Beyond 7.1.4... Multi-AVR set-up for Immersive Audio - Page 33 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 468Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #961 of 2112 Old 07-04-2017, 11:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
Ok let me try again. For starters I use two AVR's one set to 9.1.2 and one set to 5.1.4. I only use the 9.1.x from the first and the x.x.4 from the second.

On the 9.1.2 AVR I have the .2 set to TM but no speaker is connected to it.

On the 5.1.4 AVR I have the .4 set to FH and RH.

Now for Atmos things are working absolutely fine since it never tries to phantom between the base and height layers.

The problem is for DTS:X, since the 9.1.2 system will try and phantom the height sounds between the TM and the Fronts as well as the Rear Surrounds. Once you add .4 from the second AVR to the mix you will notice that a shedload of the sound is duplicated by using the FH and RH designations. The idea is that if I set them to TF and TR some of the pahntomed sounds ending up in the base layer isn't duplicated in the heights. I'm sure it still will be some but it should reduce it considering the FH/RH assumes nothing is phantomed.
Unless your AVR/processor adds some (non-DTS:X) matrixing, a 9.1.2 DTS:X config employs Front Heights, not Top Middles. So I would expect 'leaking' to the Rear Surrounds, but not to the Fronts. Did you actually experience this on your system?

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #962 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 11:55 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,462
Mentioned: 146 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4780 Post(s)
Liked: 5029
Why do you keep insisting that DTS:X doesn't support Top Middle? It does, or at least you can certainly configure your AVR that way. I assume it just combines the "top" sound into the single pair of speakers while continuing to phantom forward/rearward the "height" sounds as if you had TM+TR, which is the crux of the issue here (all the sound bleeding down to the base layer speakers unlike with Atmos 9.1.2).
Mashie Saldana likes this.

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

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #963 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 12:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,166
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1197 Post(s)
Liked: 1023
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
Why do you keep insisting that DTS:X doesn't support Top Middle? It does, or at least you can certainly configure your AVR that way. I assume it just combines the "top" sound into the single pair of speakers while continuing to phantom forward/rearward the "height" sounds as if you had TM+TR, which is the crux of the issue here (all the sound bleeding down to the base layer speakers unlike with Atmos 9.1.2).
You sir got it right.

It is the TF+TR bleeding I'm interested to re-introduce since FH+RH combined with 9.x.x base layer speakers doesn't work very well. At least if I set the second AVR to TF+TR some of the bleeding ending up in the base layer is expected while the sounds produced with FH+RH expect 0 bleeding. Sure the height channels will be less defined but at least less duplicated sounds.

Atmos won't care either way, only DTS:X needing some messing around.

It is a shame I didn't get two SR7010's, then I could have done some speaker switches and had DTS:X content run in a native 7.1.4 layout.

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room
Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Panasonic TX65EZ952B, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #964 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 02:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
I have the Lyngdorf MP-50 on order which basically does ScAtmos internally. I'm going to be simplifying my rack and hopefully increasing my SQ drastically with Room Perfect.

I am running 7.3.6 (Subs: Main LFE subs, Nearfield subs, Nearfield MBMs).

I will be posting my ScAtmos TOP MIDDLE processors in the classifieds. 2 Outlaw 950 pre-pros, 2 Yamaha RX-V1600 AVRs, 2 Yamaha HT-R5830 AVRs.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #965 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 02:32 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,863
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7173 Post(s)
Liked: 6182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I have the Lyngdorf MP-50 on order which basically does ScAtmos internally.
The MP-50 doesn't extract a centre output between the front & rear overhead speakers the way a ScAtmos set-up does. It just copies signals so that those sounds come out of two speakers instead of one.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #966 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 02:55 PM
Member
 
Kurtos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 52
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 14
DtsX 7.1.4 and atmos 9.1.4

Hi,

I have a marantz 7009 and a 7010. Is there a way I can keep dtsX 7.1.4 and 9.1.4 for atmos? I want to keep the .4 for dts because I like the dts up scaler more. Any help please? Thanks in advance
Kurtos is offline  
post #967 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 05:26 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The MP-50 doesn't extract a centre output between the front & rear overhead speakers the way a ScAtmos set-up does. It just copies signals so that those sounds come out of two speakers instead of one.
I'm not sure yet but I think the Lyngdorf method may end up being an improvement as I have just rearranged my seating. I basically have 2.5 rows now as I have staggered the seating to fit more seating into my narrow space (14.5 ft wide).

