited to below 5kHz (the D2v can correct up to 20kHz).
J.P is offline  
post #41 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 10:48 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.P View Post
From Kal Rubinson`s review of the MRX700 :

It's nearly the same version of ARC as is used in the Anthem Statement D2v processor: the MRX receivers have slightly less DSP power, and correction is limited to below 5kHz (the D2v can correct up to 20kHz).
If that is correct, then I understand where the question is coming from. I do not, however, understand the value in attempting to correct for high frequencies given the very short wavelengths. Unless you are going to sit with your ears in the exact location of the test microphone, then correcting high frequencies is as likely to make issues worse than better.
Scott B is offline  
post #42 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 10:55 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bkeeler10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woods Cross, Utah
Posts: 1,022
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
I thought Atmos on current Blu-Rays was made for 7.1.4 speaker layout and that is why they give recommendations for 7.1.4 speaker placement?
Atmos is Atmos. An Atmos mix is not made for any particular speaker layout -- that's a big part of the point of Atmos. You can play the Atmos track from any blu-ray so equipped on a 5.1.2 setup or a 24.1.10 setup, or anything in between. And 9.1.6 > 7.1.4 > 5.1.2, etc (although there is obviously a point of diminishing returns depending on your room size and layout).

Now, I think I have read that many current Atmos tracks are being remixed for blu-ray using a 7.1.4 layout. Not sure about that, but either way there will likely be improvements in precision and envelopment if such a track is played back on a 9.1.6 layout, for example.

System
Transducers: Revel Concerta2 F36 (3), M16 (4); Tannoy AMS 6DC (4); Rythmik F18 (2)
Front end: NAD T758 v3; Outlaw Model 7125
Sources: Panasonic UB820; Oppo BDP-103; Toshiba HD-A2
Projection: JVC DLA-RS440; Seymour CenterStage UF retractable 110" 2.35:1

bkeeler10 is offline  
post #43 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 10:57 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bkeeler10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woods Cross, Utah
Posts: 1,022
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B View Post
If that is correct, then I understand where the question is coming from. I do not, however, understand the value in attempting to correct for high frequencies given the very short wavelengths. Unless you are going to sit with your ears in the exact location of the test microphone, then correcting high frequencies is as likely to make issues worse than better.
Yep, and even though the Statement models can correct up to 20 kHz, the default is still 5 kHz and Anthem has always recommended not going above that IIRC.

System
Transducers: Revel Concerta2 F36 (3), M16 (4); Tannoy AMS 6DC (4); Rythmik F18 (2)
Front end: NAD T758 v3; Outlaw Model 7125
Sources: Panasonic UB820; Oppo BDP-103; Toshiba HD-A2
Projection: JVC DLA-RS440; Seymour CenterStage UF retractable 110" 2.35:1

bkeeler10 is offline  
post #44 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 11:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
Yep, and even though the Statement models can correct up to 20 kHz, the default is still 5 kHz and Anthem has always recommended not going above that IIRC.
Maybe if I actually used ARC on my AVM50V then I would have a better understanding of how its applied. I never tried using ARC because I was lucky enough to be able to design and build my HT from the ground up with acoustics in mind.
Scott B is offline  
post #45 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 11:31 AM
J.P
Senior Member
 
J.P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Maybe not important if ARC on AVM60 can correct up to 20khz, but i would really like ARC to support IOS(Apple)
ht guy likes this.
J.P is offline  
post #46 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 11:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bkeeler10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Woods Cross, Utah
Posts: 1,022
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B View Post
Maybe if I actually used ARC on my AVM50V then I would have a better understanding of how its applied. I never tried using ARC because I was lucky enough to be able to design and build my HT from the ground up with acoustics in mind.
Have you measured the low frequency response in your room? Very few are the rooms that would not benefit from some touch-up EQ in the lower octaves. But a well-designed room with good equipment may need little or no help above there.

If you currently have no EQ, you should try ARC, limiting its correction to below 200 - 500 Hz, and see what happens. You will likely find a smoother bass response and better transition between mains and sub.
Kris Deering likes this.

