The "Official" Immersive Audio Discussion thread - Atmos/DTS:X/Auro - Page 15 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1241Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #421 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 10:25 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,458
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1756 Post(s)
Liked: 1425
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
He's not had time to post. He's been too busy fiddling with the 1,942,227 adjustable parameters the Altitude offers
LOL...you forgot the third order derivative of the flux capacitor gradient. So more like 1,942,228 .

In all seriousness, not everyone on this thread knew, and in context my point was that at least today, there's no inherent limitation for upmixing DTS-HD with Dolby Surround (or Auro 3D for that matter if you were one of the few inclined that wat).

I'll post more once I have an Atmos setup in the near future, of course, so I can bitch about the lack of content with the best of you .

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 online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #422 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 10:33 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
LOL...you forgot the third order derivative of the flux capacitor gradient. So more like 1,942,228 .

In all seriousness, not everyone on this thread knew, and in context my point was that at least today, there's no inherent limitation for upmixing DTS-HD with Dolby Surround (or Auro 3D for that matter if you were one of the few inclined that wat).

I'll post more once I have an Atmos setup in the near future, of course, so I can bitch about the lack of content with the best of you .
Yes, the point about where the limitation lies was a good one. Let's hope Denon etc wake up to the concept of consumer choice too. Or maybe the architecture of the lowly Denons can’t handle it the way the Trinnov does, in which case, well, it will be what it will be.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #423 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 10:59 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
sdrucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,458
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1756 Post(s)
Liked: 1425
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
Yes, the point about where the limitation lies was a good one. Let's hope Denon etc wake up to the concept of consumer choice too. Or maybe the architecture of the lowly Denons can’t handle it the way the Trinnov does, in which case, well, it will be what it will be.

More to the point, what will Yamaha, Pioneer, or Onkyo be doing WRT this front? I think that would give you a better idea of whether this is urban folklore or a real limitation to come imposed by DSP resource bottlenecks or otherwise. And like I said, my point is as of today. If I get DTS:X in the future and the DTS-HD/DSU restriction suddenly emerges, I'll have my answer as well.


If I weren't now in the Trinnov world, I'd probably be perfectly happy to "settle" for having an upmixer matched to the provider of the codec, so Dolby->DSU and DTS->Neural, with stereo or PCM handled by either, would be par for the course. Assuming that this was some sort of limitation invoked to save DSP resource or something. No different in its way than what Denon does with adjacent pairs and how you configure Atmos as quirks go. We work with the hand we're dealt.
chi_guy50 likes this.

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 online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #424 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 11:02 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,632
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4787 Post(s)
Liked: 3697
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
But not according to the only professional film mixer we have here on AVS in the discussion. Marc just said today (or I read it today) that if one arbitrarily raises the level of the dialog, without reference to the rest of the mix, the quality is reduced not raised.
And as I mentioned in another post, the people who need this feature don't care about that.

Which reduces the quality of the work more, allowing users to fiddle with the mix, or forcing them to listen to it in an environment where the dialogue isn't intelligible with nothing compensate for that?

Quote:
And it is academic - if the mixers aren't intending to enable dialog as a separate object, that's the end of it.
It isn't the end of it if we're able to have a real conversation about the subject, rather than just digging into entrenched ideological positions.

Quote:
I agree. But the answer is not for the mixer to pander to the lowest common denominator and create mixes optimised for crappy little TV speakers. The answer is for people to get decent gear if they want decent sound. Most people do not want decent sound and so they aren't relevant to the discussion.
You don't seem to have understood what I said at all. I think I explained it pretty clearly. I recommend that you read it again rather than forcing me to rewrite it.

