Originally Posted by CherylJosie
I seem to recall from earlier in this thread (and also from glancing at the 8500 spec) that there is an Auro 3D upmix issue? where speakers in the top positions/decoding are not driven, but speakers in the height positions/decoding are driven?
Top positions are totally unsupported with Auro-3D. If you intend to use those locations, you will either have to keep a separate stored setting (say on a USB stick, especially with Audyssey settings for them) to "cheat" the system to do without ANY Auro-3D support what-so-ever.
Some sound modes from competing manufacturers are going to have incompatibilities with some channel allocations. IMO, just pick the sound mode that delivers the best rendition for the content and be happy.
That doesn't make me happy at all. Besides, to come to any kind of conclusion you'd have to compare the formats first. DTS/Atmos aren't mutually exclusive. Auro-3D is harder to integrate, but it can be done. DTS will happily work with either configuration, although some would say the Atmos configuration is closer to the DTS mixing studio setup. Personally, listening to Jurassic Park Fallen Kingdom with front/rear height + extracted middle, I thought the ceiling effects lined up perfectly fine with what I was seeing on-screen so I have this lingering doubt about how important it is to match the mixing setup. Off-screen sound effects generally can't be verified as to the "correct" location of a sound and frankly, how much does it really matter if the bird flying across the top of the room from front to back is 3 feet back into the room at moment "A" or 5 feet? I'd find what is closer to the screen more important, personally.
The problem with "Top" ceiling speakers is they are really nowhere NEAR the screen so any effects that should be at the top of the screen are going to be either some combination of the bottom + top phantom imaged diagonally into real space or they're going to be floating well in front of the screen. There is no such thing as "top screen" effects with "top" speakers. Front height, OTOH are supposed to be at the top of the screen. These are separate rendered locations in Atmos. With a Trinnov, you can actually have BOTH without overlap (it IS a coordinate system for objects, after all).
It's not so simple when deciding which channels (top or height) to install speakers for however.
It's not simple at all and complicated by whether or not you can or want to install speakers either in or on your ceiling. One doesn't preclude the other, however. You CAN put in-ceiling speakers at the top of the screen (particularly those with aimed tweeter/midranges) and here they could sit more or less right in line with the screen and not interfere directly. Similarly, you CAN put them on or in the ceiling in a height location in the back of the room (e.g. my rear height speakers are mounted on the ceiling in the back of the room). "Height" doesn't have to mean on the front or rear "wall". It's just an angle. There's also a very clear difference, IMO between front height + top middle + rear height and just front height + rear height. Some think they get "more" "overhead" sounds with the 'top' location than the 'height' location even if the speakers are located in the height positions physically. Personally, I find that once "top middle" is used, the differences between the two aren't as great (i.e. it can image anywhere in-between so you're not really limited as the middle speakers will fill in the sounds one way or another by imaging between the two). Frankly, at least with Atmos trailer material, I didn't hear that much difference between the two settings even when using front height + top middle versus top front + top middle in settings (e.g. the Atmos helicopter demo still flew around them in a square/rectangle regardless). Movies may be a difference story. Many of them use top middle more than anything else so if it's missing you're dependent on phantom imaging between the front/rear and that may be part of the issue in some setups. Trailers tend to do a lot more front/rear panning.
My experience with height speakers in DTS Neo:x 11.1 channel synthesis playback is that cramming speakers into the corner between front wall and ceiling makes them sound like they have cupped hands around them.
My question is why were you cramming height speakers in the "corner" ??? Height speakers and top speakers are still in line with each other and generally speaking are more or less in line with the front left/right speakers. In my room, the heights are generally nowhere NEAR the "corners" of the room (one back rear corner is closer due to a half bathroom wall sticking out into the room but it's still not in the corner). A "front height" speaker is supposed to be 30-45 degrees and a "top front" speaker 45-60 degrees. There is no rule that says the front height has to be on the wall or right at the ceiling. It could be two or three feet in front of the screen depending on the room. It might be lower than 30 degrees if the room only permits that (supposedly compromised, but mine at are at 20 degrees from the MLP, but because I have extracted "top middle" overheads, it pans perfectly smoothly across the ceiling anyway (i.e. the angles were designed with 2-4 overhead speakers in mind, IMO; I would personally want sounds to match with the screen more than fit some supposedly "magic number". You lose a little separation, perhaps, but if it matches the top/bottom of the screen, where's the harm? Ceiling speakers weren't really an option in the front of the room (bookcases built into the walls would have looked "bad" with speakers sitting dropped down in front of them; my projection screen actually drops between the two bookcases).
