Dts:x - Page 140 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2478Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #4171 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 08:14 AM
Member
 
tom703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chiloquin, Oregon, USA
Posts: 186
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by G4n0nD0rf View Post
I tested almost every Disney movie I own in mediainfo. All of them use 14 waveforms! How weird is that
You might want to double check that with ffprobe. Mediainfo is notoriously inaccurate.

Samsung UN55HU8550/SEK-3500U 4K TV, and UBD-K8500 BR Player. Receivers: Denon AVR-X4300H - 5.1.4., JBL Spearkers: Center Studio 235C, 2 - Studio 590 - L&R, ES250PBK Sub, 2 - ES90 Towers - L&R surround, 2 - Studio 230 - front height, 2 - ES20 - rear height. Video production: Resolve Studio 15, Windows 10 Pro, CPU i9 9940X, MSI X299 Carbon MB, EVGA RTX 2080, 128GB (4x16)Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200, GH5 camera, Zhiyun Crane 2 Gimble
tom703 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4172 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 08:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Belgium
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
How are you looking at that?

When I look at my Disney movies they all say MLP FBA 16-ch
Audio
ID : 2
Format : MLP FBA 16-ch
Format/Info : Meridian Lossless Packing FBA with 16-channel presentation
Commercial name : Dolby TrueHD with Dolby Atmos
Codec ID : A_TRUEHD
Duration : 1 h 34 min
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 6 422 kb/s
Maximum bit rate : 8 226 kb/s
Channel(s) : 8 channels
Channel layout : L R C LFE Ls Rs Lb Rb
Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz
Frame rate : 1 200.000 FPS (40 SPF)
Compression mode : Lossless
Stream size : 4.25 GiB (13%)
Title : Inside Out
Language : English
Default : Yes
Forced : No
Number of dynamic objects : 13
Bed channel count : 1 channel

Bed channel configuration : LFE


13 dynamic objects + 1 channel = 14 waveforms
G4n0nD0rf is offline  
post #4173 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 08:53 AM
Advanced Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 998
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 842 Post(s)
Liked: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by G4n0nD0rf View Post
Audio
ID : 2
Format : MLP FBA 16-ch
Format/Info : Meridian Lossless Packing FBA with 16-channel presentation
Commercial name : Dolby TrueHD with Dolby Atmos
Codec ID : A_TRUEHD
Duration : 1 h 34 min
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 6 422 kb/s
Maximum bit rate : 8 226 kb/s
Channel(s) : 8 channels
Channel layout : L R C LFE Ls Rs Lb Rb
Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz
Frame rate : 1 200.000 FPS (40 SPF)
Compression mode : Lossless
Stream size : 4.25 GiB (13%)
Title : Inside Out
Language : English
Default : Yes
Forced : No
Number of dynamic objects : 13
Bed channel count : 1 channel

Bed channel configuration : LFE


13 dynamic objects + 1 channel = 14 waveforms
Thanks I don't know how I missed that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom703 View Post
You might want to double check that with ffprobe. Mediainfo is notoriously inaccurate.
Do you know the command for showing the Atmos data with ffprobe?

I tried with "-show_streams -select_streams a:0" but it just says TrueHD with no information about Atmos.
SirMaster is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4174 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 12:08 PM
Member
 
tom703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chiloquin, Oregon, USA
Posts: 186
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
Thanks I don't know how I missed that.



Do you know the command for showing the Atmos data with ffprobe?

I tried with "-show_streams -select_streams a:0" but it just says TrueHD with no information about Atmos.

I am not an expert on ffprobe, and I am not at home to try anything. Were I home, I would have tried,
"$ ffprobe -v error -show_format -show_streams" but that is essentially what you tried.

You can also try a ffprobe command search that might be faster than trial and error.
As a last result, there is always the manual "man ffprobe"

Samsung UN55HU8550/SEK-3500U 4K TV, and UBD-K8500 BR Player. Receivers: Denon AVR-X4300H - 5.1.4., JBL Spearkers: Center Studio 235C, 2 - Studio 590 - L&R, ES250PBK Sub, 2 - ES90 Towers - L&R surround, 2 - Studio 230 - front height, 2 - ES20 - rear height. Video production: Resolve Studio 15, Windows 10 Pro, CPU i9 9940X, MSI X299 Carbon MB, EVGA RTX 2080, 128GB (4x16)Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200, GH5 camera, Zhiyun Crane 2 Gimble
tom703 is offline  
post #4175 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 12:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 7,280
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2652 Post(s)
Liked: 2153
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom703 View Post
As a last result, there is always the manual "man ffprobe"[/FONT][/SIZE]
Maybe I’m old fashioned but I’m avoiding anything that involves a man ff probe...
galonzo and steelman1991 like this.
thrang is offline  
post #4176 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 12:25 PM
Member
 
tom703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Chiloquin, Oregon, USA
Posts: 186
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post
Maybe I’m old fashioned but I’m avoiding anything that involves a man ff probe...
Finding stuff in the ffprobe manual is not easy, which is why for me it is a last resort.

Samsung UN55HU8550/SEK-3500U 4K TV, and UBD-K8500 BR Player. Receivers: Denon AVR-X4300H - 5.1.4., JBL Spearkers: Center Studio 235C, 2 - Studio 590 - L&R, ES250PBK Sub, 2 - ES90 Towers - L&R surround, 2 - Studio 230 - front height, 2 - ES20 - rear height. Video production: Resolve Studio 15, Windows 10 Pro, CPU i9 9940X, MSI X299 Carbon MB, EVGA RTX 2080, 128GB (4x16)Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200, GH5 camera, Zhiyun Crane 2 Gimble
tom703 is offline  
post #4177 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 12:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 7,280
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2652 Post(s)
Liked: 2153
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom703 View Post
Finding stuff in the ffprobe manual is not easy, which is why for me it is a last resort.
Ummmm.....a joke?
thrang is offline  
post #4178 of 4221 Old 10-31-2019, 12:55 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,654
Mentioned: 154 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4929 Post(s)
Liked: 5333
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
How are you looking at that?