Quote:
Yes indeed - they can do all those things and nobody cares if they do. But you are not talking about their ability to change the nature of the mix as it is played on their equipment. You are asking that they have the ability to change the actual mix. That is the objection from the industry.
No, that's not at all what I'm asking. We're not giving them the ability to permanently alter the original mix for all users forever. Anyone who wants to hear the original soundtrack the way the mixer intended can still do so. We're just giving certain users the ability to change the way it's played back by bumping up the dialogue volume. Ideologically, there is ZERO difference between this and letting them bump up their center channel volume - which they can already do now - except that this works better.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.
Josh Z is offline  
post #425 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 11:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JKR1963's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 346 Post(s)
Liked: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post

I will likely hold on to my $ on this Blu as they are withholding the obviously available Atmos track. Everyone makes their choice .......... consumers and companies.
JKR1963 is offline  
post #426 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 11:26 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,431
Mentioned: 236 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7525 Post(s)
Liked: 6683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
Ideologically, there is ZERO difference between this and letting them bump up their center channel volume - which they can already do now - except that this works better.
Bumping up the centre channel level on your AVR doesn't require the consent nor cooperation (or even awareness) of the content creator. Encoding the dialogue stem as a separate, user adjustable object requires the content creator to be a willing participant in your ability to alter the balance of the dialogue level relative to their carefully crafted mix. That's the difference. You can do what you want to their soundtracks at home, but they don't have to help you with that.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #427 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 11:44 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,632
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4787 Post(s)
Liked: 3697
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Bumping up the centre channel level on your AVR doesn't require the consent nor cooperation (or even awareness) of the content creator. Encoding the dialogue stem as a separate, user adjustable object requires the content creator to be a willing participant in your ability to alter the balance of the dialogue level relative to their carefully crafted mix. That's the difference.
That's a technical difference, not a philosophical difference. They both let the user change what the mixer might think is ideal.

Quote:
You can do what you want to their soundtracks at home, but they don't have to help you with that.
So, the sound mixers are just being pissy, then? Why not also lock out users' ability to change speaker volume, or calibrate, or apply room correction? "If you're not watching in an acoustically treated room with high-end speakers and equipment that sound exactly like what we use on the mixing stage, then SCREW YOU! You don't deserve to hear my precious soundtrack!" Is that it?

No, I don't think that's what is happening here. I just think that people who have an ideological objection to a dialogue isolation are being short-sighted and are needlessly alienating a significant portion of the consumer base.

Personally, I don't have a big stake in this. I have a dedicated, acoustically treated home theater room, and my sound quality is fine there. But I might occasionally want to watch a Blu-ray in the living room, and that experience currently sucks. So I feel for people who might really benefit from this feature.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.
Josh Z is offline  
post #428 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 12:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,431
Mentioned: 236 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7525 Post(s)
Liked: 6683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
That's a technical difference, not a philosophical difference. They both let the user change what the mixer might think is ideal.
The difference is that one of them requires enabling from the content creator.
Quote:
Why not also lock out users' ability to change speaker volume, or calibrate, or apply room correction?
Because they have no control over those things. However, they do control whether the dialogue stem is delivered as a user-adjustable object.
Quote:
I just think that people who have an ideological objection to a dialogue isolation are being short-sighted and are needlessly alienating a significant portion of the consumer base.
The sound mix is their art, their Mona Lisa. On your copy of the painting, you can darken the background if you want so that her face stands out better under your living room lighting. But the artist is not obligated to provide you with the dark ink to do that. You can do what you want to a soundtrack at home. The people who mixed that soundtrack aren't obligated to help manipulate their artistic creation.
Quote:
So I feel for people who might really benefit from this feature.
EVERYONE can benefit from this feature, since sound mixes (and dialogue intelligibility) vary so much. If you look at features that are trying to do something like this, albeit crudely (vocal boost, centre channel boost, night mode, etc) it is obvious that there is a real need for this amongst consumers. More useful than telling them to treat the acoustics of their room. Out of all the approaches, being able to adjust the dialogue stem itself would be the cleanest way to do it.