System
Transducers: Revel Concerta2 F36 (3), M16 (4); Tannoy AMS 6DC (4); Rythmik F18 (2)
Front end: NAD T758 v3; Outlaw Model 7125
Sources: Panasonic UB820; Oppo BDP-103; Toshiba HD-A2
Projection: JVC DLA-RS440; Seymour CenterStage UF retractable 110" 2.35:1

bkeeler10 is offline  
post #47 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 12:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
Have you measured the low frequency response in your room? Very few are the rooms that would not benefit from some touch-up EQ in the lower octaves. But a well-designed room with good equipment may need little or no help above there.

If you currently have no EQ, you should try ARC, limiting its correction to below 200 - 500 Hz, and see what happens. You will likely find a smoother bass response and better transition between mains and sub.

Measured it from the primary seating positions with a GoldLine RTA. No significant peaks or dips even into the low bass range. The room was designed considering room dimensions, speaker positioning and seat positioning to minimize room modes. Significant acoustical treatments were used and are hidden behind GM cloth. Worked out great. I am sure that ARC could further smooth the response, but I guess in the end I am a bit of a purist. Like I said, I will eventually get around to trying out ARC to see if notable improvements may be made.
bkeeler10 likes this.
Scott B is offline  
post #48 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 12:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1887 Post(s)
Liked: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
Atmos is Atmos. An Atmos mix is not made for any particular speaker layout -- that's a big part of the point of Atmos. You can play the Atmos track from any blu-ray so equipped on a 5.1.2 setup or a 24.1.10 setup, or anything in between. And 9.1.6 > 7.1.4 > 5.1.2, etc (although there is obviously a point of diminishing returns depending on your room size and layout).

Now, I think I have read that many current Atmos tracks are being remixed for blu-ray using a 7.1.4 layout. Not sure about that, but either way there will likely be improvements in precision and envelopment if such a track is played back on a 9.1.6 layout, for example.
I know Atmos and DTS-X are object oriented data, I didn't know object oriented data was available under Dolby True HD/ DTS Master Audio encoding. I thought that encoding was channel based and currently limited to 8 channels. I am glad they can do object oriented data, that way it doesn't matter how many speakers you have. As long as the processor knows where the speakers are placed and aimed it should present the best representation possible.
Ellebob is offline  
post #49 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 01:19 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,604
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3750 Post(s)
Liked: 6401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B View Post
Maybe if I actually used ARC on my AVM50V then I would have a better understanding of how its applied. I never tried using ARC because I was lucky enough to be able to design and build my HT from the ground up with acoustics in mind.
Makes little difference when it comes to low frequency issues in a room. It can tame some of the issues, but it is VERY unlikely that ARC wouldn't still benefit your low frequency response. Just set the upper frequency limit of correction to like 200 - 500 Hz.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #50 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 01:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,604
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3750 Post(s)
Liked: 6401
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkeeler10 View Post
Have you measured the low frequency response in your room? Very few are the rooms that would not benefit from some touch-up EQ in the lower octaves. But a well-designed room with good equipment may need little or no help above there.