I have no plans to return to ScAtmos once the Lyngdorf arrives. The Lyngdorf can render TOP MIDDLES in a 5.3.6 configuration. What are your thoughts about copying the surrounds to both SIDE and REAR in a 5.3.6 atmos configuration?

Subwoofers (.3): Main subs (LFE), nearfield subs (L/R + LFE), nearfield MBMs (L/R + LFE).
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #968 of 2112 Old 07-05-2017, 10:03 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,863
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7173 Post(s)
Liked: 6182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I'm not sure yet but I think the Lyngdorf method may end up being an improvement as I have just rearranged my seating.
I wasn't judging either way, just pointing out that how Lyngdorf feeds the additional speaker outputs is very different from ScAtmos (or matrix extraction in general).
Quote:
The Lyngdorf can render TOP MIDDLES in a 5.3.6 configuration.
Are you sure it can natively render to more than 4 overhead locations?
Quote:
What are your thoughts about copying the surrounds to both SIDE and REAR in a 5.3.6 atmos configuration?
I don't think it's a good idea to sacrifice spatial resolution around you (where most of the information in the soundtrack is) for more rendering locations above you (relatively little content up there).

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #969 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 04:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
Why do you keep insisting that DTS:X doesn't support Top Middle?
Ignorance...

What I have come to understand is that while not recommended by DTS in a 11-channel set-up, Top Middle speakers are allowed/supported by DTS:X/Neural:X pending the roll-out of more channels (22.2 has been mentioned). Actually for DTS:X, the Top Middles are synonimous to Surround Heights (at 90 degrees azimuth) and positionally within the Atmos Top Middle range.

Click image for larger version

Name:	Schermafbeelding 2017-07-07 om 09.39.46.png
Views:	10
Size:	38.7 KB
ID:	2222169

So you are completely right in that:

Quote:
It does, or at least you can certainly configure your AVR that way.
And I agree with your assumption:

Quote:
I assume it just combines the "top" sound into the single pair of speakers while continuing to phantom forward/rearward the "height" sounds as if you had TM+TR, which is the crux of the issue here (all the sound bleeding down to the base layer speakers unlike with Atmos 9.1.2).

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.

Last edited by maikeldepotter; 07-09-2017 at 02:05 AM.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #970 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 04:24 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Question

BTW

Are there any main stream AVRs/processors (e.g. Denon/Marantz) that in a 5.x.6 (11.x) Auro3D set-up let DTS:X/Neural:X activate Center Height and Top speaker?

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #971 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 05:24 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
It is a shame I didn't get two SR7010's, then I could have done some speaker switches and had DTS:X content run in a native 7.1.4 layout.
Yes, then you could also do this: Declaring Front Heights instead of Top Middles in your 9.1.2 config killing all leaking to the fronts of the 9.1.2 config. To get rid of the remaining leaking to the rears of the 9.1.2 config, you could use the rears of the 7.1.4 config (FHs+RHs) which do not contain any leaking. Result: Well defined height channels, no leaking to base level speakers, AND enjoying wides together with rears and 4 overheads ...

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #972 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 08:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,166
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1197 Post(s)
Liked: 1023
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Yes, then you could also do this: Declaring Front Heights instead of Top Middles in your 9.1.2 config killing all leaking to the fronts of the 9.1.2 config. To get rid of the remaining leaking to the rears of the 9.1.2 config, you could use the rears of the 7.1.4 config (FHs+RHs) which do not contain any leaking. Result: Well defined height channels, no leaking to base level speakers, AND enjoying wides together with rears and 4 overheads ...
That would be a near perfect solution actually. Unfortunately the SR6010 I got for the heights can only do 7.1.2 or 5.1.4 so no spare rears to exploit.

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room
Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Panasonic TX65EZ952B, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is offline  
post #973 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 09:48 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
I wasn't judging either way, just pointing out that how Lyngdorf feeds the additional speaker outputs is very different from ScAtmos (or matrix extraction in general). Are you sure it can natively render to more than 4 overhead locations?
Yes, the Lyngdorf can render 9.1.2, 7.1.4, and 5.1.6.