My sole point is to look at it from the point of view of the content creator rather than the consumer: people who mixed a soundtrack have a valid reason for not wanting to provide you with the tools to mess with their work. They can't stop you, but they don't have to help you.
Scott Simonian likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #429 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 12:54 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
The more tools/features we have in our receivers to manipulate the already manipulated sound the better.

Because we want to manually restore, by our own ourselves, the intended audio soundtrack by the film director with his film sound mixer, with judicious adjustments using all audio parameters accessible to us, including dialog lift and dynamic range and EQ and notch filter for clear dialog intelligibility @ home, just like it was exactly @ the local movie theater.

Dialog lifting and intelligibility is a big part of the full immersive surround sound experience. ...It is the most important channel speaker of them all.
The proof? ...Just turn it off (only the center channel speaker), and watch a full movie like that.

And the center channel speaker has to be timbre-matched with his two front L & R flankers. ...And it has to be a three-way one too, with tweeter above mid-range driver @ center, and flanked by the two woofers on each side. ...If only a tweeter @ the center, you'll have comb filtering, and that's not really good for the people sitting away from the center line.

* If DTS:X is going to offer us a "dialog adjust/manipulator" function, then Dolby Atmos should too...or from a firmware update...or if it's not possible, then with the newer Dolby Atmos receiver models from 2016 and beyond.
NorthSky is offline  
post #430 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:21 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,632
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4787 Post(s)
Liked: 3697
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The sound mix is their art, their Mona Lisa. On your copy of the painting, you can darken the background if you want so that her face stands out better under your living room lighting. But the artist is not obligated to provide you with the dark ink to do that. You can do what you want to a soundtrack at home. The people who mixed that soundtrack aren't obligated to help manipulate their artistic creation.
Sound mixers are already obligated to provide multiple outputs for different venues: 5.1, 7.1, IMAX, Atmos, and range-compressed stereo downmixes for TV broadcast or mobile. Making sure the audience can hear their art in some acceptable fashion is a critical requirement of their job.
stef2 likes this.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.
Josh Z is offline  
post #431 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:24 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Star of the Northern Hemisphere
Posts: 16,643
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7012 Post(s)
Liked: 3563
♦ I like Yamaha receivers, with Quadfield and Trifield sound immersion.

Plus you can have your sound Nearfield, Midfield and Farfield; through Yamaha DSP various Room's Size (very small, small, mid-small, medium, medium-large, large), and you can vary the amount of delay for the echoes/reverberations. ...Plus so many more sound parameters, including dialog lift...which is fantastic...I truly think.
So, if you want a nearfield audio mix, Yamaha is the closest to offer it.

Nobody does it better than Yamaha when it comes to adjusting your own sound signature/preference yourself...nobody.

__________

DTS:X and Enhanced Dialog Intelligibility Control:

- Great for controlling the center channel speaker volume control from specific audio elements @ home.
- By increasing the center sp. volume for matching preferences from each and every film. ...No two films sound alike and were mixed the same.
- Dialog as an object (depending of the film sound mixer); it can be lifted out from the background sounds...awesome.

DTS:X | Open Immersive Promises And ...

Last edited by NorthSky; 07-24-2015 at 01:30 PM.
NorthSky is offline  
post #432 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,431
Mentioned: 236 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7525 Post(s)
Liked: 6683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
Sound mixers are already obligated to provide multiple outputs for different venues: 5.1, 7.1, IMAX, Atmos, and range-compressed stereo downmixes for TV broadcast or mobile.
Those are all still their mixes, not something that audiences have adjusted.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #433 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
timc1475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Illinois USA
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 952 Post(s)
Liked: 812
I need to upgrade my AVR. Is there one new AVR out there under 3g that can do a 7.1.5 full Auro 3D configuration? Non exist AFAIK. I called Denon rep and he said 13 speaker out AVR flagship should be available in 2016 to handle a normal 7.1 and cover the 4 extra height channels and 1 for the VOG for Auro 3D. I do not want to pay for 2 separates and frankly shouldn't have to.