This effect seems especially problematic when the channels are also extracted from ambient decorrellated content with no clear imaging of their own. They only seem to contribute confusion.
I have no clue WTF you're talking about. What confusion? Decorrelated material is typically supposed to sound hard to localize or "all around" What does the height location have to do with that? The length of the room relative to the number of overhead speakers can cause problems (e.g. my room is 24 feet long; using just TWO overheads means either the back (using front + middle) or the middle of the room (front height + rear height) is going to be missing coverage due to the massive panning angles. Using 6 overheads eliminates this problem and things like "rain" sound like they're coming from overhead everywhere in the room front to back regardless of where you sit.
For the majority of playback that will probably be upmixed from older programming, I suspect that synthesized height channels tucked into the corners near a relatively low 8' ceiling like mine add little that is pleasurable to the listening experience. I didn't particularly care for it, so much so that I have not even bothered to reinstall my height speakers of my Neo:x 11.1 now that I have moved from my apartment back into my house.
Again, I have NO IDEA why you're putting overhead speakers in the room CORNERS. Even my old Yamaha "presence" speaker diagram had them 2/3 up the wall on either side of the screen, but nowhere near the side walls or "corners".
Another possibility is if the ceiling is so high that 'height' speakers are mounted nowhere near the ceiling, and the reflection off the ceiling from those speakers is deeply attenuated by the distance so that it doesn't disturb the frequency response so much having a near reflection off just the wall. In that case, height speakers probably sound fine. I wouldn't know from personal experience because I don't have a cathedral ceiling.
I don't know why you'd assume that. You can treat a room or use room correction to help eliminate room reflections. Assuming you keep your height speakers away from the corners, that only leaves the ceiling in question. Angling downward can help; room correction can help; you could treat the ceiling even if you're really worried about it. Ceiling speakers don't guarantee good coverage either. The design of the speaker and whether it can angle the midrange and/or tweeters is important for a ceiling Atmos speaker (unless it has REALLY good off-axis response).
So for example, in my long narrow room where I have a substantial span from front to rear, I (tentatively) plan on top speakers instead of height speakers so that I get some decent top-bottom separation in front and rear, without the blatant combing and lobing from the loud ceiling reflection combined with the loud wall reflection in the front and rear corner mounting of the height locations.
Again, you keep bringing up "corner" mounting. WTF would you put them in the corners? Loud ceiling reflection? I guess I missed that since they sound quite clear here (i.e. I did a lot of experiments early on redirecting 2-channel and such to just the height speakers to compare the sound to the lower speakers).
Regarding the 11-channel DTS 'limit' that prevents playing six ceiling channels, does that limit also specifically apply to something like a 2.1.6 channel allocation? i.e. Is there currently a maximum of 4 ceiling channels in DTS encoding, or is the channel limitation only on the DTS decoding in these particular receivers that might be upgraded with new firmware some day? I wasn't able to find any relevant information with some quick search engine queries.
2.1.6? I don't believe you can configure such a layout for ANY of the modes on the 8500H. I think you could assign a 7.1.6 layout that would function as 5.1.6 (where the .6 is Center Height and Top Surround added to front/rear height as in an Auro 13.1 layout). I believe someone just confirmed that worked in the Denon 8500H thread (center height and top surround + front/rear height). IF the software allowed
a 5.1.6 with top middle, it SHOULD work from a DTS perspective (i.e. DTS has an 11-channel limit; it allows any combination within that limit generally speaking. 9.1.2 works. 7.1.4 works. 5.1.6 (with CH/TS) works AFAIK
Originally Posted by CherylJosie
I'm not sure at all that this is the best course of action for this person. For one thing, it might be necessary to disable Audyssey on all channels in order to do successful interpolation between top front and top rear because the center extraction of ProLogic depends on being able to distinguish in-phase and out-of-phase information between channels that are level-matched, time-aligned, identically crossed over to the sub, and EQ-flat at the electronic signal level.
If this person really wants to use Audyssey automated room EQ, Scatmos of six ceiling channels via ProLogic is a problem unless Audyssey can be disabled on a channel-by-channel basis for the four ceiling channels of the 8500 only. I doubt that selectively disabling Audyssey is even possible for any but the front l/r speakers because that's the only such case I have ever seen referenced anywhere.