It can be configured for 9.1.6 only by utilizing the matrixing for WIDES & TOP MIDDLES.
Quote:
I don't think it's a good idea to sacrifice spatial resolution around you (where most of the information in the soundtrack is) for more rendering locations above you (relatively little content up there).
That makes sense. Thanks Sanjay!
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #974 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 10:18 AM
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 21,509
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5986 Post(s)
Liked: 5115
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
BTW

Are there any main stream AVRs/processors (e.g. Denon/Marantz) that in a 5.x.6 (11.x) Auro3D set-up let DTS:X/Neural:X activate Center Height and Top speaker?

Good question!

I don't know but I doubt any do but it would be pretty cool if they could.
Scott Simonian is offline  
post #975 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 10:25 AM
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 21,509
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5986 Post(s)
Liked: 5115
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
The MP-50 doesn't extract a centre output between the front & rear overhead speakers the way a ScAtmos set-up does. It just copies signals so that those sounds come out of two speakers instead of one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
Yes, the Lyngdorf can render 9.1.2, 7.1.4, and 5.1.6.

It can be configured for 9.1.6 only by utilizing the matrixing for WIDES & TOP MIDDLES.
Scott Simonian is offline  
post #976 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 11:06 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,863
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7173 Post(s)
Liked: 6182
Matrix can have more than one meaning:


What ScAtmos does (matrix extraction).




What Lyngdorf does (matrix routing).


Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #977 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 01:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,651
Mentioned: 306 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2524 Post(s)
Liked: 3392
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
BTW

Are there any main stream AVRs/processors (e.g. Denon/Marantz) that in a 5.x.6 (11.x) Auro3D set-up let DTS:X/Neural:X activate Center Height and Top speaker?
No!
None of them can do more that 10.1, so even in native Auro : no center height. And even though DTS claims that :X will work in any speaker setup, it does not activate Top Surround/VOG.

It does work with Surround Height, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Yes, then you could also do this: Declaring Front Heights instead of Top Middles in your 9.1.2 config killing all leaking to the fronts of the 9.1.2 config. To get rid of the remaining leaking to the rears of the 9.1.2 config, you could use the rears of the 7.1.4 config (FHs+RHs) which do not contain any leaking. Result: Well defined height channels, no leaking to base level speakers, AND enjoying wides together with rears and 4 overheads ...
Clever That would be the best way to go beyond 7.1.4 in DTS:X.

I have a little less correct way, i have my 7200 do the normal 7.1.4 with FH+RH, and the 6200 do the wides +TF+TR for a total of 9.1.8.

But remember, if wides are activated, the top test tones will bleed even to the wides(although not as much as to fronts and rears).

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 8xJBL 12" BOSS - 4xJBL 12" w/SLAPS M12" VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #978 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 01:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,651
Mentioned: 306 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2524 Post(s)
Liked: 3392
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
Why do you keep insisting that DTS:X doesn't support Top Middle? It does, or at least you can certainly configure your AVR that way. I assume it just combines the "top" sound into the single pair of speakers while continuing to phantom forward/rearward the "height" sounds as if you had TM+TR, which is the crux of the issue here (all the sound bleeding down to the base layer speakers unlike with Atmos 9.1.2).
In a 9.1.2 setup with top middle, the front height test tones leak down the the center!! channel( i.e mono), and the rear height test tones leak to the surround backs(also a mono signal), so yes a top middle setup would be the worst possible for the base level speakers.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 8xJBL 12" BOSS - 4xJBL 12" w/SLAPS M12" VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #979 of 2112 Old 07-06-2017, 04:27 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
No!
None of them can do more that 10.1, so even in native Auro : no center height.
The Steinway Lyngdorf P200 and its children, the Lyngdorf MP-50 and McIntosh MX160 advertise 11.1 Auro3D support.

From the MP-50 manual:
Quote:
Auro-3D:
• HL (Height Left)
• HC (Height Center)
• HR (Height Right)
• HLS (Height Left Surround)
• HRS (Height Right Surround)
• TOP (Top ceiling, AKA VoG / Voice of God)


Edit: DTS:X support is rumored to be within the next few weeks.