The AVR needs to be current with Atmos, Auro 3D 7.1.5 capable, HCCP 2.2, Pass 3D, pass 4k, pass HDR, HDMI 2.0a, 444 @ 60Hz, DTS-X. Some current AVR's have these newer creature features but not all. Oh a DP would be nice too btw. The AVR would need to be able to switch from Atmos to Auro 3D on the fly as well without physically having to move speakers around or do a whole new internal speaker setup either to pacify each formats needs. SMH & Sighs.

Below is the Denon 7200WA btw fyi. YMMV

(Life was simpler before object based formats.)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	de_avrx7200w_e3_bk_re_bg001_hi.png
Views:	47
Size:	723.1 KB
ID:	847618  

If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got.

Last edited by timc1475; 07-24-2015 at 01:42 PM.
timc1475 is offline  
post #434 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Skylinestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borneo Island
Posts: 3,050
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
♦ I like Yamaha receivers, with Quadfield and Trifield sound immersion.
Plus you can have your sound Nearfield, Midfield and Farfield; through Yamaha DSP various Room's Size (very small, small, mid-small, medium, medium-large, large), and you can vary the amount of delay for the echoes/reverberations. ...Plus so many more sound parameters, including dialog lift...which is fantastic...I truly think.
Nobody does it better than Yamaha when it comes to adjusting your own sound signature/preference yourself...nobody.
Agreed. Yamaha is the only manufacturer who perform the real "dialogue lift" (& care about the majority who doesn't own AT screen). I don't understand why D&M and Onkyo are not doing it. Once you get the dialogue to come out of the screen, your brain will tell you that it is real and the intel will be clear.
Skylinestar is offline  
post #435 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Skylinestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borneo Island
Posts: 3,050
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by timc1475 View Post
I need to upgrade my AVR. Is there one new AVR out there under 3g that can do a 7.1.5 full Auro 3D configuration? Non exist AFAIK. I called Denon rep and he said 13 speaker out AVR flagship should be available in 2016 to handle a normal 7.1 and cover the 4 extra height channels and 1 for the VOG for Auro 3D. I do not want to pay for 2 separates and frankly shouldn't have to.

The AVR needs to be current with Atmos, Auro 3D 7.1.5 capable, HCCP 2.2, Pass 3D, pass 4k, Pass HDR, HDMI 2.0a, 444 @ 60Hz, DTS-X which a few AVR's have but not all. Oh a DP would be nice too btw. SMH & Sighs.

Below is the Denon 7200WA btw fyi. YMMV

(Life was simpler before object based formats.)
None of the consumer gear can do Auro3D 13.1 (7.1 + 5 heights + VOG). Heck even 11.1 is not supported. (5.1+5+VOG)
Skylinestar is offline  
post #436 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 01:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
timc1475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Illinois USA
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 952 Post(s)
Liked: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylinestar View Post
None of the consumer gear can do Auro3D 13.1 (7.1 + 5 heights + VOG). Heck even 11.1 is not supported. (5.1+5+VOG)
Bummer. The Denon rep said they will do 13 ch spk outs to cover this in 2016. Although he said I could buy a 2nd amp or AVR to power those other 2 channels from 5.1 to 7.1 for the 7.1.5 full Auro 3D config but he was not 100% sure and said he would get back to me. He also was not sure about their flagship having HDMI 2.0a or when or if the 7200WA would get it. Odd.

I find it somewhat aggravating that the engineers expects us to downgrade our 7.1 setups to 5.1 to upgrade to Auro 3D. SMH So my current 7.1 setup if I invest into an Auro 3D AVR I will have to "lose" my L & R middle room surround channel speakers? In the Denon manual it says to use the 2nd sub out for the VOG speaker. I thought the sub out was not full range? Unless if you select it in the speaker setup as a VOG it becomes full range...Brain is beginning to short circuit and making me wonder about their engineers mental clarity.

2016 seems like a long wait for them to get their act together on these emerging sound formats. IMO

Interesting article: http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/Up...-AURO-3D.shtml

(Life was simpler before object based sound.)