I don't know what frequency response correction has to do with PHASE extraction.... (this isn't DIRAC). I think Audyssey would work just fine. To get every individual speaker done, though you'd need the additional receivers doing Scatmos to have Audyssey as well, at least to do individual response for each speaker. You could combine YPAO or even do without on the ceiling speakers. It's all a big subjective. I honestly think it's kind of weird how much 2-channel audiophiles tend to HATE any form of EQ or room correction (not all obviously) while theater types can't seem to imagine functioning without it. With some judicious room treatments, a home theater can sound great without any room correction applied from the AVR. In fact, without an editor (like the iOS/Android app), you're pretty limited in what it does to your room (some hated without any bandwidth limiting) etc. and older models like my previous 7010 were either only automatic or required a professional kit to adjust them (big money).
Also, if the output power is problematic for the ceiling channels (that may be smaller and less efficient speakers than those on the floor level), it might be unsatisfactory to drive them with a cheap old prologic receiver at 75WPC even without regard for the distance, EQ, and level match issues of Scatmos. Remember, the plan is to drive all six ceiling speakers with ProLogic decoding off those two additional receivers, not just the top middles that are close to the MLP.
I call BS here simply because you'd be LUCKY to get 75W out of a ANY receiver out there with ALL channels running (i.e. The 8500H has a 900W power supply. Driving all channels to 150 watts would require nearly 2000W of continuous power (and that power supply has to power the preamp, decoders, video, etc. as well so it's not even going to have 900W available. The output caps might give you a small instantaneous power boost, but it won't last long. My pro logic decoders have 50W each for top middle. I haven't come anywhere near clipping at LOUD volumes (speakers 90dB/[email protected]
; 32 watts reaches 105dB (That's Dolby's reference PEAK volume!) at that ONE speaker for goodness sake and that unit only powers ONE speaker so it gets it ALL; I doubt ANY Atmos program pushes 105dB out of ONE top middle overhead speaker at Dolby reference levels. It would literally be operating by itself at full theater volume all by its lonesome and that's CONTINUOUS power, not peak).
At the very least, that pair of old ProLogic receivers need to have comparable output power so they can keep up with the floor channels.
It doesn't take as much as you apparently THINK it does. 60 Watts TOTAL can bring 15 90dB rated speakers to 105dB when played in unison, for example. 150 watts is useful for bringing STEREO speakers to 100+ dB levels, but not 15 speakers as it takes the SAME TOTAL amount of power to reach 105dB with TWO speakers as it does with 10 speakers or 15 speakers! In other words, that power is divided among more drivers instead. 10 speakers at 10 watts each (with same efficiency) produces the same output level as one speaker at 100W. Thus, to reach "reference" volumes, you need enough power to drive a single speaker to 105dB. A 90dB speaker needs only 32W. 10 speakers would only need 3.2 watts each (assuming they're all playing the same thing, etc.) to reach the same level as one speaker at 32W.
Thus, you don't NEED 150W for all 11 or 13 speakers. 50-60 Watts is more than plenty unless you have some truly low efficient speakers. However, real world speakers are not typically purely resistive loads and many amps have trouble driving more reactive speakers, which is probably why some people think they need really large amps for some speakers. There are inefficient speakers out there as well (every 3dB drop in rating needs 2x as much power to drive to the same level). You could probably drive a Klipsch based home theater with 98dB rated speakers to 121dB with all of 200 watts total (ouch on the ears).
My Carver speakers by comparison rated at 87dB need quite a lot of power to reach 115dB (nearly 350W) with pink noise, but only 35W to reach 105dB. Sub levels are 115 peak with Dolby and so I have 350W amps on the bass drivers alone (gives it an equivalent 90dB rating or peaks at 118dB headroom. I've never clipped the bass amp, but I have tripped the safety on ribbon amp near those levels before, but that amp is only rate to 150W).
Also, we are back to doing manual EQ at least on the 8500 with this ProLogic Scatmos, so I think I would just keep the 6200 and use that one for the floor level speakers instead of the 8500 that is better suited to the ceiling anyway. It's a simpler and more efficient solution plus it is also an accurate decoding that he already has all the gear he needs to complete should he take the plunge and invest in an 8500.
And you will get ZERO content for top middle with DTS that way due to the 11-channel limit (you don't get to choose priority for 7.1.6 for DTS and it won't let you do less than 7.1.6 to get the 0.6 even if you're combining receivers). "Accurate" decoding in a misnomer. My extracted top middle passes the Dolby Atmos .6 test just fine (in other words, top middle IS the in-phase information between the two channels regardless whether it's moved by channel extraction or coordinates. The results are the same).