When I look at my Disney movies they all say MLP FBA 16-ch
I'm pretty sure that refers to the Meridian Lossless Packing which is the foundation for TrueHD encoding. The format has a limit of 16 discrete channels so I believe it will report that at the top of any TrueHD bitstream (even if the mix itself is 7.1 or 5.1 etc).
dfa973 likes this.

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is online now  
post #4179 of 4221 Old 11-01-2019, 08:00 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,594
Mentioned: 93 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3029 Post(s)
Liked: 1784
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
I'm pretty sure that refers to the Meridian Lossless Packing which is the foundation for TrueHD encoding. The format has a limit of 16 discrete channels so I believe it will report that at the top of any TrueHD bitstream (even if the mix itself is 7.1 or 5.1 etc).
MLP is structured as a series of substreams with different numbers of channels: 2, 4 (for 3.1), 2, 8.
  • 2 is the complete stereo mix
  • 2+3.1 = 5.1
  • 5.1+2 = 7.1
  • 7.1+8 = Atmos

In the bitstream, it will say whether the MLP format is 2, 6, 8 or 16 channels. This makes it easy for the decoder to quickly understand how many substreams to decode to address the capabilities of the playback system.

Deadwood II Theater (Previous Deadwood Theater HTOM)
Anthem AVM 60 7.4.4; Classé SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4; MiniDSP OpenDRC-AN
Oppo UDP-203; Oppo BDP-93; Win10 media PC w/Roon+Kodi; Roku Ultra; DirecTV Genie
Adam Audio S3V/S3H LCR, KEF Ci200QS 4 srrnd, Tannoy Di6 DC 4 hts, Hsu ULS-15 4 subs
JVC RS520; Stewart Cima Neve screen 125" diag 2.35:1, MLP at 115"
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #4180 of 4221 Old 11-02-2019, 03:21 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
MLP is structured as a series of substreams with different numbers of channels: 2, 4 (for 3.1), 2, 8.
  • 2 is the complete stereo mix
  • 2+3.1 = 5.1
  • 5.1+2 = 7.1
  • 7.1+8 = Atmos

In the bitstream, it will say whether the MLP format is 2, 6, 8 or 16 channels. This makes it easy for the decoder to quickly understand how many substreams to decode to address the capabilities of the playback system.

Does "16-channel presentation" mean phisically 16 discrete waveforms? 7.1+8=16 MLP waveforms. The Atmos TrueHD shold be double-sized comparing to "classic" 7.1 TrueHD. But it is not.
Also I forget that ffmpeg ignores the 4th substream due to "4th substream does not include audio data". I suppose that ffmpeg team knows more about TrueHD structure.
Something is wrong for me here.

Last edited by -Henry-; 11-02-2019 at 05:56 AM.
-Henry- is offline  
post #4181 of 4221 Old 11-02-2019, 03:57 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,594
Mentioned: 93 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3029 Post(s)
Liked: 1784
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Henry- View Post
Does "16-channel presentation" mean phisically 16 discrete waveforms? 7.1+8=16 MLP waveforms.
Think of it as a container with 16 slots. Any MLP soundtrack with 9-16 waveforms will be carried in the 16-channel container. The empty slots waste no data space due to lossless compression.

Quote:
The Atmos TrueHD should be double-sized comparing to "classic" 7.1 TrueHD. But it is not.
That's due to the statistics of sound allocation within the soundfield. The LCR channels are most heavily used, then the surrounds, and then the heights. It is often the case that sound exists in the base channels for long durations with no sound in the overheads. But rarely does the opposite happen. This means that the amount of information needed to carry a consumer Atmos mix is not going to double what it takes for a conventional 7.1 mix.

Quote:
Also I forget that mmfpeg ignores the 4th substream due to "4th substream does not include audio data". I suppose that mmfpeg team knows more about TrueHD structure. Something is wrong for me here.
The 4th substream obviously carries audio. If not, then the following from the Dolby Atmos Production Suite Guide would not be true.

Quote:
Dolby TrueHD: In this case, the spatially coded objects are losslessly delivered to
consumer playback devices. Typically, the Dolby TrueHD encoder creates a bitstream
containing the spatially coded objects, a 7.1-ch render of the objects, and 5.1-ch and 2-ch
downmixes. The 7.1, 5.1 and 2-ch presentations are backward-compatible with legacy
Dolby TrueHD decoders. A Dolby Atmos-capable Dolby TrueHD decoder losslessly reverses
the downmixes and render to recreate the original spatially coded objects. Dolby TrueHD
also supports independent 7.1, 5.1, and 2-channel presentations of 7.1.
Perhaps you are referring to this statement from ffmpeg:
Quote:
The fourth substream is being discarded, since its not raw audio data,
but an encoded Atmos stream which needs a specialized decoder.
That does not mean there's no audio present. It means they cannot decode it.
mrtickleuk likes this.

Deadwood II Theater (Previous Deadwood Theater HTOM)
Anthem AVM 60 7.4.4; Classé SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4; MiniDSP OpenDRC-AN
Oppo UDP-203; Oppo BDP-93; Win10 media PC w/Roon+Kodi; Roku Ultra; DirecTV Genie
Adam Audio S3V/S3H LCR, KEF Ci200QS 4 srrnd, Tannoy Di6 DC 4 hts, Hsu ULS-15 4 subs
JVC RS520; Stewart Cima Neve screen 125" diag 2.35:1, MLP at 115"

Last edited by Roger Dressler; 11-03-2019 at 12:03 AM.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #4182 of 4221 Old 11-02-2019, 05:46 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Pwehaps you are referring to this statement from ffmpeg: That does not mean there's no audio present. It means they cannot decode it.
Ok, but I was referring to another resource https://ffmpeg.org/doxygen/3.4/libav...8c_source.html
Code:
 /* limit to decoding 3 substreams, as the 4th is used by Dolby Atmos for non-audio data */
-Henry- is offline  
post #4183 of 4221 Old 11-03-2019, 12:01 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,594
Mentioned: 93 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3029 Post(s)
Liked: 1784
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Henry- View Post
Ok, but I was referring to another resource https://ffmpeg.org/doxygen/3.4/libav...8c_source.html
Code:
 /* limit to decoding 3 substreams, as the 4th is used by Dolby Atmos for non-audio data */
Either they use the term "non-audio data" to mean object-based coding (which is indeed a different animal than the channel-based audio carried in the first 3 substreams), or they do not know how Atmos is constructed.