If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got.

Last edited by timc1475; 07-26-2015 at 12:31 AM.
timc1475 is offline  
post #437 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:17 PM
Senior Member
 
BigScreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WI USA
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post
I am a big proponent of doing a near field/home theater mix...

Every time I get into that discussion (as I did in the mastering audio for home theater thread last month) I get jumped on by a small but very vocal minority for having such a view point.

They complain about how they've spent so much money on their gear, how they are better than a cinema, etc....

I don't disagree that there are those that have amazing rooms. With very capable gear, maybe even better than even the best cinemas....

However, they still aren't setup like a cinema.
I have no desire to jump all over you about this topic, but I think it's worth a little more exploration, especially in this thread as immersive audio has the potential to "reboot" the issue.

I have mixed feelings about near-field sound mixes, as I think that the potential is ripe for screwing things up for those of us that have invested in decent equipment and tuning their setups. However, I'm willing to believe that good sound mixers will not crank on those adjustments so hard that it compromises what could be done if the mix was just left alone, but I'm also willing to believe that there are mixers that aren't as skilled, or perhaps are getting pressure from outsiders to make the mix sound good on their flat-panel TV in their office.

Is there any test cases out there that one could hear for themselves the difference between an untouched mix and an "adjusted for home" mix? Perhaps a title that has had multiple releases, where one release was unmodified, and another had the modified mix? I've never seen any references to any, and I would love to experiment with that.

One example that I know of where people are quite unhappy with the modified mix was Jurassic Park. Projectionists that are very familiar with how the movie sounded in theaters in 1993 are very unhappy with how the movie sounds on Blu-ray. Supposedly, the LaserDisc release has the theatrical sound mix. Unfortunately, I do not have access to an LD player or the movie on LD to perform such an experiment.

Quote:
Regarding Lionsgate.... They have used DTS exclusively for a long time. They were bound to start mastering some titles in DTS:X. It is my understanding that "Insurgent" will be in Atmos. "Ex Machina" was only released theatrically in 5.1. The DTS:X on the BR was done after the fact.
I just checked the Fact Sheet on Lionsgate's extranet, and it's still listing the sound mix for Insurgent as: English Dolby Atmos (Dolby TrueHD compatible)

My guess is that Lionsgate used Ex Machina as a test case for DTS:X, perhaps like Gravity was for Warner Bros. with Atmos. Something needed to be first, and for whatever reason, that title was chosen. Since a subsequently-announced title from Lionsgate (Age of Adaline) is using Atmos, I don't think we've seen a studio-wide shift to DTS:X.
audiofan1 likes this.

Publisher - The BigScreen Cinema Guide
DTS:X Resources | Dolby Atmos Resources
Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons, the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas. - Henry Thomas Buckle - historian and author
BigScreen is offline  
post #438 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:34 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,632
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4787 Post(s)
Liked: 3697
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Those are all still their mixes, not something that audiences have adjusted.
I'm not going to belabor this argument, but I just don't see the big distinction between letting the user bump up the dialogue volume and letting them turn on Dynamic Range Compression. DRC is potentially even more harmful to the intended sound quality, yet everyone recognizes it as a necessary evil. If sound mixers think that's so offensive to their art, they should lobby hardware manufacturers to disable DRC on all future receivers. Is that likely to ever happen? No, of course not.

So long as the original, intended mix is available on the disc for everyone who wants it, I don't see what business it is of anyone's how a specific user alters it in his or her own home.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.
Josh Z is offline  
post #439 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,862
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2394 Post(s)
Liked: 3040
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigScreen View Post
I have no desire to jump all over you about this topic, but I think it's worth a little more exploration, especially in this thread as immersive audio has the potential to "reboot" the issue.