If you currently have no EQ, you should try ARC, limiting its correction to below 200 - 500 Hz, and see what happens. You will likely find a smoother bass response and better transition between mains and sub.
Oops, should have read past his post as you nailed it here.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #51 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 01:23 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,604
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3750 Post(s)
Liked: 6401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
I know Atmos and DTS-X are object oriented data, I didn't know object oriented data was available under Dolby True HD/ DTS Master Audio encoding. I thought that encoding was channel based and currently limited to 8 channels. I am glad they can do object oriented data, that way it doesn't matter how many speakers you have. As long as the processor knows where the speakers are placed and aimed it should present the best representation possible.
It technically doesn't know where they are placed and aimed. With Atmos they advise that you put the speakers in a sort of gray area for different types (front height, top front, etc) and emphatically claim that you don't have to be overly sensitive to exact positions (probably because most of the data isn't very discrete and is more for envelopment). We don't know for sure what DTS:X will involve as far as speaker placement and how lenient they are with it.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #52 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 01:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ovation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. Hubert, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 3,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 184 Post(s)
Liked: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
It technically doesn't know where they are placed and aimed. With Atmos they advise that you put the speakers in a sort of gray area for different types (front height, top front, etc) and emphatically claim that you don't have to be overly sensitive to exact positions (probably because most of the data isn't very discrete and is more for envelopment). We don't know for sure what DTS:X will involve as far as speaker placement and how lenient they are with it.
What little I've seen on ceiling placement suggests, for a two speaker setup (I have no room for more in my small space, and only one decent place to anchor them on an otherwise drop ceiling), a placement slightly forward of the main listening position. In my current setup, the speakers would be directly overhead (if I were to move to an Atmos setup--not a certainty by any means). Would that fall into the "gray area" to which you refer (it is a matter of about a foot away from the "ideal" diagram I've seen)?
Ovation is offline  
post #53 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 01:44 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
I know Atmos and DTS-X are object oriented data, I didn't know object oriented data was available under Dolby True HD/ DTS Master Audio encoding. I thought that encoding was channel based and currently limited to 8 channels. I am glad they can do object oriented data, that way it doesn't matter how many speakers you have. As long as the processor knows where the speakers are placed and aimed it should present the best representation possible.
TrueHD and DTS-HD MA are channel based, 8 channels max. Atmos and DTS-X are not TrueHD/DTS-HD MA, though my understanding is that they are based on them. I assume it's similar (in concept at least if not implementation) to DTS (core) vs DTS-HD MA. A DTS-HD MA stream consists of the core, DTS (limited to lossy compression, and 6 channels), and extension that extends that out to 7.1 lossless compression. If you play it on DTS compatible system you just get the 5.1 DTS (core), if you play it on a DTS-HD MA compatible system, you get the full 7.1 DTS-HD MA stream.

Atmos and DTS-X work the same way, they start on a 7.1 channel base (TrueHD/DTS-HD MA respectively) and if you're using an Atmos/DTS-X compatible decoder, it reads the extension which contain the information for up to 30/32 objects and their locations, which it then steers to whatever your speaker configuration happens to be.

I think a big part of the ".4" (ie 4 new Atmos/DTS-X "speaker locations"), beyond limiting channel count, is to vastly simplify setup. If you build AVRs with "standard" speaker layouts, you can continue with the current paradigm of speaker configurations, ie, do you have fronts, center, sides, rears, front ceiling, rear ceiling. And you can build your audio processing/steering in a pretty standard way. Where as (I imagine) with something like a Trinnov Altitude, you can configure exact locations for all your speakers, degrees of azimuth and elevation plus distance, or x, y, z cooridinates, which requires a much more advanced setup, more advanced user to do the setup, and more advanced processing/steering.
stanger89 is offline  
post #54 of 9522 Old 05-28-2015, 01:45 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,604
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3750 Post(s)
Liked: 6401
Not really, there is a placement referred to as Top Middle that has a pair above the main listener with the speakers the same width apart on the ceiling as your main L/R speakers are. My only concern there is we are not as sensitive to sounds coming from directly above us. Atmos compensates for this by spreading the speakers out as opposed to a single speaker directly above you. I haven't heard an Atmos setup with only the Top Middle speakers (every demo and my room use 4 speakers on the ceiling in the Top Front and Top Rear positions) so I don't know how effective that layout would be. Only one way to find out really.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #55 of 9522 Old 05-29-2015, 07:06 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.P View Post
Will we be able to use IOS(Apple) running ARC on AVM 60 ?
We've been looking at iOS, Android, and Mac OS X but I have no idea whether or when any might materialize.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #56 of 9522 Old 05-29-2015, 07:37 AM
Advanced Member
 
rwheelwright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 40
I guess this is all good news to know that Anthem is moving in the right direction although a little slow. I'm years and years away from getting a pre\pro so hopefully by the time I am ready I will be in a new house and Anthem will have a new Statement product available. In the mean time I need to get a P5 and P2 (well, not a need. A want!) And other things need to happen to be able to run that P5 like new elec service, new box or sub panel, new power run into the room, etc... And I don't want to spend too much money on this house cause I want to be out in the next 4 1/2 years so going back to my original statement, it will be years and years.
rwheelwright is online now  
post #57 of 9522 Old 05-29-2015, 08:52 AM
J.P
Senior Member
 