Dolby has said it very plainly:
Quote:
Dolby has extended the Dolby TrueHD format, used in Blu-ray discs, to allow the format to
carry Dolby Atmos content. Before Dolby Atmos, Dolby TrueHD included lossless support for
channel-based audio, such as 5.1 and 7.1. We have added a fourth substream for Dolby
Atmos sound. This substream represents a losslessly encoded fully object-based mix.

--Dolby Atmos for the Home Theater, August 2014
Surely you do not think ffmpeg is contradicting themselves when they state:
Quote:
The fourth substream is being discarded, since its not raw audio data,
but an encoded Atmos stream which needs a specialized decoder.
OOps, I guess we should close this here and continue in the Atmos thread.

Deadwood II Theater (Previous Deadwood Theater HTOM)
Anthem AVM 60 7.4.4; Classé SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4; MiniDSP OpenDRC-AN
Oppo UDP-203; Oppo BDP-93; Win10 media PC w/Roon+Kodi; Roku Ultra; DirecTV Genie
Adam Audio S3V/S3H LCR, KEF Ci200QS 4 srrnd, Tannoy Di6 DC 4 hts, Hsu ULS-15 4 subs
JVC RS520; Stewart Cima Neve screen 125" diag 2.35:1, MLP at 115"

Last edited by Roger Dressler; 11-03-2019 at 12:08 AM.
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #4184 of 4221 Old 11-03-2019, 06:06 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,986
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1585 Post(s)
Liked: 591
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Object size is an abstraction, not something physical. For the theatrical version of Atmos, the smallest object would play back from only one speaker whereas the largest sized object would play back from all the speakers. You can see it in the theatrical mixing tools (pic below), but I have to do some digging to see how this translates to the home version.

Maybe in the home version object size as an audio object parameter does not exist, and the audio objects as delivered by the spatial coding process are one size only ...?

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is offline  
post #4185 of 4221 Old 11-03-2019, 09:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Maybe in the home version object size as an audio object parameter does not exist, and the audio objects as delivered by the spatial coding process are one size only ...?
I think the term "spatial encoding" is a bit opaque here. I find the use of home clustering to be the possible cause. I'm under the impression that the original cinema soundtrack has objects that are "spatially coded" in the literal sense that objects have coordinates assigned to them as to where they are present in the room at any given moment in time. They also have a size that also factors into the cinema renderer's decision of both panning changes and which and how many speakers to include in that waveform's playback. I also assume the home objects have their own "spatial coordinates" in the sense of where the home object is located relative to the available speakers (which may be the same except in relation to the overall speaker count when free unclustered objects are available). Thus, "spatial coding" seems relative at best as sounds like a generic term for the object's location (grid position) whether a cinema or home object. Clustered objects would have their individual original locations altered would they not?

The home Atmos object limitation coupled with fewer maximum speakers available mean the soundtrack must be essentially down-converted. Converting the layout to fewer speakers probably is straight forward and not a big deal. But fewer objects is a big problem. In comes object clustering to the rescue to reduce the number of objects by grouping together similar objects. These new objects would presumably already contain the combined waveforms as one object, which has its own spatial coordinates to render with the combined previous objects already mixed to relative levels to each other so the home renderer only has to play back one combined/pre-mixed waveform, not several.

The question is how it selects these groupings and what effects and tradeoffs are introduced. What takes precedence, object location or object size? Is the clustering able to accommodate both at the same time without affecting the speaker count?

Let's introduce an example. Let's say the combined waveform would need to play a bird sound at the left side surround position only, but a babbling brook sound centered at the same speaker is larger and needs to also play somewhat through the left rear surround and left front main (and any speaker in-between potentially if more are present). Would these two sounds be chosen to be clustered together in any possible scenario and IF they were, would that mean the brook sound is reduced to just one surround speaker (or perhaps two if split with another bed object, but keeping it from using in-between possible speakers like "surround #1 " and "surround #2 ") or would the bird sound size be increased to appear in all those speakers the brook should be in, but perhaps altered in a new rendered level and pre-pan mix so that even though it's technically playing through those speakers, it's not really heard there as it should array and phantom to the middle side only (i.e. Its in phase enough to only appear centered between the much broader brook sound)? Clearly, stereo can play sounds of different sizes and locations through just two channels, so it would seem possible to render smaller objects into a larger object's space, which would probably sound much better than being forced to shrink a larger object's footprint. But premixing could be considered less accurate than discrete rendering, but given a choice between playing a sound through fewer speakers or having to combine waveforms into one arrayed object that plays through all those speakers, which would be the greater evil/inaccuracy? Which does clustering do in such a situation? Or is there some other possibility I've overlooked?

In short, the idea of clustering and pre-combining objects into fewer objects sounds simple enough to grasp in concept, but the actual details in how it accomplishes this moment to moment (and groupings could change as the original cinema object moves its position) is another matter. Getting that information conceptually for some different examples without getting into overly complex mixing code has not been something I've ever seen addressed.

It's much simpler, IMO to grasp in detail how Neural X can separate in-phase material to create in-between speakers from a strictly channel based mix based on the furthest boundaries of potential speaker configurations (i.e. The corners of the overall square or rectangle, which a 7.1.4 mix fully accommodates) than how Atmos clustering achieves as much accuracy as possible from a conversion of a much more complex possible 128 object cinema mix.