I have mixed feelings about near-field sound mixes, as I think that the potential is ripe for screwing things up for those of us that have invested in decent equipment and tuning their setups. However, I'm willing to believe that good sound mixers will not crank on those adjustments so hard that it compromises what could be done if the mix was just left alone, but I'm also willing to believe that there are mixers that aren't as skilled, or perhaps are getting pressure from outsiders to make the mix sound good on their flat-panel TV in their office.

Is there any test cases out there that one could hear for themselves the difference between an untouched mix and an "adjusted for home" mix? Perhaps a title that has had multiple releases, where one release was unmodified, and another had the modified mix? I've never seen any references to any, and I would love to experiment with that.

One example that I know of where people are quite unhappy with the modified mix was Jurassic Park. Projectionists that are very familiar with how the movie sounded in theaters in 1993 are very unhappy with how the movie sounds on Blu-ray. Supposedly, the LaserDisc release has the theatrical sound mix. Unfortunately, I do not have access to an LD player or the movie on LD to perform such an experiment.



I just checked the Fact Sheet on Lionsgate's extranet, and it's still listing the sound mix for Insurgent as: English Dolby Atmos (Dolby TrueHD compatible)

My guess is that Lionsgate used Ex Machina as a test case for DTS:X, perhaps like Gravity was for Warner Bros. with Atmos. Something needed to be first, and for whatever reason, that title was chosen. Since a subsequently-announced title from Lionsgate (Age of Adaline) is using Atmos, I don't think we've seen a studio-wide shift to DTS:X.
No need to do anything! just use the Theatrical mix
audiofan1 is offline  
post #440 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:40 PM
Senior Member
 
BigScreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WI USA
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 251
@FilmMixer

Could an isolated score be achieved using objects, or would it make more sense to continue doing it via a separate track?

It would be really nice if isolated scores were more available, and if object-based audio makes that easier for the studio to provide, my hope is that it may be provided more often.

Publisher - The BigScreen Cinema Guide
DTS:X Resources | Dolby Atmos Resources
Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons, the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas. - Henry Thomas Buckle - historian and author
BigScreen is offline  
post #441 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:46 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,632
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4787 Post(s)
Liked: 3697
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigScreen View Post
I have mixed feelings about near-field sound mixes, as I think that the potential is ripe for screwing things up for those of us that have invested in decent equipment and tuning their setups. However, I'm willing to believe that good sound mixers will not crank on those adjustments so hard that it compromises what could be done if the mix was just left alone, but I'm also willing to believe that there are mixers that aren't as skilled, or perhaps are getting pressure from outsiders to make the mix sound good on their flat-panel TV in their office.
Without being told that a movie was remixed for near-field, would you be able to tell just by listening to it? If you don't hear anything wrong, what is there to complain about?

How many Blu-rays do you watch today and think, "This sounds like crap because they remixed it for near-field!"? Because basically any movie that's been made since the early DVD era has been remixed for near-field.

Quote:
Is there any test cases out there that one could hear for themselves the difference between an untouched mix and an "adjusted for home" mix? Perhaps a title that has had multiple releases, where one release was unmodified, and another had the modified mix? I've never seen any references to any, and I would love to experiment with that.
As I recall, the DVD edition (but not the Blu-ray) of The Lion King had two Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks, one that claimed to be the theatrical mix and another "Disney Enhanced Home Theater Mix." The Blu-ray has a (then new) 7.1 near-field mix.

Quote:
One example that I know of where people are quite unhappy with the modified mix was Jurassic Park. Projectionists that are very familiar with how the movie sounded in theaters in 1993 are very unhappy with how the movie sounds on Blu-ray. Supposedly, the LaserDisc release has the theatrical sound mix. Unfortunately, I do not have access to an LD player or the movie on LD to perform such an experiment.
You have your history a little mixed up. The Laserdisc edition of Jurassic Park had the bass cranked up louder than it was in theaters. When the movie hit DVD, it initially had the theatrical bass levels. People who had experienced the LD assumed that the LD was "right" and the DVD was "wrong" (because louder is always better, right?) and raised such a stink about it that Universal reissued a "corrected" DVD with a goosed bass channel. Then came the Blu-ray, which is back to the theatrical levels.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.
Josh Z is offline  
post #442 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:48 PM - Thread Starter
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 21,509
Mentioned: 204 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5986 Post(s)
Liked: 5117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post