Edit: These are far from "mainstream"

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-06-2017 at 04:33 PM.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #980 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 02:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
None of them can do more that 10.1, so even in native Auro : no center height. And even though DTS claims that :X will work in any speaker setup, it does not activate Top Surround/VOG.
Not being able to multi-purpose Auro3D's 'VOG' speaker as top speaker for DTS:X (e.g. in a 5.x.5 config) is very likely a limitation brought upon by the AVR manufacturer. The only limitation that DTS:X currently imposes is the maximum of 11 active main channels.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #981 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 04:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,651
Mentioned: 306 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2524 Post(s)
Liked: 3392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
The Steinway Lyngdorf P200 and its children, the Lyngdorf MP-50 and McIntosh MX160 advertise 11.1 Auro3D support.

From the MP-50 manual:



Edit: DTS:X support is rumored to be within the next few weeks.

Edit: These are far from "mainstream"
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Not being able to multi-purpose Auro3D's 'VOG' speaker as top speaker for DTS:X (e.g. in a 5.x.5 config) is very likely a limitation brought upon by the AVR manufacturer. The only limitation that DTS:X currently imposes is the maximum of 11 active main channels.
Makes sense. Maybe the upcoming 13 channel 7400 could change that.

DTS:X is so far limited to 7.1.4 with heights(even in the Trinnov). Anything other than that is matrixed or phantomed.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 8xJBL 12" BOSS - 4xJBL 12" w/SLAPS M12" VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #982 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 05:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
DTS:X is so far limited to 7.1.4 with heights(even in the Trinnov).
I believe the current 7.1.4 channel limitation is on the encoding (production) side, with optionally a couple of separate objects added to that (in principle, an infinite number of objects can be used during re-recording which with only a few of them not ending up in this 7.1.4 channel bed). On the decoding (re-production) side, practically any combination of 11 main speakers out of 30 possible speaker locations can be chosen (at least on the Altitude).

Quote:
Anything other than that is matrixed or phantomed.
Yes, with the differention made by @sdurani between matrix routing what some AVRs/processors can provide, and matrix extraction which is an intrinsic part of the DTS:X codec, and in the way it works similar to Neural:X up-mixing (that is my current understanding...).

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.

Last edited by maikeldepotter; 07-07-2017 at 05:53 AM.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #983 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 07:21 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,651
Mentioned: 306 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2524 Post(s)
Liked: 3392
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
I believe the current 7.1.4 channel limitation is on the encoding (production) side, with optionally a couple of separate objects added to that (in principle, an infinite number of objects can be used during re-recording which with only a few of them not ending up in this 7.1.4 channel bed). On the decoding (re-production) side, practically any combination of 11 main speakers out of 30 possible speaker locations can be chosen (at least on the Altitude).
Yes, that is my understanding too, but even in a 9.1.2 setup, the wides are not encoded, they are matrixed, as all of the DTS:X releases so far is encoded to a 7.1.4 channel setup.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 8xJBL 12" BOSS - 4xJBL 12" w/SLAPS M12" VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
post #984 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 08:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
maikeldepotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1475 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
as all of the DTS:X releases so far is encoded to a 7.1.4 channel setup.
I expect that 7.1.4 will remain the standard for DTS:X encoding, even if they eventually arrive at the mentioned (and on occasion already demonstrated) 22 channel roll-out. You might say that if Atmos is about objects and Auro3D about channels, DTS:X is about 'matrix extraction'...
Nalleh likes this.

A good idea and understanding lies at the base of every successful project.
maikeldepotter is online now  
post #985 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 03:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,863
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7173 Post(s)
Liked: 6182
Quote:
Originally Posted by maikeldepotter View Post
Yes, with the differention made by @sdurani between matrix routing what some AVRs/processors can provide, and matrix extraction which is an intrinsic part of the DTS:X codec, and in the way it works similar to Neural:X up-mixing (that is my current understanding...).
Correct, there is a limited version of Neural:X built into the DTS:X decoder (limited = the front portion of the Neural:X matrix, which converts 2 inputs to 3 outputs using the typical centre channel extraction). When a DTS:X track is unpacked, channels and objects take separate paths: channels are upmixed to the speaker layout while objects are mapped to the speaker layout. The results are combined before being output from the decoder. Same way matrix extraction was built into Surround EX decoding. In the future, this should allow current DTS:X 7.1.4 soundtracks (with or without objects) to scale to a 9.1.6 speaker layout. Sounds extracted to the wides and top middles would have phantom imaged at those locations anyway.
VideoGrabber and batpig like this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #986 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 04:01 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Matrix can have more than one meaning:


What ScAtmos does (matrix extraction).