Converting to a fixed channel layout is easy enough to figure out, but I lack enough information about object clustering to be able to say where a number of objects would actually end up both in terms of combined objects at any moment and the contrasting ultimate rendered final speaker location compared to IF it could render all objects directly to ALL possible home speaker locations.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)

Last edited by MagnumX; 11-03-2019 at 10:47 AM.
MagnumX is online now  
post #4186 of 4221 Old 11-03-2019, 10:27 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 28,193
Mentioned: 220 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7376 Post(s)
Liked: 6453
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Maybe in the home version object size as an audio object parameter does not exist, and the audio objects as delivered by the spatial coding process are one size only ...?
The parameter might not directly translate to the home version (will still have to check) but it's effect should: i.e., if an object in the theatrical Atmos track was large enough to light up all the speakers on the left wall, then the home track should light up however many speakers are on the left wall (W, S1, S, S2, R1). This is not channel arraying, because that doesn't exist in the home version and we're not talking about a channel. So the sound of a large object should be part of multiple clusters.
maikeldepotter and dfa973 like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #4187 of 4221 Old 11-03-2019, 11:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Maybe in the home version object size as an audio object parameter does not exist, and the audio objects as delivered by the spatial coding process are one size only ...?
The parameter might not directly translate to the home version (will still have to check) but it's effect should: i.e., if an object in the theatrical Atmos track was large enough to light up all the speakers on the left wall, then the home track should light up however many speakers are on the left wall (W, S1, S, S2, R1). This is not channel arraying, because that doesn't exist in the home version and we're not talking about a channel. So the sound of a large object should be part of multiple clusters.
But WILL it light up all those speakers IF it runs out of objects AND none of the other objects are using the extra speakers like left surround #1 and #2 ? Would it be forced to render the sound to fewer speakers and rely on phantom imaging?

OR do the objects it's grouped with gain those speakers instead, but are mixed so as to be more or less inaudible on them?

It doesn't seem like it can do both (light up all those speakers AND keep the grouped objects out of them that aren't supposed to use them) if those are the only options for the clustering code due to the limited number of objects. You'd have to lose accuracy somewhere. The question is what the Atmos cluster code does in that situation.

Yes, if groups that use those speakers too are available, it might be able to put the sound in more than one object, but beyond the conceptual complexity of one object becoming bits of multiple objects instead, you could conceivably end up in a situation where nothing else is using those extra surround #1 and #2 speakers so how could it be grouped with them? It can't be its own object since no more are available. Something has to go (speakers meant to be used) or be altered (speakers added to combined object size that wouldn't have been used by themselves). I don't see any other possibility under those conditions. But which would it do?

Either way, that's why I think DTS:X Pro's method of letting Neural X divide up a 7.1.4 channel framework is ultimately going to be superior to Dolby's home Atmos version for overall accuracy to the cinema mix as it is not limited by a small number of available objects that could alter the intended result. It simply divides the correct soundtrack into smaller speaker angles by creating hard sources between discrete locations rather than relying on phantom images, which are hampered or otherwise rendered inaccurate sounding by large angles between speakers (image fades into nothing) and off axis listening locations/seats (image pulls to closest speaker).

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #4188 of 4221 Old 11-04-2019, 03:00 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dfa973's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: EU
Posts: 1,254
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 842 Post(s)
Liked: 784
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
I think the term "spatial encoding" is a bit opaque here. I find the use of home clustering to be the possible cause. I'm under the impression that the original cinema soundtrack has objects that are "spatially coded" in the literal sense that objects have coordinates assigned to them as to where they are present in the room at any given moment in time.
Spatial Coding is the technique that is employed only when Cinema Atmos must be delivered to Home.
There is no need for Cinema Atmos to be spatially coded because the medium for delivering the Cinema Atmos is not that limited as the medium for delivering Atmos to Home.

I have attached some screenshots from the "Dolby Atmos Immersive Audio From the Cinema to the Home" where is very clear that Cinema Atmos has very few limits - in contrast with Home Atmos.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
The home Atmos object limitation coupled with fewer maximum speakers available mean the soundtrack must be essentially down-converted.
The main objective for Atmos was: SCALABLE - so even if delivered to Home, there will be no downmix or down conversion - all the objects are carried but within the limits of the transport medium.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Atmos - to the home.PNG
Views:	32
Size:	78.6 KB
ID:	2636250   Click image for larger version

Name:	Atmos - the challenge.PNG
Views:	30
Size:	47.8 KB
ID:	2636252   Click image for larger version

Name:	Atmos - data reduction.PNG
Views:	28
Size:	50.5 KB
ID:	2636254   Click image for larger version

Name:	Atmos - data reduction - spatial coding.PNG
Views:	28
Size:	142.7 KB
ID:	2636256  
dfa973 is offline  
post #4189 of 4221 Old 11-04-2019, 08:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfa973 View Post
Spatial Coding is the technique that is employed only when Cinema Atmos must be delivered to Home.
There is no need for Cinema Atmos to be spatially coded because the medium for delivering the Cinema Atmos is not that limited as the medium for delivering Atmos to Home.
So, in other words, "spatial coding" may have been a poor choice of words on Dolby's part as what they really refer to is their clustering/grouping code, which means combining objects to use a new combined spatial location rather than each individual object's coordinates (and the original objects would have to contain their coordinate positions if that system is to function as they are not channels), but that's not what Dolby is referring to by "Spatial Encoding" but rather the newly combined locations (and possibly the conversion to the home format as well at the same time). In any case, I don't care for their use of the term as it does not describe what is actually happening, which is more like a "Cluster Fudge" than "Spatial Encoding" of the data. Of course, that sounds negative in connotation. But is lossy coding of any type not a negative thing in some respects?