You have your history a little mixed up. The Laserdisc edition of Jurassic Park had the bass cranked up louder than it was in theaters. When the movie hit DVD, it initially had the theatrical bass levels. People who had experienced the LD assumed that the LD was "right" and the DVD was "wrong" (because louder is always better, right?) and raised such a stink about it that Universal reissued a "corrected" DVD with a goosed bass channel. Then came the Blu-ray, which is back to the theatrical levels.

In other words: I should crank up the LFE on my Blu-ray copy.
Scott Simonian is offline  
post #443 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdrucker View Post
More to the point, what will Yamaha, Pioneer, or Onkyo be doing WRT this front? I think that would give you a better idea of whether this is urban folklore or a real limitation to come imposed by DSP resource bottlenecks or otherwise. And like I said, my point is as of today. If I get DTS:X in the future and the DTS-HD/DSU restriction suddenly emerges, I'll have my answer as well.


If I weren't now in the Trinnov world, I'd probably be perfectly happy to "settle" for having an upmixer matched to the provider of the codec, so Dolby->DSU and DTS->Neural, with stereo or PCM handled by either, would be par for the course. Assuming that this was some sort of limitation invoked to save DSP resource or something. No different in its way than what Denon does with adjacent pairs and how you configure Atmos as quirks go. We work with the hand we're dealt.
The whole thing isn't something I am overly worrying about I must admit. it may be that DSU works best on Dolby and Neural-X works best on DTS, or that there isn’t all that much difference either way. Either way, we have to take what our units give us, as you suggest, so whatever they give us is whatever they give us and since there isn't anything we can do about that, it seems to be less than productive to spend much time worrying about it. It's a bit like all the endless discussion about whether the Denon 5200 would be FW upgradeable to DTS:X or not. Regardless of how people wanted it, or wished for it, in the end they had to take what they were offered, which is no upgrade. I hate to say ITYS (well I kinda like it sometimes LOL) but, well, I did (Not you - "one").
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #444 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,632
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4787 Post(s)
Liked: 3697
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigScreen View Post
Could an isolated score be achieved using objects, or would it make more sense to continue doing it via a separate track?

It would be really nice if isolated scores were more available, and if object-based audio makes that easier for the studio to provide, my hope is that it may be provided more often.
Whether it could technically be done or not, the inclusion of an isolated score is a business decision by the studio, and requires that the music be licensed specifically for that purpose out of fear that it might cut into soundtrack album sales.

Josh Z
Television and Home Theater Writer/Editor, Primetimer.com

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers, whoever they may be.
Josh Z is offline  
post #445 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:54 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Bumping up the centre channel level on your AVR doesn't require the consent nor cooperation (or even awareness) of the content creator. Encoding the dialogue stem as a separate, user adjustable object requires the content creator to be a willing participant in your ability to alter the balance of the dialogue level relative to their carefully crafted mix. That's the difference. You can do what you want to their soundtracks at home, but they don't have to help you with that.
That was my point, although you have expressed it better. One is altering the mix provided, the other is altering the mix itself. There's a difference.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #446 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:57 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 27,253
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7757 Post(s)
Liked: 7108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
I just think that people who have an ideological objection to a dialogue isolation are being short-sighted and are needlessly alienating a significant portion of the consumer base.
It's not an ideological objection. As FM has explained, changing the dialog object level on its own affects the rest of the mix in a negative way. Since they have worked hard to create a balanced mix, they don't want random changes at the listener end screwing with that. If raising the dialog object level causes other problems to arise, then it is just fixing one thing and ruining another.

What would be next - letting the end user decide on the level of foley as well, for example? Or on the level of the score?