What Lyngdorf does (matrix routing).

Sanjay,

This is my simplified understanding of the Lyngdorf auxiliary matrixing:

Instead of fully extracting a phantom image to the WIDES or TOP MIDDLES Lyngdorf is leaking (for lack of a better word) & summing audio from the adjacent channels to place that content WIDE or TOP MIDDLE and will attentuate that content from the adjacent channels rather than fully extracting.

Am I close? Off base? What am I missing?
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #987 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 04:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,863
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7173 Post(s)
Liked: 6182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
Instead of fully extracting a phantom image to the WIDES or TOP MIDDLES Lyngdorf is leaking (for lack of a better word) & summing audio from the adjacent channels to place that content WIDE or TOP MIDDLE and will attentuate that content from the adjacent channels rather than fully extracting.
You're describing matrix extraction, where common info from adjacent channels is summed to a speaker between them and attenuated/cancelled from the adjacent speakers. That's not how Lyngdorf does it.

Ever use a y-splitter to send one channel to two speakers? You end up having to attenuate both speakers so that the channel doesn't play back twice as loud as the rest of the soundtrack. That's what Lyngdorf is doing: internal y-splitter. Like a matrix switcher that lets you route one channel to more than one speaker.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #988 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 05:04 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
You're describing matrix extraction, where common info from adjacent channels is summed to a speaker between them and attenuated/cancelled from the adjacent speakers. That's not how Lyngdorf does it.

Ever use a y-splitter to send one channel to two speakers? You end up having to attenuate both speakers so that the channel doesn't play back twice as loud as the rest of the soundtrack. That's what Lyngdorf is doing: internal y-splitter. Like a matrix switcher that lets you route one channel to more than one speaker.
There must be some attenuation or extraction going on, no? It was confirmed that the output of FRONT and SIDE SURROUND was different with WIDES configured vs no WIDES.

There must be some special sauce making it sound good and not distracting.
@sdurani & @Scott Simonian I hope you guys are willing to come over and help me with a Lyngdorf matrix vs ScAtmos comparison analysis.

Free internet access!

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-07-2017 at 05:08 PM.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #989 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 05:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,863
Mentioned: 205 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7173 Post(s)
Liked: 6182
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Ever use a y-splitter to send one channel to two speakers? You end up having to attenuate both speakers so that the channel doesn't play back twice as loud as the rest of the soundtrack. That's what Lyngdorf is doing: internal y-splitter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
There must be some attenuation or extraction going on, no?
Didn't I just say that in the post you quoted? (the part about attenuation)
Quote:
It was confirmed that the output of FRONT and SIDE SURROUND was different with WIDES configured vs no WIDES.
The difference is the attenuation. When you send the front channel or the side channel to more than one speaker, then that channel will play louder than other channels that are sent to only one speaker. So you attenuate the speakers to keep that channel the same level as all other channels.
Quote:
There must be some special sauce making it sound good and not distracting.
The same sound coming from more than one speaker isn't distracting, otherwise 2-channel stereo wouldn't have survived for 80 years.
Quote:
@sdurani & @Scott Simonian I hope you guys are willing to come over and help me with a Lyngdorf matrix vs ScAtmos comparison analysis.
Anytime.
Marc Alexander likes this.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #990 of 2112 Old 07-07-2017, 05:43 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,494
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5455 Post(s)
Liked: 4951
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Didn't I just say that in the post you quoted? (the part about attenuation) The difference is the attenuation. When you send the front channel or the side channel to more than one speaker, then that channel will play louder than other channels that are sent to only one speaker. So you attenuate the speakers to keep that channel the same level as all other channels. The same sound coming from more than one speaker isn't distracting, otherwise 2-channel stereo wouldn't have survived for 80 years.
Ok, I believe it's sinking in. I was envisioning an overhead object playing out of TOP FRONT, TOP MIDDLE, TOP REAR at the same time and at the same level (which is wrong). When in fact TOP MIDDLE should be playing at the proper level while the other channels will still be playing, but attenuated. Correct?

I believe this method should be quite effective for multi-row seating.
Marc Alexander is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off