The cinema version has up to 128 simultaneous audio streams and 64 speakers locations (does that imply the objects can optionally be stored with "stereo" waveforms? I don't know a lot about the renderer, but I know the final panning would have to be channel-based level+phase differences in the final render. Stereo waveforms in a given object could allow even more objects to be pre-combined to create more individual sounds than the 128 limit as the bed channels normally would have in their mixes and that could probably explain the ratio choice.) The home version has up to 16 simultaneous audio streams and up to 34 speaker locations. That's going from 2:1 to just under 1:2. Many review sites say home Atmos reproduces all 128 possible objects, but retaining the "sounds" within the original objects and storing the object on the home medium (blu-ray or streaming) is another thing altogether. I can't see how they could be stored to save data. That would seem to be the entire point of "spatial coding" (reducing the overall waveforms to reduce the storage and processing requirements). But loss is loss. The question is what spatial accuracy is actually lost under certain conditions (such as the bird example in the post of mine above) and I have yet to see a single reply in that regard.

Quote:
I have attached some screenshots from the "Dolby Atmos Immersive Audio From the Cinema to the Home" where is very clear that Cinema Atmos has very few limits - in contrast with Home Atmos.
I'm aware of the cinema Atmos capabilities. They are fairly straight forward to understand. It's the home version I'm interested in knowing what it does in situations with a limited number of objects and I don't mean a block diagram with a circle around other circles and hence the bird example I gave that has been ignored.

Perhaps an object of a bird ends up going back and forth between surround #2 and side surround as an object becomes available and then unavailable in each second in time. Perhaps something like that would seem to have the potential to sound more objectionable to the ear than a more stable configuration (like Disney's 7.1.4 locked objects), even if it's using less speakers, particularly if you were seated closer to surround #2 to hear it turning on/off in such a way with the sound as to be objectionable (from certain locations, it could seem to get weaker/stronger in terms of a phantom image versus the discrete speaker image).

This would be the type of thing I could imagine Disney wanting to avoid as it could be disconcerting. Perhaps Disney chose absolute accuracy and stability with fewer speakers over the possibility of spatial error. IF that is the reason, I can see why they (if not Dolby) wouldn't want to tell us and/or have someone like FilmMixer tell us as it implies Atmos has an accuracy issue they'd rather have you believe "spatial coding" can deal with in a non-noticeable way every time. But is it noticeable? It seems like with more speakers it certainly at least could be possible to notice issues. But the question is even with a 7.1.4 render compared to a 7.1.4 print-through, were there enough inaccuracies that Disney felt more comfortable limiting their Atmos mixes to 7.1.4 rather than let the "spatial coding" create inaccurate renditions of their cinema soundtracks? We may never know as apparently it's still a secret and mere speculation.

Like most conspiracy theories, however, something that might be relatively innocuous like that sounds ever the more sinister when they refuse to tell you what's really going on. Certainly, a print-through 7.1.4 would be utterly stable in the speakers it's using as it could never run out of objects as it's only using 11 plus the LFE as stationary objects. Something must give in a lossy situation. Perhaps it's inaudible or mostly inaudible most, if not all the time. Given we have no frame of comparison, it's hard to know what we might be missing from the original soundtrack positions of objects. Disney could easily tell, however. All they have to do is compare a 7.1.4 print-through locked mix to the straight conversion of their cinema Atmos track and compare various busy surround scenes. If they found there were a lot of relative positional errors of individual sounds in the process compared to limiting the combination to a pre-combined 11.1 channel output, that would explain WHY they are using locked 7.1.4 tracks, even if some of us might find those differences not worth losing the extra speakers. That would explain FilmMixer's comment that he understood their reasoning (absolute accuracy compared to the cinema soundtrack in relative imaging terms of all sounds), but disagreed with it (not significant enough error to warrant killing the scaling ability of Atmos to use up to 34 speakers).

DTS:X Pro by comparison would be like taking a Disney style 7.1.4 mix and extracting more speakers for hard sources and larger rooms without changing the actual mix itself. This could result in more accuracy, if not suffer some "bleed through" losses or what have you in the extraction process (things are rarely perfect, but are the differences audible?)

Quote:
The main objective for Atmos was: SCALABLE - so even if delivered to Home, there will be no downmix or down conversion - all the objects are carried but within the limits of the transport medium.
This sounds like splitting hairs. The home version is definitely down-scaled in object count and speaker count as well. "Conversion" of that cinema track to the home format is aptly described by "downmix" in my opinion. Downmix isn't a patented term or anything. It simply implies something is scaled down. HOW it's done is not implied. Call it a conversion or call it "spatial coding" if you like (I like "Cluster Fudge"), but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably still a duck. Cinema Atmos goes from 128 waveforms/objects and 64 speakers to 12 or 16 waveform/objects and as many as 34 speakers. How is that not a "downmix" ?

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #4190 of 4221 Old 11-05-2019, 01:38 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Belgium
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 40
I agree with your reasoning, but it still baffles me that it would be such a big problem when most publishers choose to use only 12 or 14 waveforms when they have 16 waveforms available. And again, if that would be the reason to lock the mix, it doesn't explain why they lock it to only 7.1.4.
G4n0nD0rf is offline  
post #4191 of 4221 Old 11-05-2019, 05:32 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by G4n0nD0rf View Post
I agree with your reasoning, but it still baffles me that it would be such a big problem when most publishers choose to use only 12 or 14 waveforms when they have 16 waveforms available. And again, if that would be the reason to lock the mix, it doesn't explain why they lock it to only 7.1.4.
Well, that is by far the most common "maximum" configuration for Atmos. It probably covers 95% of all Atmos users. More waveforms means more space and perhaps Disney didn't think it was worth bothering. They're a mass market company, after all, even with high prices. I'm sure most of us would like to see 9.1.6 as the standard configuration if such a thing was going to be done (which would probably cover 99% of Atmos users). But the remaining 1% that have Trinnovs and more than 15 speakers get the shaft either way (although I think Trinnovs can "remap" which might at least give more coverage, but then maybe not as I've only heard it used to simulate phantom speakers for things like Auro-3D; I don't know if it can stretch 7.1.4 to create a larger array with better coverage or something so you don't get angular dead spots in a large room, but I suppose up until now they would have to contend with the same thing for DTS:X and Auro-3D (11 and 13 real speakers maximum). DTS:X Pro should solve the issue for at least 30 speaker configurations and now that an upmixer can be used with Atmos itself (if I read the release from Dolby correctly), DTS:X could theoretically apply Neural X to Atmos to extend those Disney soundtracks to 30.2 also at some point (and Auro-3D as well for that matter).