J.P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post
We've been looking at iOS, Android, and Mac OS X but I have no idea whether or when any might materialize.
Ok, thanks.
J.P is offline  
post #58 of 9522 Old 05-29-2015, 09:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 4,519
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 987 Post(s)
Liked: 626
FWIW I think we'll see two possible groups for 98-99% of what's offered to the market by most all manufactures.


The first group, 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 for 10 channels total. The second group 7.1.4 or 9.1.2 for 12 channels total. Maybe they will throw in 1 extra redundant subwoofer channel to bring the total to 11 or 13 channels respectfully. And I expect 7.1.4 will be the sweet spot for sales and installations.


I expect this will happen or be true largely because Dolby says that these are the recommended configurations for home theater and DTS says that they don't really care because their codec, DTS:X, is flexible and will work with almost any layout.


Sixteen channel and up pre-pros will be more specialized, read expensive, or flag ship models.
b curry is offline  
post #59 of 9522 Old 05-29-2015, 09:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nick @ Anthem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwheelwright View Post
And other things need to happen to be able to run that P5 like new elec service, new box or sub panel, new power run into the room, etc.
Not necessarily. Using the same volume, speakers, and bass management as with existing amp (if class AB) there's no huge impact on circuit requirement. Net effect during short-lasting musical peaks: They get by without being clipped where they might have been by a less powerful amp. On the other hand, idle consumption goes up with the increased number of transistors. Changing to lower impedance speakers and playing louder would of course change current draw considerably.

Circuit breakers are like slow-blow fuses, typically letting 10x rated current through for a second. It's not enough heat buildup to damage the wires. Appliance motors wouldn't be able to turn on otherwise.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	TripCurve.jpg
Views:	827
Size:	222.4 KB
ID:	743641  
feistyacorn likes this.

The most important noise floor is in your head. Always remember to protect your hearing.
Nick @ Anthem is offline  
post #60 of 9522 Old 05-29-2015, 12:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
rwheelwright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick @ Anthem View Post
Not necessarily. Using the same volume, speakers, and bass management as with existing amp (if class AB) there's no huge impact on circuit requirement. Net effect during short-lasting musical peaks: They get by without being clipped where they might have been by a less powerful amp. On the other hand, idle consumption goes up with the increased number of transistors. Changing to lower impedance speakers and playing louder would of course change current draw considerably.

Circuit breakers are like slow-blow fuses, typically letting 10x rated current through for a second. It's not enough heat buildup to damage the wires. Appliance motors wouldn't be able to turn on otherwise.

Nick, shouldn't the P5 have 2 dedicated circuits? One for each power supply?

My house only has 100amp service and the box is full. Right now I have 2 circuits in that room. Lights, 82inch dlp, Sub2, MRX700, bd player, Large wine fridge (used as a humidor), amazon fire tv, plus cd player and wifi router used as an AP are consuming those circuits. Because the box is full, I am limited on what I can do. I always assuming I would keep the existing set up using the MRX as a the pre and then putting the P2 on an existing circuit and then 2 separate circuits for the P5. BTW, I am running a 7.1 full sig set up with S8s, C5, S2s and ADP3s. Not interested in putting in ceiling speakers in this house. Just making due with what I have to work with now. Next house will hopefully have a dedicated room that can be remodeled and locked!


Unfortunately, my plan on getting a P2 this year might be in jeopardy. Kids eat up a lot of money plus I need to do more pratical things with my money like get windows that aren't drafty and get a new front door. Sucks being a grown-up sometimes!
rwheelwright is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
antehm arc genesis , anthem avm 60 , the official anthem avm60 thread

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