"Hey Mr Picasso, thanks for that painting of The Weeping Woman. I thought it was great but I personally don't like the red ribbon in her hair so I've changed it to green, and her face was a bit angular too for my liking, so I've softened all the outlines. It's much better now, thanks."

Last edited by kbarnes701; 07-24-2015 at 03:00 PM.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #447 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 02:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
timc1475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Illinois USA
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 952 Post(s)
Liked: 812
I just called Marantz & asked a rep about their AV8802. It is not listed on their site as of this post. Although another poster on another thread said it does have it. SMH The phone rep said I would have to wait until 2016 for HCCP 2.2 and 7.1.5 Auro 3D capability (13.1) and for the receiver to auto switch from Auro 3D to Atmos. Currently there are some hoops and workarounds that need to be done to switch via puter of saved settings. He was unaware if the flagship had DTS-X or HDMI 2.0a or when it would get it btw.

If a AVR cannot pass HCCP 2.2 then it is useless when the 4k HDR BD players arrive late 2015. It appears the engineers were asleep across the board of manufacturers for 2015. Auro 3D (2006) & Atmos (2012) is not new by any means. IMO

2016 ummm...ok then.

If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got.

Last edited by timc1475; 07-24-2015 at 11:59 PM.
timc1475 is offline  
post #448 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 03:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lichfield UK
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 29
The "Official" Immersive Audio Discussion thread - Atmos/DTS:X/Auro

A very informative thread.

William
2Ch Good Music
Fight Loudness War. Preserve Dynamic Range.
wtaylorbasil is offline  
post #449 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 03:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,862
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2394 Post(s)
Liked: 3040
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
It's not an ideological objection. As FM has explained, changing the dialog object level on its own affects the rest of the mix in a negative way. Since they have worked hard to create a balanced mix, they don't want random changes at the listener end screwing with that. If raising the dialog object level causes other problems to arise, then it is just fixing one thing and ruining another.

What would be next - letting the end user decide on the level of foley as well, for example? Or on the level of the score?

"Hey Mr Picasso, thanks for that painting of The Weeping Woman. I thought it was great but I personally don't like the red ribbon in her hair so I've changed it to green, and her face was a bit angular too for my liking, so I've softened all the outlines. It's much better now, thanks."
While I greatly respect the great work that mixers do and some better than others. In my home cinema the option to change the dialog object level would be a welcome one and don't need anyone telling me what to do with it once I've laid down the coin for it! As for it messing with some other parameter of the mix! that's something that must and should be expected. Bottom line its an option many including myself would love to have and not sure why you would want to tie the hands of the end user! Its a tool just like the many other controls we have at our disposal in our setups and can like the others, be defaulted back to there original settings!

Why are you so opposed to such a feature
audiofan1 is offline  
post #450 of 3180 Old 07-24-2015, 03:58 PM
Senior Member
 
BigScreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WI USA
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post
Agreed. It's not worth worrying about it at this point. DTS still has to get their s**t together and you know.... actually release a working product of DTS:X.
We've been told that DTS:X firmware updates are forthcoming, likely in October or November. We'll probably hear about more definite timeframes at CEDIA, but we've been told to expect updates this Fall. They haven't produced any white papers, a la Dolby from last summer, but DTS has stated that their format will work with existing speaker formats, so what would be gained from such a white paper?

My guess is that the manufacturers are still working on the code, so they have nothing to report. They've already shown us what to expect re: next-generation receivers.

Want to know when the firmware upgrades will be available? Ask the manufacturers. Want to know when more DTS:X titles will be available and which ones? Ask the studios.

I'm unclear as to what information we've been promised by DTS but are missing. Given that, they seem to have their s**t together.
audiofan1 likes this.

Publisher - The BigScreen Cinema Guide
DTS:X Resources | Dolby Atmos Resources
Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons, the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas. - Henry Thomas Buckle - historian and author
BigScreen is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
atmos , auro3d , dts:x

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