I kind of doubt we'll see that, but then again, I did read something about DTS now being able to extend DTS:X only soundbars to work with Atmos and DTS Virtual:X to work with Atmos as well (I'd actually like to see a firmware update to the latter even for my 7012 as I'd be curious to hear how it compares to my hybrid layout. It actually seemed to work quite well for the MLP with DTS:X material using just the 7.1 bed, although I can't say it sounded "better" except perhaps the top middle phantom image was perhaps slightly taller since it wasn't forced to use speakers a few (around 5" I think compared to the ceiling speakers mounted "on" the ceiling that hang down a bit too so they're not "at" ceiling level) inches lower to accommodate the steel beam box in the middle of my room (the Auro-3D surround height speakers have to sit just below the box to work in the room). I think there was a bit of bleedthrough with the virtual speaker locations and the beds actually making the image and I don't think it worked off the center line axis much, if at all, but I can see some real value with a system where you couldn't realistically (due to room layout or WAF) put in ceiling speakers in a given system. For one listener, at least, it was quite effective.

I'm thinking if DTS Virtual:X gets extended to Atmos as well of putting it in my Carver system that is 4.0 (really meant for high-end stereo listening, but i threw in some surround speakers on either side of the MLP facing the side walls at the base of the recliner and it's shocking how much it sounds like there are speakers mounted on the side walls for that one chair and of course it has a phantom center; so phantom heights should work well there too, I think. I could add another set of surrounds behind the chair facing the back wall and perhaps get a simulated rear set of speaker reflected surrounds as well (there's a huge stair well behind it so it's not realistic to put rear or rear height surrounds in that room, but the acoustics are AMAZING in that room. I get +/- 3.5dB without any room correction whatsoever (the Carvers are only rated +/- 3.0dB to begin with and are dipolar ribbons so there's reflected sound as well). Bass is like +/- 1.5dB from 26Hz to 90Hz with no correction. So it's an ideal "stereo" room, but it would be neat to hear some Atmos music and/or limited movies or whatever with the Carvers driving the front sound stage.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #4192 of 4221 Old 11-10-2019, 04:55 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,785
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4739 Post(s)
Liked: 2774
Near field mixes are a necessity for the home environment. Sometimes, editing mistakes are picked up on in this remix process that got through during the rushed post-production time table.


What can get screwed up during the translation is if bass frequencies become too filtered and the dynamic range is too compressed... or they fiddle around with sound placement to the detriment of the filmmakers' intent... or do fixed immersive print-outs when they shouldn't.
mrtickleuk likes this.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!

Last edited by rboster; 11-10-2019 at 05:41 PM.
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #4193 of 4221 Old 11-10-2019, 06:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Near field mixes are a necessity for the home environment. Sometimes, editing mistakes are picked up on in this remix process that got through during the rushed post-production time table.


What can get screwed up during the translation is if bass frequencies become too filtered and the dynamic range is too compressed... or they fiddle around with sound placement to the detriment of the filmmakers' intent... or do fixed immersive print-outs when they shouldn't.
I'd hardly say they're a must from what I've heard to compare so far. Paramount supposedly does straight cinema conversions rather than editing for the home and I find their Atmos tracks to be some of the best sounding out there. The DTS Cinema version of The Matrix conversion soundtrack I have here sounds much better in dynamics than the Atmos track, even if the Atmos track has some nice added overhead moments here and there (matching dialog and comparing sound effects moments). The front-to-back imaging isn't night and day different either. There's nothing to lead me to believe there's anything wrong with cinema soundtracks played in the home environment. You can't directly compare a given cinema to a home environment as homes vary quite a lot. Scaling alone (to cinema size rooms) shouldn't affect the sound that much, IMO if the room is well controlled.

Frankly, Disney is the best example of why we would have been better off with a straight cinema conversion instead. I'm not thrilled with over half the soundtracks that I have that they put out in the past 4 years. Compare any of them to TRON: Legacy from 2010 and it's night and day.
dfa973 likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #4194 of 4221 Old 11-11-2019, 09:53 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 25,250
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4457 Post(s)
Liked: 3383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
Frankly, Disney is the best example of why we would have been better off with a straight cinema conversion instead.
This isn't a near-field mixing issue. Disney's theatrical mixes are also bad. Whatever is behind this problem at the studio starts at the beginning.
Dan Hitchman 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 online now  
post #4195 of 4221 Old 11-11-2019, 10:27 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 14,785
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4739 Post(s)
Liked: 2774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
This isn't a near-field mixing issue. Disney's theatrical mixes are also bad. Whatever is behind this problem at the studio starts at the beginning.

Correct. Their theatrical sound mixes are questionable as well. If the soundtracks start out poorly the translation to the home will be as bad or worse.

Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #4196 of 4221 Old 11-11-2019, 10:58 AM
 
Skinfax1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
I'd hardly say they're a must from what I've heard to compare so far. Paramount supposedly does straight cinema conversions rather than editing for the home and I find their Atmos tracks to be some of the best sounding out there. The DTS Cinema version of The Matrix conversion soundtrack I have here sounds much better in dynamics than the Atmos track, even if the Atmos track has some nice added overhead moments here and there (matching dialog and comparing sound effects moments). The front-to-back imaging isn't night and day different either. There's nothing to lead me to believe there's anything wrong with cinema soundtracks played in the home environment. You can't directly compare a given cinema to a home environment as homes vary quite a lot. Scaling alone (to cinema size rooms) shouldn't affect the sound that much, IMO if the room is well controlled.

Soundtracks for consumer releases are mastered completely different.
Dynamics is reduced for smaller and acoustically untreated rooms. Bass is geared torwards systems with bass managed speakers. Home-Atmos in many cases is remixed to the 7.1.2 bed.
And it all depends how much effort and time and money the publisher is willing to spend on the mix.

Most studios don't care much about quality because the consumer is focused to buy labels like "Atmos" anyway. They know that 99% of customers sit in echo chambers and even those, who install many speakers, don't have a clue about room acoustics.
I can understand the publishers.

For how many years have the golden hifi-ears proven to the publishers, how stupid they are with the HD-audio fad? The studio masters in 48k simply upconverted or adding some bass and treble and increasing loudness the customer has been totally happy about the "better sound" and demands more of it.


They sell, whatever sells and the lower the costs are for creating a "superior product" the more they like it.

Consumers are idiots and the publishers know that very well. And who knows better, how stupid people are, than film studios? Just look at the garbage that is produced and how ppl love it.


We get what we deserve.
bruecksteve and G4n0nD0rf like this.
Skinfax1 is offline  
post #4197 of 4221 Old 11-11-2019, 01:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
This isn't a near-field mixing issue. Disney's theatrical mixes are also bad. Whatever is behind this problem at the studio starts at the beginning.
I wouldn't know as I haven't been to a movie theater to see a Disney movie for a LONG time. But as for the rest, I'd like some actual proof rather than forum hearsay. There should be a demo disc/file with a few minutes of theatrical mixes and then some of these made for home mixes and then we can see for ourselves what we're missing. If you're running a 40x40 home theater room, it should NOT be near-field IMO. But by what you guys are saying, if I played music made for the home over a high-grade theater system, it wouldn't sound good at all. A room is a room. The AVR has a setting for near-field and further away and for dynamic compression or not, so why should the cinema mixes be downgraded? Use the correct setting. That was what THX processors were all about (and had the treble reduction and dynamic settings on THX rated Lexicon gear and the like long before average consumer gear had it and that was to correct for those differences). But at some point (around the late 1990s and early 2000s, IMO, although it varied and does still vary by studio and even individual soundtracks), they started PRE-NEUTERING the soundtracks and home and cinema soundtracks were utterly different.

I think Skinfax1 has hit it right on the head. They think consumers are cheap, ignorant (they typically have NO IDEA how to adjust settings beyond the volume control) and perhaps even tone deaf and all use sound bars and all live in 10x12 sized rooms and THAT is the real reason they remix. They also may not be able to crank it to the levels required for cinema grade (They live in apartments or other people are doing other things in the house or the neighbors complain, etc.) so they seem to adjust the dialog for what they "think" the home environment will play it at. But THAT was supposed to be settings on the processor to compensate (dynamic compression for example) NOT pre-bake it into the soundtrack, but if "most" soundtracks are like The Matrix (to greater or lesser degrees), I'd say they're ALL pre-baking it. They should have had like THREE settings of compression or a separate dialog setting (DTS:X had a great idea for a purely separate dialog channel that you could adjust independently and if they all followed the rules, you'd only have to do it ONCE for a home theater).

I heard no major imaging differences between the converted CINEMA DTS (APT) soundtrack of The Matrix and the Dolby TrueHD/Digital down-conversion of the new Atmos soundtrack (it finally got the sequence right where the guns go flying to the back of the room. The older DD mixes sounded terrible there, but the Cinema DTS version sounded like I remembered from the theater (a big "whoosh" sound flying into the back of the room, not all at once or mostly in the front). I saw that movie 17 times at the theater in DTS and I remembered that scene explicitly as being an awesome surround moment that sucked on the DD DVD when it came out (I actually saw it at a "dollar theater" AFTER the DVD came out so while I may not remember the actual sound event so well, I remember what I thought about it and I know my reaction to the Cinema DTS soundtrack when I got a conversion of it and how the Atmos one compares I can do directly).

The PRIMARY difference between the 5.1 down-mix of the new Atmos track (we'll leave the overheads out since they didn't apply then) and the Cinema DTS version is the dynamic range of the sound effects. I matched the dialog bits with a sound meter to gauge the average dialog level for a scene and then used that volume setting to compare various action bits (e.g. a primary example is where the helicopter hit the building and the glass exploded and the scene where they shoot up the lobby and blow the elevator. The sound effects were probably 6-8dB (let's say 7) louder on average on the Cinema soundtrack for the same dialog level than the Atmos track. That's not a small difference. It's 2/3 louder during the explosive moments and less noticeable during other moments. It's clear they lowered the sound levels relative to dialog for the home version. Why?

Consumers don't typically play movies at theater levels and yet they still need the dialog to be intelligible.

Now compare that experience to Raiders of the Lost Ark from Paramount, a studio known to do straight conversions of the theatrical soundtracks. They might be modified, but they're not completely redone from what I read. I can play the THX BD of Raiders of the Lost Ark at 0db on my AVR and it sounds EXCELLENT at theatrical levels. Other studio soundtracks have problems with treble and dialog being too loud and THAT is why I can't stand to turn them up past 6-8dB most of the time. It all adds up, IMO. The home versions have the dialog cranked 6-8dB over the cinema mixes, making them harsh to listen to at cinema sound effect levels (i.e. Most people blame the consumer for not "tolerating" that level or "having a small room" when you CANNOT listen at that level if they raise the dialog ahead of time as it will be too loud (unbearably loud even).


Thus, I surmise they may not be squashing the sound effects so much as cranking up the dialog track and/or compressing it to be louder already, making it hard to listen to the overall soundtrack at reference levels. It's not just the size of the theater because you can have a 50x50 home theater if you want. Headphones are as near-field as you can get and yet stereo recordings sound good on speakers near and far and that is why I don't buy the argument AT ALL. It's parroted marketing data to cover up the fact they think consumers are too ignorant to turn on dynamic compression when they NEED it as they will blame the soundtrack and not their listening level as most people don't understand the first thing about dynamic compression and will leave the setting on/off regardless of what they're actually doing at the time (that's why they turn it on by default now, but we always turned it OFF in high-end audio as that was supposedly compromising the sound.

THX promised us REFERENCE levels. How can you have a reference compared to the theater and then modify all the levels for the home environment ahead of time? The 0dB setting means nothing if it's never used due to compression or higher dialog levels making it unlistenable relative to the rest of the soundtrack so you end up turning it down to where it's comfortable sounding and lose the explosive moments in the process as they are no longer reference level (10dB is half as loud).

But I have little doubt someone will tell me that's BS and it's all about the home being "different" from the cinema (a room is a room, IMO and there are settings for dynamic range and treble to compensate for small/large rooms). The only reason it's different is a TV speaker (especially these days on flat screens) sound like crap and THAT (or some cheap sound bar) is what MOST consumers listen with. I say let that equipment adjust the sound rather than SCREW the high-end consumers with overly compressed crap.
dfa973 likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #4198 of 4221 Old 11-16-2019, 07:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 2,115
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked: 737
I'll say the new Disney+ service is quite impressive on my AppleTV 4K. Even without a 4K projector, all the Atmos movies work in Atmos here. And there's a LOT of Atmos on there. All SIX of original Star Wars films are now in 4K HDR and Atmos on there as are most of the major Disney/Pixar/Marvel movies (watching Toy Story 2 right now in Atmos). Given I bought most of the Disney movies in 3D I only have 7.1 except for Ralph Breaks the Internet (it came with 4K + 3D from Japan so I remuxed the Atmos version to the 3D one there). So I've got a lot of moves to try in Atmos. I tested the first 15 minutes of Dumbo and the train going through the tunnel sounded great (print-through issues don't matter here since I use 'Scatmos' Pro Logic extraction and Matrixed front wides and surround #1 . The speakers all work in DTS:X too. Toy Story 2 has a TON of material in the matrixed Front Wide speakers so far and that bit where the chicken guy walks around the apartment with the camera focused on Woody in the display box pans smoothly all the way around the left side of the room into the back and out the back door in the rear center of the room (in my room that's 24' back so it's quite an impressive pan/walk, right up there with that bird in the Atmos "Amaze" demo that flies all the way around the back of the room into the front and in front of you off to the left).
Legairre, mrtickleuk and dfa973 like this.

Click THEATER (Updated: Nov-12-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 11-01-19)
MagnumX is online now  
post #4199 of 4221 Old 11-23-2019, 07:15 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
I would like to share my findings with DTS:X. First of all, I apologize for my bad English . I have 5.1.2 setup (L,C,R,SL,SL, 2 Top Middle,Sub). I've been tweaking my system for a long time to get the best out of dts:x, but unfortunately I wasn't satisfied until I heard

The 2 top speakers were positioned overhead a few inches away from MLP and angled towards me.With my current setup, I couldn't hear any sound from my top speakers when audio in that clip emulated 5.1.2. But for 7.1.4, I heard sound only when that object passed rear heights. After few minutes of testing, I found out that my front speakers are playing sound when it's emulating front heights and overhead speakers are playing sound when it's emulating rear heights. For 5.1.2, only my fronts are playing sound.

I then changed my speaker configuration in AVR and set overhead speakers to Top Front and guess what? Both the speakers are active when it's emulating front and rear heights
I've gone through some posts in atmos thread and came to know that dts:x considers atmos fronts as heights and that everyone should change them accordingly and that it wouldn't affect people having only 2 overheads. It seems that's not true (atleast in my case). Even with neural x upmixer, I could hear a lot of sound coming from my overheads and the overall immersiveness is great. I haven't noticed any difference when it came to atmos and dsu upmixing after this change. So I guess I'll continue with this setup until I finally upgrade to 5.1.4

Edit: Sorry for quoting magnumx's post.
xavierlehnsherr is offline  
post #4200 of 4221 Old 11-23-2019, 08:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mrtickleuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Birmingham, UK - you know, the original one!
Posts: 7,495
Mentioned: 184 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5191 Post(s)
Liked: 7512
Quote:
Originally Posted by xavierlehnsherr View Post
I would like to share my findings with DTS:X. First of all, I apologize for my bad English . I have 5.1.2 setup (L,C,R,SL,SL, 2 Top Middle,Sub). I've been tweaking my system for a long time to get the best out of dts:x, but unfortunately I wasn't satisfied until I heard this video
I think your English is perfectly fine the only issue is that Youtube doesn't support anything other than plain 2.0 stereo, so are you 100% sure that that video even contains DTS:X? It's plain 2.0 stereo here.
Perhaps I have mis-read, because you use the word emulation, so you know that it's just a 2.0 soundtrack and it's relying solely on the AVR's DTS Neural:X up-mixer.
galonzo and xavierlehnsherr like this.

_______________
Denon AVR-X4200W, Arcam Alpha 8P; 5.1.4 setup: Mission 702e, M7C1i, 77DS, 731. Rel T5 Sub. Monitor Audio CT165 4 Tops | LG OLED55C8PLA TV | Samsung UBD-K8500 UHD Blu-Ray

HDMI 2.0 4K modes | Dolby & DTS core+outer audio tracks on (UHD) Blu-Rays | Hello to Jason Isaacs

Last edited by mrtickleuk; 11-23-2019 at 08:20 AM.
mrtickleuk is online now  
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